Show simple item record  

dc.contributor.authorTarighaleslami, Amir Hosseinen_NZ
dc.contributor.authorWalmsley, Timothy Gordonen_NZ
dc.contributor.authorAtkins, Martin Johnen_NZ
dc.contributor.authorWalmsley, Michael R.W.en_NZ
dc.contributor.authorNeale, James R.en_NZ
dc.date.accessioned2017-11-20T22:11:42Z
dc.date.available2017en_NZ
dc.date.available2017-11-20T22:11:42Z
dc.date.issued2017en_NZ
dc.identifier.citationTarighaleslami, A. H., Walmsley, T. G., Atkins, M. J., Walmsley, M. R. W., & Neale, J. R. (2017). A comparison of utility heat exchanger network synthesis for total site heat integration methods. Chemical Engineering Transactions, 61, 775–780. https://doi.org/10.3303/CET1761127en
dc.identifier.urihttps://hdl.handle.net/10289/11498
dc.description.abstractThis paper compares Utility Heat Exchanger Network (UEN) design between two Total Site Heat Integration (TSHI) methods, the Conventional Total Site Targeting method (CTST) and the recently developed Unified Total Site Targeting (UTST) method. A large Kraft Pulp Mill plant has been chosen as a case study. Total Site targets have been calculated using a Excel ™ targeting spreadsheet and networks have been designed with the help of Supertaget ™ for both the CTST and UTST methods. To achieve heat recovery and utility targets, both series and parallel utility heat exchanger matches for non-isothermal utilities are allowed in the CTST method, while series matches are allowed in the UTST method if the heat exchangers in series are from the same process. Series matches based on CTST method may create a dependency on two or more separate processes, which operational and control issues may occur, higher piping costs may be imposed, and utility target temperatures may not be achieved in the consecutive processes if one or more processes were to be out of service. Relaxation of the network can resolve these issues for the CTST method; however, if the relaxation occurs on the side of the utility loop that constrains heat recovery, the net heat recovery targets may not be achieved within the Total Site. The UTST method with its modified targeting procedure may offer slightly lower heat recovery targets but with simpler UEN design compared to CTST method are more realistic and achievable. Finally, after UEN design, non-isothermal utility loops need to be balanced in terms of mass and energy for both methods.en_NZ
dc.format.mimetypeapplication/pdf
dc.language.isoenen_NZ
dc.publisherAIDIC (Italian Association of Chemical Engineering)en_NZ
dc.rightsCopyright © 2017, AIDIC Servizi S.r.l.
dc.titleA comparison of utility heat exchanger network synthesis for total site heat integration methodsen_NZ
dc.typeJournal Article
dc.identifier.doi10.3303/CET1761127en_NZ
dc.relation.isPartOfChemical Engineering Transactionsen_NZ
pubs.begin-page775
pubs.elements-id208328
pubs.end-page780
pubs.publication-statusPublisheden_NZ
pubs.publisher-urlhttp://www.aidic.it/cet/17/61/programma.htmlen_NZ
pubs.volume61en_NZ
dc.identifier.eissn2283-9216en_NZ


Files in this item

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record