DESIGN AND SCHEDULING

OF BATCH PROCESSES
6.1 INTRODUCTION
6
While many chemicals are manufacLured in large scale continuous processes, it is a.lso the
case that chemicals are often manufactured in batch processes, especially if the produc-
tjon volumes arc f"dLher small. With the recent trend of huilding small flexibl e plants thal
are close to the markets of consumption, (here ha'\ fleen renewe-d interest in batch
processes.
Balch processes are used in the manufacture of specialty chemicals, pharmaceutical
products, food, and certain types of polymers (Reeve, 1992). Since commonly the produc-
tion volumes arc low, batch plants are often multiproduct facil ities in which the various
products share the same pieces of equi pment. Thi s requires that the production in these
pl ants be schedul ed. Specitically. one has to decide the order in which products will be
produced and the time allocation ror each of them. This in turn al so implies that at the de-
sign stage one has to anticipate how the production will be scheduled and thi s Ciln have a
largc economic impact as we will see in this chapter (see Reklaitis, 1990; Rippin, 1993).
The maj or objective in thi s chapter will be to introduce basic scheduling and design
concepts for batch processes. We will first describe a simple batch plant to introduce the
concepts of recipes and Gantt charts. We will then describe the m<\ior types of scheduling
policies and the computation of their cycle times. Next, we will present a preliminary de-
sign procedure for sizing and di scuss the major erred":; for invemories. Finally. alterna-
ti ves for the synthesis of these types of plams will be descri bed.
6.2 SINGLE PRODUCT BATCH PLANTS
Batch processes arc commonly used to manufacture specialty chemicals with relatively
short li fe cycles. For this reason a common solution is that the manufacturing will follow a
recipe specified by a set of processing tasks with fixed operating condi tions and li xcd pro-
180
Sec. 6.2 Single Product Batch Plants 181
cessing limes. Recipes are also common in the production of phannaceuticals and food
products because of regulatory requirements. There are cases, however, when operating
conditions and processing lengths can be modified, such as in the case of solvents. In this
chapter, for simplicity. we will restrict ourselves to the case of batch processes that arc spec-
ifi.ed through recipes. As we wi ll see, even under this simplification, the design is not en-
tirely lri vic, 1 due to the need of anticipating operati onal issues, mostly related to scheduling.
Figure 6.1 presents a simple example of a batch process for manufacturing a single
product. Note that it consisl, of four major pieces of equipmentthaL arc operated in batch
mode: reactor, mixing tank, centrifuge. tray dryer. The pumps and the cooler are equip-
ment that operate in semi-continuous mode. Initially we wjil assume that a singl c product
is produced. Thi s is accompli shed by performing the following tasks that correspond to
the recipe described below:
Proce,.,ing Recipe
1. Mix raw materials A and B. Heat to 80
a
C and react during 4 hours to form pro-
duct C.
2. Mix wiLh solvent D for 1 hour at ambient conditi ons.
3. Centrifuge to separate solid product C for 2 hours.
4. Dry in a tray for 1 hour at 60
a
C.
Note that each of the above tasks is performed in each of the four bateh equipment
of Figure 6.1. We can represent in a chart. denoted as a Gantt chan, the lime activities in-
volved at each stage of the processing as seen in Fi gure 6.2a. In Lhis chart we have shown
with thick lines the times for emptying and filling . Since these are commonly much
~
B
llf
0
=
A
~
A.B.C
Mixing
Reactor
lank
Siage 1
SIage2
FIGURE 6.1 Simple example of batch process.
Centrifuge
Siage 3
Solid C
Liquid
A.B.D
Tray dryer
Siage 4
182
Design and Scheduling of Batch Processes Chap. 6
shorter thun the processing times, we will neglect them, which then gives rise to the sim-
pler Ganll charl of Figure 6.2b.
