17 views

Uploaded by herrtang

cos

- FE1001 Physics 1 Time Table - Sem 2 10-11 Updated 190111
- Science Test1
- natural convection in air heater-6.1.2015.pdf
- Physics
- Wikibooks - Engineering Thermodynamics
- a109210305 Thermodynamics
- hvac-sml_opt
- ChBE+2100+Syllabus+Fall+2015+081815
- General Maintenance Test
- 1
- 201052176567601
- What Makes a Great Workplace White Paper
- 1993_Distillation Column Targets
- lecture1_3.pdf
- Calculating Heating Syst
- Dutypoint Dirt & Air Separators.pdf
- Process Dynamic Modelling
- Steam System Opportunity Assessment for the Pulp & Paper, Chemical Manufacturing & Petroleum Refining Industries - Appendices
- HVAC Presentation-3 Power
- Energy Saving solutions in Restaurant.pdf

You are on page 1of 276

Course EN

Daniel Declercq

1

The Author

MSc Electro-Mechanical engineering - KULeuven 1967 PhD Electrical Engineering - KULeuven 1972 1972 1980 : BASF Antwerp Head of Utilities 1980 1985 : BASF Ludwigshafen Energy controller & Project leader heat integration 1986 1998 : Air Products Europe Director Energy & Feedstock supply 1998 2004 : Electrabel Director European Development 2005 - ... : Pinchco Independent Energy Consultant Senior Technical Advisor at Laborelec Visiting Professor at the University of Antwerp Expert Evaluator Research Executive Agency EC

2

Heat integration, as a part of process integration aims at

Designing a process in such a way that it makes optimum use of energy that is available within the process itself Optimising the quality level of the utilities required Optimising energy exchange with neighbouring plants and energy recovery With the view to optimise energy and capital cost

It is essential to understand that It is about economics

Less energy in does not automatically mean trade-off between energy and capital

Combine hot streams and cold streams in a Heat Exchanger Network (HEN)

Supply energy deficits from utilities to complete the energy balance Trade-off between energy and capital Study operational acceptability (stability , flexibility , start-up , shutdown) Feed-back into the process design

Combining hot and cold streams in a HEN design is laborious and time consuming There is no measure nor any indication for the quality of the proposed design Even very simple problems do not get solved in a satisfactory way The conventional approach generates no feed-back

With the view to reduce overall cost

Gives a good estimate for required heat exchanger surface area and HEN cost

And .... this whole analysis prior to design

The technique can be extended

To optimise and/or integrate utility systems To total site studies To optimise use of process water To optimise site-wide hydrogen systems

1970s : Lumped curves : used in cryogenic air separation plant design 1971 : Ed Hohmann :

It is possible to predict minimum utility and to estimate surface area requirements without knowing the heat exchanger network to accomplish it

Problem Table algorithm

Part 1 : targeting:

To define optimum utility levels To set targets for heat exchanger surface areas and cost To provide hints for process changes that should lead to better targets To initiate trade-off between energy and capital

10

To get insight in driving parameters To search for the optimum TMin that leads to the economical optimum (conventional software) Or, to search for the integration that leads to the economical optimum (new software Heatit)

11

To design a heat exchanger network that achieves the energy targets on the basis of the rules developed To adjust the network in order to simplify the structure whilst minimising the energy penalties To analyse the networks dynamic behaviour To assess the operational acceptability

12

13

14

Pinch Analysis

Part 1 : targeting approach :

Extract energy data from the flow sheet Apply algorithm to calculate targets for energy and for heat exchanger surface area Analyse structure of Composite Curves Check Grand Composite and define optimum utility levels Look for potential process changes Initiate trade-off between energy and capital

15

Pinch Analysis

210C Reactor

40C Recycle Purge

Flash tank

16

Pinch Analysis

a soft start ... : a two-stream problem One hot stream with one cold stream

DTMin K 5 5

Stream H1 C1

17

Pinch Analysis

The two-stream problem an answer

180C 90C

H1 mcp 2.0

C

40 kW

70C

140C

H 60 kW

125C

80C

C1 mcp 4.0

180 kW

18

Pinch Analysis

a little bit more difficult but still easy (we think ...) :

Two hot streams

...... how much energy is needed ?

19

Pinch Analysis

Two hot streams - Two cold streams

Stream N 1 2 3 4 Tsupply C 245 195 30 125 Ttarget C 30 95 180 200 Heat kW 86 100 90 120 Stream H1 H2 C1 C2

20

Pinch Analysis

Proposed solutions

............ ?

21

Pinch Analysis

The four-stream problem A possible solution

Cp 0.4 1 245 135 105 30

C1 2 C2

10 42

Cp 1.0

195

95

180

30

Cp 0.6

90

200

H

76

152.5

125

4

44

Cp 1.6

Energy needed :

QHot = 76 units

QCold = 52 units

22

Pinch Analysis

The four-stream problem A better solution

Cp 0.4 1 245 120 135 30

1

2

C 3

36

Cp 1.0

195

95

180 50 200

96.7

30

Cp 0.6

40

125 60 4 Cp 1.6

H

60

162.5

Energy needed :

QHot = 60 units

QCold = 36 units

23

Pinch Analysis

The four-stream problem the best solution ?

QCold 52 36 25

24

Pinch Analysis

Solving the problem with the conventional approach

We make a design Energy requirements result from the design If we are happy with the result, then thats it

25

Pinch Analysis

Pinch Analysis offers a way to solve the problem :

With a systematic approach Through analysis prior to design And tells us how to design the heat exchanger network in order to achieve the promised targets

26

Temp 200 180 160 140 120 100

Lumped Curves

80

60 40 20 0

Hot Cold

Heat

100

200

300

400

500

27

Pinch Analysis

Temp 200 180 160 140 120 100 80 60 40 20 0 0 50 100 150 200 250 300 Heat 350 Hot Cold

Lumped Curves

28

Pinch Analysis

Temp 200 180

Lumped Curves

Heating

160

140 120 100

Transfer

Hot Cold

80

60 40 20 0 0 50 100 150 200 250 300

Cooling

Heat 350

29

For one hot stream and one cold stream : Push the cold stream under the hot stream in the T-H diagram until the minimum approach temperature Tmin is reached For more hot streams and more cold steams : Lump all the hot streams into one hot composite curve

Lump all the cold streams into one cold composite curve Push the cold composite curve under the hot composite curve until the Tmin is reached

30

Temp 250 200 150 100 50 0 0 50 100 150 200 250 300 Heat

H2 H1

75 125 50

31

Temp

50

100

150

32

Temp 300 250

Composite Curve

200 150

Heat 350

33

Temp 300 250 200 150 100 50 0 0 50 100 150 200 250 300 Heat 350

34

Hot Cold

Temp 300 250 200 150 100 50 0 0 Heat

QH

Hot Cold

QC

50

100

150

200

250

300

350

35

Early 1980s, manipulating graphics was still complicated in computer applications The Problem Table algorithm (Bodo Linnhoff) provided a numerical method that was more amenable (Target, Hint, PinchLeni, Then, ...) Today, graphics and numerical calculations can be combined, which offers additional advantages

36

Pinch Analysis

37

210C Reactor

40C Recycle Purge

Flash tank

38

210C Reactor

40C Recycle Purge

Flash tank

39

210C Reactor

40C Recycle Purge

Flash tank

40

Process flow sheet

Reactor 210C 40C Recycle Purge 210C St To distillation

Flash tank

41

Process flow sheet

Reactor 210C 40C Recycle Purge 210C To distillation

45C

20C Feed

35C

Flash tank

42

Guideline : ensure that all energy saving opportunities have a change. Therefore :

Differentiate between hard and soft data Prefer optimisation of the process prior to solving actual concepts that might be second best

43

Avoid mixing of streams of different temperatures Respect practical temperature levels which streams are available at (cfr. quenching) Take precautions for streams that might give rise to forbidden matches Accept intermediates if imposed by process constraints Partition streams with non-linear profiles and define extracted sections on the save side

44

Temp 250 200 150 100 50 0 0 50 100 150 200 250 300 Heat

45

Lower the temperature level of all hot streams with 0.5* Tmin (shift)

Increase the temperature level of all cold streams with 0.5* Tmin (shift)

All supply- and target temperatures of the shifted streams define temperature levels The zones between two adjacent temperature levels define temperature intervals

46

Calculate, for each temperature interval, the available heat of all hot streams in that interval and lump these values of available heat Calculate, for each temperature interval, the required heat of all cold streams in that interval and lump these values of required heat Calculate, for each temperature interval, the balance between available heat and required heat If the balance is zero, then no additional heating nor cooling is required for that interval

