Accepted Manuscript

Title: Modeling and energy reduction of multiple effect

evaporator system with thermal vapor compression

Author: Tianming Chen Qi Ruan

PII: S0098-1354(16)30169-7
DOI: http://dx.doi.org/doi:10.1016/j.compchemeng.2016.05.011
Reference: CACE 5471

To appear in: Computers and Chemical Engineering

Received date: 3-7-2015

Revised date: 15-5-2016
Accepted date: 21-5-2016

Please cite this article as: Chen, Tianming., & Ruan, Qi., Modeling and energy reduction
of multiple effect evaporator system with thermal vapor compression.Computers and
Chemical Engineering http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.compchemeng.2016.05.011

This is a PDF file of an unedited manuscript that has been accepted for publication.
As a service to our customers we are providing this early version of the manuscript.
The manuscript will undergo copyediting, typesetting, and review of the resulting proof
before it is published in its final form. Please note that during the production process
errors may be discovered which could affect the content, and all legal disclaimers that
apply to the journal pertain.
Modeling and energy reduction of multiple effect
evaporator system with thermal vapor compression

Tianming Chen*, Qi Ruan

School of Chemical Engineering, Fuzhou University, Fuzhou 350116, PR China

*
Corresponding author. Tel.:+8618850149362 E-mail: 1243876775@qq.com

-1-
Research highlights
A general and rigorous mathematical model is developed for a multiple effect evaporation system.
Thermal vapor compression, vapor bleeding, condensate flashing and solution flashing are included
in the model.
A iteration method combined with matrix methods is used to solve the model.
Variable physical properties, heat transfer coefficient and boiling point rise are taken into
consideration in the model.
Effect of various energy saving schemes on steam consumption is studied.
The optimal feed flow sequence can be selected under a specific condition, using the general
mathematical model.

-2-
Abstract: A general and rigorous mathematical model is developed for a multiple effect evaporator
system which includes various energy reduction schemes (ERSs). These ERSs are thermal vapor
compression, vapor bleeding, condensate flashing and solution flashing. The model can achieve the
function of pumping steam at any effect and can work as an effective screening tool for the selection of
optimal feed flow sequence (OFFS). In order to solve the model, the iteration method combining with
matrix methods is proposed. To study effect of different ERSs on steam consumption (SC), an example
of the co-current quadruple effect evaporator system is considered. These schemes can reduce the SC up
to 46.56% if the feed is heated up to 88 oC and ejection coefficient at 3rd effect is set to 0.3. The OFFS
is forward sequence as long as preheating temperature is high enough when constraints of heat transfer
driving force can be satisfied.

Keywords: Rigorous mathematical model; Multiple effect evaporator; Thermal vapor compression;
Optimal feed flow sequence; Steam consumption

Nomenclature

A heat transfer area (m2)

At total heat transfer area of evaporators and preheaters (m2)

c specific heat capacity of feed or concentrated liquid (Jkg-1 C -1)

c * specific heat capacity of condensate (Jkg-1 C -1)

Q heat transfer rate of evaporator (W)

D flow rate of heating steam (kgs-1)

F flow rate of feed or concentrated liquid (kgs-1)

G flow rate of vapor produced in condensate flash tank (kgs-1)

E flow rate of bleeding vapor (kgs-1)

H specific enthalpy of vapor (Jkg -1)

K heat transfer coefficient (Wm-2 C -1)

r specific latent heat of vapor (Jkg -1)

T temperature of vapor (C)

-3-
T0 temperature of mixed steam (C)

Tk temperature of vapor produced in last effect evaporator (C)

t boiling point of concentrated liquid (C)

t 0 temperature of feed that enters evaporator (C)

t p temperature of feed leaving pre-heater (C)

tc the total effective temperature difference for heat-transfer (C)

t effective heat transfer temperature difference (C)

temperature difference loss caused by the loss of vapor pressure of feed or concentrated liquid (C)

i temperature difference loss caused by the hydrostatic head of liquid column (C)

i temperature difference loss caused by the steam flow between evaporators (C)

W vapor flow rate (kgs-1)

x mass fraction of solute in feed or concentrated liquid, dimensionless

Z flow rate of vapor produced in solution flash tank (kgs-1)

u ejection coefficient of steam jet heat pump, dimensionless

heat utilizing coefficient of evaporator, dimensionless

Subscripts

i effect number

j number of pre-heater

p pre-heater

q position of pumping vapor

n number of total effects

s live steam

Superscript

0 solution flash tank

-4-
1. Introduction

Multiple effect evaporator (MEE) is still the most important and common unit operation for the
concentrate of heat sensitive materials, such as fruit juice, vegetable juice, sugar solution and milk
(Miranda and Simpson, 2005; Urbaniec, 2004; Higa et al., 2009; Ye et al., 2005). Evaporation process
needs to consume a large amount of energy to remove a lot of water from the feed. It can be known that
the evaporation operation is an energy intensive process. Therefore, energy conservation is a most
pressing issue for the evaporation operation. Essentially, the MEE system is to repeatedly utilize the
latent heat of vapor produced in previous effect for the purpose of energy saving. Increasing the effect
number of the MEE system is an effective measure to reduce energy consumption. However, the feed to
be concentrated is usually heat sensitive material in the food industry. In order to keep the nutrient
content and natural flavors, it should be evaporated under low temperature and low pressure. For this
reason, the boiling point of liquid and the temperature of heating steam in first effect is not too high,
which leads to a result that the total effective driving force for heat transfer is not big enough.
Consequently, the increase of effect number is subject to technological constraints in the MEE system.
Generally, triple effect or quadruple effect is more common in the evaporation process of food industry.
Thus, it is necessary to search other methods to further reduce steam consumption (SC).
For the MEE system, some energy reduction schemes (ERSs) which utilize latent heat of vapor have
been reported, including thermal vapor compression (Kumar et al., 2005; El-Dessouky et al., 2000;
Ruan et al., 2015), mechanical vapor compression (El-Dessouky et al., 2000; Slesarenko, 2001) and
vapor bleeding to preheat the feed (Li and Ruan, 2009; Kaya and Ibrahim, 2007; Ruan et al., 2001a;
Ruan et al., 2001b). Furthermore, there are other ERSs which utilize sensible heat of the system, such as
condensate flashing (Ruan et al., 2001a; Gautami and Khanam, 2011; Gautami and Khanam, 2012;
Bhargava et al., 2008; Jernqvist et al., 2001; Ray and Singh, 2000; Ray et al., 2004; Khanam and
Mohanty, 2010) and solution flashing (Ruan et al., 2001b). Many researchers have analyzed the MEE
system with condensate flashing using mathematical models (Gautami and Khanam, 2012; Bhargava et
al., 2008; Jernqvist et al., 2001; Ray and Singh, 2000; Ray et al., 2004; Khanam and Mohanty, 2010).
Many investigators also incorporate vapor bleeding to preheat the feed in the MEE system (Gautami
and Khanam, 2011; Gautami and Khanam, 2012; Bhargava et al., 2008; Khanam and Mohanty, 2010;
Jyoti and Khanam, 2014). These researchers have developed the model for the MEE system with
condensate flashing and vapor bleeding. However, the rigorous mathematical model of the MEE system
which includes thermal vapor compression, vapor bleeding to preheat the feed, condensate flashing and
solution flashing simultaneously is not reported in the literature. As far as the evaporation process of
fruit juice under low temperature and pressure, compressing the same mass of vapor needs larger
volume because of its large specific volume. If mechanical vapor compressor is used to compress vapor

