Journal of Physics: Conference Series

PAPER • OPEN ACCESS You may also like

- Station Layout Optimization Genetic
Process layout evaluation in the production of Algorithm for Four Stations TDOA Location
Ruiqi Sun, Zhonghang He, Lu Gao et al.
ethanol fuel - Multi-objective Mixed Integer Programming
approach for facility layout design by
considering closeness ratings, material
To cite this article: Mohd Fahmi Md Salleh et al 2021 J. Phys.: Conf. Ser. 2051 012056 handling, and re-layout cost
Muhammad Ridwan Andi Purnomo and
Yoga Satrio Wiwoho

- A simulation-based optimization method

for facility layout considering the AGV path
View the article online for updates and enhancements. Cheng Yang, Songkai Liu and Zhigang Xu

This content was downloaded from IP address 202.80.216.9 on 04/06/2023 at 10:40

ICADME 2021 IOP Publishing
Journal of Physics: Conference Series 2051 (2021) 012056 doi:10.1088/1742-6596/2051/1/012056

Process layout evaluation in the production of ethanol fuel

Mohd Fahmi Md Salleh1,a, Hazim Sharudin1, a, Nor Liawati Abu Othman 1,

Muhamad Ridzuan Arifin2, Noor Hafiz Noordin1 and Adam Harith Hashim2
1
School of Mechanical Engineering, College of Engineering, Universiti Teknologi MARA,
Cawangan Johor, Kampus Pasir Gudang, Johor, Malaysia.
2
School of Mechanical Engineering, College of Engineering, Universiti Teknologi MARA,
Cawangan Pulau Pinang, Kampus Permatang Pauh, Pulau Pinang, Malaysia.
a
Corresponding author: fahmisalleh@uitm.edu.my, hazim@uitm.edu.my

Abstract. Due to depletion of petroleum reserves and environmental impact of fossil fuels, an
alternative solution is introduced in form of ethanol fuels. Ethanol fuels have promising potential
in the transport sector and in the generation of electricity. In addition, very few researches
highlighted the production electricity cost of ethanol fuel for the transportation sector. Therefore,
this study will focuses on finding the effective process layout in the production of ethanol fuel.
The first main objective of this research is to simulate the layout of ethanol fuel plant using
DELMIA QUEST software. The second objective is to determine the most efficient process
layout in the production of ethanol fuel. The layout of ethanol fuel plant was simulated and the
most efficient layout in terms of ethanol production was suggested from the simulation. At the
end of this research, the efficient process layout is highlighted between the dry mill and wet mill
process layout. It was found that dry mill layout offers lower electricity cost for ethanol
production.

1. Introduction
Renewable energy comes from the repetitive currents of energy that occurs naturally in the environment.
Examples of renewable energy sources are solar, hydropower, wind, tide and waves, and non-carbon
technologies. Non-carbon technologies include geothermal heat and biomass. The supplies of these
renewable energy are affected by various factors such as technological innovation, policies and cost [1].
The field of renewable energy received the global attention due to depletion of fossil fuels caused by
increasing demand and the growth of automotive industry [2]. Besides, environmental issues such as air
pollution and global warming also contributing towards this attention [3].

As discussed by Chen et al. [4], the automotive industry must attempt to allocate all its resources
efficiently in order to achieve the standard requirements of emission reductions derived from the
vehicles. Emission reduction from the combustion engine will further reduce the impact on the
environmental issues and air pollutions. This can be achieved by using the alternative sustainable fuels
such as alcohol, natural gas and biodiesel where it has lower NOx, CO, HC, CO2 emissions.

In recent years, biofuels have captured most of the attention in the transportation sector since they
are environmentally friendly, clean and safe. Generally, biofuels are produced from the conversion of
biomass which well known for their renewable characteristics. In comparison with fossil fuels, biofuels
were found having [5]:

Content from this work may be used under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 licence. Any further distribution
of this work must maintain attribution to the author(s) and the title of the work, journal citation and DOI.
Published under licence by IOP Publishing Ltd 1
ICADME 2021 IOP Publishing
Journal of Physics: Conference Series 2051 (2021) 012056 doi:10.1088/1742-6596/2051/1/012056

a) lower emission of gas that reduce the greenhouse effect,

b) lower impact of sulfur dioxide (SO2) emissions due to the low contents of sulfur in biomass,
c) lower usage of non-renewable sources such as fossil fuels, and
d) sustainable biofuels can be developed with the aid of the advance power systems through
biogas combustion.

