A CASE STUDY ON GRAPHICAL PINCH ANALYSIS APPROACH FOR

MAXIMUM WATER AND ENERGY REDUCTION

PAN KIM HONG

A project report submitted in partial fulfilment of the

requirements for the award of Bachelor of Engineering
(Hons.) Chemical Engineering

Faculty of Engineering and Science

Universiti Tunku Abdul Rahman

September 2011
 ii

DECLARATION

I hereby declare that this project report is based on my original work except for
citations and quotations which have been duly acknowledged. I also declare that it
has not been previously and concurrently submitted for any other degree or award at
UTAR or other institutions.

Signature : ________________________

Name : PAN KIM HONG G

ID No. : 08UEB00141 1

Date : 1
 iii

APPROVAL FOR SUBMISSION

I certify that this project report entitled “A CASE STUDY ON GRAPHICAL

PINCH ANALYSIS APPROACH FOR MAXIMUM WATER AND ENERGY
REDUCTION” was prepared by PAN KIM HONG has met the required standard
for submission in partial fulfilment of the requirements for the award of Bachelor of
Engineering (Hons.) Chemical Engineering at Universiti Tunku Abdul Rahman.

Approved by,

Signature : 1

Supervisor : Miss Azlyana Ismail l

Date : 1
 iv

The copyright of this report belongs to the author under the terms of the copyright
Act 1987 as qualified by Intellectual Property Policy of University Tunku Abdul
Rahman. Due acknowledgement shall always be made of the use of any material
contained in, or derived from, this report.

© 2011, Pan Kim Hong. All right reserved.

 v

Specially dedicated to
my beloved grandmother, mother and father
 vi

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

The author would like to express his utmost gratitude to the UTAR for providing
opportunity to author to complete the Final Year Project as a partial fulfilment of the
requirement for the degree of Bachelor of Engineering.

The author would like to thank everyone who had contributed to the
successful completion of this project. The author would like to express his gratitude
to his research supervisor, Miss Azlyana Ismail for her invaluable advice, guidance
and her enormous patience throughout the development of the research.

In addition, the author would also like to express his gratitude to his loving
parent and friends who had helped and given the author encouragement throughout
the project period.
 vii

A CASE STUDY ON GRAPHICAL PINCH ANALYSIS APPROACH FOR

MAXIMUM WATER AND ENERGY REDUCTION

ABSTRACT

Water and energy are among the most important process utilities used in the process
industries. As the price of crude oil for energy generation remain high nowadays and
the scarcities of water sources all around the world, the optimum consumption of
both process utilities to reduce the operating cost has become the most critical issue
in all process industries. Past decades, there were numbers of research methods have
been developed for targeting of the optimum usage of process utilities. The previous
researches were mainly divided into graphical approach and numerical approach.
However, in previous studies, certain research gaps that could not be solved still
existed. From the previous research, the author has realised that graphical approach
to the minimisation of utilities usage was relatively easier, more efficient, and
provides insight through visualisation compare to the numerical method. Therefore,
in this project, the author has utilised a new graphical method named Superimposed
Mass and Energy Curve (SMEC) to perform the process integration to a given case
study to minimise the water and energy consumption. Besides, through research, this
method was also applicable to wide range of system such as mass transfer-based,
non-mass transfer-based system and complex design problems with multiple pinches.
The SMEC was an improved graphical method which adapted from few of the
research papers, where the source and demand allocation curve was superimposed
into the heat surplus diagram with constraints of six design heuristics. A great
achievement has been reach through this method in the author’s case study where
large percentage of utilities, which were 31.17 % of freshwater and wastewater,
65.55 % of heat utilities and 100 % of cold utilities have been reduced compare to
the original case.
 viii

TABLE OF CONTENTS

DECLARATION ii
APPROVAL FOR SUBMISSION iii
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS vi
ABSTRACT vii
TABLE OF CONTENTS viii
LIST OF TABLES xi
LIST OF FIGURES xii
LIST OF SYMBOLS / ABBREVIATIONS xiii
LIST OF APPENDICES xiv

CHAPTER

1 INTRODUCTION 1
1.1 Background 1
1.2 Problem Statement 2
1.3 Objective 3
1.4 Significant of Research 3
1.5 Scope of Study 3

2 LITERATURE REVIEW 5
2.1 Introduction 5
2.2 Process Integration and Pinch Analysis 6
2.3 Application of Pinch on Energy 7
2.3.1 Review of Energy Pinch Targeting Methodology 7
2.3.1.1 Numerical Approach 7
 ix

2.3.1.2 Graphical Approach 9

2.3.1.3 Research Gap on Energy Pinch 12
2.4 Application of Pinch Analysis on Water 12
2.4.1 Review of Water Pinch Targeting Methodology 12
2.4.1.1 Numerical Approach 12
2.4.1.2 Graphical Approach for Water Reduction 14
2.4.1.3 Research Gap on Water Pinch 15
2.5 Application of Pinch Analysis Simultaneously on Water
and Energy 16
2.5.1 Water and Energy Pinch Targeting and
Network Design Methodology 16
2.5.2 Research Gap of Water and Energy Pinch
Targeting and Network Design Methodology 18

3 METHODOLOGY 19
3.1 Introduction 19
3.2 Assumptions Made in Construction of Superimposed
Mass and Energy Curve (SMEC) 20
3.3 Targeting and Curves Design Procedure 21
3.3.1 Data Extraction 21
3.3.2 Targeting of Heat and Mass Recovery
Network Based on Heat Constraints 23
3.3.2.1 Construction of Source and Demand
Composite (SDCC) and Energy Match
Diagram (EMD) 23
3.3.2.2 Constructing the Source and Demand
Allocation Curve (SDAC) 25
3.3.3 Heat Data Extraction from EMD for
Energy Targeting using Heat Composite
Curve (HCC) 28
 x

4 RESULTS AND DISCUSSIONS 29

4.1 Data Extraction 29
4.2 Targeting of Heat and Mass Recovery Network Based
on Heat Constraints 30
4.2.1 Source and Demand Composite Curves (SDCC) 30
4.2.2 Energy Match Diagram (EMD) on Source
and Demand Composite Curve (SDCC) 32
4.2.3 Source and Demand Allocation Curve (SDAC) 34
4.2.4 Energy Recovery Targeting by Heat
Composite Curve 37
4.3 Summary of the Water and Energy Recovery 40

5 CONCLUSION 41

REFERENCES 42

APPENDICES 46
 xi

LIST OF TABLES

TABLE TITLE PAGE

1.1 The Water Using Operation Data (Ataei & Yoo,

2009) 4

3.1 The Water Using Operation Data (Savulescu et al.,

2005a) 21

3.3 Example of Stream Matching/Process Integration

Results 26

4.1 Case Study - Water Using Operation Data (Ataei

& Yoo, 2009) 29

4.2 Extracted Source and Demand Data from the Case

Study 30

4.3 Results of Source - Demand Streams Matching

Process 35

4.4 Extracted Heat Data 38

4.5 Percentage of Reduction of Utilities after SMEC

Method 40
 xii

LIST OF FIGURES

FIGURE TITLE PAGE

2.1 Example of Composite Curves 9

2.2 Example of Energy Level Composite Curve

(ELCC) 11

3.1 Example of Source and Demand Curves (SDCC) 23

3.2 Example of Source and Demand Curves (SDCC)

with Pinch Point 24

3.3 Example of Source Demand Curves with Energy

Match Diagram 25

3.4 Example of Source Demand Allocation Curves

(SDAC) with Energy Match Diagram (EMD) 27

3.5 Example of Heat Composite Curve 28

4.1 Source and Demand Composite Curve 30

4.2 Source and Demand Composite Curve with Pinch

Point 31

4.3 Source and Demand Composite Curve with Energy

Match Diagram 33

4.4 Source and Demand Allocation Curve with Energy

Match Diagram 36

4.5 Heat Composite Curve 39

 xiii

LIST OF SYMBOLS / ABBREVIATIONS

C concentration, ppm
Cp specific heat capacity, J/(kgK)
F flowrate, kg/s
∆H enthalpy change, kW
∆m mass loading, ppm
QCmin minimum cooling energy, kW
QHmin minimum heating energy, kW
Tin inlet temperature, oC
Tout outlet temperature, oC

EMD energy match diagram

FW freshwater
HCC heat composite curve
MTB mass transfer base
NMTB non-mass transfer base
SDCC source demand composite curve
SDAC source demand allocation curve
SMEC superimposed mass and energy curve
WW wastewater
 xiv

LIST OF APPENDICES

APPENDIX TITLE PAGE

A Case Study 46
 CHAPTER 1

1 INTRODUCTION

1.1 Background

Process utilities especially water and energy are among the most important resources
used in the process industries. As the price of crude oil increased significantly
nowadays and the scarcities of water sources, the optimum consumption of both
process utilities has become the most critical issue in process industries (Bogataj and
Bagajewicz, 2008).

