Computers and Chemica!

Engineering Supplement (1999) SI61-SI64

~ Pergamon 4) 1999 Elsevier Science Ltd. All rights reserved
PH: 5009 8-1354/99/00127-1

OPTIMIZATION STRATEGIES FOR THE DESIGN AND SYNTHESIS OF

DISTRIBUTED WASTEWATER TREATMENT NETWORKS.
B. Galan+ and I.E. Grossmann*
*Department of Chemical Engineering, CarnegieMellon University,
Pittsburgh, PA 15213. U.S.A.

+ Department of Chemistry. ETSII. Universidad de Cantabria

Santander.39005, Spain.

Abstract
This paper applies, an optimization strategy for the design of a distributed wastewater network where
multicomponent streams are considered. The streams are to be processed by different technologies for reducing the
concentration of several contaminants to meet environmental regulations. The model gives rise to a nonconvex
nonlinear and a heuristic search procedure is applied to find the global optimum or a good upper bound of the global
optimum. The procedure is based on the successive solution of a relaxed linear model and the original nonconvex
nonlinearproblem and on the use of several objective functions in the relaxed model.Two examples are presented to
illustrate that method.

Keywords: distributed wastewater treatment. membrane separation, nonconvex optimization.

Introduction optimization is used. A detailed description of the

The increasing importance at environmental method is given in Galan and Grossmann (1998).
regulations motivate the need of design tools for
waste treatment systems. In the past. these systems Problem statement
have been operating in a centralized plant where all The problemcan be stated as follows:
the process streams are collected. In distributed Given is a set of process liquid streams. with known
wastewater treatment. streams are either treated flowrates, that contain certain pollutants with known
separately or only partially mixed which reduces the concentrations. Given is also a set oftechnologies for
flowrate to be processed when compared to the removal of each pollutant. The goal of this
centralized wastewatertreatmentsystems. This in turn problem is to identify the interconnections of the
reduces investment because the capital cost of most technologies. and their corresponding flowrates and
treatment operations is proportional to the total flow compositions that will meet the discharge
of wastewater and the operating cost for treatment composition regulations for each pollutant at
increases with decreasing concentration for given minimum total cost.
mass contaminant, (McLaughin et al, 1992). The general superstructure of the network presented
A number of studies on wastewater treatment design by Wang and Smith, (1994) includes splitters (S),
have been reported: Takama et al (1980). EI-Halwagi mixers (M), treatment units (T) and their
and Manousiouthakis, (1989), Gupta and interconnections. Figure I shows the network
Manousiouthakis, (1994), EI-Halawagi, (1997). superstructure whichcover all the alternatives.
Papalexandri et al. (1994). Wang and Smith (1994)
and Kuo and Smith (1998) approach the general Figure 1: Superstructure for three streams and three
problem for design of the final disposal wastewater treatment units. Circles are splitter units, diamonds
network using a graphical representation and are mixerunits and rectanglesare treatmentunits.
techniques on superstructures of alternative design.
Alva-Argaez et al (1998) proposed a solution
approach based on recursive MILP to optimize the
Wang and Smith model.
In this paper we will apply an NLP model for the
superstructures presented by Wang and Smith (1994).
Since the proposed model give rise to a nonoconvex
nonlinear model, the problem can exhibit local
minima and/or causes convergence difficulties. A
search procedure that is based on relaxation for the
global optimization at bilinear problems is applied.
The proposed method can be also used to predict a
very good upper bound if a rigorous global
5t62 Computers and Chemical Engineering Supplement (1999) S161-S164
The applied NLP formulation for optimizing process consists of determining the bounds of the variables
