Ind. Eng. Chem. Res.

2011, 50, 965–973 965

Heat-Exchanger Bypass Control

William L. Luyben*
Department of Chemical Engineering, Lehigh UniVersity, Bethlehem, PennsylVania 18015, United States

Many methods are used for controlling temperatures in heat exchanger systems. Direct manipulation of the
flow rate of either the hot or the cold stream is most often used when that stream is a utility (cooling water,
steam, hot oil, or refrigerant). When the flow rates of both streams are set by process requirements, heat-
exchanger bypassing is widely used. A portion of one of the streams (either hot or cold) is sent through the
heat exchanger, and the remainder is bypassed around the exchanger. The temperature of the mixed steam is
controlled by valves in each path. This system provides very tight temperature control, since the dynamics of
blending a hot stream and a cold stream are very fast. This paper explores the design and control issues when
heat-exchanger bypassing is used. The design optimization variables include the fraction of bypassing, the
area of the heat exchanger, and the design pressure drops over the control valves. Dynamic rangeability
requires heat-transfer rates to be adjustable over a wide range. As expected, results demonstrate that a larger
area and more bypassing improve the ratio of maximum-to-design heat transfer rates, which is important for
dynamic controllability. An unexpected, counterintuitive result is that control valve design pressure drops
have little effect on rangeability in heat-exchanger bypass systems in which variable-speed pumps are used
to maintain total flow rates.

1. Introduction blending of hot and cold streams quickly compensates for these
slow disturbances.
Heat exchangers are undoubtedly the most numerous indus-
Like most design situations, the design of heat-exchanger
trial unit operation. The temperatures or phases of process
bypassing systems involves trade-offs. Increasing the fraction
streams must be changed to achieve process objectives. Hot
of the stream that is bypassed permits larger changes in the
sources of heat (steam, hot oil, or molten salt) and cold sinks
heat-transfer rates, which means wider dynamic rangeability to
of heat (cooling water, air, or refrigeration) are sent through a
handle changing process requirements, but increasing bypassing
variety of different types of heat exchangers to heat, cool,
requires a larger heat exchanger (more area) because the
vaporize, or condense a process stream. Process-to-process heat
differential temperature driving forces are smaller than they
exchangers are widely used to reduce utility consumption, which
would be if all the stream were sent through the heat exchanger.
lowers energy costs.
This situation is good example of the interaction (conflict)
Most heat exchangers require some type of control system between design and control.
to achieve process objectives. When a utility stream is involved,
its flow rate is usually manipulated to control a process Another example that also comes into play in bypass heat-
temperature. If phase changes are occurring in the heat exchanger design is the issue of pressure drop. The design
exchanger (vaporization or condensation), the control objective pressure drop through the heat exchanger is usually established
may be to maintain vessel pressure or liquid level instead of by heuristics to give reasonable heat-transfer coefficients. The
temperature. higher the pressure drop, the higher the velocity, the larger the
film coefficients, the smaller the required heat-transfer area and
Bypassing is sometimes used in heat exchangers in which
the lower the capital investment. But higher pressure drops mean
low velocities of cooling water can result in fouling. The cooling
higher-head pumps or compressors and higher energy require-
water flow can be set at a fixed high flow rate, and the hot stream
ments in motors or turbines.
can be bypassed.
When the heat exchanger involves a hot process stream and This issue is important in heat-exchanger bypass systems because
a cold process stream, manipulation of either for control sometimes these systems are designed with a control valve in the
purposes is usually not possible, since their flow rates are set bypass line but with no valve in the line going through the heat
by upstream or downstream process objectives. In this situation, exchanger (see the top flowsheet in Figure 1A). The pressure drop
heat-exchanger bypassing is frequently employed. over the bypass valve must be equal to the pressure drop through
the heat exchanger. Rangeability is usually very limited in this
Sometimes a portion of the hot stream is bypassed around
situation, particularly when the bypass valve is opened wide
the heat exchanger. In other situations, a portion of the cold
because there is still flow through the heat exchanger.
stream is bypassed. The common heat-transfer heuristics is to
bypass the stream whose outlet temperature is to be controlled. Much wider rangeability is achieved by having two control
The blending of the portion of the process stream going through valves, one in the bypass line and one in the line through the
the heat exchanger with the portion being bypassed affects the heat exchangers (see the bottom flowsheet in Figure 1A). The
mixed temperature almost instantaneously, so tight temperature flow rates through the two paths can be much more widely
control of the blended stream can be achieved. There are adjusted, which provides a larger ratio of maximum-to-minimum
secondary, slower changes that occur as the flow rate through heat transfer rates. Remember, however, that in most situations,
the heat exchanger affects the outlet temperature, but the fast the total process flow rate is set by other process requirements.
An upstream variable-speed pump is used in some liquid systems
* To whom correspondence should be addressed. Tel: 610-758-4256. to maintain the total required flow rate. Alternatively, one of
Fax: 610-758-5057. E-mail: [email protected]. the two valves can control the total flow rate while the other
10.1021/ie1020574  2011 American Chemical Society
Published on Web 12/16/2010
966 Ind. Eng. Chem. Res., Vol. 50, No. 2, 2011

