1/25/2019 Module 2.

3: Control of Separation Processes

Module 2.3: Control of Separation Processes

Introduction
This module deals with the control of a couple of simple separation processes:

Adiabatic Flash
Non-adiabatic Flash

In each of these sections there will be a degrees of freedom analysis, some discussion on control strategies
and then a few examples. Note that distillation columns will be dealt with in a separate section.

Adiabatic Flash: Degrees of Freedom

Before we can attempt to control this process we have to know how many streams we are allowed to
manipulate i.e. the control degrees of freedom. This can be evaluated by the equation

d.o.f = unknowns - equations

Unknowns

There are 3 streams in this process. Each stream has unknown composition, temperature and pressure. Thus
for a stream with C components there are

3 [C + 2] = 3C + 6 unknowns

Equations

In an adiabatic flash there are

C material balances
C equilibrium relationships
1 energy balance
1 equation relating the temperature of the products i.e. they must be the same.
1 equation relating the pressure of the products i.e. they must also be the same.

Hence altogether there are

2C + 3 constraints

http://homepages.ed.ac.uk/jwp/control06/controlcourse/restricted/course/third/course/module2-3.html 1/13
1/25/2019 Module 2.3: Control of Separation Processes

Degrees of Freedom

From the above we can evaluate that we have

C + 3 degrees of freedom

However we know the composition, temperature and pressure of the input stream. These were considered
unknowns for the above calculations but now can be taken into account. Thus this adds on another C + 1
constraints and so we now have

2 control degrees of freedom or C.D.F

This answer can be compared with that obtained directly using the equation below.

C.D.F = no. of connections + 1 - no. of phases

Number of connections for an adiabatic flash = 3

Number of phases = 2
Hence C.D.F = 3 + 1 - 2 = 2, as expected!

Adiabatic Flash: Control Strategy

It is now possible to devise control schemes for this adiabatic flash vessel. The basic input-output block has 3
streams. It has been evaluated above that there are 2 control degrees of freedom which means control valves
on two of the three streams. That leaves one other stream which also has a control valve on it to regulate
inventory i.e. to ensure that the mass balance does in fact balance.

Of the two streams left one would normally have a flow controller and be used to regulate throughput. This
could be any of the three streams. This leaves one other to regulate a strategic variable.

From a knowledge of the properties of the adiabatic flash, the normal design specification is the feed and
only one further quantity, usually pressure, but temperature or another flow could also be chosen.

Adiabatic Flash: Examples

For the examples below we will choose to regulate the pressure and one flowrate, not necessarily the feed.

Feed Rate and Pressure

Vapour Rate and Pressure
Liquid Rate and Pressure

This gives rise to six different alternatives. Each one is shown below with a short discussion on whether it is
feasible or not. Note that the shaded valve indicates a valve used for inventory regulation. Not shown is the
controller and level measurement. Since all measurements in this example orginate in the flash drum that end
of the loop is omitted to simplify the diagrams.

Feed Rate and Pressure

Figure 1 below shows the alternatives for this set up.

http://homepages.ed.ac.uk/jwp/control06/controlcourse/restricted/course/third/course/module2-3.html 2/13
1/25/2019 Module 2.3: Control of Separation Processes

Figure 1 - Feed Rate Controlled

Figure 1 (a) is a very common arrangement and will work well. Both pressure and level loops have good
adjustment-measurement sensitivity. There is some undesirable interaction because opening the pressure
control valve increases the rate of boiloff and hence affects the level.

Figure 1 (b) will not work. Although as noted above the vapour rate affects level, altering the liquid rate does
not change the pressure of the flash.

Vapour Rate and Pressure

Figure 2 below shows the alternatives for regulation of vapour rate and pressure.

Figure 2 - Vapour Rate Controlled

Figure 2 (a) is another fairly conventional arrangement. Level control is good, although there is interaction
between both flow and pressure loops. That is if the flow of vapour is increased then the pressure will
decrease significantly and so the feed rate will have to be increased also. Decreasing the vapour flow will
have the opposite effect causing the feed rate to be reduced.

Figure 2 (b) is unworkable for the same reasons given above for figure 1(b).

Liquid Rate and Pressure

Finally figures 3 gives the two alternatives for liquid rate and pressure.

http://homepages.ed.ac.uk/jwp/control06/controlcourse/restricted/course/third/course/module2-3.html 3/13
1/25/2019 Module 2.3: Control of Separation Processes

Figure 3 - Liquid Rate Controlled

Both of these schemes will work. However figure 3 (b) should give stronger response of both pressure and
level control loops to their respective adjustments, and hence less interaction. It would be preferred to figure
3 (a).

Alternative Arrangement
It would be possible to devise other schemes in which the flow control loop acted indirectly. For example, by
adjusting a stream other than the one which is measured as shown below in figure 4. Such arrangements
should be avoided, as should any system in which the operation of one loop, here the flow control, depends
also on the operation of another, here the inventory loop.

Figure 4 - Another Possibility?

