Heat Exchanger Network

Retrofit
Trevor Hallberg
Sarah Scribner

Heat Exchanger Network (HEN)

Retrofit

Outline
Mixed Integer Linear Programming (MILP)
Pinch Technology Theory for Retrofit
Improvements on Pinch Technology
Crude Distillation Unit Example
Discussion

Heat Exchanger Network (HEN)

Retrofit
Small Conceptual Example

128C

H1

170C

35.5C

CU
10 kW/C

30C

55 kW
HU

C1

200C

76.7C

1110 kW

9 kW/C

30C

420 kW

HU
109.1C

C2

200C

11 kW/C

925 kW

1000 kW

Retrofit Options :

Adjust existing area

Relocate existing exchangers
Add new exchangers
Introduce stream splits

25C

Optimal Results :

Reduce utility usage

Increase process-process exchange
Maintain network integrity

Mixed Integer Linear Programming

(MILP)

Based on transportation-transshipment
m 1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
model
Hot stream, i
z ,H
qijm

z
qim
, jn

z ,C
qijn

Cold stream, j
1

33

44

55

66

Heat transfer Zones

Temperature Intervals
Energy and flow
balances

88

Mixed Integer Linear Programming

(MILP)

Heat Transfer Zones

Two Zones
Pinch Technology (Above and Below the Pinch)
One Zone
Find minimum total cost, even if cross-pinch
transfer occurs

MILP

Sophisticated cost analysis

Model parameters
Area adjustment
Existing heat exchangers
New heat exchangers
Re-piping

Ability to tailor-fit model for a variety of

HEN scenarios

Area Adjustments

Area Addition
Existing Exchangers
Increase area of existing shell
Install a new, larger shell
New Exchangers
Limit number of new
exchangers
Limit area (size) of new
exchangers
Enforce realistic area

adjustments
Area addition 20%

Area Reduction
Plug Tubes
By-pass fluid

Enforce realistic area

adjustments
Area reduction 50%

Re-piping

Re-piping scenarios
Exchanger relocation
Stream splitting
Exchanger by-pass

Re-piping cost assignments

Model compares number of split streams in

retrofitted network to original network

Assigns user-defined fixed cost to number of
new splits

MILP

Objective Functions
Maximize value of savings
Value of Savings = Utility Cost Savings Annual Capital
Cost

Maximize net present value

NPV = (DiscountFactori * Utility Cost Savingsi ) Capital
Cost

Maximize return on investment

ROI = Annual Utility Cost Savings / Capital Cost

MILP

INPUT Parameters
Stream data (FCp)
Stream temperatures (Inlet & Target)
Cost functions

OUTPUT Data
Optimized objective function
Exchanger locations
Cost requirements
Utility savings

Pinch Technology

The root of heat integration

technology

Systematic methodology for

retrofitting
Identifies locations where process change

will reduce the overall energy consumption

Allows us to set these energy targets

Pinch Technology

Based on thermodynamic principles

Uses Temperature vs. Enthalpy diagrams
Called composite curves

Pinch Technology

Composite Curves - Combined

Pinch Technology

The pinch (Tmin)

Splits the process into 2 regions that are

analyzed separately
Heat Sink region above the pinch
Heat Source region below the pinch

Pinch Technology

3 Pinch Rules
No heat transfer across the pinch
No external cooling above the pinch (only

HU)
No external heating below the pinch (only
CU)

Violating these
results in crosspinch heat
transfer
Increases heat

Pinch Technology

Total Network Area - Aideal

Q = UAintervalTLM
Vertical Heat Transfer- vertical enthalpy

regions
Assumes equal area of each exchanger
Vary Tmin
Aideal = A1+A2++Ai

Pinch Technology

Retrofitting
Energy vs. Area diagram
Blue curve = Aideal for

various Tmin values

Want to improve

ineffective use of area

Want to decrease

energy requirements

Pinch Technology

Retrofitting continued
Why would we increase

area and energy?

Could theoretically work
but the point is to use
area better and decrease
energy
Pinch recommends not
decreasing area in which
we have already invested
- ???
For now we will assume

Pinch Technology

Need a way to compare energy and

area
Want a curve similar to

the optimum design

curve
Need a way to

determine the most

economical solution on
the new curve
We use something

Which path do we choose?

