TheconceptofT

min
anditsrelevanceModule:04Lecture24

Module : 04
Lecture-24 : Global & Stream specific T
min
anditsrelevance
Keywords:T
min
,HeatRecoveryapproachtemperature(HRAT).

Up till recently, the basic decision variable used in designing the HEN has been the minimum
approach temperature(T
min
) or Heat Recovery approach temperature(HRAT). The T
min
in
generalappears at onelocation between hot and cold composite curves calledheat recovery
pinch.AspinchpointisrelatedtoT
min
,ithasspecialsignificanceinthedesign.Thisisdueto
the fact that the pinch constitutes a bottleneck to heat recovery, in which the minimum
approachtemperaturedeterminesthedegreeofheatrecoverypossible.

The selection of T
min
values warrants some discussion. In heat recovery problems having a
pinch, the utility requirements are always sensitive to the selection of T
min
. Further, for any
heatrecoveryproblem,thechoiceofT
min
affectstheshapeoftheprocesssource/sinkprofile
andthusaffectstheheatexchangernetworktopology.Duetothisthefixedcostcomponentas
wellastheoperatingcostcomponentoftheHENvarieswiththeselectionofT
min
.

A four stream problem given in Table 3.8 from Lecture 10: Energy Targeting is reproduced
belowtoshowtheeffectofvariationofT
min
onutilityandfixedcost.

Table3.8:FourstreamproblemforloadintegrationandutilitypredictionforT
min
equalto
10C.
Nameofthestream SupplyTemperature
Ts,C
TargetTemperature
Tt,C
CP
kW/C
H
kW
Hot1 140 50 2 180
Hot2 90 40 6 300
Cold1 30 150 2 240
Cold2 70 125 3 165

Fig.24.1showsthecompositecurvesforT
min
=10C.

Fig.24.1AllTvaluesbetweenhotandcoldcompositesare
greaterthanT
min
values
70C
125C
150C
140C
50C
40C
30C
T,C
H,kW
HotCompositecurve

ColdCompositecurve

T
min

T
T
TheconceptofT
min
anditsrelevanceModule:04Lecture24

Fig.24.2showsthevariationinutilitydemandwhenT
min
ischangedstepsoftenfrom10Cto
50C. Table 24.1 Shows the values of hot and cold utility demand as well as internal heat
exchange.

Table24.1VariationinHotandcoldutilitydemandaswellasinternalheatexchangewithT
min

T
min
HotUtility,kW ColdUtility,kW Internal Heat
Exchange,kW
Total Heat
Exchange,kW
10C 175 250 155 580
20C 225 300 105 630
30C 245 320 85 650
40C 265 340 65 670
50C 285 360 45 690

FromtheTable24.1followingcanbeconcludedwiththeincreaseinT
min
ofaHEN:
1. Therequiredhotandcoldutilityamountincreases
2. The amount of internal heat exchange( process hot streams to process cold streams)
decreases
3. The Total heat exchange for the HEN increases. This diminishes the effect of area
reductionwhichonegetsbyincreasingT
min
ofaHEN.

Thus a complicated interaction between T

min
of a HEN and capital as well as operating cost
takesplaceasgivenbelow:
Fig.24.2ShowseffectofdifferentT
min

70C
125C
150C
140C
50C
40C
30C
T,C
H,kW
T
min
=10C
InternalHeat
Exchange

External
Hotutility

ExternalCold
utility

HotCompositecurve

ColdCompositecurve

T
min
=20C
T
min
=35C
TheconceptofT
min
anditsrelevanceModule:04Lecture24
IfT
min
isreducedthen:

1. Theamountofhotandcoldutilityreducesandthusitscost.
2. Theamountofprocesstoprocessheatexchangeincreasesandthustherequiredareaof
heat exchanger. This increases the fixed cost (capital cost) of the HEN. As overall heat
exchangealsodecreasesitsavesintermsofareaandthuscapitalcost.
3. The overall temperature driving force ( T) of the HEN decreases and thus the area of
the heat exchangers present in HEN increases increasing the fixed cost of heat
exchangers.
4. Loadsof heaters andcoolers decrease , therebyits fixed costdecreases. However,the
increases in the cost of heat exchangers transferring process heat invariably outweighs
thereductioninheaterandcoolercosts.