In certain processes, large amount of energy consumption to be needed to

heat up or cool down the water. For example, in petrochemical plants, significant
amount of energy and water are required in heating and cooling of process streams in
order to meet process operating conditions (Bagajewicz et al., 2002). In food
manufacturing industries, large amount of energy and water are required for the
washing operations and sterilisation processes. As consequence, water and energy
management need to be considered simultaneously when both the quantity and
temperature of water are important (Bogataj and Bagajewicz, 2008).

Past decades, there were different methods based on conceptual design or

mathematical programming, have been developed for energy and water minimization.
The most widely and famous used technology was the well-known Pinch Technology
(Linnhoff et al., 1982). However, there are some drawbacks from this method such as
only energy was concerned in the research, non-optimal solution achieved or limited
by multi-contaminant problems (Bogataj & Bagajewicz, 2008). Thus, mathematical
 2

programming techniques were developed to overcome the drawbacks. Still, the

techniques mentioned previously were limited to only mass-transfer based systems.
In addition, the research in simultaneously minimisation of energy and water was
still in the developing stage and hence more researches were needed.

In this project, a new method called Superimposed Mass and Energy Curves
(SMEC) proposed by Wan Alwi et al. (2010) was used to solve the energy and mass
utilised problem. This SMEC method provides a simple and interactive visualisation
tool to target the minimisation of water and energy usage. It is also offers graphical
insights for network design where it can be apply to both flowrate deficit and mass
load deficit cases. In this method, energy match diagram is superimposed into the
same graph with the source and demand composite curves on a plot of flowrate
versus mass load/temperature.

1.2 Problem Statement

Process utilities including heat and water are very important resources in process
industry. Over the last ten years, many researchers come out with the technique to
minimise heat and water consumption. Separate reduction of heat and water may
result in extra utilities as well as heat exchanger. In this study, the author focus on
application a case study on new development method that can reduce the water and
heat simultaneously to achieve the minimum utility consumption.

Give a set of water and heat-using systems which involve the mass transfer-based
water using, it is desired to reduce the water and energy consumption using a user-
friendly visualisation tool i.e. graphical technique based on pinch analysis concepts
and heuristics.
 3

1.3 Objective

The main objective of this project is to simultaneously minimise the water and
energy consumption on a given case study by using a new graphical approach
method named Superimposed Mass and Energy Curves (SMEC) developed by Wan
Alwi et al. (2010).

The new SMEC graphical method provides a good insight between the water
and energy where the temperature effect on the source and demand water in the case
study can be seen immediately (Wan Alwi et al., 2010). This cannot be achieved by
the graphical approach technique proposed by Savulescu at al. (2005a) and
Savulescu et al. (2005b). Therefore, as an extension for this study, the new SMEC
method is used in this project for approach of the water and energy design target.

1.4 Significant of Research

In previous studies, simultaneously minimisation of water and energy has been

approached by various methods such as conceptual graphical methods and
mathematical modelling methods. However, there are some research gap still exist in
those methods (Wan Alwi et al., 2010). Hence, in this work, a new SMEC graphical
method which combined the water and energy targeting will be used to fill up those
research gaps in previous studies.

1.5 Scope of Study

The scope of study in this project is to graphically determine the minimum flowrate
of fresh water usage and waste water discharge by using the Superimposed Mass and
Energy Curves (SMEC) from the case study in Ataei and Yoo (2009). Besides, this
project also targets the minimum hot and cold utilities requirements from the SMEC.
 4

In this project, a case study studied by Ataei and Yoo (2009) was chosen.
Ataei and Yoo (2009) applied a new mathematical method called ―Non-isothermal
Mixing‖ point identification in their paper. In this problem, one contaminant was
considered instead of all three contaminants from the case study where no water
flowrate change but with heat loss inside unit operations.

Table 1.1: The Water Using Operation Data (Ataei & Yoo, 2009)
Contaminant Temperature Limiting
Water
Operation Inlet Outlet Inlet Outlet Flowrate, F
(ppm) (ppm) (oC) (oC) (kg/s)

1 0 100 0 90 7.56
2 50 125 50 85 3.88
3 50 150 50 50 8.64
 CHAPTER 2

2 LITERATURE REVIEW

2.1 Introduction

In past recent years, a new research direction where the minimisation of water and
energy consumption targets simultaneously has drawn attention of many of the
researchers in the process integration field. The researchers were basically approach
the research by conceptual graphical design methods, mathematical programming
techniques or both.

Among the methods, conceptual graphical methods were typically easier to

apply and master, most importantly, as a visualisation tools for the network design
and pinch targeting. Whereas in mathematical programming methods, despite it
provides great accuracy in global optimality, high effectiveness in computational
dimensionality and complex network can be handling easily, however, less
engineering practitioners are familiar with these methods mainly due to the difficulty
to master the technique and to set up the problem models.

In this chapter, the previous studies and the development of the various
methods of pinch analysis on the minimisation of energy and water were reviewed.
In section 2.2 reviews the concept of process integration and pinch analysis. Section
2.3 covers the application of pinch analysis for energy reduction. The application of
pinch analysis on the water will be reviewed in section 2.4. Lastly, section 2.5
reviews the application of pinch analysis simultaneously on water and energy.
 6

2.2 Process Integration and Pinch Analysis

Process integration is a holistic approach to process design, retrofitting, and

operation which emphasizes the unity of the process (El-Halwagi, 1997). Process
integration is a special pathway for researchers to fundamentally understand the
global insights of the process, methodically determine the process achievable
performance targets, and by making systematically decisions, lead to the realization
of these targets (El-Halwagi, 2006).

El-Halwagi (2006) concluded that Process integration involves following

steps:
1. Task identification: Indentify the goal of the task and the achievable of the task.
2. Targeting: the identification of performance benchmarks ahead of detailed design.
3. Generation of Alternatives (Synthesis): Numbers of solutions are suggested to
reach the target.
4. Selection of Alternative (Synthesis): Optimum solution is chosen among the
suggested alternatives.
5. Analysis of Selected Alternative: Employ process analysis to evaluate the chosen
alternative.

There have been numerous studies on the two main commodities utilities in
the typical process field: energy and water. Energy integration is the understanding
of the energy utilisation by systematic methodology and this understanding is
employed in identifying the energy targets and optimizing heat recovery in energy
utility systems. Mass integration, on the other hand, is the understanding of the
global flow of water by systematic methodology and this understanding is employed
in identifying mass performance targets and optimizing the generation and routing of
species throughout the process (El-Halwagi, 2006).

Pinch analysis was firstly introduced by Linhoff and Vredeveld (1984). It is

one of the most widely used and practical tools to apply the process integration in the
energy and mass based process field. It allows researchers investigate the energy and
mass flows within a process where the most economical ways of maximise heat
 7

recovery and minimise the utilities demand can be identified systematically (Natural
Resources Canada [NRCAN], 2003).

Over the years, there have been numerous of pinch analysis studies
successfully applied to the minimisation of energy consumption in various process
field such as petrochemicals and pulp and paper industry. Pinch analysis allows the
minimisation of utilities not only in energy but also in other sources such as water
and hydrogen. Most recently, the application of pinch analysis has been extended to
the optimisation of water and simultaneously energy and mass consumption where
spectacular results have been achieved (NRCAN, 2003).

2.3 Application of Pinch on Energy

2.3.1 Review of Energy Pinch Targeting Methodology

2.3.1.1 Numerical Approach

Over twenty years ago, first numerical method called Problem Table Analysis (PTA)
was introduced by the Linnhoff and Flower (1978). It was the first numerical method
which was based on the pinch analysis. Table of hot and cold streams in the PTA
perform the heat cascade analysis. The results of heat cascade analysis allow the
determination of heat transfer between the hot and cold streams. Nowadays, PTA is
typically used to determine the energy targets and to locate the pinch point prior to
the drawing of the composite curves (CCs) proposed by Linnhoff et al. (1983).

