chemical engineering research and design 8 7 ( 2 0 0 9 ) 16581666

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Chemical Engineering Research and Design

journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/cherd

Internal heat integrated distillation columns (iHIDiCs)New

systematic design methodology

Mamdouh A. Gadalla
Universitat Rovira i Virgili, Departament dEnginyeria Qumica, Av. Paisos Catalans 26, 43007 Tarragona, Spain

a b s t r a c t

Distillation of close-boiling mixtures, such as propylenepropane and ethyl benzenestyrene systems, is an energy
intensive process. Vapor recompression techniques and heat pumping-assisted columns have been adopted for such
applications for their high potential of energy savings. In direct vapor recompression columns, the vapors leaving the
top of the column are compressed, and in the reboiler of the same column, these vapors are condensed to provide
heat for vapor generation. Internal heat integrated distillation columns or iHIDiCs are new developments employing
the same concept of vapor recompression. These new column congurations can have signicantly lower energy
demands than common vapor recompression units. In iHIDiCs, rectifying section is operated at a higher pressure
(i.e. higher temperature) than in stripping, and therefore its heat can be used to generate vapor in stripping section. So
far, design of these column congurations is performed based on engineering experience, simulation or experimental
studies on given cases, including dynamic control simulations. Within previous and most recent research efforts on
iHIDiCs, there exist no generalized design methods or systematic approaches for design of these internal integrated
distillation columns.
The present paper presents a systematic design procedure for iHIDiCs. A design hierarchy for iHIDiCs is devel-
oped, which includes two phases of design, thermodynamic and hydraulics. This design procedure is applied using
commercial simulation-based design methods. In thermodynamic design, temperature proles for column sections
are used as a design tool to guide designers. On the other hand, hydraulic capacities of stages for heat exchange are
analyzed to determine the maximum physical space area available for heat exchange. Hence, feasibility regions for
both heat integration and hydraulic design are identied.
2009 The Institution of Chemical Engineers. Published by Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

Keywords: Heat integration; Distillation; Process intensication; HIDiC; Temperature proles; Design feasibility;
Hydraulics

1. Introduction coupling, heat integration, vapor recompression and heat

Distillation is an old separation process and has broadly been
used in various chemical and petrochemical industries. High
energy consumption of distillation processes is a practical
shortcoming. According to various energy estimates, energy
consumption of rening and chemical processes is utilized
in distillation columns. Besides, distillation of mixtures with
low relative volatilities, such as propylenepropane splitting,
ethyl benzenestyrene system, is an energy intensive process.
The energy inefciency of distillation has urged the industrys
interest towards adopting the implementation of advanced
technologies with higher efciencies. As a result, thermal
pumps were adopted as new techniques and developments
to increase the distillation efciency (Stupin and Lockhar,
1972; Linnhoff et al., 1983; Freshwater, 1951; Sulzer, 2006). In
columns with vapor recompression techniques, the vapors
from the top of the distillation column are compressed to a
certain pressure (increasing temperature of vapors) and are
then condensed in the reboiler of the same column through
an indirect contact of the liquid of the column bottom. As
result, the condensed vapors provide heat needed for vapor
generation at the bottom of the column. Vapor recompression
or heat pumping columns have been widely applied for the
separation of close-boiling mixtures. Internal heat integrated