Figure 1. (A) Heat-exchanger bypass with and without valve in heat-

exchanger line. (B) Heat-exchanger bypass with fixed-speed pump.

Figure 2. (A) Valve position control. (B) Three-heat-exchanger system with

controls the temperature, as shown in Figure 1B. We will return bypassing.
to this system later in the paper to see the effect of valve design
pressure drop on rangeability. position control” by Shinskey,5 who demonstrated its application
The action of the two valves is different. As shown in Figure to minimum pressure operation of distillation columns.
1A, if sending all the flow through the heat exchanger is the A quantitative study of a bypass system is given in Seider et
fail-safe situation (cooling of this stream being done in the heat al.,6 who examined the three-heat-exchanger system shown in
exchanger), the valve in the heat-exchanger line should fail wide Figure 2B. A bypass was added to permit the control of all
open (air-to-close, reverse action) and the bypass valve should three temperatures. Resiliency analysis was applied to guide in
fail closed (air-to-open, direct action). Of course, putting a valve the pairing of controlled and manipulated variables in the three
in the heat-exchanger circuit produces more pressure drop and temperature loops. The effects of two design parameters (heat-
increases motor work requirements. exchanger area and percent bypassing) were explored. Increasing
These issues are all fairly obvious, but little quantitative either parameter was shown to improve rangeability (handle
analysis has appeared in the literature of the several design larger disturbances while maintaining temperature set points).
factors involved. Little guidance is available in setting up a heat- Dynamic simulations were presented to demonstrate control
exchanger bypass system. That is the purpose of this paper. The performance. Seider et al. did not study the effect of valve design
specific application is one in which a circulating coolant stream pressure drop on rangeability.
is used to cool a chemical reactor. The coolant stream is itself In this paper, a reactor/exchanger process is considered in
cooled in a heat exchanger that has a bypass. which heat-exchanger bypassing is used in a circulating coolant
Most control textbooks show various heat exchanger con- system.
figurations and control structure alternatives, but little quantita-
tive analysis is provided. McMillam and Toarmina1 and Riggs 2. Process Studied
and Karim2 discuss a number of piping and control configura- Figure 3 shows the flowsheet of the process considered in
tions, including bypassing, and point out some of the control this paper as a numerical example. The conditions and param-
advantages of the bypass configuration. Bequette3 shows the eters shown correspond to one particular case and will vary for
simple bypass structure with only a valve in the heat exchanger different design choices. The exothermic liquid-phase reaction
line (see the top graph in Figure 1A). Balchen and Mumme4 of aniline with hydrogen to form cyclohexyl amine (CHA) is
discuss the bypass system shown in Figure 2A. The example carried out in a jacketed CSTR reactor.
uses a cold utility stream to control the exit temperature of a
process stream. They show only a valve in the bypass line, which C6H7N + 3H2 f C6H13N
is used to control the outlet temperature of the blended stream R ) VRkCACH (1)
and provides tight temperature control. On top of this basic
control structure, they add a “parallel” controller whose input where R is the overall reaction rate (kmol/s), VR is the reactor
signal is the signal sent to the bypass valve and whose output liquid volume (m3), k is the specific reaction rate (m3 kmol-1
signal manipulates the position of a valve in the cold utility s-1), CA is the concentration of aniline in liquid phase (kmol/
stream. The idea is to keep the bypass valve at ∼50% open m3), and CH is the concentration of hydrogen in liquid phase
under steady-state conditions so that tight temperature control (kmol/m3).
can always be achieved by the blending of hot and cold streams.
This type of structure is more descriptively termed “valve- k ) 2 × 104e-11,111 (cal/mol)/RT (2)
 Ind. Eng. Chem. Res., Vol. 50, No. 2, 2011 967

Figure 3. Circulating water system with heat-exchanger bypassing.