47

Start at the highest temperature interval and repeat the balance calculation for each interval below If the balance is positive, then this excess heat is cascaded down into the lower interval If the balance is negative, then there is a heat deficit; this value will also mathematically be cascaded down into the lower interval On the lower interval, the value cascaded down is added to the balance of the interval itself Any resulting balance is cascaded down as was done for the upper intervals

48

Calculations (3)

At one (or more) temperature levels between intervals, a negative energy value (a deficit) might have been cascaded down Physically, heat can only be transferred from higher into lower temperature levels

To restore the balance, energy is put in on the top in an amount equal to the largest deficit

49

Calculations (4)

The heat, added at the top, is cascaded down though the intervals and will compensate all deficits

The hot energy target equals the amount of heat, put in at the top

The cold energy target equals the amount of heat to be evacuated at the bottom The energy targets are the minimum amount of hot and cold utility, required to run the process

50

Data preparation

DTmin K 5 5 5 5

51

TLevel 240.0 205.0 190.0 185.0 130.0 90.0 35.0 25.0 DeltaH Hot DeltaH Cold Hot1 Hot2 SumH Cold1 Cold2 SumC Balance -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------14 14 14 -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------6 6 24 24 -18 -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------2 5 7 8 8 -1 ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------22 55 77 33 88 121 -44 -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------16 40 56 24 24 32 -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------22 22 33 33 -11 -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------4 4 4 -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------52

TLevel 240.0 14 Balance Cascade Problem Table 49.0

205.0

-18 190.0 -1 185.0 -44 130.0 32 90.0 -11 35.0 4 25.0

14

-4.0 -5.0 -49.0 -17.0 -28.0 -24.0

63

45 44 0 32 21 25 25.0

53

Result of the calculations

The Composite Curves (shifted) The Grand Composite (the data from the Problem Table in a T/H diagram)

54

The enthalpy balance of the total system :

Target Hot Total energy out (where the energy went to) = Target Cold QHot + Target Hot = QCold + Target Cold

QHot +

QCold +

QHot -

55

The enthalpy balance of the total system :

QH = 49

DH = 86 DH = 100 DH = 90

30 95 30

200

DH = 120

QC = 25

125

56

TLevel 240.0 14 205.0 -18 190.0 -1 185.0 -44 130.0 32 90.0 -11 35.0 4 25.0 -24.0 25 25.0 4 4.0

57

Balance

63 45 44 0 32 21

14 49.0 45 44 0 21.0 11 0

TLevel 240.0 14 205.0 -18 190.0 -1 185.0 -44 130.0 32 90.0 -11 35.0 4 25.0 -24.0 25 25.0 25 25.0

58

Balance

63 45 44 0 32 21

83 65 64 20.0 0 32 21

TLevel 240.0 14 205.0 -18 190.0 -1 185.0 -44 130.0 32 90.0 -11 35.0 4 25.0 -24.0 25 25.0 45 45.0

59

Balance

63 45 44 0 32 21

63 45 44 0 20.0 52 41

TLevel 240.0 14 205.0 -18 190.0 -1 185.0 -44 130.0 32 90.0 -11 35.0 4 25.0 -24.0 25 25.0 35 35.0

60

Balance

63 45 44 0 32 21

73 55 54 10 42 31

Temp 300

250

200

150

Hot Cold

100

61

Temp 300

Grand Composite

250

200

150

100

50

Heat

62

The number in the Problem Table at each temperature level = the horizontal distance between the hot and the cold composite curve

the hot and cold utility targets the temperature limits for these utilities The options for multiple utility levels

63

Temp 300

Grand Composite

250

QH

200

150

100

50

0 0.0

QC

10.0 20.0 30.0 40.0 50.0 60.0 70.0

Heat

64

What about Process constraints such as Forbidden matches between two critical streams

Therefore, the question is : What is the penalty caused by such constraint ?

65

Procedure (1)

Calculate the interval enthalpies for the unconstraint part of the problem and for the constraint streams Keep sinks and sources within each interval separated Use the heat available from the constraint hot stream to satisfy the sinks in the unconstraint part If the heat cannot be used in the same interval, cascade down to the lower interval Heat that cannot be used in the last interval is removed

66

Procedure (2)

In each interval, add the heat sink of the critical cold stream to the remaining sinks of the unconstraint part to form the sinks left In each interval, balance the sources of the unconstraint part with the sinks left to build a new set of interval balances Proceed with the Problem Table calculation by cascading down excess heat in each interval Complete the Problem Table calculation by adding heat on top to compensate for the largest negative cascade The heat added is the new hot utility target, any heat removed plus the heat removed before constitute the cold utility target

67

Procedure (3)

The difference in the heat input required in comparison with the unconstraint process is the energy penalty to be allocated to the constraint

This value should also be equal to the amount of energy crossing the pinch Restrictions between one hot stream and several cold streams can be handled in a similar way, as well as restrictions between several hot streams and one cold stream Restrictions between several hot streams and several cold streams would require a more sophisticated approach

68

Procedure (4)

Apart from the potential energy penalty, there might also be a capital penalty However, .... Do not worry too much If the penalty becomes too big, then an intermediate heat transfer medium might offer an alternative Such constraints will seldom kill a potential energy saving opportunity

69

Example Data

Tsupply C 180 220 180 40 150 Ttarget C 140 170 80 120 220 Heat kW 40 40 40 56 84 DTMin K 10 10 10 10 10 Stream H1 H2 H3 C1 C2

Forbidden match between streams 3 and 4 (Unconstrained targets : QHot = 40 QCold = 20)

70

Procedure

Unconstraint Part Stream 3 Stream 4 TLevel Source Sink Source Sink 230.0 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------0.0 24.0 0.0 0.0 210.0 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------32.0 48.0 0.0 0.0 170.0 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------18.0 12.0 4.0 0.0 160.0 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------30.0 0.0 12.0 0.0 130.0 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------0.0 0.0 24.0 42.0 70.0 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------0.0 0.0 0.0 14.0 50.0 -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

71

Procedure

3 TLevel 230.0 210.0 170.0 160.0 130.0 70.0 50 Unconstraint Part Source Remaining Sink Total New Total Source Sink Stream 3 Sink Stream 4 Sink Cascade Prob Tab ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------56.0 0.0 24.0 24.0 24.0 -24.0 -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------24.0 32.0 32.0 48.0 48.0 48.0 -16.0 -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------40.0 16.0 18.0 12.0 4.0 8.0 8.0 10.0 2 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------0.0 -30.0 26.0 30.0 0.0 12.0 0.0 0.0 30.0 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------12.0 0.0 56.0 0.0 0.0 24.0 0.0 42.0 42.0 -42.0 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------36.0 -42.0 14.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 14.0 14.0 -14.0 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------36.0 -56.0 0.0 1 36.0 reject reject

72

Mandatory start-up heater - Procedure (1)

If the mandatory heater appears in the pinch design, then the condition is satisfied If the mandatory heater does not appear in the pinch design, then try an alternative pinch design If the mandatory heater appears in the alternative pinch design, then refined trade-off is required Between the number of heaters The load on the heaters The quality of the required utility If the mandatory heater does not appear in any alternative pinch design , then accept the heater

73

Mandatory start-up heater - Procedure (2)

Remove the heater heat exchanger with corresponding parts of the utility and cold stream and run the analysis on the modified problem for a new target The penalty for the mandatory start-up heater equals the difference in heat demand between the new target plus the load on the start up heater and the original target If there is no penalty, then a satisfying pinch design exists that has not been discovered so far The corresponding pinch design can be developed from the modified problem

74

75

The process shows a heat recovery bottleneck at a temperature level that will be called the pinch

The process can be separated in two sections : one above the pinch and one below the pinch There should be no cooling with utilities above the pinch There should be no heating with utilities below the pinch

There should be no mixing of streams across the pinch Process modifications should concentrate on the pinch area in order to be effective

76

Any CHP should supply heat into the system above the pinch Any heat pump should be located across the pinch Use of multiple utilities will create utility pinches A system can have more than one pinched areas The pinch can jump from one stream to another stream in particular cases, e.g. if both composite curves are convex or concave (see slide example)

77

The pinch can jump from one stream to another

Temp

250

Lumped Curves

200

50

Heat

250

78

however .... for normal problems, The pinch will always be caused by the beginning of a stream

79

Energy targeting :

Very straightforward One clear answer Thermodynamically 100% achievable Energy cost depends further on : Actual energy unit cost Energy price scenarios Company internal procedures (allocation)

80

Objectives : Set targets for the required heat exchanger surface area Set targets for the number of units If objectives are not compatible, then find ways to minimise the cost of the HEN

81

The cost of the heat exchanger network depends on

The number of units (heat exchangers) required The size of these units (area required) The specific cost parameters of these units The cost for installation, connection and annualised cost for maintenance

82

The minimum number of units Eulers theorem : Nc = Ne + NL Ns With : Nc = number of connections between elements Ne = number of elements NL = number of loops Ns = number of independent systems

83

Eulers theorem applied :

For one system and with no loops Min#Units = #Streams + #Utilities 1 However, with two independent areas Above the pinch: Min#Units = #Streams above the pinch + #Hot Utilities 1 Below the pinch: Min#Units = #Streams below the pinch + #Cold Utilities 1

84

Unit cost structure

A and B = specific coefficients exponent c = 0.6 to 0.8 Unit Area = Q/(U*f* TLnMean) Total investment cost = 2 to 4 x unit cost (Lang factor)

(NPV 10 to 50%)

85

Cost structure Comments

The business activity (refinery, pulp and paper ... ) The size of the process (kWs or MWs) the construction of the heat exchanger (multi-pass, ...) the fouling that might require a correction factor is a rough approximation (concept dates from 1947 !) For differentiation : Guthrie-factors (1970), Marshall & Swift Index, ...

