Chem. Eng. Technol. 2006, 29, No.

11, 1303–1310 1303

Young Han Kim1 Research Article

1
Department of Chemical
Engineering, Dong-A
A New Configuration for a Fully Thermally
University, Pusan, Korea.
Coupled Distillation Column with a
Postfractionator and Separated Main
Columns
The installation of a postfractionator into a fully thermally coupled distillation
column (FTCDC) significantly improves the distillation column efficiency, but
the column operation is more difficult than for the original FTCDC. A modified
configuration of the postfractionator FTCDC having sectionalized main columns
is proposed for operational improvement, and its performance is examined
through the HYSYS simulation of a BTX fractionation process. By setting differ-
ent pressures for the various sections of the main columns, the proposed distilla-
tion column facilitates easy vapor transfer between the sections without the need
to utilize compressors. The outcome of a dynamic simulation on the column
shows that the control of the column pressure is easily undertaken and the speci-
fications of three products in the BTX process can be separately controlled to fa-
cilitate ease of column operation.

Keywords: Columns, Distillation, Fractionation

Received: March 2, 2006; revised: July 16, 2006; accepted: August 5, 2006
DOI: 10.1002/ceat.200600079

1 Introduction
Fully thermally coupled distillation columns (FTCDCs) have
been widely utilized in a variety of plants around the world in-
cluding North America [1–3]. Their practical applications
which are less energy demanding than conventional distillation
systems are particularly attractive in Europe and Japan, be-
cause most of crude oil consumed there is imported from
other countries. One of problems in the utilization of the
FTCDC is the difficulty with manipulating column pressure
independently. Whereas the pressures of the two columns in a
conventional two-column system can be separately deter-
mined, the FTCDC does not allow independent pressure ma-
nipulation due to a two-way flow connection between a pre-
fractionator and the main column. This problem is made even
worse with the divided wall configuration of the FTCDC.
When the pressure of a column varies, all material flowing in
and out of the column is subjected to fluctuating flow rates
and this generates a significant control problem.
Presently, several divided wall columns are being commer-
cially utilized in Japan, but the major petrochemical compa-
– trolling vapor flow is not simple in either the original or the
Correspondence: Prof. Y. H. Kim (yhkim@mail.donga.ac.kr), Depart-
ment of Chemical Engineering, Dong-A University, 840 Hadan-dong,
Saha-gu, Pusan, 604-714 Korea.
nies there have been reluctant to adopt this type of column in
their processes due to the application difficulty of the divided
wall configuration. The divided wall system employs a packed
column instead of a tray column, and the utilization of the
packed column is limited to small throughput processes.
Though the addition of a postfractionator to the original
FTCDC results in the reduction of a significant amount of the
energy requirement [4], it is also expected that the operational
complexity of the column would hamper its application in
field operations. The postfractionator FTCDC consumes 29 %
less energy than the original FTCDC in a BTX fractionation
process. The postfractionator FTCDC illustrated in Fig. 1 has
three columns – a main column and two sub-columns, a pre-
fractionator and a postfractionator. The pressure control of the
individual columns is especially difficult due to the two-way
transfer of vapor and liquid streams among the main column,
prefractionator and postfractionator. In other words, a pres-
sure change in a column affects the other columns and adjust-
ing the pressure of a troubled column without causing a
variation in the pressure of the other columns is not easy.
Maintaining the column pressure is important to stabilize
vapor and liquid flows.
In addition to the problem of pressure manipulation, con-
postfractionator FTCDC. When the vapor pressure of the
sending column is lower than that of the receiving column or
the pressure difference between the columns is too small, a

