Prof. Kathleen B.

Aviso
Chemical Engineering Department
De La Salle University, Manila, Philippines

1
Outline of Presentation

• Generic Mathematical Model

• Generic MILP model for Process Synthesis
• Components of P-graph
• Case Study
• Concluding Remarks

2
 Generic Mathematical Program
Any optimization problem can be stated in the following form:

min f(x, y) (Objective function)

subject to:
g(x, y) ≤ 0 (Inequality constraints)
h(x, y) = 0 (Equality constraints)
x  Rn (Continuous variables)
y  Im (Integer variables)

The specific algebraic form of the functions f, g and h depends

on the problem.
 Notes on Model Components
Model Component General Remarks/Examples
Objective function Quantitative measure of performance (e.g., efficiency or
profitability) expressed as a function of variables

Inequality constraints Inequality based restrictions (e.g., pressure safety limits,

entropy generation)

Equality constraints Equation-based restrictions (e.g., energy or mass

conservation)

Continuous variables Physical variables (e.g., concentration, P, T)

Integer variables Discrete variables (e.g., number of stages) or logical

decisions (with/without catalyst); can always be expressed
in terms of equivalent binary variables
 Model Classifications

f, g and h are comprised f, g and h are NOT

ONLY of linear polynomials comprised ONLY of linear
polynomials

All variables are Linear program (LP) Non-linear program (NLP)

continuous

All variables are integer- Integer linear program (ILP) Integer non-linear program
valued (INLP)

Both continuous and Mixed-integer linear Mixed-integer non-linear

integer variables are program (MILP) program (MINLP)
present
General Problem Statement
Given Find
• Process unit data Maximum annual profit
Input/Output ratios Selected process units
Capital cost function Capacity of process units
• Process streams Net output of flowrate streams
Products/by-products
Intermediates
Raw materials
• Other techno-economic data
Bounds on net flowrate of
streams
Stream prices
Others (e.g. operating hours,
annualizing factor)

6
 Simplifying Assumptions Used
Process units have fixed input-output ratios.
Process unit capacity can be varied continuously.
Process units have piecewise linear capital cost functions.
Plant cost is approximated by sum of capital cost of major process
units.
Process streams have fixed prices.
Revenues and costs from process streams dominate process
economics.
Annualizing factor (i.e., capital recovery factor) is fixed (computed
from interest rate and plant life).
Process Units in Isolation
 Process Vector Convention

Facilitates model
formulation.
Inputs and outputs denoted
with negative and positive
values.
Input-output ratios signify:
Process Stream Boiler Efficiency
Heat (MW) 1 Yield
Power (MW) 0.01 Coefficient of performance
Cooling (MW) 0 etc.
Purified Water (t/h) 2.16
Fuel Oil (t/h) 0.122
Fresh Water (t/h) 0
Rejected Water (t/h) 0
 Piecewise Linear Capital Cost Function

A piecewise linear cost

Capital function can be used to
Cost True cost approximate a non-linear
capital cost function.
This formulation allows model
Variable cost linearity to be preserved.
Fixed cost component must
Fixed cost
be zero when capacity is zero.
Capacity
 Generic MILP Model for Process Synthesis
(adapted from Grossmann & Santibanez, 1980. CACE 4:205)

max c1Ty – AF(c2Tx + c3Tb) Parameters

subject to: A Process matrix
Ax = y c1 Price vector
yL ≤ y ≤ yU c2 Variable cost vector
c3 Fixed cost vector
x≤Mb
bi  {0, 1} i AF Annualizing factor
M Arbitrary large number
yL Net output lower limit vector
yU Net output upper limit vector

Variables
b Binary variable vector
x Capacity vector
y Net output vector
 Generic MILP Model for Process Synthesis
(adapted from Grossmann & Santibanez, 1980. CACE 4:205)

max c1Ty – AF(c2Tx + c3Tb) Parameters

subject to: A Process matrix
Ax = y c1 Price vector
yL ≤ yAnnual
≤ y revenue from c2 Variable cost vector
U
product sales minus
c3 Fixed cost vector
x ≤ Mannual
b costs from
purchase of inputs AF Annualizing factor
bi  {0, 1} i
M Arbitrary large number
yL Net output lower limit vector
yU Net output upper limit vector