86

Lang factor

Cost structure Comments : Less units generate lower cost, therefore :

Try to minimise the # of units, and : Assume a minimum # of units above and below the pinch, maintaining the pinch design principle

Equal sizes generate maximum cost, therefore : One would try to maximise the inequality of the units However, there is no guidance regarding the distribution of the inequality, therefore : Assume all units equal sized This will generate a conservative realistic target

87

Cost structure Comments :

The size of a single unit is techno-economically limited ( a practical limit can vary from 300 m to 2000 m). The average unit size should not exceed the practical limit U and f values have a direct impact on the size; in view of the above, they can also have a direct impact on the N# of units Experience indicates that economics become questionable if the multi-pass f correction factor drops below 0.8; in this case, more single-pass must be foreseen (more units) All aspects that have a potential impact on the technical and economical feasibility should be anticipated when choosing the N# of units in the targeting phase

88

Cost structure formula : With : AreaA = the total area required above the pinch

Na = a practical minimum N# of units above the pinch AreaB = the total area required below the pinch Nb = a practical minimum N# of units below the pinch

89

Cost structure formula : The cost target = Cost = Na*[A + B*(AreaA/Na)c]+ Nb*[A + B*(AreaB/Nb)c] Final check : There should be a reasonable ratio between fix cost and variable cost

90

Area required : concept of the calculation :

Put heat exchangers on all streams in each vertical section of the composite curves assuming a spaghetti network Calculate the area in each section, taking into account the specific heat transfer coefficients and correction factors of each stream (U*f)

91

Mcp-weighted distribution of heat loads in a Spaghetti Network:

H1

H2

C1 C2 C3

92

Area required : the Area formula

Area =

i{

1/ TLnMean(i) x

j[

Q(j)/U*f(j)] }

The formula shows a remarkable feature : The contribution of each stream depends only on its own contribution to the overall heat transfer coefficient and is invariant with regard to the contribution of the stream on the other side of the heat exchanger This is a direct consequence of the way the overall heat transfer coefficient is calculated :

93

Calculating missing T-values After construction of the Composite Curves (without shift), all Q and T-values are known in all horizontal bands

However, Q and T-values are now required for all vertical bands Q Consequently, missing T-values have to be calculated for corresponding values of Q ; this can be done by interpolation

Such calculation, however, should be applied with care and should be verified on simple examples

94

Calculating missing T-values

Temp 180 160 140 120 100 80 60 40 20 0 0 100 200 300 400 500 Hot Cold

Lumped Curves

Missing temperature

Heat 600

95

Area required - calculation comments (1)

In case of a uniform TMin, the shapes of shifted and nonshifted curves are identical In case of a non-uniform TMin (see later), the shapes of shifted and non-shifted curves are no longer identical In most cases, the area target calculated with the spaghetti network is close to what can be achieved in practice.

So far, however, the effects of criss-cross heat exchange have been disregarded

96

Area required - calculation comments (2)

Although, with disregarded criss-cross , the area target will be approximate, we still do not know how approximate With large differences in U*f values , leading to significant criss-cross in real networks, the area target is not reliable In case of an energy optimum design, heat exchange will not necessarily be vertical , but , at the pinch, there will be no criss-cross exchange crossing the pinch

(*) with non-uniform TMin in the pinch-area, pinch temperatures are not identical !

97

Global minimum # of units is not compatible with rules for energy optimum (two separate systems , one above and one below the Pinch) Minimum # of units is not always compatible with vertical heat exchange Area targeting : Straightforward procedure for vertical heat exchange The limitation , however , to networks without crisscross heat exchange is a serious weakness and makes the area target unreliable

98

A straightforward procedure but, More uncertainty Several factors beyond direct control An approximation, but ...... - provided that criss-cross heat exchange can be disregarded hopefully still good enough

99

Pinch Analysis Part 2 : Trade-off between energy and capital Energy consumption and Area and

as a function of TMin and Integration

100

Straightforward, targets fully achievable a straightforward procedure but, more uncertainty several factors beyond direct control

However, it is the total cost that counts and trade-off between energy and capital is mandatory

101

Two levels : Targeting level and Design level

With driver TMin : uniform TMin required With driver Integration : stream dependent TMin possible Objective of trade-off on the targeting level is to find a good estimate for the TMin or degree of integration that will generate the lowest total cost

102

Objective of trade-off on the design level is to find a good compromise between what is technically feasible and what is economically and operationally desirable A first design will be based on a pinch design

That design may be simplified and/or its total cost reduced by using loops and paths

103

Trade-off : Calculations

Lang factor : small plant = 4 / large plant = 3 Energy cost escalation 2%/year Maintenance cost 1.5%, escalation 1%/year Operating hours = 7500 h/year

Lifetime = 10 years

Discount rate = 7 %

104

Trade-off : Calculations

Case 1 : U*f = 2.0 Case 2 : U*f = 0.2 Utility cost : PHot = 25 /MWh; PCold = 3 /MWh Case 1 : U*f = 2.0 Case 2 : U*f = 0.2

105

Utility prices : PHot = 25 /MWh; PCold = 3 /MWh U*f value (1) : 2.0 kW/m,K U*f value (2) : 0.2 kW/m,K

Tsupply C 245 195 30 125 Ttarget C 30 95 180 200 Heat kW 86 100 90 120 DTmin K 5 5 5 5 U*f kW/m,K

Stream N 1 2 3 4

106

Case : Example 1 , small plant (200 kW range) U*f = 2 Conventional design as below TMin(total) = 10K

1 245

Cp 0.4

120 135

30

Cp 1.0

195

36

95

180 50

30

Cp 0.6

200

H

60

107

Trade-off : calculations

Targeting and conventional design - basis TMin

Area(m)

QHot(kW) 80 70 60 50 40 30

Area AConv QConv Qtarget

14 12 10 8 6 4 0 5 10 15 20 25

DTMin

108

Trade-off : calculations

Targeting and conventional design - basis QHot

Area (m)

14 12 10 8 6 4 40 45 50 55 60 65 70

QHot (kW)

80 70 60 AConv 50 40 30

AreaTarget QHot

QHot

109

Presentation :

TMin is not an objective and has no value in its own right QHot (which is a direct function of Integration) is much more representative parameter than TMin The pinch design requires less surface area for the same energy consumption Since the area depends directly from the U*f value, this conclusion will hold for all U*f values

Results :

The first conclusion is in favour of pinch Analysis; however, will the same conclusion remain valid for the cost ?

