0263–8762/02/$23.50+0.

00
# Institution of Chemical Engineers
www.catchword.com=titles=02638762.htm Trans IChemE, Vol 80, Part A, September 2002

LONG-TERM SCHEDULING OF CLEANING OF

HEAT EXCHANGER NETWORKS
Comparison of Outer Approximation-based Solutions
with a Backtracking Threshold Accepting Algorithm
F. SMAÏLI, V. S. VASSILIADIS and D. I. WILSON
Department of Chemical Engineering, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK

M
anagement of cleaning of heat exchanger networks (HENs) subject to signiŽ cant
fouling plays an important role in oil reŽ nery heat recovery network economics.
Recent studies have shown that where this can be applied1;2, signiŽ cant beneŽ ts can
be achieved in, for instance, reducing Ž red-heater duties over the operating horizon considered.
These previous approaches have focused on using outer approximation (OA) based formula-
tions and solution techniques to solve the associated mixed integer-nonlinear programming
problem (MINLP) involving binary decision variables describing when and which unit to clean
in a multi-period formulation. In parallel to this avenue, this work explores the options offered
by stochastic optimization techniques for combinatorial problems applied to the HEN cleaning
problem. A particular method, the backtracking threshold accepting algorithm (BTA) is
developed, derived from the standard threshold accepting algorithm (TA), which is related to
the class of methods typiŽ ed by simulated annealing (SA). Two large-scale case studies are
considered: one involving 14 heat exchanger units, and one involving 25 units. Both are
tackled by the OA and BTA approaches: the latter proved able to handle larger problems, for
example, with more time intervals or exchangers, than the commercial OA solver used.

Keywords: fouling; heat exchanger networks; scheduling; optimization; MINLP.

INTRODUCTION (MINLP) and using suitable commercial solvers to obtain

The management of cleaning in heat exchanger networks
(HENs) subject to fouling has signiŽ cant industrial impor-
tance. First, networks subject to fouling experience deterior-
ating heat transfer efŽ ciency, which may eventually fall
below design and operating speciŽ cations. The situation
may become so acute that operation of the network, and
the associated processes relying on it, are rendered inoper-
able without extensive cleaning. Secondly, operational
requirements may be met, but at the expense of signiŽ cantly
increased utility consumption: increase in Ž red heater duties,
pumping pressures, steam consumption, and cooling stream
 ow rates. These re ect directly on process economics and
environmental impact (e.g., via carbon dioxide taxes). An
important example of such a network is the preheat train on
an oil reŽ nery crude distillation unit, where several exchan-
gers are used to recover heat from the distillate streams and
fouling is often a signiŽ cant problem.
Long-term planning of cleaning actions for HENs is
possible, as shown by Smaõ¨li et al.2 , and also by Georgiadis
and co-workers3;4 . The methodology adopted by these
workers relies on formulating the cleaning problem as a
multi-period mixed integer-nonlinear programming problem
solutions. The good results reported, in terms of actual
improvement of process economics, motivate further
research into techniques that can generate sensible schedules
for long-term planning, such that results can be obtained
quickly and reliably, thereby allowing effective considera-
tion of different operating parameters and constraint scena-
rios. This latter aspect is particularly important where the
quality of input data for fouling models is poor (or unavai-
lable), or where the operator wishes to review existing
schedules on the basis of new data, or in an adaptive mode.
Although the multi-period MINLP formulation concep-
tually affords the rigour of mathematical programming, it
suffers from some drawbacks. It is, Ž rstly, expensive to
solve, with the cost of using branch and bound (B&B) based
techniques increasing with the number of units and periods
involved in the model. The number of binary decision
variables, describing when and which unit to clean, is the
product of the periods and units considered. ‘Classical’
optimization techniques have yet to be developed for
problems featuring thousands of binary and continuous
variables as encountered in large scheduling problems.
Without considering special global optimization techniques,
it is prudent to consider other heuristic techniques. In the

561
562
absence of ‘classical’ optimization techniques, these other
heuristic approaches are potentially equally valid for gene-
rating cleaning schedules to aid engineers make decisions
on the operation and cleaning of HENs subject to fouling.
Secondly, we note at this point that the multi-period
formulation used to generate the MINLP problem represents
the application of a heuristic to the scheduling problem. By
subdividing the time horizon into regular periods in which
cleaning actions may (or may not) be performed, the
 exibility of the schedule is reduced. The truly global
optimum schedule may require non-regular spacing of
events in time, such that the MINLP formulation may only
be able to approximate, for example, from several similar
solutions. Flexibility could be maintained by using a large
number of periods (Ž ne discretization), at a cost associated
with increased problem size.
The remainder of this work focuses on presenting the
HEN cleaning problem and scheduling of cleaning actions
in a multi-period setting as a mathematical programming
formulation. The backtracking threshold accepting algorithm
(BTA) is presented, suitably modiŽ ed for the HEN cleaning
problem, along with a comparison to results obtained over
the same problems using the MINLP formulations utilizing
the outer approximation method (OA)5 . The BTA algorithm
is implemented in standard ANSI C directly, while the OA
method is accessed through the solver DICOPT 5 within the
GAMS mathematical programming language6 .
THE HEN MINLP FORMULATION
UNDER FOULING
A heat exchanger network consists of a number of hot and
cold input streams, which pass through a set of heat transfer
units in a Ž xed conŽ guration, as shown in Figure 1. Each
unit may be taken off line for cleaning without interrupting
the process; the conŽ guration is temporarily changed while
the relevant hot and cold streams either bypass the unit or
are diverted to another exchanger. The formulation
presented here is based on the following assumptions:
(1) Constant inputs—heat capacity  ow rates. We consider
here the situation where the network is working under
constant input  ow and temperature conditions, that is,
corresponding to the maximum throughput scenario.
Seasonal variations in  ow rate could be considered in
the multi-period formulation if necessary. This assump-
tion precludes the use of inter-period optimization in
Figure 1. Schematic diagram of a heat exchanger network (circle, heat
exchanger; C, cold utility; H, hot utility).
SMAÏLI et al.
order to maximize performance, for example, by adjust-
ing  ow rates between parallel sets of units with
different extents of fouling. Constant values of Cp are
used within each unit.
(2) Fouling rate models used. Heat exchanger performance
and fouling effects are modelled using a lumped para-
meter approach. Equation (1) shows how the overall
heat transfer coefŽ cient, U , is related to the coefŽ cient
when the exchanger is clean, U0 , and the fouling
resistance, Rf .
Rf thus combines tube-side, shell-side, and  ow pattern
effects.
1 1
Rf …t† ˆ ¡ …1†
U …t† Uclean
The fouling resistance changes over time, with several
different behaviours being observed in practice7 . The
work presented here uses a linear fouling model with
constant parameters, based on plant data reconciliation.
Rf …t† ˆ Rf 0 ‡ at …2†
where a is a constant, and Rf 0 is the initial fouling
resistance. The use of other fouling models in the
scheduling problem has been investigated by Smaõ¨li
et al.8 The use of constant fouling rate parameters is
justiŽ ed on the grounds that the temperature range in
each unit does not vary signiŽ cantly over the total time
period, and constant  ow rates maintain similar bulk
velocity, wall shear stress, and residence time condi-
tions. Moreover, the variation in feedstock composition
in a typical HEN operation is likely to render the use of
more sensitive models inappropriate.
(3) Pressure drop. The effect of fouling on the pressure
drop across an exchanger is often as important as its
effect on the unit’s thermal performance. The reduction
in  ow area resulting from accumulated deposits will
result in higher velocities through the unit and conse-
quently increased pressure drop. Pressure drop effects
are therefore acknowledged to be important, but are not
considered in detail here. Such effects have been
discussed elsewhere8 . Under the constant  ow rate
assumption, there will exist a maximum tolerable pres-
sure drop over a unit or group of units, effectively
imposing a particular operating constraint on the
model. One of the difŽ culties posed by pressure drop
considerations is obtaining a reliable mapping between
the effects of fouling on the thermal and hydraulic
performances of an exchanger. The relationship is
usually nonlinear, and depends strongly on whether
fouling occurs on both sides of the heat transfer surface,
and whether uneven  ow leads to tube blockage.
The aim of the mathematical model is to determine which
unit should be cleaned and when. Each unit n over each
period p can be represented by a binary variable y where
»
1; if unit n is on-line over period p
yn;p ˆ
0; otherwise
Trans IChemE, Vol 80, Part A, September 2002
 LONG-TERM SCHEDULING OF CLEANING OF HENs 563