-5-
in the MEE system, the electric energy consumed by compressor is great. In addition, the investment
and maintenance cost of the mechanical vapor compressor is very high. Therefore, steam jet heat pump
is generally superior to mechanical vapor compressor because of the advantages of simple structure and
low investment or maintenance cost.
The application of ERSs mentioned above in the MEE system needs to change the existing design of
the MEE system, which is time and resource consumption. Effect of different ERSs on SC may have
distinctions for different feed flow sequences (FFSs). It is necessary to develop a method which is able
to reduce SC by only changing the FFS. To screen the optimal feed flow sequence (OFFS) of a MEE
system, Bhargava et al. (2008) has proposed a nonlinear model. This model could screen the OFFS
when different ERSs like feed flashing, product flashing, condensate flashing and steam splitting are
included in the MEE system. However, thermal vapor compression and vapor bleeding to preheat the
feed is not included in the model. Besides, to facilitate this screening process, Westerberg and
Hillenbrand (1988) have proposed a method based on concepts of process integration and have
developed concepts of temperature paths. Khanam and Mohanty (2010) have developed the modified
temperature path. This method can be used as a pre-selection tool. However, these methods are based on
some ideal rules, such as constant boiling point rise, negligible heat of mixing, negligible heat losses
from effects, equal driving force for each evaporator or equal vaporization. Evaporators are usually
designed based on the principle of equal heat transfer area in food industry. Therefore, these methods
may be unsuitable or they can result in greater deviation if they are used to simulate the MEE system.
In this paper, a general and rigorous mathematical model will be developed for the MEE system
which includes thermal vapor compression, vapor bleeding to preheat the feed, condensate flashing and
solution flashing. Subsequently, the solving algorithm of the model is proposed. Eventually, to study
effect of different ERSs on SC, an example of the co-current quadruple effect evaporator system,
employed for the concentrate of pineapple juice, is considered. In addition, effect of different ERSs on
SC is also studied for different FFSs. The optimal feed flow sequence will be selected according to the
study results. That has vital significance for deeply comprehending the law of the MEE system for fruit
juice concentration, improving the level of design and operation and greatly reducing energy
consumption.

2. Process description

In this section, the process of the MEE system is described by taking the cross current MEE system as
an example. For other MEE systems, the only difference is the flow direction of the concentrated liquid.
The schematic diagram of the cross current MEE system which includes different ERSs is shown in
Fig.1. These ERSs are thermal vapor compression, vapor bleeding to preheat the feed, condensate
flashing and solution flashing. The type of the evaporators shown in Fig.1 is the falling film evaporator

-6-
suitable for evaporation of fruit juice and other heat sensitive materials. The schematic diagram includes
a feed, a steam jet heat pump, n evaporators, n pre-heaters, n 1 condensate flash tanks and n 1
solution flash tanks.
The flow direction of all streams in the system is described as the following. The live steam from a
boiler enters into the steam jet heat pump. A part of vapor generated in qth effect is pumped into the
heat pump and then is mixed with live steam. The mixed steam is sent to first effect as a heating
medium. The vapor generated in i th effect is sent to ( i 1 )th effect as a heating medium. This process
continues up to last effect. Vapor from last effect enters into a condenser.
To further reduce SC, vapor produced in each effect is split into two vapor streams. One of two vapor
streams is used as a heating medium in an appropriate evaporator, and the other vapor stream is used to
preheat the feed in the pre-heater. Because the temperature of vapor decreases with the increase of
effect number, bled vapor stream, En , from n th effect as shown in Fig.1, is used to preheat the feed in

1st pre-heater. Bled vapor stream, En 1 , from ( n 1 )th effect is used to preheat the feed in 2nd pre-
heater. This process continues up to ( n i 1 )th pre-heater. Feed is sent to 1 st pre-heater and is heated
up to the target temperature, t p,np . Then the feed is sent to an appropriate evaporator (such as the i th

effect evaporator). The concentrated liquid leaving the i th effect enters into ( i 1 )th effect. This process
continues up to last effect. The concentrated liquid produced in the last effect is sent to the ( i 1 )th
effect. The concentrated liquid leaving ( i 1 )th effect is sent to ( i 2 )th effect. This process continues
up to first effect. The concentrated liquid leaving the evaporator enters into the 2nd solution flash tank.
Then the vapor produced in the 2nd solution flash tank is mixed with the vapor produced in 2nd effect.
The concentrated liquid from the 2nd solution flash tank is sent to the 3rd solution flash tank. This
process continues up to the last solution flash tank. The product exits from the last solution flash tank.
In order to make the most of energy, condensate leaving each effect except last effect as well as
condensate of bled vapor leaving each pre-heater is flashed in the appropriate flash tank. The vapor
produced in the flash tank is used as part of heating medium in next effect. Condensate leaving the flash
tank is mixed with condensate leaving next effect as well as condensate leaving the appropriate pre-
heater and then enters the next flash tank. This process continues up to the last flash tank.

3. The mathematical model

The complete model of a MEE system for fruit juice concentration is developed in this section.
Following hypotheses are made to cut down the complexity of the mathematical model proposed in this
study.
(1) The solute is totally non-volatile in evaporation process.
(2) The composition and temperature is homogenous in every evaporator during operation.

-7-
3.1. Mass balance equations

The expressions of the mass balance around the i th effect evaporator are given by
F0 x0 Fi xi (1)
n
Fi F0 f (k , i)Wk (2)
k 1

where f is a function. It is defined as

0 g ( x) g ( y)
f ( x, y ) (3)
1 g ( x) g ( y)
where 1 x n and 0 y n . In Eq (3), g is a function. It is related to the flow direction of
concentrated liquid. For example, for a countercurrent quadruple effect evaporator system, the FFS is
represented as "Feed 4 3 2 1" and g is defined as " g (0) 0 , g (4) 1 , g (3) 2 , g (2) 3 ,
g (1) 4 "; For a co-current quadruple effect evaporator system, the FFS is represented as
"Feed 1 2 3 4 " and g is defined as " g (0) 0 , g (1) 1 , g (2) 2 , g (3) 3 , g (4) 4 "; For
other FFS such as "Feed 2 1 3 4 ", g is defined as " g (0) 0 , g (2) 1 , g (1) 2 , g (3) 3 ,
g (4) 4 ".
The expressions of the mass balance around the i th solution flash tank are given by
F0 x0 Fi 0 xi0 (4)
n i
Fi 0 F0 Wk Z k (5)
k 1 k 2

where i 2,3,, n .
The total flow rate of water evaporation can be expressed as
n n
Wt Wi Z i F0 (1 x0 xN ) (6)
i 1 i 2

