Pinch Analysis:

Data and Targeting

Prof. G.P. Rangaiah

Department of Chemical & Biomolecular
Engineering @ NUS

Dr. GP Rangaiah
 Data and Targeting - Outline

 Data Extraction
 Case Study: Organics Distillation Plant (ODP)
 Threshold Problems
 Multiple Utilities
 Advanced Energy Targeting
 Targeting Number of (HE) Units
 Targeting Area
 Supertargeting
 Examples/Practice Session

Dr. GP Rangaiah 2
 Data Extraction

 Process Data
 For a New Plant: from Design Data

 For an Existing Plant: from Measured Data

•Mass Balances
•Heat Balances
•Measurement Errors
•Heat Losses
•Data Reconciliation

Dr. GP Rangaiah 3
 Data Extraction
 Stream Data Extraction
 Hot and Cold Streams
•Streams with Change in T (Heat Load) but
without Composition Change

 Stream Supply & Target Temperatures

 Stream CP or heat load (H)
H = Cp(TS – TT)
= (hS – hT)
= CP (TS – TT)
: mass flow rate (kg/s); Cp: specific heat capacity (kJ/kg.K)
h: specific enthalpy (kJ/kg)
Dr. GP Rangaiah 4
 Data Extraction

 Heat Loads and Heat Capacities

 Use Correct Data T

 CP variation
•Cp is a function of T
CP = c0 + c1T + …
H = c0T + c1(T2/2) + …
•Phase Changes
H

 Segment a stream into 2 or more streams

 Safe-side Linearisation
Dr. GP Rangaiah 5
 Data Extraction

 Choosing Streams

How many streams in this process?

Are they hot or cold streams?

Which layout should be

considered?

Dr. GP Rangaiah 6
 Case Study: ODP

Organics Distillation Plant

Stream Mass Specific Initial Final

Flow Rate Heat T (oC) T (oC)
(kg/s) (kJ/kg.K)
Crude Feed 10 2+0.005T 20 180
Dehydrate (9.67) 3.1 152 302
Bottoms 4 2.5 261 158
Middle Oil 5 2 199 70
Overheads ? ? 123 52
Light Oil 2.67 2 52 52 Dehydrate

Fresh Oil 2 2 20 45
Water 0.33 4.19 52 52
Note: Back calculated value is shown in brackets.

Dr. GP Rangaiah 7
 Case Study: ODP
 Data for Existing Heat Exchangers
Streams Exchanger Hot Cold LMTD Calculated Calculated
Area (m2) Stream T’s Stream (oC) Heat Load Overall HTC, U
(oC) T’s (oC) (kW) (kW/m2.K)
Crude Feed/ 57.5 123 to 112 20 to 60 77 880 0.2
Overheads
Crude Feed/ 73.2 199 to 123 60 to (92) 83 760 0.125
Middle Oil

Note: T in brackets is calculated from energy balance on the HE.

o Assume all organic liquids have the same film HTC, and neglect
wall resistance.
o From U = 0.125 for Crude Feed/Middle Oil HE, h for organic liquids
is 0.25 kW/(m2.K)
o From U = 0.20 for Crude Feed/Overheads HE, h for overheads is 1.0
kW/(m2.K) – How? Ok?

Dr. GP Rangaiah 8
 Heat Exchanger Basics

 Heat Transfer Coefficients

 Overall Heat Transfer Coefficient, U

• Film Heat Transfer Coefficient, h
Tube Bundle and
• Fouling Factor, Rd Tube Cross-section
• Wall Resistance (Small)
hi, Rdi
ho, Rdo

Dr. GP Rangaiah 9
 Case Study: ODP
 Process Stream Data
o Using calculated heat load of 880
kW for Cold feed-Overheads
exchanger, CP of Overheads from
𝟖𝟖𝟎
123 to 112 C =
o = 80 kW/K
(𝟏𝟐𝟑 𝟏𝟏𝟐)

o From cooling water flow rate and

temperatures of Overheads cooler,
its heat load is 1,800 kW

o CP (for Overheads from 112 to

𝟏,𝟖𝟎𝟎
52oC) = = 30 kW/K
(𝟏𝟏𝟐 𝟓𝟐)

Dr. GP Rangaiah 10
 Case Study: ODP
 Process Stream Data

Stream Stream TS (oC) TT (oC) Film HTC CP (kW/K) Heat Flow Rate
Name Type (kW/m2.K) (kW)
Bottoms Hot 1 261 158 0.25 10 1,030
Middle Oil Hot 2 199 70 0.25 10 1,290
Overheads Hot 3A 123 112 1 80 880
Overheads Hot 3B 112 52 1 30 1,800
Crude Feed Cold 1 20 180 0.25 20+0.05T -4,000
Dehydrate Cold 2 152 302 0.25 30 -4,500

