Documente Academic
Documente Profesional
Documente Cultură
2013 Aspen Technology, Inc. AspenTech, aspenONE, the Aspen leaf logo, the aspenONE logo, and OPTIMIZE are trademarks of Aspen Technology, Inc. All rights reserved. 11-4500-1113
2013 Aspen Technology, Inc. AspenTech, aspenONE, the Aspen leaf logo, the aspenONE logo, and OPTIMIZE are trademarks of Aspen Technology, Inc. All rights reserved. 11-4500-1113
Executive Summary
This paper describes a new and exciting approach for incorporating granular solids and the corresponding solids processing steps when modeling chemical processes. Modeling the solids section of a process is important for many common processes including specialty chemicals, agrochemicals, metals and mining, pharmaceuticals, biofuels, and more. The main challenges that arise when optimizing or troubleshooting a solids process include inefficient designs due to separate modeling of fluids and solids sections, overdesign of equipment, high-energy demands, reduced yields, and quality variability. Opposed to fluids, which are generally described by concentrated properties like vapor fraction, composition, and temperature and pressure, granular solids are described by distributed properties such as particle size distribution (PSD). This adds an extra level of complexity to the description of the material and therefore the solids section of a production process is often neglected or over simplified. Whether particles are being formed (e.g. crystallization, spray drying), reduced in size (e.g. crushing/grinding), enlarged (e.g. granulation, agglomeration), participating in reactions (e.g. fluidized bed reactor, fixed bed reactor) or just being separated from a fluid stream (e.g. cyclones, filters, centrifuges), ignoring or poorly modeling the solids processing steps may lead to lost opportunities, including costs reductions and quality improvements. Considering this, some companies use in-house models or spreadsheets to describe the solids section of a process. The drawback of this custom or one-off approach is that the fluid section of the process is modeled in one simulation environment (e.g. Aspen Plus) while the solids section is modeled in another (e.g. Excel). In general, this approach may lead to errors and inefficiencies due to data transfer, different stream structures, or inconsistent physical properties. With the introduction of aspenONE version 8 in December 2012, Aspen Plus process simulation software provides the capability to describe granular solids in detail and provides a comprehensive model library for the equipment associated with solids processing steps. In V8.4, the model library covers drying, fluidizationincluding chemical reactions, granulation, crystallization, crushing and grinding, classification, solid/liquid and gas/solid separation, as well as pneumatic conveying of solids. The Aspen Plus user can consequently model processes that contain both fluids and solids in one simulation environment using consistent physical properties and avoid errors and inefficiencies that may result from the transfer of data from one simulation system to the other. The unit models offered in the library can range in fidelity from conceptual to rigorous. Process engineers who are not solids modeling experts can use conceptual models to design a sketch of the solids section before handing it off to a solids expert for more rigorous design, if needed. Activated features in Aspen Plus such as Economics, Energy, and Exchanger Design and Rating are available to further optimize processes that contain solids sections. Over 100 organizations have embraced AspenTechs innovative solids modeling since its introduction one year ago with very positive customer reactions. Evonik Industries AG, a leading specialty chemical manufacturer, has strong potential business benefits from the new capabilities in terms of improved work flow and more detailed modeling. Furthermore, Aspen Plus enables the user to optimize the entire process and via features such as Activated Economics and Activated Energy, achieve operating benefits including reduced capital and energy costs and improved throughput and quality. According to the head of Computer Aided Process Engineering & Automation at Evonik Industries AG, Dr. Hans-Rolf Lausch states: Conceptual models are easy to use and enable Evonik's process engineers to describe solids equipment without being solids experts, allowing them to model and optimize entire processes. Our engineers in the CAPE & Automation department can work with the particle technology department to make the model more rigorous, leading to better collaboration and more efficient projects.
