Heat exchanger network cost optimization considering multiple utilities and different types of heat exchangers

• Published in: Computers & chemical engineering 2013-02, Vol.49, p.194-204
• Main Authors: Sun, Kheen Nam, Wan Alwi, Sharifah Rafidah, Manan, Zainuddin Abdul
• Format: Article
• Language: English
• Subjects: Composite curves; Minimum temperature approach; Multiple utilities; Pinch analysis; Stream temperature versus enthalpy plot (STEP); Supertargeting
• ISSN: 0098-1354; 1873-4375
• DOI: 10.1016/j.compchemeng.2012.10.017

[Display omitted] ► A new tool to determine the optimum ΔTmin for heat exchanger networks. ► Considers heat exchange between individual streams instead of composite streams. ► Considers different heat exchanger types based on individual stream properties. ► Include capital and operating costs for multiple utilities. ► Conventional supertargeting method can lead to up to 50% error in the total cost target. Supertargeting based on composite curves (CC) is widely used to determine the optimum approach temperature (ΔTmin) that yields the minimum total cost for heat exchange networks (HEN). Supertargeting using CC has two key limitations. Firstly, the HEN area calculations are drastically simplified through the assumption that CC segments may be considered as pseudo-single hot and cold streams exchanging heat via only one exchanger that is governed by a single cost correlation. Secondly, the current Supertargeting approach of considering only one hot and one cold utility level may lead to a crude estimation of the total HEN cost and the optimum ΔTmin. This work presents the stream temperature vs. enthalpy plot supertargeting (STEPS) method that overcomes these limitations. This paper proves that supertargeting based on CC can lead to up to 50% error in the total cost target and poor ΔTmin estimations.