157

A publication of

CHEMICAL ENGINEERING TRANSACTIONS

VOL. 56, 2017 The Italian Association
of Chemical Engineering
Online at www.aidic.it/cet
Guest Editors: Jiří Jaromír Klemeš, Peng Yen Liew, Wai Shin Ho, Jeng Shiun Lim
Copyright © 2017, AIDIC Servizi S.r.l.,
ISBN978-88-95608-47-1; ISSN 2283-9216 DOI: 10.3303/CET1756027

A Simple Case Study on Application in Synthesising a

Feasible Heat Exchanger Network
Suraya Hanim Abu Bakara,b, Mohd Kamaruddin Abd Hamid*,a,b, Sharifah Rafidah
Wan Alwia,b, Zainuddin Abdul Manana,b
a
Process Systems Engineering Centre (PROSPECT), Research Institute of Sustainable Environment, Universiti Teknologi
Malaysia, 81310 UTM Johor Bahru, Johor, Malaysia
b
Faculty of Chemical and Energy Engineering, Universiti Teknologi Malaysia, 81310 UTM Johor Bahru, Johor, Malaysia
[email protected]

Heat exchanger network (HEN) is very important to optimise energy usage in process industry. Heat
exchanger network synthesis is an important process synthesis problem where different tools and methods
have been presented to solve this synthesis problem. In HEN synthesis, the feasibility of the HEN design is
not taken into consideration. The HEN design may not be able to be implemented in industrial applications. It
is essential to check the feasibility of a design before it is being implemented in the industry. The objective of
this paper is to present the application of a new flexible and operable heat exchanger network (FNO HEN)
methodology in synthesising a feasible HEN using a simple case study. The novelty of this work is to
determine an optimal ∆Tmin value that gives minimum external energy requirement (EER) and heat exchanger
area (HEA) as well as simultaneously analyse the feasibility of the HEN design in an easy, systematic and
efficient manner. Using the new developed FNO HEN methodology framework, HEN design target, which is
the value of ∆Tmin is determined to obtain the feasible HEN design. From process design point of view, ∆Tmin
value determines the size of heat exchanger in the network as well as energy saving. A process simulator is
used to check the process feasibility of the HEN designs. With the use of the feasible HEN trade-off plot,
which is a plot of EER and HEA at different value of ∆Tmin with additional of feasibility area, the optimal
feasible HEN design which satisfies external energy requirement (operability), heat exchanger area (capital)
and process feasibility has been successfully determined.

1. Introductions
Supiluck and Kitipat (2015) claimed that integration of heat exchanger network (HEN) is one of causes that is
able to give major impacts on energy conservation in industrial processes. Sun et al. (2013) have proposed a
method of Super Targeting (ST) HEN that aims to optimise cost by considering multiple utilities with different
type of heat exchanger. Akbarnia et al. (2009) studied the material piping cost and piping labour cost and they
finally modified the current trade-off plot by considering the total piping cost. Yang et al. (2014) had applied
Pinch Analysis to synthesis HEN with consideration of heat pump.
Feasibility of HEN synthesis has been neglected and can be questionable. The objective of this paper is to
find the optimal ∆Tmin value that gives minimum external energy requirement (EER) and heat exchanger area
(HEA) as well as simultaneously analyse the feasibility of the HEN design. The basic requirement to
synthesise HEN is by selecting HEN design target, which is the value of ∆Tmin. From process design point of
view, ∆Tmin value determines the size of heat exchanger in the network.