2013 Aspen Technology, Inc. AspenTech, aspenONE, the Aspen leaf logo, the aspenONE logo, and OPTIMIZE are trademarks of Aspen Technology, Inc. All rights reserved. 11-4500-1113
Introduction
In addition to fluids, many industrial processes involve solids processing steps that often have a significant influence on the overall process performance, product quality, or energy demand. In general, the solids section of an industrial process has to fulfill one or more of the following tasks: formulate particles (e.g. granulation, crystallization), adjust the moisture content (e.g. drying), change the composition by chemical reactions (e.g. fluidized bed reactor), adjust the particle size distribution (crushing/grinding, classifying, compacting) and separate solids from fluids (e.g. cyclone, centrifuge). In developing a process with a solids section that addresses one or more of the mentioned tasks, four main interconnected challenges typically arise:
2013 Aspen Technology, Inc. AspenTech, aspenONE, the Aspen leaf logo, the aspenONE logo, and OPTIMIZE are trademarks of Aspen Technology, Inc. All rights reserved. 11-4500-1113
Figure 1: Typical flow diagram of a specialty chemical process with a solid product
Alternatively, as Figure 1 displayed, the reaction step in the upstream part could already involve solids. An example for this type of process is the synthesis of organosilanes as monomers for silicone polymers. Here, granular silicone reacts in a fluidized bed in the presence of a solid copper catalyst with chloromethane to dimethyldichlorosilane. Other examples include the production of rubber, vinyl chloride, polyethylene, and styrene. Typical challenges for the processes described above is to make sure the product qualitywith regard to composition, purity, particle size distribution, and moistureminimizes the energy demand of the process.
2013 Aspen Technology, Inc. AspenTech, aspenONE, the Aspen leaf logo, the aspenONE logo, and OPTIMIZE are trademarks of Aspen Technology, Inc. All rights reserved. 11-4500-1113
Biofuel processes
As shown in Figure 2, in most biofuel processes (e.g. corn stover, switchgrass, sugarcane) the solids feed of the process are comparably large particles that need to be reduced in size to be further processed. This is done in a grinding and classification step that produces a material with a well-defined particle size distribution. Subsequently, in the case of ethanol production, the material enters a section where solid/liquid reactions including hydrolysis and fermentation occur to produce ethanol and the ethanol must be separated from the remaining biomass and be further purified. Or, in the case of biodiesel production, oil is extracted from the biomass and then dried to remove excess water before it is processed into biodiesel1. Alternatively, biomass gasification serves as a way to produce energy using a fluidized bed reactor. One of the major challenges for this kind of process is the reduction of the total energy demand of the process. Here, size reduction is an energy-consuming process, especially for second generation biofuels and for a process where an energy carrier is the productusing less energy is critical for a more economically feasible and sustainable solution2.
Figure 2: Typical flow diagram of a biofuel process with a solid biomass feed
Extractive Processes
Similar to biofuel processes, extractive processes (e.g. oil shale, copper) contain, in most cases, a grinding and classification step to allow the feed particles to be processed in a subsequent extraction and separation step, as shown in Figure 3 below. Depending on the specific process, the products could be either fluids (the case of an oil shale process) or solids (the case of a copper production process) where copper is extracted from the raw ore and then concentrated by use of flotation.
Figure 3: Typical flow diagram of an extractive process with a solid feed and fluid product
One of the main challenges for this kind of process is to find the optimal combination between the operating conditions for the upstream grinding and classification part and the downstream extraction and separation part. The finer the material is grinded in the beginning, the better the extraction and separation may work, but at the same time the energy demand for the grinding may increase. The examples above demonstrate that in many industrial production processes, fluids and solids sections influence each other due to recycles from the solids to the fluid section or vice versa. Therefore, modeling both the fluids and the solids section of a process is important for many applications including most bulk and specialty chemicals, agrochemicals, mineral extraction and processing, pharmaceuticals, biofuel, energy, and more.
