Separation and Purification Technology 80 (2011) 403–417

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Separation and Purification Technology

journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/seppur

Review

Dividing wall columns in chemical process industry: A review on current activities

Ömer Yildirim a, Anton A. Kiss b, Eugeny Y. Kenig a,⇑
a
University of Paderborn, Faculty of Mechanical Engineering, Chair of Fluid Process Engineering, Pohlweg 55, D-33098 Paderborn, Germany
b
AkzoNobel Research, Development and Innovation, Process Technology Expert Capability Group, Velperweg 76, 6824 BM, Arnhem, The Netherlands

a r t i c l e i n f o a b s t r a c t

Article history: In spite of being an energy intensive process, distillation remains the most important separation method
Received 13 January 2011 in the chemical process industry. Especially for the separation of mixtures with three or more compo-
Received in revised form 28 April 2011 nents, the total energy requirement and the capital cost are very high. In this respect, dividing wall col-
Accepted 7 May 2011
umns (DWCs) represent a very promising technology allowing a significant energy requirement
Available online 26 May 2011
reduction. This article reviews current industrial applications of DWCs and related research activities,
including column configuration, design, modelling and control issues. Furthermore, the application of
Keywords:
DWCs for azeotropic, extractive and reactive distillation is highlighted.
Dividing wall column
Distillation
Ó 2011 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.
Control
Azeotropic distillation
Extractive distillation
Reactive distillation

Contents

1. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 404
2. DWC configurations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 405
3. DWC control issues . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 406
3.1. Degrees of freedom . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 406
3.2. DWC control structures . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 407
3.2.1. Three-point control structure . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 407
3.2.2. Three-point control structure with alternative pairing . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 408
3.2.3. Four-point control structure . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 408
3.2.4. Three-point control structure with nested loops . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 408
3.2.5. Performance control of prefractionator sub-system using the liquid split . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 408
3.2.6. Control structures based on inferential temperature measurements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 408
3.2.6.1. Controlling the temperature in the top of the prefractionator . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 408
3.2.6.2. Controlling the temperature in the bottom of the prefractionator. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 408
3.2.7. Feedforward control to reject frequent measurable disturbances . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 408
3.2.8. Advanced control techniques. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 409
3.3. Guidelines for DWC control . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 409

Abbreviations: A-DWC, azeotropic dividing wall column; ACM, Aspen Custom

Modeller; CSTR, continuous stirred-tank reactor; DMC, dynamic matrix control;
DWC, dividing wall column; E-DWC, extractive dividing wall column; ETBE, ethyl-
tert-butyl-ether; EtOH, ethanol; GMC, generic model control; HETP, height
equivalent to a theoretical plate; HPNA, heavy poly nuclear aromatic; LQG,
linear-quadratic gaussian; LQR, linear-quadratic regulation; MIMO, multi-input
multi-output; MeOH, methanol; MPC, model predictive control; NMP, N-methyl
pyrolidine; PID, proportional integral derivative; PEP, Pacol Enhancement Process;
R-DWC, reactive dividing wall column; RBA, rate-based approach; SISO, single-
input single-output.
⇑ Corresponding author. Tel.: +49 (0) 5251 60 2408.
E-mail address: eugeny.kenig@upb.de (E.Y. Kenig).

1383-5866/$ - see front matter Ó 2011 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.
doi:10.1016/j.seppur.2011.05.009
404 Ö. Yildirim et al. / Separation and Purification Technology 80 (2011) 403–417

4. Design and modelling of DWCs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 409

5. DWC applications . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 409
5.1. Separation of ternary mixtures. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 410
5.2. Separation of mixtures with more than three components . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 411
5.3. Reactive DWC . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 412
5.4. Azeotropic DWC . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 412
5.5. Extractive DWC . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 413
5.6. Revamping to DWC . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 414
6. Conclusions. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 415
References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 415

Nomenclature

B bottoms rate b internal split ratio in DWC

D distillate rate
L reflux rate Subscripts
Q heat duty B bottom
R reflux ratio C condenser
S side stream rate D distillate
V vapour boilup rate L liquid
x mole fraction R reboiler
S side stream
Greek letters V vapour
a relative volatility

1. Introduction in the second column. The improvement of the thermal efficiency,

Process intensification represents a dominating trend in the
chemical process engineering, mostly due to increasing awareness
of the society of limited energy resources [1]. Besides, the last
achievements in the process modelling as well as growing compu-
tational power and advanced numerical methods make process
intensification possible. Amongst others, apparative process inte-
gration shows a great potential.
For the separation of multicomponent mixtures, most often a
sequence of distillation columns is applied. In case of three compo-
nents, at least two columns are necessary, for instance, the direct
and indirect sequence shown in Fig. 1. An energetically favourable
alternative configuration is shown in Fig. 2. In this so-called Pet-
lyuk configuration, the vapour and liquid streams leaving the first
column are directly connected with the second column [2]. The
first column performs a sharp split between A (light boiling com-
ponent) and C (heavy boiling component), whereas the middle boi-
ler B is distributed naturally between the top and bottom products.
A further separation towards high-purity components takes place
due to avoiding unnecessary mixing effects, leads to considerable
energy savings of about 30% [3] compared to the direct or indirect
sequences. Since only one reboiler and one condenser are used, the
capital costs are also reduced.
Further integration and cost saving can be obtained, if these two
columns are integrated into one shell. This alternative to conven-
tional columns is identified as a dividing wall column (DWC) and
illustrated in Fig. 3 [4]. Due to the large number of design param-
eters, for many years, it has been virtually impossible to simulate,
design and built DWCs. The first industrial application of DWCs
was accomplished in 1985 by BASF SE [5]. Since then the number
of application of DWCs has increased rapidly to more than 100 in
2010 [6]. According to Schultz et al. [3], the DWC will become a
standard distillation tool in the next 50 years.
A recent review by Dejanović et al. [7] gives a comprehensive
overview of DWCs, covering both the theoretical description and
A

a b
A B A

ABC
1 2 B

ABC 1 2 ABC 1 2
BC
AB

C C B

Fig. 1. Direct (a) and indirect (b) sequence for separating a three-component C
mixture (ABC; A: light boiling component, B: middle boiling component, C: heavy
boiling component). Fig. 2. Petlyuk configuration.
 Ö. Yildirim et al. / Separation and Purification Technology 80 (2011) 403–417 405

a b c
Liquid split
A

Dividing wall

ABC B

Prefractionation
section
Main column

Vapour split Fig. 5. Different positions and shape of the dividing wall.

Fig. 3. Dividing wall column. a b

the patent area. The present paper can be considered as an exten-

sion to the review of Dejanović et al. [7], with the focus being put
on the specific industrial applications and control issues.

2. DWC configurations

For a three-component separation, two different DWC configu-

rations can be applied. The first type shown in Fig. 4a is patented
by Wright [8] and is more common. The dividing wall as well as
the feed and side draws are usually placed close to the middle of
the column [9]. The second configuration is shown in Fig. 4b and
c. The wall is located either at the lower or at the upper part of
the column. This configuration is patented by Monro [10] and first
applied in 2004 [11]. The column in Fig. 4b is referred to as split
Fig. 6. Dividing wall columns for the separation of four-component mixtures.
shell column with common overhead section and divided bottoms
section, while the column shown in Fig. 4c is named split shell
column with divided overhead section and common bottoms section [13]; the two middle-boiling products are accumulated at the right
[12]. Moreover, the wall can be shifted from the centre towards side of the dividing wall. According to Kaibel et al. [11], the config-
the column walls, as shown in Fig. 5a, and can have diagonal uration with only one wall is thermally inefficient, it can be im-
sections (Fig. 5b and c). proved by application of additional dividing walls, as shown in
DWCs can also be applied for the separation of more than three Fig. 6b. This configuration is referred to as Sargent arrangement
components. With increasing number of components, the number [14]. However, no industrial application has been reported so far.
of possible configurations grows. For this separation, the basic A further configuration shown in Fig. 7a is known as the Agrawal
DWC types applied for such separations are shown in Fig. 6. In
the configuration illustrated by Fig. 6a (reffered to as Kaibel col-
umn), the separation is performed in a shell with one dividing wall a b
ABCD
A