© 2006 WILEY-VCH Verlag GmbH & Co. KGaA, Weinheim http://www.cet-journal.com

1304 Y. H. Kim Chem. Eng. Technol. 2006, 29, No. 11, 1303–1310

2 Design Procedure
The improvement of distillation column efficiency in the
FTCDC comes from matching the column profile of the distilla-
tion system to an ideal column profile, which is similar to one of
the residue curves [8]. Attaching a new column (postfractiona-
tor) to the main column, as shown in Fig. 1, results in the
column profiles of the main column and postfractionator
closely resembling the residue curves, leading to an improve-
ment in distillation column efficiency [4]. Because the post-
fractionator FTCDC is modified from an FTCDC, its design is
derived from that of the original FTCDC – consisting of a pre-
fractionator and a main column – of which the middle section
of the main column is converted into the postfractionator.
The configuration of the proposed system is illustrated in
Fig. 2, and is composed of three separated columns from the
main column of the postfractionator FTCDC. By setting the
Figure 1. A schematic diagram of a fully thermally coupled distil-
pressure in the lower main column (Ic) as the highest value, in
lation column with a postfractionator.
the upper main column (Ia) as the lowest value, and in the
sub-columns II and III and the middle main column (Ib) at an
intermediate value, the vapor generated at a reboiler flows
compressor is required, leading to additional investment and through all the trays in the system, without the requirement
operational difficulties. In order to ease the vapor transfer for an external supply of work. Instead, the liquid flows toward
problem, an operational improvement in an FTCDC was pro- the higher pressure column requiring pumping, but the utili-
posed by rearranging the sections of the main column and pre- zation of a pump is a lot simpler than that of a compressor for
fractionator [5]. The rearrangement focused on the easy vapor vapor transfer.
transfer between the two columns with even pressure distribu-
tion. Since the vapor transfer between distillation columns
causes an operational problem requiring tight pressure control
at the columns, a general framework was introduced for the
design of thermally coupled distillation columns without any
intercolumn vapor transfers [6]. In another attempt to solve
the operational problem, a partial separation of the main
column by connecting its upper and lower sections with only a
heat exchanger has also been introduced and the operational
difficulty was examined with multi-variable controllability in-
dices [7]. In the proposed system the upper and lower column
sections are thermally connected for energy saving purposes,
whereas the sections do not allow material transfer between
them. While the thermal integration of the two sections main-
tains high distillation column efficiency, the separated sections
of the main column help the operation because the manipula-
tion of the product composition in the separated columns is
easier than that in a single combined column.
In this study, a new configuration of a postfractionator
FTCDC having a high distillation column efficiency is pro-
posed to ease the difficulties of column pressure manipulation
and vapor transfer, by properly separating the sections of the
main column in the distillation system. Using a separate main
column and two sub-columns does not change the column
profile of the original FTCDC with respect to its high distilla-
tion column efficiency, and it is also possible to construct the
distillation system with high capacity tray columns. The design
procedure of the proposed system is explained, and the opera-
tional and control performances are compared with those of Figure 2. A modified configuration of the fully thermally coupled
the original postfractionator FTCDC system. A commercial distillation column with a postfractionator and separated main
simulation program, HYSYS, was utilized in the evaluation. columns.

© 2006 WILEY-VCH Verlag GmbH & Co. KGaA, Weinheim http://www.cet-journal.com

Chem. Eng. Technol. 2006, 29, No. 11, 1303–1310 Energy-efficient distillation 1305

