Programmes in Advanced Process Design

MSc Design Project 2011-2012

Design of Heat Exchanger Network 14th March, 2012 -

Submitted To: Simmon Perry Project Advisor Submitted By: Farhan Hafeez ID: 8197194

MSc Design Project 2011-2012

Contents
1. Introduction .............................................................................................................................................. 3 2. Site Description ......................................................................................................................................... 4 2.1 Plant A: ................................................................................................................................................ 4 2.2 Plant B: ................................................................................................................................................ 4 2.3 Plant C: ................................................................................................................................................ 4 3. Process Data Extraction ............................................................................................................................ 5 3.1 Stream Identification: ......................................................................................................................... 5 3.2 Temperature-enthalpy profile: ........................................................................................................... 5 3.3. Mixing: ............................................................................................................................................... 5 3.4 Effective Temperature: ....................................................................................................................... 6 .................................................................................................................................................................. 6 3.5 Soft Constraints:.................................................................................................................................. 6 4. Energy Target: ........................................................................................................................................... 7 4.1 Delta Tmin selection: ............................................................................................................................. 7 4.2 4.3 4.4 Composite Curves ......................................................................................................................... 8 Problem Table ............................................................................................................................... 9 GrandCompositeCurve:............................................................................................................... 11

4.5 Utilities selection............................................................................................................................... 11 4.5.1 Plant A ........................................................................................................................................ 11 4.5.2 Plant B ........................................................................................................................................ 12 4.5.3 Plant C ........................................................................................................................................ 12 4.6 Utilities Summary .............................................................................................................................. 13 5. Economics ............................................................................................................................................... 14 5.1 Capital Cost Estimation ..................................................................................................................... 14 5.2 Heat Exchanger Area Targeting ........................................................................................................ 15 5.3 HEN Area Cost Calculations............................................................................................................... 17 5.4 Energy Cost Calculations ................................................................................................................... 18 6. Capital Energy cost Trade-off and Tmin ............................................................................................... 21 7. Heat Exchanger Network Design ............................................................................................................ 22 7.1 Plant Data.......................................................................................................................................... 22 7.2 HEN Design Methods ........................................................................................................................ 23

Heat Exchanger Network Design

Page 1

MSc Design Project 2011-2012

7.3 HEN Design Plant A ........................................................................................................................... 24 7.3 HEN Design Plant B ........................................................................................................................... 27 7.4 HEN Design Plant C ........................................................................................................................... 29 7.5 Sensitivity Analysis ............................................................................................................................ 30 8. Conclusion ............................................................................................................................................... 30 9. References: ............................................................................................................................................. 30

Heat Exchanger Network Design

Page 2

MSc Design Project 2011-2012

1. Introduction
This report is written in reference to Research Techniques and Methods (skills) module for MSc in Advanced Process Design. The work assigned in this course is to design a total site system and is named as MSc Design Project. Groups comprising of four students have been made to accomplish this task and the design project is divided into two main sections based on individual members work and group work. The individual member has to design heat exchanger network for each plant in the total site and group task is to design site utility system. This report covers the design of heat exchanger network for each plant on total site as an individual task for the design project.

Heat Exchanger Network Design

Page 3

MSc Design Project 2011-2012

2. Site Description
The total site includes three plants named as Plant A, B & C respectively. The data provided for each plant is limited to feed and product streams, process streams temperatures and heat flows associated with each stream. Thus the thermodynamic analysis of each plant is based on given data and each plant is discussed in detailed in the following sections. A brief introduction of each plant is as follows:

2.1 Plant A:
Plant is consisted of two overall feed streams and two product streams with number of intermediate streams from one unit to the other. Each stream has its own heating or cooling duties with specified inlet and out temperatures from heat exchangers. The flow sheet for plant A is shown below:

Figure 1: Flow sheet Plant A

2.2 Plant B:
Plant B is the most complex plant in the given case which involves four product streams from two distillation columns in sequence and a feed stream to first distillation column after passing through two more process units. The flow sheet of Plant B is shown below:

Figure 2: Plant B Flow Sheet

2.3 Plant C:
Plant C has two cold streams entering into a reactor with a single outlet hot stream which is being cooled down. Moreover there is downstream process involves in plant C which requires 10MW of MP steam and 48MW of LP steam which are being supplied at 19.07and 3.62bara respectively.

Figure 3: Flow sheet and Stream Data Plant C

Heat Exchanger Network Design

Page 4

MSc Design Project 2011-2012

3. Process Data Extraction
Following basic rules have been employed in extracting data for each plant:

3.1 Stream Identification:

It is important to identify the streams which are to be included in heat integration analysis from a process thus only streams with known temperatures and heat flows are considered for heat integration analysis for each plant i.e. in fig 4 of plant A, the stream circled red is not considered due to unknown material and energy flow.

Figure 5: Plant A under defined stream

Figure 4: Plant B Undefined and Unknown Streams

Similarly in plant B the red circled streams are not considered in analysis due to unknown or not fully defined stream properties.

3.2 Temperature-enthalpy profile:

As the physical properties data for the streams is unknown so we have assumed that the heat capacity of the streams in each plant is constant over the range of temperature change with gives straight line when plotted these streams on temperatureenthalpy diagram for heat exchanger area targeting unless until specified in the given data as in case of one stream in plant C which is shown as follows:

Figure 6: Plant C Stream 2 Temperature-Enthalpy Data

In this case we have assumed three streams based on heat capacity change with temperature change from 100 to 264C, 264 to 264C with phase change and 264 to 650C of a single stream. The purpose of selecting this data is to avoid significant errors in heat integration analysis and heat exchanger area targeting.

3.3. Mixing:
Mixing of two streams causes hidden heat transfer and thus this fact is considered in data extraction for our process. This problem can be seen in plant A feed streams heating as follows:

Heat Exchanger Network Design

Page 5

MSc Design Project 2011-2012

Here we have assumed heating of Stream 1 from 58 to 150C and stream 2 from 25 to 150C instead of 58 to 165C and 25 to 80C respectively to avoid heat of mixing and thus error in heat integration analysis.
Figure 7: Plant A Mixing Streams

However the CP value for each stream is calculated with initial temperature change from 58 to 165C and 25 to 80C respectively which is required to calculate heat load from heating these streams from initial 58 and 25C temperature to final 150C temperature. Stream No Type TS C TT C H kW CP kW/C 1 Cold 58 165 3380 31.59 2 Cold 25 80 185 3.36
Table 1: Stream Data Plant A

These values of CP are used to calculate heat load of heat exchangers for each stream to be heated to 150C as follows: Stream-1: Q = CP x (TT TS) Similarly for; Stream-2: Q = CP x (TT TS) Q = 31.59 x (150-58) Q = 3.36 x (150-25) Q = 2906.28 kW. Q = 420 kW.

3.4 Effective Temperature:

Data is extracted from each plant based on availability of heat at its effective temperature which can be used for heat recovery opportunities, e.g. the feed entering into the process unit is at 380C in a section of plant B as follows: However the unit outlet stream is at 400C which is being cooled to 225C. Thus the availability of heat for heat recovery opportunity is at 400C temperature and thus by extracting data based on this rule for every stream in each plant has provided an opportunity to get error free heat integration analysis.