3.2. Energy balance equations

3.2.1. Energy balance around evaporators

Based on energy balance around each evaporator, the flow rate of vapor generated in each evaporator
can be obtained. For heat sensitive materials, boiling point elevation caused by the solute is usually
small. If falling film evaporator is used in the evaporation process, boiling point elevation caused by
static pressure of liquid column can be negligible. In addition, heat loss exists in the evaporation process.
Therefore, the superheated vapor produced in each evaporator will quickly become the saturated steam
in the actual operation. Because of this fact, it is reasonable that vapor is approximated as saturated

-8-
steam in the development of the model. If heat loss and concentrated heat is unconsidered temporarily,
the energy balance around i th effect evaporator can be expressed as
Di Hi1 Fl (i )cl (i )tl (i ) Wi Hi Fi citi Di c*Ti1 (7)

where l is a function. It is also related to the flow direction of concentrated liquid. For example, for a
countercurrent triple effect evaporator system, the FFS is represented as "Feed 3 2 1" and l is
defined as " l (3) 0 , l (2) 3 , l (1) 2 "; For a co-current triple effect evaporator system, the FFS is
represented as "Feed 1 2 3 " and l is defined as " l (1) 0 , l (2) 1 , l (3) 2 "; For other FFS
such as "Feed 2 1 3 ", l is defined as " l (2) 0 , l (1) 2 , l (3) 1". The specific heat capacity
can be obtained, using the following expression (Muramatsu et al., 2010).
ci axi bti d (8)
The values of coefficients a , b and d are shown in Table 1 (Muramatsu et al., 2010).
The following expression is obtained by putting Fi from Eq. (2) into Eq. (7) and multiplying a heat

utilizing coefficient, i , which represents the effect of heat loss and concentrated heat.

Wi i Di F0 f (k , l (i))Wk i i
n
(9)
k 1
where i H i1 cTi1 H i citi , i (cl (i )tl (i ) ci ti ) ( H i ci ti ) . Generally, in fruit juice evaporation

process, the heat utilizing coefficient i is equal to 0.98 (Ruan et al., 2001b).

The flow rate of heating steam, Di , can be represented as

Di D1 Ds 1 uq , i 1
(10)
Di Wi1 Dsui 1 Gi 1 Ei1 Z i1 , 2 i n

If i 1 q , ui 1 0 , otherwise ui 1 uq . If heat pump is excluded from the MEE system, uq 0 and

ui 1 0 .

3.2.2. Energy balance around condensate flash tanks

The energy balance around the i th ( i 1,2,, n 1 ) condensate flash tank gives
Vi c*Ti1 Gi H i Si c*Ti (11)

where Vi Dk Gk Ek , Si Dk Gk Ek .
i i 1 i 1 i i i 1

k 1 k 1 k 1 k 1 k 1 k 1
The flow rate of steam, Gi , can be rewritten as the following equation.

Gi Ds (1 uq uk ) Wk Z k c*i
i 1 i 1 i 1
(12)
k 1 k 1 k 2

-9-
where i Ti 1 Ti H i c*Ti . If i 1 , uk =Wk =Z k =0. If i 2 , Z k =0.
i 1 i 1 i 1 i 1

k 1 k 1 k 2 k 2

3.2.3. Energy balance around pre-heaters

The energy balance around the jth ( j 1,2,, n ) pre-heater gives

Qp , j p, j En- j 1rn- j 2 F0cp (tp , j tp , j 1 ) (13)

The heat utilizing coefficient of each pre-heater p, j is set to 0.98 (Ruan et al., 2001a).

3.2.4. Energy balance around solution flash tanks

The expression of the energy balance around the i th solution flash tank is
Fi01ci01ti01 Zi H i Fi 0ci0ti0 (14)
where i 2,3, , n .
Combining Eqs. (5) and (14) and considering heat loss and concentrated heat, the following
expression can be obtained

Z i F0 Wk Z k i0i0
n i 1
(15)
k 1 k 2
where i0 ci01ti01 ci0ti0 H i ci0ti0 . The heat utilizing coefficient of each solution flash tank, i0 , is
i 1
set to 0.98 (Ruan et al., 2001b). If i is equal to 2, Z
k 2
k is equal to 0 in Eq. (15).

3.3. Steam jet heat pump and ejection coefficient

Steam jet heat pump is a device which uses steam to pump liquids, gases or a mixture of liquids and
gasses. The way it works in a MEE system can be described in the following. A high velocity jet of the
motive steam with high temperature and pressure is produced through nozzles, which creates vacuum
condition. The vapor produced in evaporator is pumped to the heat pump because of pressure difference.
And then, the motive steam and the vapor are mixed in the mixing chamber. At last, the mixed steam is
fed to first effect as heating steam. The ejection coefficient not only is an important technical indicator
of steam jet heat pump but also is an important design parameter of multiple effect evaporator system
with thermal vapor compression. Based on the experimental data of Sokolov and Zinger (1977), Wang
and Xiang (1997), the following expression is used to calculate the ejection coefficient of steam jet heat
pump at qth effect.
uq 123 1 H s H 0 H 0 H q 1 (16)

-10-
where 1 q n . 1 , 2 and 3 are the velocity coefficients of the nozzle, the mixed chamber and the

diffusion chamber, respectively. In this paper, the values of 1 , 2 and 3 are equal to 0.95, 0.975 and
0.9, respectively (Wang and Xiang, 1997). The correction coefficient can be set to 1.1 (Wang and
Xiang, 1997).

3.4. Heat transfer rate equations

3.4.1 Heat transfer rate equations of each evaporator

During the evaporation process, the temperature difference is constant. The heat transfer area of each
evaporator, Ai , can be calculated by the following expression.

Ai Qi ( Ki ti ) Di ri ( Ki ti ) (17)

where K i represents the heat transfer coefficient of any effect evaporator. In the literatures, K i is
considered to be a constant (Miranda and Simpson, 2005; Li and Ruan, 2009; Ruan et al., 2001a, 2001b).
When operating conditions change, the heat transfer coefficient should be re-estimated under specific
conditions. In this paper, the following empirical correlation is used to estimate the heat transfer
coefficient for the concentration of pineapple juice (Song, 2010).
0.0698
3600 Fi
K i 4.968 t i0.2681Ti 1.5738 xi0.0208 (18)
i nb
where nb is the number of heat transfer components. The following expression is used to calculate the
density of pineapple juice (Song, 2010).
i 4.788576 xi 0.621Ti 1000.857 (19)
In Eq. (17), the effective temperature difference is defined as the following expressions.
ti T0 t1 , i 1
(20)
ti Ti1 i ti , i 2
From Eq. (17), it can be known that the effective temperature difference should be determined before
the heat transfer area is calculated. For the MEE system shown in Fig.1, the total temperature difference
is calculated, using the following expression
n n
tc ti T0 Tk (i i i) (21)
i 1 i 1

The value of i can be computed, using the following equation

i 1.78xi 6.22 xi
2
(22)

-11-
 For falling film evaporators, the temperature difference loss caused by the hydrostatic head of liquid
column can be considered as 0 o C . According to engineering experience, the value of i is usually
equal to 1. In the iterative calculation process of heat transfer area, the total temperature difference is
assigned to each evaporator according to the principle of equal area. The effective temperature
difference of each evaporator can be obtained by the following expression

ti tc Di ri / K i Di ri / K i
n
(23)
i 1
The boiling point of liquid in each evaporator needs to be known before calculating the values of i ,

i , and ti . Based on the phase equilibrium equation (Ruan et al., 2001a, 2001b), the value of ti can be
obtained by the following equation.
ti Ti i i (24)