a b c
B

ABCD
C
I II III
B I II III

D
A D

Fig. 4. Basic types of dividing wall columns. Fig. 7. Agrawal arrangement for the separation of four components.
406 Ö. Yildirim et al. / Separation and Purification Technology 80 (2011) 403–417
arrangement [15]. In this configuration, the feed enters the middle
partition of the DWC. This can easily be understood, if the DWC is
seen from the top view (Fig. 7b). Further arrangements for the wall
are also conceivable, for instance a configuration shown in Fig. 8.
Recently Rong [16] has introduced a procedure allowing a quick
synthesis of three-products DWCs for a given separation task and
has shown possible alternative configurations for the separation
of a four-component mixture (Fig. 9), but this study does not cover
the configuration of the Kaibel column.
A proper selection of column internals is necessary to achieve
efficient heat and mass transfer and, hence, the required purity.
Dividing wall columns can be equipped with trays or with different
kinds of packings. Generally, the selection criteria for the optimal
column internals for DWCs are similar to those for conventional
distillation columns. In most industrially available DWCs, struc-
tured packings are applied. BASF SE exclusively applies packed col-
umns; other companies, e.g. Koch Glitsch and CEPSA Refinery,
install trays [17]. The latest advances in trays and packings were
reported by Olujić et al. [18].
The wall construction is different for tray and packed columns.
Generally, tray DWCs are easier to build and the dividing wall that
is welded on the column can strengthen the shell stability. The
construction of a packed DWC is more complex, the welding of
the wall being especially difficult. During the installation, it must
Fig. 8. Top view of triangular wall structures.
A B
ABCD
C A
ABCD
D D
A B
ABCD
C A
ABCD
D D
Fig. 9. Possible DWC configurations for the separation of a four-component mixture according to the synthesis procedure of Rong [16].
be assured that the packing material does not touch the column
walls. According to Kaibel et al. [11], this would result in excessive
liquid flow and negatively affect the separation.
Recently, the non-welded wall technology has been developed
in a cooperation of Julius Montz GmbH and BASF SE. Using unfixed
walls, the column design becomes much simpler. Another advan-
tage of non-welded dividing walls is a faster and more precise
installation [11]. Other benefits include fewer manholes and lower
weight, since the manufacturing requires less metal. The revamp-
ing of conventional columns becomes faster, simpler and cheaper,
too. After the first implementation of non-welded walls in mid
1990s, the number of DWCs delivered by Montz GmbH has in-
creased considerably and reached around 85 deliveries in 2009 [7].
3. DWC control issues
The advantages of using DWCs for ternary separation are the
main drivers for commercial implementation. However, there are
also major hurdles [6], for instance, the concern that the benefits
of DWCs are obtained at the cost of lack of controllability and con-
sequently flexibility in operation.
Although much of the existing literature focuses on the control
of binary distillation columns, there are only a limited number of
studies on the control of DWCs. Here we give a critical overview
of the most important DWC control studies up to date. It should
be mentioned that various authors have selected different ternary
chemical systems to be separated and have explored many control
structures. The selection and pairing of manipulated and controlled
variables – with different control objectives and different control
algorithms – vary from the classical proportional integral deriva-
tive (PID) to model predictive control (MPC). Some authors control
only two compositions, while others control three or even four
compositions. Several papers look at inferential temperature con-
trol instead of (or in combination with) composition control. Nev-
ertheless, the main conclusion is that DWCs have good
controllability properties, providing that an appropriate control
structure is implemented [19].
3.1. Degrees of freedom
The dividing-wall distillation system has seven degrees of free-
dom. Six degrees of freedom are usual for a distillation column
with side stream, namely: the condenser duty (QC), the product
rates (distillate D, side stream S, bottoms B), the reflux (L) and
B C A B C A B
ABCD ABCD
C
D D
B C A B
ABCD
C
D
 Ö. Yildirim et al. / Separation and Purification Technology 80 (2011) 403–417
the reboiler duty (QR) or, equivalently, the vapour boilup (V). These
variables can be also combined, for example, instead of the reflux
rate L the reflux ratio R = L/D could be manipulated.
The additional degree of freedom arises from the flow of liquid
between the two sections of the column: at the top of the divided-
wall section, the liquid coming down from the rectifying section
can be split, in a controlled manner, between the two sides of
the wall by using a total liquid trap-out tray and sending part of
the total liquid to the prefractionator side and the rest to the side-
stream side. Thus, this internal liquid split (bL) is available for con-
trol purposes. At the bottom of the dividing wall section, the
vapour flow is split in accordance with the hydrodynamic condi-
tions (above all, pressure drop and flow resistance). It is worth not-
ing that the vapour split is fixed by the stage-reflux requirements
consideration and it needs to be physically established during
the design of the partitioned part of the column. Consequently,
the cross-sectional area of each side is fixed by the physical loca-
tion of the wall, and this is already set at the design stage. There-
fore, it cannot be changed when the column is operated [7];
moreover, the vapour split (bV) variable cannot be adjusted for
control purposes during the column operation.
Typically the distillate (D) and bottoms flow rates (B) are used
to maintain liquid levels in the reflux drum and column base,
respectively. Moreover, the condenser duty QC controls the pres-
sure. Therefore, the four degrees of freedom left (L, S, QC, bL) can
be used to control four variables. It should be remarked that, in
some control structures, the roles of the flow rates D and B can
be exchanged with that of the flow rates R and QC, respectively.
Ideally, the purities of all three product streams should be con-
trolled: the amount of mid-boiler component in distillate and bot-
tom streams (xD2 and xB2, respectively) and the amounts of light
and heavy components in the side stream (xS1 and xS3). However,
the last set of specifications is usually replaced by the purity of
the side stream (xS2), which means that one degree of freedom
can be used to achieve some other objective, as, for example, to
minimise the energy requirements.
3.2. DWC control structures
All the control structures described hereafter could use or make
use of an additional optimisation loop that manipulates the liquid
split in order to control the heavy component composition at the
top of fractionator, and implicitly achieving minimisation of the
energy requirements. Many authors analysed the effect of mini-
mising the energy requirements on the controllability properties
of the system, because an optimal design might give the highest
Table 1
Overview of various DWC control structures.
DWC control structure
Three-point control structure
Four-point control structure
Three-point control structure with nested loops
Three-point control structure with nested loops
Three-point control structure with alternative pairing
Performance control of prefractionator sub-system using the liquid split
Control of the temperature in the top of the prefractionator
Model Predictive Control (MPC)
Control of the temperature in the bottom of the prefractionator
Temperature-composition cascade
Null space method
Self-optimising control
Feedforward control to reject frequent measurable disturbances
Feedforward and differential temperature control loops
LQG/LQR, higher order controllers based on H1 norm l-synthesis
407
energy savings, but lack good controllability [20–22]. Rong and
Turunen [23] reported a reliable synthesis method, whereas
Gómez-Castro et al. [24] proposed a robust method for the design
of distillation sequences with dividing walls and recommended an
analysis of both thermodynamic and controllability properties.
Accordingly, it was concluded that the distillation arrangements
(e.g. DWC), other than conventional Petlyuk configurations, pre-
sented the best values for condition number and minimum singu-
lar value. As a result, good dynamic closed-loop performance could
be expected for these types of thermally coupled distillation sys-
tems [24]. Moreover, it was found that thermally coupled distilla-
tion systems (TCDS) are not only well controllable, but they
sometimes exhibit dynamic responses that are easier to manage
than in the case of conventional distillation sequences [21,24,25].
Recently, Kiss and Rewagad [26] performed a comparison of sev-
eral conventional control structures based on PID control loops
enhanced by using the liquid split as an additional manipulated
variable, thus implicitly achieving minimal energy requirements.
Their reported dynamic results show good DWC controllability,
relatively short settling times and low overshooting.
Table 1 gives an overview of the DWC control structures re-
ported so far in the open literature, while the next paragraphs pro-
vide a more detailed analysis of most important ones.
3.2.1. Three-point control structure
The simplest control structure that can be imagined is just an
extension of the control of a regular distillation column with a side
stream. This is known as the three-point control structure. The dis-
tillate purity (xD1) is controlled by manipulating the reflux rate
(L), the sidestream purity (xS2) is controlled by manipulating the
sidestream flow rate (S) and the bottom purity (xB3) is controlled
by manipulating the vapour boilup (V). The three-point structure
was suggested by Wolff and Skogestad [27]. They studied the sep-
aration of an ethanol/propanol/butanol system in a configuration
with 40-tray main column and 20-tray prefractionator. The
authors analysed the controllability of the system by using linear
tools, concluding that the system is easy to control. Moreover, they
also performed dynamic simulations of the nonlinear model, show-
ing that the column handles well the disturbances and some set-
point changes. However, sometimes small changes in the purity
setpoints (for example xS2, from 0.994 to 0.996) cannot be handled,
changes of 100% in L and V being required. Although this does not
appear to be a problem in a practical implementation, the authors
tried to find a solution by using the remaining available degree of
freedom (bL), hence adding another point to the control structure.
Note that the mole fraction xS2 does not define the composition of
Ternary system Reference
Ethanol/propanol/butanol [27]
Methanol/2-propanol/butanol [31]
Hypothetical system with constant relative volatilities: 1:2.15:4.65 [28–30]
Hypothetical system with constant relative volatilities: 1:2:4, Boiling points 100, 50, 0 °C [32,33]
Butanol/pentanol/hexanol
Butanol/pentanol/hexanol [34]
Ethanol/1-propanol/1-butanol [35]
Hypothetical system with constant relative volatilities: 1:3:9 [38]
Benzene/toluene/xylene [36]
Benzene/toluene/xylene [37]
Benzene/toluene/xylene [39]
408 Ö. Yildirim et al. / Separation and Purification Technology 80 (2011) 403–417
the side stream, as it can correspond to several levels of the con-
centration of impurities xS1 and xS3.
3.2.2. Three-point control structure with alternative pairing
Serra et al. [28–30] performed a comprehensive study concern-
ing the operation and controllability of DWCs. They studied a
hypothetical system with constant relative volatilities (a = 1:
2.15: 4.65). Different controllability indices were used to select
the pairing in a three-point control structure. However, the liquid
split was not varied. The results showed that the best structure
was the one previously introduced by Wolff and Skogestad [27].
Moreover, Serra et al. [28–30] compared the performance of the
PI control with Dynamic Matrix Control (DMC), revealing the better
performance of the PI control and the limitations of the DMC. The
authors also pointed out that the performance depends on the de-
sign of the column, but did not elaborate further on this
conclusion.
3.2.3. Four-point control structure
In addition to the reflux, sidestream and boilup that control the
concentration of the main components in the product streams, the