Non-Adiabatic Flash: Degrees of Freedom

http://homepages.ed.ac.uk/jwp/control06/controlcourse/restricted/course/third/course/module2-3.html 4/13
1/25/2019 Module 2.3: Control of Separation Processes

As with the Adiabatic Flash we will start by evaluating the control degrees of freedom from the equation

d.o.f = unknowns - equations

Unknowns

In this example there are 4 streams associated with the flash. There are 3 process streams each with unknown
composition, temperature and pressure, and 1 energy flow. This gives

3 [C + 2] + 1 = 3C + 7 unknowns

Equations

In a flash with heat input there are

C material balances
C equilibrium relationships
1 energy balance
1 equation relating the temperature of the products i.e. they must be the same.
1 equation relating the pressure of the products i.e. they must also be the same.

Hence altogether there are

2C + 3 constraints

Degrees of Freedom

From the above we can evaluate that we have

C + 4 degrees of freedom

Now, as before, we can fix the composition, temperature and pressure of the feed stream. These C+2
constraints can be included in the above to give

3 control degrees of freedom

Once again this answer can be compared with that obtained directly.

C.D.F = no. of connections + 1 - no. of phases

Number of connections for an flash with heat input = 4

Number of phases = 2
Hence C.D.F = 4 + 1 - 2 = 3, as expected!

Non-Adiabatic Flash: Control Strategy

The non-adiabatic flash separator has an additional adjustment not present in the adiabatic case, namely a
heat input from a heating stream of steam or other utility. Analysis of the design problem, as shown in the
previous section, confirms that there is a further degree of freedom and therefore a flowrate plus two further
variables can be set. i.e. there are four possible adjustments we can manipulate, the three mentioned and the
material balance maintained with the fourth.

The best procedure to adopt in these examples is the following.

Put in all flow controllers on the streams which they regulate.

Check to see if it is now possible to locate the inventory control unambiguously, if so do it.
Consider all possible combinations for remaining loops.
Eliminate those without casual relationships between measurement and adjustment.
http://homepages.ed.ac.uk/jwp/control06/controlcourse/restricted/course/third/course/module2-3.html 5/13
1/25/2019 Module 2.3: Control of Separation Processes

Evaluate the others.

Note that while it is usually important to locate strategic loops before choosing the manipulated variable for
level, we have found that liquid rate does not affect either temperature or pressure. All other things being
equal, this would be the preferred choice for the level control loop. As with the adiabatic example, the
measurement ends of the control loops are not shown and the adjustment for the level loop is indicated by a
shaded valve.

Non-Adiabatic Flash: Examples

Below are four examples with the following parameters regulated.

Pressure, temperature and vapour rate

Pressure, liquid and vapour rates
Pressure, liquid to vapour flow ratio and feed rate
Pressure, temperature and vapour to feed ratio

Pressure, Temperature and Vapour Rate

Figure 5 below shows the best arrangement for this option. In this case interchanging temperature and
pressure loops could result in an inferior arrangement, as the feed rate would probably not have so direct an
effect on temperature, but would still work.

Figure 5 - Pressure, Temperature and Vapour Rate Regulated

Pressure, Liquid and Vapour Rates

Once flow controllers are placed on the liquid and vapour product streams, the third material stream, i.e. the
feed, must be used to maintain the mass balance. This leaves only the heat input, steam, valve to regulate
pressure. This is the only possible scheme and is shown below in figure 6.

http://homepages.ed.ac.uk/jwp/control06/controlcourse/restricted/course/third/course/module2-3.html 6/13
1/25/2019 Module 2.3: Control of Separation Processes

Figure 6 - Pressure, Liquid and Vapour Rates Regulated

Pressure, Liquid to Vapour Flow Ratio and Feedrate

To regulate a ratio requires a flow control loop on one stream, with its setpoint adjusted by a ratio controller.
A flow measurement on the second stream feeds into the ratio controller which sees both flows and changes
the setpoint of the flow controller accordingly. Thus only one of the ratioed streams has a valve, but both
have flowmeters. In principal the valve may be on either stream.

A suitable arrangement is shown in Figure 7. The flow control valve for the ratio system has been located on
the vapour line in order to leave the liquid line for level adjustment, as discussed above. Pressure control
must then be by the heat input.

Figure 7 - Pressure, Liquid to Vapour Flow Ratio and Feedrate Regulated

Pressure, Temperature and Vapour to Feed Rate Ratio

http://homepages.ed.ac.uk/jwp/control06/controlcourse/restricted/course/third/course/module2-3.html 7/13
1/25/2019 Module 2.3: Control of Separation Processes

One alternative is shown in figure 8 below. It would be possible here to put the valve for the ratio control on
either feed or vapour streams. Also it is possible to interchange the temperature and pressure loops. The best
choice would depend on the particular system: flowrates, component volatilities, etc. and would be
determined after detailed modelling of the process.