3.4.2 Heat transfer rate equations of each pre-heater

Combining the heat transfer rate equation of each pre-heater and energy balance equation of each pre-
heater, the following expression can be obtained
Qp, j K p, j Ap, j (tp, j tp, j 1 )/ln[(Tn j 1 tp, j 1 )/(Tn j 1 tp, j )] (25)

The following expression can be obtained by combining Eq. (13) with Eq. (25)
Ap, j F0 cp ln[(Tn j 1 tp, j 1 )/(Tn j 1 tp, j )]/K p, j (26)

If the design of the pre-heaters is based on the principle of the equal area, the following expression
can be used to the average area Ap
np
1
Ap
np
A
j 1
p, j (27)

The temperature of the feed leaving each pre-heater can be calculated by the following expression

tp , j Tn j 1 Tn j 1 tp , j 1 exp Ap K p, j F0 cp (28)

Many parameters in the above model involve the enthalpy and the latent heat of saturated steam. For
a convenience of programming and calculation, the following regression equations based on
experimental data are used to calculate the values of ri and H i (Ruan et al., 2001a, 2001b).

H i 2474771.0 2410.2Ti 3.8Ti 2 (29)

ri 2466904.9 1584.3Ti1 4.9Ti21 (30)

4. Solution of the mathematical model

-12-
 The calculation of the mathematical model requires solving the mass balance equations, energy
balance equations, phase equilibrium equations and heat transfer rate equations simultaneously. After
these equations are solved, the values of Ai , Di , Wi , Ei , Gi and Z i could be obtained. Calculation
formulas of the developed mathematical model are essentially nonlinear algebraic equations. As many
parameters of the mathematical model are interrelated and interact on each other, it is extremely
difficult to solve the mathematical model. To solve the mathematical model, an iteration method
combining with matrix methods is developed in this paper. Nonlinear algebraic equations of the
mathematical model should be rewritten as a matrix equation.

4.1. The matrix equation of mass balance and energy balance

n formulas for calculating the value of Wi ( i 1,2,, n ) can be obtained by Eq. (9). Based on Eq. (6),

a formula can be obtained to calculate the value of Wt . There are n 1 formulas for calculating the

value of Gi ( i 1,2,, n 1 ) according to Eq. (12). Similarly, there are n formulas for calculating the

value of Ei ( i 1,2,, n ) according to Eq. (13) and n 1 formulas for calculating the value of

Z i ( i 2,, n ) according to Eq. (15). The number of formulas mentioned above is 4n 1 , which is
equal to the number of unknown variables. These formulas form a set of nonlinear algebraic equations.
It is extremely difficult to solve these nonlinear equations by reason of a large number of variables and
high nonlinearity. In order to solve the model more efficiently, the above 4n 1 nonlinear algebraic
equations are written as a matrix equation. The coefficient matrix of the matrix equation is a sparse
matrix. Rewriting the coefficient matrix as block matrixes can make the structure of the original matrix
equation much simpler and make the model easier to be solved. Through the analysis of the model
structure, the block matrix expression of the nonlinear algebraic equations is given as follow
A1 A2 A3 A4 B1 C1
A A6 A7 A8 B2 C2
5 (31)
A9 A10 A11 A12 B3 C3

A13 A14 A15 A16 B4 C4

where A7 , A9 , A10 , A12 , A14 , A15 and C2 are null matrixes. The other block matrixes in Eq. (31) are

described in detail below. The control parameters, ki ( i 1,2,, n 1 ), are artificially added to block

matrix A5 so as to realize the arbitrariness of effect for pumping and the generality of the model with or

without a heat pump. Whether there is thermal vapor compression or not, the value of k i is equal to 1

for i 1,2,..., q and the value of ki is equal to 1 (1 uq ) for i q 1, q 2,..., n - 1 in the block matrix A5 .

-13-
 11 1 u q 1 11 f 1, l 1 11 f 2, l 1 11 f i, l 1 11 f n, l 1
u f 1, l 2 1 f 2, l 2 2 2 f i, l 2 2 2 f n, l 2
2 2 1 2 2 2 2 2 2

3 3u 2 3 3 f 1, l 3 3 3 3 3 f 2, l 3 3 3 f i, l 3 3 3 f n, l 3


A1
i i ui 1 i i f 1, l i i i f 2, l i 1 i i f i, l i i i f n, l i


u n n f 1, l n n n f 2, l n n n f i, l n 1 n n f n, l n
n n n1
0 1 1 1 1 n1n1
0
0
0
3 3
2 2
33
4 4

A2
A4
ii
i i

n n
n n
0 ( n1)( n1) 1
1 1 1 1 ( n1)( n1)

0 0
0
2 2 1
3 3 0
1

A3 A6 1
i i 0


1
n n 0 ( n 1)( n 1)

0 0 ( n1)n

k1c 1 1 u q 0 0 p,n r2
k 2 c 2 1 u q c 2

0 0
p,n1r3

A5
k i c i 1 u q c i c i
A11
0 0 p,n1i ri


k n1c n1 1 u q c n1 c n1 c n1 p,1rn1 nn

0 0 n1n1

-14-
 0 0 0
0 0 0

c 3 0 0

c 4 c 4 0 0
A8


c i 0 0


c n1 c n1 c n1 c n1

0 0 ( n1)( n1)

0 20 20 20 20 20 20
Ds
0 3 3 30 30 30 30 E1
0 0
W G1
1 E
A13 G2
2
0 B2
B W B
0 i 1 i 1
0 0
i01
0
i 1
i 1 i 1
0 1

2

3


Gn1 n11 En n1
Wn
n 11
0 n n n0 n0 n n ( n1)( n1)
0 0 0 0

1
0 0 1
3 3 Z 2
40 40 40 40 1 Z
3
A16 B
4

i01 i01 i01 i01 i01 i01 1
Z n ( n1)1

0 0 n0 n0 n0 n0 n0 n0 1 ( n1)( n1)
n n

F0 11 F0 cp t p ,n F0 cp t p ,n1 20 20 F0
F F c t F c t 0 0
0 2 2 0 p p ,n 2 F
C4 3 3 0
0 p p ,n 1
C1 C3

F
F0 cp t p ,1 F0 cp t p ,0 n1 n n F0 ( n1)1
0 n n 0 0

Wt
n 11

4.2. Advantages and generality of the matrix equation

The matrix equation described in Eq. (31) is the general mathematical model of a MEE system which
includes thermal vapor compression, vapor bleeding to preheat the feed, condensate flashing and
solution flashing. This matrix model has several advantages, such as a clear structure and a definite
meaning, easiness for programming and strong universality. It is easy to be simplified into the model of
a MEE system with different combinations of these schemes.
If thermal vapor compression is included in the system and a part of vapor generated in qth effect is
sent to the heat pump, the value of u q in A1 or A5 is unequal to 0, but the value of ui in A1 are set to 0