Since we will manufacture many batches or lots, one of the first decisions we need
to make is whether we will use a non-overl apping or an overlapping operation as shown
in Figure 6.3. In the non-overlapping operalion, each batch is processed until the preced-
ing one is completed. In this way no two hatches are manufactured simultaneomly. In the
overlapping operation, on the other hand, we eliminate the idle times as much as possible,
which then leads to the simultaneous production of halchcs. For instance, after 7 hours,
Stage 1
Stage 2
Stage 3
Stage 4
Stage 1
Stage 2
Stage 3
Stage 4
Processing times
~ Transfertimes
4 hrs
1 hr
(a) Chart with transfer times
4 hrs
I
t 1 hr
---,
2 hr
t, __ 2_hr...,
, 1 hr
(b) Chart without transfer times
FGURE 6.2 Gantt charts lor plant in Figure 6.1.
1 hr
Time
Time
Sec. 6.2 Single Product Batch Plants 183
the first hatch has heen completed in the third stage, while the second balch has been
processed 75% of the time in stage I.
From Figure 6.3 it is clear that the overlapping mode of operation is more effi cient
because the idle times are greatly reduced. In fact, stage I has no idle time, it operates
without interruption. Also, what Figure 6.3b suggests is that stage I represents the bottle-
neck for manufacturing successive bat.ches.
The above observation c.an he quantified with the following definition of cycl e
time, CT,
CT=lr -t,
where and '.r are the initial and final times of each operating cycle. So, for instance, in
Figure 6.3a we have for each stage:
CT
I
= (H + 1, 1) - 1, 1 = 8 hours
CT, = (8 + Id - 1, 2 = 8 hours
CT
J
= (8 + I, )) - I,) = 8 hours
CT. = (8 + I, .) - I, . ) = 8 hours
where f l' j' ll"2' Is3' and '. .. 4 are the initial times at each stage. It is clear that all stages operate
with identical cycle times of 8 hours.
For the case of Figure 6.3b, the cycle times for each stage arc as follows:
CT
I
= (4 + t,tl - til = 4 hours
CT
2
= (4 + 1,2) - 1,2 = 4 hours
CT, = (4 + I,)l - I,) = 4 hours
CT, = (4 + 1'4l - 1,4 = 4 hours
Thus, the cycle time is 4 hours for all stages. [n thi s way for Figure 6.3a C1' = 8 hours im-
pli es every 8 hours a hatch is manufactured, while for Figure 6.3b with C1' = 4 hours, a
batch is completed every 4 hours.
From the above example, it cl earl y foll ows Ibat Ihe cycle times for a single product
pl ant are given in general as follows:
Cycle time operati on
(0. 1)
Cycle time overlapping operation
(6.2)
where is the processing time in stage j. The above equations can easily be verified with
our examples. It should also be mentioned that the scheduling term makespan correspondfi
to the total time required to produce a given number of batches. From Figure 6.3a it can be
seen that the makespan for producing two h::t tches is 16 hours; for Figure 6.3b it is 12 hours.
184
Slage 1
Slage 2
Slage 3
Slage 4
Slage 1
Stage 2
Stage 3
Slage 4
Design and Scheduling of Batch Processes
Cycle Time = 8 hrs
4 hfS
I
I ~
I
2 h'
I
b
4 hrs
I
I ' h,
--,
I
Makespan = 16 hrs
11m.
(a) Nonoverlapping operation
Cycle time = 4 hrs
... .
4 hrs
I
I 'hr
--,
I
I ~
I 2h,
l2!:.
I
Makespan = 12 hrs
(b) Overlapping operation
2 hr
Time
FIGURE 6.3 Nonoverlapping and overlapping modes of operation.