Over the years of developing in numerical approaches, a new targeting

method for the retrofit of heat exchanger networks was proposed by Van Reisen et al.
(1997). The concept of zoning in grassroots design was applied in this technique with
the combination of targeting and retrofit design method. The result from this
technique takes the consideration of three aspects: saving, area investment and
structural modification. Hence, the structural targeting retrofit method gives not only
 8

the utilities but including three aspects mentioned above. The definition of structural
unities in the network is the most crucial step in this proposed method.

Kralj et al. (2002) proposed a new heat integration method which involves
three steps:
1. Retrofit of the individual processes
2. Analysis of efficient transfer of waste heat between:
 existing non-retrofitted processes
 existing non-retrofitted and efficiently retrofitted processes
 efficient retrofits and
3. Simultaneous integration between some non-retrofitted and some retrofitted
existing processes using mixed integer non-linear programming (MINLP).
MINLP algorithm can be applied to the simultaneous integration between processes,
non-retrofitted or/and retrofitted processes.

Years later, a new targeting method has been proposed by Kralj et al. (2005)
which extended from heat integration method in Kralj et al. (2002) between
processes using another three possible steps:
1. Internal integration of individual processes;
2. Analysis of possible heat transfer between internally nonintegrated and
integrated processes;
3. Simultaneous external heat integration between the internally nonintegrated
and the best internally integrated processes using the mixed integer nonlinear
programming (MINLP).
Four existing complex processes which using pinch analysis and MINLP has been
applied with this new targeting method. Maximise the annual profit of integration
between processes and retrofits were the main objectives of this approach.

Salama (2005), on the other hand, has developed an improved algorithm

based on PTA named as the simple problem table algorithm (SPTA). Which is
similar to the PTA, SPTA also used to generate the grand composite curve (GCC) to
determine heat energy targets (hot and cold utilities and pinch temperature), but
SPTA eliminates the lumping stage exists in the PTA. This approach proposed was
 9

different from the conventional PTA, where the optimal positioned CCs was
determined first before the determination of energy targets, pinch location and lastly
GCC.

Year later, Salama (2006) proposed a simple and direct numerical technique,
which based on geometric approach, to determine the optimal heat targets. The based
geometric approach was the horizontal shifting of the cold composite curve (CC)
where the hot composite curve remains stationary. The proposed numerical technique
was conceptually deviates from the PTA and SPTA due to the technique based on the
geometric approach not the heat cascade analysis using temperature subintervals.

2.3.1.2 Graphical Approach

The first intend of targeting the energy pinch point by graphical method was
conducted by Linnhoff et al. (1983). The composite curves (CC) introduced was the
plot of temperature versus enthalpy (T-H) which graphically represent the profiles of
heat sources (hot composite curve) and heat demands (cold composite curve) in a
certain energy based process. Figure 2.1 shows the example of a composite curves
proposed by the authors.

Figure 2.1: Example of Composite Curves

 10

From the figure above, the overlap area (green shaded area) in between the
hot and cold composite curves represent the potential of maximum amount of heat
recovery possible in the process. The ―overshoot‖ of the cold composite curve, is the
amount of external heat required from the utilities which is QHmin in the figure above.
On the other hand, the ―overshoot‖ of the hot composite curve is the amount of
external cooling required from the utilities, which is QCmin. The pinch temperature is
the closest point of two curves. A minimum temperature difference, ∆Tmin is the
minimum temperature for heat exchange, to target the external heating and cooling
utilities.

A new graphical targeting methodology has been proposed by

Bandyopadhyay et al. (1998) to solve the problem of the pinch in distillation column.
The column grand composite curve (CGCC) which is the T-H diagram of a
distillation column at practical near-minimum thermodynamic condition (PNMTC) is
a useful technique for the targeting of energy pinch. In this paper, the proposed feed
stage correction (FSC) rigorously considers the mass and enthalpy balance at feed
stage to make sure that the CGCC is identical for the top-down approach or the
bottom-up approach in the distillation column. The paper has further discussed the
effect of FSC on the targets for energy conservation by reflux modification, feed
conditioning, and introduction of side reboilers/condensers.

Anantharaman et al. (2006) on the other hand, utilise process simulation tools
to develop an energy integration strategy to define the interaction between various
subsystems in a certain plant. In addition, a graphical technique also proposed to
explore the possible schemes and help the engineer to easily interpret the results from
the simulation to improve the energy efficiency. This graphical method is nearly
similar to the pinch analysis composite curve (CC), which is named as Energy Level
Composite Curve (ELCC). ELCC offers the reduction of pinch analysis case when
dealing with heat transfer. Since pressure, temperature, and composition changes
were taken in consideration in this method, therefore, wide range of energy utilised
chemical plants can be applied.
 11

Figure 2.2: Example of Energy Level Composite Curve (ELCC)

As discussed in numerical approach in section 2.3.1.1, Salama (2009), has

also gave his contribution in the research of graphical approach on energy targeting
method. The new technique developed called enthalpy flowrate technique used
stream cumulative enthalpy flowrate as independent variable to construct the HEN
composite curves. Complement grand composite curve (CGCC) was a new
developed curve from the proposed enthalpy flowrate technique. CGCC can be
considered as a tool for (a) presentation of the temperature differential distribution
between the composite curves (CCs), (b) estimation of heat exchanger area, and (c)
facilitation of heat exchanger area estimation in multiple-utility targeting. HEN
designer that targeting the energy pinch can have full range of information on
composite curve and presentation of GCC and CGCC plotted in a graph, by using the
technique of cumulative enthalpy flowrate proposed.

Nordman and Berntsson (2009a; 2009b) presented a new theory and concept
of a graphical method for HEN retrofit. New insights on the complexity and possible
solutions of different retrofit alternatives were introduced. In this paper, they
concluded that the closer the pinch to the existing heaters or coolers, the higher the
potential for the cost-effective retrofit to perform.
 12

2.3.1.3 Research Gap on Energy Pinch

Pinch analysis on energy integration has been introduced at 1970’s. Since the
introduced of pinch analysis, various authors were mainly focus in the research in
this field and various method such as mathematical approach and graphical approach
have been well developed.

Mathematical approaches provide great accuracy and global optimal solution

to the system, however, the mathematical modelling was hardly to accomplish for the
researchers as tedious iteration need to be done. However, graphical approaches
provide great visualisation and insight to the system. The researchers prefer graphical
approaches technique as it is typically easier to apply and understand it.

2.4 Application of Pinch Analysis on Water

Apart from energy targeting method, minimising the mass consumption using pinch
analysis is another focus of study among the researchers. Mass such as water,
chemicals and gas is another commodity utility used in most chemical plants. Water
pinch analysis approach comprises two distinct stages, targeting followed by design.
In this section, the review on the development of targeting mass in pinch analysis is
conducted.

2.4.1 Review of Water Pinch Targeting Methodology

2.4.1.1 Numerical Approach

Sorin and Bédard (1999) established the Evolutionary Table to numerically

determine the fresh water and wastewater targets. This paper has further developed
the two approaches proposed earlier by Wang and Smith (1994) and Dhole et al.
(1996). However, the targeting approach introduced by Dhole et al. (1996) could
 13

result in a number of ―local‖ pinch points, but Wang and Smith (1994) define just
one pinch point. However, the method fails to locate pinch point correctly when
multiple pinch points exist in water using processes, as mentioned by Hallale (2002).

Nonetheless, Manan et al. (2004) established a revolutionary water and

wastewater targets technique named as Water Cascade Analysis (WCA). As similar
to the characteristic of problem table analysis (PTA) in grand composite curves
(GCC), WCA was developed towards to the water surplus diagram in water pinch
analysis. WCA offers a quick and accurate yield of water targets and pinch point for
a water network without the tedious interactive steps. Therefore, the design and
retrofit of a water recovery network can be performed easily with this method.
Besides, WCA was applicable to the wide range of water using operations compare
to the previous proposed method.

Aly et al. (2005) introduced the load problem table (LPT) which was another
numerical approach to establish the wastewater minimization problem and synthesis
of water reuse networks. This technique was adapted from load interval diagram
(LID) by El-Halwagi and Almutlaq (2004) for material reuse and recycling. The LPT
was almost similar with the Problem Table Algorithm (PTA) used in heat integration.
Mass Transfer Based (MTB) and Non Mass Transfer Based (NMTB) operations
were applicable to this technique and good insight in network design was provided.