Correspondence address: Universitat Rovira i Virgili, Campus Sescelades, Departament dEnginyeria Qumica, Av. Passos Catalans 26,
43007 Tarragona, Spain. Tel.: +34 977 55 8675; fax: +34 977 55 9621.
E-mail address: mamdouh.gadalla@urv.cat.
Received 12 September 2008; Received in revised form 9 June 2009; Accepted 13 June 2009
0263-8762/$ see front matter 2009 The Institution of Chemical Engineers. Published by Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.
doi:10.1016/j.cherd.2009.06.005
 chemical engineering research and design 8 7 ( 2 0 0 9 ) 16581666
distillation columns (iHIDiCs) are further intensications of
vapor recompression principle. These columns combine the
advantages of both direct vapor recompression and diabatic
operation and can have signicantly lower energy demands
than common vapor recompression distillation columns or
heat pumps (Nakaiwa et al., 1997, 2000; Olujic et al., 2003).
The primary concept of iHIDiCs was earlier introduced by
Mah et al. (1977) and Fitzmorris and Mah (1980) under the
name Secondary Reux and Vaporization (SRV). Seader in
his patent (1978/1980) and Glenchur and Govind (1987) advised
different column congurations for implementing these inter-
nal distillation columns. Thereafter, a shell and tube-type
packed column was presented by the patent of Aso et al.
(1996/1998).
Later, the idea of iHIDiC attracted the interest of many
researchers worldwide, such as in Japan and the Netherlands.
A group of Japanese researchers such as Nakaiwa et al. (1997,
2000, 2001) and Naito et al. (2000) studied internal heat inte-
grated columns, focusing on theoretical evaluations and pilot
plant testing. Their results indicated energy savings of up
to 60% with respect to conventional columns. Among the
research efforts on iHIDiC designs, few design aspects have
been reported. The research rather concentrated on simula-
tion, experimental studies, operational studies, and control
aspects. Most recent work by Huang et al. (2008) addressed
the effect of feed preheating on the overall energy efciency
of total iHIDiCs. This work reported that the heat integration
between the distillate and feed poses additional difculties
to process operation. The work did not include any design
suggestions, modeling or simulation aspects.
Nevertheless, most simulation studies were performed
without any guidelines and not following systematic strate-
gies. Further research efforts were published by Horiuchi et
al. (2008), focusing on the energy saving characteristics of the
internally heat integrated distillation columns. In this work,
iHIDiCs were used for multicomponent petroleum distillation
by constructing a pilot plant for the separation of hydrocar-
bons mixture. The study of the process system was conducted
considering a packed column type HIDiC, a concentric dou-
ble tube packed column. This work did not present any design
procedures or refer to how to design an iHIDiC for a given prob-
lem, but rather concentrated on the operation results of pilot
plant installations. On process design level, simulation and
process synthesis aspects, there were no general approaches
or methods to deal with new design problems and applications
of iHIDiCs; i.e. no systematic method to address such column
congurations. Furthermore, design feasibility and hydraulic
capacities for viable heat exchange were not dened. In this
current work, more attention is directed to the systematic
design of iHIDiC. The designs feasibility is introduced and then
evaluated with respect to two various aspects, thermal and
physical space capacities. A design procedure, simulation and
design hierarchy are developed to guide the design of a distilla-
tion problem as an internal heat integrated distillation column
(iHIDiC). The design procedure is based on rigorous models-
based commercial softwares, such as AspenHysys and ASPEN
Plus (Aspen Technology, 2008), ProII, etc.
2. Simulation background of iHIDiCs
A schematic diagram for an internal heat integrated dis-
tillation column is illustrated in Fig. 1. As seen, iHIDiC
conguration comprises two separate distillation columns,
1659
Fig. 1 Schematic representation of an iHIDiC.
stripping and rectifying columns. There is a pressure differ-
ence between the two columns; the overhead vapor of the
stripping column is compressed and then enters at the bot-
tom of the rectifying column. The rectifying column therefore
operates at a higher pressure and hence at a higher temper-
ature. The liquid from the bottom of the rectifying column is
fed into the top of the stripping column, as reux stream. The
pressure of the recycled liquid stream from the rectifying col-
umn is equalized with the pressure of the stripping column
through a throttling valve. The vapor leaving the top of the
rectifying column is the light product, while the heavy prod-
uct is the bottom stream of the stripping column. The two
columns are congured in a particular way so that the energy
of the hot rectifying column can be used to heat the stripping
column (Glenchur and Govind, 1987; Seader, 1978/1980). The
amount of heat transfer between the two columns can vary,
and correspondingly the reboiler duty will change.
The schematic representation of Fig. 1 explains the man-
ner through which internal HIDiCs are simulated by using
commercial simulators (Aspen Technology, 2008). Therefore,
the simulation is performed using two separate distillation
columns, one for stripping column and another for rectifying
column. However, the implementation of internal HIDiCs is
executed such that the two columns of stripping and rectifying
are congured in various forms, e.g. concentric conguration
with the rectifying column placed inside the stripping shell,
or as adjacent-two columns (Gadalla et al., 2007).
In simulation of internal HIDiCs, heat is transferred from
hot rectifying column to stripping column in order to heat the
liquid on a stage-basis. Initially, when no heat is exchanged,
the reboiler duty will have a large value and is comparable
with conventional duty. In this case, the reboiler provides all
heat required for vapor generation. Heat is transferred on each
column tray through an indirect contact of the rectifying hot
vapor and the stripping cold liquid streams. This implies that
a continuous condensation of the vapor phase occurs along
