chapter 3 heat integration
TRANSCRIPT
8/17/2019 Chapter 3 Heat Integration
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/chapter-3-heat-integration 1/18
3-1
CHAPTER 3
PROCESS INTEGRATION
3.1 Introduction
Process integration can lead to a substantial reduction in the energy requirements of
a process. In recent years much work has been done on developing methods for
investigating energy integration and the efficient design of heat exchanger networks;
Gundersen and Naess (1988). Pinch technology is one of the most successful and
generally useful techniques that developed by Bodo Linnhoff and others workers.
The term derives from the fact that in a plot of the system temperatures
versus the heat transferred, a pinch usually occurs between the hot stream and cold
stream curves. It has been shown that the pinch represents a distinct
thermodynamic break in the system and that, for minimum energy requirements,
heat should not be transferred across the pinch, Linnhoff and Townsend (1982).
In this section the fundamental principles of the pinch technology method for
energy integration will be outlined and illustrated with reference to a simple problem.
The method and its applications are described fully in a guide published by the
Institution of Chemical Engineers, ICheme (1994). (Sinnott, 2006)
3.2 Pinch Technology
The development and application of the method can be illustrated by considering the
problem of integrating the utilization of energy between hot and cold stream. Each
stream starts from a source temperature Ts and is to be heated or cooled to a target
temperature Tt. The heat capacity of each stream is shown as CP (Sinnott, 2006).
For stream where the specific heat capacity can be taken as constant and there is
no phase change, CP will be given by:
= ṁ
8/17/2019 Chapter 3 Heat Integration
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/chapter-3-heat-integration 2/18
3-2
ṁ = mass flow rate (kg/s)
Cp = average specific heat between stream supply and target
Table 3.1: Stream data for heat integration problem (Hysys)
T actual
streamstream
typesupply T (°C) target T (°C)
Heat
capacity
flowrate
(kW/°C)
Heat Load,
∆H, kW
Product hot 117.2000 20.0000 8.4529 821.62107
DC 2 hot 76.9118 30.6300 1.4672 67.9043414
Condenser hot 83.4500 40.0000 1.7262 75.0019296
DC 1 cold 108.7000 120.2000 10.8761 125.074732
Reactor 2 cold 110.0000 120.0000 11.6552 116.552111
Reactor 1 cold 89.5300 110.0000 15.4710 316.69137
Figure 3.1: Hot streams plotted separately
8/17/2019 Chapter 3 Heat Integration
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/chapter-3-heat-integration 3/18
3-3
Figure 3.2: The composite hot stream
Figure 3.3: Cold stream plotted separately
8/17/2019 Chapter 3 Heat Integration
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/chapter-3-heat-integration 4/18
3-4
Figure 3.4: Composite cold stream
Figure 3.5: The hot and cold composite curve plotted together at ∆Tmin =10°C
Minimum cooling
requirement
Minimum heating requirement
8/17/2019 Chapter 3 Heat Integration
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/chapter-3-heat-integration 5/18
3-5
Figure 3.6: The grand composite curve
Minimum temperature difference is the driving force for heat transfer. ∆Tmin must be
determined for the energy recovery system of plant. The optimum value of ∆T min isvery significant because ∆Tmin will determine the size of the heat exchanger in a
network.
Table 3.2: Values of ∆Tmin for the respective industries (Cheresource.com, 2011)
Industries Optimum, ∆Tmin
Oil refining 20-40°C
Petrochemical and Chemical 10-20°C
Low temperature processes 3-5°C
2-EHA plant is categorised under chemical industries. Therefore, in our plant, we
assume ∆Tmin = 10°C.
3.3 The Problem Table Method
Linnhoff and Flower give the name as problem table to a numerical method for
determining the pinch temperatures and the minimum utility requirements. (Sinnott,
2006)
The procedure is as follows:
1) By converting the actual stream temperature Tact into interval temperature
Tint by subtracting half the minimum temperature differences from the hot
stream temperatures, and by adding half to the cold stream temperatures:
ℎ = − ∆
2
= + ∆2
Tpinch=94.53°C
8/17/2019 Chapter 3 Heat Integration
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/chapter-3-heat-integration 6/18
3-6
The use of the interval temperature rather than the actual temperatures
allows the minimum temperatures differences to be taken into account ∆Tmin = 10°C
for the problem being considered.