Thustheoverallinteractioncanbejudgedintermsofthetotalannualcost(TAC)oftheHEN.

The most appropriate value of T

min
( called optimum T
min
) or in other words the relative
positionsofthehotandcoldcompositecurvesisdeterminedbyaneconomictradeoffbetween
energy and capital. Once the correct economic value of T
min
( through Supertargeting) is
knownthentheenergytargetsintermsofthevaluesofhotandcoldutilitiesareautomatically
fixed.

Thetradeoffbetweenenergy(operatingcost)andcapital(fixedcost)inthecompositecurves
suggestthatonaverage,individualexchangersshouldhaveatemperaturedifferencenoless
thanT
min
.Thisisexplainedbelow:

LetusconsiderthataparticularHENhassixnumbersofheatexchangersasshownbelow:

IftheheatexchangersaredenotedasHX1,HX2,HX3andHX4,HeaterasHRandcoolerasCR,
thenasperFig.24.3thesewillhave12numbersofT.IftheHeatRecoveryapproach
temperature(HRAT)andexchangerminimumapproachtemperature(EMAT)aresameandequal
toT
min
thenfollowingargumentsholdgood.

HX1 T
11

T
12

HX2 T
21

T
22

HX3 T
31

T
32
HX4 T
41

T
42

HR T
H1

T
H2

CR T
C1

T
C2

Fig.24.3AsixheatexchangerHEN
1 C
H
H1
H2
C3
C4
C5
1
2
2
3
3
4
4
TheconceptofT
min
anditsrelevanceModule:04Lecture24

Mathematically

Min.{T
11
,T
12
,T
21
,T
22
,T
31
,T
32
,T
41
,T
42
,T
H1
,T
H2
,T
C1
,T
C2
}T
min

Further,itshouldbenotedthatthetemperaturedifferencebetweenhotandcoldcomposite
curvesatpinchisequaltoT
min
.Whereas,forotherplacesitcreaseswhenonemovesaway
frompinchpoint.

TostarttargetingprocessonehastoassumeguessvalueofT
min
whichcanbetakenformthe
Table24.2ThistableprovidestypicalT
min
valuesfordifferentprocessesstreams.

Table24.2TypicalT
min
valuesforvarioustypesofprocesses
S.No. Industrialsector ExperienceT
min

Values
Comments
1 OilRefining 2040C Relatively low heat transfer coefficients,
parallel composite curves in many
application,foulingofheatexchangers
2 Petrochemical 1020C Reboiling and condensing duties provide
betterheattransfercoefficients,lowfouling.
3 Chemical 1020C AsforPetrochemical
4 Low
Temperature
Processes
35C Powerrequirementforrefrigerationsystemis
very expensive. T
min
decreases with low
refrigerationtemperatures

BelowaretypicalT
min
Valuesformatchingutilitiesagainstprocesssteams.Theseexperience
basedT
min
valuesareusefulinidentifyingtargetsforappropriateutilitiesloadsatvarious
utilitieslevels.

Table24.3TypicalT
min
valuesusedformatchingutilitylevelsagainstprocessstreams
Match T
min
Commends
StreamagainstProcessStream 1020C Good heat transfer coefficient for stream
condensingorevaporation
RefrigerationagainstProcessStream 35C Refrigerationisexpensive
FluegasagainstProcessStream 40C Lowheattransfercoefficientforfluegas
FluegasagainstStreamGeneration 2540C Goodheattransfercoefficientforstream
FluegasagainstAir(e.g.airpreheat) 50C Aironbothsides.Dependsonaciddew
CWagainstProcessstream 1520C Depends on whether or not CW is
competing against refrigeration.
Summer/Winter operation should be
considered.