the rectifying column and a continuous evaporation, i.e. vapor
generation takes place in the stripping column. This heat inte-
gration will result in a reduction in both the reboiler and
condenser duties. The heat transfer is achieved in an exter-
nal medium (device), such as heat panels (Gadalla et al., 2007).
Heat panels are placed either on the rectifying side or strip-
ping side of the column trays, depending on the larger space
area. Hot vapors of rectifying column enter panels, while cold
liquids of stripping column ow across the outer surface of the
panels. As a result of this integration, the energy requirement
1660 chemical engineering research and design 8 7 ( 2 0 0 9 ) 16581666
Fig. 2 A hierarchy for iHIDiC design.
in the reboiler is reduced as part of the vapor is generated
by heat exchange. The more the heat exchanged, the less the
energy consumed in the reboiler. Design of iHIDiCs can be par-
tial, when the reboiler energy consumption is decreased to a
lower value, or ideal, when the reboiler duty is reduced to zero.
For an ideal iHIDiC, the reboiler unit is not needed since all the
energy required for vapor generation is provided by the recti-
fying section; however, for startup necessities, a reboiler unit
may be available.
As mentioned above, design of internal HIDiCs is typically
performed using process simulations (e.g. HYSYS). The design
task includes the calculations of the compressor, condenser
and reboiler duties, stage heat transfer rates, and the heat
transfer area required per stage. The heat transfer area is the
area of heat panels that is placed inside the column on stages
to achieve the heat exchange between the hot vapor and the
cold liquid of the rectifying and stripping stages, respectively.
3. A hierarchy for design of iHIDiCs
Prior to any design calculations of iHIDiCs, conventional dis-
tillation calculations are easily performed, besides in other
cases, heat pump data may be available. The design process
of iHIDiCs therefore may start from this basic step. Based on
available conventional calculations, a design hierarchy is pro-
posed in Fig. 2 for internal heat integrated distillation columns.
The hierarchy is to guide the designer to perform a systematic
design and to provide valuable insights for optimum results.
The design process starts by simulating a conventional col-
umn (or heat pump conguration), if not available, for the
given design problem. Required data (given data) for simula-
tion design are typically: (1) feed ow rate and conditions, (2)
components composition, (3) product and separation require-
ments, and (4) column pressure and pressure drops. Simulated
design parameters (output parameters) are: (1) number of
stages in each column section, (2) reboiler duty, (3) condenser
duty, and (4) product compositions. On the other hand, for
separation systems where heat pumps are adopted, the col-
umn conguration is simulated to calculate, in addition to
the above parameters, the compressor electricity consump-
tion and working pressure ratio. The design of iHIDiCs follows
up according to the hierarchy to rst a design of basic iHIDiC
which has no heat exchange or integration. Then a complete
iHIDiC is designed based on the design obtained in the pre-
vious step. This complete iHIDiC is simulated by increasing
the level of heat transfer between the individual columns step
by step until the reboiler duty is reduced to minimum (partial
iHIDiC) or zero (ideal iHIDiC). The two designs are different
only in the heat exchanged between the two columns, rec-
tifying and stripping. The design step of complete iHIDiC is
performed through a two-step approach, rst according to
the thermodynamic capabilities of the design and then based
on the hydraulic capacity of the stages. The nal design is
completed by an optimization procedure and some improve-
ment modications. However, the optimization procedure of
the design will not be taken into account in the current work.
Improvements may include addition of stages, ash drum, gas
turbine for more energy and power efciency.
Certainly when heat is exchanged between the rectify-
ing and stripping columns, liquid and vapor ows along the
column stages will change. It must be noted that the inte-
gration of the two columns does not necessarily imply heat
exchange on all trays. If the two columns are asymmetric,
this means that not all stages of the two columns will be
integrated. Part of the two columns will perform as conven-
tional column, i.e. vapor and liquid ows are almost constant
throughout this section. Typically when heat is integrated,
vapor ow increases in stripping column due to an internal
evaporation in the heat integrated part, while in the corre-
sponding integrated part of rectifying, vapor ow decreases
due to an internal condensation. On the other hand, in non-
integrated part on both sides of the columns, vapor and liquid
ows are almost unchanged.
3.1. An iHIDiC basic design
When iHIDiC is simulated, considering the column congura-
tion of Fig. 1 with no heat transfer between the two columns,
this simulation design is called basic design. This basic design
will be considered a rst step in designing a full iHIDiC. The
design is expected to show maximum reboiler duty which is
comparable with conventional designs. Therefore, the heat
transfer per stage Qstage is equal to 0. The prole of vapor
and liquid ows for this design throughout the column is con-
stant, which is similar to conventional columns. The principal
question to be addressed when designing iHIDiCs is where
to start the design process for the two designs, basic iHIDiC
and complete iHIDiC, given the basic data for separation. In
this context, several basic assumptions need to be taken into
account for both design cases, including: (1) feed location in
the iHIDiC conguration, (2) number of stages in each column,
and (3) pressure before and after the compressor (pressure
ratio). The conventional column design which is the only avail-
able data for iHIDiC is a key for starting the design. The column
is split around the feed entrance into two separate columns
for iHIDiC, rectifying and stripping. The relative feed location
is kept unchanged, i.e. the feed enters the stripping column
at the top stage. So, the upper section of the conventional
column will be rectifying column, while the lower section