and where the following are sets of indices used to describe The multi-period approach features discretizing the time
the network: horizon into NP equal periods (time slots) where each is
further split into a ‘cleaning interval’ (length Dtccl ) and a
p is the period number …1; . . . ; NP†; ‘processing interval’ (length Dtppr ), as shown in Figure 2.
n is the unit number …1; . . . ; NE† For unit n within period p, the heat transfer coefŽ cients in
the cleaning and in the processing intervals are related to the
where NP is the number of periods and NE is the number of corresponding heat transfer coefŽ cients from the previous
units. period:
Each heat exchanger unit is modelled here as a single pass pr
counter-current unit. Other models could be used as cl
Un;p¡1
required, without loss of generality in the approach. The Un;p ˆ …8†
1 ‡ U pr ¢ R_ f n ¢ Dtpcl
n;p¡1
following equations are written for one unit and are repeated
for each exchanger in the network. cl
Un;p
The heat balance is given by pr
Un;p ˆ ¢ y ‡ Uclean ¢ …1 ¡ yn;p †
cl ¢ R
1 ‡ Un;p _ f n ¢ Dtppr n;p
Q ˆ Fh ¢ Cph ¢ …Tinh ¡ Tout
h
† …3†
…9†
on the hot side and by
where Rfn is the fouling rate of each unit in each interval.
c
Q ˆ Fc ¢ Cpc ¢ …Tout ¡ Tinc † …4† Dtppr and Dtccl are Ž xed. Dtccl represents the time that a unit
must be taken out of service in order to effect cleaning: Dtppr
on the cold side. The  ow rates Fh and Fc may vary if is an operating window—such as weekends—when cleaning
cleaning actions cause the local conŽ guration to change, and is not allowed, and may have zero length.
(typically) the hot stream from one unit is diverted to The fouling rate for each unit is constant and is given by
another unit operating in parallel.
The heat exchanger performance is given by R_ f n ˆ an …10†
Q ˆ U ¢ A ¢ DTLM …5† Unit temperatures in each interval are then calculated
by simultaneously solving the equations describing the
where DTLM is the logarithmic mean temperature difference. network: the above exchanger performance relationships,
Simulation of the network involves rating equations and and conŽ guration equations describing  ow splitting,  ow
the performance of each unit is calculated explicitly using mixing, and recycle.
the NTU-effectiveness method; see, for example, reference
9. The outlet temperatures are calculated from the inlet
temperatures via the rearranged equations (3) to (5): Objective
Á !
Fc ¢ Cpc The objective function to be minimized is the total cost
h h c
Tout ˆ Tin ¡ …Tout ¡ Tinc † …6† incurred due to the loss of performance of the network:
Fh ¢ Cph … tF NE X
X NP

and ‰CE …t† ‡ Cm …t† ‡ Cf …t†Š ¢ dt ‡ Cc;n0 …1 ¡ yn0 ;p0 †

( " Á !# ) 0 n0 ˆ1 p0 ˆ1
U ¢ A ¢ yn;p Fh ¢ Cph …11†
exp ¡ ¡1 ¡1
Fc ¢ Cpc Fc ¢ Cpc
Á ! where NC is the number of cleanings and the costs Cj are:
h
Fh ¢ Cph CE ˆ extra energy required due to fouling, provided by
£ Tin ¡ ¡ 1 ¢ Tinc
Fc ¢ Cpc heating and cooling utilities,
c
Tout ˆ " Á !# Cc ˆ cleaning costs incurred for cleaning operations and
U ¢ A ¢ yn;p Fh ¢ Cph Fh ¢ Cph
exp ¡ ¡1 ¡ chemical treatment,
Fc ¢ Cpc Fc ¢ Cpc Fc ¢ Cpc Cm ˆ extra maintenance costs caused by fouling-related
…7† effects (e.g., replacement of furnace tubes due to
prolonged operation at high temperatures), and
giving a set of nonlinear equations describing the inlet and
Cf ˆ opportunity cost—lost production owing to reduc-
outlet temperatures in the network. U is the heat transfer
tion in throughput caused by fouling.
coefŽ cient, A is the area, Fc is the cold stream  owrate, Fh is
the hot stream  owrate, Cpc is the cold stream heat capacity, Inspection of equation (11) indicates that if the cleaning
and Cph is the hot stream heat capacity. Note that equation costs are insigniŽ cant compared to the energy costs,
(7) incorporates the effect of bypassing a unit whenever it is the objective takes the form of maximizing energy recovery.
isolated for cleaning, by setting Toutc ˆ Tc . We consider here the case where Cm ˆ Cf ˆ 0 and Cc is the
in

Figure 2. Decomposition of the time horizon.

