Ethanol–water distillation — a NRTL process flowsheet
An 8-stage column concentrating ethanol overhead toward the azeotrope (the headline demo).
352 views 3 forks
- Rigorous NRTL thermodynamics, solved by the same engine every simulation runs on.
- 1 unit operations modeled: COL.
- Focus areas: Distillation, NRTL VLE, Azeotrope.
- Thermodynamics
- NRTL
- Components
- ethanol, water
- Unit operations
- COL
Opens in a new tab, loaded straight into the app — no setup.
Read the step-by-step guideReproduce 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("ethanol-water-distillation")
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
Tray efficiency — real trays vs ideal stages
The same ethanol–water column solved with a Murphree vapor tray efficiency of 0.7 instead of ideal equilibrium stages. A real sieve/valve tray never reaches full vapor-liquid equilibrium — the vapor leaving it only partly approaches the equilibrium composition with the tray liquid, mixing in un-equilibrated vapor from the tray below: y = E·K·x + (1−E)·y_below (Murphree 1925). At E = 0.7 each of these 12 trays does 70% of an ideal stage's work, so the overhead ethanol is lower than an equilibrium column of the same tray count would predict — which is exactly why a real column needs more trays than a shortcut (ideal-stage) calculation says. Both HYSYS and Aspen RadFrac expose this per-tray efficiency; set murphree_efficiency back to 1.0 to recover the ideal-stage column. The efficiency auto-selects the component-flow Naphtali-Sandholm solver (the reduced-form solvers carry no explicit per-tray VLE row to apply an efficiency to).
Acetone–water distillation
A 12-stage column recovers acetone overhead from a dilute aqueous solvent-recovery feed — a common industrial acetone/solvent-recycling duty.
Extractive distillation (ethanol/water with ethylene glycol)
Near-azeotropic ethanol/water (85 mol% ethanol) can't be pushed past the 89 mol% azeotrope by ordinary distillation. A heavy, high-boiling entrainer (ethylene glycol) fed near the top of the column raises water's relative volatility enough to pull overhead ethanol past the azeotrope in one pass; a second column then strips water overhead from the glycol, regenerating it as the bottoms product. The classic extractive-distillation textbook case (Luyben, Ind. Eng. Chem. Res. 2006, 45, 4625).
Ethanol-water column at 6 atm (SRK + MHV1)
The ethanol-water column everyone knows, run at 6 atm on the Gᴱ-mixing-rule package: Soave-Redlich-Kwong whose mixture energy parameter comes from NRTL's excess Gibbs energy through the MHV1 rule (Michelsen 1990) instead of a kij — the package built for polar, hydrogen-bonding mixtures at pressure, where a γ-φ activity model is past its ~10 bar ceiling and a plain cubic with van der Waals mixing has no hydrogen bonding at all. A 10 mol% ethanol feed through 16 stages at a reflux ratio of 2.5 gives a 66.7 mol% distillate and an ethanol-free bottoms, 2.6 MW on the reboiler. Read it against NRTL, which at 6 atm is still inside its own range: the two packages put the pressure-shifted azeotrope in different places — 0.88 mol fraction ethanol here, 0.84 on NRTL at 6 atm (0.97 against 0.89 at 1 atm) — so this card shows where the MHV1 rule sits, not a number to prefer over the fitted binary at low pressure. The cut is kept well short of the azeotrope on purpose: at a distillate ratio of 0.12 the profile pinched against it and the column reported exactly that. Each solve is about a minute, because every stage K-value is a Gᴱ mixing-rule evaluation.
n-Hexane / 1-butanol column with no fitted binary (UNIFAC)
A binary the databank has no regressed NRTL parameters for, so the column runs on predictive original UNIFAC from the two molecules' groups alone: 50/50 n-hexane and 1-butanol, 20 stages, reflux 2, 45% distillate. UNIFAC predicts the minimum-boiling azeotrope at 97 mol% hexane and 341.7 K, and the column lands its distillate exactly there (96.7%) with an 88% butanol bottoms — the azeotrope, not the stage count, is what caps the overhead purity, and that is a prediction from group contributions with no data on this pair behind it. Read it as a screening result: original UNIFAC's mean error against fitted binaries in this tree is 0.08 in ln gamma, and an alkane/alcohol pair is in its well-behaved range.
Toluene removal from 1-butanol solvent (modified UNIFAC, Dortmund)
A recovered 1-butanol solvent contaminated with 5 mol% toluene, redistilled to send the toluene overhead: 24 stages, reflux 3, an 8% distillate. There is no fitted toluene/1-butanol binary, so this runs on modified UNIFAC (Dortmund) — the variant that cuts infinite-dilution error from 42% to 16% in this tree, and a dilute contaminant in a solvent is exactly the infinite-dilution regime. The toluene/butanol azeotrope at 68 mol% toluene caps the overhead: it comes out at 39% toluene rather than pure, with 2.1% left in the bottoms — 62% of the contaminant removed per pass. The two variants agree on the azeotrope (67.6% against original UNIFAC's 67.7%) and differ where the toluene is dilute: original UNIFAC removes 67% on the same column, so the model choice is worth five points of recovery here.