Dr. GP Rangaiah 11
 Energy Targeting

 Use Problem Table Procedure or Composite

Curves to find Minimum Utilities, Pinch Point and
Grand Composite Curve for a given Tmin

 Tmin may have to be different for some streams

due to their HTC

 Include this as individual Tmin contribution

 Shifted T = T  (½) Tcont instead of T  (½) Tmin

 No Other Change in Problem Table Procedure

Dr. GP Rangaiah 12
 Energy Targeting

 Case Study: ODP

 Assume Tmin = 20oC
 CP of Crude Feed = 2 + 0.005 T kJ/(kg-K)
 Segment Crude Feed into 2 Streams

Stream Stream TS (oC) TT (oC) Film HTC CP (kW/K) Heat Flow Rate
Name Type (kW/m2.K) (kW)
Bottoms Hot 1 261 158 0.25 10 1,030
Middle Oil Hot 2 199 70 0.25 10 1,290
Overheads Hot 3A 123 112 1 80 880
Overheads Hot 3B 112 52 1 30 1,800
Crude Feed Cold 1A 20 103 0.25 23.075 -1,915
Crude Feed Cold 1B 103 180 0.25 27.075 -2,085
Dehydrate Cold 2 152 302 0.25 30 -4,500

Dr. GP Rangaiah 13
 Energy Targeting

 Case Study: ODP

 Using Available Software
 Hot Utility = 4,795 kW
 Cold Utility = 1,295 kW
 Pinch at 113oC (123/103oC)
Comparison
Dehydrate
Situation Tmin HU CU Heat Exchanger
(oC) (kW) (kW) Recovery Area (m2)
(kW)
Current 63 6,860 3,360 1,640 128.5
Target 63 5,830 2,330 2,670 225.4
Target 20 4,795 1,295 3,705 605.0
Dr. GP Rangaiah 14
 Energy Targeting

 Case Study: ODP

Composite Curves

Grand Composite Curve

Dr. GP Rangaiah 15
 Threshold Problems

 Many Processes need

both HU and CU
 Pinch Problems

 Many Others need

either HU or CU
 Threshold Problems
 No Pinch

Dr. GP Rangaiah 16
 Threshold Problems

 Two Types of Threshold Problems

Which utility is
required?

Temperature approach
closest at the “non-
utility” end. Mostly
large driving forces.

Which utility is
required?

Near pinch, and

smaller driving forces

Dr. GP Rangaiah 17
 Multiple Utilities

 Hot Utilities
 LP, MP and HP Steam
 Furnaces
 Flue Gas Constant-Temperature
Utility
 Electric Heating

 Cold Utilities
 Steam Production Variable-Temperature
 Cooling Water Utility
 Air Cooling
 Chilled Water
 Refrigeration Systems

Dr. GP Rangaiah 18
 Multiple Utilities

 Appropriate Placement Principle

 Above the Pinch: Hot Utilities ONLY

 Below the Pinch: Cold Utilities ONLY

 Which Utility? How many Utilities?

 Cheaper
 One or more
 Use GCC

Dr. GP Rangaiah 19
 Multiple Utilities

 Case Study: ODP

Steam at 330oC
- How Much?
Grand
Composite
Curve

4.8 MW from
Furnace or
Steam at Shifted T of
Steam at 330oC
200oC. How Much?

Dr. GP Rangaiah 20
 Multiple Utilities
Pocket: Heat
Exchange among
 4-Stream Example Process Streams

GCC
(Continuous lines)

Pinch
Shifted T
Heating duty (= 20 kW) = 85oC
at what temperature?

Cooling duty (= 60 kW)

at what temperature?

Dr. GP Rangaiah 21
 Multiple Utilities
Two Hot Utilities
 Utility Pinch

 Whenever a utility profile

touches GCC

 Increases number of units

GCC
(Continuous
(discussed later) lines)

Dr. GP Rangaiah 22
 Multiple Utilities

 Variable-temperature Utility

 GCC for ODP Case Study

Shifted T (oC)
Flue gas at Shifted T = 360oC
and CP = 24 kW/K
GCC
(Continuous
Improvement: Decrease lines)
CP or Shifted T

Utility Pinch?

Dr. GP Rangaiah 23
 Advanced Energy Targeting

 Zonal Targeting
 Targeting for the Complete Plant

• Good Idea. But is heat exchange between two parts of a

plant feasible? Any operational problems?