Variables
b Binary variable vector
x Capacity vector
y Net output vector
 Generic MILP Model for Process Synthesis
(adapted from Grossmann & Santibanez, 1980. CACE 4:205)

max c1Ty – AF(c2Tx + c3Tb) Parameters

subject to: A Process matrix
Ax = y c1 Price vector
yL ≤ yAnnual
≤ y cost of capital c2 Variable cost vector
U
recovery based on
c3 Fixed cost vector
x ≤ Mpiecewise
b linear cost
function for process AF Annualizing factor
bi units
{0, 1} i
M Arbitrary large number
yL Net output lower limit vector
yU Net output upper limit vector

Variables
b Binary variable vector
x Capacity vector
y Net output vector
 Generic MILP Model for Process Synthesis
(adapted from Grossmann & Santibanez, 1980. CACE 4:205)

max c1Ty – AF(c2Tx + c3Tb) Parameters

subject to: A Process matrix
Ax = y c1 Price vector
yL ≤ y ≤ yU c2 Variable cost vector
c3 Fixed cost vector
x≤Mb
bSystem-wide
 {0, 1} material
i AF Annualizing factor
i energy balance
and
equations using M Arbitrary large number
input-output yL Net output lower limit vector
convention
yU Net output upper limit vector

Variables
b Binary variable vector
x Capacity vector
y Net output vector
 Generic MILP Model for Process Synthesis
(adapted from Grossmann & Santibanez, 1980. CACE 4:205)

max c1Ty – AF(c2Tx + c3Tb) Parameters

subject to: A Process matrix
Ax = y c1 Price vector
yL ≤ y ≤ yU c2 Variable cost vector
c3 Fixed cost vector
x≤Mb
AF Annualizing factor
i  {0, 1} i
bUpper/lower bounds
on net output from M Arbitrary large number
plant yL Net output lower limit vector
yU Net output upper limit vector

Variables
b Binary variable vector
x Capacity vector
y Net output vector
 Generic MILP Model for Process Synthesis
(adapted from Grossmann & Santibanez, 1980. CACE 4:205)

max c1Ty – AF(c2Tx + c3Tb) Parameters

subject to: A Process matrix
Ax = y c1 Price vector
yL ≤ y ≤ yU c2 Variable cost vector
c3 Fixed cost vector
x≤Mb
bi  {0, 1} i AF Annualizing factor
M Arbitrary large number
Big M constraint to
link binary variable to
yL Net output lower limit vector
process unit capacity yU Net output upper limit vector

Variables
b Binary variable vector
x Capacity vector
y Net output vector
 Generic MILP Model for Process Synthesis
(adapted from Grossmann & Santibanez, 1980. CACE 4:205)

max c1Ty – AF(c2Tx + c3Tb) Parameters

subject to: A Process matrix
Ax = y c1 Price vector
yL ≤ y ≤ yU c2 Variable cost vector
c3 Fixed cost vector
x≤Mb
bi  {0, 1} i AF Annualizing factor
M Arbitrary large number
yL Net output lower limit vector
Specification of yU Net output upper limit vector
binary variables to
signify existence of
process unit
Variables
b Binary variable vector
x Capacity vector
y Net output vector
Screenshot of website
(www.p-graph.org)

18
Components of P-graph
Consists of 2 types of vertices which are connected by arcs
• Operating units (O – type vertices)

• Materials or streams (M – type vertices)

Raw materials

Intermediate materials

Products

19
User Interface of P-graph Studio

20
User Interface of P-graph Studio

Material Nodes, Operating

Unit Vertices and Links

21
User Interface of P-graph Studio

Material Nodes and

Algorithms Operating Unit vertices

22
 Representation in P-graph
REACTOR DISTILLATION BOILER
COLUMN BIOGAS

Flowsheet

BOILER

Q CO2

P-graph

23
 Generic MILP Model for Process Synthesis
(adapted from Grossmann & Santibanez, 1980. CACE 4:205)

max c1Ty – AF(c2Tx + c3Tb) Parameters

subject to: A Process matrix
Ax = y c1 Price vector
yL ≤ y ≤ yU c2 Variable cost vector
c3 Fixed cost vector
x≤Mb
bi  {0, 1} i AF Annualizing factor
M Arbitrary large number
yL Net output lower limit vector
yU Net output upper limit vector