Because the proposed sectionalized FTCDC is derived from
the original FTCDC, the design of the sectionalized FTCDC
can be obtained from that of the original column. Therefore,
the design detail of the original column is briefly explained
here. A structural design technique for a minimum number
tray system [9–12] to yield a given separation was implemen-
ted in the design of the original FTCDC. When the column
profile of the distillation system matches to one of the residue
curves, its distillation column efficiency is ideal and the system
requires a minimum number of trays at the total reflux opera-
tion. The minimum number tray structure of the prefractiona-
tor in the original FTCDC can be obtained from stage-to-stage
computation using the feed compositions with the assumption
that the composition of the feed tray is equal to the feed com-
position [13]. The liquid composition above the feed tray is
calculated from the equilibrium relationship at the tray, and
the computation is continued to the top tray in a stage-wise
manner. The same procedure is utilized in the design of the
lower section of the prefractionator. In the same manner, the
minimum tray structure of the main column is obtained, be-
ginning with the composition of the side draw product, which
is equal to the liquid composition at the side draw tray. The
top and bottom trays of the prefractionator are determined
from the comparison of the column profiles of the prefractio-
nator and main column. The liquid compositions of the top
and bottom trays in the main column are the specifications of
overhead and bottom products, respectively. Counting the tray
numbers gives the total number of trays, feed and side product
locations and interlinking stages. Because the trays numbers
calculated so far were for the minimum tray column, the tray
structure was scaled up by a factor of two for a practical col-
umn using a design guideline [14].
In the design of the postfractionator FTCDC as shown in
Fig. 1, the middle section of the main column in the original
FTCDC designed above was taken to be a postfractionator, to
raise the distillation column efficiency [4]. Note that the im-
provement is obtained by arranging the column profiles close
to the residue curves of simple distillations of the mixture to
be processed. The difference between the original and postfrac-
tionator FTCDCs results from the conversion the middle sec-
tion of the main column into a postfractionator, without vary-
ing the total number of trays in both systems. The proposed
distillation system of this study was derived from the postfrac-
tionator FTCDC. The main column in the postfractionator
FTCDC was sectionalized at the interlinking trays with the
postfractionator, as indicated in Fig. 2. The comparisons of
tray numbers of the sectionalized and postfractionator
FTCDCs are listed in Tab. 1. These values show how the design
of the proposed system was obtained. After the structural in-
formation had been determined, the operating variables were
found from the HYSYS simulation for the given set of product
specifications. The liquid flow and vapor flow rates were varied
until the compositions of the three products satisfied the given
specification. The simulation results are also listed in Tab. 1,
and the specifications of the feed and products are summa-
rized in Tab. 2.
An example process, a BTX fractionation process [15], was
utilized for the evaluation of the design procedure and opera-
tion. The BTX fractionation process has a battery of distilla-
tion columns in series to separate benzene, toluene and xylene
isomers from the effluent of a naphtha reforming plant. Due
to the large handling capacity of the process, the impact of en-
ergy demand reduction by employing a high efficiency distilla-
tion system is significant in a petrochemical plant. The design

Table 1. Tray numbers from structural design and operating conditions of the sectionalized and the original postfractionator FTCDCs of
the fractionation process. Tray numbers are counted from top.

Name Sectionalized FTCDC Postfractionator FTCDC

Prefract. Main Postfract Prefract Main Postfrat
Ia Ib Ic

Structural
number of trays 21 26 3 25 35 21 54 35

feed/side product 15 20 15 20
interlinking stages 16 10 16.39 (pre)
26.30 (post)
Operating
feed (kmol/h) 801.8 801.8
overhead (kmol/h) 86.48 86.48
bottom (kmol/h) 376.5 376.5
side (kmol/h) 337.8 337.8
reflux (kmol/h) 345.1 1241 265.4 465.0 537.5 340.0 1236 529.8
vapor boil-up (kmol/h) 533.3 663.5 327.3 1146 343.9 529.2 1169 340.1
heat duty (GJ/h) 41.97 42.44

© 2006 WILEY-VCH Verlag GmbH & Co. KGaA, Weinheim http://www.cet-journal.com

1306 Y. H. Kim Chem. Eng. Technol. 2006, 29, No. 11, 1303–1310

Table 2. Flow rates of feed and products of the sectionalized and the original postfractionator FTCDCs of fractionation process with unit
of kmol/h.

Component Feed Sectionalized FTCDC Postfractionator FTCDC

Overhead Side Bottom Overhead Side Bottom

(Light)
benzene 87.850 86.472 1.2755 0.0000 86.472 1.7015 0.0000
dimethyl c-pentane 0.0124 0.0115 0.0006 0.0000 0.0116 0.0008 0.0000
(Intermediate)
methyl c-hexane 0.0075 0.0002 0.0157 0.0000 0.0000 0.0064 0.0000
toluene 338.10 0.0005 335.87 1.3989 0.0002 335.62 2.2289
n-octane 0.049 0.0000 0.0483 0.0012 0.0000 0.0474 0.0016
(Heavy)
ethylbenzene 14.975 0.0000 0.1231 14.862 0.0000 0.0971 14.782
p-xylene 57.798 0.0000 0.1484 57.681 0.0000 0.1046 57.443
m-xylene 128.55 0.0000 0.2938 128.32 0.0000 0.2043 127.81
o-xylene 60.160 0.0000 0.0218 59.985 0.0000 0.0149 60.004
n-nonane 0.0057 0.0000 0.0000 0.0057 0.0000 0.0000 0.0057
n-pentyl benzene 0.3300 0.0000 0.0000 0.3298 0.0000 0.0000 0.3297
methyl-ethyl benzene 26.010 0.0000 0.0000 25.995 0.0000 0.0000 25.991
tri-methyl benzene 75.950 0.0000 0.0000 75.918 0.0000 0.0000 75.919
methyl-n-propyl bz 0.5700 0.0000 0.0000 0.5698 0.0000 0.0000 0.5698
di-ethyl benzene 0.3300 0.0000 0.0000 0.3299 0.0000 0.0000 0.3299
o-cymen 4.1200 0.0000 0.0000 4.1182 0.0000 0.0000 4.1183
tetra-methyl benzene 4.7500 0.0000 0.0000 4.7488 0.0000 0.0000 4.7491
penta-methyl benzene 2.2389 0.0000 0.0000 2.2387 0.0000 0.0000 2.2388