One of the alcohol types that has captured the attention of the researchers is ethanol. It was said that
ethanol has the potential to replace gasoline due to higher octane number, broader flammability limit,
higher flame speed and higher heat of vaporization. These characteristics can lead towards higher
compression ratio, shorter burn time and leaner burning engine. Thus, combustion in spark-ignition
engine using the bioethanol can be said more complete than using gasoline [5].

Ethanol can be produced from sugar cane or starch, molasses, sugar beets, cereals, cellulosic biomass,
shale oil and natural gas [6]. These resources are fermented, and then distilled up until purification. The
production cost of biofuels can vary with respect to the feedstock, region, scale of production and
conversion process. Currently, ethanol is more expensive to be produced than gasoline in all regions
considered [7]. Other than that, cost for large-scale production of bio-based products is currently more
expensive in developed countries. Conversely, in developing countries, the biofuels production cost is
much lower and very near to the world market price of petroleum fuel. Besides, the simultaneous
production of bioethanol appears economically attractive in locations where hydroelectricity is available
at very low cost.

There were also studies conducted on the mixture of ethanol and gasoline in spark-ignition engine in
the transportation sectors. Surprisingly, the results were very convincing as one of the study states that
the blending of alcohol and gasoline showed a positive improvement in terms of performance of the
engine and smooth operation under different operating conditions [8]. Although many studies have been
performed to find the best methods to produce the alcohol fuels and their performance in spark-ignition
engine, still only few researches have highlighted on the production electricity cost which is one of the
most important factor to implement ethanol fuels in the transportation sector. Thus, this study is
investigating the efficiency of the ethanol fuel production process layout with respect to the electricity
cost that simulated using DELMIA QUEST software.

2. Materials and Methods

2.1 Process Layout of Ethanol Fuel Production
There are two layouts investigated in this study. They are dry mill and wet mill process layout. The
explanation on each layout are as follows.

2.1.1 Layout 1 – Dry Mill

During dry milling process, the corn kernel was first ground into flour and called as meal. Water is then
added to the meal to produce slurry. Next, conversion of starch to dextrose, a simple sugar was done by
adding enzymes that from switchgrass, corn stover (corn stalks, leaves and other leftovers). In order to
control the pH value, ammonia and nutrient for the yeast were added. The mixture was processed with
high temperature to reduce levels of bacteria before its being cooled and transferred to fermenters.
During this process, yeast was added, and the sugar was converted to ethanol and carbon dioxide.

2.1.2 Layout 2 – Wet Mill

In wet mill, the corn grain was soak in a dilute combination of sulfuric acid and water for several hours
to separate the grain into few components. The slurry mix was then grinded purposely to separate the
corn germ. The byproduct from this process is corn oil than can be sold to gain profit. Meanwhile, the
remaining components which consist of fiber, gluten and starch were separated using a series of
separators.

2
ICADME 2021 IOP Publishing
Journal of Physics: Conference Series 2051 (2021) 012056 doi:10.1088/1742-6596/2051/1/012056

2.2 Part Class Creation

Part class was an important element before starting the simulation. A part class can be introduced to
create several parts having similar properties. A part is an entity that moves between elements and is
processed by the system. Parts are generated at sources or as a result of a machine process. Sinks will
consume parts and parts act as a result of a process of a machine. The part class parameters were
identified and shown in Table 1.

Table 1. Part class parameters

Part Class Color By-Product Machine Involved
Name
Part1 White Corn Milling
Part2 Grey Corn grits Milling and mashing
Part3 Black Corn mash Mashing and cooking
Part4 Red Liquefied mash Cooking and fermentation
Part5 Green Fermented mash Fermentation and ultrafiltration
Part6 Blue Filtrate Ultrafiltration and Pervaporator 1
Part7 Yellow Impure ethanol Pervaporator 1 and Pervaporator 2
Part8 Cyan Ethanol Pervaporator 2

Table 2. Dry milling parameters

Process Rate (kg/s) Simulation
Time
Input Output
Dry milling 9.84 (corn) 9.84 (corn grits)
Mashing 9.84 (corn grits) 24.84 (corn mash) 8 working
Cooking 24.84 (corn mash) 25.22 (liquefied mash) hours or
Fermentation 25.22 (liquefied mash) 21.53 (fermented mash) 28800
Ultra-filtration 21.53 (fermented mash) 19.03 (filtrate) seconds
Pervaporator 1 19.03 (filtrate) 3.36 (impure ethanol)
Pervaporator 2 3.36 (impure ethanol) 3.20 (ethanol)

Table 3. Wet milling parameters

Process Rate (kg/s) Simulation
Time
Input Output
Wet milling 19.9 (corn) 9.84 (corn grits)
Mashing 9.84 (corn grits) 24.84 (corn mash)
Cooking 24.84 (corn mash) 25.22 (liquefied mash) 8 working
Fermentation 25.22 (liquefied mash) 21.53 (fermented mash) hours or
Ultra-filtration 21.53 (fermented mash) 19.03 (filtrate) 28800
Pervaporator 1 19.03 (filtrate) 3.36 (impure ethanol) seconds
Pervaporator 2 3.36 (impure ethanol) 3.20 (ethanol)

2.3 Simulation Procedures

The simulation process starts with the identification of the simulation elements. The element class can
be defined to create a few elements having similar properties. Elements act as the basis of QUEST
models systems. The elements needed in the simulation were divided into three different parts; source,
machine and sink.