Trans IChemE, Vol 80, Part A, September 2002

564 SMAÏLI et al.
same for all units. A CE value of 0:34 £ kW¡1 day¡1 is used
in both case studies.
Furthermore, it is noteworthy that equation (11) does not
consider the state of the network after the Ž nal time tF ,
which has signiŽ cant impact on the schedules generated.
The schedules generated under this objective function could
be inoperable later on, incurring signiŽ cant cleaning costs.
Consideration of extended operation (post tF ) would require
an amended objective function, such as by adding penalty
terms related to the network efŽ ciency at tF .
Constraints
The scheduling problem seeks the set of cleaning deci-
sions that minimizes the objective function (11). Each case
to be considered will feature its own constraint set, which
can involve binary and=or continuous variables (e.g.,
Appendix A and Appendix B). The constraints frequently
take the following forms, which may vary from period to
period and=or unit to unit as the problem requires.
Simple performance targets
The values of individual continuous variables in the
network, particularly temperatures, may be subject to
bounds or limits, for example,
T L < Tout
h
< TU …12†
Particular examples on oil reŽ nery heat preheat trains are the
inlet crude temperature to a  ash tank or desalter, and ‘run-
down’ temperatures of hot streams. Cleaning decisions that
would cause violation of these constraints are therefore
excluded.
Complex performance targets
Several performance targets involve combinations of
continuous and=or binary variables, which introduce signif-
icant complexity or bilinearities into the problem formula-
tion. An example on an oil reŽ nery is a furnace Ž ring limit,
where there exists a maximum heating duty in the furnace.
The heat required will depend on both the  ow rate and
temperature of the incoming stream(s). In the work reported
here, the constant  ow rate assumption reduces such a limit
into a simple constraint, based on inlet temperatures. Our
experience is that such constraints can often render the
scheduling problem intractable or very difŽ cult to solve,
and thus we do not consider local control actions such as
partial bypassing of exchangers in order to avoid pressure
drop limits.
Selection constraints
Operational protocols and management strategy will
frequently result in restrictions on the allowed combination
of cleaning actions. For instance, a unit will rarely be
allowed to be cleaned immediately after it has been returned
to service; thus can be expressed as:
yn;p ‡ yn;p‡1 ¶ 1 …13†
Selection constraints can also be used to preclude combina-
tions of cleaning decisions that would automatically lead to
violations of performance targets. These combinations may
be known from experience, or identiŽ ed by simulation. Such
constraints both reduce the number of network simulations
and the size of the combinatorial problem.
STOCHASTIC SEARCH METHODS:
SA, TA, AND BTA
The use of stochastic solution techniques arises from cases
of practical combinatorial optimization problems that either
because of their size, or because of their inherent complex-
ity, are very difŽ cult to obtain good solutions with determi-
nistic methods.
In particular, the introduction of the simulated annealing
method (SA) by Kirkpatrick et al.10 has inspired a multitude
of either direct variants or of related methods, all of which
have found successful application in niche combinatorial
problems providing stochastically good solutions. SA has
become an extremely popular method in practically every
Ž eld that in one way or another touches upon combinatorial
(integer-variable-related) decision making in operations
research.
The basic SA algorithm operates using the analogy of
cooling down a melt to obtain a defect-free crystal (the
globally minimal energy conŽ guration at any temperature T ).
It relies on getting an initial feasible system conŽ guration s
and an initial ‘temperature’ T , which are modiŽ ed according
to the generic algorithm given in Figure 3. The theoretical
literature on SA and related algorithms contains proofs of
asymptotic convergence to the globally optimal solution. A
thorough review and comparison of SA and other stochastic
methods can be found in Nurmela11 and Schoen12 .
However, such proofs are only of theoretical value since
they would imply an inŽ nite sample of ‘moves’ (new points
generated from the old conŽ gurations, as in step 2.1.1 in
Figure 3).
Furthermore, the SA algorithm has many variants added
to it, depending on how the pseudo-temperature parameter T
is reduced from one outer iteration to the next. Different
schemes obviously affect the percentage of uphill moves
accepted at each inner iteration loop and the number of such
iterations required to reach ‘thermal equilibrium’ (or satisfy
the stochastic termination criteria). Finally, the use of the
probabilistic acceptance of an uphill move (particularly
frequent at lower pseudo-temperatures) follows a Boltzmann
probability distribution function according to the basic SA
algorithm presented.
What distinguishes SA algorithms from random genera-
tion of conŽ gurations s0 in the neighbourhood of a previous
1. Get an initial system conŽ guration s and an initial
temperature T
2. While outer loop stop criterion not satisŽ ed do:
2.1 While inner loop stop criterion not satisŽ ed do:
2.1.1 Select a trial solution s0 derived from s.
2.1.2 Let D ˆ c…s0 † ¡ c…s†
2.1.3 If D < 0 set s ˆ s0
2.1.4 If D > 0 set s ˆ s0 with probability
exp…¡D=T †.
2.2 Reduce ‘‘temperature’’ T.
3. Report best solution found, along with other near
solutions for comparison.
Figure 3. The simulated annealing algorithm.
Trans IChemE, Vol 80, Part A, September 2002
 LONG-TERM SCHEDULING OF CLEANING OF HENs
conŽ guration s, is the ability gradually to restrict costly
conŽ gurations and introduce a type of descent property by
gradually requiring more and more accepted conŽ gurations
to have a smaller cost function. Performing uphill moves for
some of the time allows the routine to escape from local
minima, at least at the beginning of the run. It can be seen
(and indeed as SA is practised) that an initial sample is
necessary to evaluate the Ž rst temperature parameter so that
a certain percentage of moves is accepted at the beginning.
Thus, depending on the function values, a suitable range of
initial temperature is identiŽ ed.
The use of an artiŽ cial temperature parameter and an
arbitrary reduction scheme have little relation to the actual
optimization problems attempted to be solved by SA. In our
opinion a more practical and simple algorithm is that of
threshold accepting (TA) and our variant, backtracking
threshold accepting (BTA), which is presented directly in
Figure 4.
The TA algorithm is not new; indeed it can be found in
Dueck and Scheuer13 and Nurmela11. The TA algorithm is
effectively a very close variant of the basic SA algorithm.
Notably, acceptance is performed without a Boltzmann
probability distribution function, and in our scheme the
threshold is simply reduced by a constant parameter a1,
where a1 < 1 and is used as a linear scaling factor.
Our modiŽ cation is the addition of a backtracking step in
the case where a given number of new conŽ gurations do not
gain acceptance. This can also be applied to the SA basic
algorithm. Since our intention was not to work with SA, but
with a closely related method requiring fewer artiŽ cial
parameters, we provide no comparison of the two. In
Figure 4, the parameters a1 , a2 are both less than unity.
Parameter a2 is a scale factor used to increase the threshold
close to its previous value, following a failure to accept a
new move in the inner iteration loop.
In general, comparisons of highly stochastic methods are
not very useful, especially in generic methods that do not
attempt to exploit speciŽ c properties of a given problem.
These methods are termed ‘meta-heuristics,’ implying that
the optimization is achieved by suitably modifying (optimiz-
ing) the parameters of an algorithm to solve a particular
problem, such as in SA and TA. This displacement of the
optimization to the tuning of the algorithm to improve the
problem’s cost function implies that the performance of each
algorithm can be maximized by suitable modiŽ cation of its
1. Get an initial system conŽ guration s and an initial
threshold Dnew ˆ Dold
2. While outer loop stop criterion not satisŽ ed do:
2.1 While inner loop stop criterion not satisŽ ed do:
2.1.1 Select a trial solution s0 derived from s.
2.1.2 If c…s0† < c…s† ‡ Dnew set s ˆ s0
2.2 If s has changed reduce threshold:
Dold ˆ Dnew ,
Dnew ˆ Dold £ a1 .
2.3 If s did not change increase threshold:
Dnew ˆ Dold ¡ …Dold ¡ Dnew † £ a2
3. Report best solution found, along with other near
solutions for comparison.
Figure 4. The backtracking threshold acceptance algorithm.
Trans IChemE, Vol 80, Part A, September 2002
565
parameters. It is thus best to adopt the most simple meaning
and ease of estimation of these parameters.
A signiŽ cant issue concerning SA and TA algorithms is
when to stop the outer and inner loops. For the outer loop
we select the following criteria:
(1) The number of consecutive outer iterations without
accepting any new conŽ gurations reaches n1 (typically
5–10 have been used in our BTA implementation). A
counter is incremented while no outer iterations yield
new accepted conŽ gurations, and is reset to zero when
one is accepted.
(2) The number of consecutive outer iterations satisfying:
sin
µ e1 …14†
min
reaches the value of n2 iterations. The parameters min
and sin are the average and standard deviations of all
the samples considered (total, not only the accepted
ones) in the inner iteration; e1 is a user accuracy
parameter for the coefŽ cient of variation (typically set
to a small enough statistical signiŽ cance value, e.g.,
10¡3 or 10¡4 ). Again, a counter is incremented while
consecutive outer iterations satisfy the criterion in
Equation (14), and is reset to zero on the Ž rst outer
iteration that does not satisfy it.
(3) The total number of function=system evaluations. This is
usually set to a sufŽ ciently large value (in our case we used
typically 100 000 function evaluations, although in the
runs presented this bound was hardly reached). Alterna-
tively, CPU time may be used to terminate lengthy runs
and present the best solution found to that point.
The BTA algorithm, as presented in Figure 4 with the
termination=stopping criteria enumerated above, was imple-
mented in standard ANSI C yielding a portable software
package. The particular implementation of a HEN cleaning
formulation abstraction within the framework of BTA is
considered in the next section.
IMPLEMENTATION OF THE HEN
SCHEDULING PROBLEM
Solution by the Outer Approximation Method
The MINLP scheduling problem consists of the above
performance equations, together with the input variables
and constraints set. Solutions are generated by simulta-
neously solving the MINLP problem for all periods under
consideration.
The case studies presented here were implemented in the
GAMS modelling language6 and solved using DICOPT‡‡5
on a Sun SPARC 10 workstation.
Implementation of the Backtracking
Threshold Algorithm
Stochastic search methods such as TA and SA are
applicable in general where system conŽ gurations (in parti-
cular, combinations of binary decision variables in the HEN
scheduling) can be performed very cheaply. In other words,
as several thousands of system conŽ gurations will be
evaluated, the associated objective (and constraint) function
evaluations must require very small CPU times.
566 SMAÏLI et al.

