Pinch Technology 1075
Pinch Technology
Bodo Linnhoff, University of Manchester Institute of Science and Technology, Manchester, United Kingdom
Vimal Sahdev, Linnhoff March Ltd., Manchester, United Kingdom
1. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
2. Composite Curves and Energy Targets
3. Pinch Principle . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
4. Energy – Capital Tradeoff . . . . . . . .
5. Process Modifications and
Applications . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
5.1. Batch Processes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
1. Introduction
The discovery of the pinch principle by
Linnhoff has provided engineers with a sci-
entific design methodology which has achieved
outstanding results across the range of process
industries [1]. The way in which industrial pro-
cesses are designed and retrofitted has been rev-
olutionized. Using the pinch principle, engineers
can obtain a better understanding of the funda-
mentals of a particular process. Some of the orig-
inal applications in ICI [2] and Union Carbide
[3] showed energy savings and capital savings in
new designs. The technology has evolved to in-
corporate cogeneration schemes [4], to improve
plant flexibility [5], [6], increase production ca-
pacity [5], and reduce the effect of fouling [7] in
both new designs and existing plants.
The early applications were in the oilrefin-
ing, petrochemical, and bulk chemical plants,
but the technology has also been proved across
a wide range of process industries, including
pharmaceuticals, food, pulp and paper, cement,
brewing, coffee making, and ice-cream and dairy
products. Pinch technology has been used in var-
ious kinds of processes including batch, semi-
continuous, and continuous operations incorpo-
rating various operating parameters, such as dif-
ferent feedstocks, seasonal demand fluctuations,
multiple utilities, quality constraints, and envi-
ronmental constraints.
1075 5.2. Cogeneration . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1078
1075 5.3. Flexibility . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1078
1076 6. Specific Examples . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1079
1077
6.1. Modification of a Continuous Process 1079
1077 6.2. Integration of a Batch Operation . . . 1080
1078 7. References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1080
2. Composite Curves and Energy
Targets
All processes consist of hot and cold streams. A
hot stream is defined as one that requires cooling,
and a cold stream as one that requires heating.
For any process, a single line can be drawn on
a temperature – enthalpy plot which represents
either all the hot streams or all the cold streams
of the process. A single line representing all the
hot streams and a single line representing all the
cold streams are called the hot composite curve
and the cold composite curve, respectively.
The construction of a composite curve is il-
lustrated in Figure 1. Two hot streams are shown
on a temperature – enthalpy diagram.
Stream 1 is cooled from 200 ◦ C to 100 ◦ C. It
has a CP (i.e., mass flow rate times specific heat
capacity) of 1; therefore, it loses 100 kW of heat.
Stream 2 is cooled from 150 ◦ C to 50 ◦ C. It has
a CP of 2; therefore, it loses 200 kW of heat.
The hot composite curve is produced by sim-
ple addition of heat contents over temperature
ranges. Between 200 ◦ C and 150 ◦ C, only one
stream exists and it has a CP of 1. Therefore, the
heat loss across that temperature range is 50 kW.
Between 150 ◦ C and 100 ◦ C, two hot streams ex-
ist, with a total CP of 3. The total heat loss from
150 ◦ C to 100 ◦ C is 150 kW. Since the total CP
from 150 ◦ C to 100 ◦ C is greater than the CP
from 200 ◦ C to 150 ◦ C, that portion of the hot
composite curve becomes flatter in the second
temperature range from 150 ◦ C to 100 ◦ C. Be-
1076 Pinch Technology
tween 100 ◦ C and 50 ◦ C, only one stream exists,
with a CP of 2. Therefore, the total heat loss is
100 kW. LIVE GRAPH
Click here to view
Figure 1. Two hot streams plotted on a temperature –
enthalpy diagram
Figure 2 shows the hot composite curve for
the problem. The cold composite curve is con-
structed in the same way. In practical applica-
tions the number of streams is generally much
greater, but these streams are constructed in ex-
actly the same way. Figure 3 shows the hot and
cold composite curves plotted on the same tem-
perature – enthalpy diagram. The diagram repre-
sents the total heating and cooling requirements
of the process. LIVE GRAPH
Click here to view
Figure 2. Hot composite curve
Along the enthalpy axis the curves over-
lap. The hot composite curve can be used to
heat up the cold composite curve by process-to-
process heat exchange. However, at either end
an overhang exists such that the top of the cold
composite curve needs an external heat source
(QH , min ) and the bottom of the hot composite
curve needs external cooling (QC , min ). These
are known as the hot and cold utility targets.