3
ICADME 2021 IOP Publishing
Journal of Physics: Conference Series 2051 (2021) 012056 doi:10.1088/1742-6596/2051/1/012056

Once the elements of the simulations have been defined, the simulation process flow was developed/
Process flow is an important element for simulating process layout in DELMIA QUEST software. The
process will start with milling before it goes to mashing and cooking. After that, the process will enter
the fermentation and ultra-filtration. Next process is Pervaporator 1 and Pervaporator 2 before it end at
the storage.

Lastly, the simulation was performed. In this study different factors have been considered which are
simulation time, types of machines and machine rate. All scenarios were considered as the flow of
production which starting from the raw material to the final product. In order to achieve the objectives
of this study, different parameters have been conducted in the simulation. Table 2 and Table 3 concluded
the simulation parameters for both dry and wet milling ethanol production.

2.4 Method of Result Analysis

DELMIA QUEST is a tool to simulate the process layout of any production process. The results
produced from this simulation that will be included are number of finished parts and average processing
time. These results will be further analyzed and compared to each other in terms of efficiency in
producing ethanol fuel.

Additionally, to further analyze the comparison between the process layouts, the cost of electricity
of the machine involved in the production of ethanol fuel for both dry and wet milling layout will be
calculated using the simple mathematical formula as follow:

(Wattage x Operation Hours) x kWh Rate = Electricity Cost

where Electricity cost (RM), Wattage (kW) = wattage of dry/wet milling machine, Operation Hours = 8
working hours per day, kWh Rate = Tariff charges, based on 38.00 cent per kWh [9].

3. Results and Discussion

3.1. Finished Product
Table 4. Number of finished parts created
Type of milling process Finished parts
Dry milling 348
Wet milling 174

Based on Table 4, dry milling layout produced higher number of ethanol when compared to wet milling
layout. This result is supported by the fact that ethanol is the primary product of the dry mill plant and
produced high protein caloric animal feed and carbon dioxide as the co-products. Meanwhile, wet mills
are slightly less effective in producing ethanol and it produce high protein animal feeds, and corn gluten
feed as the byproducts. Thus, the production electricity cost to run a dry mill ethanol plant will be much
lower than that of a wet mill plant. This is because dry milling machine is less capital intensive [10].
Besides that, dry milling machine has far less components and features when compared to wet milling
machine [11].

Although the capital for wet milling machine is high, wet mill plant is more flexible and can produce
not only ethanol, but other valuable products such as corn sweeteners, starch, and oil. Due to the
flexibility of the wet mill plant, it allows better reaction and adjustability to the market demands for corn
products as compared to dry mill plant. Furthermore, the wet mill process also possesses many other
advantages such as the ability to recycle yeast cells batch by batch and has lower usage of water per
gallon during the ethanol production [10]. However, the amount of ethanol produced by wet mill plant
is lower than dry ill plant. Nevertheless, the flexibility and adjustability of the wet mill plant products
to the market demand will affect the production cost of ethanol.

4
ICADME 2021 IOP Publishing
Journal of Physics: Conference Series 2051 (2021) 012056 doi:10.1088/1742-6596/2051/1/012056

3.2. Average Processing Time

From Table 5, dry mill layout has faster overall average processing time as compared to wet mill layout
at the same parameters besides the rate of corn supply that can be processed at a time by the milling
machine. Wet milling machine has higher processing rate which is 19.9 kg/s of corn as compared to
9.84 kg/s for the dry milling machine. Thus, it can be said that the processing rate of milling machine
affect the average processing time. The higher processing rate is due to wet milling involves with
soaking the corn to assist in separation of the corn kernel. Unlike wet mill plants, dry mill plants have
shorter average processing time and rate because the corn milling process is much simpler and does not
require extra time to be completed.