-15-
for i 1,2,...., q 1, q + 1,..., n 1 . If thermal vapor compression is excluded from the system, the value
of u q is equal to 0. Because of these control parameters, the function of pumping steam at any effect can

be achieved. If A2 , A5 , A6 and A8 are set as null matrices, the matrix equation could be simplified into the

model of a MEE system without condensate flashing. If A3 , A11 and C3 are null matrices, the matrix
equation could be simplified into the model of a MEE system without vapor bleeding to preheat the feed.
If A4 , A8 , A13 , A16 and C4 are null matrices, the matrix equation could be simplified into the model of a
MEE system without solution flashing. Similarly, the matrix equation can be converted into the model
of a MEE system with only one kind of ERSs or none of ERSs.
In addition, the number of pre-heaters or solution flash tanks can also be changed by changing some
elements of matrices. For example, if nth and ( n 1 )th pre-heaters are excluded from the MEE system,
the following matrices can be used to replace the corresponding matrices in Eq. (31).
0
0
0
0 p,n-3 r4


C3 0 p p ,n2
F c t F c t
0 p p ,n 3
A11

p,n-i 1ri

F0 cp t p ,1 F0 cp t p ,0
n1
p,1rn1 nn

0 0
0 0

0 0

4 4 0
A3

ii 0


n n 0
0 ( n1)n
0

4.3. The iteration method combining with matrix methods

To solve the matrix equation, the initial values should be assign to the elements of coefficient
matrixes A1 , A2 , A3 , A4 , A5 , A6 , A8 , A11 , A13 and A16 as well as column vectors C1 , C3 and C4 . These

elements are related to some parameters or variables, such as i , i , i0 , i , i , i0 and u q . However, i ,

and i are related to c i , H i , t 0 , t i and Ti . i0 is related to ci0 , H i and t i0 . i is related to H i and Ti . u q

is related to H s , H 0 and H q . Besides, Ai is related to Di , ri , K i and ti . ti is related to t c , i and

-16-
i . Ap , j is related to ri , t p , j , Tp , j and K p . j . It can be seen that many parameters or variables in the

mathematical model are interrelated and interact on each other. Therefore, the calculation process needs
to keep the iteration. An iteration method combining with matrix methods is developed to solve the
model (Li and Ruan, 2009; Ruan et al., 2001a, 2001b). This method is helpful in solving the matrix
equation and has advantages of good stability and quick convergence speed. Once the initial values of
these parameters are given, the aforementioned nonlinear equations will be converted into a set of linear
equations. The main steps of the iterative process are described as the following. First, the initial values
of i , i , i0 , i , i0 , i , tc and other parameters are determined by experience. And then, the values

of Ds , Wi , Gi , Ei and Z i can be obtained, using the Gauss-Jordan method. Finally, the values of

xi , xi0 , ti , ti0 , Ti is obtained, which can be used to update those parameters. The model can be solved by

repeating the above steps until the values of Ai and Ap, j stop changing. Detailed flow chart of solution

of the model is shown in Fig.2. For the solution of the mathematical model, a computer program is
developed in Visual Basic 6.0.

5. Results and discussion

5.1. Sample study

The sample problem comes from a juice factory, and the feed is obtained from pineapples. The
concentration of pineapple juice is increased from 0.1 to 0.35 (mass fraction). The feed flow rate is
3.7 kgs-1. The inlet temperature of fresh pineapple juice is 30.7 oC. The pineapple juice is heated up to
the target temperature and then the pineapple juice is fed to first effect. Fresh pineapple juice is
concentrated in a co-current quadruple effect evaporator system. Falling film evaporators are used in the
system and they are made of stainless steel materials. The temperature of live steam is 145 oC and the
temperature of vapor in condenser is 46 oC. It should be noted that the temperature of live steam is
reduced from 145 oC to 110 oC through a valve in the factory. And then it is sent to first effect.
Therefore, the temperature of live steam is set to 110 oC if thermal vapor compression is excluded from
the MEE system. The heat transfer coefficient of each evaporator, K i , is estimated by Eq. (18). The

number of heat transfer components is set to 10, namely nb 10 . A part of vapor produced in 3rd effect
evaporator is pumped to steam jet heat pump, namely q 3 . The ejection coefficient of steam jet heat
pump is set to 0.3, namely uq 0.3 .

Five different cases are considered. For the convenience of description, condensate flashing, vapor
bleeding to preheat the feed, solution flashing and thermal vapor compression is marked as, ,
and , respectively. The design conditions of these cases are inputted into the software and the study

-17-
results are shown in Table 2. According to the study results, the energy saving effect of various ERSs
will be evaluated and analyzed.
For evaporators made of stainless steel or carbon steel materials in MEE system, the operating cost is
computed based on SC and the capital cost is computed based on flash tanks, pumps, pre-heaters and
evaporators. The operating cost accounts for 88 to 96 percent of the total annual cost, while the capital
cost only accounts for 4 to 12 percent of the annual total cost (Ruan et al., 2001a, 2001b).

5.2. Validity of the mathematical model

In order to verify the validity of the model developed in this paper, the comparison between the
simulation results and plant data has been carried out. The plant data are obtained from an actual and
co-current quadruple effect evaporation system with condensate flashing and vapor bleeding to preheat
the feed, and the preheating temperature is equal to 86.5 oC. The comparison is shown in Table 3. It
can be known that the simulation results are fairly consistent with the plant data. The relative errors
shown in Table 3 are acceptable. This also indicates that the calculation of the various variables (such
as the heat transfer coefficient and the specific heat capacity, etc) is reasonable in this paper. In other
words, the developed model can be used to simulate the concentration process of fruit juice rationally.

5.3. Comparison between different ERSs

It can be known from Table 2 that the SC decreases by 2.60% and the total heat transfer area
increases by 1.47% if condensate flashing is included in the MEE system. Because the operating cost
accounts for about 90 percent of the total annual cost, the economic benefit brought by the decrease of
the SC is far more than the increase of the capital cost caused by the increase of heat transfer area.
Therefore, condensate flashing is still an effective measure to reduce the energy consumption.
If condensate flashing and vapor bleeding to preheat the feed are included in the MEE system
simultaneously and the preheating temperature is set to 68 oC, the SC can be reduced by 18.08%.
Though the heat area of pre-heaters increases, the total heat transfer area has no obvious change.
Therefore, the operating cost can be greatly reduced. The results show that vapor bleeding to preheat the
feed can significantly reduce the energy consumption in the co-current MEE system. It has a better
energy saving effect to use condensate flashing and vapor bleeding to preheat the feed simultaneously.
Meanwhile, it can also be seen that the SC can be reduced by 29.04% if the preheating temperature is
set to 88 oC. This suggests that the higher the preheating temperature, the better the energy saving effect.
However, the preheating temperature is less than the temperature of vapor produced in first effect by
reason of heat transfer driving force.

-18-
 If condensate flashing, vapor bleeding to preheat the feed and thermal vapor compression are used
together in the MEE system, the SC decreases by 46.56% and the total heat transfer area increases by
24.20%. The total annual cost can be greatly reduced. The study results show that a best energy saving
effect is obtained by using thermal vapor compression, vapor bleeding and condensate flashing in the
co-current MEE system simultaneously.
On the basis of the analysis above, it can be concluded that the aforementioned three kinds of ERSs
all have outstanding energy saving effect. And the energy saving effect from high to low is thermal
vapor compression, vapor bleeding to preheat the feed and condensate flashing. The best energy saving
effect can be obtained by using these three kinds of schemes simultaneously in the co-current MEE
system for the concentration of the pineapple juice.