will be based on the use of individual contaminants involved in the non-convex terms, total and individual
and total flows (f and F respectively). The NLP flows, and then applying these bounds to the
model is given as follows: underestimators in the LP subproblem.
In this search method, the values of the optimal
Objectil'e (unction variablesof the LP will be used as a starting point for
the solution of the NLP model. The non-convex
<1>= L:F
ieTU
i
(I)
model can be solved by application of a standard
where TU are the unit treatments NLP algorithm. However, there is no guarantee that
the global optimum will be obtained. To deal with
Mixer twits (MUI this problem different objective functions are used in
k i the relaxed problem. Each objective function leads to
F = LF , 'r/ k EMU (2) different optima and therefore to different starting
ieM, point for the NLP problem. This may conduct to
If = Ls«, 1/
ie
' 'r/ j, 'r/ k E MU different local optimumsolutions.
Two types of objective functions are considered in
(3) the LP model: (a) minimizing the flow rate processed
Splitter units (SUI by each treatment unit and (b) minimizing the total
k flow rate processes by all units together.
IFi=F , 'r/ k E SU (4)
The search procedure can be summarized in four
ieS,
steps: (I) Solve the NLP model given by equations 2-
L I) = If, 'r/ k E SU (5) II using the total objective function and the upper
bound of the variables as starting point. (2) For each
'r/j, 'r/ k E SU treatmentunit, solve the LP model using the objective
functions of the individual treatments units and then
(6) the solve the NLP model using as starting point the
where optimum value of the variables from the LP
O:::;S; :::;1 (7) problems. (3) Solve the LP model using the objective
·functions of all treatments units and then solve the
Is: = I,
ieS,
'r/ k E SU (8) NLP model using as starting point the optimum value
of the variables from the LP problems. (4) Among all
'r/ k E SU NLP solutionsselect the one with the lowest objective
function .
(9)
The technologies considered for the removal of
where Sis the splitter fraction contaminants in the equation II apply the case where
the output concentration of the contaminants can be
Treatment units expressed as a linear relation of the inlet
r' =F'' , 'r/ k E TU (10) concentrations. However, not al1 technologies fol1ow
If =fJ; 1/, \j j, VkETU (II)
this case. Membranetechnologies are included among
them. Among all the membrane separation
where p is the removal ratio. technologies, non-dispersive solvent extraction was
selected to extend the model. In this technology the
The model given by equations (I)-(lI) corresponds to outlet concentration depends on the inlet
an NLP model since equations (6) and (9) are concentration of the pol1utant in the streams and on
nonlinear. As these equations involve bilinear terms, the flow rates.
standard algorithms may lead to a local optimum. In The NLP model for NDSX makes use of the previous
this paper instead of applying global optimization NLP model except for equation (II). A short-cut
techniques (e.g. see Grossmann, 1996) we applied a model of the non-dispersive solven extraction
heuristic search procedure. (NDSX) is used in this paper (Ortiz et al, 1996). The
equation for the NDSX treatment is as follows:
Search procedure
The search procedure is based on the solution of two f! -C 0 P)-I
n(H(J -
f~ -C 0 Fk )
n(H(J " K.. F"
II, N~I '"vJ,"k
v E TU
models: the NLP model defined by equations (I}-
. (12)
(II), and a relaxed LP model of the original non-
Therefore, the NLP model for NDSX is finally
convex NLP model. The LP model incorporates
described by equations (1)-(10) and by equation (12).
linear bounding information in order to replace the
nonconvex bilinear equations (6) and (9). The LP
Examples
relaxation that is applied is similar to the one
The search procedure explained above is used for two
employed by Quesada and Grossmann (1995). The
examples. In the first one the output concentrations of
procedure for obtaining the LP underestimators
the contaminants are expressed as a linear relation of
 Computers and Chemical Engineering Supplement (1999) SI61-S164 5t63