Figure 8: A Stream Data from Plant B

3.5 Soft Constraints:

Considering the flexibility of product storage temperature as a soft constraint we have extracted the data for plant A and B following streams at different temperatures than given to reduce the complexity of heat exchanger network design which is shown in the later part of the report.

Figure 9: A Stream from Plant A and B -Soft Constraint

Heat Exchanger Network Design

Page 6

MSc Design Project 2011-2012

Following is the streams data from each plant for heat integration analysis based on above rules. Plant A: Stream No Type TS C TT C H kW CP kW/C 1 Cold 58 150 2906.28 31.59 2 Cold 25 150 420 3.36 3 Cold 35 225 2150 11.32 4 Hot 258 257 4270 4270 5 Hot 280 110 5760 33.88 6 Hot 80 55 5200 208 7 Hot 45 35 2600 260 8 Hot 450 80 4193 11.33
Table 2: Stream Data Plant A

Plant B: Stream No 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Plant C: Stream No 1 2

Type Cold Cold Cold Cold Hot Hot Hot Hot Hot Hot

TS C 25 210 350 278 400 40 184 350 200 278

TT C 380 280 351 279 225 39 183 200 199 67.5

H kW 30350 6475 8400 4960 28880 4080 7430 9700 1760 6084

CP kW/C 85.5 92.5 8400 4960 165 4080 7430 64.66 1760 28.9

Table 3: Stream Data Plant B

Type Cold Cold

Hot

TS C 25 100 264 264.1 650

TT C 650 264 264.1 650 170

H kW 96000 15600 34800 21000 14800

CP kW/C 153.6

30.833

Table 4: Stream Data Plant C

4. Energy Target:
Now we evaluate the energy target for each plant with the above data. We will use each plants composite curve, grand composite curve and problem table analysis using SPRINT (CPI software) to determine the energy targets for respective plant.

4.1 Delta Tmin selection:

To generate above mentioned tools for energy targeting using SPRINT software we need an initial value of minimum approach temperature i.e. Tmin. The value of Tmin sets the energy recovery target between hot and cold streams of the process which is quite evident from

Heat Exchanger Network Design

Page 7

MSc Design Project 2011-2012

composite curves of the process and is discussed in following section. We select an initial value of 10C for each plant based on experience and high energy cost these days.

4.2

Composite Curves:

The composite curves are produced by plotting all the hot and cold streams in a process on temperature-enthalpy diagram and the enthalpy change is the sum of individual stream enthalpy change in a certain temperature range. Two different curves are plotted one is termed as hot composite curve which contains all the hot streams in a process and second is termed as cold composite curve which contains all the cold streams of the process. Composite curve is a tool which is used to determine the process-to-process heat recovery, hot and cold utility targeting at certain minimum temperature difference (Tmin) between hot and cold streams. Following are the composite curves of our system for individual plant at Tmin 10C.

Figure 10: Composite Curve Plant A

The red and blue curve in above figure is hot and cold composite curves respectively for plant A. It is noticeable from the curve above that cold stream does not extend beyond the start of hot stream and ends at same enthalpy value indeed. This type of problem is called as threshold problem where there is no need of either hot or cold utility in the process. Here in this case the threshold value for both the curves is at start of hot composite curve of the process thus there is no need of hot utility in this system as all the heat required for the process will be provided by process-to-process heat recovery, whereas relatively large quantity of cold utility is required. The overlap area of the hot and cold composite curve shows the process-to-process heat recovery, In our case the heat recovery comes out to be 5475kW.

Figure 11: Composite Curve Plant B

Heat Exchanger Network Design

Page 8

MSc Design Project 2011-2012

For plant B the composite curve shows that there is a huge process-to-process heat recovery opportunity however in this case the hot composite curve extends beyond the start of cold composite curve and vice versa. Thus we need both cold and hot utility for our process. The value for process-toprocess heat recovery in this case comes out to be 45821kW.

Figure 12: Composite Curve Plant C

For plant C is also a threshold problem at Tmin of 10C with no cold utility requirement and process heat recovery is 143800kW.

4.3

Problem Table:

The composite curve gives us the potential of process-to-process heat recovery and hot and cold utility requirement but it does not clearly shows the temperatures at which these utilities are required and exact values of utilities load as there could an error in reading these values from graph. Moreover its difficult to construct composite curves without computer aided programs. Thus to overcome this problem we have Plant A - Tmin 10C used another technique which gives same results Interval Temperature* Enthalpy with more accuracy and both heat loads with [C] [kW] required temperatures for utilities targeting. 445 0 275 253 252 230 155 150 105 75 63 50 40 30
Table 5: Problem Table Plant A

1926.1 2920.72 7235.93 8230.55 10773.1 10767.8 10210.7 8822.97 10763.9 13277.2 13130.5 16546.9

In constructing problem table we follow the same technique of dividing streams into temperature intervals as in case of producing composite curves but in this case we shift hot streams by -Tmin/2 and cold streams by Tmin/2 to keep feasible temperature difference for heat transfer. The enthalpy change is then calculated in each interval and finally the heat is cascaded down from high temperature side to low temperature side of the process. We get some negative heat flows in the process of heat cascading down which is not feasible for heat flow thus we add external heat

Heat Exchanger Network Design

Page 9

MSc Design Project 2011-2012

equal to highest negative value in the system to make it at least zero and the temperature at which the heat flow value becomes zero is termed as pinch temperature. This external heat is actually the hot utility target and the heat left at the end of the table is cold utility target. Adding Tmin/2 in highest temperature in the table gives us the required temperature of the hot utility and subtracting Tmin/2 from lowest temperature gives the required temperature for cold utility. SPRINT software is again used to construct the problem table for each plant. The threshold problem for plant A is also evident from problem table as the Value of external heat requirement for process heating is zero at the shifted temperature of 445C. It is the pinch temperature of the process which divided the process into heat source and heat sink which will be discussed further in following part of the report. Furthermore the maximum cold utility temperature required for the process is at 25C which is achieved by subtracting Tmin/2 from lowest temperature in the problem table corresponding to minimum cold utility requirement i.e. 16546.7 kW. Plant B Interval Temperature* [C] 395 385 356 355 345 285 284 283 273 220 215 195 194 179 178 62.1 35 34 30 Enthalpy [kW] 4363.65 6013.93 8320.46 0 795.356 9447.49 9499.2 4590.9 5107.92 9380.03 8957.91 9119.46 10822.9 9974.03 17347.4 10788.7 8471.86 12466.4 12124.4 In case of plant B the pinch temperature is at 355C and 4363.65kW of hot utility is required at the temperature of 400C. (Adding Tmin/2 in highest temperature in the table) The area below the pinch is heat source area and it require cold utility which in this case is 12124.4kW at 25C. (Subtracting Tmin/2 in lowest temperature in the table). Similarly for plant C the minimum hot utility temperature comes out to be 660C from problem table and there is no need for cold utility requirement as Plant C Interval Temperature* C Enthalpy kW 655 645 270 269 165 105 30 23600 21518.5 55807.8 21153.7 26443.3 11520 0

Table 6: Problem Table Plant B

all the process streams lie above the pinch region. The heat duty of hot utility is found to be 23600kW.