6.3 MULTIPLE PRODUCT BATCH PLANTS
Chap. 6
2 h'
When a batch process is used to manufacture two or more products, two major limiting
types of plants can arise: Il owshop plants in which all products require all stages following
the same sequence of operations, and jobshop plants where not all products require all
stages and/or t<)l1ow the same sequence (see Fi gure 6.4). Note that in Figure 6.4a all three
products follow the same processing sequence, whi le in Figure 6.4b the lhree products fol-
low different paths. The greater the similarity in the products being produced. the closer a
real plant wi ll approach a tlowshop. and vice versa-the more dissimilar, the more it will
approach a jobshop. 1t should also be noted that flowshop plants are often denoted as "mul-
tiproduct plants", while johshop plants are denoted as "multipurpose plants. "
Sec. 6.3 Multiple Product Batch Plants
1 : 1 2 1 :1 3 1 : 1 4 tE ~
(a) Flowshop plant
(b) Jobshop plant
FIGlJRE 6.4 rIowshop and jobshop plants.
A
B
C
185
Another important issue in flowshop plants is the type of production campaign that
is used for manufacturing a prcspecified number of batches for the various products. To
illustrate this point consider the manufacturing of three batches each of products A and B
in a plant consisting of two stages. The processing times are given in Table 6.1.
It should be noted that for the case of batch plants with mulliplc products, it is not
generally possible to ohtain closed form expressions for the cycle times.
As seen in Figure 6.5a, one option is to use single-product campaigns (SPC) in
which all batches of a given product arc manul"actured hefore switching to another prod-
uct. The other option, shown in Figure 6.5b, is to use mixed-product campaigns (MPC) in
which the various batches are produced according to some selected sequence (e.g.,
ABABAB). Note that the makespan for the campaign in Figure 6.5a is 29 hours. while for
Figure 6.5h it is 25 hours. The cycle time for the sequence AAABBB in Figure 6.5a is 25
hours; for ABABAB in Figure 6.5h it is 21 hours. This might suggest that mixed product
campaigns are more efficient. This might not necessarily be the case iF the cleanup times
or changeovers that might be needed are significant when switching from one product to
TABLE 6.1 Processing Times
for Two-Product Plant
(Processing Times, hrs)
A
B
Stage I
5
2
Stage 2
2
4
186 Design and Scheduling of Batch Processes Chap. 6
..
Cycle time = 25 hrs

5 5 5 2 2 2
Sfl
A
i
8
1
=1
~
2 2
1 2
1
4 4 4
- -
-
.. ..
Sf2
Makes an = 29 hrs
(a) Single product campaigns (SPC)
Time
Sf I
..
Cycle time = 21 hrs
2
5 2
Iii
2
Iii
A
1;"1
A Fai A Fa!
L..l..1
4
~ I
St2
4
I...l..I
4
.. ..
Makes an = 25 hrs
Time
(b) Mixed product campaigns (MPC)
FIGURE 6.5 Schedules for single and miJI.ed producl campaigns.
another. For instance, if in our example the cleanup times are all 1 hour, then it can be
seen in Figure 6.6 that the makespan is increased from 25 hours to 30 hours and the cycl e
time from 21 hours to 27 hours.
6.4 TRANSFER POLICIES
1n the previous section we have assumed that rbe balch at any stage would be transferred
immediatel y to the next stage. Thus, it i s known as zero- wait (ZW) transfer and is com-
monly used when no intermediate storage vessel is available or when it cannot be held
further inside the current vessel (e.g., due to chemical reaction). The 7.ero- wait Lransfer. as
it turns out , is the most restrictive policy. The opti on at the olher extreme is unlimited ill-
tmmediate storage (VIS) in which it is assumed that Lhe hatch can be stored without any
capacity limit in the storage vessel. Finall y, an intermediate transfer option is known as
no-intermediate storage (NlS). which ali ows the poss ibility of holding the material inside
the vessel.
To illustrate the effect of the various transfer polici es, consider a flowshop plant
consisting of three stages for producing products A and B. Let us assume we would like to
manufacture the same number of batches of each product using a sequence ABAB ... and
that the processing times arc as given in Tabl e 6. 2.
From Fi gure 6.7 it is easy to verify that the cycle times for each pair AB are as
foll ows:
Sec. 6.5 Parallel Units and Intermediate Storage 187
Cycle time = 27 hrs
5 2 5 2 5 2
Sil
F=F r-=r- F=F
A B A B A B
I
~ . ! l
4
~ ~ . 1
4
~ ~ l
4
-
-
) )
SI2
Makespan = 30 hrs
Time
IDiII Clean-up time
FIGURE 6.6 Effect of cleanup time on cycle time.