Total 801.81 86.485 337.79 376.50 86.484 337.80 376.52

results listed in Tab. 1 are from the sample process. Since the
postfractionator is interlinked at the 16th and 30th trays of the
main column, the top and bottom sections were taken as co-
lumns Ia and Ic in Fig. 2, respectively. Then the middle section
became column Ib. The locations of the feed tray in the pre-
fractionator and side draw tray in the postfractionator were
similar in both systems.
3 Results and Discussion
In the design of operating variables of the sectionalized
FTCDC, a steady-state simulation was conducted using a com-
mercial process design program HYSYS. Based on the design
result from the steady-state simulation, a dynamic simulation
of the sectionalized FTCDC was carried out to examine the op-
eration of the proposed sectionalized FTCDC using the
HYSYS. Due to the large number of feed and system compo-
nents, it was difficult to write an in-house program to simulate
the process. The process flow diagram and operating condi-
tions are shown in Figs. 3 and 4. Setting the highest pressure
of 184.5 kPa at the lower main column (Ic) and the lowest
pressure of 110 kPa at the upper main column (Ia) resulted in
easy vapor flow, and no compressor was required. The pressure
of the middle main column was set at 161.5 kPa, and the pre-
fractionator and postfractionator pressures were at 159.1 kPa
and 154.4 kPa, respectively.
The outcome of the dynamic simulation of the proposed
distillation system using the HYSYS indicated that the system
could be operated in stable conditions. There were six flow,
one pressure, and two level control loops for the control of the
system, as described in Fig. 3. Though the number of control
loops in the original postfractionator FTCDC is the same as in
the proposed column, four compressors were installed in the
postfractionator FTCDC, as shown in Fig. 5. The operating
conditions of the original postfractionator FTCDC are listed in
Fig. 6, and demonstrate that whereas the burden of column
control is similar in both systems, the proposed system does

© 2006 WILEY-VCH Verlag GmbH & Co. KGaA, Weinheim http://www.cet-journal.com

Chem. Eng. Technol. 2006, 29, No. 11, 1303–1310 Energy-efficient distillation 1307

Figure 3. A process flow diagram of the fully thermally coupled distillation column with a postfractionator and separated main columns.

Figure 4. Results of dynamic simulation of the fully thermally coupled distillation column with a postfractionator and separated main col-
umns.

© 2006 WILEY-VCH Verlag GmbH & Co. KGaA, Weinheim http://www.cet-journal.com

1308 Y. H. Kim Chem. Eng. Technol. 2006, 29, No. 11, 1303–1310

Figure 5. A process flow diagram of the original postfractionator fully thermally coupled distillation column.

Figure 6. Results of dynamic simulation of the original postfractionator fully thermally coupled distillation column.

not require the compressors which are expensive and difficult
to maintain. As an alternative configuration of the postfractio-
nator FTCDC, a divided wall column can be utilized which
does not require a compressor for vapor transfer. However, the
improvement of control performance cannot be achieved in
the column due to the unavailability of process modification
parameters, as explained below.
In order to examine the operation of the proposed system
the step responses of input changes were displayed, as in
Fig. 7. When reflux flow rate was reduced by 1.6 %, the con-
centration of benzene in the overhead product was lowered
while the compositions of the side and bottom products were
not affected, as shown in the top three plots of Fig. 7. The val-
ues of the input variations are listed in Tab. 3. In this test, an
external liquid supply was provided as the liquid flow from the
upper main column (Ia) to the middle main column (Ib) in
Fig. 3, to maintain the flow rate in the middle and lower main
columns despite the reduced reflux flow in the upper main col-
umn. Reducing the reflux flow rate for the step response test
decreases the liquid flow rate from the upper main column to
the middle column, resulting in a decreased liquid flow in the
middle and lower main columns. In order to eliminate the dis-
turbances in flow from the upper main column to the middle
and lower columns in practical applications, an intermediate
storage tank can be placed between the upper and middle main
columns to adjust the liquid flow. An external supply of