(stripping) will be the stripping column with the column feed
 chemical engineering research and design 8 7 ( 2 0 0 9 ) 16581666
entering at the top. Consequently, the numbers of stages for
both iHIDiCs columns are identied from the upper and lower
sections of the conventional column design. This simplied
assumption seems reasonable since the separation performed
in HIDiC two columns is the same as achieved in the con-
ventional two sections. The pressure in rectifying column of
iHIDic is assumed to be as high as the pressure at the bottom
of the conventional column. On the other hand, the pressure
of the stripping column is taken to be the same for the con-
ventional top section. Therefore, a reasonable pressure ratio
is obtained from the pressure at the bottom of the rectifying
column and the pressure of the top of the stripping column.
This assumption will allow a logical temperature difference
for heat integration. Pressure ratio needs to meet some eco-
nomic constraints since it leads to a high operational cost of
electricity; so it can undergo through an optimization proce-
dure in late design stage. The pressure distribution suggested
is an initial guess for the pressure to be used in both columns
of stripping and rectifying columns. However, the pressure for
a nal design and hence the pressure ratio can be adjusted
through an optimization, and thus the pressure distribution
will be re-estimated. A reasonable pressure drop per stage is
assumed for both columns. By considering the same pressure
drop per stage as for the conventional column as an approxi-
mation, the pressure prole across the two columns (stripping
and rectifying) can then be estimated. Certainly these under-
lying assumptions of the distribution of stages and pressure
will have implications on the total cost of the total design.
Additionally, the pressure drop assumed will affect the relative
volatility (i.e. separation) and hence to fulll the same separa-
tion, reux and utilities will change. After obtaining the basic
design, optimization can be applied in order to reach an opti-
mum number of stages in each column and best pressure ratio
values, by considering all cost components of column capi-
tals and variable costs of cooling water, electricity and heating
steam. The column diameter will be also calculated according
to the ooding and pressure drop encountered in each column
stage. The diameter obviously will have an inuence on capital
costs.
When a heat pump design is available for the separation
problem, the basic assumptions will be different, and are
rather close to design of iHIDiCs. This implies that rectify-
ing and stripping columns will be equivalent to the top and
bottom sections of heat pump column design. The pressure
difference between the top and bottom of heat pump column,
i.e. pressure ratio will be used directly for both columns, i.e.
rectifying and stripping. Further optimization will result in
optimum values of number of stages and pressure distribu-
tion, taking into account all implications of capital costs and
utility costs (water, electricity, steam).
3.2. Simulation of iHIDiC basic design
The basic design of HIDiC is simulated using, as mentioned
above, a commercial simulator. In this work, HYSYS (version
2006.5) is used to perform the process simulation. Chemical
components included in the system need to be specied, fol-
lowed by selecting a physical property model, such as Peng
Robinson (Aspen Technology, 2008), for the calculations of the
physical and thermodynamics properties. After specifying the
components, together with the property model, the column
conguration is simulated as shown in Fig. 1. First, stripping
column is simulated for the feed conditions and ow rate.
Number of stages is specied and reux ratio is calculated
1661
Fig. 3 Basic iHIDiC for methanolwater separation (no
heat exchange) (numbers inside columns refer to number
of stages).
for the required separation (product composition). Then the
vapors from the top are compressed to enter the rectifying
column. Similarly, rectifying column is simulated to achieve
the product specications. Required stage diameters for sepa-
ration are then calculated based on ooding conditions given
by Fairs correlations (Kister, 1992) and liquid and vapor ow
rates inside the column (Aspen Technology, 2008).
Fig. 3 shows a basic iHIDiC designed for separating
methanolwater system. Design assumptions are made in
accordance with the above discussion, and based on a conven-
tional design and available data (condential). The column is
to separate a nearly pure methanol as top product and almost
pure water in the bottom product. Separation data and column
specications are shown in Fig. 3. In addition, the feed to this
column is at atmospheric conditions: physical and thermody-
namic properties are calculated using Peng Robinson model
(HYSYS). Design assumptions of Fig. 3 are:
(1) Number of stages in the stripping column is 30, whereas
the rectifying column contains 65 stages. Feed enters at
the rst stage from top of stripping column.
(2) The pressures for the striping column are 1.2 and 1.6 bar
at column top and bottom, respectively.
(3) For rectifying column, the bottom pressure is 2.6 bar, while
the top pressure is 1.8 bar.
(4) The pressure drop per stage is kept unchanged for the
basic design as for the conventional base case.
(5) The working pressure ratio is calculated to be 2.1.
Opting for the above assumption, a basic conguration
design of iHIDiC can be simulated to meet the separation
requirement of the design and obtain the required products.
From Fig. 3, it may be noted that the simulated values of
reboiler duty (41 MW) and condenser duty (39 MW) of basic
iHIDiC are close to those of conventional column design
(40 MW for condenser, 45 MW for reboiler). Also the simulated
diameter is 3.8 m for both columns, compared with 4 m for
the conventional column. The basic HIDiC remains an inter-
mediate stage between conventional column and complete
HIDiC. It represents a fundamental conguration that leads
eventually to an optimum full HIDiC.
3.3. An iHIDiC complete design
After obtaining the basic design of internal HIDiC, a com-
plete design is simulated to achieve both conditions, ideal and
partial designs. The simulation of internal HIDiCs proceeds
1662 chemical engineering research and design 8 7 ( 2 0 0 9 ) 16581666