2013 Aspen Technology, Inc. AspenTech, aspenONE, the Aspen leaf logo, the aspenONE logo, and OPTIMIZE are trademarks of Aspen Technology, Inc. All rights reserved. 11-4500-1113
New Workflow: A Holistic Fluid and Solids Model in One Simulation Environment
In response to a lack of an industrial simulator to rigorously model the solids section of an industrial process, the standalone solids simulator SolidSim was developed by solids experts and industry participants in Germany in the early 2000s to 2010 timeframe. SolidSim introduced a generally applicable flowsheet simulation system to rigorously describe granular solids and the machines and apparatuses of particle technology3. The development of SolidSim was focused mainly on solids so users of that tool couldnt rigorously model the fluid section of a process. In February 2012, Aspen Technology acquired SolidSim Engineering GmbH, the company that was developing and marketing SolidSim in order to unify these two modeling environments. With the release of Aspen Plus V8 in December 2012, the Aspen Plus model library was enhanced with the SolidSim technology incorporating 25 unit operations models, including models for drying, crystallization, granulation and agglomeration, crushing and grinding, classification, gas/solid, and solid liquid separation. In addition, an easy-to-use workflow for the definition of particle size distributions was introduced with an enhanced results representation that allows visualizing particle size distributions (e.g. cumulative, density, or RRSB) and apparatus-specific results (e.g. separation efficiency curve of a screen or a gas cyclone) with the click of a button. Also, characteristic diameters such as d25, d50, or the Sauter Mean Diameter (SMD) are now shown in Aspen Plus in the stream results. This enhancement enables the user of Aspen Plus, without any additional software use costs, to model processes that contain both fluids and solids in one simulation environment using consistent physical properties and avoiding errors and inefficiencies that may result from the transfer of data from one simulation system to the other. Considering the entire process, rather than only smaller subsections, allows the user to avoid sub-optimal design due to localized optimization. By overcoming this challenge, as well as introducing detailed solids modeling, users can address capital costs due to overdesign, energy and other operating costs, and reduce product quality or throughput. Furthermore, Aspen Plus V8 enables the user to optimize the entire process and use integrated features such as Activated Economics and Activated Energy. One example of this more holistic workflow is shown in Figure 4 and displays the process model of the entire urea production process containing both the synthesis and the granulation part in Aspen Plus V8.
Figure 4: New workflow: Holistic process model of the urea synthesis and granulation in Aspen Plus V8
2013 Aspen Technology, Inc. AspenTech, aspenONE, the Aspen leaf logo, the aspenONE logo, and OPTIMIZE are trademarks of Aspen Technology, Inc. All rights reserved. 11-4500-1113
Since this model describes the upstream urea synthesis (fluid part) and the downstream urea granulation section (solids part), the influence of each part is considered in a rigorous way. If, for example, the air flow rate to the fluidized bed coolers in the granulation section of the urea process needs to be increased, this will lead to a higher entrainment of fines from the coolers. The entrained particles will be removed from the gas stream by the venturi scrubber, dissolved in the wash liquid, and then recycled back to the synthesis section. Therefore, the change of the air flow rate to the cooler will have an influence on the upstream urea synthesis which will then have an impact on the downstream solids part. Figure 5 below shows an example of the process of the predicted process behavior when varying the air flow rate to the fluidized bed cooler4. By performing sensitivity studies in that way, an optimal operating point for the overall process plant can be found to match operating constraints.
Figure 5: Case study: urea spray rate, exhaust gas solids load, and product temperature as function of cooling air flow rate
Aspen Technology continues to advance the solids modeling capability in Aspen Plus. Table 1 summarizes the solids modeling features introduced with each Aspen Plus release since V8.0.