Pinch Technology

Area Efficiency ()

Agrassroots
Aexisting

Based on utilities of current process

Agrassroots = optimal area for current process
Assume new design has new current
The best can be is 1 (cannot be better than

Pinch Technology

Area Efficiency

Aideal

Aretrofit

Agrassroots
Aexisting

Assume = and

Aideal Agrassroots

Aretrofit
Aexisting
Aideal
Agrassroots

Aretrofit Aexisting

Can now calculate Aretrofit based on constant

curve
Process:

Tmi
n

Qu,min

Aideal

Aretrofi
t

Pinch Technology

Which do we use?
Infinite amount of

values
At least want current
The best is = 1
Larger = smaller Aretrfit
Assume value of 1

Aideal Agrassroots
Aretrofit Aexisting

Pinch Technology

Now that we have Aretrofit?

Aretrofit

( Aideal Agrassroots )

Aexisting

We need the optimum Tmin value

Total Annualized Cost (TAC) vs. Tmin diagram

for constant
Optimum Tmin value corresponds to the

minimum

Pinch Technology

TAC vs. Tmin

CC
OC
n

TAC

OC C HU CCU

b Aretr

CC N min a

N min

Nmin = [Nh+Nc+Nu-1]AP + [Nh+Nc+Nu-1]BP

Still assuming that the total area of the

network is distributed evenly among the

Pinch Technology
Now we need to design the HEN

Eliminate cross-pinch heat exchangers (E2)

Reuse the other exchangers (usually more

economic)
Design sections above and below pinch separately
128C

H1

170C

40C

CU

35.5C

40C

10 kW/C
2

30C

55 kW
HU

C1

200C

76.7C

11 kW/C

30C

30C

30C

1110 kW

30C

420 kW

HU
109.1C

C2

200C

1000 kW

925 kW

9kW/C
25C

Pinch Technology

HEN Design
Start design at

pinch
Matching streams
AP: (FCp)hot
(FCp)cold

128C

H1

BP: (FCp)cold
(FCp)hot
170C

loads
Q = FCpT (for each
stream)
40C

200C

76.7C

10 kW/C
2

30C

45 kW
30C

30C

30C

30C

11 kW/C

230 kW

CU

35.5C

40C

HU

C1

Maximize exchanger

1300 kW

HU
109.1C

C2

200C

1870 kW

9 kW/C
2

55 kW

25C

Pinch Technology
HEN Design

Add E6 to reduce utilities

Use loops and paths to make design more

flexible
Give E6 a duty of X
A web of exchangers is affected
128C

H1

170C

40C

40C

CU

35.5C
10 kW/C

30C

45 kW
HU

C1

200 C

76.7C

30C

30C

30C

30C

11 kW/C

230 + X kW

1300 - X kW

HU
109.1C

C2

200C

X kW
1870 - X kW

9kW/C
2

55 kW

25C

Pinch Technology

Individual Heat Exchanger Area

Evaluate the specific exchanger areas by

accounting for temperature cross within the

exchangers

Q U Aexchanger TLM

TLM

(TH ,in TC ,out ) (TH ,out TC ,in )

TH ,in TC ,out

T
H ,out C ,in

ln

Need these areas to calculate the capital cost

Pinch Technology

Cost comparisons
No longer assume equal areas for each

exchanger
CC (Capital Investment Cost)
Based on area change for each exchanger in the
network
Fixed and variable costs
Includes area addition, reduction, and new
exchanger cost
Operating Costs (OC)

Pinch Technology

How can we improve

it?
Allowing relocation of all

exchangers
May be able to cut down on
area change expenses
May decrease the number
of new exchangers needed

Incorporate Pro-II

simulation

Pinch Technology Improvement

Incorporate Pro-II Optimization

Pro-II simulation based on Pinch Technology

results
Exchanger location

Minimize total cost

Vary heat exchanger area
Vary stream split ratio
Fix stream target temperatures

Pro-II Optimization
Controllers set stream target
temps
Calculator assigns cost
equations
Optimizer minimizes cost
function

HEN Retrofit Results

Crude Distillation Unit

MILP
Process Pinch
Process Pinch Improvements
Pro-II Simulation

Retrofit Considerations
Stream splitting
Addition of new exchangers
Allow & disallow exchanger relocation