liquid split ratio bL can be added to the set of manipulated vari-
ables with the goal of controlling the levels of both impurities in
the side stream. Wolff and Skogestad [27] tested this structure
with the separation of the same system as previously described.
Both linear and nonlinear tools predicted difficult control. Beside
small gain from the manipulated variables toward the controlled
variables, the steady state feasibility space shows regions where
no steady states exists.
3.2.4. Three-point control structure with nested loops
Wolff and Skogestad [27] have switched the V – xB3 and S – xS2
loops to the alternative pairing V – xS2 and S – xB3. Although the lin-
ear controllability tool did not predict control difficulties, the
structure proved unworkable under mild disturbances. The authors
attributed this to the strong nonlinearity link between V and xS2.
However, it should be stated that the loops V – xS2 and S – xB3 are
nested: a change of the side stream flow rate is expected to affect,
first, the side stream purity xS2, and only later the bottom purity
xB3. Therefore, strong interactions between the loops are expected.
The same control structure was also considered by Mutalib and
Smith [31]. They presented a simulation study of the methanol/2-
propanol/butanol system. In contrast to the results of Wolff and
Skogestad [27], it was found that the pairing V – xS2 and S – xB3
worked well in the three-composition control structure. Moreover,
they switched the reflux and distillate in the level and distillate-
concentration loops. The performance comparison of the two con-
trol structures made for setpoint changes and feed disturbances
showed that the system is indeed controllable.
3.2.5. Performance control of prefractionator sub-system using the
liquid split
Halvorsen and Skogestad [32,33] formulated two key tasks that
should be achieved by the prefractionator when the whole system
faces disturbances or setpoint changes are required: (1) keep the
heaviest component from going out to the top of the prefractiona-
tor section, and (2) keep the lightest component from going out to
the bottom of the prefractionator section.
A portion of the heaviest component that enters the rectifying
section will flow down through the sidestream side of the wall
and it will adversely affect the purity of the liquid sidestream. Sim-
ilarly, a portion of the lightest component that goes out to the bot-
tom of the prefractionator section will flow up through the
sidestream section, mostly in the vapour phase, with a reduced ef-
fect on the composition of the liquid sidestream. Based on these
considerations, the authors added a fourth control loop in which
the liquid split is used to control the level of the heavy impurity
in the top of the prefractionator. Note that the mixture considered
for separation was a hypothetical constant relative volatility sys-
tem. The relative volatilities were assigned the values of 1, 2, 4,
whereas the boiling points were 100, 50, 0 °C, respectively.
3.2.6. Control structures based on inferential temperature
measurements
The control structures make use of controlling the temperature
in the top or bottom of the prefractionator.
3.2.6.1. Controlling the temperature in the top of the prefractiona-
tor. Adrian et al. [34] reported experimental results concerning the
control of a butanol/pentanol/hexanol system. Compared to the
previous studies, temperature control was used instead of concen-
tration control. The location of the controlled temperatures in-
cluded the top of the prefractionator, a point above the side draw
and the lower part of the column. It should also be remarked that
the heat input was fixed. Model Predictive Control (MPC) was em-
ployed by a second control structure, where the heat input was
added for a total of four manipulated variables used to control
three temperatures. The MPC controller showed better perfor-
mance for disturbances, not only in the feed flowrate, but also in
the feed composition. Nevertheless, the additional manipulated
variable cast some doubt on the conclusion of Adrian et al. [34]
that MPC alone is generally better than a multi-SISO control (i.e.
multiple SISO loops).
3.2.6.2. Controlling the temperature in the bottom of the prefractio-
nator. Wang and Wong [35] studied a high-purity ethanol/1-pro-
panol/1-butanol column. Proportional-Integral-Derivative (PID)
algorithms and temperature control were used instead of composi-
tion control. A temperature in the prefractionator and two temper-
atures in the main column were selected. The pairing was
completely different than that previously proposed by Adrian
et al. [34]. A temperature in the bottom section of the prefractiona-
tor was controlled by manipulating reboiler heat input, while a
temperature in the rectifying section was controlled by manipulat-
ing the reflux flow rate. Moreover, a temperature near the base of
the column was controlled by manipulating the sidestream flow
rate. The liquid split was again not manipulated. Stable control
was achieved and products returned to their desired purity levels
for feed flow rate changes. However, large product purity devia-
tions were reported for feed composition disturbances. The authors
recommended a temperature/composition cascade control struc-
ture to solve this problem.
3.2.7. Feedforward control to reject frequent measurable disturbances
Ling and Luyben [36] proposed to control the impurity levels in
the three product streams and one composition in the prefractio-
nator. This implicitly helps to achieve also the minimisation of
the energy requirements. The four manipulated variables are liquid
split, reflux flow rate, sidestream flow rate, and vapour boilup. This
four-point control structure uses combined feedback and feedfor-
ward to account for feed flow disturbances. Dynamic simulations
demonstrated the improved performance.
In a more recent paper, Ling and Luyben [37] explored also the
use of temperatures in order to avoid expensive and high-mainte-
nance composition analysers. Two types of temperature control
structures were studied. In the first one, three temperatures lo-
cated in the main column and one temperature on the prefractio-
nator side were used to adjust the four manipulated variables.
Feed flow rate disturbances are well handled with this structure,
but product purities start to deviate significantly from their desired
values for feed composition changes greater than 10%. In the sec-
ond control structure, four differential temperature control loops
 Ö. Yildirim et al. / Separation and Purification Technology 80 (2011) 403–417
were used. The performance is improved and disturbances of 20%
in the feed composition are well handled with only small devia-
tions in product purities. This second structure also handles large
changes in the column operating pressure.
3.2.8. Advanced control techniques
The null space method is a self-optimising control method that
selects the control variables as combinations of measurements
[38]. For the case of a Petlyuk distillation setup, this resulted into
the following candidate measurements: temperature at all stages
and all flow rates. Using the null space method, a subset of six mea-
surements was obtained, resulting in a practical implementation.
Van Diggelen et al. [39] applied more advanced controllers such
as Linear Quadratic Gaussian (LQG/LQR) control, Generic Model
Control (GMC) and higher order controllers based on H1 loop
shaping design procedure (LSDP) and the l-synthesis procedure.
The controllers were applied to a DWC used in an industrial case
study – the ternary separation of benzene/toluene/xylene. The per-
formance was compared to several structures involving multi-loop
PID controllers. Amongst the multi-loop PID strategies, the LSV
(using reflux/side-stream/vapour for purity control) and DSV (dis-
tillate/side-stream/vapour) structures were the best, being able to
handle persistent disturbances in reasonably short times. Obvi-
ously, shorter times means better control performance. These re-
sults agree with those of Mutalib and Smith [31], although Wolff
and Skogestad [27] reported the lack of controllability for this con-
trol structure- this was attributed to the nonlinearity of the re-
sponse from V towards xS2. While PI control structures were also
able to control the DWC, significantly shorter settling times and
faster control were achieved using multi-input multi-output
(MIMO) controllers.
3.3. Guidelines for DWC control
Kim et al. [40] recommended general guidelines and rules for
the DWC design and standards for selecting control structures for
DWCs. These were used in a several studies, described previously.
Hereby, the following rules can be recommended in order to select
the appropriate control strategy for DWCs [19]:
 Use the reflux and boilup to control the distillate and bottom
compositions.
 Use the sidestream flow rate to control the sidestream
composition.
 Alternatively, use the distillate and bottoms flow rates for com-
position control.
 Use the liquid split to control the amount of heavy component
leaving in the top of the prefractionator.
 Use (inferential) temperature measurements for controlling
DWCs.
 Use temperature – cascade loops.
 Combine feedback with feedforward control.
 Apply MPC and MIMO control strategies when single-input sin-
gle-output (SISO) loops are not sufficient.
It is worthy of note that information about control structures for
industrial applications described in the open literature is very
scarce. It is thus desirable that column manufactures make such
information available.
4. Design and modelling of DWCs
An optimal design of a DWC requires adequate models and
computer-based simulations. However, commercial process simu-
lators do not include particular subroutines for DWCs. The so-
409
Fig. 10. Decomposition of DWCs into simple column sequences.
called decomposition method developed by Triantafyllou and
Smith [41] simplifies the design problem. The existing DWC config-
uration is replaced by a sequence of conventional distillation col-
umns. Possible decomposition variants are shown in Fig. 10.
For the initial design of a DWC, the shortcut method suggested
by Triantafyllou and Smith [41] can be applied. This method is
based on the equations introduced by Fenske, Underwood, Gilli-
land and Kirkbride. The calculations are relatively simple and can
be used for mixtures of any number of components [42]. Another
simple method for the conceptual design of DWCs is suggested
by Halvorsen and Skogestad [43–45]. This method is based on a
graphical treatment of the minimum energy represented by nor-
malised vapour flow.
Meanwhile, Aspen Plus suggests a routine for the design of Pet-
lyuk configurations. The latter are thermodynamically equivalent
to a DWC if the heat transfer across the wall is neglected. Rangaiah
et al. [46] developed a procedure for a quick design of DWCs using
AspenTech. This tool is based on the equilibrium stage model,
which assumes that the streams leaving a column segment (stage)
are in thermodynamic equilibrium. This is an idealised description
that requires experimental parameters, such as efficiency factors
for tray columns or HETP values for packed columns. A more con-
sistent alternative is given by the rate-based approach that takes
the process kinetics and specifics of column internals directly into
account. In this case, the rates of mass and heat transfer between
the liquid and vapour phases are determined explicitly [47,48].
For the rate-based model, adequate correlations describing pres-
sure drop, liquid hold-up, mass and heat transfer coefficients are
necessary.
The reader will find a detailed description of the modelling and
design methods of DWC in the review by Dejanović et al. [7].
5. DWC applications
Dividing wall columns are applied for separation of mixtures
with three and more components. Initially, they found application
for systems with low fractions of the light and heavy boiling com-
ponents. Currently, DWCs are used for a broad spectrum of sys-
tems, e.g. hydrocarbons, alcohols, aldehydes, ketones, acetals,
amines and others [11].
Further, DWCs can be used to conduct azeotropic, extractive
and reactive distillation. Despite that the DWC technology prom-
ises significant reduction in operating and capital cost, its indus-
trial applications are still limited. Moreover, the information on
the particular application of DWCs is mostly scarce.
Table 2 shows the number of implemented DWCs reported in
the literature. It can be seen that most of them (more than 116)
410 Ö. Yildirim et al. / Separation and Purification Technology 80 (2011) 403–417