Nevertheless, Foo et al. (2006) established an algebraic technique which

consists of two approach tools to rigorously targets the basic frameworks which were
minimum usage of fresh resources and waste discharge, maximise the direct
resources reuse in a mass utilised network. First tool was the graphical approach
called property surplus diagram to perform the basic frameworks as mentioned above.
Besides, pinch location also can be determined in this graphical tool. Next, the
Cascade Analysis (PCA) technique was established. PCA offers a simple technique
to obtain fresh and waste water targets and material allocation targets without the
tedious iterative steps. Additionally, to achieve various targets, a network design
technique also presented in this paper to synthesis a maximum resource recovery
(MRR) network.
 14

2.4.1.2 Graphical Approach for Water Reduction

A first graphical method of targeting for maximisation water recovery network in a

wide range of processes was first introduced by Wang and Smith (1994). The method
was based on concept of limiting water profile where maximum inlet and outlet
concentration to be considered during the approach. Using the graph of limiting
water profile, pinch location was obtained to target the minimum fresh and
wastewater flowrates prior to the network design. The proposed method can be
addressed to both single and multiple contaminants problem. However, the method
was only applicable to mass-transfer based operations.

Dhole et al. (1996) discovered limitation from Wang and Smith (1994) work
where modelling the mass transfer operations in some unit operations were hard to
accomplished. Therefore, water source and demand composite curves proposed to
overcome this limitation. They also suggested process changes such as mixing and
bypassing to further reduce the fresh water consumption. Meanwhile, Polley and
Polley (2000) later demonstrated that unless the correct stream mixing system was
identified, the apparent targets generated by Dhole’s technique (Dhole et al., 1996)
could be substantially higher than the true minimum fresh water and wastewater
targets.

Hallale (2002) suggested a graphical procedure for targeting the fresh water
and wastewater minimisation. The method was based on water composite curves and
water surplus diagram. This approach had similar representation to the water source
and demand composite curves introduced by Dhole et al. (1996). Graphical tools
presented provide valuable insights that cannot be obtained from a purely
mathematical approach. The advantage of this method was applicable to wide range
of water using operations such as MTB and NMTB. Nevertheless, this new work has
the ability to handle all mixing possibilities and yet still result the unique pinch and
water reuse target.

El-Halwagi et al. (2003) introduced the source and demand composite curves
(SDCC). The SDCC was a plot of cumulative mass load versus cumulative flow rate.
This method can be used to establish the minimum fresh water and wastewater flow
 15

rates targets for both mass transfer-based and non-mass transfer-based operations. In
addition, SDCC was applied for matching and allocation of mass load and flow rates
of each source and demand. Pinch point obtained in SDCC divides the curve into
above and below pinch regions for the matching process to be performed.

Nevertheless, concept of selection of external mass separating agents (MSAs)

using the grand composite curve (GCC) in mass exchange network synthesis (MENS)
was established by Fraser et al. (2005). This developed concept was superior to the
method proposed previously. Alternative external MSAs or minimum flowrate for
each MSA can be chosen systematically through this concept. According to Fraser et
al. (2005), lowest cost per unit mass of MSA does not represent the cheapest,
whereas permissible concentration change also was the issue that has to be
considered. The paper also demonstrates the important role of composition levels of
the MSAs to the target compositions of the rich streams and to the capital cost
implications of the resulting mass transfer driving forces.

2.4.1.3 Research Gap on Water Pinch

The research on the targeting of mass such as water has been well developed in
recent pass years. However, the research on targeting for other mass substances such
as solvents and chemical substances remains a wide gap in the research field. In the
SMEC method proposed by Wan Alwi et al. (2010), targeting and design of mass on
the chemical substances has well developed as ammonia was used in the study.
 16

2.5 Application of Pinch Analysis Simultaneously on Water and Energy

2.5.1 Water and Energy Pinch Targeting and Network Design Methodology

A new approach of simultaneously optimisation of energy and water consumption

was introduced by Bagajewicz et al. (2002). This approach was the improvement in
the design network of water utilisation process plant where minimum freshwater and
minimum utility consumption were featured. A single pollutant case was studied in
this paper, where a numerical technique of linear programming formulation and heat
transshipment model was applied. The first step of the approach was the solving of
the LP model to obtain the minimum water usage and target values of minimum
utility heating amount. Next, a MILP was proposed to consider the non-isothermal
mixing where the necessary information for the construction of water reuse structure
and corresponding heat exchanger network.

Savulescu et al. (2005a; 2005b) established a new systematic design

methodology for the problem of simultaneous energy and water minimisation.
Taking the consideration of water network mixing possibilities and water
contamination, the design of a water system for maximum energy recovery can be
achieved by this method. First stage in this method was the determination of the
various options in water system with minimum water and energy consumption. In
second stage, heat exchanger network design was performed. In this method, the
complexity of the stream distribution can be reduced which implied to a better heat
exchanger network design. However, since the approach cannot observe immediately
temperature effect, hence, there were some drawbacks in this technique. In addition,
since the energy minimisation graphical method only focused in this method,
therefore the design of water minimisation network need to be constructed manually.

Zhelev (2005) proposed a paper with the objective of management energy

and water, which are two important resources in process industry. A method of
design procedure with the consideration of simultaneous heat and mass transfer
which based on the concepts of pinch analysis was proposed. Two procedures with
targeting of maximum flue gas energy recovery and minimum temperature of cooling
water proposed provide guidance for the system design and operation. Through this
 17

design method, water conservation can be achieved by the minimisation the losses of
water evaporation.

On the other hand, Leewongtanawit and Kim (2008) developed a

simultaneous design technique which provides a general design framework for the
water and energy combined system. This approach is based on the mathematical
optimisation where MINLP model was formulated. Besides, the proposed method
was applicable to the multi contamination system. In this paper, the authors
systematically investigated the design interactions between two subsystems and its
economic trade-offs, in addition, stream merging and generation of separate systems
have also taken into the focus in this technique. Hence, a cost-effective and
environmental-benign design of heat-integrated water systems has been developed in
this paper.

Bogataj and Bagajewicz (2008) presented a new superstructure for HEN

synthesis which was an approach for the simultaneous synthesis and optimisation of
heat integrated water network. Proposed method is based on the MINLP model. Due
to the various optimal solutions from the non-linear and non-convex equations and
constraints in the MINLP model, hence an efficient initialisation to search for the
global or good local optimal solution was needed. Therefore, using this developed
technique, the problems related to the initialisation were solved efficiently. Besides,
the sizes of the problems were considerably reduced by this technique.

Meanwhile, Liao et al. (2008) considered that to design the energy efficient
water utilisation systems, the split of water operations was a major role in the total
utility cost. Hence, they proposed a detailed procedure for the network design which
was based on the MINLP model. The concept was to treat the direct and indirect heat
transfer separately, hence the target for fresh water and energy consumption could be
obtained. This method provided a low complexity approach to the network design,
although local but not global optimum solutions could be obtained. However, the
approach was applicable to single contaminant and MTB problems only.

Lastly, a revolutionary technique called simultaneous water and energy (SWE)

was proposed by Manan et al. (2009). This was a method which included numerical
 18

and graphical approach. This technique included three major steps; setting the
minimum water and wastewater targets, design of minimum water utilisation
network, and lastly, heat recovery network design. An important plot called heat
surplus diagram (temperature versus stream flowrate) provided a good insight to the
stream matching procedure and the relationship between the sources and demands in
certain energy and water network. This was a very important approach to the
development of the simultaneous energy and water targeting and network design
field where it is applicable to MTB and NMTB water-using operations.

2.5.2 Research Gap of Water and Energy Pinch Targeting and Network
Design Methodology

There were number of issues still remain unsolved in the previous studies to the
simultaneous minimisation of water and energy.

1. Design of system network was still remain as a research gap for those
researchers since the targeting approach methods were only well developed
in previous studies.

2. Mathematical approach provides a great accuracy and global optimal

solution to the system approach. However, the mathematical modelling was
hardly to accomplish for the researchers as tedious iteration need to be done.