 Targeting for Individual Parts of a Plant

 Assess Benefits of HEN for the Complete Plant

versus HEN for Individual Parts of a Plant
• Consider HEN for the complete plant if the benefits are
significant

Dr. GP Rangaiah 24
 Advanced Energy Targeting

 Case Study: ODP

 Down-stream Plant: Vacuum Distillation Unit

VDU:

One Cold Stream

One Hot Stream

Dr. GP Rangaiah 25
 Advanced Energy Targeting

 Case Study: ODP

 Energy Targeting Separately and Together
Situation Current HU Potential CU Pinch –
HU use Target HU Saving Target Shifted
(kW) (kW) (%) (kW) T (oC)
Atmospheric Unit 6,860 4,795 30.1% 1,295 113
VDU 1,640 1,640 0.0% 1,050 140-165
Separately 8,500 6,435 24.3% 2,345 -
Combined Plant 8,500 6,085 28.4% 1,995 113

Significant Savings by HEN GCC for the

for the Combined Plant? Combined
Plant
Network Design Easy?

Dr. GP Rangaiah 26
 Advanced Energy Targeting

 Pressure Drop

 HEN may increase

•Pump Power and/or
•Number of Pumps
(Source: wikipedia.org)

 Important in both Design and Retrofitting

 Pressure Drop Targeting

•Along with Other Targeting

Dr. GP Rangaiah 27
 Targeting Number of (HE) Units

 Streams and their Energy in a Process

Hot Utility/Stream
and their Energy
(Total = 3638) Energy
Balance
Satisfied
Cold Utility/Streams
and their Energy
(Total = 3638)

How Many Units

(Exchangers,
Heaters and
Coolers)?
Minimum Number of Units,
Umin = Total Number of Streams (N) - 1
Dr. GP Rangaiah 28
 Targeting Number of Units

 Another Example How many units?

Possible to
decrease?
4 Units

“Subset Equality”

Umin = N – s
(s = number of subsets)

Dr. GP Rangaiah 29
 Targeting Number of Units
 Umin for MER Design
 Pinch, Two Sub-problems

 Above Pinch and Below Pinch

Umin, MER = Umin, a + Umin, b

 Umin without Pinch (Subdivision)

 Umin  Umin, MER

 Scope to Reduce Units by Sacrificing Some

Energy Recovery (Network Relaxation)
Dr. GP Rangaiah 30
 Example

 Process Flowsheet 20oC

Heater
135oC

 Stream Data 2 kW/oC

80oC 140oC
Stream CP Supply Target Heater Reactor
o
No. & (kW/K) (Initial) (Final) 4 kW/ C
Type TS (oC) TT (oC) 3 kW/oC 170oC
(1) Cold 2.0 20 135
Cooler
(2) Hot 3.0 170 60
(3) Cold 4.0 80 140 60oC
30oC 150oC
(4) Hot 1.5 150 30 Cooler Separator
1.5 kW/ oC

 Targets Found
Hot Utility = 20 kW, Cold Utility = 60 kW Will be used in
the following …
Pinch Temperature: 85 (or 90/80) oC

Dr. GP Rangaiah 31
 Targeting Number of Units

 Four-Stream Example (No Pinch)

H
330

180

230

240

HU CU
Umin = N – 1
= (4+1+1) – 1 = 5

Dr. GP Rangaiah 32
 Targeting Number of Units

 Four-Stream Example (with Pinch for MER)

CP Pinch at 90/80 H

170 90 60
2 3.0 240/90

150 90 30 90/90
4 1.5

135 80 20
1 2.0 110/120

3 4.0 140 80 240/0

Umin, a = (4+1) – 2 = 3 (2 sub-sets)

Umin, b = (3+1) – 1 = 3
Umin, MER = Umin, a + Umin, b = 6
Dr. GP Rangaiah 33
 Targeting Number of Units

 Four-Stream Example (with Pinch for MER)

CP Pinch at 90/80 H

170 90 60
2 3.0 1 3 240/90

150 90 70 30 90/90
4 1.5 2 4 C
60
135 125 80 35 20
1 2.0 H 2 3 4 110/120
20 90 90 30
3 4.0 140 80 240/0
1
240

Design using the minimum Improvement

utilities and corresponding Possible?
target number of units

Dr. GP Rangaiah 34
 Targeting Area
 Using Composite
Curves

Divide CCs into Segments

Segment: No change in
Streams or Utilities in a
segment

Calculate Area for Each

Segment

How many segments for

the 4-stream example?
Dr. GP Rangaiah 35
 Targeting Area

5
6

Cooling Water
from 20 to 45oC
Dr. GP Rangaiah 36
 Targeting Area
1
 Segment 1
 Cold stream, C3 (CP = 4 kW/K) is
heated from 135 to 140oC. 3