110

Anticipated : Pinch design Example 1 ( TMin = 10 K)

Units : kW

217.5

Cp 0.4 Cp 1.0 1 2 245 195

2 1

135 135

5 4

92.5

C

25

30 90

180 33 200

125 40 125 60 4

58.3

30 17

Cp 0.6

H

49

169.4 11

162.5

Cp 1.6

111

Targeting & Pinch design versus Conventional

Cost '000 450 400 350 300 250 200 150 35 45 55 65 75 QHot(kW)

Target2 Design2 Conv2 Target1 Design1 Conv1

U*f =0.2

U*f =2

112

(The graph anticipates results for the pinch design case)

General comment

Targeted cost is close to cost of pinch design QHot minimum achievable with TMin of 5 K

With conventional design : 55 kW

For Conventional design at QHot = 55 kW / 65 kW

However, ... The Pinch design costs up to 12% more than the conventional design

113

Maximum potential energy saving is lower than the penalty for the higher N# of units Be cautious when energy cost is low compared with area fix cost

Conclusion :

Check whether cost formula and Lang-factor are suited for the particular process and size

Refine investment cost projection with detailed engineering

114

Was it a waste of time to apply Pinch Analysis and to develop the Pinch design ? Not necessarily :

The Pinch design can be developed by relaxation into alternatives that might cost less

If the higher cost is due to the cost structure as above, then reducing the number of units by relaxation will automatically reduce the cost and, Any conventional design can be derived from the Pinch design

115

Design small plant - relaxation (U*f = 0.2)

217.5 Cp 0.4 Cp 1.0 1 2 245 195

2 1

135 135

5

4

6

92.5 11

C

25

30 90

180

11 33 162.5

125

58.33

30

17

Cp 0.6

40 125

60 4 Cp 1.6

200

H

49

169.4

11

116

Design small plant after relaxation (U*f = 0.2)

Cp 0.4 Cp 1.0 1 2 245 195 120 135 30 90

2 1

36

180 50 200

30

Cp 0.6

H

60

117

Design small plant after relaxation (U*f = 0.2)

The structure of the developed design is identical with the original conventional design Obviously, going through the pinch exercise makes also any conventional solutions emerge The pinch method offers a systematic and structured approach with the certainty that the optimum will not be overlooked

118

Utility prices : PHot = 20 /MWh; PCold = 2 /MWh U*f value (1) : 2.0 kW/m,K U*f value (2) : 0.2 kW/m,K

Tsupply C 245 195 30 125 Ttarget C 30 95 180 200 Heat kW 1720 2000 1800 2400 DTMin K 5 5 5 5 U*f kW/m,K

Stream N 1 2 3 4

119

Anticipated : Pinch design Example 2 ( TMin = 10 K)

Units : kW

217.5

Cp 8 Cp 20 1 2 245 195

2 1

135 135

5 4

92.5

C

500

30 90

58.3

30 340

Cp 12

H

980

169.4 220

162.5

Cp 32

120

Targeting - Pinch design versus Conventional

Cost '000 2800

2400

U*f =0.2

2000

U*f =2

1600

QHot(MW)

121

Targeting - Pinch design versus Conventional Energy cost +20% - lifetime 15 years Lang factor 2

Cost '000 3200 2800 2400 2000 1600 1200 0.8 1.0 1.2 1.4 1.6

U*f =0.2

Target2 Design2 Conv2 Target1 Design1 Conv1

U*f =2

QHot(MW)

122

General comment

Targeted cost is close to cost pinch design Minimum cost achieved with pinch design QHot can be reduced by 24% compared with the Conventional design With high U value : cost reduction 15 to 19% but, With low U value : cost reduction 1 to 5%

123

In this example

The cost curve shape is very sensitive to the cost structure (fix part versus variable part) of the investment Fix part might be fix, but is not necessarily the same for all plant sizes or for all business areas The cost curve shape is sensitive to applicable U*f values (since these are the determining factors for the area size) If multiple shells are required due to size limits, either the fix part or the Lang factor might need adjustment Small changes in integration might cause a step change in the area cost due to a change in the # of units if size limits are reached

124

Trade-off between energy and capital leads to development of feasible optimum design structures The optimum design structure, apart from few exceptions, is the Pinch design structure Usually,

The Pinch design generates networks that enable lower energy consumption The optimum Pinch design has lower total cost and lower energy consumption at the same time

Even at equal total cost, lower energy consumption offers a strategic advantage on long term

125

Pinch Analysis

Break

126

127

HEN Design

Observations :

In the T/H diagram, the driving force is minimum at the pinch If the design is possible at the pinch - and we know it is then it should also be possible away from the pinch, since the driving force diagram is opening up on both sides

128

HEN Design

Driving force diagram

DT

50 45 40 35 30 25 20 15 10 5 0 0 25 50 75 100 125 150

129

DeltaT/TCold

TCold

130

Design on the flow-sheet is inappropriate Data needed from the flow-sheet are :

Heat load

131

PinchTemp Hot streams

135 135

Hot streams

1 Cp 8 2 Cp 20 180 195 245

30 95

125

125 xx yy

Cold streams

30

3 Cp 12

200

Cp 32

Remark : in the T/H diagram, hot streams go from right to left and cold streams from left to right !

132

Segregate the process in a section above the pinch and a section below the pinch

Keep the two sections apart in order to avoid heat exchange across the pinch For the hot section :

Start the design at the pinch and move upwards Do not use cold utility Start the design at the pinch and move downwards Do not use hot utility

133

Both are feasible : not conclusive

Pinch

Cp 8 Cp 20 1 2 245 195 T Cp 8

135

Cp 12

TMin

H

feasible

T 3 Cp 12

180

Cp 8

200

4 xx

125

Cp 32

Cp 32

TMin H

feasible

134

Only one match feasible

Pinch

Cp 8 Cp 20 1 2 245 195 T Cp 20

135

Cp 12

TMin

H

not feasible

T 3 Cp 12

180

Cp 20

200

4 xx

125

Cp 32

Cp 32

TMin H

feasible

135

Since no cold utility is allowed above the pinch, all hot streams must be cooled down to pinch temperature by heating up cold streams above the pinch If the number of hot streams exceeds the number of cold streams, cold streams have to be split A match between a hot stream and a cold stream is possible if mcp(cold) >= mcp(hot) or : mcp(out) >= mcp(in) If insufficient cold streams can satisfy the above requirement, hot streams have to be split

136

T Cp 8

Pinch

135 60 30 H 1 2 Cp 8 Cp 20

TMin

Cp 12

Not feasible

T

Cp 20

125

20

Cp 12

TMin Cp 12

Feasible

137

Since no hot utility is allowed below the pinch, all cold streams must be heated up to pinch temperature by cooling down hot streams below the pinch If the number of cold streams exceeds the number of hot streams, hot streams have to be split A match between a hot stream and a cold stream is possible if mcp(hot)>=mcp(cold) or mcp(out) >= mcp(in) If insufficient hot streams can satisfy the above requirement, cold streams have to be split

138

Cp 8 Cp 20 1 2

245

195

135

? ?

135

30

95

180

125

30

Cp 12

200

125

Cp 32

139

Cp 8 Cp 20 1 2

245

195

135

? ?

135

30

95

180

125

30

Cp 12

200

125

Cp 32

140

Design

Start with this ?

Cp 8 Cp 20 1 2

Or with this ?

Cp 8 Cp 20 1 2

245

195

a? b?

135

135

245

195

a? b?

135

135

A

180

125 3 125 4 Cp 32 Cp 12

B

180

125 3 125 4 Cp 32 Cp 12

200

200

Cp 8 Cp 20

1 2

245 195

135 135

Cp 8 Cp 20

1 2

245 195

135 135

C

180 200

125

D

3 Cp 12 180

b?

a?

125

b? a?

Cp 32

200

Cp 32

141

Design

Checks A and B reveal possibilities and restrictions, but they do not point towards the main task e.g. cooling down the hot streams through heat exchange Therefore, we should start with C and D

an exclusive answer, so, finally, it is check D that answers the question Reason: stream 2 is the hardest to get cooled down (highest Cp, lowest slope)

142

Design

Start with the hot stream with the highest Cp (= the biggest stream into the pinch) Place pinch matches first

(= the biggest stream into the pinch) Place pinch matches first

143

Yes

Nout>=Nin

No

Yes

Place matches

Split stream in

Tick-off streams

144

Design

217.5

Cp 8 Cp 20 1 2 245 195

135 135

30 95

180

125

30

Cp 12

200

125

Cp 32

145

Design

217.5

Cp 8 Cp 20 1 2

245 195

2 1

135 135

30 95

180 660

125

30

Cp 12

200

H

980

169.4 220

162.5 1200

125

Cp 32

146

Design

217.5

Cp 8 Cp 20 1 2 245 195

2 1

135 135

? ?