The volume of the reactor is 34 m3, the operating temperature into the jacket for once-through operation. First, the fairly high
TRX is 400 K and the pressure is 20 atm. The fresh feed of reactor temperature (400 K) would result in high water exit
aniline is 50 kmol/h. An excess of hydrogen is fed (200 kmol/ temperatures even at normal loads, which could result in corrosion
h) to maintain a high conversion of aniline. problems. At low loads with small cooling water flow rates, the
The exothermic reaction requires that 516.2 kcal/s of heat water could even boil. Second, the dynamics of the once-through
be removed by the circulating treated-water system flowing system are much slower than the circulating system. The water in
through the jacket at a temperature TJ of 350 K. The circulation the jacket must be displaced by the incoming water before jacket
rate, FJ, is high enough so that a uniform jacket temperature temperatures change. In the circulating system, the hot bypass flow
can be assumed. The vessel aspect ratio is 2, so the diameter is and the cold heat-exchanger flow are mixed and immediately
2.8 m and the jacket heat-transfer area is 50.9 m2. An overall change the blended temperature. The high circulation rate changes
heat-transfer coefficient of 0.885 kW K-1 m-2 is assumed. Jacket the jacket temperature very quickly. So reactor temperature control
volume is 10 m3. is much tighter in the circulating system.
The circulating water is pumped through two parallel paths. However, the downsides of the circulating system are that a
One flow, FHX, is fed to a water-cooled heat exchanger. The pump is required, a larger heat exchanger is needed, and more
other flow, FBY, flows around the heat exchanger. The two cooling-tower water is consumed. These make the circulating
streams are combined and circulate back to the jacket. There system more expensive. In addition, the maximum heat-removal
are two control valves, one in each line. The valve in the heat- rate is smaller, since there are two heat-transfer resistances (one
exchanger line is air-to-close (fails open for maximum cooling). through the reactor jacket and one through the tubes in the heat
The bypass valve is air-to-open. The total circulation flow rate exchanger) between the high-temperature source and low-
is 6000 kmol/h with 3714 kmol/h bypassing the heat exchanger, temperature sink.
so the fraction bypassed is 62%. As we demonstrate in the Is the improvement in dynamic control worth the added
following sections, the fraction bypassed is uniquely set in this expense? In many reactor systems, the answer is a definite yes.
system by the total circulation flow rate and the heat-transfer Reactor temperature control is usually critically important to
area in the heat exchanger. maintain both stability and selectivity. Temperature deviations
The flow rate of the cooling-tower water on the cold side of can lead to runaways. Not maintaining optimum reactor tem-
the heat exchanger is set so that the cooling water exit perature can lower yields, produce undesirable byproducts or
temperature is 315 K with a 305 K inlet cooling water degrade catalyst. Potential corrosion or environmental problems
temperature. The required water flow rate to remove 522.0 kcal/s can also become issues.
in the heat exchanger is 9670 kmol/h (770 gpm). The heat duty The reactor example considered in this paper is just one of
in the heat exchanger is slightly larger than in the reactor because many types of applications of heat-exchanger bypassing. Feed-
of the pump work. Pump motor work is 22 kW in this case effluent heat exchanges with bypassing are widely used.
with a 5 atm pump head. With a 1 atm pressure drop over the Condensers and pumparounds on distillation columns sometimes
heat exchanger, the design pressure drop over the bypass valve use bypassing to adjust heat removal. Heat-integrated systems
is 5 atm and over the heat-exchanger valve is 4 atm. frequently use heat-exchanger bypassing.
The case shown in Figure 3 has a heat exchanger area of
200 m2, a total coolant circulation of 6000 kmol/h, and a bypass 4. Bypass Design Issues
control valve design pressure drop of 5 atm. Other cases are
explored in the following sections to see their effects on Now that the process has been established, there are several
rangeability. decisions that must be made to complete the design: (1) What
fraction of the total circulation should be bypassed at design
conditions? (2) How large should the heat exchanger be? (3) How
3. Advantages of Bypass Configuration
much pressure drop should be taken over the control valves at
The circulating water system has several advantages in chemical design conditions? Thus, there are three design optimization
reactors over the alternative of adding cooling-tower water directly variables.
968 Ind. Eng. Chem. Res., Vol. 50, No. 2, 2011

Figure 4. Control structure with heat-exchanger bypassing.