Table 3.3: Interval temperature
T actual T interval
Streamstream
typesupply T (°C) target T (°C)
Supply T
(°C)
target T
(°C)
Product Hot 117.20 20.00 112.20 15.00
DC 2 Hot 76.91 30.63 71.91 25.63
Condenser Hot 83.45 40.00 78.45 35.00
DC 1 Cold 108.70 120.20 113.70 125.20
Reactor 2 Cold 110.00 120.00 115.00 125.00
Reactor 1 Cold 89.53 110.00 94.53 115.00
2) Note any duplicate interval temperatures.
3) Rank the interval temperature in order of magnitude, showing the duplicated
temperature only once in the order.
8/17/2019 Chapter 3 Heat Integration
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/chapter-3-heat-integration 7/18
3-7
Figure 3.7: Rank the interval temperature in order of magnitude
4) Carry out a heat balance for the stream falling within each temperature
interval:
For the nth interval:
∆ = − ℎ ∆ Where:
∆ = ℎ ℎ ℎ = ℎ ℎ ℎ
ℎ=
ℎ
ℎ
ℎ
ℎ
∆ = = −1 −
8/17/2019 Chapter 3 Heat Integration
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/chapter-3-heat-integration 8/18
3-8
Figure 3.8: Rank the interval temperature with heat balance
Table 3.4: Problem table
Rank
interval
temperature,
°C
∆Tn, °C
− ℎ ,
/°
∆H, kW Surplus
or deficit
Heat
cascade
Correction
125.2 Nil Nil 0 0 408.9556
125 0.2 10.8761 2.1752 D -2.1752 406.7804
115 10 22.5313 225.3127 D -227.4880 181.4677
113.7 1.3 26.3471 34.2512 D -261.7391 147.2165
112.2 1.5 15.4710 23.2065 D -284.9456 124.0100
8/17/2019 Chapter 3 Heat Integration
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/chapter-3-heat-integration 9/18
3-9
94.53 17.67 7.0181 124.0100 D -408.9556 0.0000
76.45 16.08 -8.4529 -135.9225 S -273.0331 135.9225
71.9118 6.5382 -10.1791 -66.5525 S -206.4806 202.4750
35 36.9118 -11.6463 -429.8843 S 223.4037 632.3593
25.63 9.37 -9.9201 -92.9512 S 316.3549 725.3105
15 10.63 -8.4529 -89.8542 S 406.2091 815.1647
5) “Cascade” the heat surplus from one interval to the next down the column
of interval temperatures.
Cascading the heat from one interval to the next implies that the temperature
difference is such that the heat can be transferred between the hot and cold
streams. The presence value in the column indicates that the temperature gradient
is in the wrong direction and that the exchange is not thermodynamically possible.
This difficulty can be overcome if heat is introduced into the top of the cascade.
Below is the figure of cascade which Cascade 1 on the right hand side and for
Cascade 2 on the left hand side.
8/17/2019 Chapter 3 Heat Integration
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/chapter-3-heat-integration 10/18
3-10
Figure 3.9: Heat cascade before and after
6) Introduce just enough heat to the top of the cascade to eliminate all
the negative values.
8/17/2019 Chapter 3 Heat Integration
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/chapter-3-heat-integration 11/18
3-11
Figure 3.10: Flow of heat cascade
∴Therefore, the pinch temperature is 89.53°C and 99.53°C.
3.4 The Heat Exchanger Network
3.4.1 Network design for maximum energy recovery
8/17/2019 Chapter 3 Heat Integration
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/chapter-3-heat-integration 12/18
3-12
The analysis carried out in figure 3.10 has shown that the minimum utility
requirements for the problem set out in table 3.4 are 408.3556 kW of the hot and
730.6358 kW of the cold utility and the pinch occurs where the cold streams are at
89.53°C and the hot 99.53°C.