5.4. Effect of u q and q on SC, Ai and Ap, j

The variations of u q and q will change the temperature of the mixed steam. Further, it will change the

total driving force of transfer heat. Therefore, it is necessary to study the effect of u q and q on SC, Ai

and Ap, j . The co-current quadruple effect evaporator system is considered as an example. Condensate

flashing, vapor bleeding to preheat the feed and thermal vapor compression are included in the system.
The preheating temperature is set to 65o C . Figs 3, 4 and 5 has been plotted to show that effect of u q

and q on SC, Ai and Ap, j , respectively.

From these figures, it can be seen that Ds varies obviously with u q and q for a given value of Ts .

This suggests that thermal vapor compression has a most obvious energy saving effect. As shown in
Fig. 3, if the value of q is fixed, Ds decreases with the increase of u q . It is due to the increase of flow

rate of vapor sucked by the steam jet heat pump. Meanwhile, it can also be found that the larger the
value of q , the more live steam the MEE system can save for a fixed value of u q . This is because latent

heat of vapor produced at the latter effect is utilized more fully and efficiently. However, it can also be
seen from Figs. 4 and 5 that Ai and Ap, j also increases with the increase of u q for a fixed value of q .

Furthermore, the larger the value of q , the more the heat transfer area increases. The results can be
explained from the thermodynamic point of view. The larger the value of q , the smaller the value of
H q . The decrease of H q and the increase of u q will result in the decrease of H 0 or T0 . This has further

led to the decreases of tc , ti and Ti . The final result is that the heat transfer area of each evaporator

or each pre-heaters increase. It is worth noting that the values of u q and q should not be too large.

-19-
Otherwise, the values of T0 , tc and ti drop too much. Further, it will lead to a result that the

constraints, ti 5 oC, are unable to be satisfied.

In conclusion, there might be the optimal u q and q to achieve the minimum total annual cost, which

is a complex optimization problem for the MEE system. It needs to be further researched in the future.

5.5. Selection of OFFS

In this section, the effect of different FFSs on SC is studied when different ERSs are included in the
MEE system. Four kinds of feasible FFSs are considered and shown in Table 4. The quadruple effect
evaporator system is taken as an example. The ejection coefficient of steam jet heat pump at 3rd effect
is set to 0.3. The study results for each FFS are shown in Tables 2, 5, 6 and 7, respectively.
From the Tables 2, 5, 6 and 7, it can be seen that the OFFS is S2 if none of ERSs is included in the
MEE system. If only condensate flashing is included in the MEE system, the OFFS is still S2.
Furthermore, it can be seen that the energy saving effect of condensate flashing is different for different
FFSs. It is obvious that the energy saving effect of condensate flashing for S2, S3 and S4 is better than
the energy saving effect of condensate flashing for S1. From the Tables 2, 5, 6 and 7, it can also be seen
that vapor bleeding to preheat the feed has a most obvious energy saving effect and the energy saving
effect is closely related to the preheating temperature. The SC of co-current MEE system decreases
rapidly if vapor bleeding to preheat the feed is included in the MEE system. For S2, S3 and S4, the
energy saving effect of vapor bleeding to preheat the feed is limited because the preheating temperature
can not be further increased. Especially for S2, the vapor bleeding to preheat the feed reduces the SC by
only 2.22%. Though the solution flashing can be included in the countercurrent MEE system, the SC is
still greater than the SC of co-current MEE system if the feed is heated up to 88 o C . The results can be
seen from the fifth column of the Tables 2, 5, 6 and 7. This suggests that the OFFS is S1 instead of S2.
If thermal vapor compression is included in MEE system, the SC of the MEE system for S1 is
significantly less than the SC of the MEE system for S2.

6. Conclusions

In this paper, a general and rigorous mathematical model of a MEE system which includes various
ERSs simultaneously is established for the first time. These ERSs are thermal vapor compression, vapor
bleeding, condensate flashing and solution flashing. As long as some simple processing is done on some
block matrices of the matrix equation, the complex mathematical model could be simplified into the
model of a MEE system with different ERSs for different FFSs. Therefore, the model has strong
generality.
The iteration method combining with matrix methods is an efficient algorithm to solve the
mathematical model of the complex MEE system for fruit juice concentration. This algorithm has been
achieved in the computer and designed as generic software, using Visual Basic 6.0 language. The
generic software can quickly and accurately solve the mathematical model of the MEE system with
different ERSs. The simulation results are fairly consistent with the factory data. It is of great theoretical
and practical significance to deeply comprehend the law of the MEE system, to improve the level of
design and operation and to greatly reduce energy consumption.

-20-
 The simulation results indicate that the energy saving effect from high to low is thermal vapor
compression, vapor bleeding to preheat the feed and condensate flashing in the co-current quadruple
effect evaporator system. The higher the preheating temperature, the larger the values of u q and q, the
more live steam the MEE system can save. However, the total heat transfer area increases with the
increase of the values of u q and q. If the feed is heated up to 88 oC and ejection coefficient of steam jet
heat pump at 3rd effect is set to 0.3, the SC can reduce by 46.56% and the total heat transfer area
increases by 24.20%.
To select the OFFS, the effect of various ERSs on SC is studied for different FFSs. The study results
indicate that the OFFS is backward flow sequence when none of ERSs or only condensate flashing is
included in the MEE system. Meanwhile, the study results also indicate that condensate flashing is an
efficient energy saving measure. However, the energy saving effect of condensate flashing has obvious
distinctions for different FFSs and it can obtain a best energy saving effect for the countercurrent MEE
system. The study results also show that vapor bleeding to preheat the feed has a most obvious energy
saving effect for different FFSs and its energy saving effect is dependent on the preheating temperature.
The SC of co-current MEE system is less than the SC of countercurrent MEE system as long as the
preheating temperature is high enough when the constraints are able to be satisfied. If the thermal vapor
compression is also included in the MEE system, the OFFS is still the forward flow sequence if the
preheating temperature is high enough under the constraints of driving force of heat transfer. The
general mathematical model can be used to select the OFFS as a tool when different ERSs like thermal
vapor compression, vapor bleeding to preheat the feed, condensate flashing and solution flashing are
included in the MEE system.
The mathematical model of the MEE system has a wide application prospect in the concentration of
other heat sensitivity materials, such as vegetable juice, sugar solution, milk and so on. The energy
consumption can be further reduced if the optimization could be carried out. The researches of the
proposed model in this paper have laid a good foundation for further optimal design. The further
research can focus on the optimal design in the future.

Acknowledgment

The authors acknowledge the financial support provided by the National Science Foundation for
Fostering Talents in Basic Research of the National Natural Science Foundation of China (Grant No.
J1103303).