ZW: II hours
NIS: 10 hours
UIS: 9 hours
Thus, as we anticipated, the ZW transfer required the longest cycle time and UIS the
shortest. In practice, plants will normally have a mixture of the three transfer policies.
Finally, it is worth mentioning that the cycle time for VIS can be determined from
the following equation (see exercise 4):
CT[J1S:::c . ~ a x {in(t"ij
)-l..M i=l
(6.3)
where 'tU is the processing time of product i for stage j, n
i
is the number of batches for
product i, and M and N are the number of stages and products, respectively.
6.5 PARALLEL UNITS AND INTERMEDIATE STORAGE
In the previous section the examples have dealt with simple sequential flowshop plants
that involve one unit per stage. As we will see in this section. adding intennediate storage
tanks between stages or adding parallel units operating out of cycle can increase the effi-
ciency or equipment utilization.
TABLE 6.2 Processing Times for Example
on Transfer Policies (hrs)
A
B
Stage 1
6
3
Stage 2
4
2
Stage 3
3
2
188

Design and Scheduling of Batch Processes
Cycle time = 11 hrs

6 3 6
3
A
B
~
4 I 2
4
"I
3 2
(a) Zero-wait transfer
Cycle time = 10 hrs

6 3 6
3
A A
4 2 4
3 2
(b) No intermediate storage
Cycle time = 9 hrs
6 3 6
3
A
Bl
A
B
1
4 2 4
1
3 2
(c) Unlimited intermediate storage
3
I 2
"'I
3 2
2
3 2
2
1
2
F1GURE 6.7 Cycle times for various transfer policies.
Chap. 6
Sec. 6.5 Parallel Units and Intermediate Storage 189
St 1
12 12 12
- -
3 3 3
-
St 2
Time
FIGURE 6.8 Gantt chart for fermentation plant.
As an example, consider the fermentation plant in Figure 6.8 in which stage 1
(fennenter) takes J 2 hours compared to only 3 hours [or stage 2 (separation). For sim-
plicity, we assume zero-walt transfer and that the size of the batch in each stage is the
same (1000 kg).
It is clear that the cycle time for each batch in Figure 6.8 is 12 hours applying Eq.
(6.2). Since stage I is the bottleneck. we might consider adding a unit in parallel in that
stage. With this additional unit the plant can be operated as shown in Figure 6.9 in which
the cycle time has been reduced to 6 hours. The equation for cycle time with ZW transfer
and parallel units. NPj" j = I ... M. is the following.
CT = max { ~ . I NP.}
j=l..M I] }
(6.4)
Applied to our example in Figure 6.9, this leads to CT = max {12/2, 3) = 6 hours. Note
that if a large number of batches are to be produced, then to produce the same amount we
can reduce the batch size to 500 kg since the cycle time has been halved.
The other alternative in Figure 6.8 is to introduce intermediate storage between
stages. This has the effect of decoupling the two stages so that each stage can operate with
different cycle times and batch sizes. As seen in Figure 6.10, stage I has a cycle time of
t2
t2
St 1
II
12 12
3 3
3 3
St 2
- - - -
.. ..
Cycle time = 6
Time
FIGURE 6.9 Plant with parallel units in fermenter.
190 Design and Scheduling of Batch Processes Chap. 6
12 12
St 1
St 2
Time
FIGURE 6.10 Fcrmenlation plant with intermediate sLorage.
12 hours and handles batches of 1000 kg; stage 2 has a cycle time of 3 hours and handles
batches of 250 kg. Thus, for every batch in stage j, four batches can be processed in stage
2. In thi s case it is also easy to verify that the intermediate storage must hold up to three
batches (i.e., 750 kg) and !'hat all the idle times have been elimi nated.