TheconceptofT
min
anditsrelevanceModule:04Lecture24
TypicalT
min
valuesusedinretrofittargetingofrefineryprocesses,basedonLinnhoffMarchs
refinerystudies.ThecommendsprovidequalitativeexplanationforthechoiceofT
min
values

Table24.4TypicalT
min
valuesusedinretrofittargetingofvariousrefineryprocesses
Process T
min
Commends
CDU 3040C Parallel(tight)composites
VDU 2030C Relatively wider composites (compared to CDU) but
lowerheattransfercoefficients
Naphtha Reformer /
HydrotreaterUnit
3040C Heat exchanger network dominated by feed effluent
exchanger with P limitations and parallel temperature
drivingforces.
FCC 3040C SimilartoCDUandVDU
GasOilHydrotreater
/Hydrotreater
3040C Feedeffluent exchanger dominant. Expensive high
pressureexchangersrequired.Needtotargetseparately
forhighpressuresectionandlowpressuresection.
Residue
Hydrotreating
40C AsaboveforGasOilHydrotreater/Hydrotreater
Hydrogen
ProductionUnit
2030C Reformer furnace requires high T(30C50C). Rest of
theprocess:10C20C

AlowT
min,cont,i
canbeassignedinfollowingcases:

1. Aboilingorcondensingstreamwithhighheattransfercoefficients,
2. Abelowambientcryogenicstreamwhereeconomicsfavormaximumheatrecoveryto
decreaseexpensiverefrigerationcosts,
3. Astreamwhichislikelytoundergodirectcontactheatexchange(forwhichT
min,cont,i

maybesettozero)

InactualpracticefollowingfactsaretakencareofwhileselectingT
min
.

1. Theshapeofthecompositecurve.AhighervalueofT
min
isselectedifthehotandcold
compositecurvesarealmostparallelincomparisontocompositecurvewhichdiverge
sharply.Thisisforsimplefactthatforparallelcompositecurves,thetemperature
differencebetweenhotandcoldstreamswillbeclosetoT
min
setforthecomposite
curvesdemandinghighheattransferarea.Thiswillnothappenforexchangerscloseto
pinchpointbutforothersalsowhichareawayfrompinch.
2. InsystemswherefoulingiscommonorheattransfercoefficientsarelowhigherT
min

valuesintherangeof3040Cisusedtocompensatetheaboveilleffectstosome
extent.





TheconceptofT
min
anditsrelevanceModule:04Lecture24

NonglobalminimumTemperatureDifferenceandT
min
contributionsfor
individualstreams

Most work on HENS based on Pinch Analysis, uses a single basic parameter in the design,
namelythestreamindependentminimumapproachtemperatureforaheatexchangernetwork
which applies globally between all streams in the network. For many years, this has met the
requirementandcertainguidingvaluesofT
min
havebeenacceptedbydesignersforparticular
industrial problems. It is common in chemical plants to have a mixture of liquid and vapour
streams with one to two orders of magnitude difference in film heat transfer coefficients.
However, inappropriate match selection involving the heat transfer coefficients can yield a
largerareaevenifthecorrecttemperaturedifferencesareselected.

The major limitation with this approach is the concept of a single minimum approach
temperaturethatisusedasthebasicdesignparametertobevariedindeterminingthematches
of theinitial design.Although theeffect ofdifferent heattransfer coefficients is accountedfor
atthetotalcosttargetingstage,atthesynthesisstagetheconceptofasingleT
min
isapplied
to the problem. As shown recently by Gundersen and Grossman (1988), to insist on a single
global approach temperature for all exchangers in the network may put the engineer in
topological traps. Further, for very different film heat transfer coefficients it is no longer true
thatstrictverticalheattransfergivesthelowestareaandinvestmentcost.

TheconceptofstreamspecificTcontributionwasproposedtoincorporatenonverticalheat
transferforminimumareapredictions(Nishimura,1980;Ahmadetal.,1990).Thestream
specificcontributionscanbeappliedtoactualtemperaturesofthehotandcoldstreamsto
createshiftedtemperaturesasgiveninEq24.1andEq.24.2

T*
H,I
=T
H,i
T
min
,
cont,I
.(24.1)
T*
C,j
=T
C,j
+T
min
,
cont,j
(24.2)

where T*
H,i
, T
H,i
are the shifted and actual temperatures for Hot Stream i, T*
C,j
, T
C,j
are the
shifted and actual temperatures for Cold Stream j, and T
min,cont,i
and T
min,cont,j
are the
contributionstoT
min
forHotStreamiandColdStreamj.Sothatwheni
th
hotstreamtouches
with j
th
cold streams in a shifted composite curves then the temperature difference(T
min
)
betweentheseremainsT
min,cont,i
+T
min,cont,j
.