Version Date of Release Features
December 2012
Addition of 25 SolidSim unit operations PSD characterization Solids-related results representation Economics for solids processing (Activated Economics) Total of 38 SolidSim unit operations Enhanced PSD definition and results representation Conceptual models Spray dryer unit model Reactions in fluidized bed unit model
May 2013
November 2013
Table 1: Solids-related features highlighted for the Aspen V8.0, V8.2, and V8.4 releases
To further streamline the workflow, new conceptual models have been introduced with Aspen Plus V8.4 that allow the user to model solids processing steps with only a few parameters and without the requirement of having deep knowledge of the specific apparatus or particle technology. The conceptual models are an enhancement of the existing solids blocks in Aspen Plus and allow users to model solids processing steps at different levels of fidelity from conceptual to rigorous without changing the structure of the flowsheet. When painting a scene, an artist doesnt start in one corner and paint in great detail while moving slowly across the blank canvas to the opposite corner. An artist will sketch the scene, apply conceptual shapes, and end with layers of detail. Modeling solids is similar to painting a scene, with some finished models looking less like finely detailed masterpieces than others. Depending on the stage of project or the project depth, how
2013 Aspen Technology, Inc. AspenTech, aspenONE, the Aspen leaf logo, the aspenONE logo, and OPTIMIZE are trademarks of Aspen Technology, Inc. All rights reserved. 11-4500-1113
rigorous the model is may differ in appropriateness. For instance, when a rough estimate is quickly needed, the consideration of exact solids processing equipment may not be necessary. With conceptual modeling, particle scientists and process engineers can model solids processes in various degrees of detail, from rough sketches to the Mona Lisa of models. Once a user is ready to switch a unit from conceptual to rigorous, it can be done without changing the flowsheet. With conceptual models, process engineers that are not savvy with solids modeling can be eased into learning how to use the capabilities. Another great opportunity that the conceptual models offer is the possibility that process engineers and particle scientists can collaborate more closely by using the same simulation environment. When setting up the model of a combined fluids and solids process, the process engineer can use the conceptual models to describe the solids section of the process. After having the first simulation results, the process engineer can decide what parts of the solids section need to be modeled more rigorously, and if necessary, ask the particle scientist to help select and parameterize the rigorous model.
In addition to this, an intuitive and easy-to-use workflow for the definition of particle size distributions has been integrated into Aspen Plus that consists of the following steps:
2013 Aspen Technology, Inc. AspenTech, aspenONE, the Aspen leaf logo, the aspenONE logo, and OPTIMIZE are trademarks of Aspen Technology, Inc. All rights reserved. 11-4500-1113
Definition of the mass fraction within the different particle size classes
For the definition of the mass fractions, Aspen Plus offers an automated or manual mode. In the automated mode, the user can define mass fractions by selecting a distribution function (e.g. GGS, RRSB (Rosin Rammler Sperling Bennet), lognormal, or normal distribution) he wants to use to define the PSD and enters a value for the shape (e.g. dispersion parameter) and the position parameter (e.g. characteristic diameter d63 or d50). In the manual mode, the user defines the mass fractions as tabular data such as from measured data found during a particle size analysis. By opening the stream results, users can visualize the defined and calculated particle size distributions with a click of a button in the form of a cumulative mass, density, or RRSB distribution. It is also possible to show the PSD for different particle types and streams in the same plot and compare inlet and outlet streams of a unit operation to fully understand how a certain unit operation changes the particle size distribution of its feed material. An example of how a double-deck screen changes the PSD is shown in Figure 7.
Figure 7: Cumulative particle size distributions for the stream entering (purple) and the three streams leaving (fines: green, midsize: pink, coarse: blue) the screen
In addition to the plot of the particle size distribution of the streams, the user can easily generate plots that are specific to a unit operation. This could be the solids volume concentration profile of a fluidized bed, or the solids temperature and moisture profile in a convective dryer. As an example, Figure 8 shows the separation efficiency curve of the double-deck screen used in the example above.
Figure 8: Separation Curves for the two decks used in the screen in the granulation example
2013 Aspen Technology, Inc. AspenTech, aspenONE, the Aspen leaf logo, the aspenONE logo, and OPTIMIZE are trademarks of Aspen Technology, Inc. All rights reserved. 11-4500-1113
2013 Aspen Technology, Inc. AspenTech, aspenONE, the Aspen leaf logo, the aspenONE logo, and OPTIMIZE are trademarks of Aspen Technology, Inc. All rights reserved. 11-4500-1113
the separation efficiency curve based on the more rigorous model, therefore at a higher level of fidelity. A comparison of the calculated separation efficiency curve using the conceptual and the rigorous model is shown in Figure 11. The plot shows that the conceptual model predicts the classification in the centrifuge with accuracy that already may be sufficient for different use cases, for example a feasibility study.