Table 7: Problem Table Plant C

Heat Exchanger Network Design

Page 10

MSc Design Project 2011-2012

4.4 GrandCompositeCurve:

After setting targets for process-to-process heat recovery and hot and cold utility targets with their required temperature levels we need to select appropriate utilities for the process. This objective is attained using grand composite curve which is obtained by plotting problem table on temperature-enthalpy curve. The grand composite curve presents true interface between the utilities and process conditions and clearly shows the process division into heat sink and heat source regions in a graphical manner. The hot utility is supplied in heat sink area and cold utility is supplied in heat source area. Moreover grand composite curve is used to target multiple utilities in a process. Discussion on each plant grand composite curve is incorporated in the following section of utilities selection.

4.5 Utilities selection:

SPRINT software is used again to produce grand composite curves for each plant as follows:

Figure 13: Balanced Grand Composite Curve Plant A

4.5.1 Plant A Grand composite curve of plant A (only red curve in above figure) shows that sufficient heat is available at higher temperatures so steam generation can be considered. Maximum saturated steam temperature that can be achieved in plant A is around 250 which can be superheated to 400C at Tmin of 10C, we need saturated MP steam at 19.07bara for downstream process heating of plant C so we have considered to produce MP stream in plant A.MP steam produced in plant A is at 20 bar Saturated conditions with 212.37C saturation temperature. MP steam pressure is considered to be a bar above the required pressure in downstream process to accommodate pressure and temperature losses and it is assumed that there is no more than one bar pressure drop in steam supply to downstream process. The utilities targets obtained from balanced grand composite curve are as follows: MP Steam = 9673.19kW and Cooling water = 6873kW

Heat Exchanger Network Design

Page 11

MSc Design Project 2011-2012

4.5.2 Plant B The balanced grand composite curve for plant B is shown in the following figure:

Figure 14: Balanced Grand Composite Curve Plant B

Similar to plant A the plant B has also potential to use steam as cold utility and here in this case we have considered to produced MP steam at same level as at in plant A production and for plant C downstream process heating. The utility targets for plant B from balanced grand composite curve are: MP Steam = 8471kW and Cooling water = 3652kW. Hot utility is also required in plant B at minimum temperature of 360C with a duty of 4363kW. This temperature is high enough to make steam heating unsuitable because maximum steam saturation temperature (supercritical temperature) at supercritical pressure is 372.15C which is practically infeasible to use for process heating, moreover superheated steam at high temperature is also not feasible for process heating due to low heat transfer coefficients and local condensation at lower temperatures. For these reasons hot oil can be used as hot utility in plant B. Hot oils can achieve higher temperature at relatively lower pressures and can be used both in vapor and liquid phase for process heating. Thus hot oil at 400C will be used for this process heating. The return temperature of hot oil is also vital in setting energy targets and it is considered to be at hot stream pinch temperature of 360C for our case. 4.5.3 Plant C The balanced grand composite curve for plant C is shown as follows:

Heat Exchanger Network Design

Figure 15: Balanced Grand Composite Curve Plant C

Page 12

MSc Design Project 2011-2012

Two hot utilities have been used in this case one is flue gas at 750C and other is LP steam at 4 bar saturated conditions to produce balanced grand composite curve. It is clearly seen from the balanced grand composite curve of plant C that there is a demand of hot utility at much higher temperature but with relatively small heat load. The big heat pockets in the process have potential to supply remaining high level heat. Moreover it is the most energy intensive process as total hot utility requirement with maximum process-to-process heat exchange is 23600kW. Around 12905kW of heat can be supplied by flue gas and remaining 10695kW can be provided by LP steam but we will not use LP steam as a major portion of flue gas would be wasted at lower heat level so instead of using LP steam at lower temperature level we can utilize lower temperature level flue gas heat left after exchanging at higher temperature for heating. And if we look at the stream data of plant C then it is quite evident that all the heat required for this plant is to be supplied to cold feed streams and the only heat source(hot stream) is product stream which put a significant constraint on maximum process-to-process heat recovery as more than 167400kW of heat would be required at least 660C for plant start-up which is to be provided by some outside heat source. Thus for these practical constraints we have divided the plant into two sections as follows: Cold Streams Plant C + Hot Stream
Figure 16: Plant C Section

Thus by dividing Plant C we can use furnace flue gas for cold stream heating and hot stream heat will be used for high pressure steam generation which can be used for power production and plant C downstream LP steam requirement, it can also supply heat to hot oil for plant B heating as heat is available at high temperature and in sufficient quantity. The MP steam requirement for plant C will be provided by MP steam generated in Plant A and B.

4.6 Utilities Summary

The following table contains the utilities selected for each plant: Plant Hot Utility Requirement kW 0 4363 167400 Cold Utility Requirement - kW 16546 12124 143800 Hot Utility & Load - kW Hot Oil 4363 Flue Gas - 167400 Cold Utility & Load kW MP Steam 9673 CW 6872 MP Steam 8472 CW 3652 HP Steam 143800

A B C

Table 8: Utilities Data - Plant A,B and C

Heat Exchanger Network Design

Page 13

MSc Design Project 2011-2012

5. Economics
One of the most important factors to be considered in designing a process is the process economics. There are number of parameters to be evaluated in the economic analysis of a process but we will consider the capital cost of heat exchanger network and energy cost for our processes in this part of report. In second part of the design project includes the capital cost estimation of other major equipment in total sight utility system.

5.1 Capital Cost Estimation

Capital cost involves the cost of constructing a new plant or a piece of equipment. There are five generally acceptable methods to estimate capital cost in process industry as follows: a. b. c. d. e. Order of Magnitude Estimate. Study Estimate. Preliminary design Estimate. Definitive Estimate. Detailed Estimate.

A brief introduction of each method is carried out in the following table: Method Order of Magnitude Estimate Main Features This estimate is usually based on the previous cost data of same process and it involves the whole process estimate which is then corrected by using scaling factor. The approach to this method is based on order of magnitude estimate method but in this case cost estimation of major equipment in a process based on their approximate sizing is carried out. This estimate requires more accurate equipment sizing with some approximation of piping, electrical and instrumentation requirements This estimate is based on preliminary specification of major equipment, utilities, piping, electrical and instrumentation. This Estimate is as close to actual cost as possible and is based on detailed engineering of the equipment, utilities etc. with vendors quotes.

Study Estimate

Preliminary Design Estimate

Definitive Estimate

Detailed Estimate

Table 9: Description of Capital Cost Estimation Techniques

We have selected to do the cost estimation of heat exchanger network based on Study Estimate due to limited time and data resource. Cost data available for equipment would be out of date, based on some years ago and using this data could result in significant error in cost estimation. To take this thing into account we use Escalating Factor which is defined as below:

Heat Exchanger Network Design

Page 14

MSc Design Project 2011-2012

A=

..eq-01

Where, CEPCI is the chemical engineering plant cost index, it is published on monthly basis and includes major equipment cost indices. CEPCIbase year is the year in which the equipment given cost is available. There are other similar cost indices available in the market which can be used for updating the cost of equipment using same formula as given in equation 04,however we have data available for heat exchangers based on CEPCI so our calculations are based on this index. Thus by using escalating factor the cost of equipment in current year is calculated as; Ccurrent year = Cbase year A Where Ccurrent year and Cbase year are the cost of equipment in current year and base year respectively and; We might encounter a problem where the base year equipment cost would be based on certain capacity which might be different from current equipment capacity. This problem can be resolve by using following equation: Ccurrent year = Cbase year ( ) .eq-02