Theabovefactisexplainedthroughanexamplegivenbelow:

Suppose,iftheT
min
contributionforliquidstreamsistakentobe5Candthatforgasstreams
15C, then a liquidliquid match would have a T
min
= 10C, similarly a gasgas match would
give rise to T
min
= 30C and a liquidgas match would result in T
min
= 20C. The above
arrangementcanbeincludedintheproblemtablealgorithmeasily.Allthatisrequiredisthat
appropriate T
min
contribution for each stream is to be allocated based on some rules (
discussedbelow)andthenitissubtractedinthecaseofhotstreamsandaddedinthecaseof
cold streams. This would give rise to different interval temperatures compared with a global
TheconceptofT
min
anditsrelevanceModule:04Lecture24
minimum temperature difference. This transformation provides a heat cascade where the
streams with good heat transfer conditions can be matched with lower T, and vice versa.
During this process not only the interval temperatures (as well as temperature and enthalpy
intervals) but also the stream subsets are changed. Moreover, a altogether new pinch, called
diverse pinch point, is created. The differences between the conventional pinch with global
T
min
andthediversepinchvaluesaretechnicallydifferent.Thedifferenceinstreamsubsetsin
a temperature/enthalpy interval implies different pinch designs and consequently different
HENS.

Further, It is recommended that the individual film heat transfer coefficients should be taken
into account at the earliest possible stage of design when these film coefficients are order of
magnitude different from each other. In order to use streamdependent contributions to
minimum approach temperatures the streams are to be vertically shifted by a. value
proportionaltotheinverseoftheindividualfilmcoefficients.Theeffectsofthisproposalshould
be farreaching. Not only will it make the driving force distribution smoother but it will also
provide a more realistic initial network supertargeting andavoid some topological traps in the
synthesisofinitialheatexchangernetworks.

Underthisbackdropletusexaminethestreamdependentcontributionstominimum
approachtemperatureofferedbydifferentinvestigators[Ahmad,1985;Nishimuraetal.,1970;
Nishimura,1975;Nishimura,1980;E.REVandZ.FONYO,1991]:

Nishimuraetal.(1970)andNishimura(1975,1980)wereprobablyamongthefirstauthorsto
advocateit.Theyshowedforcaseswhereonelargehotstreamisintegratedwithseveralsmall
coldstreams,orviceversa,thattheoptimumvalueof(T
min)i
forstreamiwasgivenintermsof
theindividualheattransfercoefficientofthatstream,h
i
,by:

T
min
,
i
h
i
=constant (24.3)

Inthecaseofpluralheatsourcesandsinks,duetoitscombinatorialproblem,theextensionof
thisresultisquestionable.

Townsend(1989)forthecaseofmultiplehotstreamsmatchingmultiplecoldstreamsdefined
streamindividual"Tcontributions"asfollows:

T
i
h
i
=constant=a

WhereT
i
=theTcontributionfromthestreamiandh
i
=filmcoefficientofthestreami.

Aquitestraightforwardapproachistousestreamindividualcontributionstotheglobal
minimumapproachtemperaturepresentedbyAhmad(1985).HeextrapolatedNishimuras
resultstoageneralcase,i.e.thecontributionTforstreamiwasrelatedtoitsfilmtransfer
coefficientthroughtheequation


TheconceptofT
min
anditsrelevanceModule:04Lecture24
I

=
c
b

. (24.4 )

where C is a constant that is adjusted until the heat recovery level obtained by using the
contributionsisthesameaswhenusingasingleglobalT
min
.Unfortunately,theextrapolation
of Nishimuras results to general problems with plural heat sources and sinks is questionable
and, as will be discussed later in this paper, the determination of this T contribution is
ambiguous. Nevertheless, he provided the first systematic approach to adjusting the stream
temperaturessothatstreamswithgoodheattransferconditionscanbematchedwithlessT
i
andviceversa,thanwouldhavebeenverticalaccordingtotheoriginalmodel.