If we considered only steady-state economics, these decisions Both reactor temperature, TRX, and jacket temperature, TJ, are
would be easy. Nothing should be bypassed. This would give changing with time.
the smallest circulation rate, smallest pump, and least heat- 5.3. Control Structure. The control scheme used in this
exchanger area. However, good dynamic control and range- system is shown in Figure 4. The following loops are set up
ability are vital in this reactor system, so we must consider how using conventional PI controllers:
the selection of the three design optimization variables impact 1. Aniline feed is flow-controlled.
control. The approach is to select a range of values of these 2. Hydrogen feed is flow-controlled with the flow controller
three variables and see what rangeability in heat removal they set point ratioed to the aniline feed flow rate.
provide. Rangeability is judged by the maximum possible feed 3. Reactor level is controlled by manipulating liquid product
flow rate to the reactor while still maintaining the desired 400 using a proportional controller with KC ) 4.
K reactor temperature. Of course this maximum heat-removal
4. Reactor pressure is controlled by manipulating vapor
occurs when the bypass valve is completely shut (no bypass
product.
flow, everything going through the heat exchanger for maximum
5. Jacket temperature is controlled in a cascade control
cooling).
structure by manipulating both the bypass and the heat-
exchanger valves. The jacket temperature controller is reverse
5. Simulation
acting. A 1-min deadtime is inserted in the temperature
Setting up this process for dynamic simulation is not a trivial measurement. With the jacket temperature controller on auto-
job. Aspen simulation software is used. The steady-state process matic (not cascade), relay-feedback tests and Tyreus-Luyben
is configured in Aspen Plus and then exported into Aspen tuning are used to find the gain and integral time. These
Dynamics to evaluate dynamic performance. controller settings change from case to case as process param-
5.1. Steady-State Simulation. The RCSTR model is used eters (heat-exchanger area and circulation rate) are varied.
in Aspen Plus with the Direct heat-transfer option selected. The 6. Reactor temperature is controlled by manipulating the set
liquid level in the reactor is set at 80% by selecting the setup point of the jacket temperature controller in this cascade
option of reactor. Reactor temperature is 400 K at design. The structure. The reactor controller is reverse-acting. A 1-min
reactor jacket is simulated using a Flash2 model with a heat deadtime is inserted in the temperature measurement. With the
stream input coming from the reactor. Jacket temperature is 350 jacket temperature controller on cascade and the reactor tem-
K at design conditions with an aniline feed flow rate of 50 kmol/ perature controller on automatic, relay-feedback tests and
h. At higher throughputs, the jacket temperature must decrease Tyreus-Luyben tuning are used to find the gain and integral
to increase heat removal from the reactor. The valve on the time of the reactor temperature controller. These controller
vapor line in the Flash2 model used for the jacket is completely settings change from case to case as process parameters (heat-
closed. exchanger area and circulation rate) are varied.
The heat exchanger uses a HeatX model with counter-current 7. The total circulation flow rate is flow controlled by
flow of cooling-tower water and circulating water. An overall manipulating pump speed. Note that a variable-speed pump is
heat-transfer coefficient of 0.85 kW K-1 m-2 is used in the heat assumed in the simulation.
exchanger. 8. The flow rate of cooling-tower water fed to the heat-
5.2. Dynamic Simulation. The Aspen Plus file is exported exchanger is fixed.
into Aspen Dynamics as a pressure-driven simulation. The heat- Note that the two valves in the circulation loop have opposite
transfer rate between the reactor and the jacket is calculated action. All valves in Aspen Plus are direct (AO). In Aspen
using the relationships given in eq 3. Dynamics the action can be selected, so the valve in the heat-
QJ ) UAJ(TRX - TJ) exchanger line is specified to be reverse (AC). Their size
QRX ) -QJ (3) depends on their design flow rates, pressure drops, and fraction
open. All valves are assumed to be 50% open at design. Valve
The Aspen Dynamics Flowsheet Equations capability is used pressure drop depends on the pump head specified at design.
to set up these relationships during the dynamic simulations. Aspen default pump characteristics are used. Flow rates depend
 Ind. Eng. Chem. Res., Vol. 50, No. 2, 2011 969