The point at which the curves come closest to
touching is known as the pinch. At the pinch the
curves are separated by the minimum approach
temperature ∆ T min . For that value of ∆ T min ,
the region of overlap shows the maximum possi-
ble amount of process-to-process heat exchange.
Furthermore, QH, min and QC ,min are the min-
imum utility requirements.
Figure 3. Composite curves showing the pinch and the en-
ergy targets
3. Pinch Principle
Once the pinch and utility targets of a process
have been identified, the three “golden rules”
of pinch technology can be applied. The pro-
cess can be considered as two separate systems
(Fig. 4) – a system above the pinch and a system
below the pinch. The system above the pinch
requires only residual heat and is, therefore, a
heat sink, whereas the system below the pinch
has heat to reject and is, therefore, a heat source.
The three rules are as follows:
1) Heat must not be transferred across the
pinch.
2) There must be no outside cooling above the
pinch.
3) There must be no outside heating below the
pinch.
If the amount of heat traveling across the pinch is
α, then an extra amount (α) of hot utility must be
supplied and an extra amount of cold utility α is
required (Fig. 5). Similarly, any outside cooling
of the heat sink and any outside heating of the
heat source increases the energy requirements.
Thus:

T =A−α
where
T = target energy consumption,
A = actual energy consumption
α = cross-pinch heat flow
To achieve the energy targets, cross-pinch heat
flows must be eliminated.
Figure 4. Schematic representation of the systems above
and below the pinch
Figure 5. Heat transfer across the pinch from heat sink to
heat source
4. Energy – Capital Tradeoff
The composite curves can be moved anywhere
parallel to the enthalpy axis, because the com-
posite curves represent changes in enthalpy bet-
ween certain temperatures, and not absolute val-
ues. Thus, ∆ T min can be increased or decreased
Pinch Technology 1077
simply by shifting one or both of the compos-
ite curves horizontally relative to the other. Ver-
tical movement of the composite curves is not
allowed since temperatures are governed by the
process.
If ∆ T min is increased, the overlap decreases
and the energy target increases. However, capital
cost decreases.
If ∆ T min decreases, capital cost increases
but energy cost decreases. Therefore, a tradeoff
between energy and capital and, thus, a cost opti-
mum exists. Figure 6 shows the effect of ∆ T min
on energy, capital, and total cost.
Pinch technology provides the value of
∆ T min with the minimum total cost prior to de-
sign. This is determined by a procedure known
as supertargeting [8].
Figure 6. Energy cost, capital cost, and total cost plotted
against ∆ T min
5. Process Modifications and
Applications
The insight into the thermodynamics of the pro-
cess provided by pinch technology enables an
experienced practitioner to identify potentially
advantageous process changes. For example, by
alteration of the temperatures or pressures, it
may be possible to reduce substantially the en-
ergy bill without an adverse effect on the product
or process. Proper modification of the process
also leads to other benefits, such as the removal
of bottlenecks and the improvement of process
operability.
1078 Pinch Technology

A systematic search of the data for such op- the projects identified by pinch technology have
portunities is an essential element in any pinch been implemented, in whole or part, in all in-
technology survey. This can be an iterative pro- stances mentioned in Table 1.
cedure: once any beneficial changes are high-
lighted, the composite curves must be redrawn
and the minimum energy needs recalculated, 5.1. Batch Processes
which may then open the way to further process
changes [3], [9]. In the early days pinch technology achieved its
most impressive results in continuous processes,
Table 1. Savings from some applications of pinch technology ∗ but Table 1 includes a number of processes with
exceptionally successful studies in batch opera-
Process description Savings
tions. The key to applying pinch technology in
Crude oil unit savings of ca. $ 1.75×106 at 1.6 year noncontinuous processes lies in the data extrac-
payback
Large petrochemical savings over ca. $ 7.00×106 with
tion. There are no shortcuts; detailed measure-
complex manufacturing paybacks from 12 to 20 months ments and timings of all the process streams are
ethylene, butadiene, essential if cost-saving opportunities are to be
HDPE, LDPE, and
polypropylene found. Where the technology has been applied to
Tailor-made chemicals, savings of ca. $ 0.45×106 at existing operations, there have frequently been
batch process with 30 paybacks of 3 months to 3 years wider process benefits, as well as lower energy
reactors and over 300
products bills. By improved integration of the plant, ca-
Sulfur-based speciality 30 % savings to total site energy bill pacity has often been increased, without ad-
chemicals, batch and (worth ca. $ 0.18×106 at paybacks of
continuous 9 – 16 months
versely affecting operability [10].