Table 2 technology was applied more than 116 times for the separation
Overview of industrial applications reported in the literature. of ternary mixtures. Most industrial columns are exploited by BASF
System Number SE (more than 70 units). Almost all these columns have been built
Ternary mixtures >116 by Montz GmbH; they are filled with packings. Information on the
Mixtures with more than three components 2 systems or on the specifics of these DWCs is not available. The
Reactive system – reader can find more information in the corresponding patents
Azeotropic system 1 which are summarised in the review published by Dejanović
Extractive system 2
Revamps 4
et al. [7]. Further, they have mentioned that, Bayer AG has recently
started employing DWC, too.
The world largest column with 107 m height is constructed by
are applied for the separation of three-component mixtures. In to-
Linde AG for Sasol in Johannesburg, South Africa. This tray column
tal, there exist more than 125 applications. In Fig. 11, the number
recovers hydrocarbons from the Fischer–Tropsch synthesis. Fur-
of industrial applications is plotted against the corresponding year.
thermore, Uhde has built two DWCs in Germany and Saudi Arabia
An exponential increase in the number over the years can be ob-
and applied an extractive DWC (cf. Section 5.5). Sumitomo Heavy
served. If this increase is assumed for the next five years, about
Industries and Kyowa Yuka designed six DWCs for undisclosed
350 DWCs can be expected by 2015.
companies (they refer to DWCs as ‘‘column in column’’). Further
constructors are Sulzer Chemtech Ltd. and Koch-Glitsch. Sulzer
5.1. Separation of ternary mixtures has installed more than 20 DWCs and Koch-Glitsch more than 10
[5].
The industrially available DWC applications for three-compo- In the last years, UOP has also built DWCs. One application is
nent mixtures are summarised in Table 3. Accordingly, the DWC realised for the optimisation of the process shown in Fig. 12. It con-
sists of a sequence of three reaction/separation units. A reagent A
and an inert I are fed to a reactor, where A reacts to B. Afterwards,
the heavy product B is separated from the mixture by distillation.
Number of industrial DWCs

Since the bottom products of all columns are similar, the separa-
100
tion of B can be carried out within one shell (Fig. 13).
The DWC is also applied for the UOP Pacol Enhancement Pro-
This study cess (PEP) shown in Fig. 14a. Fig. 14b shows the developed DWC
for the same separation problem. In this process, A is pentane, B
10 is benzene, C consists of C7 + olefins and D comprises C7 + aromat-
ics [3,12]. In order to prevent mixing of C and D, a novel trap tray is
applied and excessive B is added. According to Schultz et al. [12],
the DWC shown in Fig. 14b has found more than five applications
in industry. Energy savings of approximately 50% and capital sav-
1 ings of approximately 35% could be achieved compared to the
1985 1990 1995 2000 2005 2010 2015
Year two-column design (Fig. 14a).
It appears probable that most of the future implementations of
Fig. 11. Number of reported industrial DWCs over the years. the DWC technology will be realised in developing countries with

Table 3
Industrial applications of DWCs for ternary systems.

Company System Constructor and year Features Reference

BASF SE, diverse sites Mostly undisclosed Majority of the columns are built  More than 70 DWCs [75–77]
by Montz GmbH  Diameter 0,6–4 m
First commercial DWC in 1985  Operating pressure 2 mbar to 10 bar
Sasol Separation of hydrocarbons from Linde AG  World largest DWC [3,49]
Johannesburg, South Africa Fischer–Tropsch synthesis unit In 1999  Height 107 m
 Diameter 5 m
 Tray column
Veba Oel Ag, Separation of benzene from Uhde  170,000 mt/year feed capacity [3,69]
Münchs münster, Germany pyrolysis gasoline In 1999
Saudi Chevron Petrochemical Undisclosed Uhde  140,000 mt/year feed capacity [69]
Al Jubail, Saudi Arabia In 2000
ExxonMobil Benzene-toluene-xylene ExxonMobil  No data available [5]
Rotterdam, Netherland fractionation Was planned for 2008
Undisclosed Undisclosed Sumitomo Heavy Industries and  Six DWCs [78]
Kyowa Yuka  No data available
Undisclosed Separation of C7 + aromatics UOP  Five DWCs [3,12]
from  Trap tray
C7 + olefin/paraffin
Undisclosed Undisclosed reactive system UOP  Split shell column with two walls [12]
consisting of two reactive
components and an inert
component
Undisclosed Undisclosed Sulzer Chemtech Ltd.  20 DWCs [5]
 No data available
Undisclosed Undisclosed Koch Glitsch  10 DWCs [78]
 No data available
 Ö. Yildirim et al. / Separation and Purification Technology 80 (2011) 403–417 411

