Sharma 2010

I NTERNATIONAL J OURNAL OF C HEMICAL
R EACTOR E NGINEERING
Volume 8 2010 Review R5
Control of Reactive Distillation Column: A

Review
Neha Sharma∗ Kailash Singh†
∗
Malaviya National Institute of Technology Jaipur, nehasharma103@gmail.com
†
Malaviya National Institute of Technology Jaipur, ksingh.mnit@gmail.com
ISSN 1542-6580
Brought to you by | Statsbiblioteket - State and University Library Aarhus

Authenticated | 134.68.190.47
Download Date | 10/17/12 11:22 AM
Control of Reactive Distillation Column: A Review
Neha Sharma and Kailash Singh
Abstract
The objective of this paper is to give a critical survey of the present status
within the field of control of a reactive distillation column. Control of a reactive
distillation column is a challenging task due to process nonlinearity and complex
interactions between the vapor-liquid equilibrium and chemical reactions. There
are different types of control methodologies, which have been studied in the re-
active distillation, ranging from a simple proportional-integral (PI) controller to
advanced model predictive controllers (MPC) such as dynamic matrix control
(DMC), quadratic dynamic matrix control (QDMC), robust multivariable pre-
dictive control technology (RMPCT), generalized predictive control (GPC), and
other advanced control techniques. With the goals of optimal performance, energy
conservation and cost effectiveness of process operations in industries, the design
of optimal controllers and controller performance assessment have received great
attention in both industries and academia. The main objective of control is to
maintain the product purity within the desired range.
KEYWORDS: reactive distillation column, PID control, model predictive con-

trol, advanced control techniques, reactive dividing wall distillation column

Sharma and Singh: Control of Reactive Distillation Column: A Review 1
1. Introduction
Nowadays, process intensification (PI) has become a thrust area of research in

chemical engineering and related disciplines because it offers many potential
advantages, such as reduction in equipment and plant size (low capital investment),
improvements in process efficiency and safety, and decreased energy consumption
(low operating cost). This goal is achieved by developing a novel apparatus or
technique and combining different mechanisms like reaction and separation in a
single unit, to bring dramatic improvements in manufacturing and processing,
substantially decreasing equipment size/production-capacity ratio, energy
consumption, or waste production. Reactive distillation (RD) is an important
example of process intensification.
Reactive distillation is a combination of chemical reaction and
multi-component distillation in a counter-current column. There were a total of 562
publications for the period of 1970-1999 (Malone 2000). In the next five-year
period (2000-2004), there were another 253 publications (Zeng 2006) in the
research area of reactive distillation and from year 2005 till date, the number of
applications are approximately 373 (Source: Google Scholar). These processes as a
whole are not a new concept as the first patent dates back to the 1920’s .The
reaction can be catalyzed either homogenously or heterogeneously. The most
important advantage in use of RD for equilibrium-controlled reactions is the
elimination of conversion limitations by continuous removal of products from the
reaction zone. The use of RD process can offer several advantages (Hiwale et al.
2004) such as reduced downstream processing, utilization of heat of reaction for
evaporation of liquid phase, simple temperature control of reactor, possibility of
influencing chemical equilibria by removal of products and limitations imposed by
azeotropic mixture. All these factors contribute to the growing commercial
importance of reactive distillation column (RDC). Thus it is also necessary to
discuss about the reactive azeotrope both from theoretical and practical standpoint.
At a reactive azeotrope, the change in composition due to reaction is compensated
by the change in composition due to phase equilibrium and so a constant boiling
mixture is achieved. They limit the products of a reactive distillation in exactly the
same way that ordinary azeotropes limit the products of non-reactive distillation.
Like in a non-reactive column these azeotropes cannot be crossed at steady state in
a fully reactive system. In the case of reactive systems, azeotropes may also prove
to be beneficial, for example by preventing an adverse back reaction (Ung &
Doherty 1995). Furthermore, the location of reactive azeotropes is needed in the
construction of residue curve maps for the synthesis and design of reactive
separation operations.
Reactive distillation is ideal for reactions that are difficult to drive to
completion without separation of one of the products. Such reactions are called

2 International Journal of Chemical Reactor Engineering Vol. 8 [2010], Review R5
'equilibrium limited' reactions such as esterification, ester hydrolysis and

transesterification; this offers distinct advantages over the conventional sequential
approach. In a reactor, the principal process objective, which maximizes
profitability, is conversion of the limiting reactant, whereas in distillation, it is
separation (or fractionation) which is normally measured by the product purity. A
typical set-up used for reactive distillation is shown in Figure 1.
Due to the combination of reaction and separation, reactive distillation
exhibits complex behaviors (Khaledi & Young 2005), such as steady state
multiplicity, process gain sign changes (bi-directionality) and strong interactions
between process variables. Hence, reactive distillation processes are highly
nonlinear in nature. These complexities make reactive distillation control
extremely difficult.
Most of the publications of reactive distillation column deal with the
research on various aspects, such as modeling and simulation, process synthesis,
column hardware, nonlinear dynamics and control, etc. Most of the papers are
basically based on steady state conditions including process design and the analysis
of multiple steady states (Pisarenko et al. 1988; Ciric & Miao 1994; Sneesby et al.
1997; Sneesby et al. 1998; Gehrke & Marquardt 1997; Güttinger & Morari 1997)
but a relatively small amount of research work has been reported on the control of
RD columns.
Condenser + decanter
Rectifying
Section
Reflux
Feed
Top product
Catalyst
(Reaction zone)
Stripping
Section
Reboiler
Bottom Product
Fig. 1 Reactive Distillation Column

Research and development of reactive distillation has been

comprehensively reviewed by Doherty and Buzad (1992) and Taylor and Krishna
(2000). The control papers up to 1999 were discussed by Al-Arfaj (2000). Sneesby,
Tade and Smith (2000) studied three control structures for a single-feed ETBE
reactive distillation. Monroy-Loperens et al. (2000) studied the control of ethylene
glycol reactive distillation using nonlinear control. Luyben (2000) studied the
economics and control effects of using excess reactant. The books by Doherty and
Malone (2001) , Sundmacher and Kienle (2003), Luyben & Yu (2008), Stichlmair
and Fair (1998) give updated summaries of modeling, simulation and control of
reactive distillation.
Many Chemical systems are studied by Al-Arfaz and Luyben. In the ETBE
system (Al-Arfaj 2002c), there are two reactants, one product and one inert. They
studied single-feed and double-feed designs and several control schemes were
examined. The ethylene glycol system (Al-Arfaj 2002b) has two feeds but only one
product. A control scheme where a temperature in the stripping section is
controlled by the heat input was found to be effective. Olefin metathesis (Al-Arfaj
2002d) has only one reactant and two products. A temperature in the stripping
section is controlled by the heat input and another temperature in the rectifying
section is controlled by the reflux rate.
Most of the publications on closed-loop control of RD columns deal with
the linear control schemes including conventional proportional integral (PI)
controller (Monroy-Loperens 2000; Al-Arfaj 2002c; Al-Arfaj 2002b; Al-Arfaj
2002d; Al-Arfaj 2002a; Kaymak & Luyben 2005; Kaymak & Luyben 2006) and
model predictive controller (MPC) (Balasubramhanya & Doyle III 2000; Dwivedi
& Kaistha 2008; Kawathekar 2004; Olanrewaju & Al-Arfaj 2005; Qin & Badgwell
2003; Silva & Kwong 1999; Kumar & Daoutidis 1999) . Roat et al. (1986)
presented the inadequacies of conventional linear multi-loop controllers and
highlighted the need for more advanced controllers designed within the framework
of nonlinear control science. A limited number of papers dealing with the advanced
nonlinear control of continuous reactive distillation have appeared in open
literature (Jana & Adari 2009).
In recent years, many articles have appeared in the literature on the control
of RD columns. Kumar and Kaistha published a series of articles on RD control
(Singh et al. 2007; Kumar & Kaistha 2008d; 2008a; 2008e; 2008b; 2008c; 2009b;
2009a). Their work offers much insight on key issues that a RD column control
system must address. The steady-state simulation of reactive distillation columns
for methyl acetate and MTBE systems using the conventional Naphtali-Sandholm
(NS) method is studied in Singh et al. (2007). The authors show that controlling a
reactive tray temperature with acceptable sensitivity but larger rangeability gives
better robustness. They also showed that controlling the difference in the
temperature of two suitably chosen reactive trays further improves robustness of

both the structures as input multiplicity is avoided (Kumar & Kaistha 2008d). The
authors also focused their work on the controllability issues at the design stage.
Effect of feed tray location on the controllability of double feed reactive distillation
(RD) columns is evaluated in Kumar and Kaistha (2008b). They also studied the
effect of internal heat integration by catalyst redistribution on the controllability of
an ideal and a methyl acetate reactive distillation (RD) column in Kumar and
Kaistha (2008c). A two-temperature control structure for a methyl acetate reactive
distillation (RD) column on the basis of ratio control scheme is evaluated in Kumar
and Kaistha (2009a).
Other authors have also studied the control of RD columns. Jana and Adari
(2009) discussed the advanced adaptive control, i.e. generic model controller
(GMC) and an adaptive state estimator (ASE) for nonlinear process, of a batch
reactive distillation (BRD) column. Wang et al. (2008) investigate the design and
control strategies of a reactive distillation process with partially thermal coupling
for the production of methanol and n-butyl acetate by transesterification reaction of
methyl acetate and n-butanol. Adams and Seider (2009b) introduced a
semi-continuous process that alternates between reactive extraction and reactive
distillation in a single packed column. They have shown a different control scheme
with different tuning parameters, which triggers for the various process
functionalities. Wang et al. (2010) investigate the control strategies of the reactive
distillation with thermally coupled extractive distillation process for the production
of dimethyl carbonate (DMC) and ethylene glycol. Dynamic simulation results
reveal that designed temperature control strategy can maintain reactant inventory in
the RDC and product purities at or around their desired values under external and
internal disturbances.
2. Control Structure
A “control structure” as defined by Singh et al. (2005) refers to the number of

control loops and the specific input-output pairing used in the loops. Potential input
variables are the reflux rate, reflux ratio, reboiler duty, reboiler ratio, distillate rate,
bottoms rate, and the fresh feeds. Potential output variables are easily measurable
variables such as tray / stream temperatures and compositions. There are thus
several possible input (manipulated) variables and output (controlled) variables
even in a simple RD column.
Three types of control structures are evaluated by Kawathekar (2004) for
the reactive distillation systems:
1. In the first control structure, the top and bottom purities are controlled by
adjusting reflux rate and reboiler heat duty, respectively. The composition inside

the reactive zone of the column is measured and controlled by manipulating one
of the fresh feeds.
2.In the second control structure, only the column internal composition is
controlled and a temperature is controlled in the stripping section in order to
maintain bottom purity at a specified value. Distillate purity is not controlled but
the reflux ratio is held constant.
3.The third control structure uses two temperatures that manipulate the two fresh
feeds. Reboiler heat input is flow controlled and serves as a production rate
handle while the reflux ratio is held constant.
Several different control structures have been proposed for reactive

distillation columns. Al-Arfaz (2002a), Kayamak and Luyben (2005), Sneesby et al.
(1999), and Sneesby et al. (1997) investigated a suitable control structure (i.e. the
choice of manipulated variables and controlled variables) for reactive distillation
processes. The appropriate control structure depends on the flowsheet and on the
type of reactions occurring in the column (Luyben & Yu 2008). For example, some
of the common types of reactions are the following:
1. Reactions with two reactants and two products

2. Reactions with two reactants and one product
3. Reactions with one reactant and two products
Two different control structures are explored for the single reactive
distillation column process. The first is the two temperature control structure,
which uses only temperatures and does not require a direct composition
measurement. The second control structure uses a composition analyzer to measure
a composition of one of the reactants on a selected tray in the column to adjust one
of the fresh feeds.
If two reactants are involved and if it is desirable to operate the process
without any excess of reactant, it is necessary to manage the fresh feedstreams so
that the stoichiometry is exactly balanced. A composition analyzer that measures
an internal composition in the column is sometimes required. However, if two
products are produced, it may be possible to avoid the use of an analyzer by using
two temperatures in the column to adjust the two feedstreams. This type of
structure was proposed by Roat et al. (1986) for the ideal reaction A + B ↔ C + D
in one of the earliest articles dealing with reactive distillation control. We call this
control structure the “Eastman structure” (Luyben & Yu 2008).
A control structure that maintains a tray temperature in both the reactive
and stripping sections using the fresh acetic acid and methanol feeds respectively
provides the best control of all the control structures studied. The column is

operated at fixed reflux ratio and the reboiler duty is the production rate handle. It is
worth mentioning that this is the control structure implemented at Eastman.
There are three basic methods for monitoring product composition
(Sneesby et al. 1997):
(a) Directly, with one or more online analyzers (GC, NIR);

(b) Indirectly, using a temperature or pressure corrected temperature to infer
composition; and
(c) Externally, using process samples taken at regular intervals and appropriate
laboratory equipment.
Analyzers have many advantages but are costly, require high maintenance,
and introduce dead time into the control loop, it is desirable to use inferential
temperature measurements instead of direct composition measurements whenever
possible. It is necessary to measure the composition dead time as it affects the
effectiveness of the control system and may result in an unstable control system.
Sneesby et al. (1997) used inferential controller to monitor product composition.
Chiang et al. (2002) assumes a 4 minute analyzer dead time for the composition
measurements with a transmitter span of 0.1 mole fraction for the production of
amyl acetate. Wang et al. (2003) assumed dead time of 5s for the temperature
measurement with a transmitter span of 150 K and dead time of 5 min is assumed
for the concentration measurement with a transmitter span of 0.3 for the processing
and control of MTBE. Luyben et al. (2004) inserted dead times of 1 min in the
column temperature controllers for the production of butyl acetate. Hung et al.
(2006) assumed 4 minutes of analyzer dead time for the composition loop.
Similarly Tsai et al. (2008) assumed a dead time of 5 minute for composition
analyzer for the production of ethyl acetate. So, in most cases dead time of 4-5
minute was considered for composition measurement.
In the Eastman control structure, two PI temperature controllers are used to
maintain two tray temperatures in the column by manipulating the two fresh
feedstreams. Production rate changes are achieved by changing the vapor boilup.
The base level is controlled by manipulating the bottoms flowrate.