Where, Ccurrent year and Cbase year are the cost of equipment in current year and base year respectively and; Qcurrent year and Qbase year are the equipment size in current scenario and base year case And m is the power factor which is mostly known for some major equipment in process industry and if its value is unknown then it can be taken as 0.6 which turn the above equation into sixth-tenth rule as most of the equipment cost due to change in size varies around sixth-tenth to the original equipment size Some other factors to be considered in cost estimation of an equipment are pressure factor(FP), temperature factor(FT), design factor(FD) and material of construction factor(FCM). All these factors are to be considered in cost estimation of equipment based on current case and base year case. Thus the final equation for cost estimation of equipment can be written as: Ccurrent year = Cbase year A FPFD FCM FT ( ) eq - 03

5.2 Heat Exchanger Area Targeting

Heat exchanger area account for a significant cost of manufacturing and it should be considered in designing a heat exchanger area network. The area is inversely proportional to Tmin so by increasing Tmin the area can be reduced. Thus selection of Tmin for a given process heat exchanger network design is vital in terms of capital investment. Composite curves not only give the energy targets for a process but these can also be used to estimate the heat transfer area of a network. For area targeting we produce composite curve with utilities included and these composite curves are termed as balanced composite curves. The balance composite curves are divided into different enthalpy intervals based on kinks in the curve. Vertical heat transfer in each interval is calculated and the cold and hot streams temperature considered are the

Heat Exchanger Network Design

Page 15

MSc Design Project 2011-2012

terminal temperature of the interval. We also consider that the overall heat transfer coefficient remains constant in each interval and thus with this assumption we calculate area of heat exchanger in each interval by using following equation: Ainterval = Where, Ainterval = the area of an interval Qinterval = heat transfer between hot and cold stream in one particular interval U = overall heat transfer coefficient LMTD = = log mean temperature difference between cold and hot stream in one

particular interval, h1& h2 and c1&c2 are the hot and cold stream inlet and outlet terminal temperature respectively. The network area is calculated by the summation of each interval area as follows: ANetwork = .eq-04

Where ANetwork = heat exchanger area of vertical heat transfer for whole network K = total number of enthalpy intervals Now we consider the area targeting for plant A heat transfer by using following balanced composite curve:

Figure 17: Blocked Balanced Composite Curve Plant A

The balanced composite curve for plant A is divided into 16 intervals and by assuming 4 kW/m2- C value of heat transfer coefficient (U), we calculated the area of heat transfer in each interval using eq-04 and the results are tabulated in the following table:

Heat Exchanger Network Design

Page 16

MSc Design Project 2011-2012

Interval 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14

Qinterval kW 2600 4290.34 16.81 337.63 555.22 340 1279.39 2885.81 1819.9 661.6 4315.2 994.8 1784.9 141.7 AreaNetwrok

LMTD 4.867923 9.259437 1.189795 8.058595 6.208295 16.10384 27.97374 53.86313 50.50524 2.00597 0.334114 2.85725 17.55247 12.52

Ak m2 133.5272 115.837 3.532121 10.47422 22.35799 5.278245 11.43385 13.39418 9.008472 82.45387 3228.838 87.04175 25.42234 2.829473 3644.289

Table 10: Enthalpy, LMTD and Area Data for Plant A - Decomposed Balanced Composite Curve at Tmin 10C

Similarly we have estimated the area of heat exchanger network for Plant A at different values of Tmin. The results are shown in the following table: Area m2 3732.592 3663.14 3644.289 3626.003 3583.583 3565.436 3549.73
Area - m2

Tmin - C 2.5 7.5 10 12.5 15 17.5 20

HEN Area vs Tmin

3750 3700 3650 3600 3550 3500 0 10 20 30
Figure 18: HENTmin- Cmin Graph Area vs T

Table 11: HEN area vs Tmin Data - Plant A

This data in above table and accompanying graph clearly shows that the area decrease with increase in Tmin. This data is produced only for Plant A due to study the relationship of heat exchanger area vs Tmin. Similarly same data can be produced from plant B and C but due to time constraint and complex utilities involvement in plant B and C these calculations are restricted to Plant A only.

5.3 HEN Area Cost Calculations

Based on equipment cost estimation method as discussed earlier we now calculate the cost of heat exchanger network (HEN) area (as calculated in above section ) for plant A. The escalating factor is calculated for April, 2011 as the latest data available for CEPCI was in this month and the base year is 2001.

Heat Exchanger Network Design

Page 17

MSc Design Project 2011-2012

A=

= 1.69

FCM and FDthe material of construction and design factors are considered to be the same as per original equipment. The pressure factor (FP) is considered based on stream pressure i.e. 20 bar and temperature factor (FT) is based on maximum temperature of the system i.e. 450C. The values for these factors and power factor m in eq-06 is taken from Chemical Process Design and Integration by Robin Smith. FP = 1.5, FT = 2.1 and m = 0.68 Base Equipment capacity = 1000m2 and Base equipment cost = $ 105,000 Thus cost of HEN with area 3644.289m2 (Tmin 10C) for Plant A is as follows, C2011 = C2001 A FPFD FCM FT ( )

Thus by putting all the values in above equation we get the cost of HEN C2011 = 105000x1.69x1.5x1x1x2.1x( )

= 1347000 $ or 1.347 MM$ similarly the cost for each network for different Tmin values are calculated and tabulated in the following table, Tmin - C 2.5 7.5 10 12.5 15 17.5 20 Area m2 3732.592 3663.14 3644.289 3626.003 3583.583 3565.436 3549.73
Table 12: HEN Cost Data for Different Tmin Values

Cost MM$ 1.369 1.352 1.347 1.343 1.332 1.327 1.323

The cost for heat exchanger network follows the same downward trend as of area for increase in Tmin value which is quite evident from the above table.

5.4 Energy Cost Calculations

High energy price has put a strict condition in giving priority to design minimum energy requirement processes. For this reason heat exchanger network has become more significant than ever in order to meet process heating and cooling demands with minimum external energy requirements. For energy analysis of a system the cost of energy is vital and there are certain ways in which we can calculate the utilities cost. For this report steam pricing and hot oil cost estimation is considered. Price of some common fuels is given in the following table: Fuel Coal Price 4.72 $/GJ

Heat Exchanger Network Design

Page 18

MSc Design Project 2011-2012

Heavy Oil Electricity Natural Gas

Table 13: Fuel Prices

909.01 $/t 0.10608 $/kWh 0.0319 $/kWh

Moreover the cost of cooling water is considered to be 1% of the price of electricity. The steam price calculations are as follows: Steam HP MP LP Pressure bar a 40 20 4
Table 14: Steam Conditions for Total Site

Temperature - C 400 super heated 212.37 - Saturated 143.7 - Saturated

The above table shows the different steam levels we have selected for our system. HP steam is at 40 bar and 400C superheated temperature. Its cost calculation is as follows; Amount of heat required to produce HP steam = QHP = hsh-hBFW - kJ/kg From steam table, hsh = 3214 kJ/kg Boiler feed water is available at 105C, so hBFW = 4.2 (105-25)(relative to make-up water at 25C) = 336 kJ/kg QHP = 3214 336 = 2878 kJ/kg Thus the fuel required to produce HP steam = QHP x Costfuel x Assuming boiler efficiency of 0.90 and natural gas as fuel the cost of HP steam comes out to be CostHP = = 0.0283 $/kg or 28.3 $/t Cost of MP steam = CostHP Valuepower produced HP steam is expanded isentropic ally to 20 bar MP steam conditions, thus; W = hHP - hisp Whereas hisp = isentropic enthalpy of steam after turbine And hisp = hHP (hHP hg) Whereas hg = enthalpy of steam at 20 bar and = turbine isentropic efficiency which is assumed to be 0.87 in our case Again using steam table hHP = 3214 kJ/kg Hg = 2799 kJ/kg Thus, hisp = 3214 0.87(3214-2799) = 2852.95 kJ/kg From steam table this enthalpy value at 20 bar dictate the steam temperature of 231.5C which is higher than the saturated temperature of 212.37C, thus the steam at turbine outlet is superheated and we