A, I A, I A, I

A, A, A,
I, I, I,
A, I Reaction B Reaction B Reaction B
Stage 1 Stage 2 Stage 3

B B B
B

Fig. 12. Multistage reaction/separation flow scheme with three distillation columns [12].

emerging markets (e.g. India, Brasil), rather than in countries with

Reaction established distillation networks.
Stage 2

5.2. Separation of mixtures with more than three components

A, A,
I I,
B There are only two applications of DWCs for the separation of
mixtures with more than three components (Table 4). According
A, I to Parkinson [49], in 2002 BASF SE started with the development
of DWCs separating quaternary mixtures. The columns are in-
tended to recover fine chemical intermediates. Another DWC for
A, A, the separation of mixtures with more than three components
I, I,
A, I Reaction B
was developed by UOP. In this process, a split shell column (shown
B Reaction
Stage 1 Stage 3 in Fig. 15) was introduced for the separation of two streams into
five components. The first stream was from a hydrocracking pro-
cess that contained different hydrocarbons, such as naphta, kero-
sene, diesel and oil. The second stream was from the reactor
section of a plant that contained heavy polynuclear aromatic
dividing walls (HPNA) and light components. This column was built at an undis-
closed company in the far east [5,12].
Recently, Dejanović et al. [50] have given a theoretical analysis
B of the DWC configurations shown in Fig. 6 and replaced a usual
three-column sequence. In their study, an aromatic mixture is used
Fig. 13. Multistage reaction/separation flow scheme with single split shell column
[12].
as a test system. The analysis shows that considerable energy and
cost savings can be achieved with the DWC technology.

(a) Two Column Design (b) PEP DWC

A,B
A A

A,B,C A,B,C

B
A.B,D

B,C

A.B,D
B

D B,C D

Fig. 14. PEP fractionation in a two column design (a) and in DWC (b) [3,12].
412 Ö. Yildirim et al. / Separation and Purification Technology 80 (2011) 403–417

Table 4
Industrial applications of DWCs for mixtures with more than three components.

Company System Constructor and year Features Reference

BASF SE Recovery of four-component mixtures of fine chemical BASF SE/Montz GmbH  Single wall [49,76]
intermediates since 2002  Height 34 m
 Diameter 3.6 m
 Column works under deep vacuum
Undisclosed customer in the Integration of a product separator and an HPNA stripper Designed by UOP  5 product streams [5,12]
Far East

To naphtha stripper reactive distillation

To kerosene stripper

To diesel stripper

Mixture of Product
hydrocarbons fractionator

HPNA stripper feed distillation reactive

dividing wall column

dividing wall column

HPNA rich Fig. 16. Schematic showing the path from a distillation column to a reactive
Stream dividing wall column (grey area represents the reactive zone).

Recycle oil
to reactor
Fig. 15. UOPs split shell column.
The application of DWC for the separation of mixtures with
more than three components is still very scarce. This is presumably
because it is considered to be a more complex technology than for
three-component separations. However, due to the clear advanta-
ges, we believe, that also for these systems, further DWC applica-
tions can be expected, especially, as far as developing countries
are concerned.
R-DWCs were also shown to yield considerable energy and cost
savings. Some other groups investigated R-DWCs using standard
routines available in commercial software tools, e.g. Aspen Plus.
Experimental investigations of R-DWC configurations are still very
scarce [53,56,57].
The application and investigation of DWCs for reactive distilla-
tion processes is also very limited. This situation can be explained
by the clear niche character of the R-DWC technology. In the mean-
time, the DWC concept is rapidly evolving to become a standard
distillation tool and, thus, further applications for reactive systems
can be expected. Interestingly, R-DWC studies are rather popular
as compared to other integrated DWC applications. This can be ex-
plained by the general interest to reactive distillation itself.

5.3. Reactive DWC

Reactive DWC (R-DWC) represents a combination of a reactor
and a separation unit in one DWC (Fig. 16). It is a highly integrated
operation which is already mentioned in some patents [51,52]. In
such columns, reactive systems with more than two products,
non-reacting components or excessive reagents can be separated
[48].
Up to now, just very few industrial applications of R-DWC have
been reported [53,54]. However, this process has been analysed
theoretically (see Table 5). The first comprehensive papers on
R-DWC modelling were published by the group of Kenig
[42,47,48,55]. They also introduced the name R-DWC into use.
The modelling was realised with the rate-based approach and the
performance of R-DWCs was theoretically studied for different
systems. The advantages of this integrated process, i.e. high con-
version, selectivity and product purity were demonstrated. The
5.4. Azeotropic DWC
In some cases, it is difficult or impossible to separate two com-
ponents (A and B) by distillation, due to similar boiling points or
due to the occurrence of an azeotropic point. In such cases different
methods can help, e.g. pressure swing distillation or azeotropic dis-
tillation [58]. The latter process uses an additional component
(entrainer E) that forms an azeotrope with the components to be
separated [59,60]. Preferable are entrainers forming heterogeneous
azeotropes, since they can be easily separated in a decanter [61].
By using a two-column sequence (shown in Fig. 17), a separation
of an azeotropic mixture A-B can be realised. A detailed description
of this process can be found in [62].
In principle, it is possible to combine azeotropic distillation
with the DWC concept according to the scheme shown in Fig. 17.
Up to now, only few papers have been published in which
 Ö. Yildirim et al. / Separation and Purification Technology 80 (2011) 403–417 413

Table 5
Works published on reactive DWCs.

Reaction Simulation Reference

methanol + butanol + acetic acid M methyl acetate + butyl acetate + water Rate-based model / Aspen Custom Modeller [42,47,48,79]
dimethyl carbonate + ethanol M diethyl carbonate + methanol
methyl acetate + water M methanol + acetic acid
methyl acetate + water M methanol + acetic acid Aspen PlusÒ or PRO/II [80]
isoamylenes + ethanol M tertiary amyl ethyl ether Aspen DISTILTM, Aspen HYSYSTM, CSTR [81]
Isoamylenes are:
2-methyl butene-1 and 2-methyl butene-2
methyl acetate + water M methanol + acetic acid Aspen PlusÒ or PRO/II [56]
ethanol + acetic acid M ethyl acetate + water Aspen PlusÒ Aspen Dynamics [57,82]
reactive distillation with 10 species Aspen Plus RADFRAC [53]
TM
isobutane + ethanol M ethyl tertiary butyl ether (ETBE) Aspen HYSYS [83]
ethanol + acetic acid M ethyl acetate + water Aspen PlusÒ [84]
methanol + isobutylene M methyl tertiary butyl ether
ethanol + ethylene M ethoxyethanol

theoretical analysis of azeotropic DWCs (A-DWC) is presented.
Midori et al. [63] simulated an A-DWC with Aspen Plus. The test
system was the separation of ethanol and water using cyclohexane
as entrainer. Briones-Ramírez et al. [64] also performed theoretical
investigations using Aspen Plus. In their study, isopropanol-water–
acetone and isopropanol-water–methanol were used as test sys-
tems. Furthermore, they applied an optimisation procedure using
a multiobjective genetic algorithm in order to find the optimal de-
sign. The results of this study show that energy savings of up to
50% can be achieved using an A-DWC instead of a two-column se-
quence. Industrial application of the A-DWC technology was men-
tioned in the literature only once by Kaibel et al. [11], without any
specific information.
5.5. Extractive DWC
Azeotropic or narrow boiling mixtures (A, B) can also be sepa-
rated using extractive distillation. In this process, an additional
substance (solvent S), with a boiling point much higher than that
of A and B is added [58]. By adding this solvent the relative volatil-
ity of one of the components, for instance of the heavy boiling com-
ponent B, decreases. In this case, A can be withdrawn at the top of
the first column, whereas S and B can be separated in a second col-
umn [59,61,65,66].
The two-column configuration can also be integrated into one
column. The integration scheme of an extractive DWC (E-DWC)
is illustrated in Fig. 18. The mixture of A and B and the solvent S
are fed to the E-DWC (Fig. 18, right). The heavy boiling product B
interacts with S, which reduces the vapour pressure of B. The light
boiling component A is obtained in the left part of the column. B
and S are separated in the right part of the column and S is fed back
into the left part.
Table 6 shows the main industrial applications of E-DWCs. Uhde
applied the DWC technology for the Morphylane process, initially
based on a two-column configuration for the recovery of benzene,
toluene or xylenes from various feed stocks [67,68]. The integrated
column solution (Fig. 19) was applied in 2004 at the Arsol Aromat-
ics GmbH (formerly Aral Aromatics) in Gelsenkirchen, with a feed
capacity of 28,000 mt/year [69]. Another E-DWC was implemented
by BASF SE for the production of butadiene from a C-cut [7,9,70].

azeotropic distillation

azeotrop E-rich
phase

azeotrop

E-rich
A,B B-rich
phase
phase

B A A,B
B-rich
phase

B A

distillation azeotropic dividing wall column

dividing wall column

Fig. 17. Schematic showing the path from a distillation column to an azeotropic dividing wall column.
414 Ö. Yildirim et al. / Separation and Purification Technology 80 (2011) 403–417

extractive distillation

A B
S

B,S

A,B
A B

B,S
A,B

distillation extractive dividing wall column

dividing wall column

Fig. 18. Schematic showing the path from a distillation column to an extractive dividing wall column.