Figure 5. Effect of area on maximum heat removal.

on the total circulation rate and heat exchanger area specified The design heat-removal rate is 516.2 kcal/s. Designing for
in a given case. a circulation flow rate of 6000 kmol/h gives a maximum heat-
removal rate of 643.6 kcal/s. Thus, the ratio of maximum-to-
6. Effect of Design Parameters design heat removal rates is 1.25 for this design case. The ability
to remove at least 25% more heat in reactor systems is often
A range of circulation rates, heat-exchanger areas, and valve required, so this design is not overly conservative.
design pressure drops are explored. We are interested in finding
Setting the total circulation flow rate establishes the fraction
the maximum heat removal in each case or, equivalently, the
of bypassing for fixed heat exchanger area and exit temperature.
maximum feed flow rate to the reactor while still maintaining
The flow rate through the heat exchanger is the same for all
the 400 K reactor temperature.
circulation rates, since the inlet and exit temperatures to the
The maximum heat removal is obtained when the bypass
heat exchanger and the heat duty are the same in all cases.
valve is completely shut and the heat-exchanger valve is wide
Therefore, the bypass flow rate changes directly with the total
open. The total circulation goes through the heat exchanger.
The dynamic simulation is used to find the maximum. The jacket circulation flow rate. The lower graph in Figure 6 shows that
temperature controller is placed on manual, and its output signal the fraction of the total circulation that is bypassed (FBY/FJ)
is set to zero percent, which shuts the bypass valve completely over the range of total circulation flow rates.
and opens the heat-exchanger valve completely. Then the control Notice that for a 6000 kmol/h circulation flow rate, the
structure is changed so that the reactor temperature controller’s fraction bypassed at design is 62%. More circulating coolant is
output signal changes the set point of the aniline flow controller. bypassed than goes through the heat exchanger under design
The aniline flow controller is put on cascade. The final steady conditions. Trying to convince a project engineer that this much
state when reactor temperature is driven to 400 K gives the bypassing is required can take a lot of quantitative arguments.
maximum feed flow rate and heat removal. The role of dynamic simulation in this type of analysis is
6.1. Heat-Exchanger Area. Figure 5 shows the effect of invaluable.
using heat exchangers of different sizes for two different 6.3. Control Valve Design Pressure Drop. A. Circulating
circulation flow rates (4000 and 6000 kmol/h). As the area Water System. The third design optimization variable is valve
increases, the maximum heat removal and maximum feed flow pressure drop at design conditions, which is established by the
rate increase, as we would expect. Higher circulation rates give pump head specified. In all the results shown so far, the pressure
higher heat removal and maximum feed flow rates. However, drop over the control valve in the heat exchanger line has been
the curves flatten out for areas above about 200-300 m2. The 4 atm. The pressure drop over the heat exchanger is assumed
point of diminishing returns is somewhere in this range. to be 1 atm, so the pressure drop over the bypass valve is 5
Heat-transfer area represents capital investment. Investing atm. A pump head of 5 atm is therefore required, which gives
capital can usually be justified to save energy and, particularly, a motor work of 22 kW with a circulation rate of 6000 kmol/h.
to improve product yield. The 200 m2 heat exchanger shown in At design conditions, only a portion of the circulation flows
Figure 3 costs about $ 230 000 (Douglass7). Increasing to 300 through the heat exchanger. This portion decreases as total
m2 raises the price to about $300 000. The dynamic rangeability circulation flow rate is increased, as discussed in the previous
required of the process has to be considered to decide the section. For all circulation flow rates, 2289 kmol/h go through
appropriate size. the heat exchanger with an assumed pressure drop of 1 atm.
6.2. Coolant Circulation Flow Rate. Figure 6 shows the When the process is at maximum heat-removal conditions, the
effect of designing with different circulation flow rates. Heat- entire circulation goes through the heat exchanger with nothing
exchanger area is fixed at 200 m2 for these results. The top graph flowing through the bypass. The pressure drop through the heat
shows that increasing circulation increases the maximum heat- exchanger increases as the square of the flow rate, since turbulent
removal rate. flow exists in this unit. The result is a very large increase in
970 Ind. Eng. Chem. Res., Vol. 50, No. 2, 2011

Figure 6. Effect of circulation rate.