© 2006 WILEY-VCH Verlag GmbH & Co. KGaA, Weinheim http://www.cet-journal.com

Chem. Eng. Technol. 2006, 29, No. 11, 1303–1310 Energy-efficient distillation 1309

17 kmol/h was provided in the line for the step test of reflux the side draw was not affected and instead, the bottom product
flow rate change. This modification is not available with the composition was reduced. This response was also observed in
postfractionator FTCDC, where the three separate columns are the previous studies [1, 16], and a cross-pairing of control con-
combined into one. The step response for the same amount of figurations between the side and bottom products was sug-
reflux flow rate change in the postfractionator FTCDC, is illus- gested, as explained below.
trated in the top three plots of Fig. 8. Although the composi- The operational improvement was clearly demonstrated in
tions of the side and bottom products were not varied, the de- the step response of the vapor boil-up rate change, as demon-
crease of benzene composition in the overhead product was so strated in the bottom three plots of Fig. 7. While the composi-
low as not to affect the reflux flow for the control of the over- tion of overhead product was not varied, the toluene concen-
head product specification. It should be noted that the scale tration in the side product was lowered with a 1.6 % reduction
ranges of plots in Figs. 7 and 8 are same. Reducing the reflux of the vapor boil-up rate. Although a slight increase of toluene
flow further may yield more changes in overhead product pur- composition in the bottom product was observed, the varia-
ity, but it is not possible to avoid the disturbances in the side tion is much less than the change from the alteration of the
and bottom products. side draw rate. In order to maintain vapor flow rates in the
When the side draw rate was increased by 1.5 %, the step re- middle and upper main columns despite the reduced vapor
sponses in the sectionalized and postfractionator FTCDCs boil-up rate, a small heat exchanger was installed in the line of
were similar, as shown in the middle three plots of Figs. 7 and vapor flow from the lower main column Ic, to the middle Ib,
8. Although the side draw rate was altered, the composition of and extra heat was supplied in the sectionalized FTCDC. An
additional heat supply of 5 · 105 kJ/h
was provided. Because the side draw
composition is adjusted with the va-
por boil-up rate and the bottom
product composition is adjusted
with the side draw rate, the control
configuration is crossed and it has
been utilized in industrial practice.
The responses of the vapor boil-up
rate reduction in the postfractiona-
tor FTCDC are shown in the bottom
three plots of Fig. 8. A significant in-
crease of toluene composition in the
bottom product was obtained along
with the composition elevation of
overhead product resulting in a
coupled response. The coupling in-
troduces a control difficulty in mul-
tivariable systems. However, in the
postfractionator FTCDC it is diffi-
cult to install the extra heat exchang-
er, as used in the sectionalized
FTCDC for the operational im-
provement.
The step responses of the pro-
posed sectionalized FTCDC clearly
indicate that the compositions of the
Figure 7. The responses of overhead, side draw and bottom product specifications with step three products are separately con-
changes of reflux, side draw and vapor boil-up rates in the FTCDC with a postfractionator and trolled with reflux, side draw, and
separated main columns for a BTX fractionation process. Top three figures are of reflux flow vapor boil-up rates. Namely, a 3 · 3
rate, middle three are of side draw rate and the bottom three are of vapor boil-up rate. multivariable control system can be

Table 3. Input changes in the sectionalized and original postfractionator FTCDCs for operational comparison.
Variable Sectionalized FTCDC Postfractionator FTCDC
(kmol/h) Reflux Side draw Vapor boil-up Reflux Side draw Vapor boil-up

Initial Value 1206 337.8 1171 1300 337.8 1113

Applied Value 1187 342.9 1153 1280 342.9 1095
% Change –1.6 +1.5 –1.6 –1.6 +1.5 –1.6

