MaximaLabs
Back to gallery
Decatur, Illinois, USA

Corn wet milling: starch to high-fructose corn syrup — a SUGAR process flowsheet

The sweetener train of a corn wet mill, end to end on the new sugar thermo package. A 35 wt% starch slurry off the mill is saccharified to glucose (glucoamylase, Michaelis-Menten), part-isomerised to fructose, enriched by simulated moving-bed chromatography, and concentrated to syrup in a two-effect evaporator.

Three results are worth reading rather than assumed. The isomerase lands at 42% fructose — the real equilibrium of glucose isomerase, which is precisely why an SMB exists downstream: the reaction cannot reach HFCS-55 on its own. The SMB then splits on the cited Ca²⁺-resin affinities (fructose H=0.69 vs glucose H=0.26), sending fructose to the extract and recycling glucose in the raffinate. The evaporator finishes at 77 wt% solids, commercial HFCS syrup spec.

That last number is only reachable because of boiling-point elevation. Modelled as inert solids the sugars give no BPE feedback and the evaporator is bimodal — it either does not boil or boils to dry sugar, with nothing in between. The sugar package (Norrish) supplies the real elevation, and syrup concentration becomes a smooth, controllable function of steam (42 → 77 wt% over the sweep range). Starch itself is carried as an involatile pseudo-component: it has no boiling point to characterise, so none is invented.

2 views 0 forks

Slurry
Sacchar
ISOM
Desorb
feed
eluent
extract
raff
SMB
feed
steam
conc
vapor
cond
Evap1
feed
steam
conc
vapor
cond
Evap2
Cond1
Syrup
Vapor
Condensate
Steam
Raffinate
What this showcases
  • Rigorous SUGAR thermodynamics, solved by the same engine every simulation runs on.
  • 3 unit operations modeled: 2× ISOM, SMB, 2× Evap2.
  • Focus areas: Corn wet milling, HFCS, SMB chromatography, Enzymatic, Evaporation.
Specification
Thermodynamics
SUGAR
Components
starch, glucose, fructose, water
Unit operations
2× ISOMSMB2× Evap2
Open in workspace

Opens in a new tab, loaded straight into the app — no setup.

Read the step-by-step guide
Python SDK

Reproduce this exact result from Python — the real client.get_example() → run_and_wait() path, not a mockup.

from flowsim.sdk import FlowSimClient

client = FlowSimClient()
example = client.get_example("corn-wet-milling-hfcs")
sim = client.create_simulation(example["title"], example["flowsheet"])
result = client.run_and_wait(sim["id"])

print(result["status"])              # "converged"
streams = client.streams(sim["id"])

Related models

Corn wet-milling plant, Decatur, Illinois, USA

High-fructose corn syrup: SMB glucose/fructose separation

The single largest-volume industrial SMB in the world — separating fructose from glucose to make 55-HFCS. A glucose/fructose isomerate (dilute in water eluent) feeds the native SMB unit op; on a Ca²⁺-form ion-exchange resin fructose is the more-retained sugar, so it reports to the extract (the sweetener product) while glucose leaves in the raffinate (recycled to the isomerase reactor in a real plant). Solved as the steady-state True Moving Bed equivalent — a purely isotherm-driven liquid separation, so the sugars need no vapor-liquid-equilibrium data.

Chiral API plant, Visp, Switzerland

Chiral API purification: continuous SMB chromatography

A racemic active pharmaceutical ingredient (R/S enantiomers, dilute in ethanol eluent) is resolved continuously by simulated moving bed chromatography — the workhorse of chiral-drug manufacture that legacy steady-state flowsheet simulators have no native model for (engineers script it in MATLAB). This uses the native SMB unit op, which solves the standard steady-state True Moving Bed equivalent: a 4-zone counter-current equilibrium-stage cascade whose zone flow-rate ratios sit inside the triangle-theory separation region, so the more-retained enantiomer reports to the extract and the other to the raffinate — the separation is driven by the chiral adsorption selectivity (the two enantiomers are otherwise thermodynamically identical).

Renewable fuels plant, Hugoton, Kansas

Enzymatic biodiesel from high-FFA waste oil (lipase)

Immobilised-lipase (e.g. Novozym 435) production of FAME from a waste feedstock — used cooking oil / rendered fat carrying ~17 mol% free fatty acid. This is the feed slate a renewable-fuels producer actually buys, and it is exactly where the conventional alkali route breaks down: NaOH or methoxide saponifies free fatty acid into soap (the databank even carries sodium palmitate), which destroys yield and emulsifies the glycerol settling step, so a high-FFA feed needs an acid-esterification pretrain before it can be base-catalysed at all. A lipase does both reactions at once and at 40 C: it transesterifies the triglyceride to esters plus glycerol, and it esterifies the free fatty acid into more product rather than losing it to soap. Both reactions are carried explicitly here, so the FFA ends up as methyl palmitate instead of as a loss. The result: 97.9 wt% ester content (EN 14214 requires >= 96.5 wt%) with the free fatty acid taken down to under 0.1 mol% of the product, i.e. a low acid value, from a feed the alkali route could not process directly. Esterification also makes one mole of water per mole of FFA converted, which is why the vacuum flash takes methanol and water overhead together — water inhibits the enzyme and has to leave the loop.

Ludwigshafen, Germany

Polymerization reactor comparison: CSTR cascade vs. tubular (PFR)

The same monomer feed, split 50/50 into two trains at equal total reactor volume: a 3-stage CSTR cascade (each stage blending its own new polymer with the MWD already carried by the stream from the stage before it) versus a single tubular (PFR) reactor. Both converge to a real, different Mn/Mw/PDI — the PFR reaches higher conversion at the same total volume, but its cumulative polydispersity is measurably broader than the cascade's, because chain length drifts continuously with conversion along the tube while each CSTR stage makes its own local production under one fixed monomer concentration. See the 'Polymerization Reactors' docs page for the full reasoning.

Amarillo, Texas, USA

Helium liquefaction (Linde-Hampson cycle)

A Joule-Thomson liquefaction loop: helium is compressed, aftercooled, precooled well below its ~40-51 K JT-inversion temperature, then throttled through a valve into a flash drum that draws off liquid helium while the cold vapor recycles back to the compressor suction — the same JT-cycle physics as the platform's LNG/refrigeration loops, run on a fluid whose inversion curve makes precooling mandatory before the throttle can cool it at all.

Brevik, Norway (Heidelberg Materials Norcem — first full-scale cement CCS)

Cement kiln calcination + CO2 liquefaction

Preheated limestone (CaCO₃) enters an indirectly-heated rotary kiln that calcines it toward CaO, releasing a CO₂-rich off-gas; the gas passes a knockout drum, then is compressed and cooled to liquefy the CO₂ for transport/storage.

Stop fighting legacy software. Build your first flowsheet in 60 seconds.