6,6 SIZING OF VESSElS IN BATCH PLANTS
Wc will consider tJrst the equipment sizi ng for the case of si ngle product plants, and we
will illustrate !'he ideas fhrough an example problem.
Assume we have a two-stage plant and we want lo produce 500,000 Ib/yr. of prod-
uct C. The plant is assumed to operate 6000 hours per year. The reci pe for producing
product C is as follows:
1. Mix 1 Ib A, I Ib B, and react for 4 hours to form C, The yield is 40% in weight and
!'he density of the mixture, Pm' is 60 Ibm"
2, Add I Ib solvent and separate by centrifuge during I hour to recover 95% of prod-
uct C. The density of !'he mixture. Pm. is 65 Ib/ft
J
Figure 6. 11 shows all thc relevant elements for the mass balance according to !'he
above recipe. To perform the equipment sizing it is convenient to define size factors, Sj'
for each stage j:
Sj = vol ume vessel j requi red to produce 1 lb of final product.
Sec. 6.6
llbA
lib B
Sizing of Vessels in Batch Plants
1 Ib solv.
1.2 1b A.B
Reacti on Separation
O.8IbC
O.761b C
FIGURE 6.11 Mass balance information for batch plant.
2.241b
A.B. solv.
191
For our example. the specific volume for stage 1 is v = lip" = 0.0166 ft
3
/1b mix. In
this way we have
s, = 0.0166 ft3 2 lb mix
lb mix 0.761b prod

Ih prod
(6.5)
Similarly, for stage 2 the specific volume is v = 0.0153 ft.
3
/ Ib.mix, thus the size factor is
S2 = 0.0153 ft
3
3 lb mix 0.0604 (6.6)
Ib mix 0.76 Ih prod Ib prod
If we use one unit per stage and operate with zero- wait transfer, the cycle time from
Eq. (6.2) is:
CT= max [4, 1) = 4 hours (6.7)
Thi s. then, implies that the number of balehes to be processed in 6000 hours is
no. batches
6000 hrs.
4 hrs.lbateh
1500 batches
Since the product demand is 500,000 Ib, the batch size of the final product is
B = 500, 000 Ih 333 Ib
1500
We can then compute the volumes of the two vessels:
ft
3
VI = SI B = 0.0438- 333 Ib = 14.6 ft
3
Ib
ft
3
V
2
= S2 B = 0.0604 - 333 Ib = 20.1 ft
3
Ib
(6.8)
(6.9)
(6. 10)
Since the bottleneck is in stage 1, we might consider placing two units operating in paral-
lel out-of-phase. The cycle time from Eq. (6.4) is then:
192 Design and Scheduling of Batch Processes Chap. 6
CT= max {4/2, I} = 2 hours (6. 11 )
Thi s implies we can produce twice as many batchcs- 3000 each of 166 Ib, or half the
original hatch size. In this way the sizes are as follows:
(6. 12)
Although the total volume (24.6 ft
3
) is smaller than in the case of I unit per stage (34.7
ft)), we require a total of 3 vessels, 2 in stage I and I in stage 2. Depending on the cost
correlation we mayor may not achieve a reduction in the investment cost.
We will consider next the equipment sizing for the case of plants for multipl e prod-
ucts, and again use a simple example to illustrate the main ideas (see Flatz, 1980, for an
alternative treatment).
Let us consider a plant consisting of ~ w o stages thaL manufactures two products, A
and B. The demands are 500,000 Ib/yr. for A and 300,(XJO Ib/yr. for B, and the production
time considered is 6000 hours, Data on processing times, size factors, and cleanup times
are given in Table 6.3. In order to perform the sizing, we need to specify the production
schedule. There are many alternatives, some of which you will analyze in exerci se 5. Here
we will consider the simplest case, namely single product campaigns. Even here, how-
ever, we need to specify the lengO] of the production cycle. We wi ll select arbitrarily a
production cycle of 1000 hours (42 days), which impli es that over one year the cycle will
be repeated six times. The choice of length of cycle has implications for inventori es as we
will see in section 6.7.