RevandFonyo(1991)proposedthediversepinchconcept,whichusesanindividual
contributionTforeachstream,accordingtothefollowingrelationship:

T
I
= kh
I
-z
(24. 5 )

wherekandzareempiricalparameters.ThevalueofkcanbeeasilycalculatedforanyT
min
,in
an iterative manner so that same hot and cold utility demands are achieved. The T
min

contributionforindividualstreamsprovidesaheatcascadewherethestreamswithgoodheat
transferconditionscanbematchedwithlowerT,andviceversa.

Example1

AnexamplewastakentoshowhowT
min
contributionforindividualstreamscanbeused.For
thispurposeanExampleproblemfrom(Ahmad,1985)wastakenupwithz=1asshownbelow
andthevalueofkforEq.24.5isdeterminedbymatchinghotandcoldutilitydemandsas
computedforT
min
=30C(Table24.5).

Table24.5AsevenstreamproblemtodemonstrateT
min
contributionassuggestedbyRevand
Fonyo(1991)

Stream(s) Ts,C Tt,C CP(kW/C) h(kW/(Cm

2
) T
min,cont,i

H1 159 77 2.285 0.1 7.099

H2 267 80 0.204 0.04 17.748
H3 343 90 0.538 0.50 1.419
C1 26 127 0.933 0.01 70.99
C2 118 265 1.961 0.50 1.419
HU 300 300 0.05 14.198
CU 20 60 0.20 3.549
TheproblemwassolvedbyAhmad,S.(1985)usingT
min
=30C

TheutilitydemandforT
min
=30Care:HU=145.672kWandCU=124.804kW

Table24.6HotandcoldutilitiesfordifferentvaluesofkofEq.24.5
IterationNo. Valueofk Hotutility,kW ColdUtility,kW
1. 0.600 131.937 111.069
TheconceptofT
min
anditsrelevanceModule:04Lecture24
2. 0.695 143.804 122.936
3. 0.7099 145.67 124.804

ThustheTmincontributionforindividualstreamscanbegivenas:

I
mn,cont,
= u.7u99b

-1

Table24.7ShiftedtemperaturetableusingT
min
=30C
Stream(s) Ts,C Tt,C Shifted
Ts,C
Shifted
Tt,C
H1 159 77 144 62
H2 267 80 252 65
H3 343 90 328 75
C1 26 127 41 142
C2 118 265 133 280
HU 300 300 285 285
CU 20 60 35 75

Table24.8ShiftedtemperaturesusingT
min
contributionforindividualstreams
Stream(s) Ts,C Tt,C Shifted
Ts,C
Shifted
Tt,C
T
min,cont,i
CP(kW/C) h
(kW/(Cm
2
)
H1 159 77 151.901 69.901 7.099 2.285 0.1
H2 267 80 249.252 62.252 17.748 0.204 0.04
H3 343 90 341.581 88.581 1.419 0.538 0.50
C1 26 127 96.99 197.99 70.99 0.933 0.01
C2 118 265 119.419 266.419 1.419 1.961 0.50
HU 300 300 285.802 285.802 14.198 0.05
CU 20 60 23.549 63.549 3.549 0.20

3
2
8

2
8
0

2
5
2

1
4
4

1
4
2

1
3
3

7
5

6
5

6
2

4
1

H1
H2
H3
C1
C2
(a)
P
i
n
c
h

3
4
1
.
6

2
6
6
.
4

2
4
9
.
3

1
9
8

1
5
1
.
9

1
1
9
.
4

9
7

8
8
.
6

7
0

6
2
.
3

H1
H2
H3
C1
C2
(b)
P
i
n
c
h

Fig.24.4Streamstructureandtemp.intervalsfor(a)T
min
as30C(b)T
min
contributionfor
individualstreams
TheconceptofT
min
anditsrelevanceModule:04Lecture24

