Heat Integration A short description with illustration case study Department of Process Integration, UMIST Manchester, UK

1
Heat IntegrationA short description with
illustration case study Department of
Process Integration, UMISTManchester, UK
2
Heat Integration
Grassroot
HEN
Retrofit Analysis
3
Process Integration

• Developed and pioneered at DPI UMIST
• Gradually being established in industrial
  applications needs to penetrate into municipal
  etc
• DPI UMIST has a consortium of 26 world leading
  partners in the field
• It is supported by research SW
• Latest research in combined Water Energy
  savings

4
Heat Integration

• Typical energy saving 15 45
• Very general easily applicable in Power
  generation, Oil refining, Petrochemicals, Food
  and Drink Industry, Pulp Paper, hospitals etc
• Typical pay-back periods from a few weeks to 16
  months (decision made by the client)
• Considerably contributes to Emissions Reduction
  including CO2

5
Some PI Consortium Members

• BP Degussa Mitsubishi
• Air Products Saudi Aramco Exon Mobil
• AspenTech Sinopec Norsk Hydro
• Shell IFP Eng of India
• CANMET TotalFinaElf JGC Corp
• UOP MW Kellogg BOC

6
Demonstration Example

• Most present applications are
• not grass-route but retrofits
• Considerably more difficult constrained problem
• Economy dictates the energy saving potential by
  pay-back period

7
Retrofit of HEN

• Crude Distillation Unit
• Part of a Romanian refinery complex
• Designed some years ago by a well known
  contractor
• Improvement of efficiency and energy consumption
  economic savings

8
IntroductionObjectivesProcess Integration
AnalysisConclusionsAcknowledgements
EXISTING PROCESS
EXISTING PROCESS
Process Integration Analysis
9
Kerosene
10
IntroductionObjectivesProcess Integration
AnalysisConclusionsAcknowledgements
EXISTING PROCESS
SIMULATION
SIMULATION
SIMULATION
Process Integration Analysis
DATA COLLECTION
PINCH ANALYSIS
RETROFIT ANALYSIS
SUGGESTED DESIGNS
11

• Plant measurements HYSYS
• Peng-Robinson property package
• Main source of data
• Existing HEN
• Energy consumption

12
112.8?C
63.6?C
H1
1
69.1?C
92.4?C
2
H2
107.2?C
162.8?C
H3
3
60?C
158.1?C
H4
4
150?C
261.4?C
5
H5
6
76.8?C
131.1?C
H6
7
50?C
170.8?C
8
H7
10
9
40?C
217.8?C
13
H8
12
11
70?C
262.9?C
14
H9
15
90?C
315.6?C
17
H10
16
18
90?C
240.1?C
H11
21
22
31
210?C
291.7?C
H12
90?C
19
23
24
32
H13
90?C
353.2?C
33
H14
26
25
20?C
220?C
27
19
14
11
8
4
6
16
C1
211.3?C
348?C
C2
28
158.3?C
162.8?C
C3
5
370?C
315?C
C4
29
350?C
144?C
C5
30
110?C
63.2?C
17
3
C6
13
11238.9
112.8?C
63.6?C
H1
1
CW 38,293 kW
6797.2
69.1?C
92.4?C
2
H2
538.9
107.2?C
162.8?C
AC 8,677 kW
H3
3
20027.8
60?C
158.1?C
H4
4
6630.3
6758.3
150?C
261.4?C
5
H5
6
15113.9
76.8?C
131.1?C
H6
7
1673.0
1228.6
230.1
50?C
170.8?C
8
H7
10
9
320.0
1410.5
1614.2
40?C
217.8?C
13
H8
12
11
3293.9
1971.7
70?C
262.9?C
14
H9
15
452.2
1652.8
177.1
90?C
315.6?C
17
H10
16
18
833.3
788.9
2767.5
90?C
240.1?C
H11
21
22
31
210?C
291.7?C
H12
16349.4
2959.4
1057.5
1207.5
90?C
19
23
24
32
H13
13326.9
1688.6
2702.2
90?C
353.2?C
33
H14
26
25
4491.7
20?C
220?C
27
19
14
11
8
4
6
16
C1
52480.6
211.3?C
348?C
C2
28
158.3?C
162.8?C
C3
5
14875.0
370?C
315?C
C4
29
1563.6
H 73,410 kW
350?C
144?C
C5
30
110?C
63.2?C
17
3
C6
14
IntroductionObjectivesProcess Integration
AnalysisConclusionsAcknowledgements
EXISTING PROCESS
SIMULATION
Process Integration Analysis
DATA COLLECTION
DATA COLLECTION
DATA COLLECTION
PINCH ANALYSIS
RETROFIT ANALYSIS
SUGGESTED DESIGNS
15
(No Transcript)
16
(No Transcript)
17
Exchanger Data
. . .
. . .
. . .
18
Economic Data
19
IntroductionObjectivesProcess Integration
AnalysisConclusionsAcknowledgements
EXISTING PROCESS
SIMULATION
Process Integration Analysis
DATA COLLECTION
PINCH ANALYSIS
PINCH ANALYSIS
PINCH ANALYSIS
RETROFIT ANALYSIS
SUGGESTED DESIGNS
20
Optimum DTMIN
(/y)
0.11E08
Total Cost
0.95E07
0.85E07
0.75E07
0.65E07
Capital Cost
0.55E07
Operating Cost
0.45E07
0.35E07
0.25E07
0.00
5.00
10.00
15.00
20.00
25.00
30.00
35.00
40.00
DTmin C
21
(No Transcript)
22
QH,MIN 55,553 kW
Composite Curves
QC,MIN 29,881 kW
23
IntroductionObjectivesProcess Integration
AnalysisConclusionsAcknowledgements
?
EXISTING PROCESS
?
SIMULATION
Process Integration Analysis
DATA COLLECTION
?
PINCH ANALYSIS
RETROFIT ANALYSIS
RETROFIT ANALYSIS
RETROFIT ANALYSIS
SUGGESTED DESIGNS
24
Network Pinch Method

• Pinching matches ? bottleneck
• How to overcome pinching matches?