Figure 8 - Pressure, Temperature and Vapour to Feed Rate Ratio Regulated

Three Phase Flash

In a three phase flash (or separator) the feed into the vessel separates into two liquid phases and a vapour
phase. An example where this can be used is in the primary separation of light organics, heavy organics and
water. The diagram below shows a typical three phase separator.

Figure 9 - Three Phase Flash

Now let us consider the degrees of freedom:

C.D.F = no. of streams - no. of interfaces

http://homepages.ed.ac.uk/jwp/control06/controlcourse/restricted/course/third/course/module2-3.html 8/13
1/25/2019 Module 2.3: Control of Separation Processes

Number of streams = 4
Number of interfaces = 2
Hence C.D.F = 4 - 2 = 2

Typical control specifications would be feed rate and pressure. Note that two interfaces must be maintained
with two control loops. An example of a control scheme is shown in the diagram below.

Figure 10 - Three Phase Flash With Control

Countercurrent Cascade Columns

We have already looked briefly at countercurrent cascade columns in Module 2.1: Controlling Simple
Processes. Here is a diagram of one without control.

Figure 11 - Countercurrent Cascade Column

Now let us consider control.

C.D.F = no. of streams - no. of interfaces

Number of streams = 4
Number of interfaces = 1 (gas-liquid)
Hence C.D.F = 4 - 1 = 3
http://homepages.ed.ac.uk/jwp/control06/controlcourse/restricted/course/third/course/module2-3.html 9/13
1/25/2019 Module 2.3: Control of Separation Processes

For gas-liquid operations the three strategic variables to control would be

Column pressure
One flow rate
One composition

Below are three examples of controlling a cascade column with comments on how good or bad the control
scheme is.

Example 1 - Good Composition Control

In this first example the control loops are:

Liquid feed flowrate

Column pressure - tops flowrate
Bottoms composition - gas input
Inventory/level - bottoms flowrate

Figure 11 - Control Scheme 1

This is a good control scheme. All the adjustments have a direct effect on the controlled variables. In
particular look at the composition control of the bottoms product. As you can see the adjustment and
measurement are both at the bottom of the column.

Example 2 - Poor Composition Control

In this second example the control loops are:

Liquid feed flowrate

Column pressure - tops flowrate
Tops composition - gas input
Inventory/level - bottoms flowrate

http://homepages.ed.ac.uk/jwp/control06/controlcourse/restricted/course/third/course/module2-3.html 10/13
1/25/2019 Module 2.3: Control of Separation Processes

Figure 12 - Control Scheme 2

This is not quite as good as the previous example. The pressure, flowrate and level are as before. However
this time the top composition is controlled using the flowrate of the gas entering at the bottom of the column.
Hence this time there will be a time delay between making the adjustment and the composition changing to
reflect this change. This will be the length of time taken by the gas too travel up the column.

Example 3 - Bad Composition Control

Finally in this third example the control loops are:

Gas feed flowrate

Column pressure - tops flowrate
Bottoms composition - liquid input
Inventory/level - bottoms flowrate

Figure 13 - Control Scheme 3

In this example the flowrate of the gas is constant and once again the pressure and level control are as before.
However this time the bottoms composition is regulated using the liquid flowrate entering at the top of the
column. So once again there will be a time delay between making the adjustment and seeing the effect of the

http://homepages.ed.ac.uk/jwp/control06/controlcourse/restricted/course/third/course/module2-3.html 11/13
1/25/2019 Module 2.3: Control of Separation Processes

adjustment, but this time it will be the length of time taken for the liquid to travel down the column - a
significantly longer time. Hence this control scheme should be avoided.

Liquid-Liquid Extraction Columns

Finally let us look at the situation where the gas in the previous example is replaced by another (lighter)
liquid to form a liquid-liquid extraction column.

Figure 14 - Liquid-Liquid Extraction Column

In this case note that there is going to be some vapour present at the top of the column. This gives another
phase and so the degrees of freedom analysis gives us:

C.D.F = no. of streams - no. of interfaces

Number of streams = 5
Number of interfaces = 2 (vapour-liquid, liquid-liquid)
Hence C.D.F = 5 - 2 = 3

A liquid-liquid column running full of both liquids would probably use implicit pressure regulation by
leaving an open line to another part of the plant or alternatively may be vented to atmosphere. This
effectively reduces the degrees of freedom to 2. Normally one flowrate and one composition of controlled
along with the two interface control loops.

The example below shows the flowrate of the lighter liquid being controlled with the flowrate of the heavier
liquid entering at the top of the column being used to regulate the composition of the top product. The two
product streams are used for inventory.

http://homepages.ed.ac.uk/jwp/control06/controlcourse/restricted/course/third/course/module2-3.html 12/13
1/25/2019 Module 2.3: Control of Separation Processes

Figure 15 - Liquid-Liquid Extraction Column With Control

Return to Start of Part 2: Further Developments

http://homepages.ed.ac.uk/jwp/control06/controlcourse/restricted/course/third/course/module2-3.html 13/13