© 2006 WILEY-VCH Verlag GmbH & Co. KGaA, Weinheim http://www.cet-journal.com

1310 Y. H. Kim Chem. Eng. Technol. 2006, 29, No. 11, 1303–1310

ability of a tray column application

for large throughput processing and
an auxiliary facility installation for
better operation.
The design procedure of the pro-
posed distillation system was ex-
plained in the present paper, and the
control performance was examined
through the dynamic simulation of a
BTX fractionation process using the
HYSYS program. The response of
step input variations showed that
a decoupled 3 · 3 control structure
could be implemented for the specifi-
cation control of three products. The
proposed sectionalized FTCDC gave
improved responses for the input step
changes, whereas those from the
postfractionator FTCDC indicated
difficulties in the specification con-
trol of overhead and side products.

Figure 8. The responses of overhead, side draw and bottom product specifications with step
changes of reflux, side draw and vapor boil-up rates in the original postfractionator FTCDC for
a BTX fractionation process. Top three figures are of reflux flow rate, middle three are of side
draw rate and the bottom three are of vapor boil-up rate.
manipulated as three single control systems. By sectionalizing
the main column of the postfractionator FTCDC into three
columns, an intermediate storage tank and an auxiliary heat
exchanger can be additionally installed to result in the opera-
tional improvement of the original column. An FTCDC is
known to be difficult to operate, and this problem is further
compounded with the postfractionator FTCDC, despite the
fact that a significant amount of energy can be saved by utiliz-
ing the postfractionator [4]. The proposed addition of the in-
termediate storage and heat exchanger is not possible in the di-
vided wall structure of the FTCDC which is implemented
widely in industrial processes. The operational improvement
from sectionalizing the main column should enhance the utili-
zation of the proposed sectionalized FTCDC resulting in high-
er distillation column efficiency and the availability of a tray
column application for large throughput processes.
4 Conclusions
Although the installation of a postfractionator in a fully ther-
mally coupled distillation column significantly reduces the
amount of energy required, the column operation is more dif-
ficult than the original FTCDC because of the interlinking be-
tween the three columns. By sectionalizing the main column of
the system into three columns and arranging column pressures
for easy vapor flow, the column operation becomes easier. The
construction of the distillation system is flexible due to the avail-
Acknowledgments
Financial support from the Korean
Energy Management Corporation
and the Korean Science and Engi-
neering Foundation (Grant No.
R01-2003-000-10218-0) is gratefully
acknowledged.
References
[1] E. A. Wolff, S. Skogestad, Ind. Eng. Chem. Res. 1995, 34, 2094.
[2] S. Midori, A. Nakahashi, Proc. of the 5th Int. Symp. Separa-
tion Tech. Between Korea and Japan 1999, 5, 221.
[3] M. A. Schultz et al., Chem. Eng. Prog. 2002, 97, 64.
[4] Y. H. Kim, Chem. Eng. Proc. 2006, 45, 254.
[5] R. Agrawal, Z. T. Fidkowski, AIChE J. 1998, 44, 2565.
[6] R. Agrawal, AIChE J. 2000, 46, 2198.
[7] Y. H. Kim, J. Chem. Eng. Jpn 2003, 36, 1503.
[8] S. Widagdo, W. D. Seider, AIChE J. 1996, 42, 96.
[9] Y. H. Kim, J. Chem. Eng. Jpn 2001, 34, 236.
[10] Y. H. Kim, Ind. Eng. Chem. Res. 2001, 40, 2460.
[11] Y. H. Kim, M. Nakaiwa, K. S. Hwang, Korean J. Chem. Eng.
2002, 19, 383.
[12] Y. H. Kim, Chem. Eng. J. 2002, 89, 89.
[13] Y. H. Kim, Comput. Chem. Eng. 2005, 29, 1555.
[14] K. N. Glinos, M. F. Malone, Ind. Eng. Chem. Proc. Des. Dev.
1985, 24, 1087.
[15] J. Y. Lee, Y. H. Kim, K. S. Hwang, Chem. Eng. Proc. 2004, 43,
495.
[16] Y. H. Kim, Chem. Eng. J. 2002, 85, 289.

© 2006 WILEY-VCH Verlag GmbH & Co. KGaA, Weinheim http://www.cet-journal.com