PINCH
Above pinch Below pinch
117.2°C99.53 °C 89.53 °C
20 °C
30.83 °C
40 °C
76.91 °C
83.45 °C
89.53 °C
H (kW)
149.3626 kW 672.2585 kW
67.9043 kW
75.0019 kW
108.27°C120.2 °C
129.7514 kW
110 °C316.6914 kW
120 °C110 °C
116.5524 kW
Figure 3.11: Grid for streams problem
3.4.1.1 The network design above the pinch
ℎ ≤
Stream 1:
∆ = − = 8.4529 117.2 − 99.53 = 149.3626
Stream 2:
∆ = − = 10.8761 120.2 − 108.27 = 129.7514
Stream 3:
∆ = − = 11.6552 120 − 110 = 116.5521
Stream 4:
∆ = − = 15.4710 110 − 89.53 = 316.6914
3.4.1.2 The network design below the pinch
ℎ ≥
Stream 5:
∆ = − = 8.4529 89.53 − 20 = 672.2585
Stream 6:
∆ = − = 1.4672 76.9118 − 30.63 = 67.9043
Stream 7:
∆=
−
= 1.7262 83.45
−40 = 75.0019
8/17/2019 Chapter 3 Heat Integration
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/chapter-3-heat-integration 13/18
3-13
3.5 Minimum Number of Exchanger
The network shown in figure 9.11 was designed to give the maximum heat recovery,
and therefore give the minimum consumption and cost of the hot and cold utilities.
Heat would cross the pinch and the consumption of the utilities would be increased.
(Sinnott, 2006)
Whether the revised network would be better, more economic, would depend
on the relatives cost of capital and utilities. For any network there will be an optimum
design that gives the least annual cost; capital charges plus utility and other
operating costs.
After heat integration, according to the figure 9.11 there are 2 heat
exchangers, 3 coolers and 2 heaters.
PINCH=94.53°C
Above pinch Below pinch
117.2°C 99.53 °C 89.53 °C
20 °C
30.83 °C
40 °C
76.91 °C
83.45 °C
672.2585 kW
67.9043 kW
75.0019 kW
120.2 °C
129.7514 kW
110 °C
116.5524 kW120 °C
E-6
E-7
E-8
heater
heater
cooler
cooler
cooler
E-11
316.6914 kW
149.3626 kW
E-1
E-2
DC 1
R2
R1
CONDENSER
PRODUCT
DC 2
Figure 3.12: Available stream heat
8/17/2019 Chapter 3 Heat Integration
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/chapter-3-heat-integration 14/18
3-14
Figure 3.13: Heat Exchanger Network design
3.6 Difference Between Before and After Heat Integration.
Table 3.5: Difference between Before and After Heat Integration
before heat integration after heat integration
number of heat exchanger 0 1
number of heater 3 2
number of cooler 3 3
hot utility 2373.6 kW 409.1 kW
cold utility 1259.3 kW 815.2 kW
total utility 3632.9 kW 1224.3 kW
Therefore, percentage of energy saving after heat integration:
=3632.9 − 1224.3
3632.9 × 100% = 66.3 %
8/17/2019 Chapter 3 Heat Integration
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/chapter-3-heat-integration 15/18
3-15
3.7 Conclusion
There are energy saving by 66.3%, but it is decided not to proceed with our
plant since it is difficult to integrate by using the product stream since the product
will tend to polymerize along the tube which will result in pressure drop. Shut down
procedure of the plant also need to be conducted frequently due to the
polymerization problem. It is also required to add-up more inhibitor in order to
prevent polymerization to occur in which will result in the add-up to cost. The
amount of increment should not be wasted; it could be use and spend for
maintenance cost.
8/17/2019 Chapter 3 Heat Integration
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/chapter-3-heat-integration 16/18
3-16
To
Incinerator
R-101
T-102 T-103
59
12
11
7
4
16
17
18 19
21
13
T-101
R-102
S-101
S-102E-103
3
8
10
15
20
14
1 2
6
E-101
M-101
E-102
E-105
Figure 9.12: PFD before heat integration
8/17/2019 Chapter 3 Heat Integration
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/chapter-3-heat-integration 17/18
3-17
P-5
P-4
ToIncinerator
R-101
T-102 T-103
59
12
11
7
4
16
17
18 19
21
13
T-101
R-102
S-101
S-102E-103
8
10
15
20
14
1
6
M-101
E-102
E-105
E-1
P-2
3
P-3
2
Figure 9.13: PFD after heat integration
8/17/2019 Chapter 3 Heat Integration
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/chapter-3-heat-integration 18/18
3-18