30 95

180 660

125

30

Cp 12

200

H

980

169.4 220

162.5 1200

125

Cp 32

147

Design

217.5

Cp 8 Cp 20 1 2 245 195

2 1

135 135

30

58.3 30 3

95

180 660

Cp 12

200

H

980

169.4 220

162.5

Cp 32

148

Design

217.5

Cp 8 Cp 20 1 2 245 195

2 1

135 135

5 4

92.5

C

500

30

95

180 660

58.3

30

340

Cp 12

200

H

980

169.4 220

162.5

Cp 32

149

Design

217.5

Cp 8 Cp 20 1 2 245 195

2 1

135 135

5 4

92.5

C

500

30 95

180 660

58.3

30 340

Cp 12

200

H

980

169.4 220

162.5

Cp 32

150

Design comments

# of units = 5HEX+1H +1C = 7 Min# of units = 6 - 1 = 5

217.5

Cp 8 Cp 20 1 2 245 195 135 135 92.5 30 95

2 1

5 4

C

500

180 660

58.3

30 340

Cp 12

200

H

980

169.4 220

162.5

Cp 32

151

217.5 Cp 8 Cp 20 1 245 195

2 1

135 135

92.5

C

500

30 95

180 660

58.3

30 340

Cp 12

200

H

980

169.4 220

162.5

Cp 32

152

Design Loops and Paths Paths between Hot and Cold utilities

217.5 Cp 8 Cp 20 1 245 195 135 92.5 30 95

2 1

C

500

135

180 660

58.3

30 340

Cp 12

200

H

980

169.4 220

162.5

Cp 32

153

Surface area and HEN cost

Assumptions : Steam @ 220; Cooling water @ 10

1589 1074 7

U*f : 0.2 kW/m,K Design(1) : as previous Design(2) : stream 3 split below pinch (more vertical) Design(3) : Design(2) + 2 heaters (still more vertical)

154

More vertical heat exchange

196.3

Cp 8

245 195

92.5

2 1

135 135

5 4

C

500

30

Cp 20

95

180

H2

170 490

30

Cp 12

200

H1

810

1200

340

155

The most crucial point for the design is at the pinch with the minimum driving force TMin

Since the driving force diagram is widening up away from the pinch, design is always possible The cp-rules (feasibility) are strict at the pinch Away from the pinch, these rules are less rigid to the extent that more driving force is available Matches at the pinch should be placed first

156

In order to minimise the # of units, a feasible match should preferably be maximised However, not too much driving force should be given away in order not to jeopardise the feasibility of the remaining network If a match is feasible, but there is doubt about the size of the load, then the analysis can be repeated for the remaining task If the new targets are higher, then this would indicate that too much driving force was given away and the load of the heat exchanger should be limited

157

Processes can, apart from a real pinch, also have other pinched areas Design rules at the pinch are also very useful for successful design in pinched areas If stream splitting is required, then, preferably, the split ratio of the branches should be adapted to the mcp ratio of the streams to match Target temperatures of the branches should not differ too much in order not to give away driving force And, so far, all heat exchange was assumed to be in counter-current

158

The analysis generates energy targets in terms of required quantity, and also in terms of quality, i.e. temperature level Design for targeted quantities generates the process pinch

Simultaneous design for minimum quality generates an additional pinch, a utility pinch Use of multiple utilities will lead to additional pinched areas, creating utility pinches if pushed too far

159

Pinch Analysis

Part 4 :

Improved targeting procedures

160

Pinch Analysis

Major remaining issues :

The heat transfer coefficient U and the heat exchanger correction factor f are not the same for all streams Consequently, the economic minimum approach temperatures in the heat exchangers are not the same for all units This will require criss-cross heat exchange in order to minimise the surface area The Problem Table algorithm stops at the Threshold

161

Pinch Analysis

Categories threshold problems (1-4)

Temp

150 125 100 75 50 25 0 -50 0 50 100 150

Lumped Curves

Temp

175 150 125 100

Hot Cold

Lumped Curves

Hot 75 50 25 Cold

Heat

200

Heat

250

Temp

175 150 125 100

Lumped Curves

Temp

200 175 150 125

Hot

Lumped Curves

100 75 50 25

Hot Cold

75 50 25 0 -20 0 20 40 60 80

Cold

Heat

100

0 -20 0 20 40 60 80

Heat

100

162

Pinch Analysis

Categories threshold problems (5-8)

Temp

200 175 150 125 100 75 50 25 0 -50 0 50 100 150 200 Hot Cold

Lumped Curves

Temp

200 175 150 125 100 75 50 25

Lumped Curves

Hot Cold

Heat

250

0 0 20 40 60 80

Heat

100

Temp

200 175 150 125 100 75 50 25 0 -50 0 50

Lumped Curves

Temp

200 175 150 125 Hot Cold 100 75 50 25

Lumped Curves

Hot Cold

Heat

100 150 200 250 -50

Heat

300

163

Pinch Analysis

Categories threshold problems (9-10)

Temp

200 175 100 150 125 100 75 50 25 0 0 20 40 60 80 Hot Cold 50 75 Hot Cold

Lumped Curves

Temp

125

Lumped Curves

25

Heat

100 -20

0 0 20 40 60 80

Heat

100

Normally, the pinch is at the beginning of a stream With a threshold problem, and still exceptionally, the pinch can be at the end of a stream In such case, the pinch is at the end of one of the composite curves

164

165

Basis : the Problem Table algorithm Driver : TMin, the minimum approach temperature in the heat exchanger network

UMIST (Sprint)

KBC Linnhoff March (Supertarget, PinchExpress) AspenTech (APinch, ASplit, AWater) Hyprotech (HYSYS, HX-Net, DISTIL) SimSci (Hextran) ChemEng Software and Services (HENSYN)

166

Basis : the Problem Table algorithm Driver : TMin, the minimum approach temperature in the heat exchanger network

dk-TEKNIK (dk-PINCH) Ecole Polytechnique Lausanne (PinchLENI) Univ. of Valladolid (A. Martin - Hint) National Engineering Lab Scottish Enterprise Technology (Heatnet) THEN (Univ. of Austin, Texas)

167

Strengths The problem Table algorithm is easy to use The energy targets can also be calculated with stream dependent TMin Weaknesses If U*f values are different, then stream dependent TMin are mandatory Area target and energy versus capital trade-off are not reliable since disregarding criss-cross heat exchange Developed Heat Exchanger Networks (HEN) can not always be turned into optimum HEN by evolution

168

Opportunities

Notwithstanding the weaknesses, application leads to significantly better insight in heat integration options In most cases, experienced users are capable of realising significant savings The impact of the simplifications (no criss-cross) on the validity of the results is unknown The limitations of the targeting concept and lack of insight in the effect of criss-cross heat exchange threaten the credibility and acceptability of the tool

169

Threats

We dont know, until we compare with a real optimised design Yes there is : the Integration and the Criss-cross algorithms (software package Heatit) The difference between the targeting results and the real design

170

for dealing with stream dependent U*f

by means of

criss-cross heat exchange

171

Some typical heat transfer values

shell & tube U Gas low pressure 1bar Gas high pressure 20 bar Process water Treated cooling water Organic liquid low visc Organic liquid high visc Boiling water Condensing steam Condensing hydrocarbon HP Condensing hydrocarbon LP Cond. Hydrocarb. with inerts kW/m,K 0.110 0.600 1.500 2.500 1.000 0.180 2.100 4.500 1.100 0.400 0.400

172

There is evidence that uniform DTMin values do not guarantee the right energy targets The pinch-stream is not necessarily the stream with the biggest effect

There is evidence that targeting whilst disregarding the effect of criss-cross heat exchange does not guarantee reliable area targets There is need for a better targeting procedure

173

Analysis with variable T-shift and U*f should enable

To anticipate on the effect of unequal U*f values by preparing criss-cross heat exchange

To study the effect of criss-cross heat exchange on the economic integration potential prior to design

To estimate appropriate criss-cross heat exchange as a function of the U*f value To identify the most critical streams that finally determine the economic integration potential

174

A new approach

Based on the Integration Potential, a new algorithm for calculating appropriate energy targets

Calculates energy and area targets with stream-dependent T-shift driven criss-cross Predicts optimum temperatures at the pinch and at all relevant integration sections Positions each stream in the Heat Exchanger Network grid

175

Calculates energy targets with stream-dependent T-shift, anticipating criss-cross heat exchange Energy targets more reliable than with a uniform TMin Driver is not the TMin but the Integration Capable of dealing with Threshold Problems in a flexible way Provides more reliable temperature data for developing HEN suitable for evolution,

176

Calculates area targets with stream-dependent U*f values and criss-cross heat exchange driven by the stream-dependent T-shift Straightforward calculation on a mathematical basis The basic structure of the HEN obtained is closer to the final optimum than the structure developed without criss-cross Enables targeting including reliable energy versus capital trade-off prior to design

177

the Integration algorithm

Available energy = lumped hot curve Required energy = lumped cold curve The maximum potential of integration is determined by the shape of the lumped curves However, whilst constructing the (shifted) lumped curves, introduction of stream-dependent T-shift will enable to calculate more reliable energy targets

178

Adjusted concept :

the Integration algorithm

Procedure :