From Figure 6.12 it is clear that the effective time for production in each cycle is
992 hours. The main question is how to allocate the production of A and B (i.e., selecting
t/l' tB in Figure 6.12) during this time horizon. A simple solution is to use as a heuristic the
same batch size for all products. The batch size Bi or product i is given by:
H = production i = production i
{ no. batches i l; I C7j
(6.13)
where {; and CT
i
are the total production time and cycle rime for each product, respec-
tively. The production of A and B in cach campaign is 5(XJ,OOO/6 = 83,333 Ih and
300,000/6 = 50,000 Ib, respectively. Appl ying the heuri stic of cquating the hatch sizes
and constrai ning the production times to 992 hours yields the two equations,
TABLE 6,3 Data for Sizing Two-Produl'l Plant
Processing Times (hr.) Size Factors (f[' lIb prod)
Stage 1 Stage 2 STage J Stage 2
A 8 3 0.08 O.OS
R 6 3 0.09 0.04
Cleanup times: 4 hours A to B, 8 to A
Sec. 6. 7 Inventories 193
~ 4 __ - - - - - - - - - " . ~ 4 ~ 4 __ - - - - - _ . ~ 4
1000 hrs
FIGURE 6.12 Ti me allocalion for production of A and B.
83,333 50,000
---=---
(6. 14)
whose solution is fA ;::: 6X4 hours, t8 = 30H hours, and hence BIJ :::: B
ll
:::: 974 lb. It is easy to
show that for N products the generalization to the above equations will lead to a system of
N linear equations (see exercise 6).
Given the bar_ch size we can then compute the requi red volumes For each product in
the two stage, (V
ij
= Sij Il ):
A
B
Stage 1
77.9
R7.7
Stage 2
48.7
39.0
Final1y. the largest volumes to be selected in each stage are given by:
v. = max W)
J i=l,N I)
with which VI = 87.7 ft
J
, V
2
= 48.7 ft J
6.7 INVENTORIES
(6.15)
An important issue in batch design and operation is the selection of the production cycle.
The main trade-off involved is the fraction of transition or cleanup times versus invento-
ries. The shorter the product ion cycle, the less inventory we need to carry since produ(;ts
are available more frequentl y, but the f raction of the transitions becomes greater: con-
versely, the longer the production cycle, the smaller thc fraction of transitions. However,
in this ease inventories will increase because products are produced less frequently.
r n the examp1e of the previous secti on we can detennine the inventory profiles as
shown in Figure 6.13. The details are as foll ows.
194 Design and Scheduling of Batch Processes
Accum (Ib)
A
26334
684
FIGURE 6.13 Tnventory profile for product A.
The demand rates of the two products arc Ihe following:
d
A
= 83,333/1000 = 83.3 Ib/hr.
dB = 50,000/1000 = 50 Ihlhr.
while the production rates are:
P
A
= 83,333 = 12J.8 Ihlhr.
684
P = 50,000 = 162.3 Ih/hr.
A 308
The inventory prollie of A can then be obtained as follows:
time (hrs)
I. 0- 6S4 hrs. Accumulation rate = PA - d
A
= 121. 8 - 83.3 = 38.5 Ib/yr.
2. 684-1 ,000 hrs. Depletion rate = -d
A
= - 83.3Ib/hr.
Chap. 6
1000
(6.16)
(6.17)
Fi gure 6.13 shows thi s profile. For product B the procedure is similar (accumulation:
688 - 996 hrs; depletion: 996 - 688 h".) and the corresponding profile is shown in Fi g-
ure 6. 14.
The annual inventory cost can he calculated hy determining the average inventory
and knowing the corresponding unit cost. The average inventory is given by calculating
the areas under the curve in Figures 6.13 and 6.14 and dividing them by the lengLh of Lhe
production cycle, 1000 hours. The average inventory of product A is:
I = 1000 (26334) = 13 167 Ib
A 2 (1000) ,
(6.1 X)
while the average inventory of producL B is:
Sec. 6.8 Synthesis of Flowshop Plants
Accum (Ib)
B
34598
688
FIGURE 6.14 Inventory profile product B.