Heat Exchanger Network Design

Page 19

MSc Design Project 2011-2012

calculate our steam price on these basis as some degree of superheat would be preferable to accommodate thermal losses in steam supply. So W = 3214 2852.95 = 361.05 kJ/kg Values of power = = 0.0106 $/kg Cost of MP steam = 0.0283 0.0106 = 0.0177 $/kg or 17.7 $/ton Similarly the cost of LP steam is calculated as, CostLP = CostMP Valuepower generated MP steam is expanded isentropically to 4 bar LP steam conditions, thus; W = hMP - hisp Whereas hisp = isentropic enthalpy of steam after turbine And hisp = hMP (hMP hg) Whereas hg = enthalpy of steam at 4 bar and = turbine isentropic efficiency which is assumed to be 0.87 in our case Again using steam table hMP = 2852.95 kJ/kg Hg = 2739 kJ/kg Thus, hisp = 2852.95 0.87(2852.95-2739) = 2753.81 kJ/kg From steam table this enthalpy value at 4 bar dictate the steam temperature of 150.46C which is higher than the saturated temperature of 143.7C, thus the steam at turbine outlet is superheated and we calculate our steam price on these basis as some degree of superheat would be preferable to accommodate thermal losses in steam supply. So W = 2852.95 2753.81 = 99 kJ/kg Values of power = = 0.00292 $/kg Cost of LP steam = 0.0177 0.00292 = 0.0147 $/kg or 14.7 $/ton Fuel Oil Calculations: Cost of hot oil = Cost of pumping + cost of fuel Cost of pumping is not considered in this system as it requires detailed engineering calculations, thus only fuel cost is considered as follows, CHO = QHO x Cfuel x

Heat Exchanger Network Design

Page 20

MSc Design Project 2011-2012

QHO = Cp (Ttarget Tsupply) Ttarget = 400C and Tsupply = 360C (temperatures selected using grand composite curve of plant B) Cp = 2.527 kJ/kg K at 360C Thus QHO = 2.527 (400-360) = 101.08 kJ/kg CHO = = 0.0001 $/kg or 0.1$/ton Initial start-up cost of hot oil would be much higher than this running cost as more heat would be required for hot oil heat up from storage temperature to required process heating temperature.

6. Capital Energy cost Trade-off and Tmin

We have seen so far that the capital cost of heat exchanger network is associated with Tmin, higher the value of Tmin less would be the overall area but another significant parameter to be considered in selection of Tmin is energy cost. Energy cost of a process increase with increase in Tmin due to missing opportunities of process to process heat recovery in a heat exchanger network. Thus the optimum value of Tmin is determined by a trade-off between capital and energy cost. Now we consider the Tmin selection for Plant A. We have already calculated the heat exchanger network area cost at different values of Tmin and we also know that Plant A has a threshold problem with cold utility requirement only. The cold utility for plant A is MP steam generation and cooling water. Only the cost of cooling water will be used to evaluate the energy cost variation with change in Tmin as the steam is being generated from process heating without external source.

Capital-Energy Cost Trade-Off - Tmin

1.38 Cost -MM $ 1.36 1.34 1.32 1.3 0 5 10 Tmin - C Total Cost Capital Cost Energy Cost 15 20 25

Figure 19: Capital-Energy Trade Off Curve Plant A

Heat Exchanger Network Design

Page 21

MSc Design Project 2011-2012

From the figure above it is quite evident that there is no change in utility cost for plant A with Tmin as it is a threshold problem for certain value of Tmin so the total cost follows the capital cost downward trend with Tmin. Thus in this case it is no possible to select optimum value of Tmin for the heat exchanger network. However another interesting fact related to change in Tmin is the change in utility temperature requirement for process heating or cooling. Quality of heat is equally important as the quantity of heat and it is observed that the maximum cold utility temperature decrease with increase in T min as shown in the following figure:

CW Temperature vs Tmin
Cooling water temperature - C 30 20 10 0 0 5 10 15 Tmin - C Cooling Water Temperature
Figure 20: Cooling water vs Tmin Curve

20

25

30

Thus from the above figure we have selected the Tmin value of 10C for Plant A heat exchanger network design as below this value the required cooling water temperature decreases our set target of 25C. similarly for plant B and C we have selected the Tmin of 10C based on experience of determining this value for plant A.

7. Heat Exchanger Network Design

Now as we have produced enough data for each plant, we can design the heat exchanger network for plant A, B and C.

7.1 Plant Data

Following table contains all the data that we have generated so far from the given site processes. Plant A Tmin - C 10 Heat Recovery kW 5476.62 QHmin & Utilities (kW) QCmin & Utilities (kW) Total - 16546 MP Steam 9673 CW 6873 Total 12124 MP Steam 8471 CW 3652 HP steam 143800

10

45821

Hot Oil - 4363

10

Flue gas -167400

Table 15: Data Summary Plant A,B and C

Heat Exchanger Network Design

Page 22

MSc Design Project 2011-2012

As we have discussed already in utility selection section of this report that plant C has been divided into two section containing cold and hot streams separately. Thus in above table all the hot utility requirement will be fulfilled by furnace flue gas and HP steam will be generated from hot stream. Another important information that is required during the design on heat exchanger network is process and utility pinch temperatures(these are shifted temperature by Tmin. Following table contains this data for each plant: Plant A B C Process Pinch Temperature C 455 355 30
Table 16: Pinch Data Plant A,B and C

Utility Pinch Temperature - C 75 35 -

7.2 HEN Design Methods

There are several methods available for design of heat exchanger network but we have discussed the following methods briefly in this section: a. Pinch Design Method. b. Superstructure Optimization. c. Stochastic Optimization (Simulated Annealing) Pinch Design Method: This method is based on pinch analysis in which a problem is divided across the pinch and design starts from the pinch. The rules to design heat exchanger network based on pinch analysis are defined near the pinch however there are no certain rules for design away from pinch. Energy targets are fully met when a network is design on this method, moreover it gives a freedom to take decision by designer and incorporate all the process insight. However this method becomes complicated when a large number of streams and multiple utilities are involved. Superstructure Optimization: In this method all the possible combinations for one streams heat exchange to other stream are made using superstructure and the final result is optimized to acceptable number of heat exchangers and streams. This method is based on automated design and it does not involve designer decisions thus the process insight cannot be incorporated into this design method. Furthermore it become really complex when large number of streams is involved due to difficult mathematical problem. Stochastic Optimization: In this method an initial feasible network is provided by the designer which is then exploited for possible matches between each hot and cold streams. Perturbation moves like repiping, resequencing, add/remove heat exchanger or stream split are set with their probabilities. Then the simulated annealing parameters like initial temperature, final temperature, Markov chain length are set. This method is analogous to physical annealing). Initial and final temperatures control the bad moves and

Heat Exchanger Network Design

Page 23

MSc Design Project 2011-2012

markov chain length governs time for each match. Finally the design is optimized to get a feasible solution. This method produce different design in every solution thus a designer can select the best solution for a given process. This method takes relatively large time to generate the design and thus an optimum solution is not possible in practical time, to overcome this problem non-linear programming is used to obtain optimum results. For this design project we have selected Pinch Design Method with maximum energy recovery in plant A and B because the number of streams and utilities involved in each process are manageable and it will give us a non-reducible energy efficient heat exchanger network design.