For the particular case of HEN scheduling we consider

the following attributes:
(1) Multi-period problem. The HEN multi-period problem
consists of a complete simulation of the network for
each period (cleaning operating intervals, see section
titled ‘The HEN MINLP formulation under fouling’),
effectively a series of system snapshots in time.
(2) Multi-period simulation. The evaluation (simulation) of
the multi-period problem, as described above, can be
speeded up by exploiting the sequential nature of the
problem. The coupling between periods is only back-
ward, as the current period will depend on the network
status in the previous period (speciŽ cally the fouling
resistances in the previous period, which deŽ ne the heat
transfer coefŽ cients in the current period). The coupling
relation is given by

…Rf †n;p ˆ ‰…Rf †n;p¡1 ‡ DRf Š ¢ yn;p¡1 ‡ Rf ;clean

£ …1 ¡ yn;p¡1 † …15†

where DRf is the variation of fouling resistance between

periods p and p ¡ 1. Here Rf;clean is zero. The multi-
period problem can therefore be decoupled into a
sequence of single-period problems.
(3) Single-period problem. Each period in the network
simulation involves solving a nonlinear set of equa-
tions, (6) and (7), for each unit. These equations are
strongly decoupled once the inlet temperatures in a
unit are known (for known heat transfer coefŽ cients).
However, the network conŽ guration equations,
connecting the outlet of one exchanger to the inlet of
another, create nonlinear coupling(s). In particular, this
coupling reduces the impact of the absence of an
exchanger (i.e., for cleaning) on the temperature distri-
bution within a network. Figure 5(a) snows a Ž ctitious Figure 5. Schematic of a ‘cyclic’ HEN conŽ guration featuring temperature
HEN with coupling of hot streams. The network coupling via hot streams: (a) Actual ‘cyclic’ network; (b) Introduction of
conŽ guration equations are solved by creating a suita- ‘tears’ to yield a sequential stream, solved by including equations of the
ble selection of ‘tears’ (Figure 5(b)), which will result form Ti‡ ˆ Ti¡ ; solid lines, cold streams; dashed lines, hot streams.
in most cases in a smaller nonlinear problem, which
can be solved very effectively using Newton or quasi-
Newton solvers. All these modiŽ cations were found signiŽ cantly to
The solution of the nonlinear equations resulting from improve the performance of the algorithm, making the
the torn instantaneously steady-state HEN are solved in the MINPACK quasi-Newton routines converge in very few
iterations.
current implementation of the BTA algorithm using the
public domain software MINPACK solvers14;15 , available In implementing the operational constraints for the two
on the World Wide Web16. The quasi-Newton Broyden case studies (given in Appendices A and B for case studies 1
and 2, respectively) a simple rejection rule was used. A
Method=exact Jacobian algorithm from the package was
modiŽ ed to include the following properties to reduce random move was selected and the feasibility of these
simulation times: constraints checked. If the constraints were found to be
feasible, then complete simulation of the network was
(1) Store previous factorizations, and re-use them by default performed. If the constraints were found to be infeasible,
in inner period problems. The Ž rst one is started from a the point was rejected without simulation, thus saving on
new, Ž nite-difference evaluated full Jacobian for the tear computational time. The number of inner iterations speci-
variables and equations (the only variables and equa- Ž ed for the BTA algorithm counted only the feasible points
tions seen by the Newton solver after tearing). examined (and thus simulation function evaluations).
(2) Use previous period solutions as starting points for the
next periods.
CASE STUDIES AND RESULTS
(3) Store the Ž rst period solution as a default starting point
for the following conŽ guration at the corresponding Ž rst The MINLP formulation described above has been applied
period. to two case studies. The Ž rst example is a 14-unit network,

Trans IChemE, Vol 80, Part A, September 2002

 LONG-TERM SCHEDULING OF CLEANING OF HENs
while the second is a 25-unit network, as summarized in
Figures 6 and 9, and Tables 2 and 4, respectively. Both
networks are based on a crude oil preheat train. Linear
fouling behaviour is considered with all units starting from
an initially clean condition. The length of each interval (i.e.,
cleaning and processing) is two weeks. Therefore, the length
of each period is one month. When a unit is taken off line
for cleaning, the cold stream  ow rate is bypassed to the
next unit. In the case of the hot streams, the  ow rate is
either bypassed or diverted to parallel units. For instance, if
unit 1A (Figure 6) is being cleaned then the hot stream  ow
rate is diverted to unit 1B.
The Ž rst case study introduces the complexities in reŽ n-
ery networks caused by interconnecting hot streams. The
second, which resembles a real network more closely,
contains a signiŽ cant amount of duplication, where several
units (and cold streams) are used in order to reduce the
impact of cleaning one exchanger. Duplication not only
increases the size of the problem, but introduces issues of
degeneracy, where notionally different schedules are in fact
identical, with interchangeable exchanger labels.
The results presented here are the best from a number of
possible solutions reached using different starting points.
The results are represented in terms of cost saving, when
cleanings occur, in comparison with the cost of the ‘no
cleaning’ scenario:
Cost…uncleaned† ¡ Cost…cleaned†
Saving ˆ ¢ 100
Cost…uncleaned†
…16†
In order to obtain solutions with the BTA algorithm, Ž ve
independent runs were performed, each of which was started
with a different initial seed provided by a random number
generator (uniform distribution). It will be seen that, as
expected with stochastic search methods such as TA and
SA, each run produces different solutions at the end of the
Figure 6. HEN for case study 1. Values of heat load, in MW, are given at initial, clean, condition: Solid lines, cold (crude) streams; dashed lines, hot streams;
SS, sidestream; PA, pumparound; VAC, vacuum tower; Atm, atmospheric tower.
Trans IChemE, Vol 80, Part A, September 2002
567
search. The BTA searches were performed using two differ-
ent types of ‘moves’, that is, search patterns. The Ž rst type
of search (move-1) is based on globally changing, at
random, any binary variable indicating cleaning by  ipping
its value between 1 or 0. In this way the number of cleanings
is not constrained, and it varies during the search procedure.
The second type of search (move-2) is carried out in an
independent run from the Ž rst, using Ž xed numbers of
cleanings for each unit in the operating horizon, equal to
the number found during the move-1 type search pattern of
the previous run. In effect, the cleanings of each unit are
moved at random time slots and evaluated with the BTA
algorithm.
The number of inner iterations performed by the algo-
rithm was Ž xed initially at 50 until the 50th outer iteration
was reached. From then on, each outer iteration added two
extra function evaluations to the inner cycle. This was done
so that when the outer cycles appeared to reach equilibrium,
more samples were tested in the binary variable space to
allow the possibility of Ž nding better solutions. The
complete settings of other parameters of the BTA algorithm
are given in Table 1; the settings were kept strictly the same
for all reported case studies. The values in Table 1 were
obtained by trial and error, for example, varying a1 from
0.99 to 0.8 and noting the effect on performance. The
threshold criterion was found by testing values, in increasing
size (if too small), to give 80–90% acceptances of the new
points generated around the starting point. This tuning
process took 1–2 hours. All runs reported are in CPU
seconds on a SunSparc 10 workstation used in the
GAMS runs.
Case Study 1
Figure 6 is a schematic of the 14-exchanger network,
which features three cold streams and seven hot streams.
568
Table 1. BTA algorithm parameter settings.
Parameter Value
a1 0.85
a2 0.20
e1 1:0 £ 10¡4
Max. function evaluations 107
D0 105
Sequential acceptance failure after 5 iterations
The three cold streams represent the same crude stream at
different stages of its passage through the network. The third
(hottest) stream is split into two branches as the exchangers
in this section are subject to the most severe fouling
(Table 2). Each heat exchanger is subject to fouling and
may be cleaned if required. This network also features
linked hot streams. The temperature of the crude entering
the furnace, the coil inlet temperature (CIT), dictates the
furnace fuel requirement and can limit the throughput of the
distillation unit downstream. This case study does not
consider adjustment of cold stream  ow rates when units
are taken off line for cleaning—this scenario can also arise
in practice where the network is limited by overall pressure
drop. Hot stream  ow rates in parallel units—such as 1A,B,
2A,B and 3A,B—are modiŽ ed when one of these units is
taken off line for cleaning, that is, all the vacuum residue
stream passes through 1A when 1B is cleaned. Pressure drop
limitations have been considered elsewhere8 ; they are not
considered here.
The cold streams correspond to the crude stream at inlet,
after the desalter and after the  ash, respectively. The
temperatures of the cold stream at the desalter are related by
cin
T6;p cout
ˆ T7;p ¡ 10
whereas the temperature change across the  ash is taken to
be negligible. However, there is a loss of 5 to 10% of the
 ow rate in the  ash. The relation is given by
Fc3A;p ˆ x ¢ Fc4;p
where Fcn;p is the cold  ow rate and x is the fraction of
 ow rate remaining …0:90 < x < 0:95†. The network para-
meters are summarized in Table 2. The linear fouling model
SMAÏLI et al.
parameters were obtained from data reconciliation on a
similar network, as described by Wilson et al.17 . Appendix A
summarizes the constraint set used in this case study; these
are mainly logical constraints restricting the amount of
network distortion allowed by cleaning; constraints on
continuous variables (hot stream rundown temperatures,
pressure drops, pumparound duties, etc.) were not used.
Figures 7(a) and 8(a) show the best optimal cleaning
schedules obtained for Case Study 1 when a cleaning cost of
£4000 per unit is used. Figure 7 shows the solution obtained
using the OA technique, hereafter referred to by GAMS,
while Figure 8 presents the best solution obtained by the
BTA algorithm. We choose to discuss each case study in
turn before comparing the performance of the different
solution techniques. CT (opt) denotes the total cost of the
optimal schedule, whereas CT (uncl) represents the total cost
when no cleaning has been performed. The total number of
cleanings, NC, is also reported.
A very evident result in the schedules in both Figures 7
and 8 is the absence of cleaning actions at both the
beginning, and near the end, of the three year time horizon.
The absence of cleaning in the Ž rst Ž ve periods is due to the
use of a ‘clean’ initial condition; there is no incentive to
clean until the effect of fouling causes signiŽ cant loss of
network performance. The absence of cleaning in the Ž nal
Ž ve periods is due to the approach to the horizon; the
objective function does not consider performance following
the Ž nal period, so there is insufŽ cient time to recover
energy to offset the loss in performance caused by cleaning.
The case study thus considers a periodic problem where all
exchangers are cleaned completely after the 36-month
horizon (i.e., shutdown) at zero cost. These ‘end effects’
are observed in all subsequent schedules, as the same
…17† boundary conditions are used. A plant manager may wish
to consider different boundary conditions, such as a ‘snap-
shot’ of different fouling resistances instead of the
uniformly-clean initial condition. The end boundary condi-
tion requires careful consideration: one could attempt to
…18† achieve other periodic solutions, such as setting initial and
Ž nal fouling resistances to be similar, but such a solution
may not be feasible given the constraint set imposed on the
problem. This ‘repeating’ pattern is discussed by Georgiadis
and Papageorgiou4 . An alternative ‘long view’ approach is