(a) (b)
Fig. 2 Two alternatives for Eastman control structure (Luyben & Yu 2008).
There are two alternatives for this control structure: a constant reflux
flowrate and a constant reflux ratio. Figure 2a shows the control structure (CS7-R)
where the reflux flowrate is fixed and the reflux drum level is controlled by
manipulating the distillate flowrate. Figure 2b shows the alternative version
(CS7-RR) where the reflux drum level is controlled by the reflux flowrate and the
distillate flowrate is adjusted to give a constant reflux ratio.
Both control structures are single-input, single-output structures with PI
controllers for temperature control and P controllers for level control. The
relay-feedback method is used to obtain the ultimate gains and ultimate periods.
The valves are designed to be half open at steady state. Two 60 s first-order
measurement lags are used in both temperature loops. The temperature controllers
are tuned using the Tyreus–Luyben tuning method (Luyben 2007). The column
pressure is assumed to be constant, which is achieved by manipulating the
condenser heat duty.
Several different control structures have been proposed for reactive
distillation columns by several authors. Al-Arfaz (2002a) evaluated three control
structures for both ideal and methyl acetate reactive distillation systems. A control
structure with one internal composition controller and one temperature controller
provides effective control of both systems for high as well as moderate conversion

designs. A two-temperature control structure is effective when the system is over

designed in terms of number of reactive trays, holdup and/or catalyst load. Another
author Kaymak and Luyben (2005) compare the effectiveness of two different
types of two-temperature control structures for reactive distillation columns
operated in the “neat” mode (no excess reactant) with chemical reactions that have
two reactants and produce two products. The effectiveness of these control
structures was compared in the face of disturbances in the production rate and fresh
feed compositions. For both control structures, the process did not require the
measurement of an internal composition. For the first control structure (CS7), two
tray temperatures were controlled by manipulating the two fresh feed streams. The
vapor boilup (or reboiler duty) is the production rate handle. For the second control
structure (CS8), two tray temperatures were controlled by manipulating one of the
two fresh feed streams and vapor boilup (or reboiler duty). The other fresh feed
stream is the production rate handle. Therefore, selection of the manipulated fresh
feed stream in the second structure has an important role in the stability of the
system. Sequential tuning of the interacting temperature controllers is sometimes
necessary.
3. Control Structure of Various Chemical Systems
As mentioned earlier different control structures were proposed for different

chemical systems of reactive distillation column. Control system design basically
includes the selection of control configuration and control algorithm. Regarding
control configuration, cascade inferential control scheme via measurable
temperatures is reasonably adopted due to the lack of reliability of composition
controls. This is basically consisting of the following steps: (1) setting the control
objective, (2) selection of manipulated variables, (3) determination of
temperature-control trays, (4) finding controller settings for regulatory control, and
(5) providing feed forward compensation for production rate variation. A good
control structure is one that rejects disturbances effectively. Below we discuss
control structures of some chemical systems:
3.1 Control of MTBE System
Methyl tert-butyl ether (MTBE) is a commonly used antiknock compound added to

gasoline to increase its octane number. It has been probably the most studied
reacting system in reactive distillation. Reactive distillation was patented for
methyl tertiary butyl ether (MTBE) synthesis by L. A. Smith in 1980 (U. S. Pat. No.
4307254).
Wang et al. (2003) studied the control strategy of a reactive distillation
system that synthesizes MTBE. The main purpose was to show that a simple linear

control strategy would keep the MTBE column operating at high product purity and
reactant conversion if a proper input-output pairing can be found, even though the
overall process exhibits steady state multiplicities and nonlinear dynamics.
Barlett (1999) studied the control of a methyl tert-butyl ether (MTBE)
reactive distillation column. They discussed the several schemes using
conventional PI controllers. The selection of an appropriate tray temperature is
explored. They recommend the use of a tray in the reactive section instead of the
more conventional approach of using a temperature in the stripping section. The
authors recognized the importance of maintaining tight control over the feed
stoichiometry to avoid an excess of methanol. They first tried to measure the
methanol concentration in the overhead and manipulate methanol fresh feed, but
found that there was severe interaction between the temperature controller and the
methanol composition controller. They finally recommended a feed forward
scheme in which the feed composition is measured and used to reset the fresh
methanol feed flow rate. Flow measurement inaccuracies and composition analyzer
inaccuracies would doom this strategy to failure in a real plant environment unless
significant amounts of excess methanol are used.
A number of decentralized control systems can be synthesized and designed
for the MTBE decomposition reactive distillation column, including direct
composition control, indirect composition (i.e., temperature based) control, and
their various alternatives (Al-Arfaj 2000; Wang 2003; Zeng 2006; Kaymak &
Luyben 2006). Recently, Huang et al. (2007) studied a reactive distillation column
that decomposes methyl tertiary butyl ether (MTBE) into isobutylene (IBUT) and
methanol (MEOH) using direct composition control.
MTBE (C 5 H 12 O)  MEOH(CH 3 OH)  IBUT (i - C 4 H 8 )
Figure 3 presents a sketch of a control configuration in which the purities of

both the top and the bottom products are measured and controlled. In accordance
with the relative gain array (RGA) analysis, the composition of the isobutylene
component is controlled by manipulating the reflux flow rate in the top control loop.
In the bottom control loop, the composition of the methanol component is
controlled by manipulating the heat duty of the reboiler. The levels of the reflux
drum and the bottom reboiler are controlled by the distillate and bottom-product
flow rates, respectively. The dynamics of concentration measurements was
assumed to be two first-order lags of 30 s each, in series. The transmitter span of all
composition measurements was taken to be 0.12, and all control valves were
designed to be half-open at the nominal steady states. Proportional-only controllers
were used for all level control loops, and PI controllers were adopted for the top and
bottom composition control loops. The PI control systems were tuned in a
sequential manner. For each control loop, a relay-feedback test was performed to

obtain the ultimate gain and ultimate frequency. The following equations were then
used to calculate the tuning parameters of the PI controllers
K cu
Kc 
3
 I  Pcu 0.5
where Kc and τI represent the proportional gain and integral time, respectively, and
Kcu and Pcu are the ultimate gain and ultimate period, respectively.
Fig. 3 Control schemes for the MTBE decomposition reactive distillation column
(Huang & Wang 2007).

3.2 Control of ETBE (2-ethoxy 2-methylpropane) System
Ethyl tert-butyl ether (ETBE) is growing in importance as a gasoline oxygenate and

octane enhancer. Its gasoline blending properties are superior to methyl tert-butyl
ether (MTBE), and its semi renewability is attracting subsidies from government of
many countries. Synthesis of ETBE via reactive distillation offers advantages of
higher conversion, improved energy efficiency, and lower capital costs.
Sneesby et al. (1997; 1998; 1999; 2000) discuss different designs for the
ETBE process using reactive distillation. They also look at some control aspects of
this process. In their control work, they studied a reactive column with only nine
trays and a small production rate. Their work is limited to the single-feed design,
and reaction equilibrium is assumed on all reactive trays. They proposed a
two-point control scheme for an ethyl tert-butyl ether (ETBE) reactive distillation
column in which both bottoms product purity and conversion are controlled.
Al-Arfaz & Luyben (2002c) extend the work of Sneesby by exploring more
control structure alternatives and to study both the design and the control of the
double-feed system. They explored four control structures for ethyl tert-butyl ether
(ETBE) reactive distillation columns. All of the structures are single-input
single-output structures with PI controllers (P only on levels). The controllers are
tuned using the Tyreus-Luyben tuning method. They show direct composition
control of the bottoms ETBE purity as CS1and temperature control of a tray in the
stripping section as CS5. In control structure 1 (Figure 4a), the ETBE purity is
controlled in the bottoms by manipulating the reboiler heat input and the ethanol
impurity in the top is controlled by manipulating the reflux flow rate. An internal
composition is controlled in the reactive zone. There are two alternative cases that
depend on which of the two fresh feed streams is flow-controlled to set the
production rate and which is manipulated to control the internal column
composition. They use the notation CS1-iC4- to indicate a structure in which the
butene feed stream is manipulated to control an internal isobutene composition.
The other case is labeled CS1-EtOH to denote a scheme in which the ethanol fresh
feed stream is manipulated to control an internal ethanol composition. In control
structure 2 (Figure 4b), only the ETBE purity in the bottoms is controlled. The
distillate composition is not controlled, and the reflux ratio is held constant. In
control structure 3 (Figure 4c), a stripping tray temperature is used instead of a
bottoms composition analyzer. The reflux ratio is held constant. Control structure 4
(Figure 4d) is similar to the previous one except the ethanol fresh feed is
manipulated to control an internal ethanol composition. The interesting feature of
this structure is the location of the internal composition (tray 3), which is below the
reactive zone. This location is recommended by Singular Value Decomposition
(SVD) analysis, looking at the steady-state gain matrix between the ethanol fresh
feed and the internal tray compositions.

(a) (b)
(c) (d)
Fig. 4 (a) CS1 (Dual Composition) (b) CS1-RR (double feed) (c) CS5-iC4 - (double
feed) (d) CS5-EtOH (double feed). (Al-Arfaj 2002c)

Other authors have also studied the control of ETBE system. Tade et.
al.(2003) studied the reactive distillation column for ETBE production (Figure 5).
The control scheme consists of two main parts: a nonlinear transformation and a
pattern-based predictor (PPC). The PPC system outperforms the standard PI
control. They conclude that selection of control schemes including the measurable
inferential temperatures has crucial role on the overall control performance. To
alleviate the complex model requirement, they proposed a pattern-based predictive
control.
Fig. 5 ETBE RD System with the controllers (Tadé et al. 2003)
3.3 Control of TAME (2-methoxy 2-methylbutane) RD System
Tertiary-amyl methyl ether (TAME) is a potential gasoline additive that can be

advantageously synthesized using the reactive distillation (RD) Technology. The
largest volume component in the past was MTBE, but it is being phased out
because of groundwater contamination problems. The TAME reactive distillation
is an etherification process that is similar to ETBE. Therefore, TAME is becoming
more important. It is produced by the reaction of methanol with unsaturated C5
isoamylenes (2-methyl-1-butene and 2-methyl-2-butene). The liquid-phase
reversible reactions considered are
2M1B  MeOH  TAME

2M2B  MeOH  TAME
2M1B  2M2B

It is a widely studied model system to understand the complex behavior of

reactive distillation (Katariya et al. 2008). Al-Arfaz and Luyben (2004) studied the
plantwide control of TAME reactive distillation column. In this work level
controllers are P only and all others are PI controllers. All the controllers are tuned
using the Tyres-Luyben tuning method with the ultimate gain and ultimate period
calculated using the relay feedback method (Yu 1999). The feeds to the reactor are
subcooled methanol and subcooled C5s. As shown in Figure 6, in the TAME
system the methanol feed to the reactive column is used to control an internal
methanol composition. The C5s feed is used as the production handle. Although
both fixed reflux ratio and fixed reflux strategies were found to work. Fixed reflux
was selected because it is desirable to take the azeotrope in the distillate to the
recovery units and not to recycle it back to the reactive column.
Fig. 6 Control structure proposed by Al-Arfaz and Luyben (2004)