2. Methodology
2.1 Problem statement
The feasible HEN synthesis problem in this case study can be stated as follows:

Please cite this article as: Abu Bakar S.H., Hamid M.K.A., Wan Alwi S.R., Manan Z.A., 2017, A simple case study on application in synthesizing
a feasible heat exchanger network, Chemical Engineering Transactions, 56, 157-162 DOI:10.3303/CET1756027
158

Given two hot streams (to be cooled) and two cold streams (to be heated), it is desired to synthesis a feasible
network of heat exchangers that can transfer heat from the hot streams to the cold streams. Given the heat
capacity flow rate of each process hot stream, FCP,u; its supply (inlet) temperature, T ; and its target (outlet)
temperature, T , where, u is 1, 2. The heat capacity, fcP,v, and supply and target temperatures, t and t , are
given for each process cold stream, where, v is 1, 2. Available for service are 2 heating utilities and 2 cooling
utilities whose supply and target temperatures are known. Focus is given to synthesis a network of heat
exchangers that is feasible where the control structure is assumed to be fixed. The data required for this
simple case study is shown in Table 1.

Table 1: Information for a simple case study (Abu Bakar et al., 2013)
No Stream names Temperature (°C) Heat capacity flowrate, Enthalpy, ∆H (kW)
Supply Target FCp (kW/°C)
1 H1 250 60 0.1420 -29.81
2 H2 200 80 0.1074 -12.89
3 C1 70 180 0.1971 31.53
4 C2 140 230 0.2279 20.51

In order to solve the problem statement stated in Section 2.1, method from Abu Bakar et al. (2015a) has been
adapted. It should be noted here that the controller structure for this case study has been assumed to be fixed.
Therefore, weight factor 2 (w2) is set as zero. Multi-objective function from the method is redefined as shown
in Eq(1).

max J = w P , + w 1⁄P , + w 1⁄P , (1)

• To achieve process design objectives, P1,1 is maximised. P1,1 is the performance criteria for
maximisation of the energy recovery of the network.
• To achieve economic objectives, P3,j is minimised. P3,1 is the capital cost and P3,2 is the operating
costs.

• w1 and w3 are the weight factor assigned to each objective term P1,1 and P3,i (i=1-2) .
2.2 Feasibility test
There are two things to consider in feasibility test. Firstly, all the information from Design Target and HEN
Design Analysis stages were transfer into Aspen HYSYS process simulator (2015). Warning sign in Aspen
HYSYS such as low ft correction factors and temperature cross are also considered in this test. A ‘ft correction
factor’ is defined as a ratio of the true mean temperature difference to the log-mean temperature difference
(see Eq(2)). The ‘ft correction factor’ value must be greater than 0.75 for a heat exchanger to be feasible.
Temperature cross warning should not occur if calculation in Design Target stage has been done correctly
(Abu Bakar et al., 2015b). Secondly, it is done by calculating and analysing the ft correction factor for each
heat exchanger in the network. ft correction factors lower than 0.75 is considered as infeasible (Shah and
Sekulić, 2007).
f = ∆T ⁄∆T = q⁄UA∆T (2)
where: ∆T = True mean temperature difference; ∆T = Log mean temperature difference; q = Heat duties
U = Overall heat transfer coefficient; A = Surface area.

In Design Target and HEN Design analysis stages, HEN were synthesised at ∆Tmin = 10 °C, 15 °C, 20 °C and
30 °C. Table 2 shows the output summary for both stages. From the information in Table 2, HENs were
designed using grid diagram (see Figures 1 and 2). After grid diagram has been developed, it can be seen
that HEN designs at 15 °C, 20 °C and 30 °C are producing the same network. Feasibility of these candidates
is still a question and it needs to be analysed. For this reason, all results obtained in both stages have been
used to simulate HEN in the Aspen HYSYS process simulator to analyse the feasibility of every single heat
exchanger.
 159

Table 2: Results Design Target and HEN Design Analysis stages for different ∆Tmin in the case study
Maximum Energy External Energy Pinch
∆Tmin Unit operation (unit)
Recovery (MER) Requirement (EER) Temperature (°C)
(°C)
(kW) (kW) Cold Hot HE Cooler Heater
10 28,508.4 13,680.9 140.0 150.0 4 0 2
15 27,971.2 14,755.3 70.0 85.0 3 1 1
20 27,434.0 15,829.7 70.0 90.0 3 1 1
30 26,359.6 17,978.5 70.0 100.0 3 1 1