3. Targeting and design network in water and gas has successfully been done
by Wan Alwi and Manan (2008) and Wan Alwi et al. (2009). However,
targeting and design network in energy and water approach has no work to
be done yet.
 CHAPTER 3

3 METHODOLOGY

3.1 Introduction

The methodology applied in this project to obtain the target of the water and energy
pinch is discussed in step-wise procedure in this chapter. The newly developed
graphical method named as Superimposed Mass and Energy Curves (SMEC) for the
simultaneously approach of energy and water targets is discussed in detail. SMEC
method was proposed by Wan Alwi et al. (2010) where the sources and demands
curves (El-Halwagi et al., 2003) and heat surplus diagram (Manan et al., 2009) were
superimposed into a plot of cumulative flowrate versus cumulative mass loading/
temperature.

SMEC allows to target the minimum freshwater required in a water using

system and crucial for network design by taking into the account of energy
limitations. It is an efficient visualisation graphical tool which provides good insight
to the simultaneous minimisation of energy and water. In addition, the SMEC
method is applicable to the mass transfer based (MTB), non-mass transfer based
(NMTB) problems as well as all types of mass besides from water such as solvents
and chemical substances. In this chapter, the assumptions made in construction of
SMEC were discussed in section 4.2. Section 4.3 discussed the detailed procedures to
construct SMEC.
 20

3.2 Assumptions Made in Construction of Superimposed Mass and Energy

Curve (SMEC)

It is necessary to have some understanding of the interactions between water and

energy systems before addressing the problem. There are eight assumptions that need
to be made before the construction of SMEC. These assumptions are adapted from
the Savulescu et al. (2005a) and applied into the approach using SMEC by Wan Alwi
et al. (2010).

The assumptions made are listed as below:

1. In terms of operating data, each mass-using operation is specified by the
maximum inlet and outlet concentrations of contaminant, contaminant mass
to be transferred, and operating temperature.

2. Each mass-using operation is assumed to be isothermal and have a fixed

value for supply temperature. In other words, the mass exchange units are
assumed to be operating without heat losses or gains.

3. Single contaminants of single solvent operations are assumed.

4. The mass flowrate does not change through an operation, so there are no
flowrate losses or gains.

5. A single source of fresh mass is assumed with a given temperature of 20oC.

6. No contaminant concentration constraints have been introduced for the

discharge of effluent.

7. The discharge temperature which is 30oC has been specified.

8. The system is assumed to be operating in steady state and continuously.

 21

3.3 Targeting and Curves Design Procedure

In this section, the procedures and rules to construct the SMEC were discussed in
detail. The first major procedure in this method is the data extraction step. Following
by second major procedure, targeting and design of mass recovery network based on
heat constraints which consists the construction of few curves for SMEC approach
can be done.

3.3.1 Data Extraction

Extracting the stream data from the process flowsheet is absolutely a crucial part of
pinch analysis. Tale 3.1 below shows the example of water using operation data from
Savulescu et al., (2005a).

Table 3.1: The Water Using Operation Data (Savulescu et al., 2005a)
Contaminant Temperature Limiting
Water
Operation Inlet Outlet Inlet Outlet Flowrate, F
(ppm) (ppm) (oC) (oC) (kg/s)

1 0 100 40 40 20
2 50 100 100 100 100
3 50 800 75 75 40
4 40 800 50 50 10

It reveals the opportunity to reuse mass and heat and thus minimise the
quantity of waste generated. Source and demand streams are the important data that
need to be extracted for mass. Demand streams are actually the input flowrate to
system whereas; output flowrate from the system can be classified as source streams.
The crucial data for mass integration are as following:

1. Mass flowrate, F (kg/s) of the source and demand streams

2. Concentration, C (ppm) of each streams
 22

3. Mass loading value, ∆m by calculation using following formula:

m  F  C (3.1)

where
∆m = mass loading, mg/s
F = mass flowrate, kg/s
C = concentration, ppm

Similar to the mass data, heat data are also classified into the source and
demand streams respectively. In this case, heat stream temperature will be classified
as source stream since heat transfer from hot to cold stream, and therefore cold
stream as demand stream. The data required for heat integration are listed as follow:

1. Flowrates of the hot and cold streams, F(kg/s)

2. Heat capacity for each hot and cold streams, Cp (kJ/kg∙oC)
3. Supply (Tin) and target (Tout) temperature for each stream, (oC)

Table 3.2: Example of Extracted Source and Demand Data

Cumulative
Mass Cumulative
Flowrate, Contaminant Temperature Mass
Loading Flowrate
F (kg/s) (ppm) (oC) Loading
(mg/s) (kg/s)
(mg/s)
Demand
D1 20 0 40 0 20 0
D2 100 50 100 5000 120 5000
D3 40 50 75 2000 160 7000
D4 10 40 50 400 170 7400
Source
S1 20 100 40 2000 20 2000
S2 100 100 100 10000 120 12000
S3 40 800 75 32000 160 44000
S4 10 800 50 8000 170 52000
 23

3.3.2 Targeting of Heat and Mass Recovery Network Based on Heat

Constraints

3.3.2.1 Construction of Source and Demand Composite (SDCC) and Energy

Match Diagram (EMD)

The second procedure was to draw the source and demand composite curve (SDCC)
as developed by El-Halwagi et al. (2003) according to the Table 3.2. SDCC is the
plot of cumulative mass loading versus cumulative flowrates. Figure 3.1 below
shows the example of SDCC.

Source and Demand Curves

0.0035

0.003
Cumulative Mass Load (kg/s)

S4
0.0025

0.002 S3

0.0015
D4
S2
0.001
D3

0.0005 S1 D2

D1
0
0 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000
Cumulative Flowrate (t/h)
Demand Water Source Water

Figure 3.1: Example of Source and Demand Curves (SDCC)

From the Figure 3.1 above, by applying the concept of pinch analysis, the
source water curve was then moved horizontally towards the demand water curve
where its slopes remain the same until the point at which the source water curve was
fully under the demand water curve. The point where both curves touch each other
was obtained and called as water pinch point in the system. Figure 3.2 shows the
results obtained in SDCC curve with the pinch point located at 100 ppm.
 24

0.0035
Source Demand Curves with Pinch Point

0.003
Cumulative Mass Load (kg/s)
S4
0.0025

0.002
S3
0.0015 D4
D3
0.001
D2 S2 Pinch point = 100 ppm
0.0005 D1
S1
0
0 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000 6000 7000
Cumulative Flowrate (t/h)
Demand Water Source Water

Figure 3.2: Example of Source and Demand Curves (SDCC) with Pinch Point

Next, the energy match diagram (EMD) or heat surplus diagram was drawn
with temperature versus cumulative flowrate on the same graph as above.
Constructing the EMD into the SDCC allows the researchers to observe the energy
demands and stream matching scenarios during the design of water and energy
recovery network (Manan et al., 2009). The example of SDCC with EMD was shows
in the Figure 3.3 below.
 25

Source-Demand Composite Curve with Energy Match Diagram

0.0055 250
Below Pinch Above Pinch
0.005 D3 S3
Cumulative Mass Loading (kg/s)
0.0045 200
0.004

Temperature (oC)
0.0035 D1 S1
150
0.003
0.0025
D2 S2
100
0.002 S4
D4
0.0015
0.001 50
WW
FW Pinch
0.0005
point
0 0
0 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000 6000 7000
Cumulative Flowrate (kmol water/h)
Demand Water Source Water Demand T Source T

Figure 3.3: Example of Source Demand Curves with Energy Match Diagram

3.3.2.2 Constructing the Source and Demand Allocation Curve (SDAC)

Next, source and demand allocation curves (SDAC) were constructed based on EMD
by the source-demand streams matching process. SDAC was the graphical way to
present the results of stream matching processes or process integration in a certain
system. There were five rules adapted from Alwi and Manan (2008) and Savulescu et
al. (2005b) that need to be obeying in the stream matching processes in order to
construction the SDAC. The five rules were:

Rule 1: Zero contaminant demands must be satisfied first if there are no zero
mass load sources. The demand with concentration equal to 0 ppm has a value of
zero mass loading, consequently sources with zero mass load need to fulfil this
demand. If there are no other sources with zero mass load, fresh mass or freshwater
(FW) which is mass load is equal to zero is needed to fulfil the demand.
 26

Rule 2: All demand mass load and flowrate for below pinch region must be
satisfied (Wan Alwi and Manan, 2008). Consequently, there is no waste mass
available for below pinch region.