Edible oil refinery, batch savings of 70 % of process energy
operation, wide range of equivalent to ca. $ 0.79×106 with
feedstocks paybacks from 12 to 18 months and
debottlenecking equivalent to 15 %
5.2. Cogeneration
increased capacity
Batch processing of dairy savings of 30 % (equivalent to ca. $ The principles governing the correct siting of
products and dried 0.20×106 ) with payback of less than cogeneration systems were established several
beverages 1 year
Brewery savings from 12 % to 25 % of energy
years ago [11], [12]. A pinch study uncovers
costs with paybacks from 9 months to opportunities for introducing such equipment or
2 years optimizing existing units.
“State-of-the-art” whisky significant debottlenecking and
distillery savings of ca. $ 0.35×106 with In the pulp and paper industries, for example,
paybacks from 18 months to 2 years power generation is an important element, and
Paper mill savings of 8 – 20 % of energy bill at pinch technology has been applied successfully
paybacks from 1 to 3 years
Continuous cellulose savings of ca. $ 0.28 × 106 at 1 year to improve performance and to evaluate alterna-
acetate processing payback tives. Some of the examples in Table 1 feature
Continuous dry cement large energy savings the use of cogeneration schemes.
process
∗ Savings mentioned above are concerned primarily with
energy costs. The majority of the companies also benefited from
increased throughput and improved process flexibility and 5.3. Flexibility
operability; the economic value of these benefits is not included
in the table above. A well-integrated plant need not be less flexi-
ble [5], [6]. In fact, the opposite is the case, with
Since 1983, pinch technology has achieved techniques having been developed to ensure that
energy savings in the range of 10 – 70 %, reduc- flexibility is incorporated into the process design
tions in the capital cost of new plants by up to in the most cost-effective way. For example, it
25 %, increased process capacity by the removal is possible to allow for changes in feedstock and
of bottlenecks, and greater flexibility and oper- product specifications, turndown requirements,
ability. The projects summarized in Table 1 in- and seasonal variations.
dicate the variety of industries in which pinch In a study for Shell, UK, where flexibility
technology has been successfully applied: food, was of paramount importance, an integrated de-
paper, dairy products, whisky, cement, special- sign was produced that included twelve operat-
ity and bulk chemicals, and oil refining. To date, ing modes [13]. Throughput was also increased

Figure 7. Example of a process flow diagram
a) Fractionation column; b) Furnace; c) Reactor; d) Stabilizer column; e) Benzene column; f) Toluene column
and energy savings of ca. $ 2×106 were achieved
within a 1.6 year payback period.
Figure 8. Original flow diagram of distillery cooker system
a) Water tank; b) Cooker; c) Fermenter; d) Ejector
6. Specific Examples
The two examples that follow give some indi-
cation of the way in which pinch technology is
applied to specific problems and help to show
why it has had such an impact on every industry
that has used it.
6.1. Modification of a Continuous
Process
Figure 7 shows a simplified flow sheet of an or-
ganic chemicals plant. The crude feed is sep-
arated into residue and light aromatic fractions,
Pinch Technology 1079
which are mixed with a preheated hydrogen-rich
stream before entering the main reactor. The re-
actor product is cooled and partially separated
before being fed to the first of a series of three
distillation columns, each fitted with a reboiler
and a condenser.
The pinch analysis without process modifi-
cations showed that the utility energy target was
22 % lower than the actual use. The pinch point
occurred at 150 ◦ C on the hot curve.
When the aspect of process modification was
included, it was obvious that on all four of the
columns (the initial fractionation column and the
three distillation columns), the reboiler tempera-
ture was above the pinch and the condenser tem-
perature was below it. If the possibility existed to
reduce the reboiler temperature to below 150 ◦ C,
where excess heat is readily available, then the
requirement for heating above the pinch would
be correspondingly reduced, thus offering sig-
nificant savings. In fact, practical considerations
limited the scope for this change, but change was
achieved on one of the columns by a reduction
of the operating pressure.
The next step was to examine the furnace,
which supplied most of the process heating. The
flue gas exit temperature was well above 150 ◦ C;
therefore, recovery of this heat above 150 ◦ C
would reduce the heating target. After composite
curves had been redrawn and process modifica-
tions incorporated, the revised energy target was
less than half the former energy use.