the inlet concentrations and in the second one NDSX Ta ble 4 SoIuuons
. Iior example
I I
technology is used. In all the examples GAMS has Different obieciive functions in the LP
been used as the equation modeling system, Step Step
Step 2 3 4
GAMSIOSL as the LP solver and GAMSIMINOS as
the NLP solver. Process
number I II III 1111 11111 AliT.
LP 32 1.7 0 42 46 298 ....... -
Example I: NLP 475 440 527 475 475 450 440
The example illustrates a case of 15 streams, each
containing 5 contaminants A, B, C, D and E. The data
As shown in Table 3. solving the NLP model without
for five wastewater treatments with the removal ratios
any previous linearization (step I) leads to a feasible
are given in Table I and -the data for the
solution. However it is observed that using better
concentrations and flow rates are given in Table 2.
initial points in the NLP model than in step I leads to
For the five treatment processes costs are optimized
better feasible solutions. In step 2, three different
by minimizing the flowrate treated and the
local solutions are found: 440, 475 and 527. All of
environmental discharge limit are 100 glm3 for all the
them are better than the solution in the step I. The
contaminants.
step 3 also shows an objective function of 450 (higher
than the best objective function obtained in the step
T able I . T reatment process data ~or examnie I 1.
2). Finally. step 4 selects the best result: 440 m3/s.
Process Removal ratio (0/0)
Number A B C D E
Example 2:
I 40 0 98 0 0 The second example illustrates a case using NDSX
II 90 50 0 0 0 technology. Five streams are considered, each
III 0 0 0 0 90 containing three contaminants A, Band C. Data for
IIII 0 0 0 99 90 the effluent streams are given in Table 5. As in the
IIIIl 0 90 0 0 99 previous example. treatment processes costs are
optimized by minimizing the flow rate treated and the
T able 2 W astewater process ata or exam e1. environmental discharge limit are 100 g/rrr' for A. B
Stream Cj (g/mJ ) Rate andC
A B C D E (ml/s)
The modules considered for the NDSX application in
I 100 50 350 0 70 36 example 2 is based on extra-flow contactors built by
2 600 800 1500 0 910 24 Hoechst which have 135 m2 of membrane area. Each
3 900 0 600 150 230 15
4 10 10 100 3000 850 25 fiber has 240 urn of inner diameter and 30~m of
5 40 170 0 500 690 18 thickness. The values of K m• He' Co, NF. were taken
6 0 1100 0 200 340 35 from the literature (Ortiz et al., 1996) and some of
7 120 10 500 2000 70 9 them were modified for the inlet concentration of this
8 370 20 100 30 690 2 example. The final values for the modules are:
9 900 350 200 80 230 3 Km=2.2 10'8. NM=15 and the data for the three
10 250 270 90 0 580 23 wastewater treatments are given in Table 6.
11 0 1190 60 230 370 89
12 0 0 20 800 100 I
13 2000 600 340 0 Table 5. Wastewater stream data for example 2.
30 5
14 0 5 100 600 40 41 Stream Rate CA CB Cc
15 1000 1510 270 150 220 8 Number (ml/s) glm3 glml glm3
I 20 300 200 400
The results obtained for the example are shown in 2 15 800 60 10
Table 3 and 4. The local solution for wastewater 3 5 700 190 700
network using the NLP model and setting the 4 12 200 140 56
variables to their upper bound for the starting point 5 6 30 400 750
(step I) is presented in the first column of the Table
3. The second column of this table shows the solution Table 6. Value of He. Co for the treatment processes
of the LP model that corresponds to the lower bound . the examtne
In I 2
of the global optimum. The results obtained at the I II . III
other step of the search procedure are shown in Table Process He 900 0 0
4. number I Co 200 0 0
Process He 0 900 0
Table 3. Solutions for NLP and LP model for number II Co 0 200 0
example I. Process 0 0 900
He
First NLP LP number III 0 0 200
Co
Local solution Optimal solution
528 298