Rule 3: Connect the re-use mass source with the nearest temperature demand
(Savulescu et al., 2005b) but taking care of the mass load and flowrate constraint.
For example, if there are two mass sources at 30 oC and 70 oC respectively and one
demand at 35 oC, the mass source at 30oC is chosen since it has closer temperature to
the demand than the one at 70 oC.

Rule 4: For below pinch region, rule 1 to 3 can be used. After rule 1 to 3 have
been used, guided by the rules introduced by Wan Alwi and Manan (2008), flowrate
and mass load deficit rules can be used to satisfy other matches that cannot be
matched in terms of nearest temperature due to mass load constraints.

Rule 5: For above pinch region, use rules 3 and 4 only if the sources
concentration is below the demand concentration to ensure demand quantity are
satisfied and demand quality is still preserved. Unmatched sources will be discharged
as wastewater (WW).

Table 3.3: Example of Stream Matching/Process Integration Results

Temperature (oC) Cum.

Mass Cum.
Flowrate, F ∙ Cp Mass
Loading Inlet, Outlet, Flowrate
F (kg/s) kW/oC Loading
(mg/s) Tin Tout (kg/s)
(mg/s)
FW-D1 20 0 20 40 84 7.56 0
FW-D2 50 0 20 100 210 9.50 0
FW-D3 20 0 20 75 84 11.44 0
S1-D3 20 2000 40 75 84 15.76 2000
S2-D4 10 4000 100 50 42 20.08 6000
S2-WW 40 10000 100 30 168 21.38 16000
S3-WW 40 32000 75 30 168 25.26 48000
S4-WW 10 8000 50 30 42 33.91 56000
 27

0.0035
Source - Demand Allocation Curve with Energy Match Diagram 250

0.0030
Cumulative Mass Loading (kg/s)

S4 200

0.0025

Temperature (oC)
S3 150
0.0020

D4
S3
0.0015
100
D3 S2

0.0010 S1
D2 FW
50
0.0005 S2
D1
FW
S1
0.0000 0
FW
0 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000 6000 7000
Cumulative Flowrate (kmol water/h)
Demand Water Source Water Demand T Source T

Figure 3.4: Example of Source Demand Allocation Curves (SDAC) with Energy Match Diagram (EMD)
 28

3.3.3 Heat Data Extraction from EMD for Energy Targeting using Heat
Composite Curve (HCC)

Lastly, heat data are extracted from the EMD. Notice that in EMD, the sections
where demand temperature line located above the source temperature line indicate
that heating is required for the streams. Vice versa, the sections where demand
temperature line located below the source temperature line indicate cooling required
for the streams.

Heat composite curve is then constructed to target the potential recoverable

energy and minimum hot and cold utilities required in the system.

Heat Composite Curve

120
Minimum hot utilities, QHmin
100
Temparature,T (oC)

80

60
Cold
Potential Heat Recovery
40 Hot

20

Minimum cold utilities, QCmin

0
0 5000 10000 15000 20000 25000 30000
Enthalphy Change, ∆H (kW)

Figure 3.5: Example of Heat Composite Curve

 CHAPTER 4

4 RESULTS AND DISCUSSIONS

4.1 Data Extraction

In this project, a case from Ataei and Yoo (2009) was chosen to perform the
Superimposed Mass and Energy Curve (SMEC) method. The water using operation
system data obtained as shown in Table 4.1 below.

Table 4.1: Case Study - Water Using Operation Data (Ataei & Yoo, 2009)
Contaminant Temperature Limiting
Water
Operation Inlet Outlet Inlet Outlet Flowrate, F
(ppm) (ppm) (oC) (oC) (kg/s)
1 0 100 90 80 7.56

2 50 125 85 70 3.88

3 50 150 50 40 8.64

Applying the data extraction steps as introduced in Chapter 3 subsection 3.3.1,

the required data for further study of SMEC method were calculated and tabulated as
in Table 4.2 below. In the extracted table, demand is refer to the inlet whereas source
denotes as outlet. Take note that the freshwater (FW) is assumed to be at 20oC and
discharge wastewater (WW) is at 30oC.
 30

Table 4.2: Extracted Source and Demand Data from the Case Study
Cum. Enthalpy
Mass Cum.
Flowrate, Contaminant Temperature Mass Change,
Loading Flowrate
F (kg/s) (ppm) (oC) Loading ∆H (kW)
(mg/s) (kg/s)
(mg/s)
Demand
D1 7.56 0 90 0.00 7.56 0.00 2222.60

D2 3.88 50 85 194.04 11.44 194.04 1059.44

D3 8.64 50 50 432.17 20.08 626.21 1089.08

Source
S1 7.56 100 80 755.99 7.56 755.99 -1587.57
S2 3.88 125 70 485.09 11.44 1241.08 -651.96

S3 8.64 150 40 1296.52 20.08 2537.60 -363.03

4.2 Targeting of Heat and Mass Recovery Network Based on Heat

Constraints

4.2.1 Source and Demand Composite Curves (SDCC)

Figure 4.1 below shows the source and demand composite curve (SDCC) constructed
based on the extracted data from the Table 4.2 above.

5000.00
Source-Demand Composite Curve (SDCC)
Cumulative Mass Loading(mg/s)

4000.00

3000.00

2000.00 S3
S2
1000.00
S1 D3
D2
0.00 D1
0.00 5.00 10.00 15.00 20.00 25.00
Cumulative Flowrate(kg/s)
Demand Water Source Water

Figure 4.1: Source and Demand Composite Curve

 31

From the Figure 4.1 above, the source curve was moved horizontally towards
to the demand curve until a pinch point where it started to locate under the demand
water curve. Figure 4.2 below shows the water pinch point was located at 100 ppm.

Source-Demand Composite Curve with Pinch Point

5000.00
Cumulative Mass Loading(mg/s)

4000.00
Wastewater = 13.82 kg/s

3000.00

2000.00
S3

1000.00 S2
D3
D2 S1 Pinch Point = 100 ppm
D1
0.00
0.00 5.00 10.00 15.00 20.00 25.00 30.00 35.00 40.00
Cumulative Flowrate(kg/s)
Freshwater = 13.82 kg/s
Demand Water Source Water

Figure 4.2: Source and Demand Composite Curve with Pinch Point

Meanwhile, the freshwater flowrate and wastewater flowrate can be

determined from the Figure 4.2 as well. From the SDCC, 13.82 kg/s of freshwater
and wastewater were obtained. These values were useful for the streams allocation of
FW usage and WW discharge in the streams matching processes later. By this
method, the flowrate of freshwater and wastewater have been reduced from 20.08
kg/s to 13.82 kg/s, or 31.18 % respectively compare to the original requirement in
case study.
 32

4.2.2 Energy Match Diagram (EMD) on Source and Demand Composite

Curve (SDCC)

In this section, the energy match diagram (EMD) which was the plot of temperature
versus cumulative flowrate was constructed into the SDCC secondary vertical axis as
shown in Figure 4.3 below.

The area of rectangle formed where enclosed by the lines of source

temperature and demand temperature represents the amount of heat surplus or hear
deficit in the system by multiplying the area with water heat capacity, Cp. (Manan et
al., 2009)

From Figure 4.3 below, the area where enclosed by the demand temperature
line located above of source temperature line, heating was required in the system.
Vice versa, the area enclosed by source temperature line located at the demand
temperature line, cooling was required in the system. From the figure, the heating
amount required after this stage was 3582 kW and the cooling amount required was
1490 kW.
 33

Source-Demand Composite Curve with Energy Match Diagram

5000.00 100
D1 Below Pinch Above Pinch
4500.00 D2 90
S1
4000.00 80
Cumulative Mass Loading(mg/s)

3500.00 S2 70
Wastewater = 13.82 kg/s

Temperature (oC)
3000.00 Cooling 60
Heating
2500.00 50
D3 S3
S3
2000.00 40

1500.00 30
WW
1000.00 20 S2 20
FW
500.00 D3 10
Pinch Point = 100 ppm
D2 S1
D1
0.00 0
0.00 5.00 10.00 15.00 20.00 25.00 30.00 35.00 40.00
Cumulative Flowrate(kg/s)

Freshwater = 13.82 kg/s

Demand Water Source Water Demand-T Source T

Figure 4.3: Source and Demand Composite Curve with Energy Match Diagram
 34

4.2.3 Source and Demand Allocation Curve (SDAC)

As discussed in Chapter 3 section 3.3.2.2, there were five basic rules that need to be
obeyed in order to construct the Source and Demand Allocation Curve (SDAC).
These five rules provided a guideline to perform source and demand streams
matching process or process integration for the minimisation of mass and energy in
the system.