Figure 10: The top image shows a decanter centrifuge described with a conceptual model and the bottom image shows the same decanter described with a rigorous equipment model
Figure 11: Comparison of the calculated separation efficiency curve for the conceptual centrifuge model (red curve) and the rigorous decanter model (blue curve)
2013 Aspen Technology, Inc. AspenTech, aspenONE, the Aspen leaf logo, the aspenONE logo, and OPTIMIZE are trademarks of Aspen Technology, Inc. All rights reserved. 11-4500-1113
10
Figure 12: Schematic showing tasks available with the integrated features and layered products surrounding and including Aspen Plus and Aspen HYSYS
Economics for solids allows users to consider the capital and utility costs for all solids processing blocks. The impact of design alternatives and their associated configurations and equipment specifications can be instantly seen. An example of the activated economic interface and a portion of equipment cost list for the urea synthesis and granulation example is shown in Figure 13.
Figure 13: Economics for solids helps users determine capital and utility costs
2013 Aspen Technology, Inc. AspenTech, aspenONE, the Aspen leaf logo, the aspenONE logo, and OPTIMIZE are trademarks of Aspen Technology, Inc. All rights reserved. 11-4500-1113
11
Figure 14: View of the belt dryer layout with the proposed design alternative
2013 Aspen Technology, Inc. AspenTech, aspenONE, the Aspen leaf logo, the aspenONE logo, and OPTIMIZE are trademarks of Aspen Technology, Inc. All rights reserved. 11-4500-1113
12
Figure 15: Solids temperature and moisture profile along the belt dryer
The potassium chloride production process example (Figure 15) includes three major process steps: particle formulation by crystallization, dewatering and drying by use of a centrifuge and a convective dryer, and adjustment of the particle size by use of a compacting press, multiple hammer mills, and screens in the compacting and sizing part of the process. In the present example, the throughput of the process should be increased at minimal capital and utility costs. A first analysis shows that the compacting and sizing part of the process is the bottleneck of the overall process, due to capacity constraints for the compacting press and the hammer mills.
Figure 16: Example of a potassium chloride production process modeled in Aspen Plus
The example shows how the throughput of the process in the existing layout can be increased by using the optimization capabilities in Aspen Plus to determine the optimal operating conditions for the hammer mills. This results in an increased throughput of 30%.
2013 Aspen Technology, Inc. AspenTech, aspenONE, the Aspen leaf logo, the aspenONE logo, and OPTIMIZE are trademarks of Aspen Technology, Inc. All rights reserved. 11-4500-1113
13
In the second step, an alternative layout of the process is considered where a third hammer mill is added to improve the crushing capacity and the 1st screen is exchanged against a double-deck screen to remove particles that are already in the right particle size range. For this new layout, the optimization capabilities are used to determine the optimal operating conditions for the mills. Both the optimized original process layout and the optimized alternative layout are compared with regard to their capital and utility costs using Activated Economics. The example shows that the alternative layout allows for producing 57% more potassium chloride resulting in a 44% increase in revenue, with only slightly increased capital costs. Both the belt dryer and the potassium chloride example are available for self-guided demonstration and can be located on aspenONE Exchange, the Aspen Technology Support Center Webpage, or by using a link in the resources section of this paper.
Summary
Modeling solid processing steps using Aspen Plus V8 and higher allows for improved workflow and collaboration between process engineers and particle scientists. Ignoring or poorly modeling the solids section of a process may lead to suboptimal designs and lost opportunities, such as reduced capital and operating costs and improved throughput and quality. Modeling fluids and solids in one environment enables the optimization of the entire process at hand. New conceptual models in Aspen Plus V8.4 further improve workflow for particle scientists and accessibility for process engineers that arent savvy with solids process modelingallowing users to create models of solids processing steps with only a few parameters. The integrated workflow associated with using aspenONE engineering stimulates better process designs and encourages more efficient collaboration.