Check : how much energy can be integrated at each temperature level (e.g. what is the distance between the hot curve and the cold curve) Target : the maximum integration potential equals the minimum distance Action : integrate as you whish, but no more than the limit set by a cross-over in the derived HEN Calculate hot and cold utility targets from the energy balance

179

the Integration algorithm

With the uniform TMin approach, such value is the minimum temperature difference to be preserved in any heat exchanger With the stream specific T-shift, such value is the contribution of the stream concerned to the minimum temperature difference to be preserved in any heat exchanger

The procedure can accept a cross-over of the shifted curves, provided there is no cross-over in the derived HEN

180

the Integration algorithm

Number of variables (pinch temperatures) = N Number of T-shift values = N

Number of known temperatures = 1 (pinch stream)

Number of equations = N

With given T-shift values, pinch temperatures can be calculated for each individual stream

181

the Integration algorithm

Practical application :

T-shift values can be chosen in view of applicable U*f values but shall be optimised during the targeting

The integration procedure that can be set on automatic

Then maximum integration will apply, only limited by the pinch stream with its particular T-shift Then, T-shift only drives the criss-cross heat exchange and can be overruled at the pinch

182

or on manual

The Problem Table algorithm is a special case of the Integration algorithm The starting point of the Problem Table is an integration that equals the total heat requirement of the cold lumped curve. The cross-over at pinch level defines the hot energy target, and, consequently, the cold curve is shifted back to the right over this amount The Integration potential curve has the same shape as the Grand Composite, but not the same position on the T/H diagram

183

184

Example

185

Example

Tem p 300

250

200

T Hot

150

T Cold

186

Example

DT-shift (K) 5

Heating

Area (m) as a function of Heating and DT-shift on stream 2 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 31.5 27.5 25.1 30.4 26.6 24.3 29.6 25.8 23.6 29.1 25.3 23.1 29.1 25.1 22.9 29.7 25.3 22.8 32.8 26.1 23.1

60 80 100

29.3 24.0

27.3

187

Example

m 35.0 32.5 30.0 27.5 25.0 22.5 20.0 0 20 40 60 80 100 DT-shift stream 2 (K)

188

Design with DT = 55 K

Design QH 60 QH 80 QH 100

Example

Design for DT-shift on stream 2 of 55K

92.5

230

170

1

220

110

C

110

30

220

2

155

100

20 50

200

H1

60

185

130

100

4

120

100

120

189

Comparison between Design with sophisticated programming techniques and Design supported by criss-cross optimisation prior to design

190

Example from Gundersen and Grossmann Treated by E. Rev and Z. Fonyo in Diverse Pinch Concept for Heat Exchange Network Synthesis : the Case of Different Heat Transfer Conditions Chemical Engineering Science 1991

191

Example from Gundersen and Grossmann (1988) Minimum approach temperature = 20 K

Data example Gundersen and Grossmann Classic pinch analysis Heat DTmin U*f kW K kW/K,m 1000 1000 1000 1000 1000 1000 1000 1000 10.0 10.0 10.0 10.0 10.0 10.0 0 0 0.10 1.00 1.00 0.10 1.00 1.00 4.00 2.00 Optimum shift for Minimum Minimum Area Cost K K 0 0 0 30 0 7 0 0 0 30 0 20

192

Classic pinch design DTMin = 20 K

300 Hot1 200

200 190

1

Hot2

Area = 674 m

190 170

2

Hot3

C

1000

180

160 Cold1

190

180 Cold2

1000

230

190

H

1000

193

Network optimized with heat exchange across the pinch on the basis of common sense there are no simple algorithms available

300 Hot1 200

Optimum Network

200 190

1

Hot2

Area = 494 m

190 170

2

Hot3

C

1000

180

160 Cold1

190

180 Cold2

1000

230

190

H

1000

194

Initial structure proposed by E. Rev & Z. Fonio (1990)

Diverse pinch (Rev & Fonyo)

300 Hot1 200 Hot2

Area = 647.2 m

200

1 3 4 2

5

190 190 Hot3

C1

176.4 170

C2

823.6

180

160

H1

87.0 706.5 206.5

Cold1 190 180 Cold2 230 190 Cold3 87.0 706.5 117.1 176.4

H2

913.0

Using MINOS 5.1 (professional software for solving simultaneous systems of nonlinear equations) and PROCESS (flowsheet simulator of SimSci)

195

Criss-cross analysis : criss-crossing stream Cold1 : minimum area generated with a DT-shift of 30K

m 700 650 600 550 500 450 400 0.0 10.0 20.0 30.0 40.0 Shift 50.0

196

Criss-cross analysis : criss-crossing stream Cold3 : minimum area generated with a DT-shift of 7K

m 515 510 505 500 495 490 485 0.0 5.0 10.0 15.0 20.0 25.0 Shift 30.0

197

Network with DT-shift for minimum area (Cold1 : 30K - Cold3 : 7K)

Design with minimum area

300 Hot1

Area = 490.7 m

1a 1b 3

200

200 Hot2

190

2

190 Hot3 170

C

1000

180

160

H1

216.67 433.33 350

230

H2

783.33 216.67

190 Cold3

1000

198

Network with DT-shift for simplified network (Cold1 : 30K - Cold3 : 20 K)

300 Hot1 200

Optimum Network

200 190

1

Hot2

Area = 494 m

190 170

2

Hot3

C

1000

180

230

190

H

1000

Cold3 PINCH

199

Results Method Classic Area m 674.07 Cost KEUR 113.5 N of HE N of steps to optimum 4 Measure

Optimum design

494.36

97.7

Diverse pinch (E. Rev and Z. Fonio) first candidate design 647.19 181.5 Criss-cross analysis (minimum area) one unique design 490.70 132.8

10

shifting loads through loops and paths eliminate HEX N3 (H1 disappears) None

Criss-cross analysis continued (shift C3 from 7K to 20K) one unique design 494.36 97.7 4 0

200

Example from: Developments in the Sequential Framework for Heat Exchanger Network Synthesis of Industrial size problems Dept. of Energy and Process Engineering Norwegian Institute of Science and Technology Trondheim (NTNU) Presented by Ananthamaran & Gundersen, at ESCAPE-16 & PSE 2006

201 201

Tsupply C 353 347 255 224 116 53 40 377 20 Ttarget C 313 246 80 340 303 113 293 377 35 Heat kW 392.08 296.03 1078.18 832.76 119.87 457.62 427.57 244.13 172.60 Shift K 0.0 36.0 0.0 4.0 11.0 50.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 U*f kW/K,m 1.25 0.05 3.20 0.65 0.25 0.33 3.20 3.50 3.50 Description H1 H2 H3 C1 C2 C3 C4 Heating Cooling

202

203

204

205

Example textile Coating - Washing Drying Pinch analysis criss-cross versus classic

206 206

Classic

Temp 140 120 100 80

Hot

Cold

Heat 2500

207 207

Temp 160 140 120 100 80 60 40 20 0 0.0 500.0 1000.0

Hot Cold

208 208

Classic : Pinch at 25C

Temp 160 140 120 100 80 60 40 20 0 0.0 100.0 200.0 300.0 400.0 500.0 Heat

Grand Composite

209 209

Criss-crossing ingoing air streams

m 720.0 710.0 700.0 690.0 680.0 670.0 660.0 650.0 640.0 0.0 10.0 20.0 Shift 30.0

210 210

Criss-cross : Pinch at 105C

Temp 160 140 120 100 80 60 40 20 0 0.0 100.0 200.0 300.0 400.0 Heat

Grand Composite

211 211

Fitted Surface; Variable: Oppervlak 4 factors, 1 Blocks, 26 Runs; MS Residual=.0104947 DV: Oppervlak

212

Grid (classic) pinch caused by 3 ingoing air streams with interaction [hot water streams/air] and [air/air]

Trommel lucht uit VD totaal afgas HO totaal afgas waterafvoer voorwas Waterafvoer bad2

50 115 105 84.69 105 84.69 84 84 84 69.31 69.31 69.31 60 60 60 45 45 34.95 34.95 30 30 26.2 26.2 20 20 50

130

86.3

78.65

50 50 50

40 40 40 40 40

24.6 24.6

20 20 15

24.6 24.6

20

15

213 213

Grid (criss-cross) pinch caused by 1 outgoing air stream, ingoing air streams interacting with air streams only

Trommel lucht uit VD totaal afgas HO totaal afgas waterafvoer voorwas Waterafvoer bad2

50 115 105 105 84 84 84 73.63 73.6 73.6 60 60 60 45 45 40.3 40.3 33.5 33.5 26.2 26.2 20 20 55.65 50