3.4 Control of Ethyl Acetate RD System
Ethyl acetate, one of the most widely used esters, is used as a solvent in a wide
range of applications, across many industries including surface coating and
thinners, pharmaceuticals, flavors and essences, etc. It is synthesized industrially
mainly via the classic Fischer esterification reaction of ethanol and acetic acid. This
mixture converts to the ester in about 65% yield at room temperature:
CH3CH2OH + CH3COOH ⇌ CH3COOCH2CH3 + H2O
Reactive distillation (RD) for the production of ethyl acetate (EtAc) has
been used from many years. But, relatively very few publications have addressed
control issues. Burkett and Rossiter (2000) studied the control strategy of a reactive
distillation column with the reaction occurred at the base of a distillation column.
The control study was focused on the RD column alone, and the composition of the
EtAc product from the top of the column was not pure enough to be of commercial
use. Balasubramhanya and Doyle III (2000) applied nonlinear model-based control
to a batch reactive distillation column producing ethyl acetate. Vora et al. (2001)
studied the dynamics and control of a reactive distillation column for the
production of ethyl acetate. They considered two control configurations. In the first
control configuration, the manipulated inputs were the distillate flow rate, the
reflux flow rate, the condenser heat duty, and the reboiler heat duty. The bottom
flow rate remained constant at its steady-state value. In the second control
configuration, the manipulated inputs were the distillate flow rate, the reflux flow
rate, the condenser heat duty, and the bottom flow rate. The reboiler heat duty
remained constant at its steady-state value. They designed model based linear and
nonlinear state feedback controllers, along with conventional SISO PI controllers
and demonstrated the superior performance of the nonlinear controller over both
the linear controller and the conventional PI controller.
Other authors have also studied the control of RD columns for ethyl acetate.
Tang et al. (2003) proposed a complete process for the production of EtAc using
RD. The process includes two columns (RD and stripper), one decanter, and two
recycle streams. The process delivered a high-purity EtAc product with a stringent
impurity specification. Tang et al. (2005) studied plant-wide control with four
schemes based on this process. The simplest one was the single-point control
scheme, which has a fast settling time following fluctuations of throughput and

feed composition. However, the drawback of this scheme is a large overshoot and
the possibility of steady-state deviation in product purity. Although another scheme
with RD dual point control that they recommended can overcome these problems,
the process responses become more oscillatory. Thus, the design of a control
system for this process is very problematic. The control schemes recommended by
Tang et al. are workable but have some drawbacks which was improved and
investigated by Lee et al. (2007).
Lee et al. (2007) studied the plant-wide control of reactive distillation
process for production of ethyl acetate. They used four control schemes to control
this system. The first way is to move the operating condition to a more conservative
point. At this more conservative operating point, a simple single-point control
scheme can be used to obtain faster closed-loop settling time without oscillation.
The closed-loop dynamic response of the single-point control scheme is very fast;
however, there is steady-state deviation in the impurity content of the final product
as compared to product specifications. For the dual-point control scheme, although
the deviation problem in the product impurity is improved, the closed-loop
transient response is rather oscillatory and needs quite a long time to settle.
Recently, Tsai et al. (2008) investigate the design of the side reactor
configuration for the reactive distillation column for production of ethyl acetate via
esterification where the reactive zone is placed at the lower section of the RD with
no product removal from the column base. They used a systematic approach to
design the control structure. The design steps suggested by the authors are as
follows: (1) determine manipulated variables; (2) use NRG (nonsquare RGA) to
determine temperature control trays; (3) use decentralized PI controller; (4) use
RGA for variable pairing; (5) use relay feed back to find Ku and Pu; (6) use TL
(Tyreus-Luyben) tuning to find controller settings. They took two approaches: one
is fixing the reflux ratio (RR), and the other is the ratio of the reflux to feed
(R/FEtOH). Therefore, they had two control structures: CS1 for keeping RR
constant and CS2 for fixing reflux to feed ratio as shown in Figure 7.

Fig. 7 Control of the side reactor configuration (SRC) process: (a) CS1 (fixing RR),
(b) CS2 (fixing R/F ratio) (Tsai et al. 2008)

3.5 Control of Methyl acetate RD System
Methyl acetate is an ester that is synthesized from acetic acid and methanol in the
presence of strong acids such as sulfuric acid in an esterification reaction. Reactive
distillation was first patented for methyl acetate by Victor H. Agreda and Lee R.
Partin in 1984 (U. S. Pat. No. 4435595).
The production of methyl acetate (MeOAc) via reactive distillation system
involves the reaction:
Methanol + Acetic Acid ⇌ Methyl Acetate + Water
Al-Arfaz (2002a) explore three control structures applied to both the methyl
acetate and the ideal systems (Figure 8). All the structures are SISO structures with
PI controllers (P only on levels). The controllers are tuned using the
Tyreus–Luyben turning method (Tyreus & Luyben 1992). The relay-feedback
method (Yu 1999) is used to obtain the ultimate gain and ultimate period. All
valves are designed to be half open at steady state. In control structure 1 (Figure
8a), three compositions are measured and controlled and in control structure 5
(Figure 8b) only one composition is controlled (the column internal composition)
and a temperature is controlled in the stripping section. This temperature controller
maintains bottoms purity at or above its specified value by keeping light
components from dropping out the bottom with the heavy product component
(HOAc). But control structure 7 (Figure 8c) features the use of two temperatures
that manipulate the two fresh feeds.
Other authors also studied the control of methyl acetate in reactive
distillation column. Kumar and Kaistha studied the effect of internal heat
integration by catalyst redistribution on the controllability of an ideal and a methyl
acetate reactive distillation (RD) column (Kumar & Kaistha 2008c). They also
evaluated the two-temperature control structure for a methyl acetate reactive
distillation (RD) column on the basis of ratio control scheme (Kumar & Kaistha
2009a). Volker et al. (2007) studied the heterogeneously catalyzed esterification of
methanol and acetic acid to methyl acetate in a semi batch process in a reactive
distillation column.

(a) (b)
(c)
Fig. 8 (a) Control structure 1 (b) control structure 5 (c) control structure 7 (Al-Arfaj
2002a)

3.6 Control of Ethylene glycol RD system
Ethylene glycol is produced from ethylene, via the intermediate ethylene oxide.
Ethylene oxide reacts with water to produce ethylene glycol according to the
chemical equation
C2H4O + H2O → HOCH2CH2OH
Kumar and Daoutidis (1999) studied the control of an ethylene glycol
reactive distillation column and concluded that an advanced nonlinear
inverse-based controller is needed. Fresh ethylene oxide and fresh water are fed
into the column, and the product is removed from the base. There is no distillate
product. The variables the authors chose to control are pressure, base level, and the
purity of the bottoms product (the concentration of ethylene glycol).
Monroy-Loperens (2000) also studied the control of ethylene glycol reactive
distillation column. They regulate the ethylene glycol composition in the product
by manipulating the reboiler boil-up ratio. They used a modeling error
compensation approach to demonstrate that a PI configuration with anti-reset
windup (ARW) is able to control the ethylene glycol reactive distillation column.
Similarly, Al-Arfaz (2002b) in their study demonstrated that ethylene glycol
reactive distillation columns can be controlled effectively by a simple PI control
scheme. The structure achieves the stoichiometric balancing of the reactants and
maintains the product purity within reasonable bounds. This structure should be
generally applicable to other systems that are similar to the ethylene glycol system
in stoichiometry, kinetics, VLE, and design. In the ethylene glycol reactive column,
there is a large temperature change in the stripping section as the water is separated
from the ethylene glycol. Therefore, we control the temperature on tray 3
numbering from the bottom by manipulating reboiler heat input. The ethylene
glycol reactive distillation column is run essentially ‘‘neat’’ that is, there is a little
excess of ethylene oxide to compensate for the second reaction. An effective
control structure must be able to perfectly balance the two fresh feed streams.
Ratioing the two feeds cannot work because of flow measurement inaccuracy.
Some type of information feedback is required about the inventories of reactant
components in the system.
The PI control scheme demonstrated by (Al-Arfaj 2002b) is shown in
Figure 9. The column pressure is controlled by manipulating condenser heat duty,
and the column base level is controlled by manipulating bottoms product flow. The
temperature control loop has a first-order lag with a time constant of 0.5 min and a
dead time of 4 min, which give very conservative estimates of performance. The
temperature loop is tuned using the relay-feedback test (Yu 1999).and
Tyreus-Luyben settings.

Fig. 9 control structure of ethylene glycol shown by (Al-Arfaj 2002b)
There are many other multiple reaction systems which are used in reactive
distillation like tertiary-amyl ethyl ether(TAEE) , production of cyclohexanol from
cyclohexane, diaryl oxalate, esterification of adipic acid and glutaric acid, dimethyl
acetamide, esterification of acrylic acid with 1,4-butanediol,hydrolysis and
alcoholysis of alkyl halides(3-pentanoic acid) etc. The major advantage of reactive
distillation is reduction in formation of by-products as compared to the
conventional process and the conversion beyond an equilibrium limitation can
easily be achieved. But, there are some limitations like in some cases of multiple
reaction system there is a formation of middle boiling point products. So, for
removing such type of products we require further configuration in the design of
reactive distillation column like addition of divided wall. Use of reactive
distillation in divided wall column can make system more energy efficient.
However, the integration of RD with other unit operations should be considered to
improve its performance. Further study is required in future for processing and
control of such type of systems. Summary of some reaction systems for control of
reactive distillation column has been discussed in Table 1.

4. Control Degrees of Freedom
The number of manipulated variables is called the control degrees of freedom,

which is equal to the number of control valves. The degrees of freedom for a
reactive distillation column are essentially the same as those for a conventional
binary distillation column: distillate rate (D), bottoms rate (B), reflux rate (L or R),
reboiler duty (V or Qr), and condenser duty (Qc). Three of these streams must be
used to control the state of the column (pressure, reboiler sump level, and reflux
drum level), leaving the other two streams to control the operation of the column. In
the two-temperature control structure control degrees of freedom are allocated as
follows:
1. Throughput set by vapor boilup

2. Pressure controlled by condenser duty
3. Base level controlled by bottoms flowrate
4. Reflux-drum level controlled by distillate flowrate
5. Reflux ratio maintained by measuring distillate flowrate and adjusting reflux
flowrate
6. Temperature on some tray in the column controlled by one of the fresh feeds
7. Another temperature in the column controlled by the other fresh feed
Sneesby et al. (1999) had studied the two point control of reactive
distillation column. They showed that a simple two-product distillation column has
five degrees of freedom. Similarly Wang et al. (2008) studied the design and
control strategies of a reactive distillation process with partially thermal coupling
for the production of methanol and n-butyl acetate by transesterification reaction of
methyl acetate and n-butanol. They showed that there are four design degrees of
freedom: reflux ratio and boilup flow of the reactive distillation column, boilup
flow of the side stripper column, and liquid split ratio with only two product
specifications for the reactive distillation process with thermal coupling.