Table 1. Control Valve Design Pressure Drop Circulating Coolant

design pressure drop in HX line (atm) 1 2 4
pump head (atm) 2 3 5
motor work (kW) 9.08 13.6 22.7
valve size coefficient (m3)1.5 g0.5 s-1 atm-0.5 32 920 23 250 16 410
design QHX (kcal/s) 518.6 519.1 522.0
maximum FA (kmol/s) 61.5 61.5 61.5

heat exchanger pressure drop from 1 atm up to 6.9 atm. The

pressure drop over the control valve in the heat exchanger line
also increases, even though the valve is wide open. The control Figure 7. Simple heat-exchanger bypass system.
valve that has been designed for a 4 atm pressure drop at design
conditions (2289 kmol/h and 50% open) gives a pressure drop Table 2. Simple Bypass System
of 6.9 atm at maximum conditions (6000 kmol/h and 100% pump discharge pressure (atm) 7 10
open).The pump head must increase to provide these increased bypass valve pressure drop (atm) 6 3
pressure drops, increasing from 5 to 13.8 atm by increasing bypass valve COmax (m3)1.5 g0.5 s-1 atm-0.5 953.5 670.3
motor speed. Pump work increases linearly with head since flow heat-exchanger valve pressure drop (atm) 5.5 2.5
heat-exchanger valve COmax (m3)1.5 g0.5 s-1 atm-0.5 3408 2302
rate is constant. maximum throughput (kmol/h) 134.8 134.8
Designs with control valve pressure drops of 2 and 1 atm
were evaluated to see if rangeability was affected. In conven-
tional piping systems, increasing valve design pressure drop 305 and 320 K, respectively. An overall heat-transfer
permits more flow to pass through the valve when wide open, coefficient of 0.57 kW K-1 m-2 is assumed.
so rangeability is increased; however, results showed that there Pressure drop through the heat exchanger is assumed to be
was almost no effect on rangeability. Control valve size
0.5 atm. The pressure of the mixed process stream is 4 atm.
increases and pump work requirements decrease as valve
The pressure drops of the two valves depend on the pump head.
pressure drop is decreased. Table 1 gives results for three designs
The valves are 50% open at design. A flow controller maintains
with different valve design pressure drops.
constant total process flow through the system by manipulating
B. Simple Heat-Exchanger Bypass System. The result
found in the circulating-coolant bypass system is unexpected motor speed.
and counterintuitive. To see if this result applies only to the Table 2 gives results for two designs with different pump
circulating-coolant bypass system or is a general result for heads. As design pump head is increased, valve pressure drops
other bypass system, a simple heat-exchanger bypass system increase and valve sizes (COmax) decrease. The maximum
is simulated. Figure 7 gives the flowsheet conditions. A hot throughput while still achieving the 340 K process exit
process stream at a flow rate of 100 kmol/h and a temperature temperature is found when the bypass valve is closed completely
of 400 K is cooled to a mixed temperature of 340 K by and the heat-exchanger valve is opened completely. For both
sending 76.68% through a 11.52 m2 heat exchanger and the large and small control valve pressure drop designs, the set
bypassing 23.32%. The exit temperature of the hot stream point of the process flow controller can be increased from 100
out of the heat exchanger is 320 K. Cooling water at a flow to 134.8 kmol/h and still hold the outlet process temperature at
rate of 643.9 kmol/h is needed to remove the 60 960 kcal/s the 340 K set point. Thus, the effect of valve design pressure
of heat with cooling water inlet and outlet temperatures of drop in bypass systems in general appears to be negligible.
 Ind. Eng. Chem. Res., Vol. 50, No. 2, 2011 971

Figure 8. 20% increase with and without flow control of circulation.