Firstly, by considered the first rule stated above, where zero contaminant
demands must be satisfied in priority, therefore Demand 1 (D1) with the demands of
zero contaminant was satisfied with freshwater (FW) with the flowrate of 7.56 kg/s.
Hence, D1 with the zero mass loading requirement was satisfied.

Next, obeyed the second rule, Demand 2 (D2) and Demand 3 (D3) which
were located at the below pinch region were chosen to be satisfied. D2 and D3 can
only be satisfied with the Source 1 (S1) since it was the only source that located at
the same below pinch region. By observed the EMD for S1 (80oC), D1 (50oC) and
D2 (85oC), according to third rule, S1 was chosen to feed into the D2 with flowrate
of 1.94kg/s to satisfy the mass loading (194.04 mg/s) of the D2. Take note that this
was a flowrate deficit case where the flowrate of D2 was not satisfied yet, therefore,
the remaining requirement flowrate of D2 was fed with another 1.94 kg/s of FW.

On the other hand, the remaining demand streams (D3) was chosen to be
satisfied. S1 was chosen to be fed into D3 since it was the only source available
located at the below pinch region. Hence, in order to satisfy the mass loading of D3
(432.17 mg/s), 4.32 kg/s of S1 was fed into D3. Note again, this was another flowrate
deficit case, therefore the remaining flowrate requirement was fed with FW with the
flowrate of 4.32 kg/s.

Lastly, by obeyed the fifth rule, the unmatched and remaining sources
streams were discharged as wastewater. Therefore, 1.38 kg/s of S1, 3.88 kg/s of S2
and 8.64 kg/s of S3 were discharged as wastewater. The results of streams matching
were shown in the Table 4.3 below:
 35

Table 4.3: Results of Source - Demand Streams Matching Process

Temperature (oC) Cum.

Mass Cum.
Flowrate, F ∙ Cp Mass
Loading Inlet, Outlet, Flowrate
F (kg/s) kW/oC Loading
(mg/s) Tin Tout (kg/s)
(mg/s)
FW-D1 7.56 0 20 90 31.75 7.56 0
FW-D2 1.94 0 20 85 8.15 9.50 0
S1-D2 1.94 194.04 80 85 8.15 11.44 194.04
FW-D3 4.32 0 20 50 18.15 15.76 194.04
S1-D3 4.32 432.17 80 50 18.15 20.08 626.21
S1-WW 1.30 129.82 80 30 5.45 21.38 756.03
S2-WW 3.88 485.09 70 30 16.30 25.26 1241.12
S3-WW 8.64 1296.52 40 30 36.30 33.91 2537.64

The Source and Demand Allocation Curve, Figure 4.4 below graphically
shows the results of streams matching and the EMD was constructed on order to
provide a great insight to the energy demand in the between the streams (Manan et
al., 2009).
 36

Source-Demand Allocation Curve with Energy Match Diagram

5000.00 100

4500.00 D1 90
D2
S1
4000.00 80
S1
Cumulative Mass Loading (mg/s)

S2
3500.00 70

Temperature (oC)
3000.00 Cooling = 1832 kW 60
Heating = 2793 kW
D3
2500.00 50
S3
S3
2000.00 Heating 40
=545 kW
1500.00 30
WW
1000.00 20
FW FW S2
S1
500.00 D3 10
S1
D1 D2 FW
0.00 FW
S1 0
FW
0.00 5.00 10.00 15.00 20.00 25.00 30.00 35.00 40.00
Cumulative Flowrate (kg/s)
Demand Water Source Water Demand T Source T

Figure 4.4: Source and Demand Allocation Curve with Energy Match Diagram
 37

Notice that from the results obtained above, the total FW flowrate required to
feed to S1 (7.56 kg/s), S2 (1.94 kg/s), and S3 (4.32 kg/s), and the total flowrate of
WW discharged(1.38 kg/s of S1, 3.88 kg/s of S2 and 8.64 kg/s of S3), were equal to
value of 13.82 kg/s respectively. Take note that these FW and WW flowrate were
obtained in the SDCC curve as discussed early in section 4.2.1. Therefore, it proved
that the streams matching process was correct and relevant to the SDCC obtained.

From Figure 4.4, the shaded area or the area enclosed by the demand
temperature line and source temperature line shows the heating and cooling energy
requirement for the system after the stream matching process. The total heating
energy was 3337.32 kW and cooling energy was 1832 kW. Notice that at this stage,
the energy required for the system for heating and cooling were solely produced by
the extra utilities such as steam and cooling water. The total energy that can be
recovered between the demand and source streams from the system will be discussed
in next section.

4.2.4 Energy Recovery Targeting by Heat Composite Curve

According to the existing plant in this case study, the amount of heat required for the
heating of freshwater from 20oC to respective demands temperature requirement is
4371.12 kW. Whereas the amount of heat that need to be removed from the sources
to the temperature of wastewater at 30oC is 2602.56 kW. These amounts of heat can
be reduced by the constructing of Heat Composite Curve (HCC) method (Linnhoff et
al. 1983).

Through this HCC method, the energy supplied from extra utilities will be
reduced significantly where the energy integration or energy targeting between the
source and demand streams was performed in this stage. As discussed in Chapter 3
section 3.3.3, in order to construct the HCC, heat data must be extracted from the
EMD in Figure 4.4 above. Table 4.4 below shows the extracted heat data from
system. Heat capacity, CP for water is assumed to be 4.2 kJ/kgoC.
 38

Table 4.4: Extracted Heat Data

Temperature (oC)
Flowrate, F F ∙ Cp Enthalpy Change
(kg/s) Inlet, Outlet, kW/oC kW
Tin Tout
FW-D1 7.56 20 90 31.75 2222.60
FW-D2 1.94 20 85 8.15 529.72
S1-D2 1.94 80 85 8.15 40.75
FW-D3 4.32 20 50 18.15 544.54
S1-D3 4.32 80 50 18.15 -544.54
S1-WW 1.3 80 30 5.45 -272.53
S2-WW 3.88 70 30 16.3 -651.96
S3-WW 8.64 40 30 36.3 -363.03

From the heat data in Table 4.4, HCC of the system can be constructed as
shown in Figure 4.5 below. HCC constructed shows that after the energy targeting or
energy integration process, the minimum heating utilities required were 1506 kW.
On the other hand, the minimum cooling utilities shown zero in the HCC, which
means no extra cooling utilities were required for cooling the streams after the
energy targeting process. The shaded area represents the potential recoverable energy
after the energy targeting process. The percentage of reduction in heating utilities
compare to the existing system is 65.55 %. On the other hand, since there is no extra
cooling utility after the integration, hence the percentage of reduction in cooling
utilities is 100 %.
 39

Heat Composite Curve

100
Minimum Hot Utilities, QHmin = 1506 kW
90

80

70
Temparature,T (oC)

60

50

40

30 Potential Source and Demand

Streams Heat Recovery
20

10

0
0 500 1000 1500 2000 2500 3000 3500 4000
Enthalphy Change, ∆H (kW)
Cold Stream Hot Stream

Figure 4.5: Heat Composite Curve

 40

4.3 Summary of the Water and Energy Recovery

Table 4.5: Percentage of Reduction of Utilities after SMEC Method

Existing Plant After SMEC Percentage of

Utilities Requirement Minimisation Reduction %

Freshwater 20.08 kg/s 13.82 kg/s 31.18 %

Wastewater 20.08 kg/s 13.82 kg/s 31.18 %
Heating 4371.12 kW 1506 kW 65.55 %
Cooling 2602.56 kW 0 kW 100 %

The table above summarised the comparison of freshwater, wastewater, heating and
cooling utilities usage before and after the SMEC method. By analysis on the results,
it proved that the SMEC provides an efficient tool for the utilities recovery in a
certain chemical plant. The percentage of reduction of all utilities in the system was
significant which led to more cost saving in the chemical plant.
 CHAPTER 5

5 CONCLUSION

The Superimposed Mass and Energy Curves (SMEC) method has been successfully
applied into the water using operation case study. This method provides a good
visualisation and user friendly tool for researchers to target the mass and energy
utilisation. Besides, the research gap in the previous minimisation method such as
poor insight through visualisation of system has been solved by this SMEC method.
After applying the SMEC method, the water consumption has been reduced by
31.17 %, hot utilities by 65.55 % and cold utilities by 100 %. Before the SMEC
method, the utilities in case study were solely produced by extra utilities. The great
reduction of the utilities will lead to the saving of the plant operating cost. Therefore,
a great achievement of minimisation of process utilities has been reach by the SMEC
method in this project.
 42

REFERENCES

Aly, S., Abeer, S., & Awad, M. (2005). A new systematic approach for water
network design. Clean Technologies and Environmental Policy. 3, 154-161.