-21-
References

Miranda, V., & Simpson, R. (2005). Modelling and simulation of an industrial multiple effect
evaporator: tomato concentrate. Journal of Food Engineering, 66, 203210.
Urbaniec, K. (2004). The evolution of evaporator stations in the beet-sugar industry. Journal of Food
Engineering, 61, 505508.
Higa, M., Freitas, A. J., Bannwart, A. C., & Zemp, R. J. (2009). Thermal integration of multiple effect
evaporator in sugar plant. Applied Thermal Engineering, 29, 515522.
Ye, A., Singh, H., Taylor, M., & Anema, S. (2005). Disruption of fat globules during concentration of
whole milk in a pilot scale multiple-effect evaporator. International Journal of Dairy Technology,
58, 143149.
Kumar, R. S., Mani, A., & Kumaraswamy, S. (2005). Analysis of a jet-pump-assisted vacuum
desalination system using power plant waste heat. Desalination, 179, 345354.
El-Dessouky, H. T., Ettouney, H. M., & Al-Juwayhel, F. (2000). Multiple effect evaporationvapour
compression desalination processes. Chemical Engineering Research and Design, 78, 662676.
Ruan, Q., Jiang, H., Nian, M., & Yan, Z. (2015). Mathematical modeling and simulation of
countercurrent multiple effect evaporation for fruit juice concentration. Journal of Food
Engineering, 146, 243251.
Slesarenko, V. V. (2001). Heat pumps as a source of heat energy for desalination of seawater.
Desalination, 139, 405410.
Li, L., & Ruan, Q. (2009). Mathematical model and process simulation of parallel-feed multi-effect
evaporation system. Journal of Chemical Industry and Engineering (China), 60, 104111.
Kaya, D., & Ibrahim S. H. (2007). Mathematical modeling of multiple-effect evaporators and energy
economy. Energy, 32, 15361542.
Ruan, Q., Chen, W., Huang, S., & Ye, C. (2001a). The mathematics model and matrix method of
complex cocurrent multi-effect evaporation. Engineering Sciences (in Chinese), 3, 3641.
Ruan, Q., Huang, S., Ye, C., & Chen, W. (2001b). Conventional design model of complex
countercurrent multi-effect evaporation and its algorithm. Journal of Chemical Industry and
Engineering (China), 52, 616621.
Gautami, G., & Khanam, S. (2011). Development of a new model for multiple effect evaporator system.
Computers and Chemical Engineering, 35, 19831993.
Gautami, G., & Khanam, S. (2012). Selection of optimum configuration for multiple effect evaporator
system. Desalination, 288, 1623.
Bhargava, R., Khanam, S., Mohanty, B., & Ray, A. K. (2008). Selection of optimal feed flow sequence
for a multiple effect evaporator system. Computers and Chemical Engineering, 32, 22032216.

-22-
Jernqvist, A., Jernqvist, M., & Aly, G. (2001). Simulation of thermal desalination processes.
Desalination, 134, 187193.
Ray, A. K., & Singh, P. (2000). Simulation of multiple effect evaporator for black liquor concentration.
IPPTA Journal, 12, 5363.
Ray, A. K., Sharma, N. K., & Singh, P. (2004). Estimation of energy gains through modeling and
simulation of multiple effect evaporator system in a paper mill. IPPTA Journal, 16, 3545.
Khanam, S., & Mohanty, B. (2010). Energy reduction schemes for multiple effect evaporator system.
Applied Energy, 87, 11021111.
Jyoti, G., & Khanam, S. (2014). Simulation of heat integrated multiple effect evaporator system.
International Journal of Thermal Sciences, 76, 110117.
Westerberg, A. W., & Hillenbrand, J. B. (1988). The synthesis of multiple effect evaporator systems
using minimum utility insights-II liquid flow pattern selection. Computers and Chemical
Engineering, 12, 625636.
Muramatsu, Y., Sakaguchi, E., Orikasa, T., & Tagawa, A. (2010). Simultaneous estimation of the
thermophysical properties of three kinds of fruit juices based on the measured result by a transient
heat flow probe method. Journal of Food Engineering, 96, 607613.
Sokolov, . ., & Zinger, N. M. (1977). Jet Devices. Beijing: Science Press.
Wang, Q., & Xiang, B. (1997). A study of method for calculating jet coefficient of steam jet
compressor. Acta Energiae Solaris Sinica (in Chinese), 18, 314321.
Song, J. T., Zhao, Z., & Du, Y. X. (2010). Research on heating transfer property during evaporating
pineapple juice. Food Machinery (in Chinese), 26, 104106.

-23-
 Figure 1

solution flash tank

Ds t10 t 20 t q0 t i01 t n02 t n01 t n0
t i0
Ts x 0 2 x 0 q 0 x 0
i xi0 x 0 n-1 x 0
n xn0
1 q 1 x q
i 1 n2 n 1

F10 Fq01 Fq0 Fi 01 Fi 0 Fn02 Fn01 Fn0

uqDs, Hq, Tq Z2 Zq Zi Zn-1 Zn
heat pump

Ei En-1 En

W2 Dq Wq Tq Wi Ti Dn-1 Wn-1 Tn
T0
W1 T1 D2 T2 Di Tn-1 Dn Wn
condenser
D1 G1 G2 Gq Gi Gn-1
1 T1 2 T2 q Tq i Ti n-1 Tn-1 n
t1 t2 t3 tq t0 ti tn-2 tn-1 tn
F1 F2 F3 Fq F0 Fi Fn-2 Fn-1 Fn
Di Dn-1 Dn
x1 D1 x2 D2 x3 xq Dq x0 xi xn-2 xn-1 xn
Ti-1 Tn-2 Tn-1
T0 T1 Tq-1

V1 1 S1 V2 2 S2 Vq q Sq Vi i Si Vn-1 n-1 Sn-1

condensate flash tank En-2 En-1

Ei Ei+1 En-1 En
t p,np tp,n-i tp,n-i-1 tp,2 tp,1 F0, x0, tp,0
Live steam or Vapor Condensate Feed or concentrated
mixed steam Feed
liquid pre-heater Ei Ei+1 En-1 En

Fig.1. Schematic diagram of a cross-current MEE system with four kinds of energy reduction schemes.

-24-
 Start Calculate ti using Eq. (23)

Input the values of n , x0 , xN , T0 , Calculate ' i using Eq. (22)

Tk , F0 , t 0 , t p ,np , c* , u q , and so on
and so on Calculate Ti and t i using Eqs. (20) and (24)
Calculate Wt according to Eq. (6)
Calculate ci , H i , ri and i using Eqs.
Determine g (x) and l (x) according (8), (29), (30) and (19), respectively
to feed flow sequences
Obtain the value of K i using Eq. (18)
Input the initial values of i , i ,
i , i0 , ri , tc , K i , t p, j , Ai' and Ap' , j Calculate H 0 using
Eq. (16), respectively
Assign the values to the elements of
coefficient matrixes and column vectors Calculate tc using Eq. (21)

Obtain the values of Ds , Wi , Gi , Ei

Calculate Ap, j and Ai using Eqs. (26)
and Z i using the Gauss-Jordan method
and (17), respectively

Calculate Di , Fi , Fi 0 , xi and xi0 using Eqs.