SI64 Computers and Chemical Engineering Supplement (/999) SJ6J-SJ64
Table 7. Solutions for NLP and LP model for
example 2.
First NLP LP
Local solution Optimal solution
74 53
Table 8. Solutions of the search procedure in example
2 Engineering Design. Kluwer Academic Publishers.
Step 2 Step 3 Step4
T.I T.II T. III All T. TIIIII
23 II 15 53 .... - Distributed Wastewater Treatment Networks."
76 lnfe 77 73 73
This example show that the heuristic procedure
described can also be used with technologies where
the output concentration of the contaminants is
expressed as a non-linear relation of the inlet
concentrations.
From Table 7 and 8 we observed that the best
solution is obtained when the sum of rate flowing
through all treatments is considered the objective
function in the LP model (step 3). It is also observed
that the local solution for the NLP model (step 1) is
slightly higher than the local solution obtained in step
3.
Conclusions
This paper has addressed a heuristic search procedure
to find a good upper bound of the global optimum for
the optimum design of distributed wastewater
networks where multicomponent streams are
considered.
The basic idea of the procedure is to solve a relaxed
LP model of the original non-convex model and to
use this solution as a starting point of the NLP
problem. Different objective functions are used in the
relaxed problem. The motivation for using the
objective functions in each treatment is to be able to
generate multiple starting points in addition to the one
that is obtained with the original objective which may
lead to different local optimum solutions.
The procedure was applied to technologies where the
output concentration of the contaminants can be
expressed as a linear relation of the inlet
concentrations and for a membrane technology, such
as non-dispersive solvent extraction (NDSX). where
the concentration of the pollutants after the treatment
units depends on the inlet concentration of the
pollutant and on the flowrate, resulting in a non-linear
expression.
Acknowledgments
This work has been supported by MEC under the
project PF 97, and by the Computer Aided Process
Designed Consortium at Carnegie Mellon.
References
Alva-Argaez, A. A. C. Kokossis and R. Smith, 1998
Wastewater minimisation of industrial system using
an integrated approach. Comp Chem. E1Ig, 22 SuppJ.
5741-5744.
El-Halwagi M.M.. 1997. Pollution Prevention
through Process Integration. Academic Press. San
Diego.
EI-Halwagi M.M., Manousiouthakis, V.,- 1989,
Synthesis of mass exchange networks. AIChE J.• 35,
1233-1244.
Grossmann. I.E. (ed.), 1996, Global Optimization in
The Netherlands.
Galan. B. and I.E. Grossmann. "Optimal Design of
Ind.Eng.Chem. Res. 37,4036-4048 (1998)
Gupta A., Manousiouthakis V., 1994, Waste
reduction through multicomponent mass exchange
network synthesis, Compo Chem. Engng. , 18 Suppl,
S585-S590.
McLaughlin L. A., McLaughlin H.S., Groff K.A.,
1992, Develop an effective wastewater treatment
strategy, Cliem. Eng. Prog., Sept, 34-42.
Ortiz M.J., Galan B., Irabien J.A., 1996, Kinetic
analysis of the simultaneous nondispersive extraction
and back-extraction of Chromium (VI). Ind. Eng.
Chem. Res.• 35,1369-1377.
Papalexandri, K. P., E. N. Pistikopoulos and C. A.
Floudas, 1994. Mass exchange networks for waste
minimization: A simultaneous approach. Trans. I.
Chem. E. Part A 72, 279-294
Quesada I., Grossmann, I.E., 1995, Global
optimization of bilinear process networks with
multicomponent flows. Compo Chem, Engng.• 19, 12,
1219-1242.
Takama N., Kuriyama Y., Shiroko K.• Umeda T.•
1980, Optimal allocation in petroleum refinery,
Compo Chem. E1IgIIg.• 4, 251-258.
Wang Y. P., Smith R., 1994, Design of distributed
effluent treatment systems. Chem. Eng. Sci., 49, 18,
3127-3145.
Kuo W.C,J., Smith R., 1997, Effluent treatment
systems design. Chem. Ellg. Sci., 52. 23, 4273-4290.