Variables
b Binary variable vector
x Capacity vector
y Net output vector
Case Study
Baseline Synthesis and Design
• Consider the design of a polygeneration system

• A polygeneration system produces 2 or more energy service or

products to maximize the thermodynamic potential of resources
(Serra et al., 2009)

4 different process units are considered

4 different product streams are to be generated

25
Process Units in Isolation
 Process Vector Convention

Facilitates model
formulation.
Inputs and outputs denoted
with negative and positive
values.
Input-output ratios signify:
Process Stream Boiler Efficiency
Heat (MW) 1 Yield
Power (MW) 0.01 Coefficient of performance
Cooling (MW) 0 etc.
Purified Water (t/h) 2.16
Fuel Oil (t/h) 0.122
Fresh Water (t/h) 0
Rejected Water (t/h) 0
Process units in a Polygeneration System
TREATED
Boiler WATER

2.16 t/h

0.122 t/h
FUEL OIL
BOILER HEAT
POWER 1 MW
0.01 MW

Boiler CHP Chiller RO

Heat (MW) 1.00 1.50 0.00 0.00
Power (MW) -0.01 1.00 -0.20 -0.0016
Cooling (MW) 0.00 0.00 1.00 0.00

Treated Water -2.16 -9.72 0.00 1.00

(t/h)

Rejected 0.00 0.00 0.00 1.50

Water (t/h)

Fuel Oil (t/h) -0.122 -0.54 0.00 0.00

Freshwater 0.00 0.00 0.00 -2.5

(t/h) 28
Product Stream Specifications:
Heat
• Select Quantity type

Energy type displays units in

Joules
Electricity type displays units in
kWh

• Select Measurement unit

29
 Process Vector Convention

Facilitates model
formulation.
Inputs and outputs denoted
with negative and positive
values.
Input-output ratios signify:
Boiler
Efficiency
Fixed Cost (€) 45,500 Yield
Variable Cost 175,000 Coefficient of performance
(€/MW) etc.
 User Interface of P-graph Studio

Object Properties

31
 Process Vector Convention

Facilitates model
formulation.
Inputs and outputs denoted
with negative and positive
values.
Input-output ratios signify:
Material/ Unit Price Efficiency
Product Limits (€/unit) Yield
n/a Coefficient of performance
Fuel Oil (t) 910
etc.
Treated water (t) 360 – 540 21.5
Power (MW) 10 - 12 90
Heat (MW) 20 – 25 40
 User Interface of P-graph Studio

Object Properties

33
 Process Data (aij)
Boiler CHP Chiller RO
Heat (MW) 1.00 1.50 0.00 0.00
Power (MW) -0.01 1.00 -0.20 -0.0016
Cooling (MW) 0.00 0.00 1.00 0.00

Treated Water -2.16 -9.72 0.00 1.00

(t/h)
Rejected 0.00 0.00 0.00 1.50
Water (t/h)
Fuel Oil (t/h) -0.122 -0.54 0.00 0.00

Freshwater 0.00 0.00 0.00 -2.5

(t/h)

34
 Cost Function Parameters of Process Units

Boiler CHP Chiller RO

Fixed Cost (€) 45,500 382,500 43,750 0

Variable Cost 175,000 948,347 267,857 11,464
(€/unit)
 Product Demand Limits and Prices

Demand Price/unit
Heat 20 – 25 MW 40
Power 10 – 12 MW 90
Cooling 8 – 12 MW 51.6
Treated Water 360 – 540 t/h 21.5
Fuel Oil n/a 910
Freshwater n/a 0.86
Polygeneration System