Calculate t p , j using Eq. (28)
(10), (2), (5), (1) and (4), respectively

Update the values of i , i , i0 and i

Use the updated values of i , i ,
i0 , i , ri , tc , K i , t p , j as initial values No
Ai Ai' and Ap , j Ap' , j

Assign the values of Ai and Yes

'
Output Ai , Ap , j , Ds , Di , Wi , Gi , Ei , Z i and so on
'
Ap , j to A and A , respectively
i p,j

Fig.2. Flow chart of solution of the model.

-25-
Fig.3. Effect of uq on SC for different values of q.
Fig.4. Effect of uq on Ai for different values of q.
Fig.5. Effect of uq on Ap,h for different values of q.

-26-
Fig 3
Fig 4
Fig 5
Table 1 Value of coefficients of Eq. (8).

Coefficient Grape juice Pineapple juice Orange juice

a (kJkg-1 oC-1 %-1) 2.57910-2 2.74310-2 3.08410-2
b (kJkg-1 oC -2) 1.05310-2 9.78810-3 9.92910-3
d (kJkg-1 oC -1) 3.938 3.883 4.135

-27-
Table 2 Simulation results of the co-current quadruple effect evaporator system with different ERSs.

ERSs , , ,,
Ai (m2) 58.59 59.45 52.65 48.76 55.07
Ap,j (m2) 0 0 4.62 11.45 17.70
Ds (kgs-1) 1.1481 1.1182 0.9405 0.8147 0.6135
W1 (kgs-1) 0.5709 0.5336 0.6477 0.6921 0.7329
W2 (kgs-1) 0.6234 0.6073 0.6486 0.6778 0.7214
W3 (kgs-1) 0.6753 0.6783 0.6443 0.6416 0.6937
W4 (kgs-1) 0.7733 0.8236 0.7022 0.6313 0.4948
G1 (kgs-1) 0 0.0233 0.0181 0.0141 0.0131
G2 (kgs-1) 0 0.0197 0.0235 0.0256 0.0286
G3 (kgs-1) 0 0.0390 0.0438 0.0479 0.0618
E1 (kgs-1) 0 0 0.0764 0.0948 0.0911
E2 (kgs-1) 0 0 0.0816 0.1195 0.1190
E3 (kgs-1) 0 0 0.0818 0.1477 0.1301
E4 (kgs-1) 0 0 0.0281 0.0577 0.0758
t0 (oC) 30.7 30.7 68 88 88
Increase in At (%) 1.47 2.25 2.76 24.20
Reduction in SC (%) 2.60 18.08 29.04 46.56

-28-
Table 3 Comparison of simulation results and plant data.

Cases Simulation results Plant data The relative error (%)

Ai (m2) 49.05 47.28 3.74
Ap,j (m2) 10.59 11.17 5.19
Ds (kgs-1) 0.8254 0.8423 2.01

-29-
Table 4 Feasible FFSs in a MEE system.

Sequence no. FFS

S1 1 2 3 4
S2 4 3 2 1
S3 3 4 2 1
S4 2 1 3 4

-30-
Table 5 Simulation results of the MEE system with different ERSs and feed flow sequence S2.

ERSs , ,, ,,,
Ai (m2) 59.96 60.54 59.08 56.30 68.10
Ap,j (m2) 0 0 15.65 15.65 15.65
Ds (kgs-1) 0.9621 0.9079 0.8866 0.8298 0.6595
W1 (kgs-1) 0.8697 0.8264 0.8061 0.7542 0.7775
W2 (kgs-1) 0.7615 0.7446 0.7254 0.6735 0.6879
W3 (kgs-1) 0.5756 0.5762 0.5603 0.5263 0.6114
W4 (kgs-1) 0.4360 0.4956 0.5510 0.5496 0.4547
G1 (kgs-1) 0 0.0171 0.0167 0.0147 0.0151
G2 (kgs-1) 0 0.0366 0.0358 0.0317 0.0333
G3 (kgs-1) 0 0.0634 0.0619 0.0574 0.0644
E4 (kgs-1) 0 0 0.0691 0.0691 0.0691
Z2 (kgs-1) 0 0 0 0.0334 0.0319
Z3 (kgs-1) 0 0 0 0.0381 0.0390
Z4 (kgs-1) 0 0 0 0.0678 0.0404
t0 (oC) 30.7 30.7 41 41 41
Increase in At (%) 0.96 5.05 0.41 20.10
Reduction in SC (%) 5.63 7.85 13.75 31.45

-31-
Table 6 Simulation results of the MEE system with different ERSs and feed flow sequence S3.

ERSs , ,, ,,,
Ai (m2) 59.74 59.58 56.20 53.28 68.90
Ap,j (m2) 0 0 11.78 11.18 17.85
Ds (kgs-1) 1.0581 0.9996 0.9340 0.8803 0.6711
W1 (kgs-1) 0.9420 0.8962 0.8369 0.7876 0.7864
W2 (kgs-1) 0.7167 0.6865 0.6334 0.5744 0.6228
W3 (kgs-1) 0.4404 0.4324 0.5459 0.5123 0.6236
W4 (kgs-1) 0.5437 0.6278 0.6266 0.6352 0.5067
G1 (kgs-1) 0 0.0223 0.0205 0.0185 0.0164
G2 (kgs-1) 0 0.0497 0.0456 0.0412 0.0370
G3 (kgs-1) 0 0.0720 0.0629 0.0588 0.0617
E3 (kgs-1) 0 0 0.1097 0.1120 0.0919
E4 (kgs-1) 0 0 0.0581 0.0561 0.0749
Z2 (kgs-1) 0 0 0 0.0404 0.0342
Z3 (kgs-1) 0 0 0 0.0380 0.0371
Z4 (kgs-1) 0 0 0 0.0550 0.0321
t0 (oC) 30.7 30.7 55 55 55
Increase in At (%) 0.26 3.94 1.45 30.28
Reduction in SC (%) 5.53 11.73 16.80 36.57

-32-
Table 7 Simulation results of the MEE system with different ERSs and feed flow sequence S4.

ERSs , , ,,
Ai (m2) 57.36 57.85 52.53 50.90 58.27
Ap,j (m2) 0 0 7.26 12.02 18.80
Ds (kgs-1) 1.0554 1.0112 0.8886 0.8441 0.6509
W1 (kgs-1) 0.9215 0.8884 0.7753 0.7358 0.7368
W2 (kgs-1) 0.4697 0.4385 0.5784 0.6163 0.6787
W3 (kgs-1) 0.5861 0.5964 0.6349 0.6544 0.7216
W4 (kgs-1) 0.6655 0.7196 0.6542 0.6364 0.5058
G1 (kgs-1) 0 0.0197 0.0164 0.0151 0.0149
G2 (kgs-1) 0 0.0442 0.0359 0.0327 0.0328
G3 (kgs-1) 0 0.0344 0.0404 0.0427 0.0560
E2 (kgs-1) 0 0 0.0952 0.1115 0.1090
E3 (kgs-1) 0 0 0.1074 0.1466 0.1279
E4 (kgs-1) 0 0 0.0408 0.0594 0.0779
t0 (oC) 30.7 30.7 65 75 75
Increase in At (%) 0.86 1.09 4.47 26.18
Reduction in SC (%) 4.19 15.80 20.02 38.33

-33-