Table 1. Summary of control of reactive distillation column
Parameters
S. No. Reaction Controllers used Remarks on motive and achievements References
controlled
1. Ethanol + Product purity, Minimize the computational complexity by Balasubramhanya

Reduced order nonlinear
Acetic acid ↔ Temperature using a reduced order fundamental model and Doyle III
model based control
Ethyl acetate + (2000)
Water
Model-based linear and Reactant Performance of the nonlinear controller is Vora et al. (2001)
nonlinear state feedback conversion , superior over both the linear controller and the
controllers along with product purity conventional PI controller

conventional SISO PI
controllers
Overhead and NLMPC was found to provide significantly Kawathekar and

Nonlinear model bottoms better control performance than PI controller Riggs (2007)
predictive control composition
Present alternative ways to improve control of Lee et al. (2007)

PID controller Product purity an EtAc reactive distillation process.
99.78wt% purity
Decentralized PI Pressure, Study of the design of side reactor Tsai et al. (2008)
controller with temperature, configuration for getting maintenance
Tyreus-Luyben tuning product purity advantage as compared to conventional
method reactive distillation. 99% purity
Table 1, cont.
PID controller EtAc purity 99.78 mol% EtAc purity Chien et al. (2008)
Adaptive control Product purity A novel design technique is provided for the Jana and Adari
GMC–ASE control strategy for the batch (2009)
reactive rectifier. 93.44% purity
2. MEOH + IBUT PI controller Feed Control over feed stoichiometry to avoid an Barlett (1999)
↔ MTBE composition excess of methanol

PI controller with relay Product purity 99% purity Wang et al. (2003)
feedback test and reactant
conversion
PI controller (P for level Top and bottom MTBE Decomposition

control) with relay Product purity 94.36% conversion (MTBE), 94% purity (top Huang et al.
feedback test product, IBUT), 94% purity (bottom product, (2007)
MEOH)
3. Ethanol + tert Inferential controller Product purity Conversion 97.7%, purity 96.6% Sneesby et al.
butyl alcohol and conversion (1997)
↔ ETBE +
water
Linear (PI) controller Product purity Conversion 96.6%, purity 96.9% Sneesby et al.
and conversion (2000)
Table 1, cont.
PI controllers (P only on Product Double-feed system requires internal Al-Arfaz and

levels) tuned using the composition composition control to balance the Lyuben (2002c)
Tyreus- Luyben tuning stoichiometry, along with temperature control

method to maintain product purity. 85% product purity
PI controller and linear Product purity The model predictive controller was able to Khaledi and
model predictive and reactant handle the process interactions well and was Young (2005)
controller conversion found to be very efficient for disturbance

rejection and set-point tracking.
Pattern-based predictive Product purity 98% conversion, 90% purity Tian et al.(2003)
control incorporated with
conventional PI control.
Decentralized Isobutene The control performance was discussed to Athimathi et al.

PI controller and conversion and handle the nonlinearity and reduce the (2006)
constrained MPC ETBE purity unwanted variability. 97.87 % Isobutylene
conversion , 93.96 % product purity
Adaptive PI control One point Recommended CMPC controller for the Bisowarno et al.
strategies eg. Nonlinear PI control (product control of a reactive distillation process as it (2004)
(NPI) and model gain purity) is effective for both set point and load
scheduling (MGS) disturbance rejection.
Table 1, cont.
Methanol + Proportional-integral (PI) Tray 99.2% purity Al-Arfaz and

4. acetic acid → controllers (P only on temperature, Lyuben (2002a)
Methyl acetate levels) tuned using the product purity
+ Water Tyreus-Luyben tuning

method.
Nonlinear predictive
control using a neural Product purity Better results can be obtained by neural Engell et al. (2003)
network model network based nonlinear controller.
Ratio control scheme, Product purity Tighter product purity control is achieved for
temperature controller a through-put change when the two feeds are Kumar and
fed in ratio with the reboiler duty, the Kaistha (2009a)
through-put manipulator.
They analyzed a non minimum phase
5. Nonlinear inversion based Product purity behavior and addressed in the design of a Kumar and
Ethylene oxide controller nonlinear inversion based controller that Daoutidis (1999)
+ Water → performs well with stability in the high purity
Ethylene region.
glycol They proposed a new concept for robust Monroy-Loperena
PI controller Product purity stabilization which is based on an analysis of (2000)
the underlying I/O bifurcation diagram and
on modeling error compensation techniques.
PI controller Product purity A simple single temperature PI structure Al-Arfaz and

provides effective control, 94.8% purity Lyuben (2002b)
5. Types of Controllers
5.1 PID Controller
The PID controller, which consists of proportional, integrative and derivative

elements, is widely used in feedback control of industrial processes. The RD
control literature can be broadly classified into traditional decentralized PI control,
e.g., (Al-Arfaj 2000; Kaymak & Luyben 2005; Hung 2006; Lin 2006.; Singh et al.
2007) and advanced model based control, e.g., (Kumar & Daoutidis 1999; Tian et al.
2003; Bisowarno 2003; Gruner 2003; Khaledi & Young 2005).
In one of the earliest control papers, Roat et al. (1986) studied a two-product
reactive distillation column with the reaction
DB AC
where the control objective was to control the purity of the distillate product
(mostly A) and conversion. They proposed a control structure that used two
conventional proportional-integral (PI) temperature controllers to maintain two
tray temperatures in the column by adjusting the two fresh feed streams.
Al-Arfaz (2002d) have considered different designs for a single-feed
pentene metathesis reactive distillation with various single input-single output
(SISO) control structures involving PI controllers. Simulation results have shown
that a control structure that uses two temperatures to maintain the desired purities of
top and bottom products was found to be more effective. They have also shown that
an ethylene glycol reactive distillation column can be effectively controlled by a
simple PI control scheme.
Sneesby et al. (1999) proposed a two-point control scheme for an ethyl
tert-butyl ether (ETBE) reactive distillation column in which both bottoms product
purity and conversion are controlled. Conventional PI controllers are used to
control a temperature in the stripping section by manipulating the reboiler heat
input and to control conversion by manipulating the reflux flow rate. Conversion is
calculated inferentially from several temperature and flow measurements.
Monrey-Loperens (2000) develop a nonlinear PID-type top product
composition controller for the ethyl acetate process operated in batch mode, using
the reflux ratio as the manipulated input. They show that their scheme generates the
same reflux ratio profile as the optimization-based approach shown by Mujtaba and
Macchietto (1997) while being robust to model errors. Another author Vora and
Daoutidis (2001) have studied the application of model-based linear and nonlinear
state feedback controllers and single input single output (SISO) controllers with PI
configuration for ethyl acetate reactive distillation. The simulation results of these
controllers have shown the better performance of the nonlinear model-based
controller.

The proportional-integral-derivative (PID) controller has gained

widespread use in many process control applications due to its simplicity in
structure, robustness in operation, and easy comprehension of its principle.
Numerous tuning methods have already been proposed to design PID controller,
like Cohen-Coon and Zieglar-Nichols tuning rules, model-based design, relay
feedback test, and dominant pole design. However, most of these design methods
for PID controllers are based on a linear process model obtained experimentally
around the nominal operating condition. Therefore, the performance of the
conventional PID controller might degrade or even become unstable for nonlinear
processes with a range of operating conditions. To improve the control
performance several schemes, like neural network based model, of incorporating
nonlinear control techniques in the design of PID controllers had been developed
(Nuella et al. 2009).
PID algorithm was not capable of obtaining the full benefits of the
optimization. A high percentage of the time the optimization used its degrees of
freedom to solve for an equal number of physical constraints. The PID algorithm
was not effective in controlling the highly interactive system concurrently at a large
number of constraints.
Unit 1 – conventional Unit 2 – Model Predictive

Control Structure Control Structure
Global Economics
Plant-wide optimization Optimization
(Every day)
Local Economics
Unit-1 Local Optimizer Unit-2 Local Optimizer Optimization
(Every hour)
High/Low Select Logic

Dynamic constraint
control
Model Predictive (Every minute)
PID L/L PID Control (MPC)
SUM SUM
Basic dynamic
Unit 1 DCS-PID controls Unit 2 DCS-PID controls control
(Every second)
FC PC TC LC FC PC TC LC
Fig. 10 Hierarchy of control system functions in a typical processing plant.

Conventional structure is shown at the left; MPC structure is shown at the right.
(Qin & Badgwell 2003)

In modern processing plants the MPC controller is part of a multi-level

hierarchy of control functions (Qin & Badgwell 2003). This is illustrated in Figure
10, which shows a conventional control structure on the left for Unit 1 and a MPC
structure on the right for Unit 2. At the top of the structure a plant-wide optimizer
determines optimal steady-state settings for each unit in the plant. These may be
sent to local optimizers at each unit which run more frequently or consider a more
detailed unit model than is possible at the plant-wide level. The unit optimizer
computes an optimal economic steady state and passes this to the dynamic
constraint control system for implementation. The dynamic constraint control must
move the plant from one constrained steady state to another while minimizing
constraint violations along the way. In the conventional structure this is
accomplished by using a combination of PID algorithms, lead-lag (L/L) blocks and
high/low select logic. It is often difficult to translate the control requirements at this
level into an appropriate conventional control structure. In the MPC methodology
this combination of blocks is replaced by a single MPC controller.
5.2 Model Predictive Control
The RD control literature can be broadly classified into traditional decentralized PI

control and advanced model based control (Kumar & Kaistha 2008d). Further
studies on control of reactive distillation have shown the inadequacy of
conventional controllers and highlight the need for more advanced controllers.
During the past decade there has been an increase in the use of linear model
predictive control (MPC) techniques.
Model Predictive Control (MPC) is an optimal-control based method to
select control inputs by minimizing the predicted error from set point for the future.
The objective function is defined in terms of both present and predicted system
variables and is evaluated using an explicit model to predict future process outputs.
MPC is normally applied to multivariable process control, where its real benefits
can be realized. (Kawathekar 2004)
The most frequently cited MPC techniques are dynamic matrix control
(DMC) and model algorithmic control (MAC) (Silva & Kwong 1999), which are
used successfully in a larger number of industrial processes because they explicitly
handle constraints (Prett 1979; Moro 1995; Odloak 1996).
Balasubramhanya and Doyle III (2000) used a model predictive control to
study the control of batch reactive distillation column. A schematic of the controller
design used by Balasubramhanya and Doyle III (2000) is presented in Figure 11.
The solid lines trace the control loop associated with the amount of distillate
collected while the dashed lines trace the temperature feedback to the controller.
The dotted line represents the MPC controller that minimizes the difference
between the reference trajectory and the output prediction within the constraints
imposed.

Sensitive tray temperature

Filter
Reactive
Distillation
r (k) Column
Reference
P-Horizon
Model u(k+1)
-
Optimization Condenser
Condenser
Model
P-Horizon Distillate
Collected
-1
Z Condenser
Filter
Model -
d (k)
Fig. 11 Schematic diagram of MPC algorithm with temperature feed-back.

(Balasubramhanya & Doyle III 2000)
5.2.1 Dynamic Matrix Control (DMC)
Industrially popular model predictive control algorithms such as Dynamic Matrix

Control (DMC) use a linear convolution model of the process for control algorithm.
Cutler et al. (1983) developed the most popular form of MPC, which is called
Dynamic Matrix Control (DMC) to solve the constrained multivariable control
problem. Dynamic Matrix Control explicitly uses a lower triangular matrix called
‘dynamic matrix’ containing the step response coefficients corresponding to the
deterministic input(s) to the process. The general topic of model identification is
covered extensively by Box et al. (1994). Many researchers have reported
applications of DMC on distillation column control. McDonald and McAvoy (1987)
applied DMC to simulation of a benzene-toluene column and an
isobutene-n-butane column. A DMC algorithm for startup and continuous
operation of a reactive distillation column has been proposed by Baldon et al.
(1997) .There are many applications of DMC reported for conventional distillation

column, very few MPC applications are reported for reactive distillation control.
Ruiz et al. (1995) have reported application of DMC for control of reactive
distillation for ethyl acetate synthesis. Recently, Dwivedi and Kaistha ( 2008)
evaluated dual ended temperature inferential and product composition
compensated temperature inferential control of a double feed ideal reactive
distillation column using constrained dynamic matrix control (CDMC) and
traditional decentralized control.
For constructing the dynamic matrix, a step response model for the process
is first obtained from the open-loop data. The step response coefficients are then
arranged in a specific lower triangular form in the dynamic matrix. Key features of
the DMC control algorithm according to Qin and Badgwell (2003) include:
 linear step response model for the plant;

 Quadratic performance objective over a finite prediction horizon;
 Future plant output behavior specified by trying to follow the set-point
as closely as possible;
 Optimal inputs computed as the solution to a least squares problem.
5.2.2 Quadratic Dynamic Matrix Control (QDMC)
In the QDMC optimization problem, the output is predicted with a step response
model, which is obtained at the most probable operating conditions. Cutler et al.
(1983) first described the QDMC algorithm in a 1983 AIChE conference paper.
Garcia and Morshedi (1986) published a more comprehensive description several
years later. Although the QDMC algorithm is a somewhat advanced control
algorithm, the quadratic programming (QP) itself is one of the simplest possible
optimization problems that one could pose. The Hessian of the QP is positive
definite for linear plants and so the resulting optimization problem is convex. This
means that a solution can be found readily using standard commercial optimization
codes. The QDMC algorithm can be regarded as representing a second generation
of MPC technology, comprised of algorithms which provide a systematic way to
implement input and output constraints. This was accomplished by posing the MPC
problem as a QP, with the solution provided by standard QP codes (Reddy & Saha
2006).
Key features of the QDMC algorithm according to Qin and Badgwell (2003)
include:
 Linear step response model for the plant;

 Quadratic performance objective over a finite prediction horizon;
 Future plant output behavior specified by trying to follow the setpoint as
closely as possible subject to a move suppression term;