via integrating (exchanging) heat between the rectifying and

stripping columns. In other words, on tray-basis the heat con-
tents of the vapors of rectifying stages are exchanged in an
indirect contact in heat panels to vaporize the liquid owing
downwards across stages of stripping column. It is assumed
that the two columns are congured as concentric with recti-
fying column in the middle. So panels can be placed on trays
in the space area available (active areas) such that they are
exposed to both vapors of rectifying and liquids of stripping.
The location of panels can take place in rectifying side or strip-
ping side, subject to availability of physical space (Gadalla
et al., 2007). In simulation terms, this step is performed via
energy streams withdrawn from the rectifying column at a
given stage and added to the stripping column at the corre-
sponding stage. The value of the energy amounts exchanged
is increased gradually until the reboiler duty is reduced to a
minimum value, keeping the product specications for the
base case xed. If the ultimate value of reboiler duty reaches
zero, the column design is called ideal, otherwise the design is
partial with reboiler duty above zero. As a result of this energy
exchange, the vapor ow in rectifying column is expected to
decrease because of condensation. Consequently, the vapor
ow inside stripping column in turn increases due to an exter-
nal vaporization. As stated earlier not all stages have to be
integrated. In this case, vapor and liquid ow proles will
change in integrated stages from non-integrated stages, i.e.
constant proles in non-integrated parts. The condensation
of vapors in rectifying column will lead to a lower duty in
the external condenser. In the same way, the external reboiler
duty of the stripping column will decrease due to the vapor-
ization taken place by heat integration with rectifying column.
The simulation of complete HIDiCs seems time-
consuming; however it is useful to overcome convergence
problems of commercial simulators by decreasing the incre-
mental increase in the energy transfer value. After completing
a full design of internal HIDiCs, the calculations of heat trans-
fer areas that are required on each stage for energy integration
are performed, according to the following relationships:
Qstage
A= (1)
U Tstage
Tstage = TR TS (2)
where, A is the heat transfer area of panel, Qstage is the amount
of energy exchanged per stage, U is the overall heat transfer
coefcient, and Tstage is the temperature difference between
the rectifying stage temperature (TR ) and the stripping stage
temperature (TS ). These two temperatures can be extracted
from simulation results. Note that the temperature differ-
ence between stages indicates the driving force that allows
heat integration. The overall heat transfer coefcient can be
assumed with a reasonable value (1 kW/m2 C), or is replaced
by experimental data.
Fig. 4 Constant heat transfer rate design for iHIDiC (stages
w.r.t. column top).
requires different panel areas to be installed on each stage.
This design may lead to unfeasible requirements of heat trans-
fer areas on some stages if the required area cannot be fullled
by the existing stage capacities. On the other hand, for the
other design, the same amount of heat transfer areas is to be
installed on each stage and correspondingly the heat trans-
fer rate will vary throughout the stages as function of the
temperature differences. This last design is more practical
since it exploits the variation in temperature driving force and
hence it ascertains the design feasibility. This is because the
installed heat transfer areas will take into account the maxi-
mum tray capacity. Fig. 4 demonstrates a HIDiC designed for
methanolwater separation (data of Fig. 3), considering a con-
stant heat transfer scenario. As can be seen, heat transfer area
(A) increases rapidly with stages from top to bottom locations
(N). For this design, the heat transfer rate per stage is 1.1 MW.
In contrast, the design with constant heat transfer area per
stage of 170 m2 is shown in Fig. 5. The two designs are iden-
tical in the total amount of heat integration and separation
specications; however, they differ in the heat transfer area
distributions. Further differences between these designs may
include vapor and liquid ows, external energy consumption,
column diameters, etc. To decide on the preference of these
designs, two important criteria must be taken into account: (1)
feasibility of design, i.e. if the design is practically feasible and
(2) optimization. The feasibility will take into account whether
the heat transfer areas can be accommodated by the exist-
ing column diameters or not. On the other hand, optimization
will include all cost variations of the two cases caused by the
change in vapor and liquid ows (i.e. diameter), heat transfer
areas, reboiler and condenser duties, and electricity. A com-
parison of the two designs is shown in Table 1. The HIDiC
design with constant duty per stage assumes a rate of 1.1 MW,
while the other design installs a 172 m2 per stage. The last