Figure 1: Grid diagram process flow diagram of HEN candidates 10 °C

Figure 2: Grid diagram process flow diagram of HEN candidates 15 °C, 20 °C and 30 °C

3. Feasibility test results and discussions

3.1 HEN in Aspen HYSYS simulator
From the grid diagram, HEN designs were transferred into Aspen HYSYS simulator. HEN at ∆Tmin of 10 °C
has four heat exchangers and two heaters. Network designs of other candidates are the same with three heat
exchangers, one cooler and two heaters. The simulation for HEN designs at 10 °C, 15 °C, 20 °C and 30 °C as
shown in Figures 3 and 4.

Figure 3: HEN process simulation using Aspen HYSYS at ∆Tmin 10 °C

160

Figure 4: HEN process simulation using Aspen HYSYS at ∆Tmin 15 °C, 20 °C and 30 °C

3.2 ft Correction calculation results

After the feasibility test has been conducted, it can be seen that all of the designs are feasible. Table 3 shows
values of ft correction factor for all heat exchangers in the HEN candidates and results summary of the
feasibility analysis. The results were in line with HEN that has been simulated in Aspen HYSYS.

Table 3: Value of ft correction factor and status of HEN design candidates

∆Tmin (°C) ft correction factor Feasibility
HE1 HE2 HE3 HE4
10 0.7915 0.7913 0.9523 0.8813 Feasible
15 0.9038 0.8777 0.9538 0.8792 Feasible
20 0.8500 0.8871 0.8971 0.8671 Feasible
30 0.7938 0.9084 0.7758 0.9084 Feasible

3.3 Multi-objectives function

All objective function values were collected from Design Target and HEN Design analysis are tabulated in
Table 4. Since all the values of the objective functions have different units, therefore all objective function
values need to be normalised. The normalised value, Px,xs were calculated by dividing it with the largest value
of each objective function. Using the normalised objective function values, the value of multi-objective J is
calculated using Eq(1). The best overall candidate is at ∆Tmin of 30 °C because it has highest J value.

Table 4: Multi-objective function calculation of the designed HEN candidates

Maximum Energy Heat Exchanger External Energy
Recovery (MER) Area (HEA) Recovery (EER)
(kW) (m2) (kW)
Design/Control value, Px,x P1,1 P3,1 P3,2
∆Tmin 10 °C 28,508.00 2,946.30 13,680.90
∆Tmin 15 °C 27,971.20 2,661.40 14,755.30
∆Tmin 20 °C 27,434.00 2,294.30 15,829.70
∆Tmin 30 °C 26,359.60 1,601.30 17,978.50
Normalise value, Px,xs P1,1s P3,1s P3,2s
∆Tmin 10 °C 1.000 1.000 0.761
∆Tmin 15 °C 0.981 0.903 0.821
∆Tmin 20 °C 0.962 0.779 0.880
∆Tmin 30 °C 1.000 1.000 0.761
Multi-objective function value P1,1 1/P3,1s 1/P3,2s J
∆Tmin 10 °C 1.000 1.000 1.314 3.314
∆Tmin 15 °C 0.981 1.107 1.218 3.308
∆Tmin 20 °C 0.962 1.284 1.138 3.382
∆Tmin 30 °C 0.925 1.840 1.000 3.765
 161

3.4 F-HEN Trade-off Plot

The F-HEN trade-off plot is a plot of EER and HEA at different value of ∆Tmin with additional of feasibility area.
The plot is important to show at which ∆Tmin the HENs are feasible. To construct F-HEN trade-off plot, EER
versus ∆Tmin was constructed first as shown in Figure 5. Then, plot of HEA versus ∆Tmin was plotted in the
same graph as shown in Figure 6. Finally, the feasibility area was drawn in the same graph as presented in
Figure 7. The figure shows the best HEN candidate (in terms of EER and HEA) that satisfies the design
criteria can be identified at the intersection point between EER and HEA lines, which is approximately at ∆Tmin
of 20 °C. The similar concept also has been used by Dimian et al. (2014) to identify the optimal HEN design
using common trade-off plot which energy and capital cost versus ∆Tmin.