 Optimal inputs computed as the solution to a quadratic program.
Balasubramhanya and Doyle III (2000) used the approach of Nonlinear

Quadratic Dynamic Matrix Control with State Estimation (NLQDMC/SE) to study
the nonlinear behavior of batch reactive distillation column. They used a reduced
wave model to predict outputs into the future. The control objective is to obtain a
pure sample of the product over the entire batch as possible. It is difficult to obtain
the composition of the product at every time step for feedback control. However,
since the composition in the column is intimately linked to the temperature, the
composition of the product can be inferentially controlled by controlling the
temperature in the column. The temperature on tray 2 was used as the controlled
variable. The objective function for the minimization problem to be solved at each
instance of time is given by:
k p
min  (rdis (t )  y dis (i ) 2 )
u i k
Subject to the constraints:
u(i)≥0.0 i=k,…,k+m
u(i)≤umax i=k,…,k+m
Ttray,2(i) ≤Tmax i=k,…,k+p
∆u(i)≤∆umax i=k,…,k+m
y dis (i )  y dis (i  1)  (v(i  1)  L(i  1)Ts )

i  k ,......., k  p
rdis(i) is the reference trajectory for the amount of distillate to be produced at time
instant k+i, Ts, is the sample time (0.3 h), ydis(i). is the predicted amount of distillate
produced, umax is the maximum input, ∆umax is the maximum input change at every
time period, and Tmax is the maximum temperature allowed on tray 2. u is a vector
of magnitude 2m x 1 corresponding to the two inputs (vapor flow and liquid flow)
and the m moves that the controller calculates at every time step. The temperature
constraint at Tmax places a lower bound on the purity of the distillate. Ttray,2 (i) is the
output of the reduced model used to predict the temperature i steps into the future.
5.2.3 Linear Model Predictive Control (LMPC)
Linear Model Predictive Control employs linear or linearized models to obtain the
predictive response of the controlled process. Linear MPC has proved useful for

controlling processes that exhibit even some degree of nonlinear behavior

(Venkateswarlu & Reddy 2008).
Olanrewaju and Al-Arfaz (2005) shows the linearized state space process
model for a generic two-reactant-two-product reactive distillation system. Many
model-based controllers use linear models because the linear models are easier to
analyze and require less computational recourses than nonlinear models. Besides,
most of the nonlinear systems often have the same general phase-plane behavior as
the model linearized about the steady state condition when the system is close to
that particular condition. Therefore, it is important to derive a suitable linearized
dynamic model that when used in the model-based control applications could yield
an effective and robust control system.
5.2.4 Nonlinear Model Predictive Control (NMPC)
MPC employs linear models such as step or impulse response models in the control
algorithms. For highly nonlinear processes when operating conditions vary widely
in the presence of disturbances or when large transitions in the state variables are
desired, conventional PID controllers or linear model based controllers (LMPC) are
often less than satisfactory. Nonlinear Model Predictive Control (NMPC) can be
defined as a MPC algorithm, which employs nonlinear models of the process
Reactive distillation processes exhibits highly nonlinear behavior, hence
the use of NMPC for control of reactive distillation process is expected to provide
improved performance compared to linear control strategies. Al-Arfaj and Luyben
(2002), Sneesby et al. (1997), Kumar and Daoutidis (1999), discussed the
decentralized PI control structures for reactive distillation column. Sneesby et al.
(1998), Al-Arfaj and Luyben (2002) discussed the possibility of multiple steady
states in many reactive distillation systems. The presence of multiplicities and the
highly nonlinear nature of reactive distillation may impose limitations on use of
linear controllers.
Other authors have also studied the Nonlinear Model Predictive control of
RD columns. Kumar and Daoutidis (1999) have discussed the superior
performance of nonlinear controller compared to linear controller for reactive
distillation systems. Silva and Kwong (1999) describe a new algorithm for model
predictive control using the simultaneous solution and optimization strategy. They
use equidistant collocation because it is a simpler alternative than orthogonal
collocation on finite elements for discretization of the model differential equations.
Balasubramhanya and Doyle III (2000) applied nonlinear model-based control to a
batch reactive distillation column producing ethyl acetate. Lim (2001) also applied
nonlinear wave model based control scheme to the same reactive batch distillation
column and showed that tight distillate composition control is possible.

Nonlinear model-based control algorithms can be applied to processes

described by a wide variety of model equations, such as nonlinear ordinary
differential/algebraic equations, partial differential equations and
integral-differential and delay-differential equations. Reactive distillation columns
are generally being modeled by a set of highly nonlinear first order differential
equations (Baur et al. 2001; Kumar & Daoutidis 1999; Roat et al. 1986; Taylor &
Krishna 2000).
The solution procedure for NMPC involves setting up the control problem
as a nonlinear programming (NLP) problem and solving it over some prediction
horizon. There are two ways of implementing model predictive control
(Kawathekar 2004). The first method employs separate algorithms to solve model
equations and to carry out optimization. This method is called sequential solution
and optimization approach. An alternative to solve the NLP problem is to use a
simultaneous solution and optimization strategy.
Recently Kathel and Jana (2010) proposed a nonlinear model-based control
algorithm for a simulated batch reactive distillation column for the production of
butyl acetate. The control scheme consists of the generic model controller (GMC)
and a state predictor.
5.3 Other Advanced Control Techniques
In view of the high process nonlinearity, the application of advanced control

techniques such as advanced adaptive control, pattern based predictive control,
inferential control, stochastic optimization algorithms and model predictive control
have been propounded in the RD control literature.
5.3.1 Adaptive Control
Adaptive control is known as a control strategy whose parameters change

continuously. Basically, the parameters of the process model are tuned using on
line identification of the process and then a control action is derived and
implemented accordingly. Therefore, adaptive control is suitably applied when the
process exhibits nonlinear behavior such as directionality of the process gain or the
structure of the process is unknown.
Bisowarno et al. (2004) developed the two adaptive PI control strategies,
e.g. non-linear PI (NPI) and model gain-scheduling (MGS) and implemented these
on an ETBE reactive distillation column. Both adaptive control strategies are based
on a PI controller integrated with a tuning method. For the NPI, they developed the
controller gain, which is allowed to vary to accommodate the directionality of the
process gain. For the MGS, they derived several local models, which cover relevant
operating conditions and cope with nonlinear characteristics (e.g. directionality of

process gain). The performance of the NPI and the MGS will be evaluated and
compared to that of a standard PI controller in both set-point tracking and
disturbance rejection.
Jana and Adari (2009) discussed the advanced adaptive control i.e. generic
model controller (GMC) and an adaptive state estimator (ASE) for nonlinear
process, of a batch reactive distillation (BRD) column that produces ethyl acetate
by the esterification of ethanol with acetic acid. The adaptive control algorithm
consists of the nonlinear generic model controller and an adaptive state estimator.
The closed-loop system having different controller elements and the process is
shown in Figure 12.
Nonlinear
ASE
-
+ Nonlinear u Process x Output y
ySP GMC Map
e
GMC-ASE
Fig. 12 Block diagram for the nonlinear adaptive control algorithm.(Jana and Adari,
2009)
They conclude that GMC–ASE control law provides tight composition

control throughout the batch operation. Better set point tracking and disturbance
rejection performance is achieved by the nonlinear adaptive controller compared to
the gain-scheduled proportional integral (GSPI) scheme. The simple design, easy
tuning and good performance make the adaptive controller attractive for online use.
Bisowarno et al. ( 2003) investigated model gain scheduling for inferential
one point control of an ethyl tert-butyl ether reactive distillation column. They
studied the directionality of the process gain, which cannot be well controlled by
using standard PI control with fixed parameters, and found that the problem can be
overcome for a wide range of operating conditions by using a gain scheduled PI
controller. However, model gain scheduling demands preprogramming or online
identification of the process gain.

5.3.2 Pattern Based Predictive Control
Due to the complexity of the RD process dynamics, conventional control

technologies, e.g. PI control, cannot provide satisfactory control performance,
while the application of modern control technology requires good process models.
Pattern-based predictive control (PPC) is such a method that does not rely on exact
process models while providing improved control performance for complex
processes over conventional, e.g. PI, control algorithms. Tian et al. (2003) develops
a pattern-based predictive control (PPC) scheme incorporating with conventional
proportional-integral (PI) controller for the non-linear and complex RD process.
The PPC system for the RD process is shown in Figure 13. It consists of two main
parts: a non-linear transformation u=f(v) and a pattern-based predictor (PP). The
former is used for input-output linearization of the process gain, while the latter is
employed to anticipate process output some (e.g. d) steps ahead. The PP utilizes
process feature patterns qualitatively and quantitatively, which are extracted from
the controlled and manipulated variables, and is incorporated with a conventional
controller Gc (e.g. PI) in the PPC system. For the RD system, y and u in Figure 13
correspond to T7 and Qr, respectively. Ideally, The PP acts as a time lead
component as it provides d steps ahead prediction of the controlled variable. It will
effectively compensate for the time delay in the RD process and thus allows more
aggressive controller settings compared with the control systems without PP.
Therefore, the PPC will provide improved performance in both set-point tracking
and disturbance rejection, as will be shown later for the RD process.
Fig. 13 PPC system structure (Tian et al. 2003).

5.3.3 Stochastic Optimization Algorithms
One more important aspect of highly nonlinear systems is the optimization

algorithm. Efficient optimization algorithms exist for convex optimization
problems. However, the optimization problem often becomes non-convex in the
presence of nonlinear characteristics/constraints and is usually more complex than
convex optimization. The goal of optimization is to find the values of the variables
in the process that yield the best value of the performance criterion. Sequential
quadratic programming (SQP) is a widely used classical optimization algorithm to
solve nonlinear optimization problems. However, for the solution of large
problems, it has been reported that gradient-based methods like SQP require more
computational efforts. Moreover, classical optimization methods are more sensitive
to the initialization of the algorithm and usually lead to unacceptable solutions due
to convergence to local optima. These methods are not expected to provide the
global optimum for a multimodal function. Consequently, new optimization
techniques are being proposed to achieve efficient control performance. Stochastic
search and optimization algorithms such as genetic algorithm (GA) and simulated
annealing (SA) derived from the principles of natural phenomena are useful to find
the global optimum of complex engineering problems. These algorithms are
attractive because of their flexibility, ease of operation, and global perspective.
(Venkateswarlu & Reddy 2008).
Venkateswarlu and Reddy (2008) studied the development of nonlinear
model predictive control strategies for reactive distillation based on stochastic
optimization techniques. Stochastic optimization algorithms such as genetic
algorithms (GAs) and simulated annealing (SA) are combined with the
polynomial-type nonlinear empirical process model identified from input-output
data of the process to develop nonlinear model predictive control (NMPC)
strategies, namely, GANMPC and SANMPC (Figure 14). The growing nonlinear
control applications will certainly continue due to the nonlinear nature of RD
systems for higher product competitiveness, tighter safety and environmental
regulations.
They conclude that both the GANMPC and SANMPC were found to
exhibit almost equal performance, SANMPC involves a smaller number of tuning
parameters and requires less execution time. Hence, SANMPC is better suited for
the control of reactive distillation.

Fig. 14 Structure of stochastic optimization based NMPC (Venkateswarlu & Reddy

2008)
Control of batch reactive distillation column is a very complex operation.

Recently, Bahar and Ozgen (2010) developed an inferential control methodology
that uses ANN estimator system to infer the product compositions from
temperature measurements which is further used to control the optimal reflux
profile.
6. Other Reactive Separation Processes
Process intensification and process integration represent ways of economical

efficiency, as well as environmental friendly operating conditions, by integrating
different phenomena or operations, as for example: reactive separations,
dividing-wall columns, heat integrated reactors or columns (Kiss et al. 2009).
Several successful examples of integrated processes can be found among
reactive-separations that combine reaction and separation steps in a single unit,
such as reactive distillation, reactive absorption and reactive extraction. As we
discussed above reactive distillation has significant economic advantages over
conventional reactor-separator-recycle systems, particularly for reversible
reactions in which conversion is limited by chemical equilibrium constraints and/or
separation is restricted by VLE limitations. However, due to the integration of
reaction and separation into a single vessel, reactive distillation is limited to
systems in which the reaction and separation conditions are similar – mainly in
terms of pressure and temperature.