I - 1000 (34600) 17 300 Ib
B- 2(1000) .'
If the inventory cost is $1.25/lb yr. the total inventory cost is:
C
inv
= 1.25 (13.167 + 17.300)
= $38.084/yr
195
1000
time (hrs)
(6.19)
(6.20)
The main variable affecting this cost is often the length of the production cycle (sec
exercise 5).
6.8 SYNTHESIS OF FLOWSHOP PLANTS
Having introduced the main concepts involved in the scheduling and sizing of batch
processes, we will outline in this section some of the major alternatives that must be gener-
ated and evaluated at the synthesis stage of the design. For most problems the number of al-
ternatives is very large. Since the economic trade-offs for most of the alternatives are gener-
ally complex, there is a need to resort to systematic optimization approaches such as those
given in Chapter 22. Here we wi11limit ourselves to discussing the alternatives for flowshop
plants. For a more comprehensive treatment of this topic see Yeh and Reklaitis (1987).
For the economic evaluation of the alternatives and their comparison the net present
value NPV is used (see Chapter 5) and given as follows:
NPV = -CI + (R - CO - Cinv)(l - Ix) I (I - (I + i)")li]
+ (Clln)tx[(1- (1 + i)")li] + sCII(1 + i)n
(6.21)
where R is the annual revenue of the products, CI the investment cost, CO is the operating
cost, C
inv
the inventory cost, i the interest rate, n the length of the project life, Ix the tax
rate and s the fraction of investment for salvage value. Note that since the amounts to be
produced are specified and the production is performed by a recipe, the revenue R and the
196 Design and Scheduling of Batch Processes Chap. 6
operating cost CO are constant. Therefore, jf the only objective is to compare ahemalives
there is no need to evaluate these terms.
The three major decision levels and their corresponding ilems are Ihe following:
1. Slruclural leve!
8. Assignments of tasks to equi pment
b. Number of parallel units or intermediate storage
2. Sizi ng level
Equipment sizing
3. Scheduling level
a. Nature of production campaigns, transfer policies
b. Length of production cycles
c. Sequencing of products
At the structural level the assignment of tasks to equipmem is one of the decisions
that can have the greatest impact in the scheduling and economics. To illustrate thi s point,
Mixer
Carbon Steel
Stage 1
Stage 2
Slage 3
Stage 4
2
Reactor
Carbon Steel
4
Mixer
Carbon Steel
I 1
---,
Cycle time = 4 hrs 4 units
2
Reactor
Stainless Steel
Time (hrs)
FIGURE 6.15 Design alternative with assignment of one equipment to each
task.
Sec. 6.8 Synthesis of Flowshop Plants 197
consider as an example the case of a single product batch process that involves the follow-
ing four processing tasks:
Task 1:
Task 2:
Task 3:
Task 4:
Mixing, 2 hours
Reaction, 4 hours
Mixing, 1 hour
Reaction. 2 hours
The simplest altcmati vc is to assign each task to one processing equipment as shown in
Figure 6.15. Note that the two mixing tasks take place in simple vessels with an agitator.
while the reactions take place in jacketed vessels. Also, except for the second reactor,
which must be made of stainless steel, the three remaining units are made of carbon steel.
As seen in Figure 6.15, the cycle time is 4 hours assuming zero wait transfer.
A ~ t : c o n d allernative is to assign tasks 3 and 4 to one single piece of equipment,
namely to the stainless steel reactor as shown in Figure 6.16. Note that in this alternative
the cycle time remains unchanged in 4 hours despite the fact that we have eliminated one
piece of equipment. This altemative is clearly superior to the one in Figure 6.15. Thus, a
simple design guideline that we can postulate is: "Merge adjacent tasks whose sum of
processing times docs not exceed the cycle time."