Table 6
Industrial applications of E-DWCs.

Company System Constructor and Features Reference

year
Arsol Aromatics GmbH (formerly Aral Aromatics) Separation of toluene and non-aromatics Constructed by  28,000 mt/year feed capacity [5,67,69]
Gelsenkirchen, Germany with N-formyl-morpholine Uhde in 2004
BASF SE Crude butadiene from a crude C4 using BASF SE  Both trays and packings [17,70]
Ludwigshafen, Germany N-methyl-pyrrolidone (NMP) as solvent

The extraction/distillation part of the classic butadiene process is
shown in Fig. 20 a. At BASF SE, this part of the plant was replaced
by the dividing wall technology shown in Fig. 20b [17,70].
Although E-DWC has already found industrial application, only
few studies have been published in the open literature. Midori
et al. [71] investigated theoretically the application of E-DWCs
and the results revealed that energy savings about 36% could be
Solvent
obtained. In their study, acetone-methanol–water was used as a
test system and the simulations were carried out using Aspen Plus.
Bravo-Bravo et al. [72] applied a stochastic multiobjective proce-
dure in order to find the optimal design for three different chemical
systems. Ruffert and Olf [73] reported on the recent process devel-
opment at Bayer Technology Services with respect to the applica-
tion of extractive distillation. For the separation of a mixture of
isomers, they applied a two-column extractive distillation technol-
ogy instead of the former crystallisation-based process. They also
mentioned the possibility of applying the DWC configuration.
According to the authors, this technology would have been pre-
ferred, if the process could be realised with new equipment.

Nonaromatics 5.6. Revamping to DWC

Feed The revamping of conventional columns to DWCs is a relatively

straightforward opportunity to reduce the operating costs. Accord-
ing to Parkinson [5], the reduction of one column can save up to
30% of the energy costs and the revamping can pay back within
one or two years. Table 7 summarises retrofitted DWCs that are re-
ported in the literature. Koch-Glitsch and MW Kellogg are the only
Aromatics suppliers that performed retrofits. Koch-Glitsch converted two col-
umns of Exxon-Mobil Refineries to DWCs. For instance, the
revamping of the Fawley Refinery in England took 30 days, but
energy savings of up to 53% were achieved [5]. This revamp includ-
ing process and mechanical design is described in detail by Slade
et al. [74]. Another revamp by Koch-Glitsch was made for a CEPSA
refinery in Spain. The operating costs dropped by 40% comparing to
a conventional two-column system. In academia, the revamp of
Fig. 19. E-DWC by Uhde. conventional columns was analysed so far only by Rangaiah et al.
 Ö. Yildirim et al. / Separation and Purification Technology 80 (2011) 403–417 415

(a) Extraction/distillation part of the (b) Application of the dividing wall technology
classic butadiene extraction process
Raffinate Raffinate

Crude
butadien

Lean
Crude solvent
Lean butadien
solvent Lean
solvent

Crude Rich
Crude Rich C4 solvent
C4 solvent

Fig. 20. Production of butadiene by BASF SE: classic extraction/distillation (a); dividing wall technology (b).

Table 7
Performed retrofits of conventional columns reported in the literature.

Company System Constructor and year Features Reference

ExxonMobil Fawley Refinery
Southampton, England
ExxonMobil Refinery
Port Jerome, France
CEPSA Refinery
Algeciras, Spain
BP (now BP Amoco) Petroleum
refinery
Coryton, Great Britain
Recovers mixed xylenes from reformate Conversion by Koch-Glitsch  3.8/4.3 m diameter [5,74]
motor gasoline in 2005  Tray column
 Energy savings up to 53%
Recovers mixed xylenes from reformate Conversion by Koch-Glitsch  Reduction of the operating cost [5]
motor gasoline up to 40%
Separation of paraffins and isoparaffins Conversion by Koch-Glitsch  No data available [5]
Production of Isohexane
Undisclosed Constructed by MW Kellogg  No data available [75]