Table 2. Stream data for Case Study 1 (variable values given at initial, clean, condition).

HEX Tinh ( C)
¯
Tinc ( C)
¯
Fh (kg s¡1 ) Fc (kg s¡1 ) Cph (kJ kg¡1 K¡1 ) Cpc (kJ kg¡1 K ¡1 ) U0 a (kW m¡2 k¡1 ) A (m2 ) R_ f ¢ 1011 (m2 K J¡1 )
1A 334b 210 17.4 46.0 2.8 2.4 0.5 55.6 1.9
2A 286b 191 22.8 46.0 2.9 2.4 0.5 61.3 1.8
3A 249b 178 9.5 46.0 2.8 2.4 0.5 91.0 1.6
1B 334b 210 17.4 46.0 2.8 2.4 0.5 55.6 1.9
2B 286b 191 22.8 46.0 2.9 2.4 0.5 61.3 1.8
3B 249b 178 9.5 46.0 2.8 2.4 0.5 91.0 1.6
4 254 167 45.5 95.0 2.9 2.3 0.5 67.1 1.5
5 205b 161 55.8 95.0 2.6 2.3 0.5 67.2 1.1
6 285 135 34.8 95.0 2.8 2.3 0.5 110.1 1.5
7 237b 116 49.7 95.0 2.6 1.92 0.5 121.6 0.8
8 170b 101 49.7 95.0 2.6 1.92 0.5 112.9 0.8
9 197 50 55.8 95.0 2.6 1.92 0.5 208.3 0.6
10 296b 45 3.3 95.0 2.9 1.92 0.5 8.9 0.9
11 194 26b 19.1 95.0 2.8 1.92 0.5 56.6 0.6
a
U0 ˆ Uclean .
b
Fixed temperature inputs.

Trans IChemE, Vol 80, Part A, September 2002

 LONG-TERM SCHEDULING OF CLEANING OF HENs 569

Figure 7. Optimal cleaning schedule (a) and variation of CIT with time (b) for Case Study 1, obtained by GAMS with Cc ˆ £4000.

to add a number of periods after the NPth period in which
no cleaning is allowed. These ‘end effects’ illustrate the
need to (i) manage problems with a large number of periods,
such that the schedules obtained are less sensitive to the
horizon boundaries, and (ii) consider the form of the
objective function carefully.
The schedule presented in Figure 7(a) includes some
intuitive and non-intuitive results. The exchangers that
foul most seriously (units 1A=B, 2A=B) are cleaned most
often, and the distribution of numbers of cleaning actions in
the hot section (1A=B etc.) is symmetrical, as would be
expected. Units 3A=B, however, are cleaned less often than
unit 4, despite similar fouling rates, illustrating the impor-
tance of unit 4 and the effect of coupling in the network.
Likewise, unit 10 is not cleaned at all. There is a quasi-
periodicity in the schedule, with units 7–9 and 11 being
cleaned near the middle of the operating period, but the
distribution obtained is not immediately obvious. The Ž gure
also shows that no more than two exchangers are scheduled
to be cleaned in any one period; this is a realistic result
which is not forced by the constraint set. The latter could,
moreover, be constructed such that only one cleaning action
is allowed per period. A more sparse schedule would be
obtained by increasing the cleaning cost, limiting the total
number of cleaning actions allowed or deciding that units
with less severe fouling are not cleaned at all.
The BTA schedule in Figure 8 exhibits the same features
discussed in the GAMS results (Figure 7). Two more clean-
ing actions are performed in this case, although cleaning
starts at the Ž fth period and ends at the 30th period

Trans IChemE, Vol 80, Part A, September 2002

570 SMAÏLI et al.

Figure 8. Optimal cleaning schedule (a) and variation of CIT with time (b) for Case Study 1, obtained by BTA algorithm with Cc ˆ £4000.

(cf. starting at the sixth period in the GAMS results). Similarly,
unit 10 is not cleaned and ‘end effects’ are very evident.
The decay in CIT whenever unit 1A is being cleaned is
greater than the decay in the GAMS case. This is due to the
fact that units 1B and 2B are being cleaned simultaneously,
with a commensurate effect on CIT. The difference in the
uncleaned objective values …k£1320 cf. k£1331) arises from
the different numerical methods used to solve the equation
sets, and represents a º l% difference. This difference is
also evident in the results for Case Study 2.
Table 3 shows a summary of the cost performance and
computational results for the two methods. The underlying
MINLP problem, as solved by GAMS, was relatively large,
with 518 binary variables, 7808 continuous variables, and
10 1707 constraints. The CPU times for the OA method
(GAMS) are reasonably low. However, a feasible starting
point is necessary to achieve convergence of the problem in
these CPU times and some further work was required for
this initialization. A set of 50 starting points has been used
and the best solution was achieved at the 11th 1oop after
15 887 iterations.
Table 3 shows that the two techniques yield schedules
with effectively the same performance. The OA method
proved to be faster in this case, as it was able to con-

Trans IChemE, Vol 80, Part A, September 2002

 LONG-TERM SCHEDULING OF CLEANING OF HENs 571

Table 3. Total cost saving in comparison with the ‘no cleaning’scenario for
Case Study 1.
most appropriate schedule for a plant will frequently involve
further operating considerations, that is, extra selection
Best objective CPU time constraints, which serve to reduce the solution space. The
Model C …£†c † in k£ (Saving in %) (CPU s) NC range of move-2 results …£k755¡769† for this case study
Uncleaned — 1320 441 — was consistently lower than those obtained with move-1
OA 4000 755 (42.8) 199 25 types …£k771¡788†: it will be seen in Case Study 2 that the
BTA 4000 758 (43) 220 27 ranges for the two move types overlapped (Table 6) to a
Move 2 761 216 27 great extent.
Move 2 762 194 27
Move 2 766 283 26 Figures 7(b) and 8(b) show the variation of CIT with time
Move 2 769 195 27 for the optimal schedule and when no cleaning occurs. ‘End
Move 1 771 210 26 effects,’ as described above, are evident. Large drops in CIT
Move 1 774 265 27 could be managed by the use of constraints of the type
Move 1 784 290 27
Move 1 785 195 27
CIT > CITL . It is noteworthy that the CIT for the cleaned
Move 1 788 199 27 networks in both Ž gures does not drop below the Ž nal value
of CIT (uncleaned).

verge on a local optimum from the starting points used.