Crude Distillation Unit

Original Network
10 Hot streams
3 Cold streams
18 exchangers
2 hot utilities
3 cold utilities

Original

COMPARISON

Original
18 exchangers

MILP
8 new exchangers

Process Pinch
9 new exchangers

No Relocation
Allowed
MILP

Process Pinch

Retrofit Results

Allow Relocation
Original

COMPARISON

Original
18 exchangers
MILP
5 new exchangers
5 relocated
Process Pinch
9 new exchangers
7 relocated

MILP

Process Pinch

Retrofit Results

Discussion

Computation Time Comparison

MILP is most time-efficient

MILP only requires input of data
Pro-II requires large majority of manual labor
Pinch requires manual labor only

Where Does Pinch Go Bad?

We believe the problem is with Tmin

The optimum value is determined prior

to design

Assumes equal area of every

exchanger

Optimization occurs after the value is

chosen

MILP = The Best

Why?
Considers the greatest number of variables
Considers all solutions
No limiting assumptions or methodology
Optimization based on several cost

parameters
Computer does everything a person can do
Only requires input of data
Do not need experience with the methodology

The End

Process Pinch Limitations

Why does pinch overlook MILP solutions?

Optimum solution based on min number of

units
It then optimizes the area distribution and utilities

For large networks, there are many (if not

infinite) combinations of exchangers and heat

loads to satisfy a process
Cannot efficiently consider all heat loops and paths

Example 1

Original Network
7 exchangers
1 heater (E7)

F
kg/s
228.5
20.4
53.8

Stream
H1
H2
H3

2 coolers (E5,E6)

Cp
kJ/kg.C
1
1
1

Tin
o
C
159
267
343

Tout
o
C
77
88
90

H
kW/m2.oC
0.4
0.3
0.25

500

499

0.53

1
1

26
118

127
265

0.15
0.5

20

40

0.53

HU (hot utility)
C1
C2

93.3
196.1

CU (cold utility)
H1

159 0

228.5

77

CU

H2

267

20.4

88

CU

H3

343

53.8

127 0

C1

90

93.3

26

HU

C2

265

196.1
7

118

Example 1- Process Pinch

Retrofitted Network (No relocation

Allowed)
8 exchangers (E6 becomes non-operational)
1 heater (E7), 1 cooler (E5)
E8 and E9 added to increase process exchange
H1

New

159 0

+A

-A
5

77

CU

+A

H2

H3

267

New
4

CU

-A

+A

343

88

90

NEW SPL

C1

127

26

+A

C2

265

HU

NEW SPL
118

Example 1 Process Pinch

Retrofitted Network (Relocation Allowed)

8 exchangers (E6 is relocated a process

exchanger)
1 heater (E7), 1 cooler (E5)
E8 added to meet increase process exchange
H1

New

159 0

+A

-A
5

77

CU

+A
+A

H2

H3

267

CU

-A

+A

343

88

90

NEW SPL

C1

127

26

+A

C2

265

HU

NEW SPL
118

Example 1- MILP

Retrofitted Network (No relocation

Allowed)
9 exchangers
1 heater (E7), 2 coolers (E5, E6)
E8,E9 added to increase process exchange
H1

159

-A

New

H2

267

+A , NS
H3

343

88
CU

-A
2

+A , NS

CU

New

77

90

+A, NS

NEW SPL

127

C1

26

NEW SPL

HU

-A
C2

265

118

Example 1- MILP

Retrofitted Network (Relocation Allowed)

9 exchangers
1 heater (E7), 2 coolers (E5, E6)
E8,E9 added to increase process exchange
CU

I1

159

+A
I2

267

+A, NS
I3

343

265

New
88

New

CU

New

127

10

90

26

NEW SPL

HU

J2

77

CU

+A, NS

J1

118

-A

EXAMPLE 1 RESULTS
BEYOND THIS POINT

Example 1

Results (No relocation)

MILP has 1 more exchanger than pinch
MILP has more area but requires less energy
Pinch has less area but requires more energy
Pro-II simulation further optimizes the pinch

technology

Example 1

Results (Relocation allowed)

MILP has 2 more exchangers than pinch
MILP has more area but requires less energy
Pinch has less area but requires more energy
Pro-II simulation further optimizes the pinch

technology

Example 1

Results (No Relocation)

Example 1

Results (Relocation Allowed)