Table 5: Comparison of average processing time

Dry Mill Wet Mill
Process Average Processing Process Average Processing
Time (s) Time (s)
Dry milling 248.109 Dry milling 496.218
Mashing 248.118 Mashing 496.236
Cooking 248.126 Cooking 496.253
Fermentation 248.135 Fermentation 496.270
Ultra-filtration 248.144 Ultra-filtration 496.287
Pervaporator 1 248.152 Pervaporator 1 496.305
Pervaporator 2 248.161 Pervaporator 2 496.322

3.3. Cost of Electricity Consumption

Table 6. Wattage and tariff rates
Machine Wattage (kW) Tariff Rates
Dry milling 3
Wet milling 11 38.00 sen per kWh

Figure 1. Cost of Electricity against Type of Machine

The wattage of dry and wet milling machine was estimated based on correlations found in previous
literatures. Meanwhile, the tariff rates of electricity for industrial usage were taken from the updated
tariff on 9 August 2020. All currency values were considered in Ringgit Malaysia. Table 6 shows the
comparison between wattage of dry and wet milling machine and the tariff rates.
Based on the Figure 1, the estimated electricity cost of dry milling machine was lower than wet
milling machine. One of the reasons is dry milling machine operated at lower wattage than wet milling. The
cost of electricity of the equipment in the facility can be said to be having an impact on the production

5
ICADME 2021 IOP Publishing
Journal of Physics: Conference Series 2051 (2021) 012056 doi:10.1088/1742-6596/2051/1/012056

cost of ethanol. The lower cost of electricity basically means lower operational cost that lower the
production cost. From the results obtained, dry milling machine in a dry mill layout can save up to
70% of electricity cost when compared to the wet mill layout.

4. Conclusion
Using the multi-functional DELMIA QUEST, the simulations were successfully conducted. Featuring
crucial information from written articles, the simulation process was made easier and relevant results
were produced. The following conclusion can be drawn:
• Dry mill layout was the best technique in producing lower cost ethanol.
• The layout using dry mill produced higher amount of ethanol and has lower average processing
time than wet mill layout.
• Even though wet mill process layout was found less effective in producing ethanol, the
adjustability and flexibility to market demand is far more superior.
However, there are still many improvements and research needed to be done especially by
introducing the information and parameters regarding the modification and reduction of enzyme used in
production of ethanol.

References
[1] Verbruggen, A., Fischedick, M., Moomaw, W., Weir, T., Nadaï, A., Nilsson, L. J., Sathaye, J.
(2010). Renewable energy costs, potentials, barriers: Conceptual issues. Energy Policy, 38(2),
850-861.
[2] Erdiwansyah, Mamat, R., Sani, M. S. M., Sudhakar, K., Kadarohman, A., & Sardjono, R. E.
(2019). An overview of Higher alcohol and biodiesel as alternative fuels in engines. Energy
Reports, 5, 467-479.
[3] Krozer, Y. (2013). Cost and benefit of renewable energy in the European Union. Renewable
Energy, 50, 68-73.
[4] Chen, Z., Wang, L., & Zeng, K. (2019). Comparative study of combustion process and cycle-
by-cycle variations of spark-ignition engine fueled with pure methanol, ethanol, and n-butanol
at various air–fuel ratios. Fuel, 254, 115683.
[5] Kasmuri, N. H., Kamarudin, S. K., Abdullah, S. R. S., Hasan, H. A., & Som, A. M. (2017).
Process system engineering aspect of bio-alcohol fuel production from biomass via pyrolysis:
An overview. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, 79, 914-923.
[6] Salvi, B. L., Subramanian, K. A., & Panwar, N. L. (2013). Alternative fuels for transportation
vehicles: A technical review. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, 25, 404-419.
[7] Awad, O. I., Mamat, R., Ali, O. M., Sidik, N. A. C., Yusaf, T., Kadirgama, K., & Kettner, M.
(2018). Alcohol and ether as alternative fuels in spark ignition engine: A review. Renewable
and Sustainable Energy Reviews, 82, 2586- 2605.
[8] Mourad, M., & Mahmoud, K. (2019). Investigation into SI engine performance characteristics
and emissions fuelled with ethanol/butanol-gasoline blends. Renewable Energy, 143, 762-771.
[9] TNB. Pricing & Tariffs. 2014 [cited 2018 20.9.2018]; Available from:
https://www.tnb.com.my/commercial-industrial/pricing-tariffs1/.
[10] Rajagopalan, S., E. Ponnampalam, D. McCalla, and M. Stowers. 2005. "Enhancing
Profitability of Dry Mill Ethanol Plants." Applied Biochemistry and Biotechnology, 120(1):37-
50.
[11] Murthy, G. S., V. Singh, D. B. Johnston, K. D. Rausch, and M. E. Tumbleson. 2006.
"Evaluation and Strategies to Improve Fermentation Characteristics of Modified Dry-Grind
Crop Processes." Cereal Chemistry, 83(3):435-459.