3.3.1. Design scenarios of iHIDiCs

For achieving a full iHIDiC design, there exist two scenar-
ios for transferring heat from rectifying column to stripping
column: (i) constant energy transfer and (ii) constant heat
transfer area. In the rst scenario, the amount of heat trans-
fer is xed throughout the column stages, i.e. Qstage is a xed
value. Therefore, the heat transfer area of heat panels will
vary from one stage to another, in accordance with the tem- Fig. 5 Constant area design for iHIDiC (stages w.r.t.
perature driving force on each stage. As a result, this design column top).
 chemical engineering research and design 8 7 ( 2 0 0 9 ) 16581666
Table 1 Comparison of design scenarios of iHIDiC.
Conventional
Reboiler duty (MW) 45
Condenser duty (MW) 40
Compressor load (MW)
Total heat transfer areas (m2 )
decision for comparison should be cost-oriented, and prefer-
ably is resulting from optimization and feasibility criteria.
As seen in the above discuss, the iHIDiC is simulated, then
the calculation of heat transfer areas is performed in a two-
step procedure. However, a simultaneous simulation tool has
been developed within HYSYS simulator (Aspen Technology,
2008) and will be considered in future publications. This tool
allows performing the calculation of heat transfer at the same
time the simulation is executed. In order to achieve this, a
set of equations is built inside the simulator. Calculations are
carried out using the online values of temperatures. Note that
this new tool can handle the two scenarios of designs.
Given that the principal aspect (benets) of iHIDiCs is the
energy transfer from the rectifying column to stripping one, it
is an obvious necessity to consider this key parameter in more
detail in design. For this respect, the design task of iHIDiCs
in the hierarchy presented in Fig. 2 entails two important
stages: (a) thermodynamic design and (b) hydraulic design.
This implies that internal integration is designed according
to two fundamental considerations, rstly from the point of
view of energy exchange, and then according to the capacity
of trays to satisfy exchange requirements. It must be noted
that these aspects of thermodynamic and hydraulic designs
have not been accounted for in previous works.
3.4. Thermodynamic design of iHIDiCs
As mentioned earlier, heat is exchanged from rectifying stages
to stripping stages. Certainly, there must be enough heat (qual-
ity) to perform this exchange; therefore rectifying stages need
to be hotter than the corresponding stripping stages. For this
reason, stage temperature proles of basic iHIDiCs are found
to be key parameter for such a measure leading to heat inte-
gration. Temperature proles are obtained from simulation
results of basic iHIDiC using HYSYS (Aspen Technology, 2008)
by extracting the temperature of each stage for both columns,
i.e. rectifying and stripping. Hence, two temperature proles
are obtained; hot prole for rectifying column and cold pro-
le for stripping column. Then, these proles can be plotted
against the stages number for both columns. Temperatures for
both columns are plotted on Y-axis, whereas stage number is
represented on X-axis. For a possible heat transfer between the
two columns, the hot prole of the rectifying column must be
above (hotter) the cold temperature prole. This means that
there should be positive temperature driving forces between
the rectifying and stripping columns. The positive tempera-
ture difference is obtained by a specic pressure ratio; this
leads to the denition of a minimum pressure ratio. This
minimum value is dened as the lowest value of pressure dif-
ference that ascertains a positive driving force between the
rectifying and stripping columns. This value is crucial for good
design and can be obtained thus by plotting the temperature
proles for basic iHIDiCs. Fig. 6 shows a typical stage tempera-
ture prole of iHIDiC for separating benzenetoluene mixture
1663
HIDiC with constant HIDiC with constant heat
energy rate per stage transfer area per stage
19.5 19.9
17.9 17.9
3.5 3.5
9410 4140
with a ow of 8.5 t/h available at 40 C and 1 atm. The mixture
contains benzene and toluene with equimolar composition.
The iHIDiC design contains 10 stages for each column, and is
to separate benzene and toluene products with molar purities
of 99.7% and 99.5%, respectively. The pressure ratio for these
proles is 2:1 (rectifying pressure/striping pressure). The stage
proles were obtained for a basic iHIDiC designed for this sys-
tem. External reboiler and condenser duties are found to be
1347 kW and 1492 kW, respectively, while the compressor load
is 170.3 kW. The Peng Robinson property model was used for
this simulation.
It can be seen from the plot that the rectifying tempera-
ture prole is hotter than the corresponding cold temperature
prole with a temperate difference varying along the column
stages. There is a positive temperature difference through-
out all columns stages. This indicates that energy can be
exchanged from rectifying column to stripping column along
all stages. It is clear that some stages (top and bottom sec-
tions) show large driving forces, whereas others have smaller
temperature differences. Referring to the previous scenarios of
design, when duty per stage is xed the required heat trans-
fer areas will be large on some stages with small temperature
driving forces (middle section of Fig. 6). This design may repre-
sent a practical difculty in the case that the column diameter
is incapable of providing the required design area of heat
transfer. Thus, the variation of the temperature differences of
both proles should correspond to the distribution of the heat
transfer between the columns. In other words, the amount of
heat that can be transferred on stages should vary according to
the temperature difference. Therefore, more heat can be trans-
ferred on those stages of large driving forces and conversely
stages with smaller temperature difference preferably trans-
fer less heat. The area requirement of this design justies the
recommendation of transferring more heat on those stages
with large driving force. The larger driving force, the less area
required. Indeed, this leads to a minimum capital cost and is
accompanied by less external energy consumptions. On the
other side, if the same heat is to be transferred on stages with
Fig. 6 Stage temperature proles for basic iHIDiC.
1664 chemical engineering research and design 8 7 ( 2 0 0 9 ) 16581666