25
Network Pinch Method
Existing HEN
DIAGNOSIS STAGE New Modifications
OPTIMISATION STAGE Energy - Capital Cost Trade-off
Suggested Design
26
EXISTING HEN
27
IntroductionObjectivesProcess Integration
AnalysisConclusionsAcknowledgements
EXISTING PROCESS
SIMULATION
Process Integration Analysis
DATA COLLECTION
PINCH ANALYSIS
RETROFIT ANALYSIS
SUGGESTED DESIGNS
SUGGESTED DESIGNS
SUGGESTED DESIGNS
28
EXISTING HEN
(7) 1st RESEQUENCE HE4, stream C1
29
(No Transcript)
30
EXISTING HEN
OPTION I In need of further study Payback Time ?
1 months Savings 114,190 /y
(7) 1st RESEQUENCE HE4, stream C1
(9) 1st NEW HE HE34 H14 C2
31
(No Transcript)
32
EXISTING HEN
OPTION I In need of further study Payback Time ?
1 months Savings 114,190 /y
(7) 1st RESEQUENCE HE4, stream C1
(9) 1st NEW HE HE34 H14 C2
OPTION II Capital Investment 133,983 Payback
Time 4 months Savings 320,610 /y
(10) 2nd NEW HE HE35 H12 C2
33
(No Transcript)
34
EXISTING HEN
OPTION I In need of further study Payback Time ?
1 months Savings 114,190 /y
(7) 1st RESEQUENCE HE4, stream C1
(9) 1st NEW HE HE34 H14 C2
OPTION II Capital Investment 133,983 Payback
Time 4 months Savings 320,610 /y
OPTION III Capital Investment 648,803 Payback
Time 10 months Savings 495,440 /y
(10) 2nd NEW HE HE35 H12 C2
(11) 3th NEW HE HE36 H11 - C1
35
(No Transcript)
36
EXISTING HEN
OPTION I In need of further study Payback Time ?
1 months Savings 114,190 /y
(7) 1st RESEQUENCE HE4, stream C1
(9) 1st NEW HE HE34 H14 C2
OPTION II Capital Investment 133,983 Payback
Time 4 months Savings 320,610 /y
OPTION III Capital Investment 648,803 Payback
Time 10 months Savings 495,440 /y
(10) 2nd NEW HE HE35 H12 C2
OPTION IV Capital Investment 829,367 Payback
Time 11 months Savings 586,190 /y
(11) 3th NEW HE HE36 H11 - C1
37
Option V
600,000
550,000
Option IV
500,000
450,000
400,000
Option III
Utility Cost Saving (/y)
Option II
350,000
300,000
250,000
200,000
150,000
Option I
100,000
2
4
6
8
10
12
14
16
18
Payback Time (months)
38
112.8?C
63.6?C
H1
1
69.1?C
92.4?C
2
H2
107.2?C
162.8?C
H3
3
60?C
158.1?C
H4
150?C
261.4?C
H5
5
6
76.8?C
131.1?C
H6
7
50?C
170.8?C
9
H7
10
8
40?C
217.8?C
11
H8
13
12
70?C
262.9?C
15
H9
14
90?C
315.6?C
18
17
H10
16
90?C
240.1?C
22
21
31
H11
210?C
291.7?C
H12
19
90?C
23
24
32
H13
90?C
353.2?C
26
25
H14
33
20?C
220?C
27
19
16
14
11
8
6
C1
211.3?C
348?C
28
C2
158.3?C
162.8?C
C3
5
370?C
315?C
C4
29
350?C
144?C
C5
30
110?C
63.2?C
17
3
C6
39
OPTION IV - SUGGESTED DESIGN

• 1 Re-sequence 3 New HE
• Utility savings
• Hot utility 12
• Cold utility 19
• Emissions reduction (9 MW)
• Capital Investment 830,000 US
• Payback Time lt 10 months

40

• Network Pinch Method
• Diagnosis Stage
• Optimisation Stage

EXISTING PROCESS
EXISTING PROCESS
EXISTING PROCESS
SIMULATION
SIMULATION
SIMULATION

• Different Options (4)
• Suggested Topology
• 1 Re-sequencing. 3 New HE
• Savings
• Hot utility 12
• Cold utility 19
• Emissions reduction (9 MW)
• Payback Time 10 months

DATA COLLECTION
DATA COLLECTION
DATA COLLECTION
PINCH ANALYSIS
PINCH ANALYSIS
PINCH ANALYSIS
RETROFIT ANALYSIS
RETROFIT ANALYSIS
RETROFIT ANALYSIS
SUGGESTED DESIGNS
SUGGESTED DESIGNS
SUGGESTED DESIGNS
41
www.dcs.vein.hu/pres2004