Anantharaman, R., Abbas, O. S., & Gundersen, T. (2006). Energy level composite
curves—a new graphical methodology for the integration of energy intensive
processes. Applied Thermal Engineering , 26, 1378–1384.

Ataei, A., & Yoo, C. K. (2010). Simultaneous energy and water optimization in
multiple-contaminant systems with flowrate changes consideration. International
Journal of Environmental Research , 4, 11-26.

Bagajewicz, M., Rodera, H., & Savelski, M. (2002). Energy Efficient Water
Utilization Systems in Process Plants. . Computers and Chemical Engineering , 26,
59–79.

Bandyopadhyay, S., Malik, R. K., & Shenoy, U. V. (1998). Temperature–enthalpy

curve for energy targeting of distillation columns. . Computers and Chemical
Engineering , 12, 1733-1744.

Bogataj, M., & Bagajewicz, M. J. (2008). Synthesis of non-isothermal heat

integrated water networks in chemical processes. Computers and Chemical
Engineering , 32, 3130–3142.

Dhole, V. R., Ramchandani, N., Tainsh, R. A., & Wasilewski, M. (1996). Make your
process water pay for itself. Chemical Engineering , 103, 100-103.

Du, J., Meng, X., Du, H., Yu, H., Fan, X., & Yao, P. (2004). Optimal design of water
network with energy integration in process industries. Chinese Journal of
Chemical Engineering , 12, 247–255.

El-Halwagi, M. M. (2006). Process Integration. Amsterdam. Elsevier.

El-Halwagi, M. M. (1997). Pollution prevention through process integration.

Systematic Design Tools. California: Harcourt Brace & Company.
 43

El-Halwagi, M. M., & Almutlaq, A. (2004). An algebraic targeting approach to

resource conservation via material recycle/reuse. International Journal of
Environment and Pollution, In press .

El-Halwagi, M. M., Gabriel, F., & Harrel, D. (2003). Rigorous graphical targeting
for resource conservation via material reuse/recycle networks. Industrial and
Engineering Chemistry Research , 42, 4319–4328.

Foo, D. C., Kazantzib, V., El-Halwagi, M. M., & Manan, Z. A. (2006). Surplus
diagram and cascade analysis technique for targeting property-based material
reuse network. Chemical Engineering Science , 61, 2626–2642.

Fraser, D. M., Howe, M., Hugo, A., & Shenoy, U. (2005). Determination of mass
separating agent flows using the mass exchange grand composite curve. Chemical
Engineering Research and Design , 83, 1381–1390.

Hallale, N. (2002). A new graphical targeting method for water minimisation.

Advances in Environmental Research , 6, 377-390.

Hallale, N., & Fraser, D. (1998). Capital cost targets for mass exchange networks: A
special case, water minimisation. Chemical Engineering Science, , 53, 293-313.

Kralj, A. K., Glavic, P., & Kravanja, Z. (2005). Heat integration between processes,
integrated structure and MINLP model. Computers and Chemical Engineering ,
29, 1699–1711.

Kralj, A. K., Glavic, P., & Kravanja, Z. (2002). Waste heat integration between
processes. Applied Thermal Engineering , 22, 1259–1269.

Leewongtanawit, B., & Kim, J. (2008). Synthesis and optimisation of heat-integrated

multiple-contaminant water systems. Chemical Engineering and Processing , 27,
670–694.

Leewongtanawit, B., Kim, J. K., & Smith, R. (2004). Design and optimization of
combined water and energy systems. European Symposium on Computer-aided
Process Engineering , 14, 439–444.

Liao, Z., Jintao, W., Binbo, J., Jingdai, W., & Yongrong, Y. (2008). Design energy
efficient utilization systems allowing operation split. Chinese Journal of Chemical
Engineering , 1, 16-20.

Linnhoff, B., & Flower, J. R. (1978a). Synthesis of heat exchanger networks, Part I,
Systematic generation of energy optimal networks. AIChE J , 24, 633–642.

Linnhoff, B., & Flower, J. R. (1978a). Synthesis of heat exchanger networks, Part II,
Evolutionary generation of networks with various criteria of optimality. AIChE J ,
2, 642–654.
 44

Linnhoff, B., & Hindmarsh, E. (1983). The pinch design method of heat exchanger
networks. Chemical Engineering Science , 38, 745-763.

Linnhoff, B., & Vredeveld, D. R. (1984). Pinch technology has come of age.
Chemical Engineering Progress , 33-40.

Manan, Z. A., Tan, Y. L., & Foo, C. Y. (2004). Targeting the minimum water flow
rate using water cascade analysis technique. AIChE Journal , 50, 3169-3183.

Manan, Z. A., Tea, S. W., & Wan Alwi, S. R. (2009). A new technique for
simultaneous water and energy minimisation in process plant. Journal of
Chemical Engineering Research and Design , 87, 1509-1519.

Natural Resources Canada [NRCAN]: Pinch analysis for the efficient use. (2003).
Retrieved April 8, 2011, from www.nrcan.gc.ca

Nordman, R., & Berntsson, T. (2009a). Use of advanced composite curves for
assessing cost-effective HEN retrofit I, Theory and concepts,. Applied Thermal
Engineering , 29, 275–281.

Nordman, R., & Berntsson, T. (2009b). Use of advanced composite curves for
assessing cost-effective HEN retrofit II, Case studies,. Applied Thermal
Engineering , 29, 282-289.

Polley, G., & Polley, H. (2000). Design better water networks. Chemical
Engineering Progress , 96, 47–52.

Salama, A. (2006). Determination of the optimal heat energy targets in heat pinch
analysis using a geometry-based approach. Computers and Chemical Engineering ,
30, 758–764.

Salama, A. (2005). Optimal assignment of multiple utilities in heat exchange

networks. Applied Thermal Engineering , 29, 2633-2642.

Salama, A. (2005). Numerical techniques for determining heat energy targets in

pinch analysis. Computers and Chemical Engineering , 29, 1861–1866.

Savulescu, L. E., Sorin, M., & Smith, R. (2002). Direct and indirect heat transfer in
water network systems. Applied Thermal Engineering , 22, 981–988.

Savulescu, L., Kim, J. K., & Smith, R. (2005a). Studies on simultaneous energy and
water minimisation—part 1, systems with no water re-use. Chemical Engineering
Science , 60, 3279–3290.
 45

Savulescu, L., Kim, J., & Smith, R. (2005b). Studies on simultaneous energy and
water minimisation—part 2, systems with maximum re-use of water. Chemical
Engineering Science , 60, 3291–3308.

Sorin, M., & Savulescu, L. (2004). On minimization of the number of heat

exchangers in water networks. Heat Transfer Engineering , 25, 30–38.

Van Reisen, J. L., Polley, G. T., & Verheijen, P. J. (1998). Structural targeting for
heat integration retrofit. Applied Thermal Engineering , 18, 283-294.

Wan Alwi, S. R., & Manan, Z. A. (2008). Generic graphical technique for
simultaneous targeting and design of water networks. Industrial & Engineering
Chemical Resources , 47, 2762-2777.

Wan Alwi, S. R., Ismail, A., Manan, Z. A., & Handani, Z. B. (2010). A new
graphical approach for simultaneous mass and energy minimisation. Applied
Thermal Engineering , 31, 1021-1030.

Wang, Y. P., & Smith, R. (1994). Wastewater minimisation. Chemical Engineering

Science , 49, 981-1006.

Zhelev, T. K. (2005). Water conservation through energy management. Journal of

Cleaner Production , 13, 1395-1404.
 46

APPENDICES

APPENDIX A: Case Study