130

111

86.3

78.6

49.0

31 50 50

20.0 39.0 39.0 39.0 39.0 36.7 36.7 36.7 36.7 32.2 32.2 32.2 32.2 24.6 24.6 15 24.6 15

214 214

Conclusion (1)

The new targeting procedure is capable of calculating the surface area required, including effects of unequal U-values and with criss-cross heat exchange Consequently, by steering the criss-cross heat exchange, it is possible to find the minimum surface area required The algorithm generates temperatures required to guide design for achieving energy targets and approaching area targets Heat transfer across the pinch is avoided by correct positioning of the streams in the HEN grid

215

Conclusion (2)

The algorithm generates targets that are much closer to feasible design than those obtained with classic targeting algorithms For assessment of existing designs, calculation of pinch violations by transfer of heat across the pinch is significantly more accurate than with uniform DTmins The procedure improves the quality of, and adds value to, the Analysis prior to design approach by offering a more qualified reference point from which to start the design phase

216

Heat Integration

Break

217

Heat Integration

218

Dept. of Energy and Process Engineering Norwegian Institute of Science and Technology Trondheim (NTNU) Presented by Ananthamaran & Gundersen, at ESCAPE-16 & PSE 2006

219 219

Pinch Methods for Network Design Improper trade-off handling Time consuming Several topological traps MINLP Methods for Network Design Severe numerical problems Difficult user interaction Fail to solve large scale problems Stochastic Optimization Methods for Network Design Non-rigorous algorithms Quality of solution depends on time spent on search

Source : NTNU

220 220

The approach at NTNU : the Sequential Framework Engine

Adjust EMAT

2

1

New HLD

Preoptim.

HRAT

LP

QH QC

MILP

(EMAT=0)

U

EMAT

Vertical MILP

HLD

NLP

3 4

Final

Network

221 221

222 222

Design

Pinch Analysis

Inspection & Simplification

223 223

Design Engine

Spaghetti Network Generator

Loop Detector Surface Area Reducer # HEX Reducer (down to N-1) HEN Cost Calculator

224 224

225 225

Example Problem 9SP Data Set

Tsupply C 327 220 220 160 100 35 85 60 140 330 15 Ttarget C 40 160 60 45 300 164 138 170 300 250 30 Heat MW 28700 9600 9600 46000 20000 9030 18550 6600 32000 24000 31720 U*f Descript. kW/K,m 0.500 0.400 0.140 0.300 0.350 0.700 0.500 0.140 0.600 0.500 0.500 H1 H2 H3 H4 C1 C2 C3 C4 C5 Heating Cooling

226 226

9SP Trade- Off

Cost(NPV)

4000 3500 3000 2500 2000 1500 1000 500 0 15000

20000

25000

30000

35000

40000

Invest

Util

Total

Heating

227 227

9SP Trade- Off - Detail

Cost(NPV)

2940 2930 2920 2910 2900 2890 23000 23500 24000

Crisscross

24500

Classic

25000

25500

Heating

228 228

Published optimum Heat Exchanger Networks Example 9SP Linnhoff and Ahmad (1990) (1) Zhu and O'Neill (1995) (1) Lewin (1998) Liporace et al. (2001) Fieg et al. (2009) (1) Avila-Diaz (2008) This research

(1) (2) (2) (1) (1)

229 229

To close in much faster towards an optimum design

Optimum design

230

Attachments

231

Heat Integration

Attachment 1

Example drying tunnel Pinch analysis also appropriate for simple problems

232

Heat Integration

Drying tunnel

Drying process

Off-gas from gas motor 525C 445 kW 224C 193 kW Off-gas Air leaks Drying tunnel 34C Ambiant air 122C 137C 118C Stack 90C Hot water from gas motor 84 kW 70C

270C

123C

59C

233

Heat integration

The drying tunnel Working session

Drying process as found

Flue gas from gas motor 525C 445 kW 224C 193 kW 122C 137C 118C Stack 90C Hot water from gas motor 84 kW 70C

Air leaks

Offgas

270C

123C

59C

234

Heat integration

Drying tunnel stream dataset 1

Drying tunnel Data set 1 Tsupply Ttarget Heat DTMin U*f Description C C kW K kW/K,m 33.9 58.8 122.8 270.2 525.0 223.7 122.0 135.9 90.0 58.8 122.8 270.2 353.0 223.7 135.9 135.9 118.0 70.0 83.8 193.3 445.2 250.1 444.7 129.6 129.6 193.3 83.7 7 7 7 7 7 0 0 7 7 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05 1.00 fresh air air in air in air in CHP flue gas CHP flue gas off gas off gas Cooling water mcp kW/K 3.366 3.020 3.020 3.020 1.476 1.476 9.322 10.798 4.187

235

Heat integration

Drying tunnel stream dataset 1

Temp 600

Saving potential ?

Grand Composite

500

400

300

200

100

236

Heat integration

Drying tunnel stream dataset 2

Drying tunnel Data set 2 Tsupply Ttarget Heat DTMin U*f Description C C kW K kW/K,m 33.9 122.0 525.0 90.0 353.0 90.0 90.0 70.0 963.7 298.3 642.1 83.7 7 7 7 7 0.05 0.05 0.05 1.00 air in off gas CHP flue gas Cooling water

237

Heat integration

Drying tunnel stream dataset 2

Temp 600

Lumped Curves

500

400

THot TCold

300

200

238

Heat integration

Drying tunnel stream dataset 2

Temp 600

Saving potential ?

Grand Composite

500

400

300

200

100

0 0.0 50.0 100.0 150.0 200.0 250.0 300.0 350.0 400.0 Heat

239

Heat integration

Drying tunnel pinch violations

PINCH 137C B1a 45 kW 132C B1b 103 kW 122C B1c 46 kW 118C

123C B1a 45 kW

74C B1c 46 kW

59C

240

Heat integration

Drying tunnel optimised

Flue gas from gas motor 525C

595 kW 122C 217 kW 122C 122C 100C Stack

Air leaks

Offgas

303C

106C

Remark : we do not need the CHP cooling water !!! The rotating heat exchanger is the same as before

241

242

Chemicals Distillation As found

x

CW 120C CW 110C

H

11 t/h 10 t/h

243

Chemicals - Distillation Steam consumption Given situation Four solutions : 1. Install CHP 2. Vapour recompression : 21 t/h

: 21 t/h : 10 t/h + 350 kW 3. Adjust operating parameters p/T + heat integration : 10 t/h 4. Innovative sequencing : 7 t/h

244

Chemicals Distillation Vapour recompression

Lumped Curves

THot

Grand Composite

100 80 60 40 20

TCold

Heat 30000

245

Chemicals Distillation Vapour recompression

y

CW 120C NX(x,y,z) 50C 120C 140C 150C 130C 30C

x

350 kW

110C

H

10 t/h

246

Chemicals Distillation Adjusted parameters p/T for heat integration

Temp 180 160 140 120 100 80 60 40 20 0 0 5000 10000 15000 Heat 20000

THot TCold

Lumped Curves

Grand Composite

2000.0

3000.0

4000.0

5000.0

247

Chemicals Distillation Heat integration

x

CW 130C 100C

NX(x,y,z)

P

50C 120C

160C

120C

30C

H

10 t/h

248

Chemicals Distillation Innovative sequencing

CW

x+ y

y +z H z

30C

249

Example 2 - Distillation

First modification

v C

165C 94C

v

2760 kW 96C

x C

773 kW 124C

y C

128 kW

.067 bar

0.4 bar

210C

(v,x,y,z)

178C 650 kW

148C 1593 kW

165C

.03 bar

181C 513 kW

5 bar

H

99 kW

z

Courtesy of BASF

250

Example 2 - Distillation

Second modification

v v C

161C 113C 55C

v y C

124C

.067 bar

1.0 bar

5 bar

.03 bar

181C

H 99 kW

210C

H 308 kW z

Courtesy of BASF

251

(v,x,y,z)

Example 2 Distillation

Results Without integration : 2855 kW = 100%

252

Example 3 - Distillation

First modification

253

Example 3 - Distillation

Second modification

254

Example 3 - Distillation

Results W/O integration With integration Modification 1 Modification 2 : 27.47 MW = 100.% : 21.50 MW = 78.3% : 13.16 MW = 47.9% : 9.19 MW = 33.5%

Improved sequencing

255

Heat Integration

Process constraints Utilities Furnaces Combined Heat and Power Heat pumps

256

Accept reasonable process constraints However, Identify soft temperatures, if any Differentiate between process driven and design driven constraints Consider intermediate heat transfer medium if appropriate Trace the origin of the constraint After no because, try yes if Avoid elaborating the right solution for the wrong question

257

Evaluate appropriate use of multiple utilities, but Dont push too far, since

At the limit, a utility pinch will emerge The design will become more complex and expensive Infrastructure cost will increase

Include the use of the utilities in the global optimisation (use of condensate, maximum heat recovery from flue gas, ...)