19.000

18.000
External Energy Requirement

17.000

16.000
(kW)

15.000

14.000

13.000
5 10 15 20 25 30 35
∆Tmin (°C)

Figure 5: External energy requirement at different HEN design of ∆Tmin

19.000 3.500
External Energy Requirement

Heat Exchanger Area (m2)

18.000
3.000
17.000
16.000 2.500
(kW)

15.000 2.000
14.000
1.500
13.000
12.000 1.000 EER
5 10 15 20 25 30 35 HEA
∆Tmin (°C)

Figure 6: External energy requirement and heat exchanger area at different HEN design of ∆Tmin
162

19.000 3.500
External Energy Requirement

18.000

Heat Exchanger Area (m2)

3.000
17.000
16.000 2.500
(kW)

15.000 2.000
14.000
1.500
13.000
12.000 1.000 EER
5 10 15 20 25 30 35 HEA
∆Tmin (°C)

Figure 7: HEN trade-off plot with feasibility area for this case study

4. Conclusions
The optimal solution for the feasible HEN design of this case study which satisfies external energy
requirement (operability), heat exchanger area (capital) and process feasibility has been successfully
analysed. FNO HEN methodology framework has been successfully developed. The new trade-off plot which
incorporates the feasibility area has been successfully developed and tested using a simple case study. The
use of feasible trade-off plot helps in obtaining the optimal and feasible HEN design in an efficient and
systematic manner.

Acknowledgments
The financial support from Research University Grant (RUG) Tier 1 (Q.J130000.2546.12H67), Universiti
Teknologi Malaysia (UTM) is acknowledged.

Reference
Abu Bakar S.H., Hamid M.K.A., Wan Alwi S.R., Manan Z.A., 2013, Flexible and Operable Heat Exchanger
Networks, Chemical Engineering Transactions 32, 1297-1303.
Abu Bakar S.H., Hamid M.K.A., Wan Alwi S.R., Manan Z.A., 2015a, Selection of minimum temperature
difference (∆Tmin) for heat exchanger network synthesis based on trade-off plot, Applied Energy 162,
1259-1271.
Abu Bakar S.H., Hamid M.K.A., Wan Alwi S.R., Manan Z.A., 2015b, Effect of Delta Temperature Minimum
Contribution in Obtaining an Operable and Flexible Heat Exchanger Network, Energy Procedia 75, 3142-
3147.
Akbarnia M., Amidpour M., Shadaram A., 2009, A new approach in pinch technology considering piping costs
in total cost targeting for heat exchanger network, Chemical Engineering Research and Design 87 (3),
357-365.
Aspen HYSIS V8.8, 2008, Aspen Technology Inc., Houston, United States.
Dimian A.C., Bildea C.S., Anton A.K., 2014, Integrated Design and Simulation of Chemical Processes,
Computer Aided Chemical Engineering 35, 1-33.
Shah R.K., Sekulić D.P., 2007. Fundamentals of Heat Exchanger Design, Wiley, Canada.
Sun K.N., Wan Alwi S.R., Manan Z.A., 2013, Heat exchanger network cost optimization considering multiple
utilities and different types of heat exchangers,Computers and Chemical Engineering 49, 194-204.
Supiluck K., Kitipat S., 2015, Heat Exchanger Network Synthesis/Retrofit using MINLP Stage-wise
Superstructure with Non-isothermal Mixing, Chemical Engineering Transactions 43, 1273-1278.
Yang M., Xiao F., Liu G., 2014, Heat exchanger network design considering heat pump performance,
Chemical Engineering Transactions 39, 1099-1104.