small temperature differences, the area requirements will be

substantial. Thus, the suggestion in this case is to transfer less
heat, but this will incur more external energy consumptions.
In conclusion, stages with minimum temperature differences
are limiting stages and may dene the key bottleneck for heat
integration.
It must be noted that the shape of the temperature pro-
les is a function of the system to be separated. The shape
of proles can be divided into three groups: (1) parallel pro-
les where temperature difference is almost xed, (2) variable
proles with large difference on the terminals and minimum
in the middle, and (3) decreasing or increasing proles. Each
prole category has its implications on both duty transfer and
heat transfer areas. The rst group will have nearly constant
heat transfer areas across all column stages to transfer the
same amount of energy per stage. Benzenetoluene mixture
Fig. 7 Temperature driving force for iHIDiC with zero duty
is an example for the second group proles, where energy
and 90 kW per stage.
exchange is a maximum at top and bottom sections, while
middle section is characterized by minimum energy transfer.
fer when their temperature differences are smaller than a
Group 3 will show area and duty requirements as those given
minimum specied value (Tmin ). Therefore, maximum heat
in Figs. 4 and 5 for methanolwater system. For such proles,
integration on a stage can be calculated knowing its tempera-
the energy transfer and transfer areas are large at one end of
ture driving force. Pinched and limiting stages can be predicted
the prole and small at the other end.
ahead of design by moving the temperature proles towards
each other till their touch point (or points). Pointing to Fig. 6,
3.4.1. Pinched and limiting stages of iHIDiCs
if the proles are moved vertically against each other, stage #6
From Fig. 6, the temperature difference is shown to be at its
is pinched; this agrees with the conclusion drawn from Fig. 7.
minimum value at stage number 6 (from top). This differ-
In conclusion, temperature proles can identify stages with
ence is called the minimum temperature difference for iHIDiC
limiting temperature difference for heat exchange, also the
design (Tmin ). This value is a trade-off parameter with its
maximum heat recovery between the two columns. One more
impacts on capital-energy costs; it needs to be determined
advantage of such proles is that a minimum pressure ratio
through an optimization. When HIDiC is designed for a smaller
(or rectifying pressure) can also be identied. This pressure
temperature difference, more heat can be exchanged, and thus
ratio is the smallest value that allows a possible heat transfer
the external utility consumptions are reduced. In addition,
from rectifying to stripping stages (or positive driving force).
larger heat transfer areas will be required. On the other hand,
For a given system, the hot prole is moved vertically away
larger values of Tmin will imply less heat to be exchanged,
from the cold prole until a positive value of T is observed.
more utility consumption and less capital cost of transfer
Therefore, this minimum difference corresponds to a mini-
areas. Again, it is clear that heat transfer is possible for this
mum working rectifying pressure that leads to a feasible heat
system throughout all column stages. The temperature driv-
recovery. So the design of complete iHIDiCs can proceed by: (1)
ing force is a maximum at top and bottom locations of the
dening pinched and limiting stages, (2) identifying minimum
column, and is reduced, moving towards the middle of the
pressure ratio, and (3) calculating maximum heat recovery for
column. Note that this temperature prole was obtained for
each stage. Moreover, heat integration schemes can also be
a basic iHIDiC, i.e. no heat transfer between columns. Thus,
obtained for a given pressure ratio by performing more heat
when heat is transferred on stage-basis, vapor and liquid ows
recovery on stages with higher temperature differences. This
will change across each stage and hence temperatures will
step may result in several feasible integrated schemes with
change. Therefore, temperature driving forces will decrease
regard to the same problem. In other words, one integration
for column stages, i.e. temperature proles will move against
each other. Repetitively, heat can be exchanged until the two
proles meet at a certain stage (or stages). Fig. 7 shows tem-
perature driving force for basic iHIDiC compared with iHIDiC
with heat transfer per stage of 90 kW. On the other hand,
Fig. 8 represents the vapor ows for these designs, compared
with conventional column for benzenetoluene separation. It
is obvious for iHIDiC with energy exchange that vapor ows
decreases in rectifying column because of condensation, while
in stripping column these ows increase due to vaporization.
Back to Fig. 7, the temperature driving force decreases with
heat integration (exchange). The driving force is minimum
and equal to zero at one specic stage (stage #6). This stage
is called pinched stage and indicates the condition of maxi-
mum heat recovery for this particular stage. This means that
the maximum energy exchange on this stage is 90 kW and
heat cannot be integrated further. Stages with temperature Fig. 8 Vapor ows for iHIDiC designs compared with
difference around this pinched stage are called limiting stages. conventional design (rectifying stages from 1 to 10,
These stages are then responsible for impractical heat trans- stripping stages from 11 to 20).
 chemical engineering research and design 8 7 ( 2 0 0 9 ) 16581666
scheme could be integrating only the top and bottom stages
of the two columns since they have the largest driving forces.
Another scheme may integrate all stages except the limiting
and pinched stages. Each scheme differs in the overall exter-
nal energy consumption (reboiler/condenser), areas of heat
transfer, compressor load, and capital costs of equipments.
Therefore an optimization is necessary to screen all these
feasible options. During optimization, feasibility of design
schemes can be assessed and guaranteed using temperature
proles.
3.5. Hydraulic design of iHIDiCs
After reaching a reasonable design with respect to heat inte-
gration, the subsequent step is to design the heat transfer
medium. Traditional design of such a step only refers to the
calculations of the heat transfer areas (panels) required to per-
form the heat integration. Heat transfer area required for an
energy exchange on a particular stage can be calculated from
the relationships presented previously (Eqs. (1) and (2)). The
availability of enough heat to be integrated does not necessar-
ily imply that the design is feasible in overall. As an example,
it is likely that a designed column provides the necessary heat
from rectifying to stripping but the calculated stage diameters
are not able to provide space area (to place panels). There-
fore, the overall design is not attainable. In conclusion, there
must be a distinction between two feasibility factors in HIDiC
design, rstly the thermodynamic feasibility and secondly the
hydraulic feasibility. The design is thermodynamically feasi-
ble, as seen in Section 3.4, when there is sufcient heat or
positive temperature driving force. From another side, the
presence of enough space and large column diameters will
lead to reasonable designs with respect to hydraulic design.
Therefore, calculated heat transfer areas must be compared
with the real capacity of stages. To assess hydraulic feasibility,
the maximum available area on each tray needs to be quanti-
ed, and the available area should allow the placement of heat
panels to perform the required energy exchange.
Providing the conguration of rectifying with stripping
columns, e.g. concentric layout (Gadalla et al., 2007), the maxi-
mum physical space areas on stages can be calculated. Within
these space areas, heat transfer devices can then be placed to
allow heat exchange. The space calculation is simple and only
requires: (1) hydraulic column diameter, (2) dimensions of the
heat transfer device, and (3) layout of heat panels with col-