Figure 9. Circulation 4000 and 6000 kmol/h; 20% increase; 200 m2.

It is important to remember that the flow rate of the total If we consider the same system shown in Figure 7, more flow goes
stream is controlled in both of these systems. The set point of through the heat-exchanger than through the bypass, so process
the total flow controller would be set to achieve some upstream control wisdom (Richardson’s Rule)8 says that the valve in the
or downstream process objective. For example, the liquid level heat-exchanger line should be used to control level. An air-to-open
in an upstream vessel could by controlled by manipulating this valve would be used so that the level in the upstream vessel is not
flow rate. pumped dry in the event of instrument failure. The bypass valve
C. Bypass System with Fixed-Speed Pump. As briefly must be used to control the mixed temperature. It would also be
discussed earlier and shown in Figure 1B, there are many liquid air-to-open so that the hot material is not bypassed around the cooler
systems that do not use variable-speed pumps. In this situation, in an emergency. In the simulation of this example, a fixed-speed
the upstream liquid level must be controlled by one of the valves. pump is used with Aspen default pump characteristics.
972 Ind. Eng. Chem. Res., Vol. 50, No. 2, 2011

Figure 10. Circulation 4000 and 6000 kmol/h; 20% decrease; 200 m2.

Figure 11. Circulation 4000 and 6000 kmol/h; 20% increase; 300 m2.