[46]. In this study, six industrially important three-component
mixtures were chosen. For these systems, a two-column distilla-
tion configuration and a DWC were designed. According to the re-
sults, considerable energy and cost savings can be obtained using
DWCs.
The design of revamped columns appears generally simpler as
compared to the design of new DWCs, due to the lower degree of
freedom. We may expect more columns revamped to DWCs in
the future. However, it remains questionable whether their effi-
ciency is superior to new DWCs.
6. Conclusions
This paper provides a review on industrial DWC configurations
including those with different dividing wall positions. For three-
component separations, the dividing wall is usually located close
to the geometrical centre of a column. With increasing number
of components to be separated, the number of possible configura-
tions also grows. Such systems reveal a higher order of complexity,
and, thus, more than one wall is required for an efficient separa-
tion. The influence of the wall location, however, has not been
investigated sufficiently yet, especially for the cases with more
than one wall. The experimental and theoretical investigations of
quaternary and higher-order systems in DWCs with more than
one wall represent an interesting topic for future research.
In terms of control strategies available for DWCs, the overview
given here clearly shows that DWCs are not difficult to control pro-
viding that an appropriate control structure is selected. The results
show that MIMO controllers perform better than multi-loop PID
controllers. However, amongst the decentralised multivariable PI
structured controllers, DB/LSV and LB/DSV are the best control
structures capable of handling persistent disturbances in reason-
ably short times, with low overshooting.
The DWCs are exploited for the separation of a broad spectrum
of chemicals, e.g. hydrocarbons, alcohols, aldehydes, ketones, ace-
tals and amines. In principle, DWCs are realised in both tray and
packed columns. However, up to now, the majority have been con-
structed by Montz and used by BASF SE as packed columns. The
details on the specific features of existing DWCs is mostly
undisclosed. The DWCs are usually larger than common distillation
columns, their diameters reaching up to 5 m. For the separation of
mixtures with more than three components, only two industrial
applications are reported.
The integration of the DWC concept with azeotropic, extractive
and reactive distillation principles shows a remarkable reduction
in terms of investment and operation costs. Currently, industrial
applications exist only in the field of extractive distillation (BASF
SE and UOP). The literature on azeotropic and extractive DWCs is
scarce. A few investigations have been performed, both experimen-
tally and theoretically, for reactive DWCs. Some models have been
developed, but no industrial application is available yet.
Compared to conventional distillation towers, DWCs are consid-
erably more energy efficient and require less capital investments.
The recent rapid expansion of the DWC applications allows us to
estimate that about 350 industrial applications could be expected
by 2015.
References
[1] K. Huang, S.-J. Wang, L. Shan, Q. Zhu, J. Qian, Seeking synergistic effect – A key
principle in process intensification, Sep. Purif. Technol. 57 (2007) 111–120.
416 Ö. Yildirim et al. / Separation and Purification Technology 80 (2011) 403–417
[2] F.B. Petlyuk, V.M. Platonov, D.M. Slavinskii, Thermodynamically optimal
method for separating multicomponent mixtures, Int. Chem. Eng. 5 (1965)
555–561.
[3] M.A. Schultz, D.G. Stewart, J.M. Harris, S.P. Rosenblum, M.S. Shakur, D.E.
O’Brien, Reduce costs with dividing-wall columns, Chem. Eng. Prog. 98 (2002)
64–71.
[4] G. Kaibel, Distillation columns with longitudinal subdivision, Chem. Ing. Tech.
59 (1987) 533.
[5] G. Parkinson, Dividing-wall columns find greater appeal, Chem. Eng. Prog. 103
(2007) 8–11.
[6] J. Harmsen, Process intensification in the petrochemicals industry: drivers and
hurdles for commercial implementation, Chem. Eng. Process.: Process
Intensification 49 (2010) 70–73.
[7] I. Dejanović, L. Matijašević, Ž. Olujić, Dividing wall column – A breakthrough
towards sustainable distilling, Chem. Eng. Process.: Process Intensification 49
(2010) 559–580.
[8] R.O. Wright, Fractionation apparatus, US Patent No. 2471134 (1949).
[9] N. Asprion, G. Kaibel, Dividing wall columns: fundamentals and recent
advances, Chem. Eng. Process.: Process Intensification 49 (2010) 139–146.
[10] D.A. Monro, Fractionating apparatus and method of fractionation, US Patent
No. 2134882 (1938).
[11] B. Kaibel, H. Jansen, E. Zich, Ž. Olujić, Unfixed dividing wall technology for
packed and tray distillation columns, Distillation & Absorption 2006, IChemE,
London, England, 2006. pp. 252–266.
[12] M.A. Schultz, D.E. O’Brien, R.K. Hoehn, C.P. Luebke, D.G. Stewart, Innovative
flowschemes using dividing wall columns, in: 16th European Symposium of
Computer Aided Process Engineering, Elsevier, Garmisch-Partenkirchen,
Germany, 2006, pp. 695–700.
[13] J. Strandberg, S. Skogestad, Stabilizing operation of a 4-product integrated
Kaibel column, Distillation & Absorption 2006, IChemE, London, England,
2006. pp. 638–647.
[14] A.C. Christiansen, S. Skogestad, K. Lien, Complex distillation arrangements:
extending the Petlyuk ideas, Comput. Chem. Eng. 21 (1997) S237–S242.
[15] R. Agrawal, Processes for multicomponent separation, US Patent No. 6286335
(2001).
[16] B.-G. Rong, Systematic synthesis of dividing-wall columns for multicomponent
distillations, Distillation & Absorption 2010, IChemE, Eindhoven, The
Netherlands, 2010. pp. 85–90.
[17] M. Jobson, Dividing wall distillation comes of age, The Chem. Eng. 766 (2005)
30–31.
[18] Ž. Olujić, B. Kaibel, H. Jansen, T. Rietfort, E. Zich, G. Frey, Distillation column
internals/configurations for process intensification, Chem. Biochem. Eng. Q.
(2003) 301–309.
[19] A.A. Kiss, C.S. Bildea, A control perspective on process intensification in dividing-
wall columns, Chem. Eng. Process.: Process Intensification 50 (2011) 281–292.
[20] J.G. Segovia-Hernández, S. Hernández, A. Jiménez, Analysis of dynamic
properties of alternative sequences to the Petlyuk column, Comput. Chem.
Eng. 29 (2005) 1389–1399.
[21] S. Robles-Zapiain, J.G. Segovia-Hernández, A. Bonilla-Petriciolet, R. Maya-
Yescas, Energy-efficient complex distillation sequences: Control properties,
Can. J. Chem. Eng. 86 (2008) 249–259.
[22] V.E. Tamayo-Galvan, J.G. Segovia-Hernandez, S. Hernandez, J. Cabrera-Ruiz, J.R.
Alcantara-Avila, Controllability analysis of alternate schemes to complex
column arrangements with thermal coupling for the separation of ternary
mixtures, Comput. Chem. Eng. 32 (2008) 3057–3066.
[23] B.G. Rong, I. Turunen, A new method for synthesis of thermodynamically
equivalent structures for Petlyuk arrangements, Chem. Eng. Res. Des. 84
(2006) 1095–1116.
[24] F.I. Gómez-Castro, J.G. Segovia-Hernández, S. Hernández, C. Gutiérrez-Antonio,
A. Briones-Ramírez, Dividing wall distillation columns: Optimization and
control properties, Chem. Eng. Technol. 31 (2008) 1246–1260.
[25] J.R. Alcantara-Avila, J. Cabrera-Ruiz, J.G. Segovia-Hernandez, S. Hernandez, B.G.
Rong, Controllability analysis of thermodynamically equivalent thermally
coupled arrangements for quaternary distillations, Chem. Eng. Res. Des. 86
(2008) 23–37.
[26] A.A. Kiss, R.R. Rewagad, Energy efficient control of a BTX dividing-wall column,
Comput. Chem. Eng. (in press).
[27] E.A. Wolff, S. Skogestad, Operation of integrated three-product (Petlyuk)
distillation columns, Ind. Eng. Chem. Res. 34 (1995) 2094–2103.
[28] M. Serra, A. Espuña, L. Puigjaner, Control and optimization of the divided wall
column, Chem. Eng. Process. 38 (1999) 549–562.
[29] M. Serra, M. Perrier, A. Espuña, L. Puigjaner, Study of the divided wall column
controllability: influence of design and operation, Comput. Chem. Eng. 24
(2000) 901–907.
[30] M. Serra, M. Perrier, A. Espuña, L. Puigjaner, Analysis of different control
possibilities for the divided wall column: feedback diagonal and dynamic
matrix control, Comput. Chem. Eng. 25 (2001) 859–866.
[31] M.I.A. Mutalib, R. Smith, Operation and control of dividing wall distillation
columns: Part 1: Degrees of freedom and dynamic simulation, Chem. Eng. Res.
Des. 76 (1998) 308–318.
[32] I.J. Halvorsen, S. Skogestad, Optimizing control of Petlyuk distillation:
Understanding the steady-state behavior, Comput. Chem. Eng. 21 (1997)
S249–S254.
[33] I.J. Halvorsen, S. Skogestad, Optimal operation of Petlyuk distillation: steady-
state behavior, J. Process Control 9 (1999) 407–424.
[34] T. Adrian, H. Schoenmakers, M. Boll, Model predictive control of integrated
unit operations: control of a divided wall column, Chem. Eng. Process. 43
(2004) 347–355.