258

Maximise the use of the flue gas Include optimisation of the furnace design (air preheat, fuel preheat, ...) Evaluate flue gas generated in CHP

259

Heat from CHP should be used there where heat is really needed, e.g. above the pinch ! Evaluate total site requirements first Optimise individual plant operations before investing in site infrastructure Invest in utilities only for the remaining mandatory requirements Invest in CHP if there is sufficient mandatory baseload on long term

260

It should pick-up heat where there is excess, i.e. below the pinch

It should deliver heat to where heat is needed, i.e. above the pinch

A heat pump entirely above the pinch is equivalent with electric heating A heat pump entirely below the pinch will dump the power used into the cooling water

261

Other rules

for assessing energy efficiency

262

Choices that have impact on energy use :

Operating parameters of Unit operations Heat integration Utility supply infrastructure Be aware of the technology trap ! ! !

263

Corporation knows the specificities of each process and can differentiate between justified and not justified differences Energy (and feedstock) efficiency is a competitive edge (in terms of cost)

Particularities :

264

All processes can be equally good But also equally bad Reason : p.ex. : particular company strategy regarding utilities principle and infrastructure Criterion based on physics and thermodynamics Exergy analysis (theoretical) Heat integration analysis (practical tools available) Check state-of-the-art of process unit operations

265

Tells us where we stand compared with the others However, ... its all relative ... being the best does not mean yet that we are good enough Tells us where we stand compared with where we could stand Confirms whether we are good enough And tells us where to cure if we are not

Bottom up approach :

266

Conclusion

Minimise consumption first Then optimise utility system for supplying the unavoidable (mandatory) remaining demand

Heat integration has become an essential part of modern process design Pinch Analysis has proven to be a practical tool for determining reasonable minimum energy and capital requirements

267

Heat Integration

Attachment 5 Overview Potential Savings Areas Example : Chemicals and Petrochemicals

268

Petrochemical facility Utilities area

Process flows

Boiler efficiency (air preheat, excess oxygen, ) Steam traps Insulation Condensate return Cogeneration

269

Petrochemical facility

Process flows

Given: process hot streams & cold streams Principle: maximum heat recovery through optimised heat exchanger networks How : heat exchangers, heat pumps,

270

Process flows Process parameter optimisation

Adjustment of operating parameters of Reactors (T) Distillation columns (P, T, feed conditions, reflux) With a view to increased heat integration

Process concepts

271

Process unit operations

Alternative distillation sequencing (increased thermodynamic efficiency) Integration of reactors with heat duties (reducing or eliminating driving forces)

Process concepts

Alternative processes

272

Process unit operations

Alternative processes

273

0 to ++++ ++ to +++ 0 to ++ - - - to +

Process heat recovery : Parameter optimisation : Flow sheet optimisation : Alternative processes :

274

Mission statement

and manufacturing

275

Contact

Daniel Declercq Pinchco bvba Tel. +32 3 666 52 54 Fax +32 3 666 11 38 E-mail daniel.declercq@pinchco.com Website www.energyconsultants.biz

276

- FE1001 Physics 1 Time Table - Sem 2 10-11 Updated 190111Uploaded bylingkala
- Science Test1Uploaded byMukhtaar Case
- natural convection in air heater-6.1.2015.pdfUploaded bykarnangokul
- PhysicsUploaded byyohanes_putranto
- Wikibooks - Engineering ThermodynamicsUploaded byJuliano Rodrigues Brianeze
- a109210305 ThermodynamicsUploaded bynveman
- hvac-sml_optUploaded bySameera Rao
- ChBE+2100+Syllabus+Fall+2015+081815Uploaded byAbishek Kasturi
- General Maintenance TestUploaded bywtyreejr
- 1Uploaded byArun V Nair
- 201052176567601Uploaded byArun Ab
- What Makes a Great Workplace White PaperUploaded byShailendra Kelani
- 1993_Distillation Column TargetsUploaded byOctaviano Maria Oscar
- lecture1_3.pdfUploaded byCal
- Calculating Heating SystUploaded byjohnking5555
- Dutypoint Dirt & Air Separators.pdfUploaded bydokundot
- Process Dynamic ModellingUploaded bythenmolhi
- Steam System Opportunity Assessment for the Pulp & Paper, Chemical Manufacturing & Petroleum Refining Industries - AppendicesUploaded byVishal Duggal
- HVAC Presentation-3 PowerUploaded bymodat
- Energy Saving solutions in Restaurant.pdfUploaded byRuby Pham
- 8Uploaded byhafizrahimmit
- control valve selectionUploaded byatiqula
- ResultsUploaded byConniefer Choi
- EME_1_SemQuestionsUploaded byKalyani Sethuraman
- 40940 User Guide Tp600 and Tp400 Standard Menus (2)Uploaded byjkasmire
- Radiation Hydro HotelUploaded byMohamad Shukri
- Aid Sheet TestUploaded bydavid
- OIQ Mechanical Reference TextbooksUploaded byAnonymous scnl9rH
- GEASUploaded byJulius Erick Evangelista
- Feasibility Study FINAL 1-27-2011 (2)Uploaded byamirlove206

- Transcript Hairie OfficcialUploaded byherrtang
- Demokrasi BerparlimenUploaded byMohd Faizal Bin Yahaya
- Proses Penggubalan Undang-undangUploaded byherrtang
- Full Transcript HairieUploaded byherrtang
- Chlorine PriceUploaded byherrtang
- Butadiene Petchem PresentationUploaded byherrtang
- Guide to Set Up RheometerUploaded byherrtang
- spmbab7Uploaded byNik Nur Azmina Azhar
- Present PM CostingUploaded byherrtang
- Lab 3Uploaded byMohammad Hobbs
- ! Reakcije Hlora Sa Neorganskim i Organskim JedinjenjimaUploaded bySilvester Kolic
- Eh 220 OutlineUploaded byWan Mohammad Faris Fahmi
- w7 Isometric DrawingUploaded byherrtang
- Process EngineerUploaded byherrtang
- 13.Opflow-2008-Chlorine-Gas-vs.-Sodium-Hypochlorite.pdfUploaded byherrtang
- Unattended Install HelpUploaded byBeto Rivera
- Guideline Thesis 2013 IPSISUploaded byherrtang
- FSPUUploaded byherrtang

- 72498_04.pdfUploaded byJuan Carlos Robles Resurreccion
- Common Laboratory OperationsUploaded byJose Galera
- 2013-42-Nikoukar.pdfUploaded byisaacamankwaa
- Bessel Stirling Formula Numerical AnalysisUploaded byomed
- Dynamic Inversion of Nonlinear Maps with Applications to Nonlinear Control and RoboticsUploaded byteuap
- yagi uda antennaAntenna DocumentationUploaded byBenjielon Pascual
- MODELLING OF MOBILE ROBOT DYNAMICSUploaded bykostya_4524
- Car Seat DesignUploaded byKasi Balamurugan
- Master Thesis Michal VolfUploaded byshank100
- Measurement SensitivityUploaded byMustafa Erbakan
- Cooling Moist Air - Sensible CoolingUploaded bylocbaonguyen
- An Overview on Natural Rubber Application for Asphalt ModificationUploaded byfarahazura
- Practical Aspects of 51V and 93Nb Solid-state NMR SpectroscopyUploaded byTiago Entradas
- Acetone MO 1Uploaded bykasliwalrajesh
- 15 FCI Examen SpanishUploaded byCésar Diaz
- 9A21702 Vibrations and Structural DynamicsUploaded bysivabharathamurthy
- Intensity Scales1Uploaded byWaQar Saleem
- engadvanced_concept_training_-_adv._concrete_modules__en1992.pdfUploaded byJevgenijsKolupajevs
- HALO Phenyl-Hexyl Care UseUploaded byrpbpa
- Sensor Controller CatalogUploaded byserdang
- Keep 506Uploaded byrajatgupt
- Ejercicios_FluidosUploaded byAle Fernandez
- Solved Problem 04Uploaded byAbdullah Simpson
- SUMP TANKUploaded byAgus Marpaung
- White Paper Meshing in TdUploaded byRaturi Deepankar
- FRC TunnelUploaded byrameshkaa
- Size Effects in the Li4 xTi5O12 Spinel.pdfUploaded byVandam65
- hydrocarbonsUploaded byliaurmaza
- mar11Uploaded byTarun
- A1(D) Bessel FormulaUploaded byDeepak Sharma