1080 Pinch Technology
The implementation of these proposals pro-
duced an integrated design that used 45 % less
energy than before, with the investment that was
involved being paid for in less than one year.
Figure 9. Distillery cooker system after integration
a) Water tank; b) Cooker, c) Buffer tank; d) Interchanger;
e) Fermenter
6.2. Integration of a Batch Operation
The batch cooking operation in a distillery is
shown in Figure 8. Preheated water and grain
are cooked by steam injection; cooling begins
by venting steam at above atmospheric pressure
to the water preheat tank and is then speeded
by a steam ejector that evaporates water from
the cooker under vacuum. The cooled batch then
moves to the fermentation stage.
The pinch analysis of the distillery as a whole
had identified the pinch point at 90 ◦ C, which
meant that a substantial cross-pinch heat trans-
fer existed within the batch cooking process.
Vent steam hotter than the pinch was heating the
process water below it, and the ejector exhaust
steam was being condensed by cooling water.
The cross-pinch heat transfer was eliminated
by a series of modifications. By introduction of
a buffer tank between the cooker and the fer-
menter, the process water could be preheated
from the cooling cooked grain, which was be-
low the 90 ◦ C pinch, thus eliminating the in-
appropriate steam ejector. The vent steam, no
longer needed for preheating the process water,
was utilized elsewhere on the site to reduce the
need for steam to be brought in. The resulting
energy savings were only part of the benefit; the
cooking cycle was shortened because the cool-
ing was faster and, thus, a process bottleneck
was removed and the production capacity of the
plant increased. The revised design of the batch
cooker is shown in Figure 9.
7. References
1. B. Linnhoff., D. W. Townsend, D. Boland,
G. F. Hewitt, B. E. A. Thomas, A. R. Guy,
R. H. Marsland: User Guide on Process
Integration for the Efficient Use of Energy,
IChemE (Rugby, UK) 1982.
2. B. Linnhoff, J. A. Turner: “Heat Recovery
Networks – New Insights Yield Big Savings,”
Chem. Eng. November 2, 1981 pp, 56 – 70.
3. B. Linnhoff, D. R. Vredeveld: “Pinch
Technology Has Come of Age,” Chem. Eng.
Prog. July 1984, pp. 33 – 40.
4. B. Linnhoff, A. R. Eastwood: Combined Heat
and Power and Process Integration,
Institution of Gas Engineers, 51st Autumn
Meeting, London, November 1985.
5. E. Kotjabasakis, B. Linnhoff: “Sensitivity
Tables for the Design of Flexible Processes,”
Chem. Eng. Res. Des. 64 (1986) 197 – 211.
6. E. Kotjabasakis, B. Linnhoff: Flexible Heat
Exchanger Network Design: Comments on the
Problem Definition and on Suitable Solution
Techniques, paper presented at IChemE
Symposium “Innovation in Process Energy
Utilisation” Bath, 16 – 18 September 1987.
7. E. Kotjabasakis, B. Linnhoff: “Better System
Design Reduces Heat Exchanger Fouling
Costs,” Oil Gas J. September 1987, pp.
49 – 56.
8. B. Linnhoff, S. Ahmad: Supertarget: Optimal
Synthesis of Energy Management Systems,
presented at the ASME Winter Meeting,
Anaheim, December 1986.
9. B. Linnhoff, H. Dunford, R. Smith: “Heat
Integration of Distillation Columns into
Overall Process,” Chem. Eng. Sci. 38 (1983)
no. 8, 1175 – 1188.
10. B. Linnhoff, G. J. Ashton, E. D. A. Obeng.
Process Integration of Batch Processes, paper
presented at the 79th AIChE Annual Meeting,
New York November 1987, pp. 15 – 20.
11. D. W. Townsend, B. Linnhoff: “The
Preliminary Design of Networks in Process
Design,” Part 1: ‘Criteria for placement of heat
 Pinch Technology 1081

and engines and heat pumps in process
networks’, AIChE J. 29 (1983) pp. 742 – 771.
12. D. W. Townsend, B. Linnhoff: “Heat and
Power Networks in Process Design,” Part 2:
‘Design Procedure for Equipment Selection
and Process Matching’, AIChE J. 29 (1983)
no. 5, 748 – 771.
13. T. N. Tjoe, B. Linnhoff: “Using Pinch
Technology for Process Retrofit,” Chem. Eng.
April 28 (1986) pp. 47 – 60.

Piping Systems → Chemical Plant Design and Construction