7.3 HEN Design Plant A

Plant A has five hot streams and three cold streams and it is a threshold problem with no hot utility requirement. Based on pinch design method we first divide the process across process and utility pinch. As a threshold problem the process pinch is at the beginning of heat source area of the problem(shown in problem table section 4.3) thus the problem is divided across the utility pinch only. Table 2 has stream data for plant A and Table 14 & 15 section 7.1 contains the data required to design maximum energy recovery heat exchanger network for plant A. Using this data we generate the grid diagram using SPRINT which is the best representation of all the process streams to be included for design of heat exchanger network with their temperature, enthalpy and CP data. Moreover it also shows the process division across the pinch as follows:

Figure 21: Grid Diagram Plant A

However it was a threshold problem but multiple utilities have changed into a pinch problem. The grid representation of the process streams shows some interesting facts about the location of process streams. It is quite clear from the above figure that almost half of streams lie away the pinch and it increase the complexity in the design process as no certain rules are defined for matching streams away the pinch. Moreover we start the design of network from zero utility end of the process as there is no utility to achieve the required temperature and then we move towards the rest of the process. Following general rules are applied for making matches at pinch: Above the Pinch: Number of hot stream, NH < Number of cold Stream NC and CPH< CPC

Heat Exchanger Network Design

Page 24

MSc Design Project 2011-2012

Below the Pinch: Number of hot stream, NH > Number of cold Stream NC and CPH> CPC CP rules are of significant importance as the temperature difference should increase on moving away from pinch and this objective is achieved by following the CP rules. In matching streams away the pinch it has been considered to supply heat from lowest minimum temperature e.g. in this case the matches with hot streams and steam generation are made first at higher temperatures and then the low temperature heat is supplied to cold process streams as they required heat at relatively lower temperature than steam. Another problem associated with using steam generation as a cold utility is the phase change of the water from liquid to gas. This change takes place at constant temperature and thus a higher temperature than the saturation temperature of the steam is to be maintained in a relatively bigger area of the exchanger to maintain minimum design approach temperature. This limit further made the design more complex. Furthermore below the pinch only hot stream 4 (inlet temperature 80C) can exchange heat with three cold streams(outlet temperature 70) due to temperature constraints and one of cold stream i.e. stream 6 has inlet temperature of 58C which is higher than stream 6 outlet temperature. This problem was addressed by setting stream 6 outlet temperature at 68C after exchanging heat will all the streams through split stream rule. And to achieve exit temperature of 68C at the end mixing point one of split stream is being cooled with cooling water. This constraint resulted in an extra cooler for the process. Following above mentioned rules and considering the process limitation we have design the following maximum energy recovery heat exchanger network for plant A at Tmin of 10C:
257 80 257 257 110 110 CP:33.8824

H1 H2 H3

1 2

258 N:1 DH:4270 280 N:2 DH:5760

N:11 184.58 110 CP:4270

N:13

N:15

45 N:3 DH:2600
FF:0.061

35

8
67.99

35 N:23 CP:260 35

12
FF:0.629

10

N:29 68

14
68
FF:0.159

11 9
68 N:27

N:31

13
80 N:4 DH:5200 80.24 80 CP:11.3333
FF:0.152

68
FF:1

55

H4 H5 C1 C2 C3 Cooling Wate MP Steam

212.47 212.47 212.45 N:18 N:12 212.37 CP:90.0044 S:0 S:0 A:18.5349 A:94.7223 *Q:2167.57 *Q:4270 225 225 CP:11.3158

4 5
450 N:5 DH:4193.33 150 150 CP:31.5888 150 150 CP:3.36364 258.74 235 80.24

11

N:25

15
M1

N:33

12 N : 3 4
CP:208

55 55

N:17

N:19

N:21 150 N:16 S:0 A:67.8843 *Q:2527

70 N:26 S:0 A:37.9018 *Q:379.065

58

150 N:20

DH:2527.1:31.5888 CP

70 N:30

N:6 DH:379.065

6
25 N:7

5 6 N:22
S:0 A:173.318 *Q:1753.95

10
35 N:8 30 N:32 28.86 N:35

S:0 225 A:1.9944 *Q:269.091

D H : 2 6 9 . 0C P : 3 . 3 6 3 6 4 91

70 N:28

S:0 A:6.6912 *Q:151.364

DH:151.364

8
25 N:9

D H : 1 7 5 3 .C P : 1 1 . 3 1 5 8 95 30 30 CP:1374.7 105 N:10

S:0 A:20.5583 *Q:396.053

26.89 DH:396.053 N:24

11

12

212.39 N:14

10
70

S:0 A:35.3899 *Q:1569.52

S:0 S:0 A:81.1493 A:190.4 *Q:2704 *Q:2600

DH:6873.52

S:0 A:67.3166 *Q:3233.06

DH:9673.19

Figure 22: MER Heat Exchanger Network - Plant A

This network has zero cross pinch heat transfer and following table contains the heat exchanger network report generated by SPRINT software: Total Hot Utility = Total cold Utility = 0 16544.1 [kW] [kW] MER Heat Exchanger Network Report Plant A

Heat Exchanger Network Design

Page 25

MSc Design Project 2011-2012

Each No. F 1[H1 ]cu 2[H2 ]cu 3[<Unna] 4[<Unna]cu 5[<Unna] 6[<Unna] 7[<Unna] F 8[<Unna]cu 9[<Unna] 10[<Unna] 11[<Unna]cu

Hot Stm 1 2 2 5 5 5 4:11 3 4:13 4:12 4:14 4:15

Cold Stm 10 10 6 10 7 8 6 9 8 7 9 9

Minimum Approach [C] 44.61 28.79 34.58 46.3 108.74 10 10 10 < 10.00> < 10.00> 39.14 28.11

Hot In [C] 258 280 184.58 450 258.74 235 80 45 80 80 80 68

Hot Out [C] 257 184.58 110 258.74 235 80.24 68 35 68 67.99 68 55

Cold In [C] 212.39 105 70 212.45 70 70 58 25 35 25 28.86 26.89

Cold Out [C] 212.45 212.39 150 212.47 150 225 70 26.89 70 70 30 28.86

Original Area [m^2] 94.72 67.32 67.88 18.53 1.994 173.3 37.9 190.4 20.56 6.691 35.39 81.15

Optimized Area [m^2] 94.72 52.53 59.53 10.44 2.126 49.69 0 190.4 0 0 0 136.3

12[<Unna]cu Original [C] [C] [C] Optimized 44.94 [C] 10 [C] 10 [C]

Process Minimum Approach Temperature Utility Minimum Approach Temperature Overall Minimum Approach Temperature