6.1 Reactive Dividing Wall Distillation Column
Beside reactive separations, there is also the option to integrate two different
separation units together. To make distillation column as energy efficient system,
fully thermally coupled distillation column (or petlyuk column) or dividing wall
column (DWC, that integrates the two columns of a Petlyuk system into one
column shell) is used (Figure 15). These systems can reduce energy consumption
by 30-50% over conventional distillation sequences for the separation of some
mixtures. Feed, typically containing three or more components, is introduced into
one side of the column facing the wall. Deflected by the wall, the lightest
component A flows upward and exits the column as top distillate while the heaviest
component C drops down and is withdrawn from the bottom of the column. The
intermediate boiling component B is initially entrained up and down with both
streams, but the fluid that goes upward subsequently separates and falls down on
the opposite side of the wall. Similarly, the amount of B that goes toward the
bottom separates and flows up to the back side of the wall, where the entire product
B is recovered by a side draw stream. Note however that using DWC requires a
match between the operating conditions of the two standalone columns in a
conventional direct or indirect sequence (Van Diggelen et al. 2010).
Fig. 15 Dividing wall column (DWC) (Van Diggelen et al. 2010)
Reactive distillation column and dividing wall column both are good
examples of process intensification. If reactive distillation and DWC are further
integrated, a reactive divided wall distillation column (RDWDC) will be generated.
RDWDC has a highly integrated configuration that consists of one condenser, one
reboiler, reactive zones, a pre-fractionator and the main column together in a
single-shell distillation setup. The following reactive systems can be considered

suitable for this type of integration: reactive systems with more than two products
(e.g. with consecutive and side reactions), system containing both reactive and
non-reactive components, reactive systems with an excess of a reagent. The
RDWDC seems to be a very attractive and challenging process and some
theoretical studies have been focused on modeling and control of a RDWDC
(Bumbac et al. 2009). Integration of reaction, separation, prefractionator in a single
shell makes RDWDC system more complex.
Sander et al. (2006) discussed well this novel concept using the hydrolysis
of methyl acetate as a test system. With this reactive divided wall column, a process
alternative for the hydrolysis of methyl acetate is available (Figure 16), which leads
to a further reduction of devices compared to the reactive distillation process and
minimizes the back reactions of methanol and acetic acid to methyl acetate. The use
of the reactive divided wall column is not limited to the hydrolysis of methyl
acetate. It should be suitable for all processes in which the product of a reactive
distillation is the intermediate boiling component. Kiss et al. (2007; 2009)
discussed overcoming equilibrium limitations in RDWDC. They showed that
equilibrium limitations can be overcome and high purity components can be
obtained by integrating reaction and separation into a reactive dividing-wall
column. Bumbac et al. (2007; 2009) presented the process of reactive distillation
with divided wall column for the synthesis of ETBE and TAEE. Simulation of
flowsheet configuration was performed with ASPEN PLUS. Barroso-munoz et al.
(2009) present the thermodynamic analysis and hydrodynamic behavior of a
reactive dividing wall distillation column. They revealed that RDWDC are higher
energy efficient than classical configuration of a reactor plus a distillation column.
Fig. 16 Principle of combining the reactive distillation column with the following
separation column to form the reactive divided wall column (RDWC) (sander et al.
2006)

Cho et al. (2008) proposed a purification of lactic acid using reactive

divided wall distillation column. The proposed process increases the recovery of
lactic acid and decrease the number of equipments for the recovery, reducing
capital cost significantly. Hernandez et al. (2009) studied the dynamics of a
reactive divided wall distillation column for the production of ethyl acetate. They
implemented and tested the two control loops of temperature for different scenarios.
The results showed that the system can achieve changes in the two set points and
also eliminate disturbances in the composition of the feed stream. The dynamic
simulation results indicate that it is possible to control either the composition of the
top and bottoms products or two temperatures by manipulating the reflux rate and
the heat duty supplied to the reboiler, respectively. As reactive dividing wall
distillation column is very complex system so, further study will be required in
future in this field for controlling such type of systems.
6.2 Semi-Continuous Separation Processes with Chemical Reaction
Semicontinuous processes have been introduced in recent years as a process

intensification technique that allows multiple separations to be performed in one
separation column ((Phimister & Seider 2000a; 2000b; 2000c; 2001; Adams II &
Seider 2006a; 2008; 2009a) Several semicontinuous processes have been explored
for a variety of design scenarios, Semicontinuous distillation with chemical
reactions in middle vessels (MV) where streams are continuously exchanged
between the middle vessels and columns is advantageous over conventional
reactive distillation column for several reasons (Adams II & Seider 2006a): First,
because the two reaction products have intermediate boiling points and the reaction
is highly reversible, it is difficult to recover the product in a sidedraw. Second,
because one of the reagents leaves in the distillate (acetaldehyde) and one leave in
the bottoms product (propylene glycol), the reaction is shifted to the left. To
counter this effect, a large excess of one reagent can be used, with high
recirculation costs. Third, in reactive distillation, the temperatures in the column
are thermodynamically related to the pressure, which cannot exceed 2.1 bar for the
case study. Hence, temperature cannot be adjusted to control the rate and extent of
the reaction The semicontinuous reactive distillation (SRD) system has been
shown to be the economically optimal design strategy for intermediate production
rates when comparing it to equivalent batch and continuous processes (Adams II &
Seider 2009a).
Adams and Seider published a series of articles on semicontinuous
separation with chemical reaction in a middle vessel (Adams II & Seider 2005;
2006a; 2006b; 2008; 2009b; 2009a). A middle vessel is tightly integrated with the
separation column, where the middle vessel receives a stream from the column (the
distillate, bottoms, or sidedraw), while the column simultaneously receives a feed

stream from the middle vessel. Depending on the process objective, chemical
reaction(s) can be integrated into the separation process, either in an external vessel,
in the separation column, or in a CSTR used as a middle vessel. The process
operates in a forced cycle (or campaign), that is, a predefined sequence of operating
modes, which may include charge steps, product collection steps, and transitional
modes.
Advantages of using semicontinuous reactive distillation are:
a) Semicontinuous processes require fewer separation units than their

continuous analogs, the capital cost of semicontinuous processes are
normally lower than those of continuous processes.
b) Energy requirement are normally lower because Semicontinuous processes
do not involve column startup or shutdown modes often required in batch
processes.
c) Provide a cost effective means of separating chemicals at intermediate
production rates.
d) Temperature is easily controlled in semicontinuous reactive distillation as
reaction is carried out in a separate middle vessel.
In their recent article, Adams and Seider (2009a) developed three

configurations for semi-continuous processes as shown in Figure 17. In Scheme 1,
a single column interacts with two middle vessels in an alternating sequence. This
configuration is most appropriate when the column functionality differs
significantly in each phase of operation, or when undesirable side reactions are to
be reduced. They have shown this type of configuration in the semicontinuous
process by recovering 2,4-dimethyl-1,3-dioxolane(2,4 DMD) by the reversible
reaction of acetaldehyde and propylene glycol. In Scheme 2, only one middle
vessel is needed, but the column functionality differs significantly in each phase of
operation. Here, chemical reaction in the middle vessel is usually not effective, but
may be appropriate inside the column. Scheme 3 is chosen when the two separation
steps can be performed simultaneously inside the column, and consequently, only
one middle vessel and one operating phase are needed. This is also the most
appropriate configuration for reaction systems in which the middle-volatility
species is the reagent. They discussed this type of configuration in the
semicontinuous process to produce and recovered the ethyl lactate by reversible
reaction of ethanol and lactic acid.

(a)
(b) (c)
Fig. 17 Design configurations for semi-continuous ternary separation systems as

shown by Adams and Seider (2009a): (a) a semi-continuous process with two MVs
operating in two different phases of operation in a cycle. (b) A semi-continuous
process with one MV operating in two phases. (c) A semi-continuous process with
one MV operating in one phase of operation
7. Conclusions
The current status of control of reactive distillation column has been discussed.
Control of reactive distillation is a challenging problem due to process nonlinearity,
complex interactions between vapor-liquid equilibrium and chemical kinetics. The
first step in designing a decentralized control system is to choose the set of
controlled and corresponding manipulated variables, i.e. the control structure. The
appropriate control structure depends on the flow sheet and on the type of reactions
occurring in the column. In this paper, control structures for different chemical

systems, i.e., MTBE, ETBE, TAME, ethyl acetate, methyl acetate, etc. have been
discussed. One of the key challenges in the successful commercialization of RD
technology is designing a robust control system to effectively reject the load
disturbances such as through-put and feed composition changes
There are several types of controllers which have been studied in the
reactive distillation literature, ranging from simple proportional-integral (PI)
controllers to advanced model predictive controllers (MPC), such as dynamic
matrix control (DMC), quadratic dynamic matrix control (QDMC), nonlinear
model predictive control (NMPC), etc. The proportional-integral-derivative (PID)
controller has gained widespread use in many process control applications due to
its simplicity in structure, robustness in operation, and easy comprehension of its
principle but PID algorithm was not effective in controlling the highly interactive
system concurrently at a large number of constraints so the application of advanced
control techniques such as advanced adaptive control, pattern based predictive
control, stochastic optimization algorithms and model predictive control have been
propounded in the RD control literature. The presence of multiple steady states and
the highly nonlinear nature of reactive distillation may impose limitations on use of
linear controllers. Hence the use of nonlinear model predictive control (NMPC) for
control of reactive distillation process is expected to provide improved
performance.
Some other reactive separation processes are also included here like
reactive divided wall distillation column and semi-continuous distillation with
chemical reaction in a middle vessel. Reactive divided wall distillation column
(RDWDC) is a novel concept to reduce capital cost and make system more energy
efficient. These systems are useful for such type of reactions where intermediate
boiling product is formed. RDWDC has a highly integrated configuration that
consists of one condenser, one reboiler, reactive zones, a pre-fractionator and the
main column together in a single-shell distillation setup. So, further study is
required in this field by applying different controllers like model predictive control
to reduce the complexity of the system. Similarly, semi-continuous distillation with
chemical reaction in a middle vessel is also a novel concept and advantageous in
some aspects but it is not capable to remove azeotropes formed during the process
as they separate out using some other distillation column (probably azeotropic
distillation) and they also require a separate reaction vessel and distillation tower to
carry out the process which increases the capital cost; in those cases reactive
distillation is more advantageous. These systems are also not energy efficient as
compared to reactive distillation column and reactive dividing wall distillation
column.
Some chemical systems contain electrolytes and solid salts which clogs the
sieve holes by depositing on the tray. The modeling of the vapor-liquid equilibrium
of the system becomes complicated by the presence of electrolytes and salting out

effect. As Bezzo et al. (1999) mention the effect of electrolyte and salting out on
thermodynamic modeling for the production of propylene oxide from propylene
chlorohydrin and calcium hydroxide by using reactive distillation column. Such
type of problem affects the controller system which is basically based on the model
of the system such as model based controllers (MPC). Further research is required
to solve such type of problems and more research study is required in the field of
control of reactive distillation column to make the system simpler, economical and
more energy efficient.
References
Adams II, T. A. and Seider, W. D., "Semicontinuous reactive distillation for

specialty chemical production: Economic comparison with batch and
continuous processing", in proceedings of AIChE Annual Meet, 2005, NY,
USA, 10016-5991.
Adams II, T. A. and Seider, W. D., "Semicontinuous distillation with chemical

reaction in a middle vessel", Ind. Eng. Chem. Res., 2006a, 45, 16,
5548-5560.
Adams II, T. A. and Seider, W. D., "A synthesis procedure for the design of
semicontinuous reactive distillation for specialty chemicals", Computer
Aided Chemical Engineering, 2006b, 21, A, 949.
Adams II, T. A. and Seider, W. D., "Semicontinuous distillation for ethyl lactate
production", AIChE Journal, 2008, 54, 10, 2539-2552.
Adams II, T. A. and Seider, W. D., "Design heuristics for semicontinuous

separation processes with chemical reactions", Chemical Engineering
Research and Design, 2009a, 87, 3, 263-270.
Adams II, T. A. and Seider, W. D., "Semicontinuous reactive extraction and

reactive distillation", Chemical Engineering Research and Design, 2009b,
87, 3, 245-262.
Al-Arfaj, M. A. and Luyben, W. L., "Comparison of alternative control structures

for an ideal two-product reactive distillation column.”, Ind. Eng. Chem.
Res., 2000, 39, 3298–3307.
Al-Arfaj, M. A. and Luyben, W. L., "Comparative control study of ideal and

methyl acetate reactive distillation." Chemical Engineering Science, 2002a,
57, 5039-5050.