The effect of valve design pressure drop in this type of system pressure drop over control valves at design conditions provides
is exactly what we would expect. The higher the design pressure a modest increase in rangeability.
drop, the larger the rangeability. For example, if the pressure
drop over the valve in the heat-exchanger line is designed to 7. Dynamic Results
be 3 atm, the flow rate through the system can be increased
from 100 to 120 kmol/h. The valve in the heat-exchanger line Dynamic simulations are run to test the performance of the
is wide open. The bypass valve is 35.8% open, and the 340 K process and the control structure for the reactor/circulating
mix temperature is maintained. coolant process.
If the pressure drop over the valve in the heat-exchanger line
7.1. Circulation Flow Control. First, let us see what the
is designed to be 2 atm, the flow rate through the system can
rangeability is when the circulation flow rate is not controlled.
be increased from 100 to 119.3 kmol/h. The valve in the heat-
exchanger line is wide open. The bypass valve is 40.06% open, The Aspen default pump characteristics are used, which assume
and the 340 K mix temperature is maintained. If the pressure a fixed-speed pump. Therefore, as the opening of the control
drop over the valve in the heat-exchanger line is reduced to 1 valve in the bypass line is reduced by the jacket temperature
atm, the flow rate through the system can only be increased controller, pump discharge pressure increases, and the flow rate
from 100 to 114.5 kmol/h with the valve in the heat-exchanger decreases (following the pump curve). If a circulation flow
line wide open. The bypass valve is 45.18% open to maintain controller is used, the pump speed can be adjusted to maintain
the 340 K mix temperature. These results demonstrate that in a constant circulation, despite changes in the required pump
this type of bypass system with a fixed-speed pump, more head.
 Ind. Eng. Chem. Res., Vol. 50, No. 2, 2011 973
Figure 8 compares the performances of the two cases. A 20% maintain total flow rates, which is an unexpected and counter-
increase in aniline feed flow rate is the disturbance (top left intuitive result.
graph). The solid lines are for circulation flow control with a
variable-speed pump. The dashed lines are with a fixed-speed Nomenclature
pump so flow is not maintained. The design circulation flow
AC ) air-to-close
rate is 6000 kmol/h, 3714 kmol/h through the bypass and 2286
AJ ) heat-transfer area of reactor jacket (m2)
kmol/h through the heat exchanger.
AO ) air-to-open
The bottom right graph shows that the bypass flow goes to CA ) concentration of aniline (kmol/m3)
zero when there is no circulation flow control (dashed lines). CH ) concentration of hydrogen (kmol/m3)
Everything is going through the heat exchanger, but the flow CHA ) cyclohexyl amine
rate has dropped to ∼4000 kmol/h because we have backed up COmax ) control valve size coefficient ((m3)1.5 g0.5 s-1 atm-0.5)
on the pump curve. Reactor temperature (top right graph in CSTR ) continuous stirred-tank reactor
Figure 8) is not maintained at its set point. CW ) cooling water
When the circulation flow controller is in service (solid lines), FA ) flow rate of aniline (kmol/h)
the total circulation flow is maintained at 6000 kmol/h, 4500 FBY ) flow rate around bypass (kmol/h)
kmol/h through the heat exchanger and 1500 kmol/h through FHX ) flow rate through heat exchanger (kmol/h)
the bypass. Reactor temperature is maintained at the desired FJ ) flow rate of circulating coolant through jacket (kmol/h)
400 K. FT ) flow transmitter
7.2. Effect of Design Circulation Flow Rate on Perfor- k ) specific reaction rate (m3 kmol-1 s-1)
mance. Figure 9 gives responses for a 20% increase in the set KC ) controller gain (dimensionless)
point of the aniline flow controller at time equal 0.5 h for the LC ) level controller
two designs based on circulation rates of 4000 and 6000 kmol/ PC ) pressure controller
h. Heat exchanger area is 200 m2, and valve design pressure PDis ) pump discharge pressure (atm)
drop is 4 atm in these results. QJ ) heat-transfer rate into jacket (kcal/s)
The 4000 kmol/h design is not able to maintain the reactor QRX ) heat-transfer rate from reactor (kcal/s)
temperature at its 400 K set point. The bypass valve goes TC ) temperature controller
completely shut, and the entire 4000 kmol/h is sent through the TJ ) jacket temperature (K)
heat exchanger. Reactor temperature lines out at 402 K. The TRX ) reactor temperature (K)
6000 kmol/h design handles the 20% increase well, returning U ) overall heat transfer coefficient (kW K-1 m-2)
the reactor temperature to 400 K in about 2 h. VPC ) valve-position controller
Figure 10 shows that both designs can successfully handle a VR ) reactor volume (m3)
20% decrease in throughput. Notice that both the initial and
the final flow rates through the heat exchanger, FHX, are identical Literature Cited
in both designs, since the same amount of heat must be
transfered in the heat exchanger. Only the bypass flow rates (1) McMillam, G. K.; Toarmina, C. M. AdVanced Temperature Mea-
differ. surement and Control; Instrument Society for Measurement and Control:
Research Triangle Park, N.C., 1995.
7.3. Effect of Heat-Exchanger Area on Performance. (2) Riggs, J. B.; Karim, M. N. Chemical and Bio-Process Control; Ferret
Figure 11 gives results for two designs with 4000 and 6000 Publishing: Austin, TX, 2007.
kmol/h but with larger heat exchangers (300 m2 instead of 200 (3) Bequette, B. W. Process Control: Modeling, Design and Simulation;
m2 used in the previous section). The disturbance is the same Prentice-Hall: Upper Saddle River, N.J., 2003, p465.
(4) Balchen, J. G.; Mumme, K. I. Process Control Structures and
20% increase in throughput. Both systems can handle the Applications; Van Nostrand Rheinhold: New York, 1988, p 33.
disturbance and return the reactor temperature to 400 K. Notice (5) Shinskey, F. G. Process Control Systems: Application, Design and
that the bypass flow rate, FBY (lower right graph in Figure 11), Applications; McGraw-Hill: New York, 1988.
in the 4000 kmol/h design goes to zero for a period until (6) Seider, W. D.; Seader, J. D.; Lewin, D. R. Product and Process
eventually lining out at ∼400 kmol/h. Design Principles, 2nd Ed.; Wiley: New York, 2003, p 741.
(7) Douglas, J. M. Conceptual Design of Chemical Processes; McGraw-
Hill: New York, 1988.
8. Conclusion (8) Luyben, W. L.; Tyreus, B. D.; Luyben, M. L. Plantwide Process
Control; McGraw-Hill: New York, 1999, p 58.
The results of this study illustrate that dynamic controllability
and rangeability are improved in heat-exchanger bypass systems ReceiVed for reView October 10, 2010
by using more heat-transfer area and higher circulation flow ReVised manuscript receiVed November 26, 2010
Accepted December 2, 2010
rates. Control valve design pressure drop has essentially no effect
in bypass systems when variable-speed pumps are used to IE1020574