umn stages. The hydraulic diameter is determined by process
simulation, which is calculated from ooding limits given by
Fairs correlations (Kister, 1992). The diameters are calculated
for each stage of rectifying and stripping columns. Dimensions
of heat panels (devices) are length, thickness, and width, of
panels. Heat panels are normally placed repeatedly in vertical
layout on the space available by the trays. Then, the geometry
of the column stages together with placing heat panels is ana-
lyzed. The analysis results in estimating all the physical space
areas that are available to place heat panels. Also, the number
of heat panels that can be handled in these physical spaces is
calculated, given the panel dimensions and assuming a rea-
sonable free allowance between each pair of panels. Therefore,
on each column stage, the maximum available area is deter-
mined. If these areas are plotted against the stage number,
a prole for maximum hydraulic area available is obtained.
This prole represents the maximum area possible for energy
exchange. Details of such models and calculations are given
by Gadalla et al. (2007).
1665
Fig. 9 Stage feasibility prole for iHIDiC.
The maximum area is a limiting key for hydraulic design
and feasibility. For that reason, the required heat transfer area
for heat integration needs to be smaller than the maximum
available one (hydraulic area). If the required heat transfer
areas (design areas) are superimposed on the hydraulic prole,
a feasibility prole is obtained (Fig. 9). As a result, a hydraulic
feasibility indicator can be determined to decide whether the
energy can be exchanged, satisfying the stage hydraulic design
or not. This indicator is therefore calculated for each stage,
and is equal to the ratio between the required areas to the
maximum available areas. For a feasible hydraulic design, the
indicator must be smaller than unity. The calculations of Fig. 9
are made for iHIDiC design (10 stages for each column) for
an equimolar benzenetoluene mixture (8.5 t/h, 40 C, 1 atm.).
The reboiler duty of this design is zero, i.e. ideal iHIDiC. The
pressure ratio between the two columns is 2.5. The separa-
tion specications (by mole) for top and bottom products are
99.7% benzene and 99.5% toluene, respectively. The design
heat transfer rate to achieve ideal iHIDiC is 287.2 kW/stage.
From the prole, feasibility regions can be identied, where
energy integration can be processed due to the presence of
enough space areas. Conversely, stages which cannot allow
the energy exchange inside columns are determined. This is
because these stages have no enough spaces to place panels
for energy exchange. As seen in the gure, stages #47 cannot
provide the required heat transfer areas (design). Therefore
energy rates have to be decreased on these stages. On the other
hand, all other stages can satisfy the designed heat trans-
fer rates. This nding agrees with the observation of Fig. 6,
which indicated that the middle stages of the column have
limiting temperature driving forces. In summary, the feasibil-
ity prole identies regions of hydraulic feasibility in addition
to thermodynamic feasibility.
Note that the feasibility prole is not only a measure for
evaluating designs but it can also determine the maximum
allowable heat transfer rates for stages with indicator greater
than 1. This maximum energy rate is calculated by multiplying
the maximum available area for a given stage by the temper-
ature difference and the overall heat transfer coefcient.
4. Concluding remarks
A systematic design hierarchy has been proposed for iHIDiCs,
including thermodynamic and hydraulic approaches. Starting
from a conventional design or heat pump, a full iHIDiC design
is realized by performing basic design assumptions to con-
ventional data. A basic design of iHIDiC is rst simulated, and
1666 chemical engineering research and design 8 7 ( 2 0 0 9 ) 16581666
then a complete iHIDiC is obtained, ideal or partial. Temper-
ature proles are keys for heat integration, while hydraulic
calculations are necessary to quantify the ability of a column
design to place heat panels. Following the two design cri-
teria, together with the design hierarchy, a feasible internal
integrated column design is easily obtained. The systematic
design methodology can be applied to any separation systems,
providing a basis for further optimization and improvement
studies. Designs obtained by the new design hierarchy guaran-
tee feasibilities with respect to thermodynamics and physical
space availabilities.
Acknowledgements
The author is grateful to the Program Ofce on Economy,
Ecology and Technology for nancial support and to the part-
ners ABB-Lummus, AKZO-Nobel, BP, DSM, ECN, SHELL GS and
Sulzer Chemtech. Special thanks as well are given to Professor
Zarko Olujic and Professor Peter Jansens from Delft University
of Technology (The Netherlands) for their valuable support,
precious discussion and great advices related to this work. I
would also appreciate the help of Dr. Aris de Rijke from the
department of Process and Energy at Delft University of Tech-
nology.
References
Aso, K., Matsuo, H., Noda, H., Takada, T. and Kobayashi, N.,
1996/1998, Heat integrated distillation column, US Patent, 5,
783, 047.
Aspen Technology, Inc., 2008, AspenTech Version 2008,
20.0.0.6728.
Fitzmorris, R.E. and Mah, R.S.H., 1980, Improving distillation
column design using thermodynamic availability analysis.
AIChE Journal, 26(2): 265273.
Freshwater, D.C., 1951, Thermal economy in distillation.
Transactions IChemE, 29: 149160.
Gadalla, M., Jimenez, L., Olujic, Z. and Jansens, P.J., 2007, A
thermo-hydraulic approach to conceptual design of an
internally heat-integrated distillation column (i-HIDiC).
Computers and Chemical Engineering, 31: 13461354.
Glenchur, Th. and Govind, R., 1987, Study on a continuous heat
integrated distillation column. Separation Science and
Technology, 22: 23232328.
Horiuchi, K., Yanagimoto, K., Kataoka, K., Nakaiwa, M., Iwakabe,
K. and Matsuda, K., 2008, Energy saving characteristics of the
internally heat integrated distillation column (HIDiC) pilot
plant for multicomponent petroleum distillation. Journal of
Chemical Engineering of Japan, 41: 771778.
Huang, K., Shan, L., Zhu, Q. and Qian, J., 2008, A totally
heat-integrated distillation column (THIDiC)the effect of
feed preheating by distillate. Applied Thermal Engineering,
28: 856864.
Kister, H.Z., (1992). Distillation Design. (McGraw-Hill, New York).
Linnhoff, B., Dunford, H. and Smith, R., 1983, Heat integration of
distillation columns into overall processes. Chemical
Engineering Science, 38(8): 11751188.
Mah, R.S.H., Nicholas, J.J. and Wodnik, R.B., 1977, Distillation with
secondary reux and vaporization: a comparative evaluation.
AIChE Journal, 23: 651658.
Naito, K., Nakaiwa, M., Huang, K., Endo, A., Aso, T., Nakanishi, T.,
Nakamura, T., Noda, H. and Takamatsu, T., 2000, Operation of
bench-scale HIDiC: an experimental study. Computers and
Chemical Engineering, 24: 495499.
Nakaiwa, M., Huang, K., Naito, K., Endo, A., Owa, M., Akiya, T.,
Nakane, T. and Takamatsu, T., 2000, A new conguration of
ideal heat integrated distillation columns (HIDiC). Computers
and Chemical Engineering, 24: 239245.
Nakaiwa, M., Huang, K., Naito, K., Endo, A., Akya, T., Nakane, T.
and Takamatsu, T., 2001, Parameter analysis and optimization
of ideal heat integrated distillation columns. Computers and
Chemical Engineering, 25: 737744.
Nakaiwa, M., Huang, K., Owa, M., Akiya, T., Nakane, T., Sato, M.
and Takamatsu, T., 1997, Energy savings in heat-integrated
distillation columns. Energy, 22: 621625.
Olujic, Z., Fakhri, F., de Rijke, A., de Graauw, J. and Jansens, P.J.,
2003, Internal heat integrationthe key to an
energy-conserving distillation column. Journal of Chemical
Technology and Biotechnology, 78: 241248.
Seader, J.D., 1978/1980, Continuous distillation apparatus and
method, US Patent, 4, 234, 391.
Stupin, W.J. and Lockhar, F.J., 1972, Thermally coupled
distillationa case history. Chemical Engineering Progress,
68(10): 7172.
Sulzer Chemtech, 2006, Distillation and heat pump technology,
Brochure 22.47.06.40-V.91-100.