Al-Arfaj, M. A. and Luyben, W. L., "Control of ethylene glycol reactive distillation

column." AIChE Journal, 2002b, 48, 4, 905.
Al-Arfaj, M. A. and Luyben, W. L., "Control study of ETBE reactive distillation",

Ind. Eng. Chem. Res., 2002c, 41, 3784-3796.
Al-Arfaj, M. A. and Luyben, W. L., "Design and control of an olefin metathesis

reactive distillation column." Chemical Engineering Science, 2002d, 57,
715-733.
Al-Arfaj, M. A. and Luyben, W. L., "Plantwide control for TAME production

using reactive distillation", AIChE journal, 2004, 50, 7, 1462-1473.
Athimathi, S. and Radhakrishnan, T. K., "Control system design for a single feed
ETBE reactive distillation column", Chemical Engineering & Technology,
2006, 29, 10, 1137-1154.
Bahar, A. I. and Özgen, C., "State estimation and inferential control for a reactive
batch distillation column", Engineering Applications of Artificial
Intelligence, 2010, 23, 2, 262-270.
Balasubramhanya, L. S. and Doyle III, F. J., "Nonlinear model-based control of a

batch reactive distillation column", Journal of Process Control, 2000, 10,
2-3, 209-218.
Baldon, J. L., Strifezza, J. J., Basualdo, M. S. and Ruiz, C. A., "Control policy for
the startup, semi-continuous and continuous operation of a reactive
distillation column", 1997, 125–130.
Barlett, D. A. a. W., O.M., "Dynamic simulation and control strategy evaluation for
MTBE reactive distillation", Paper presented at FOCAP 1999.
Barroso-Muñoz, F. O., López-Ramírez, M. D., Díaz-Muñoz, J. G., Hernández, S.,

Segovia-Hernández, J. G., Hernández-Escoto, H. and Torres, R. H. C.,
"Thermodynamic Analysis and Hydrodynamic Behavior of a Reactive
Dividing Wall Distillation Column", Chemical Engineering, 2009, 17,
1263.
Baur, R., Taylor, R. and Krishna, R., "Dynamic behaviour of reactive distillation
tray columns described with a nonequilibrium cell model", Chemical
Engineering Science, 2001, 56, 4, 1721-1729.

Bezzo, F., Bertucco, A., Forlin, A. and Barolo, M., "Steady-state analysis of an
industrial reactive distillation column", Separation and Purification
Technology, 1999, 16, 3, 251-260.
Bisowarno, B. H., Tian, Y.C. and Tade, M.O., "Adaptive control of an ETBE
reactive distillation column", Journal of Chemical Engineering of Japan,
2004, 37, 2, 210-216.
Bisowarno, B. H., Tian, Y.C. and Tade, M.O., "Model gain scheduling control of
an ethyl tert-butyl ether reactive distillation column.” Ind. Eng. Chem. Res.,
2003, 42, 15, 3584-3591.
Box, G. E. P., Jenkins, G. M., Reinsel, G. C. l, "Time series analysis: Forecasting

and control", 1994, Prentice Hall, Eaglewood Cliffs, NJ
Bumbac, G., Ene, A., Isopescu, R. and Toma, A., "Process simulation of reactive
distillation in dividing wall column for ETBE synthesis process", Chemical
Engineering, 2009, 18, 4, 7.
Bumbac, G. and Plesu, E., "Reactive distillation process analysis in a divided wall
column", Computer Aided Chemical Engineering, 2007, 24, 443-448.
Burkett, R. J. and Rossiter, D., "Choosing the right control structure for industrial
distillation columns", Proc. Process Control Instrument, 2000, 38–42.
Chiang, S. F., Kuo, C. L., Yu, C. C. and Wong, D. S. H., "Design alternatives for
the amyl acetate process: Coupled reactor/column and reactive distillation",
Ind. Eng. Chem. Res., 2002, 41, 13, 3233-3246.
Chien, I., "Overall control strategy of a coupled reactor/columns process for the
production of ethyl acrylate", Journal of Process Control, 2008, 18, 3-4,
215-231.
Cho, Y., Kim, B., Kim, D. and Han, M., "Recovery of lactic acid by reactive
dividing wall column", In Proceedings of International Conference on
Control, Automation and Systems, 2008, Seoul, Korea, 2596-2599.
Ciric, A. R. and Miao, P., "Steady state multiplicities in an ethylene glycol reactive
distillation column", Ind. Eng. Chem. Res., 1994, 33, 11, 2738-2748.
Cutler, C. R., Morshedi, A. and Haydel, J., "An industrial perspective on advanced
control", "AIChE Annual Meeting", 1983, Washington DC.

Doherty, M. F. and Buzad, G., "Reactive distillation by design", Chemical

Engineering Research and Design, 1992, 70, a, 448-458.
Doherty, M. F. and Malone, M. F., "Conceptual design of distillation systems",

2001, McGraw-Hill.
Dwivedi, D. and Kaistha, N., "Dynamic Matrix Control of Ideal Reactive

Distillation Column." In Proceedings of CHEMCON, 2008, Chandigarh,
India.
Engell, S. and Fernholz, G., “Control of a reactive separation process”, Chemical

Engineering and Processing, 2003, 42, 3, 201-210.
Garcia, C. E. and Morshedi, A. M., "Quadratic programming solution of dynamic

matrix control (QDMC)", Chemical Engineering Communications, 1986,
46, 1, 73-87.
Gehrke, V. and Marquardt, W., "A singularity theory approach to the study of
reactive distillation", Computers and Chemical Engineering, 1997, 21,
1001-1006.
Gruner, S., Mohl, K.D., Kienle, A., Gilles, E.D., Fernholtz, G. and Friedrich, M,
"Non-linear control of a reactive distillation column." Control Engineering
Practice, 2003, 11, 8, 915-925.
Güttinger, T. E. and Morari, M., "Predicting multiple steady states in distillation:

Singularity analysis and reactive systems", Computers and Chemical
Engineering, 1997, 21, 995-1000.
Hernandez, S., Sandoval-Vergara, R., Barroso-Muñoz, F. O., Murrieta-Dueñas, R.,

Hernández-Escoto, H., Segovia-Hernández, J. G. and Rico-Ramirez, V.,
"Reactive dividing wall distillation columns: Simulation and
implementation in a pilot plant", Chemical Engineering and Processing:
Process Intensification, 2009, 48, 1, 250-258.
Hiwale, R. S., Bhate, N. V., Mahajan, Y. S. and Mahajani, S. M., "Industrial

applications of reactive distillation: recent trends", International Journal of
Chemical Reactor Engineering, 2004, 2, R1.
Huang, K. and Wang , S.-J., "Design and Control of a Methyl Tertiary Butyl Ether
(MTBE) Decomposition Reactive Distillation Column." Ind. Eng. Chem.
Res. 2007, 46, 2508-2519

Hung, S. B., Lee, M.J., Tang, Y.T., Yi, W.C., Lai, I.K., Hung, W.J., Huang, H.P.
and Yu, C.C., "Control of different reactive distillation configurations."
AIChE J, 2006, 52, 4, 1423-1440.
Hung, W., Lai, I., Hung, S., Huang, H., Lee, M. and Yu, C., "Control of Reactive
Distillation Columns for Amyl Acetate Production Using Dilute Acetic
Acid", Journal-Chinese Institute of Engineers 2006, 29, 2, 319.
Jana, A. K. and Adari, P., "Nonlinear state estimation and control of a batch
reactive distillation", Chemical Engineering Journal, 2009, 150, 2-3,
516-526.
Katariya, A. M., Kamath, R. S., Moudgalya, K. M. and Mahajani, S. M.,

"Non-equilibrium stage modeling and non-linear dynamic effects in the
synthesis of TAME by reactive distillation", Computers and Chemical
Engineering, 2008, 32, 2243-2255
Kathel, P. and Jana, A. K., "Dynamic simulation and nonlinear control of a rigorous
batch reactive distillation", ISA transactions, 2010, 49, 1, 130-137.
Kawathekar, R., "Nonlinear model predictive control of a reactive distillation

column", 2004, Ph.D. Dissertation, Texas Tech University.
Kawathekar, R. and Riggs, J. B., "Nonlinear model predictive control of a reactive

distillation column", Control Engineering Practice, 2007, 15, 2, 231-239.
Kaymak, D. B. and Luyben, W. L., "Comparison of two types of two-temperature

control structures for reactive distillation columns", Ind. Eng. Chem. Res.,
2005, 44, 13, 4625-4640.
Kaymak, D. B. and Luyben, W. L., "Evaluation of a two-temperature control

structure for a two-reactant/two-product type of reactive distillation
column", Chemical Engineering Science, 2006, 61, 13, 4432-4450.
Khaledi, R. and Young, B. R., "Modeling and model predictive control of

composition and conversion in an ETBE reactive distillation column", Ind.
Eng. Chem. Res., 2005, 44, 9, 3134-3145.
Kiss, A. A., Pragt, H. and van Strien, C., "Overcoming equilibrium limitations in
reactive dividing-wall columns", Computer Aided Chemical Engineering,
2007, 24, 467.

Kiss, A. A., Pragt, J. J. and van Strien, C. J. G., "Reactive dividing wall
columns-defying equilibrium restrictions", Chemical Product and Process
Modeling, 2009, 4, 5, 2.
Kumar, A. and Daoutidis, P., "Modeling, analysis and control of ethylene glycol
reactive distillation column", AIChE J, 1999, 45, 1, 51-68.
Kumar, M. V. P. and Kaistha, N., "Decentralized control of a kinetically controlled

ideal reactive distillation column", Chemical Engineering Science, 2008a,
63, 1, 228-243.
Kumar, M. V. P. and Kaistha, N., "Internal heat integration and controllability of

double feed reactive distillation columns, 1. Effect of feed tray location,"
Ind. Eng. Chem. Res., 2008b, 47, 7294-7303.
Kumar, M. V. P. and Kaistha, N., "Internal heat integration and controllability of

double feed reactive distillation columns, 2. Effect of catalyst
redistribution", Ind. Eng. Chem. Res., 2008c, 47, 19, 7304-7311.
Kumar, M. V. P. and Kaistha, N., "Role of multiplicity in reactive distillation

control system design", Journal of Process Control, 2008d, 18, 692–706.
Kumar, M. V. P. and Kaistha, N., "Steady state multiplicity and its implications on
the control of an ideal reactive distillation column", Ind. Eng. Chem. Res.,
2008e, 47, 8, 2778-2787.
Kumar, M. V. P. and Kaistha, N., "Evaluation of ratio control schemes in a

two-temperature control structure for a methyl acetate reactive distillation
column ", chemical engineering research and design, 2009a, 87, 2, 216-225.
Kumar, M. V. P. and Kaistha, N., "Reactive distillation column design for

controllability: A case study", Chemical Engineering & Processing: Process
Intensification, 2009b, 48, 2, 606-616.
Lee, H. Y., Huang, H. P. and Chien, I. L., "Control of reactive distillation process
for production of ethyl acetate", Journal of Process Control, 2007, 17, 4,
363-377.
Lim, C. a. H., M., "Profile position control of reactive batch distillation column",
Journal of Control, Automation and Systems Engineering, 2001, 7, 3, 263

Lin, Y. D., Huang, H.P. and Yu, C.C., "Relay feedback tests for highly non-linear
processes: reactive distillation." Ind. Eng. Chem. Res., , 2006, 45, 12,
4081-4092.
Luyben, W. L., " Economic and dynamic impact of the use of excess reactant in
reactive distillation systems." Ind. Eng. Chem. Res., 2000, 39, 8,
2935-2946.
Luyben, W. L., "Control of ternary reactive distillation columns with and without
chemically inert components", Ind. Eng. Chem. Res., 2007, 46, 17,
5576-5590.
Luyben, W. L., Pszalgowski, K. M., Schaefer, M. R. and Siddons, C., "Design and
control of conventional and reactive distillation processes for the
production of butyl acetate", Ind. Eng. Chem. Res., 2004, 43, 25,
8014-8025.
Luyben, W. L. and Yu, C.-C., "Reactive distillation Design and Control", 2008,
John Wiley & Sons.
Malone, M. F., Doherty, M.F., "Reactive Distillation", Ind. Eng. Chem. Res., 2000,
39, 3953-3957.
McDonald, K. A. and McAvoy, T. J., "Application of dynamic matrix control to

moderate-and high-purity distillation towers", Ind. Eng. Chem. Res., 1987,
26, 5, 1011-1018.
Monroy-Loperens, R., Perez-Cisneros, E., and Alverz-Ramirez, J., "A robust PI

control configuration for a high-purity ethylene glycol reactive distillation
column", Chemical Engineering Science, 2000, 55, 4925-4937.
Moro, L. F. L. a. O., D., "Constrained Multivariable Control of FCC Converters ",

Journal of Process Control, 1995, 5, 1, 29-39.
Mujtaba, I. M. and Macchietto, S., "Efficient optimization of batch distillation with

chemical reaction using polynomial curve fitting techniques", Ind. Eng.
Chem. Res., 1997, 36, 6, 2287-2295.
Nuella, I., Cheng, C. and Chiu, M. S., "Adaptive PID Controller Design for
Nonlinear Systems", Ind. Eng. Chem. Res., 2009, 48, 4877–4883.