Case Study 2 will demonstrate that convergence was not
always achievable. Comparison of the optimal schedules in
Figures 7(a) and 8(a) show evident differences, despite their
similarity in performance, which illustrates the combinator-
ial nature of the solution space in these systems. Several
local minima exist, with similar objective functions, as a
result of the coupling within the network.
This aspect is illustrated by the BTA results in Table 3,
which show the distribution of solutions obtained from the
Ž ve different seeds of the random number generator for both
move-1 and move-2 types. These solutions corresponded to
sometimes very different schedule patterns: similar distribu-
tions were observed in the OA runs. The selection of the
Case Study 2
This case study features more cold and hot streams than
the previous case study, and therefore more units, 25, as
shown in Figure 9 and Table 4. The second cold stream,
between the desalter and the  ash, is evenly split into two
branches and the third cold stream is split into four
branches. The same relations for desalter and  ash operation
cin …T cin †
(Equations (17) and (18)) apply to T16;p 13;p and
cout cout
T19;p …T20;p †, and to Fc18 …Fc15 † and Fc3 …Fc6 ; Fc9 ; Fc12 †. As in
Case Study 1, a hot stream feeding units in parallel is split
evenly between those units that are in service. The opera-
tional constraints are similar to those for the previous case
study and are summarized in Appendix B.

Figure 9. HEN for Case Study 2. Values of heat load, in MW, are given at initial, clean, condition. Solid lines, cold (crude) streams; dashed lines, hot streams;
SS, sidestream; PA, pumparound; VAC, vacuum tower; Atm, atmospheric tower.

Trans IChemE, Vol 80, Part A, September 2002

572 SMAÏLI et al.
Table 4. Stream data for Case Study 2: variable values given at initial, clean, condition.

HEX Tinh (¯ C) Tinc (¯ C) Fh (kg s¡1 ) Fc (kg s¡1 ) Cph (kJ kg¡1 K ¡1 ) Cpc (kJ kg¡1 K¡1 ) U0 a (kW m¡2 k¡1 ) A (m2 ) R_ f ¢ 1011 (m2 K J¡1 )
1A 334b 210 8.7 23.0 2.8 2.4 0.5 21.3 1.9
2A 286b 191 11.4 23.0 2.9 2.4 0.5 29.7 1.8
3A 249b 180 4.8 23.0 2.8 2.4 0.5 31.4 1.6
1B 334b 210 8.7 23.0 2.8 2.4 0.5 21.3 1.9
2B 286b 191 11.4 23.0 2.9 2.4 0.5 29.7 1.8
3B 249b 180 4.8 23.0 2.8 2.4 0.5 31.4 1.6
1C 334b 210 8.7 23.0 2.8 2.4 0.5 21.3 1.9
2C 286b 191 11.4 23.0 2.9 2.4 0.5 29.7 1.8
3C 249b 180 4.8 23.0 2.8 2.4 0.5 31.4 1.6
1D 334b 210 8.7 23.0 2.8 2.4 0.5 21.3 1.9
2D 286b 191 11.4 23.0 2.9 2.4 0.5 29.7 1.8
3D 249b 180 4.8 23.0 2.8 2.4 0.5 31.4 1.6
4A 293 132 23.0 47.4 2.8 2.3 0.5 26.7 1.5
4B 205 151 28.0 47.4 2.6 2.3 0.5 35.4 1.1
5A 254b 158 17.4 47.4 2.9 2.3 0.5 79.1 1.5
5B 293b 132 23.0 47.4 2.8 2.3 0.5 29.2 1.6
6A 205 151 28.0 47.4 2.6 2.3 0.5 35.4 1.1
6B 254 158 17.4 47.4 2.9 2.3 0.5 79.1 1.5
7A 237b 116 25.0 47.4 2.6 1.92 0.5 60.8 0.8
7B 196 116 25.0 47.4 2.6 1.92 0.5 80.3 0.8
8 164 100 49.6 95.0 2.6 1.92 0.5 129.2 0.8
9A 194 73 55.8 95.0 2.6 1.92 0.5 109.6 0.9
9B 180 46 55.8 95.0 2.6 1.92 0.5 96.6 0.9
10 296b 69 3.3 95.0 2.9 1.92 0.5 8.5 0.6
11 203 25.6b 19.1 95.0 2.8 1.92 0.5 56.6 0.6
a
U0 ˆ Uclean .
b
Fixed temperature inputs.

The best schedules obtained for a two-year horizon for the
OA and BTA methods are presented in Figures 10 and 11,
respectively. The two-year OA problem featured 625 binary
variables, 9401 continuous variables, and 12 850 constraints.
As in Case Study 1, 50 different starting points were used and
the best locally optimal schedule is presented here;
6575 CPU s were necessary to obtain a solution with objec-
tive function parameters Cm ˆ Cx ˆ 0 and Cc ˆ £5000 per
clean.
OA results have not been achieved for a three-year
horizon with 36 monthly periods …Dt cl ˆ Dt pr ˆ 15 days†
to date, owing to the size of the problem. Solutions for such
a scenario could be generated using a number of modiŽ ca-
tions, including (i) increasing the length of the sub-periods,
further constraining the schedule to the discretization
pattern; (ii) exploiting the observed end effects by not
permitting any cleaning in the Ž rst six or last six months;
and=or (iii) starting from an initial, dirty condition. Table 5
includes results for the ‘free’ problem for a two-and-a-half-
year horizon, which is the longest horizon we have found to
be tractable for this problem using the OA method. The
solution for the two-and-a-half-year scenario showed the
same features observed elsewhere. There is evidently a
limit to the size of the problem that can be solved using
the MINLP formulation with the solver employed here.
Alternatively, linearization of equations such as (5) could
be used to reduce the complexity of the simulation model.
Inspection of the solver records indicated that the appli-
cation found the simultaneous solution of the large nonlinear
problems (NLP) difŽ cult. This observation suggests that a
tailored NLP solver, which exploited the sequential nature of
the multi-period simulation as in the BTA model, would
allow the OA method to be applied to larger problems.
The optimal OA schedule and CIT–time proŽ le shown in
Figure 10 illustrates many of the features discussed in Case
Study 1. Some of the units are not cleaned at all, duplicated
units (1A–D) exhibit symmetry, and the number of cleaning
actions per month is µ 2. Units 4A and 4B, corresponding
to unit 4 in Case Study 1, are again cleaned more often than
those adjacent, conŽ rming the importance of these units in
the network. The ‘end effects’ discussed previously are very
evident, owing to the shorter operating period and give rise
to some congestion, with no cleaning occurring after 19
months. This horizon is undesirably short compared to a
typical reŽ nery operating horizon of 3–7 years.
The BTA results for the 24 month scenario in Figure 11
show an even more centrally congested schedule, indicating
that the boundary conditions are dominating this scenario. It
is very apparent that different schedules would be obtained
if the objective function included a dependency of the state
of the network at the time tF , as outlined in Section 2. The
schedule presented in Figure 11 is likely to result in a
furnace Ž ring limitation: the low CIT value in month 13
would be avoided by the use of temperature performance
limits, which were not included in the constraint set used
here. The number of cleaning actions is similar to that in
Figure 10 (15 for BTA versus 17 for OA), although the
objective function values for the two techniques do not agree
as well as in Case Study 1.
The BTA algorithm performance in the 24 month case
shows the trends observed in Case Study 1, where 10
different schedules were identiŽ ed within a narrow range
of objective function values (here, k£493¡509. Type 2
moves again proved more effective that type 1 moves in
three of the Ž ve seeds, requiring comparable or noticeably
smaller CPU times.
The results for the 24 month scenarios in Table 5 also
indicate the trends identiŽ ed in Case Study 1. Each solu-
tion technique identiŽ ed optimal schedules with similar
objective function values, yet different cleaning patterns

Trans IChemE, Vol 80, Part A, September 2002

 LONG-TERM SCHEDULING OF CLEANING OF HENs 573

Figure 10. (a) Optimal cleaning schedule and (b) variation of CIT with time for Case Study 2, obtained by GAMS with Cc ˆ £5000.