[35] S.-J. Wang, D.S.H. Wong, Controllability and energy efficiency of a high-purity
divided wall column, Chem. Eng. Sci. 62 (2007) 1010–1025.
[36] H. Ling, W.L. Luyben, New control structure for divided-wall columns, Ind. Eng.
Chem. Res. 48 (2009) 6034–6049.
[37] H. Ling, W.L. Luyben, Temperature control of the BTX divided-wall column,
Ind. Eng. Chem. Res. 49 (2010) 189–203.
[38] V. Alstad, S. Skogestad, Null space method for selecting optimal measurement
combinations as controlled variables, Ind. Eng. Chem. Res. 46 (2007) 846–853.
[39] R.C. van Diggelen, A.A. Kiss, A.W. Heemink, Comparison of control strategies
for dividing-wall columns, Ind. Eng. Chem. Res. 49 (2010) 188–307.
[40] K.I. Kim, S. Park, M. Lee, Dynamic simulation for the structural design of the
divided wall column for different feed composition and various separation
features, International Conference on Control Automation and Systems 2007,
pp. 235-239.
[41] C. Triantafyllou, R. Smith, The design and optimization of fully thermally
coupled distillation columns, Chem. Eng. Res. Des. 70 (1992) 118–132.
[42] I. Mueller, C. Pech, D. Bhatia, E.Y. Kenig, Rate-based analysis of reactive
distillation sequences with different degrees of integration, Chem. Eng. Sci. 62
(2007) 7327–7335.
[43] I.J. Halvorsen, S. Skogestad, Minimum energy consumption in multicomponent
distillation. 1. Vmin diagram for a two-product column, Ind. Eng. Chem. Res.
42 (2003) 596–604.
[44] I.J. Halvorsen, S. Skogestad, Minimum energy consumption in multicomponent
distillation. 2. Three-product Petlyuk arrangements, Ind. Eng. Chem. Res. 42
(2003) 605–615.
[45] I.J. Halvorsen, S. Skogestad, Minimum energy consumption in multicomponent
distillation. 3. More than three products and generalized Petlyuk
arrangements, Ind. Eng. Chem. Res. 42 (2003) 616–629.
[46] G.P. Rangaiah, E.L. Ooi, R. Premkumar, A simplified procedure for quick design
of dividing-wall columns for industrial applications, Chem. Prod. Process
Model. 4 (2009).
[47] I. Mueller, M. Kloeker, E.Y. Kenig, Rate-based modelling of dividing wall
columns – a new application to reactive systems, in: 7th Conference on
Process Integration, Modelling and Optimisation for Energy Saving and
Pollution Reduction, Prague, Chech Republic, 2004.
[48] I. Mueller, E.Y. Kenig, Reactive distillation in a dividing wall column: rate-
based modeling and simulation, Ind. Eng. Chem. Res. 46 (2007) 3709–3719.
[49] G. Parkinson, Distillation: New wrinkles for an age-old technology, Chem. Eng.
Prog. 101 (2005) 10–19.
[50] I. Dejanović, L. Matijašević, Ž. Olujić, I. Halvorsen, S. Skogestad, H. Jansen, B.
Kaibel, Conceptual design and comparison of four-products dividing wall
columns for separation of a multicomponent aromatics mixture, Distillation &
Absorption 2010, IChemE, Eindhoven, The Netherlands, 2010. pp. 85–90.
[51] G. Kaibel, Method of carrying out chemical reactions and for the simultaneous
fractionation of a mixture into several fractions by a distillation column,
European Patent EP126288 A2 (1984).
[52] T. Hill, G. Kaibel, G. Meyer, J. Niekerken, H. Schoenmakers, Reactive distillation
apparatus for production of ethers from hydrocarbon fractions comprises
simultaneous hydrogenation etherification and distillative separation, German
Patent DE10033958 A1 (2002).
[53] A.A. Kiss, J.J. Pragt, C.J.G. van Strien, Reactive dividing wall columns – how to
get more with less resources?, Chem Eng. Commun. 196 (2009) 1366–1374.
[54] A.A. Kiss, J.J. Pragt, C.J.G. van Strien, Reactive dividing-wall columns: towards
enhanced process integration, Distillation & Absorption, IChemE, Eindhoven,
The Netherlands, 2010, pp. 253–258.
[55] E.Y. Kenig, I. Müller, C. Großmann, E. Geißler, G. Kaibel, H. Schoenmakers,
Trennwandkolonnen: Entwicklungsstand und Perspektiven, Chem. Ing. Tech.
78 (2006) 1281–1282.
[56] S. Sander, C. Flisch, E. Geissler, H. Schoenmakers, O. Ryll, H. Hasse, Methyl
acetate hydrolysis in a reactive divided wall column, Chem. Eng. Res. Des. 85
(2007) 149–154.
[57] R. Sandoval-Vergara, F.O. Barroso-Muñoz, H. Hernández-Escoto, J.G. Segovia-
Hernández, S. Hernández, V. Rico-Ramírez, B. Bertrand, J. Xavier,
Implementation of a reactive dividing wall distillation column in a pilot
plant, in: 18th European Symposium of Computer Aided Process Engineering,
Elsevier, Lyon, France, 2008, pp. 229–234.
[58] H.-J. Huang, S. Ramaswamy, U.W. Tschirner, B.V. Ramarao, A review of
separation technologies in current and future biorefineries, Sep. Purif. Technol.
62 (2008) 1–21.
[59] F.M. Khoury, Multistage separation processes, 3rd ed., CRC Press, Boca Raton,
2005.
[60] B.P. Guedes, M.F. Feitosa, L.S. Vasconcelos, A.B. Araújo, R.P. Brito, Sensitivity
and dynamic behavior analysis of an industrial azeotropic distillation column,
Sep. Purif. Technol. 56 (2007) 270–277.
[61] K. Sattler, H.J. Feindt, Thermal separation processes, VCH, Weinheim, 1995.
[62] J.G. Stichlmair, J.R. Herguijuela, Separation regions and processes of zeotropic
and azeotropic ternary distillation, AIChE J. 38 (1992) 1523–1535.
[63] S. Midori, S.N. Zheng, I. Yamada, Azeotropic distillation process with vertical
divided-wall column, Kagaku Kogaku Ronbunshu 27 (2001) 756–760.
[64] A. Briones-Ramírez, C. Gutiérrez-Antonio, J. Jacek, T. Jan, Dividing wall
distillation columns for separation of azeotropic mixtures: Feasibility
procedure and rigorous optimization, in: 19th European Symposium of
 Ö. Yildirim et al. / Separation and Purification Technology 80 (2011) 403–417
Computer Aided Process Engineering, Elsevier, Cracow, Poland, pp. 555–560.
[65] A. Schönbucher, Thermische Verfahrenstechnik, Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg,
New York, 2002.
[66] Z. Lei, C. Li, Y. Li, B. Chen, Separation of acetic acid and water by complex
extractive distillation, Sep. Purif. Technol. 36 (2004) 131–138.
[67] T. Diehl, B. Kolbe, H. Gehrke, Uhde morphylane extractive distillation - where
do we stand, ERTC Petrochemical Conference, Prague, Chech Republic, 2005,
pp. 1-12.
[68] B. Kolbe, S. Wenzel, Novel distillation concepts using one-shell columns, Chem.
Eng. Process. 43 (2004) 339–346.
[69] Uhde, Aromatics, website: <http://www.uhde.eu/cgi-bin/byteserver.pl/
archive/upload/uhde_brochures_pdf_en_16.00.pdf> (10.01.11).
[70] B. Heida, G. Bohner, K. Kindler, Consider divided-wall technology for butadiene
extraction, Hydrocarbon Processing 81 (2002). 50B–50H.
[71] S. Midori, S.N. Zheng, K. Yamada, Analysis of divided-wall column for
extractive distillation, Kagaku Kogaku Ronbunshu 26 (2000) 627–632.
[72] C. Bravo-Bravo, J.G. Segovia-Hernandez, C. Gutierrez-Antonio, A.L. Duran, A.
Bonilla-Petriciolet, A. Briones-Ramirez, Extractive dividing wall column:
design and optimization, Ind. Eng. Chem. Res. 49 (2010) 3672–3688.
[73] G. Ruffert, G. Olf, Extraktivdestillation – Erfolg mit neuen
Entwicklungsmethoden, Chem. Tech. 3 (2004) 86–88.
[74] B. Slade, B. Stober, D. Simpson, Dividing wall column revamp optimises mixed
xylenes production, Distillation & Absorption 2006, IChemE, London, England,
2006. pp. 1–10.
[75] K.A. Amminudin, R. Smith, Design and optimization of fully thermally coupled
distillation columns: part 2: application of dividing wall columns in retrofit,
Chem. Eng. Res. Des. 79 (2001) 716–724.
417
[76] Ž. Olujić, M. Jödecke, A. Shilkin, G. Schuch, B. Kaibel, Equipment improvement
trends in distillation, Chem. Eng. Process.: Process Intensification 48 (2009)
1089–1104.
[77] G. Kaibel, C. Miller, M. Stroezel, R. von Watzdorf, H. Jansen, Industrieller
Einsatz von Trennwandkolonnen und thermisch gekoppelten
Destillationskolonnen, Chem. Ing. Tech. 76 (2004) 258–263.
[78] R. Premkumar, G.P. Rangaiah, Retrofitting conventional column systems to
dividing-wall columns, Chem. Eng. Res. Des. 87 (2009) 47–60.
[79] C. Großmann, E.Y. Kenig, Trennwandkolonnen – Entwicklungsstand und
Perspektiven, CIT Plus 5 (2007) 38–41.
[80] G. Daniel, P. Patil, R. Dragomir, M. Jobson, Conceptual design of reactive
dividing wall columns, Distillation & Absorption, IChemE, London, England,
2006. pp. 364–372.
[81] G. Bumbac, A.E. Plesu, V. Plesu, Reactive distillation process analysis in a
divided wall column, in: 17th European Symposium of Computer Aided
Process Engineering, Elsevier, Bucharest, Romania, 2007, pp. 443–448.
[82] S. Hernández, R. Sandoval-Vergara, F.O. Barroso-Muñoz, R. Murrieta-Dueñas,
H. Hernández-Escoto, J.G. Segovia-Hernández, V. Rico-Ramirez, Reactive
dividing wall distillation columns: simulation and implementation in a pilot
plant, Chem. Eng. Process.: Process Intensification 48 (2009) 250–258.
[83] G. Bumbac, A. Ene, R. Isopescu, A. Torma, Process simulation of reactive
distillation in dividing wall column for ETBE synthesis process, Chem. Eng.
Trans. 18 (2009) 487–492.
[84] F. Barroso-Muñoz, Thermodynamic analysis and hydrodynamic behavior of a
reactive dividing wall distillation column, The 9th International Conference on
Chemical & Process Engineering, Rome, Italy, 2009.