10 10 10

Table 17: Network Report MER Heater Network - Plant A and Area Comparison with Optimized Network

As it is clear from the table above that there is no violation of Tmin in any heat exchanger of the network but the highlighted areas of exchanger are too small and practically infeasible thus we optimized the network for minimum number of heat exchangers, the results are compared in same table above and following is the optimized heat exchanger network:
258 N:1 DH:4270 280 N:2 DH:5760 257 80 257 257 110 110 CP:33.8824

H1 H2 H3

1 2

N:11 195.77 110 CP:4270

N:13

N:15

45 N:3 DH:2600
FF:1

35

8
80

35 N:23 CP:260 35

14
80
FF:0

11 10
80 N:29

N:31

12
FF:*****

11
80 N:4 DH:5200 80.23 80 C P : 1 1 .1 5 0 3 333 N:16 D H : 2 5S : 0 1 : 3 1 . 5 8 8 8 27.P C 150 9.5281 A:5 *Q:2906.07 N:20
FF:0

N:25 80
FF:1

80 N:27

55

H4 H5 C1 C2
225.01

4 5
450 N:5 DH:4193.33 150 150 CP:31.5888 150 150 CP:3.36364 307.05 269.95 80.23

13

15
M1

N:33

12

55 N:34 CP:208 55

N:17

N:19

N:21

58 N:26 S:0 A:0 *Q:0

3 5 6

7
25 N : 3 0 10 35 N:28 S:0 A:0 *Q:0

58

N:6 DH:379.065

6
25 N:7

C3 Cooling Wate MP Steam

D H :2 2 5S : 0 P : 3 . 3 6 3 6 4 2 6 9. 0 1 1 . 0C 9 A:2.12619 *Q:420.455 N:22 D H : 1 7 5S : 0 P : 1 1 . 3 1 5 8 3 .C 5 9 A:47.6904 *Q:2150.1

DH:151.364 35 N:8 30 N:32 30 N:35

8
25 N:9

225 CP:11.3158

30 30 CP:1374.7

S:0 A:0 *Q:0

26.67 DH:396.053 N:24

11

12

212.47 212.37 CP:90.0044

212.47 N:18

212.45 N:12

212.39 N:14

105 N:10

10
70

S:0 A:0 *Q:0

S:0 S:0 A:136.316 A:189.114 *Q:5200 *Q:2600

DH:6873.52

S:0 S:0 S:0 A:10.4361 A:94.7263 A:52.5324 *Q:1620.15 *Q:4270 *Q:2853.99

DH:9673.19

Figure 23:Optimized MER Heat Exchanger Network- Plant A

Heat Exchanger Network Design

Page 26

MSc Design Project 2011-2012

This network has eliminated all the process-to-process heat exchanger(dashed lines) below the pinch and this load is shifted to process-to-process heat exchangers above the pinch but in doing so there is 926kW of cross pinch exchanger heat flow which has resulted in load shift from MP steam utility to cooling water thus total cooling requirement remained the same as shown in following cross pinch heat transfer report of above network: Minimum Hot Utility = 0 [kW] Minimum Cold Utility = 16546.7 [kW] Process heat recovery= 5476.62 [kW] Total Hot utility = 0.00000 [kW] Total Cold utility = 16544.1 [kW] Total Cross Pinch heat transfer = 0.00000 [kW] Exchanger cross pinch heat transfer 3 3 [<Unnamed> ] 379.065 [kW] Pinch Number 1 5 5 [<Unnamed> ] 151.364 [kW] Pinch Number 1 6 6 [<Unnamed> ] 396.053 [kW] Pinch Number 1 Total exchanger cross pinch heat flow = 926.482 [kW]
Table 18: Cross Pinch Report - MER Heat Exchanger Network Plant A

As the cost of cooling water is not high and there is slight decrease in steam production load thus the optimized network is feasible both in terms of exchanger cost and utility load. Additional benefit of reduced area for some heat exchanger is obtained in optimized network due to high driving force as increased process to process minimum approach temperature shown in table 16.

7.3 HEN Design Plant B

Following the same pinch design method as we used in plant A we designed maximum energy recovery heat exchanger area for plant B. The grid diagram for plant B is as follows:

360 380.1

40 25 N:1

C1
380 CP:85.493 DH:2564.79 CP:85.493 280 210 N:2 DH:6475 DH:27357.7 CP:85.493

DH:427.465

C2
280 CP:92.5 351 350 N:3 DH:8400 279

C3
351 CP:8400

3
278 N:4 DH:4960 225 225 CP:165.029 350 200 200 CP:64.6667 183 183 40 39 39

C4
279 CP:4960 400

H1 H2 H3 H4

N:5 DH:6601.14 CP:165.029 DH:22278.9

6 7

N:6 DH:9700 184 N:7 DH:7430

CP:7430

8
200 199 199 67.1 67.1 CP:28.9035 30

N:8 DH:4080 CP:4080

H5 H6 CW

9 10

N:9 DH:1760 278 N:10 25 N:11 30 CP:730.507 DH:3652.54 CP:1760

DH:6095.75

11

400

360 360 CP:109.091 212.47 105 N:13 350 212.37 CP:78.8266 DH:8471.86

Hot Oil MP

12

N:12

DH:4363.65

13
30

Figure 24: Grid Diagram Of Plant B

Heat Exchanger Network Design

Page 27

MSc Design Project 2011-2012

The complexity of design in this case is increased due to two pinches a process pinch at 355C and utility pinch at 35C. Moreover between these two pinch temperatures we can see from the grid diagram that the process streams are quite far from pinch thus causing more design difficulty due to no certain rules. In same manner as in plant A we will transfer heat at lowest possible temperature when matching hot and cold streams. Steam generation here poses the same constant temperature phase change problem in network. Another interesting feature of plant B is the availability of sufficient heat but not at high temperatures which add more complexity to the process. Thus by considering the same phase rules as in plant A with plant B process constraints the HEN design is as follows:
360 350.08 40 N:37 280 N:21 DH:27357.7 CP:85.493 210 N:2 DH:6475