Odloak, D. A., “New State Space Approach to Model Predictive Control",

Brazilian Journal of Chemical Engineering, 1996, 3, 3, 152-167.
Olanrewaju , M. J. and Al-Arfaj, M. A., "Development and application of linear

process model in estimation and control of reactive distillation", Computers
& Chemical Engineering, 2005, 30, 147-157.
Phimister, J. R. and Seider, W. D., "Semicontinuous, middle-vessel distillation of

ternary mixtures", AIChE Journal, 2000a, 46, 8, 1508-1520.
Phimister, J. R. and Seider, W. D., "Semicontinuous, middle-vessel, extractive

distillation", Computers & Chemical Engineering, 2000b, 24, 2-7, 879-885.
Phimister, J. R. and Seider, W. D., "Semicontinuous, pressure-swing distillation",

Ind. Eng. Chem. Res., 2000c, 39, 1, 122-130.
Phimister, J. R. and Seider, W. D., "Bridge the gap with semicontinuous

distillation", Chemical engineering progress, 2001, 97, 8, 72-78.
Pisarenko, Y. A., Epifanova, O. A. and Serafimov, L. A., "Steady states for a

reaction-distillation column with one product stream", Theor. Found. Chem.
Eng., 1988, 21, 281-286.
Prett, D. M. a. G., R. D., "Optimization and constraints multivariable control of a

catalytic cracking unit", "AIChE National Meeting", 1979, Houston, Texas,
Paper No. 51b.
Qin, S. J. and Badgwell, T. A., "A survey of industrial model predictive control
technology", Control Engineering Practice, 2003, 11, 7, 733-764.
Reddy, T. J. and Saha, P., "Plant wide control of hydrodealkylation process using
Aspen® engineering suite", in proceedings of CHEMCON, 2006,
Ankleshwar, Gujarat, India.
Roat, S. D., Downs, J. J., Vogel, E. F. and Doss, J. E., "The integration of rigorous
dynamic modeling and control system synthesis for distillation columns:
An industrial approach", Chemical Process Control–CPC III, 1986.
Ruiz, C. A., Basualdo, M. S. and Scenna, N. J., "Reactive distillation dynamic

simulation", Chemical Engineering Research and Design, 1995, 73, a,
363-378.

Sander, S., Flisch, C., Geissler, E., Schoenmakers, H., Ryll, O. and Hasse, H.,
"Methyl acetate hydrolysis in a reactive divided wall column", 2006,
Institution of Chemical Engineers; 1999, p. 353.
Silva, R. G. and Kwong, W. H., "Nonlinear model predictive control of chemical

processes", Brazilian Journal of Chemical Engineering, 1999, 16, 83-99.
Singh, B. P., Singh, R., Pavan Kumar, M. V. and Kaistha, N., "Steady-state
analyses for reactive distillation control: An MTBE case study", Journal of
Loss Prevention in the process industries, 2005, 18, 4-6, 283-292.
Singh, R., Kumar, M. V. P. and Kaistha, N., "Steady-state reactive distillation

simulation using the Naphtali-Sandholm method", The Canadian Journal of
Chemical Engineering, 2007, 85, 1, 75–82.
Smith, L. A., Catalytic Distillation Column, U. S. Pat. No. 4307254, (patent).
Sneesby, M. G., Tade, M. O., Datta, R. and Smith, T. N., "ETBE synthesis via
reactive distillation. 2. Dynamic simulation and control aspects", Ind. Eng.
Chem. Res., 1997, 36, 5, 1870-1881.
Sneesby, M. G., Tade, M. O. and Smith, T. N., "Multiplicity and

pseudo-multiplicity in MTBE and ETBE reactive distillation", Chemical
Engineering Research and Design, 1998, 76, 4, 525-531.
Sneesby, M. G., Tade, M. O. and Smith, T. N., "Two-point control of a reactive

distillation column for composition and conversion", Journal of Process
Control, 1999, 9, 1, 19-31.
Sneesby, M. G., Tade, M. O. and Smith, T. N., "A multi-objective control scheme
for an ETBE reactive distillation column", Chemical Engineering Research
and Design, 2000, 78, 2, 283-292.
Stichlmair, J. and Fair, J. R., "Distillation: principles and practices", 1998, VCH
Verlagsgesellschaft Mbh.
Sundmacher, K. and Kienle, A., "Reactive distillation: status and future directions",
2003, Wiley-Vch Verlag GmbH & Co. KGaA.
Tadé, M. O., Bisowarno, B. H. and Tian, Y. C., "Modelling and control of reactive
distillation systems", IFAC, 2003.

Tang, Y. T., Huang, H. P. and Chien, I., "Plant-wide control of a complete ethyl
acetate reactive distillation process", Journal of Chemical Engineering of
Japan, 2005, 38, 2, 130-146.
Tang, Y. T., Huang, H. P. and Chien, I. L., "Design of a complete ethyl acetate
reactive distillation system", Journal of Chemical Engineering of Japan,
2003, 36, 11, 1352-1363.
Taylor, R. and Krishna, R., "Modelling reactive distillation", Chemical

Engineering Science, 2000, 55, 22, 5183-5229.
Tian, Y. C., Zhao, F., Bisowarno, B. H. and Tade, M. O., "Pattern-based predictive
control for ETBE reactive distillation", Journal of process control, 2003, 13,
1, 57-67.
Tsai, R. C., Cheng, J. K., Huang, H. P., Yu, C. C., Shen, Y. S. and Chen, Y. T.,
"Design and control of the side reactor configuration for production of ethyl
acetate", Ind. Eng. Chem. Res., 2008, 47, 23, 9472-9484.
Tyreus, B. D. and Luyben, W. L., "Tuning PI controllers for integrator/dead time

processes", Ind. Eng. Chem. Res., 1992, 31, 11, 2625-2628.
Ung, S. and Doherty, M. F., "Synthesis of reactive distillation systems with

multiple equilibrium chemical reactions", Ind. Eng. Chem. Res., 1995, 34, 8,
2555-2565.
Van Diggelen, R. C., Kiss, A. A. and Heemink, A. W., "Comparison of control

strategies for dividing wall columns", Ind. Eng. Chem. Res., 2010, 49,
288-307.
Venkateswarlu, C. and Reddy, A. D., "Nonlinear model predictive control of

reactive distillation based on stochastic optimization", Ind. Eng. Chem.
Res., 2008, 47, 18, 6949-6960.
Volker, M., Sonntag, C. and Engell, S., "Control of integrated processes: A case
study on reactive distillation in a medium-scale pilot plant", Control
Engineering Practice 2007, 15, 863-881.
Vora, N. and Daoutidis, P., "Dynamics and control of an ethyl acetate reactive
distillation column", Ind. Eng. Chem. Res., 2001, 40, 3, 833-849.

Wang, S. J., Wong, D. S. H. and Yu, S. W., "Design and control of

transesterification reactive distillation with thermal coupling", Computers
and Chemical Engineering, 2008, 32, 12, 3030-3037.
Wang, S. J., Yu, C. C. and Huang, H. P., "Plant-wide design and control of DMC
synthesis process via reactive distillation and thermally coupled extractive
distillation", Computers and Chemical Engineering, 2010, 34, 3, 361-373.
Wang, S. J. W., D. S. H. and Lee, E. K., "Effect of Interaction Multiplicity on

Control System Design for a MTBE Reactive Distillation Column", Journal
of Process Control, 2003, 13, 503.
Yu, C.-C., "Autotuning of PID controllers", Springer, 1999.
Zeng, K., Kuo, C. and Chien, I., "Design and control of butyl acrylate reactive
distillation column system. " Chem. Eng. Sci., 2006, 61, 4417.


Sharma 2010

Diunggah oleh

Informasi Dokumen

Hak Cipta

Format Tersedia

Bagikan dokumen Ini

Bagikan atau Tanam Dokumen

Opsi Berbagi

Apakah menurut Anda dokumen ini bermanfaat?

Apakah konten ini tidak pantas?

Hak Cipta:

Format Tersedia

Sharma 2010

Diunggah oleh

Hak Cipta:

Format Tersedia

I NTERNATIONAL J OURNAL OF C HEMICAL

Control of Reactive Distillation Column: A

Brought to you by | Statsbiblioteket - State and University Library Aarhus

KEYWORDS: reactive distillation column, PID control, model predictive con-

Brought to you by | Statsbiblioteket - State and University Library Aarhus

Nowadays, process intensification (PI) has become a thrust area of research in

Brought to you by | Statsbiblioteket - State and University Library Aarhus

'equilibrium limited' reactions such as esterification, ester hydrolysis and

Fig. 1 Reactive Distillation Column

Brought to you by | Statsbiblioteket - State and University Library Aarhus

Research and development of reactive distillation has been

Brought to you by | Statsbiblioteket - State and University Library Aarhus

A “control structure” as defined by Singh et al. (2005) refers to the number of

Brought to you by | Statsbiblioteket - State and University Library Aarhus

Several different control structures have been proposed for reactive

1. Reactions with two reactants and two products

Brought to you by | Statsbiblioteket - State and University Library Aarhus

(a) Directly, with one or more online analyzers (GC, NIR);

Brought to you by | Statsbiblioteket - State and University Library Aarhus

Brought to you by | Statsbiblioteket - State and University Library Aarhus

designs. A two-temperature control structure is effective when the system is over

3. Control Structure of Various Chemical Systems

As mentioned earlier different control structures were proposed for different

3.1 Control of MTBE System

Methyl tert-butyl ether (MTBE) is a commonly used antiknock compound added to

Brought to you by | Statsbiblioteket - State and University Library Aarhus

MTBE (C 5 H 12 O)  MEOH(CH 3 OH)  IBUT (i - C 4 H 8 )

Figure 3 presents a sketch of a control configuration in which the purities of

Brought to you by | Statsbiblioteket - State and University Library Aarhus

Brought to you by | Statsbiblioteket - State and University Library Aarhus

3.2 Control of ETBE (2-ethoxy 2-methylpropane) System

Ethyl tert-butyl ether (ETBE) is growing in importance as a gasoline oxygenate and

Brought to you by | Statsbiblioteket - State and University Library Aarhus

Brought to you by | Statsbiblioteket - State and University Library Aarhus

Fig. 5 ETBE RD System with the controllers (Tadé et al. 2003)

3.3 Control of TAME (2-methoxy 2-methylbutane) RD System

Tertiary-amyl methyl ether (TAME) is a potential gasoline additive that can be

2M1B  MeOH  TAME

Brought to you by | Statsbiblioteket - State and University Library Aarhus

It is a widely studied model system to understand the complex behavior of

Fig. 6 Control structure proposed by Al-Arfaz and Luyben (2004)

Brought to you by | Statsbiblioteket - State and University Library Aarhus

3.4 Control of Ethyl Acetate RD System

CH3CH2OH + CH3COOH ⇌ CH3COOCH2CH3 + H2O

Brought to you by | Statsbiblioteket - State and University Library Aarhus

Brought to you by | Statsbiblioteket - State and University Library Aarhus

Brought to you by | Statsbiblioteket - State and University Library Aarhus

3.5 Control of Methyl acetate RD System

Methanol + Acetic Acid ⇌ Methyl Acetate + Water

Brought to you by | Statsbiblioteket - State and University Library Aarhus

Brought to you by | Statsbiblioteket - State and University Library Aarhus

3.6 Control of Ethylene glycol RD system

Brought to you by | Statsbiblioteket - State and University Library Aarhus

Fig. 9 control structure of ethylene glycol shown by (Al-Arfaj 2002b)

Brought to you by | Statsbiblioteket - State and University Library Aarhus

4. Control Degrees of Freedom

The number of manipulated variables is called the control degrees of freedom,

1. Throughput set by vapor boilup

Brought to you by | Statsbiblioteket - State and University Library Aarhus

Table 1. Summary of control of reactive distillation column

1. Ethanol + Product purity, Minimize the computational complexity by Balasubramhanya

controllers along with product purity conventional PI controller

Overhead and NLMPC was found to provide significantly Kawathekar and

Present alternative ways to improve control of Lee et al. (2007)