Glossary
PSD Particle Size Distribution d50 50% of particles in the distribution are smaller than this diameter d63 63% of particles in the distribution are smaller than this diameter
2013 Aspen Technology, Inc. AspenTech, aspenONE, the Aspen leaf logo, the aspenONE logo, and OPTIMIZE are trademarks of Aspen Technology, Inc. All rights reserved. 11-4500-1113
14
Additional Resources
Demos: See Whats Possible with 12+ Solids Modeling Examples http://www.aspentech.com/October_2013_solids_modeling_demo_AT Jump Start Guide: Solids Process Modeling in Aspen Plus V8 http://www.aspentech.com/solidsjumpstart/ Jump Start Guide: Solids Process Modeling for Experienced Aspen Plus Users, V8 http://www.aspentech.com/SolidsModeling-ExperiencedUsers/ Jump Start Guide: Modeling Granulators in Aspen Plus, V8 http://www.aspentech.com/jumpstartgranulators/ Jump Start Guide: Modeling Convective Dryers in Aspen Plus, V8 http://www.aspentech.com/JumpStartConvectiveDryers/ Jump Start Guide: Modeling Crushers in Aspen Plus, V8 http://www.aspentech.com/jumpstartcrushersmills/ On-demand Webinar: Modeling Solids in a BPA Process http://www.aspentech.com/November_2013_BPA_ProcessSolids/
References
1
J.Y. Zhu, X.J. Pan, Woody biomass pretreatment for cellulosic ethanol production: Technology and energy consumption evaluation, Bioresource Technology, Volume 101, Issue 13, July 2010, Pages 4992-5002, ISSN 0960-8524, http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.biortech.2009.11.007. (http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0960852409015119)
J.Y. Zhu, X.J. Pan, Woody biomass pretreatment for cellulosic ethanol production: Technology and energy consumption evaluation, Bioresource Technology, Volume 101, Issue 13, July 2010, Pages 4992-5002, ISSN 0960-8524, http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.biortech.2009.11.007. (http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0960852409015119)
Aspen Technology. Aspen Technology acquires SolidSim Engineering GmbH. Press Release. February 29th, 2012.
(http://www.aspentech.com/news/solidsim/press-release/)
4
Holistic optimization of processes with solids and fluids using flowsheet simulators in: Abstracts and proceedings:. WCPT6 - World Congress on Particle Technology Nuremburg, Germany, 2013. (http://reg.mcon-mannheim.de/onlineprogramm-mmv/render.aspx?kongressID=53&t=a&n=26775&speach=ENG)
5
Dow, Vickery, OPTIMIZETM 2013, Boston, MA Yara Techology Centre, Halvor ien, OPTIMIZETM 2013, Boston, MA
2013 Aspen Technology, Inc. AspenTech, aspenONE, the Aspen leaf logo, the aspenONE logo, and OPTIMIZE are trademarks of Aspen Technology, Inc. All rights reserved. 11-4500-1113
15
About AspenTech
AspenTech is a leading supplier of software that optimizes process manufacturingfor energy, chemicals, engineering and construction, and other industries that manufacture and produce products from a chemical process. With integrated aspenONE solutions, process manufacturers can implement best practices for optimizing their engineering, manufacturing, and supply chain operations. As a result, AspenTech customers are better able to increase capacity, improve margins, reduce costs, and become more energy efficient. To see how the worlds leading process manufacturers rely on AspenTech to achieve their operational excellence goals, visit www.aspentech.com.
Worldwide Headquarters
Aspen Technology, Inc. 200 Wheeler Road Burlington, MA 01803 United States phone: +17812216400 fax: +17812216410 info@aspentech.com
Regional Headquarters
Houston, TX | USA phone: +12815841000 So Paulo | Brazil phone: +551134436261 Reading | United Kingdom phone: +44(0)1189226400 Singapore | Republic of Singapore phone: +6563953900 Manama | Bahrain phone: +97317503000
2013 Aspen Technology, Inc. AspenTech, aspenONE, the Aspen leaf logo, the aspenONE logo, and OPTIMIZE are trademarks of Aspen Technology, Inc. All rights reserved. 11-4500-1113