380.1

380.1 N:19

269.1 N:27 280

190.01 N:31

169.43 N:29

82.52

30

C1 C2 C3

380 CP:85.493

N:25

N:43

16 4 2

13

25 N:1 DH:427.465

DH:2564.79 CP:85.493

351 351 CP:8400 N:45

FF:1

351

351 N:17

280 CP:92.5
FF:0.214

19
M2

2
351 N:15

17

350 N:3 DH:8400

FF:0.786

18 279 279 N:23 318.05 278 287.99 247.02 225 N:4 DH:4960

C4 H1 H2 H3 5
400 N:5 DH:6601.14 360 279 CP:4960

5 5
N:22

4
225

N:14 CP:165.029 DH:22278.9

N:24

N:26

10

N:40 249.87

S:0 A:268.994 *Q:6601.14

S:0 S:0 S:0 A:283.138 350 *Q:6923.31 A:232.669 A:195.901 *Q:4960 *Q:6761.29 6 N:6 DH:9700 184

225 200 CP:165.029 200

4
183

N:20

11

N:7 DH:7430

8 N:28 S:0 A:166.983 *Q:7430

S:0 A:120.961 *Q:6475

N:32 200 CP:64.6667 183 CP:7430 183

FF:0.895

39

21 40
FF:0.105

15
39

N:38
FF:1

39

H4 H5 H6 CW
FF:0.412

8 9
200 N:9 DH:1760 278 N:10 DH:6095.75 199

N:8 DH:4080

20

13

N:36

22
M3

39

9 12
N:34

199 67.1 CP:1760 199 67.1 67.1 CP:28.9035 30 30 CP:730.507

S:0 A:35.9572 *Q:427.465

N:46 39 CP:4080

N:30

10

222.45 S:0 A:97.543 *Q:1760

16

N:42

S:0 A:57.9618 *Q:4489.9

30 N:39

25

360

14 400
FF:0.588

2
360
FF:1

15 N:11 S:0 DH:3652.54 A:307.245 *Q:3652.54

11

N:16

360 N:44

Hot Oil MP

12

N:12 DH:4363.65

15

N:18

16
M1

S:0 A:73.2969 360 *Q:1798.46 360 CP:109.091 212.47 350 212.37 CP:78.8266 212.47 N:35 212.45 N:41 212.4 N:33

S:0 A:178.968 *Q:2566.3

12

10

S:0 A:54.3733 *Q:1605.72

S:0 A:166.916 *Q:3633.97

11 N:13 S:0 DH:8471.86 A:105.816 *Q:3225

105

13
30

Figure 25: MER Heat Exchanger Design Plant B

Since the hot oil returned temperature is selected by process pinch temperature of 360C so the hot oil utility stream is spit to maintain Tmin constraint for heating cold streams whose inlet temperatures are at 360C. Hot streams match with MP steam generator heat exchanger is designed in a way that the outlet temperature of hot stream remained above 222.27C i.e. 10C plus steam saturation temperature to overcome constant temperature phase change problem. Streams at lower temperatures with high heat content are used to heat cold streams to a certain temperature without violating Tmin constraint and remaining heat to the cold streams is provided by hot streams at higher temperature. This approach made the design more complex as one exchanger on each stream could not fulfill its heating or cooling requirement. The Network report for this heat exchanger network generated using sprint as follows: Exch No. 1[H1 ] 2[Hu1 ]hu 3[Hu2 ]hu F 4[H2 ] Hot Stm 5 12:14 12:15 6 Cold Stm 3:18 3:17 1 2 Minimum Approach [C] 10 < 10.00> < 9.92> 39.87 Hot In [C] 400 400 400 350 Hot Out [C] 360 360 360 249.87 Cold In [C] 350 350 350.08 210 Cold Out [C] 351 351 380.1 280 Area [m^2] 269 73.3 179 121 Duty [kW] 6601 1798 2566 6475

Heat Exchanger Network Design

Page 28

MSc Design Project 2011-2012

F 5[H3 ] 5 4 < 9.99> 6[H4 ] 5 1 < 9.92> 7[H5 ] 5 1 18.89 F 8[H6 ] 7 1 14.57 F 9[H7 ] 9 1 < 9.99> 10[<Unna]cu 5 13 12.6 F 11[G1 ]cu 6 13 13.58 12[G2 ]cu 10 13 < 9.99> 13[H10 ] 8:20 1 < 10.00> 15[Cu1 ]cu 8:21 11 10 16[<Unna] 10 1 37.1 Process Minimum Approach Temperature Utility Minimum Approach Temperature Overall Minimum Approach Temperature

318.05 360 287.99 184 200 247.02 249.87 278 40 40 222.45

287.99 318.05 247.02 183 199 225 200 222.45 39 39 67.1

278 269.1 190.01 82.52 169.43 212.4 105 212.45 25 25 30

279 350.08 269.1 169.43 190.01 212.45 212.4 212.47 30 30 82.52

232.7 283.1 195.9 167 97.54 166.9 105.8 54.37 35.96 307.2 57.96 9.92 9.92 9.92

4960 6923 6761 7430 1760 3634 3225 1606 427.5 3653 4490 [C] [C] [C]

Table 19: Network Report MER Heat Exchanger Network Plant B

The minimum approach temperature of this network is found to be 9.92C and this values is a result of two heat exchangers with 9.92C Tmin i.e. exchanger 3 and exchanger 6 and this could be result of some calculation error as the heat load and temperature are considered to 3 decimal places and the complexity of design involved large number of fractional values for the heat load and temperatures. Similarly the heat transfer across the pinch is negligible and might be the result of same error because only 6.7kW of cross pinch heat transfer is carried out from same heat exchanger 6 as shown below: *DTmin = Minimum Hot Utility = Minimum Cold Utility = Process heat recovery= 10 4363.65 12124.4 5476.62 [C] [kW] [kW] [kW]

Total Hot utility = 4364.76 [kW] Total Cold utility = 12117.2 [kW] Total Cross Pinch heat transfer = 1.11646 [kW] Exchanger cross pinch heat transfer 6 6 [H4 ] Pinch Number 1 -6.74845 [kW] Total exchanger cross pinch heat flow = -6.74845 [kW] There is no cross pinch mixing
Table 20: Cross Pinch Report - Plant B

7.4 HEN Design Plant C

As we have discussed earlier in utility selection part of this report that plant C hot stream will used to produce HP steam and its cold streams will be heated by furnace flue gas. Thus the design of heat exchanger network for plant C is straight forward and does not involve any complexity as follows:

Heat Exchanger Network Design

Page 29

MSc Design Project 2011-2012

Figure 26: Heat Exchanger Network Plant C

All the cold stream heating is carried out by furnace flue gas and all the heat from hot stream is used to produce steam.

7.5 Sensitivity Analysis

Impact of a change of process input on process out can be estimated by defining equipment depended and equipment independent relationships. Equipment dependent relations are usually called as design equation where equipment independent relationships are material balance, energy balance etc. or those relationships which do not require equipment specification. For heat exchangers equipment dependent relationships are area equations i.e. Q = U A TLMTD. Thus change in heat load due to change in temperature or process demand in any plant can affect the performance of heat exchanger area network.

8. Conclusion
A number of tools and techniques used to process data in a way to achieve required target of designing heat exchanger network for three plants in a total site. The design stages involved complex data handling which seemed to be relatively simple and straight forward in the beginning. Economic data gathering and analysis was the most challenging part of the design project followed by maximum energy recovery heat exchanger design for each plant. However the results obtained from heat exchanger network meet the design parameters and energy targets for the process.

9. References:
1] Richard Turton/C.Bailie/Wallace B.Whiting/Joseph A Shaeiwitz Analysis, synthesis, and Design of Chemical Processes, Third Edition. P: 177-182, 230, 583-584, 923-941. [2]Fuel Price Data Departmen of Energy and Climate Change , Quarterly Energy Prices, December 2011Section3Industrial Prices Table 3.1.1 <http://www.decc.gov.uk/publications/basket.aspx?filepath=statistics%2fsource%2fprices%2fqep312.xl s&filetype=4#basket [3]Chemical Engineering (April 2011) Economic Indicators: Chemical engineering Plant Cost Index. Viewed 11/02/2012 < http://www.che.com/PCI> [4]ROBIN SMITH. Chemical Process Design and Integration. P:17-20

Heat Exchanger Network Design

Page 30

MSc Design Project 2011-2012

[5]SIMON PERRY. Utility System Handouts 2011-2012. P:L08-6 [6]SIMON PERRY. Energy System Handouts 2011-2012. P:L03-L1

Heat Exchanger Network Design

Page 31