 Assume steam at 180oC is used for 2

this.
 Assume hC3 = 0.4 and hSTM = 1.0
kW/m2K
 U  1/(1/0.4 + 1/1.0) = 0.286 kW/m2K 4
 (T)LM =
𝟏𝟖𝟎 𝟏𝟒𝟎
𝐥𝐧
(𝟏𝟖𝟎 𝟏𝟑𝟓)
𝟏𝟖𝟎 𝟏𝟒𝟎 = 42.45oC
𝟏𝟖𝟎 𝟏𝟑𝟓

 From Q = U A (T)LM,
Stream No. CP Supply Target HTC, h
A = Q / {U(T)LM} & Type (kW/K) TS (oC) TT (oC) (kW/m2K)
= 4x(140-135) / (0.286x42.45) (1) Cold 2.0 20 135 0.2
(2) Hot 3.0 170 60 0.1
= 1.65 m2
(3) Cold 4.0 80 140 0.4
Dr. GP Rangaiah (4) Hot 1.5 150 30 0.3 37
 Targeting Area
 Segment 3
3
 Hot streams 2 and 4 are cooled from
150 to 90oC

 Cold streams1 and 3 are heated from

80 to 125oC
[ = 80 + (3.0+1.5)x(150-90) / (2.0+4.0)]

 (T)LM = 𝟏𝟓𝟎 𝟏𝟐𝟓 = 16.4oC Stream No. CP Supply Target HTC, h

𝟗𝟎 𝟖𝟎
& Type (kW/K) TS (oC) TT (oC) (kW/m2K)
(1) Cold 2.0 20 135 0.2
(2) Hot 3.0 170 60 0.1
(3) Cold 4.0 80 140 0.4
(4) Hot 1.5 150 30 0.3
Dr. GP Rangaiah 38
 Targeting Area
 Segment 3
3
 For a 2-stream HE, Area, A =

𝐋𝐌 𝐋𝐌 𝐡 𝒄

 For Multiple Streams in a Segment,

𝒉𝒊 𝒄𝒋
A=
𝐋𝐌 𝐡𝐢 𝐜𝒋

Stream No. CP Supply Target HTC, h

= & Type (kW/K) TS (oC) TT (oC) (kW/m2K)
(1) Cold 2.0 20 135 0.2
(2) Hot 3.0 170 60 0.1
= 182.9 m2 (3) Cold 4.0 80 140 0.4
(4) Hot 1.5 150 30 0.3
Dr. GP Rangaiah 39
 Targeting Area

 Total Area = Sum of Areas for All Segments

 Target for MER Network before Network Design

 Assumptions
 Counter-Current flow

 Vertical Matching (but Criss-

Crossing may be Better)

 Area accurate to within ±10%

 Sufficient for Capital Cost
Estimation
Dr. GP Rangaiah 40
 Supertargeting

 Decreasing Tmin leads to

 Lower HU and CU, and so Lower OC
 Smaller Heaters/Coolers, and so Lower CC
 Lower Driving Forces, and Greater Heat Exchange
 Larger Exchangers and Higher CC
 Supertargeting: Finding Optimal Tmin
 OC and CC are calculated using Targets for Energy,
Number of Units and Area at each of Many Tmin Values
 Assumption: Same Area for Each Unit
 HEN Design is NOT required
 Can be Automated Easily
Dr. GP Rangaiah 41
 Supertargeting

 Choice of Tmin

With increasing Tmin,

Utilities increase and
HE area decreases
[since Q = U A (T)LM]

Optimum Tmin

Dr. GP Rangaiah 42
 Supertargeting

 Case Study: ODP

 Flat Curve: Optimum

Tmin is not Sharp

 Optimum Tmin is not

much affected by
approximations in HTC
and Area Estimate
Variation of Capital Cost, Operating
Cost and Total Cost with Tmin

Dr. GP Rangaiah 43
 Data and Targeting - Summary

 Data Extraction
 Case Study: Organics Distillation Plant (ODP)
 Threshold Problems
 Multiple Utilities
 Advanced Energy Targeting
 Targeting Number of (HE) Units
 Targeting Area
 Supertargeting
 Examples/Practice Session

Dr. GP Rangaiah 44