Table24.10Minimumheatflowattemperature
intervalswhenT
min
contributionsforindividual
streamsconsidered.
ShiftedTemp.
level,C
Min.Heat
Flow,kW
Remarks
341.58 145.66 Minimum
Hotutility
266.42 186.10
249.25 161.67
197.99 99.18
151.90 0.0 Pinchpoint
119.42 4.32
96.99 51.29
88.58 76.74
69.90 123.23
62.25 124.80 Minimum
coldutility
Table24.9Minimumheatflowatinterval
temperaturesforT
min
=30C
ShiftedTemp.
level,C
Min.Heat
Flow,kW
Remarks
328 145.67 MinimumHot
utility
280 171.50
252 131.65
144 0 Pinchpoint
142 2.13
133 3.33
75 124.78
65 140.34
62 144.4
41 124.80 Minimumcold
utility

Fig.24.5(a)ShiftedcompositecurvetakingT
min
as30C(b)Shiftedcomposite
curvetakingT
min
contributionforindividualstreams
(b)
HU=145.66kW
CU=124.80kW
(a)
HU=145.67kW
CU=124.80kW
TheconceptofT
min
anditsrelevanceModule:04Lecture24

From the Fig24.4 to Fig 24.7 and Table 24.7to Table 24.10, it is clear that when T
min

contribution for individual streams are applied not only the interval temperatures (as well as
temperature and enthalpy intervals) but also the stream subsets are changed. Moreover,
altogether a new pinch, called diverse pinch point, is created. The differences between the
conventionalpinchwithglobalT
min
andthediversepinchvaluesaretechnicallydifferent.The
(b)
(a)
Fig.24.6(a)GCCtakingT
min
=30C(b)GCCtakingT
min
contributionforindividual

(a)

(a) (b)
Fig.24.7(a)DrivingforceplottakingT
min
=30C(b)DrivingforceplottakingT
min

contributionforindividualstreams
TheconceptofT
min
anditsrelevanceModule:04Lecture24
differenceinstreamsubsetsinatemperature/enthalpyintervalimpliesdifferentpinchdesigns
andconsequentlydifferentHENS.

The effect of using individual T contributions for individual streams, the distribution of the
heat transfer driving force is smoother. The same effect can be seen from the lower and
smootherplotinFig.24.7(Drivingforceplot(b))

Reference

1. Ahmad, S., 1985, Heat exchanger networks: cost tradeoffs in energy and capital. Ph.D.
thesis,UMIST
2. Linnhoff,B.andAhmad,S.,1986,Supertargeting,ortheoptimizationofheatexchanger
networks prior to design, in World Congress III, Chemical Engineering, Tokyo, Preprint,
Vol.4,pp.822825.
3. Gundersen, T. and Grossmann, I. E., 1988, Improved optimization strategies for
automated heat exchanger network synthesis through physical insight. AIChE Annual
Meeting,PaperNo.81g,Washington,DC.
4. Gundersen, T. and Naess, L., 1988, The synthesis of cost optimal heat exchanger
networks.Comput.Chem.Engng12,503530.
5. Ahmad,S.,Linnhoff,B.,Smith,R.,1990.Costoptimumheatexchangernetworks2
targetsanddesignfordetailedcapitalcostmodels.Computers&ChemicalEngineering
14(7),751.
6. Nishimura,H.etal.,1970,J.Chem.Engng.Japan34,1099l106.
7. Nishimura,H.,1975,TheoryonoptimalsynthesisofheatexchangesystemJapanUSA
JointSeminar,.Kyolo.
8. Nishimura,H.,1980,Atheoryfortheoptimalsynthesisofheatexchangersystems.J.
OptimizationTheoryApplic.30,423450.
9. E.REVandZ.FONYO,DiversepinchconceptforheatexchangeNetworksynthesis:the
caseofdifferentheatTransferconditions,ChemicalEngineerinqScience,Vol46,No.7,
pp.16231634,1991.