as evidenced by the NC values. The computational times
were again similar, indicating that where the OA method
was able to achieve a solution, it was not inferior to the
BTA method.
It is noteworthy that, whereas the MINLP formulation
was unable to solve the 25 heat exchanger problem over the
36-month horizon, the BTA algorithm was able to solve
such large problems without any additional complications or
tuning. Figure 12 shows the schedule and CIT–time proŽ le
obtained for this scenario, and Table 6 summarizes the
algorithm performance measures. The results for 10 trials
lay again within a narrow range …k£819¡840† and the type 2
moves were superior in speed without compromising
performance. The speed of the type 2 moves, totalling
2695 CPU s, was nearly twice that of the type 1 moves
…3965 CPU s†.
The schedule in Figure 12 shows a ‘more acceptable’
distribution of cleaning actions compared to the congested
patterns in Figures 10 and 11, although it does feature an
undesirably large drop in CIT in period 12. Such deviations
could readily be avoided by a simple performance target on
CIT. Again, units 4A=B are cleaned more often than the
adjacent units and identical units are cleaned a similar
number of times. Unit 10, the smallest, with a small duty,
is not cleaned at all, as well as units 3A and 3B.
Case Study 2 is related to the conŽ guration in Case
Study 1 and several points can be drawn from comparing
the schedules for a 36-month horizon (Case Study

Trans IChemE, Vol 80, Part A, September 2002

574 SMAÏLI et al.

Figure 11. (a) Optimal cleaning schedule and (b) variation of CIT with time for Case Study 2, obtained by BTA algorithm with Cc ˆ £5000.

1, 14 units, Figures 7 and 8: Case Study 2, 25 units, Figure savings achieved in Case Study 1 are higher (¹ 43% cf.
12, BTA only). The results cannot be compared directly as 35%) because the units in the former network are mostly
the exchanger areas in the second case study are not larger, while Cc remains similar, so that the energy
directly proportional to those in the Ž rst case study. The recovered on cleaning an individual exchanger will be

Table 5. Total cost saving in comparison with the ‘no cleaning’ scenario for Case Study 2.

Model Cc (£) Horizon length (month) Best objective in k£ (Saving in %) CPU time (CPU s) NC
Uncleaned OA — 24 622 717 —
Uncleaned BTA — 24 589 — —
OA 5000 24 525 (15.6) 6575 17
BTA 5000 24 493 (16.3) 184 15
OA 5000 30 730 (28) 544 31
BTA 5000 36 819 (35) 490 34

Trans IChemE, Vol 80, Part A, September 2002

 LONG-TERM SCHEDULING OF CLEANING OF HENs 575

Figure 12. (a) Optimal cleaning schedule (three-year scenario) and (b) variation of CIT with time for Case Study 2, obtained by BTA algorithm with
Cc ˆ £5000.

greater. Comparison of the total computational time Discussion and Evaluation of OA and BTA Results
required to solve the BTA models (14 units – 2267 s
The results for both case studies indicate that both these
cf. 25 units – 6624 s) indicates a quadratic rather that a
techniques can be used to solve the multi-period MINLP
linear relationship with problem size. The schedules iden-
scheduling problem in HENs subject to long-term fouling.
tify the same groups of units as having most impact on
Similar objective value ranges and numbers of cleaning
network performance, so that the network is sensitive to
actions are obtained, although the optimal schedules differ.
fouling in these units and will thus clean them more
The BTA schedules tended to give more ‘bunched’distribu-
regularly. The converse also holds. This identiŽ cation of
tions, which could be proscribed by a suitably designed
network sensitivities, discussed in other contexts previously
constraint set.
by Kotjabasakis and Linnhoff18, could be exploited when
Direct comparison of the CPU times for OA and BTA
considering retroŽ tting options in order to improve
techniques can best be interpreted in terms of comparable
network performance.

Trans IChemE, Vol 80, Part A, September 2002

576 SMAÏLI et al.
Table 6. BTA algorithm results for Case Study 2 (36-month scenario).

Optimal Improvement over Function CPU time

Seed Move type objective (k£) uncleaned case (%) evaluations (CPU s)
1 1 832 34.0 6301 896
2 819 35.0 3357 490
2 1 839 33.5 6763 1071
2 832 34.0 3793 545
3 1 840 33.8 5431 770
2 832 34.0 3253 478
4 1 840 33.4 4261 624
2 832 34.0 3571 520
5 1 837 33.6 3793 604
2 837 33.6 4141 626

speeds being achieved in these case studies. The difference
in performance for the largest problem, where the OA
technique failed to converge, is interpreted here as a
difŽ culty in the optimization solver used. The tailored
NLP solver in the BTA algorithm, which exploited the
sequential nature of the multi-period problem, rendered
this technique more robust and suggests that even larger
horizons could be addressed by this approach.
The combinatorial nature of the problem, added to a
highly non-convex solution space with many local optima,
clearly presents a challenge to both solution techniques.
CONCLUSIONS
This paper presents an alternative approach to the solution
of the MINLP problem generated by considering the HEN
scheduling problem in a multi-period formulation. The
approach is based on a meta-heuristic search method, the
threshold accepting algorithm (TA), with backtracking
variation (BTA) that potentially allows it to escape from
premature termination in a local region of the search space.
The BTA algorithm has proved reasonably straightforward
to implement and has been compared with a classical
optimization method (OA) in solving two case studies
based on oil reŽ nery crude oil preheat trains.
The method is compared with a mixed integer-nonlinear
programming problem formulation that has been described
in previous work (see for example, ref. 2). The TA algorithm
as implemented is shown to be very competitive with the
classical method. CPU times are signiŽ cantly small
compared to the size of the problems solved with the BTA
algorithm, and the solutions are in some instances better
than those obtained with the classical method.
Overall, the performance of the BTA algorithm appears
stable and applicable to realistic size case study sizes with-
out complications. The drawback of such stochastic search
methods, namely their inability to guarantee global optima-
lity, is less problematic in these heat exchanger cleaning
problems as the formulation is multi-modal and local
methods such as OA in themselves cannot be treated as
more than heuristic descent algorithms as well.
The schedules obtained for the two case studies highlight
the importance of the form of the objective function. The
objective function used here did not consider the state of the
network beyond the immediate horizon, resulting in notice-
able boundary effects for shorter horizon scenarios. The
schedules showed several expected features, with key
exchangers being cleaned more often, but the distribution
of cleaning actions was often non-intuitive. The case studies
presented here were freely posed, with relatively few
constraints: faster solution speeds and more ‘acceptable’
solutions are expected when constraints based on more
detailed operating criteria are included.
Both techniques are able to generate optimal cleaning
schedules, which can now be compared with other potential
strategies for mitigating fouling in heat exchanger networks.
Furthermore, the schedules identify those key exchangers in
the network that are sensitive to the effects of fouling and
whose performance may need to be augmented via retro-
Ž tting strategy.
Future applications of the BTA methodology will focus
on expanding the spectrum of case studies of cleaning in
HENs, including varying  ow rates, pressure drop limita-
tions, and pumparound streams. Another possible activity is
the consideration of dynamic effects caused by the insertion
or removal of units within a network.
APPENDIX A
Operational Constraints for 14-Unit Case Study
A set of operational constraints is provided for Case
Study 1. These relationships could be set by consideration
of performance targets, or acceptable operating practice. In
practice, a combination of operational constraints and
bounds on performance are likely to be employed.
For all periods p ˆ 1; 2; . . . ; NP the following opera-
tional constraints must hold true:
(I) Only one ‘hot end’ exchanger cleaned at a time:
y1A;p ‡ y2A;p ‡ y3A;p ¶ 2 …A1†
y1B;p ‡ y2B;p ‡ y3B;p ¶ 2 …A2†
(II) Maintaining  ash and desalter temperatures
y4;p ‡ y5;p ‡ y6;p ¶ 2 …A3†
y7;p ‡ y8;p ‡ y9;p ‡ y10;p ‡ y11;p ¶ 4 …A4†
(III) Vacuum residue rundown target
y1A;p ‡ y1B;p ‡ y6;p ¶ 2 …A5†
(IV) Atmospheric middle pumparound target
y2A;p ‡ y2B;p ‡ y4;p ¶ 2 …A6†