37
User Interface of P-graph Studio

Tree View

38
Maximal Structure

Generated using MSG

39
 Structure 1

Structure 2

Solution Structures
40
 Structure 1

No Boiler

Structure 2

Solution Structures
41
 Structure 1

All Process Units are Present

Structure 2

Solution Structures
42
Optimal Solution

43
 Optimal Solution
2.135 t/h
Treated Water

0.1206 t/h 1663.33 t/h

Fuel Oil Freshwater
540 t/h
BOILER TREATED
RO UNIT
(0.988) WATER
0.988 MW (665.33)
1.065 MW
Heat
Power
0.0099 MW
Power 998 t/h
REJECTED
123.2 t/h
WATER
Treated Water
19.01 MW
6.96 t/h Heat 20 MW
FUEL OIL HEAT
6.84 t/h CHP
Fuel Oil (12.67) 12.67 MW 10 MW
Power POWER

1.6 MW
Power CHILLER 8 MW
(8) COOLING

44
Near Optimal Solution

45
Optimal vs Near Optimal Solution
Optimal Solution Near Optimal
Solution

Objective function 5,673.97 5,604.74

Profit/h (€/h)

CAPACITY of PROCESS UNITS

Boiler 0.9884 0.00
CHP 12.67 13.33
Chiller 8.00 11.31
RO Unit 665.33 669.60

46
Optimal vs Near Optimal Solution
Optimal Solution Near Optimal
Solution
Objective function 5,673.97 5,604.74
Profit/h (€/h)
NET OUTPUT OF PRODUCTS
Heat (MW) 20 20
Power (MW) 10 10
Cooling (MW) 8 11.31
Treated Water (t/h) 540 540
Fuel Oil (t/h) 6.96 7.20
Freshwater (t/h) 1,663 1,674

47
 Case Study 2
Superstructure for CHP Plant
(Based on Carvalho et al., 2012; Sy et al., 2016)
 Process Units for CHP Plant
(Based on Carvalho et al., 2012; Sy et al., 2016)
 Process Matrix for CHP Plant
(Based on Carvalho et al., 2012; Sy et al., 2016)

Exchanger
Hot Water
Generator
Module

Boiler
CHP

Heat
Natural Gas (MW) 4.06 1.2 1.08 0
Steam (MW) 1.83 1 0 1
Hot Water (MW) 0.53 0 1 1
Electricity (MW) 1 0 0 0
 Cost Function Parameters of Process Units
(Based on Carvalho et al., 2012; Sy et al., 2016)

Exchanger
Hot Water
Generator
Module

Boiler
CHP

Heat
Fixed Cost (€) 382,500 45,500 7,500 625
Variable Cost Coefficient 948,347 175,000 39,474 4,688
(€/MW)
 Product Demand Limits and Prices
(Based on Carvalho et al., 2012; Sy et al., 2016)

Lower

Upper
Limit

Limit
Steam (MW) 20 25
Hot Water (MW) 6 8
Electricity (MW) 10 12

Price

Natural Gas (€/MWh) 20

Steam (€/MWh) 40
Hot Water (€/MWh) 30
Electricity (€/MWh) 90
Concluding Remarks

• P-graph can be used for process network synthesis

• P-graph follows the same framework as the generic
MILP model for process synthesis
• P-graph is demonstrated using a case study of a
polygeneration system
• P-graph generates the maximal structure, all
combinatorially feasible networks, optimal and sub-
optimal networks

53
Further Reading

• Friedler, F., Tarjan, K., Huang, Y.W., Fan, L.T., 1992. Graph-theoretic
approach to process synthesis: axioms and theorems. Chem. Eng. Sci.
47, 1973e1988.
• Lam, H. L., Tan, R. R., & Aviso, K. B. (2016). Implementation of P-graph
modules in undergraduate chemical engineering degree programs:
experiences in Malaysia and the Philippines. Journal of Cleaner
Production, 136, 254-265.
• www.p-graph.org
• Tan, R. R., Cayamanda, C. D., & Aviso, K. B. (2014). P-graph approach to
optimal operational adjustment in polygeneration plants under conditions
of process inoperability. Applied Energy, 135, 402-406.
• Tan, R. R., Aviso, K. B., and Foo, D. C. (2017). P-graph and Monte Carlo
simulation approach to planning carbon management networks.
Computers & Chemical Engineering. Article in press.
dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.compchemeng.2017.01.047

54
Thank you
For comments and suggestions you may also contact me at:
Email: kathleen.aviso@dlsu.edu.ph

P-graph Workshop November 25, 2019 55