Trans IChemE, Vol 80, Part A, September 2002

 LONG-TERM SCHEDULING OF CLEANING OF HENs 577

(V) Sidestream rundown temperature target Cf opportunity cost ¡ lost production, £ day¡1
Cm extra maintenance costs caused by fouling, £ day¡1
y3A;p ‡ y3B;p ‡ y11;p ¶ 2 …A7† Cp speciŽ c heat capacity, kJ kg¡1 K¡1
CIT coil inlet temperature, ¯ C
(VI) Atmospheric top pumparound target CT (opt) total cost, optimal schedule, £
CT (uncl) total cost, no cleaning actions, £
y5;p ‡ y9;p ¶ 1 …A8† F mass  ow rate, kg s¡1
MINLP mixed-integer nonlinear programming
For the Ž rst period all units must be present: NC number of cleanings
NE number of heat exchangers
yn;1 ˆ 1; n ˆ 1; 2; . . . ; NE …A9† NP number of time periods
Q heat load, kW
where NE ˆ 14 and NP ˆ 36 for this case study. Rf fouling resistance, m2 K kW¡1
Rf 0 initial fouling resistance, m2 K kW¡1
R_ f n fouling rate, m2 K kW¡1
APPENDIX B t time, day
tF Ž nal time, day
Operational Constraints for 25-Unit Case Study Dt time interval length, day
For all periods p ˆ 1; 2; . . . ; NP the following opera- T temperature, ¯ C
TL temperature lower bound, ¯ C
tional constraints must hold true: TU temperature upper bound, ¯ C
DTLM logarithmic mean temperature difference, K
(I) Vac residue rundown temperature target U overall heat transfer coefŽ cient, kW m¡2 K ¡1
y1A;p ‡ y1B;p ‡ y1C;p ‡ y1D;p ‡ y6A;p ‡ y6B;p ¶ 5 U0 ; Uclean overall heat transfer coefŽ cient: initial, clean status,
kW m¡2 K¡1
…B1† x fraction of  ow rate
y binary variable to denote cleaning status
(II) Atmospheric middle pumparound target
Greek symbols
y2A;p ‡ y2B;p ‡ y2C;p ‡ y2D;p ‡ y4A;p ‡ y4B;p ¶ 5 a BTA effectiveness parameter
…B2† e user accuracy parameter for the coefŽ cient of variation
m average deviation
(III) Sidestream rundown temperature target s standard deviation
Subscripts
y3A;p ‡ y3B;p ‡ y3C;p ‡ y3D;p ‡ y11;p ¶ 4 …B3† clean clean
c cold
(IV) Atmospheric top pumparound target h hot
in inlet
y5A;p ‡ y5B;p ‡ y9A;p ‡ y9B;p ¶ 3 …B4† l linear
n exchange unit, n 2 ‰1; NEŠ
(V) Vacuum pumparound target out outlet
p time period, p 2 ‰1; NPŠ
y7A;p ‡ y7B;p ‡ y8;p ¶ 2 …B5†
(VI) Only one ‘hot end’ exchanger cleaned at a time Superscripts
c cold
y1A;p ‡ y2A;p ‡ y3A;p ¶ 2 …B6† cl cleaning
h hot
y1B;p ‡ y2B;p ‡ y3B;p ¶ 2 …B7† i inlet
o outlet
y1C;p ‡ y2C;p ‡ y3C;p ¶ 2 …B8† pr processing
y1D;p ‡ y2D;p ‡ y3D;p ¶ 2 …B9†
(VII) Maintaining  ash temperature
REFERENCES
y4A;p ‡ y5A;p ‡ y6A;p ¶ 2 …B10†
1. Wilson, D. I. and Vassiliadis, V. S., 1997, Mitigation of reŽ nery fouling
:y4B;p ‡ y5B;p ‡ y6B;p ¶ 2 …B11† by management of cleaning, in Bott, T. R., Melo, L. F., Panchal, C. B.
and Somercales, E. F. C. (eds). Understanding Heat Exchanger Fouling
(VIII) Maintaining desalter temperature and its Mitigation, 299–307, (Begell House, NY).
2. Smaõ¨li, F., Angadi, D. K., Hatch, C. M., Herbert, O., Vassiliadis, V. S.
y7A;p ‡ y7B;p ‡ y8;p ‡ y9A;p ‡ y10;p ‡ y9B;p ‡ y11;p ¶ 6 and Wilson, D. I., 1999, Trans IChemE Part C, 77: 159–164.
3. Georgiadis, M. C., Papageorgiou, L. G. and Macchietto, S., 2000, Ind
…B12† Eng Chem Res, 39: 441–454.
4. Georgiadis, M. C. and Papageorgiou, L. G., 2000, Trans IChemE, 78:
For the Ž rst period all units must be present: l68–179.
yn;1 ˆ 1; n ˆ 1; 2; . . . ; NE …B13† 5. Viswanathan, J. and Grossmann, I. E., 1990, Comput Chem Eng,
14: 769.
where NE ˆ 25 and NP ˆ f24; 36g for this case study. 6. Brooke, A., Kendrick, D. and Meeraus, A., 1996, GAMS Release
2.25: A User’s Guide (GAMS Development Corporation,
Washington DC, USA).
NOMENCLATURE 7. Bott, T. R., 1994, Fouling of Heat Exchangers (Elsevier, Amsterdam).
8. Smaõ¨li, F., Vassiliadis, V. S. and Wilson, D. I., 1999, Scheduling
A heat transfer area, m2 of heat exchanger cleaning in reŽ nery heat exchanger networks,
Cc cleaning costs incurred for cleaning operations, £ per Proc. Engineering Foundation Conference ‘‘Mitigation of Heat
cleaning operation Exchanger Fouling and Its Economic and Environmental Implications’’
CE extra energy cost required due to fouling, £ kW¡1 day¡1 July 11–16, Banff, Canada.

Trans IChemE, Vol 80, Part A, September 2002

578 SMAÏLI et al.
9. Hewitt, G. F., Shires, G. L. and Bott, T. R., 1994, Process Heat Transfer
(Begell House, NY).
10. Kirkpatrick, S., Gellatt, Jr., C. D. and Vecchi, M. P., 1983, Science, 220:
671.
11. Nurmela, K. J., 1993, Constructing Combinatorial Designs by Local
Search, Digital System Laboratory, Helsinki University of Technology
Finland, Series A: Research Report No. 27.
12. Schoen, F., 1991, Global Optimization, 1: 207.
13. Dueck, G. and Scheuer, T, 1990, J Comput Phys, 90: 161.
14. Moré, J. J., Garbow, B. S. and Hillstrom, K. E., 1980, User Guide
for MINPACK-1. Tech. Rep. Report ANL-80-74, Argonne National
Laboratory, Argonne, Ill.
15. Moré, J. J., Garbow, B. S. and Hillstrom, K. E., 1984, User Guide for
MINPACK-1. (Prentice-Hall, New Jersey, USA).
16. Dongarra, J. and Grosse, E. (eds), 1999, Netlib Repository. World Wide
Web Database http:==www.netlib.org=
17. Wilson, D. I., Condron, P. I. and Garrett, S., 1997, AIChE Symp Ser,
93: 305.
18. Kotjabasakis, E. and Linnhoff, B., 1986, Chem Eng Res Des, 64: 197.
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
The authors wish to acknowledge the support of Esso Petroleum (UK)
and Nalco-Exxon Energy Chemicals in association with the EPSRC under
grant GR=L 33658. The assistance of J. MeGillivary, A. Cracknell and
D. Marnell from Esso is also gratefully acknowledged.
ADDRESS
Correspondence concerning this paper should be addressed to
Dr V. S. Vassiliadis, Department of Chemical Engineering, University
of Cambridge, Pembroke Street, Cambridge CB2 3RA, UK.
E-mail: vsv20@cheng.cam.ac.uk
This manuscript was received 26 February 2002 and accepted for
publication after revision 29 May 2002.
Trans IChemE, Vol 80, Part A, September 2002