Finally. a third alternative that we can consider is shown in Figure 6.17. All tasks
have been merged in one pierce of cquipmcnt-the jacketed stainless steel vessel that can
Mixer
Carbon Steel
Stage 1
Stage 2
Stage 3
2
Reactor
Carbon Steel
4
Cycle time = 4 hrs 3 units
Mixer/Reactor
Stainless Steel
3
Time (hrs)
FIGURE 6.16 Design alternatjve with merging of tasks 3 and 4.
198
Stage 1
Design and Scheduling of Batch Processes
MixerlReactor/MixerlReactor
Stainless Steel
9
Cycle time =:; 9 hrs 1 unit
Time (hrs)
FIGURE 6.17 Design alternative with complete merging of all tasks.
Chap. 6
perf 01111 the four tasks. The trade-off here is that whil e we only require one unit, the cycle
Lime increases to 12 hours, and thus a much larger stai nl ess steel vessel is required.
It should be noted that in some cases mergi ng of tasks requires new equipment to
meet the materials of constnIction requirement :Ul d to peltorm all the required functions.
For instance, if one task requires a jacketed i,;arhnn steel and the other task a simple stain-
less steel vessel, the merged tasks require ajacketed stainl ess steel vesseL
The other major structural deci sion is the assignment of intermediate storage be-
tween stages and the selection of number of units in parallel. As was shown in section 6.5,
these decisions also commonly have a great impact in the scheduli ng. The choice of inter-
mediate storage is usually dictated by feas ibility of keeping intermediate material in stor-
age. This altemmive tends to be favored whenever there is a stage with a much larger pro-
cessing time (see Figure 6.8). The alternati ve for placing parallel units operating out of
phase is favored when there is a requiremenr for mai ntaining hatch integriLy. Generally,
the trade-off here is a smaller number of bigger pieces of equipment versus a larger nulU-
hcr of smaller pieces.
The sizing outlined in section 6.6 is used as a heuri sti c to select the same batch size
for all products. It should be noted that the more the site factors differ between product"
the worse this heuristic sizing becomes.
Finally, the scheduling level involves deciding the type of campaign (single prod-
ucts vcrsus mixed product), the transfer policy (ZW, NlS, or UlS), the length of the pro-
duction cycle, and the sequencing of the products. J r cleanup or transition times are large,
single product campaigns are favored; otherwi se, the reverse is true. Also, a very useful
aid here are the Gantt charts, since they clearly indicate the extent to which idle times arc
Exercises 199
present in a proposed schedule for a given design. However, lhe choice of the length of
the production cycle requires detailed evaluation and optimization.
REFERENCES
Ratz, W. (1980). Equipment sizing multiproduct planl. Chemical Engineering, 87(6.4),
71.
Reeve, A. (1992). Batch control , lhc recipe for success? Process Engineerinli, 73(6.1), 33.
Reklaitis, G. V. (1990). Progress and issues ill computer-aided batch process design.
FOCAPD Proceedings, Elsevier, New York, 275.
Rippin, D. W. T. (1993). Batch process systems engineering: A retrospecti ve and
prospective review. Computers Chern. Engng., 17. Suppl. , SI-S13.
Yeh, N. c., & Reklaitis, G. V. (1987). Synthesis and sizing of batchlsemicontinuous
processes. Computers Chem. Enling., 11, 639.
EXERCISES
1. A given batch plant produccs one singl e product for which stage I requires 8
hours/batch; slage 2, 4 hours per batch; and stage 3, 7 hours per hatch. If zero- wait
transfer is used, whaL is the cycle time? How m.my parallel units should be pl aced
in each stage to reduce the cycle time to 4 hours?
2. Given the processing times for three products A, B, C, below, detennine with a
Gantt charI the makespan and cycle lime for manufacturing two batches of A, 1 of
B, and I of C for the foll owi ng cases:
a. Zero-wait policy with sequence AABe and sequence BAAC.
b. Same as (a) bUI wilh no intermediate storage policy (NlS).
c. Same as (a) but with unlimited intermediate storage policy (UIS).
Process ing Times (hr)
5wge I STage 2 Stage 3
A 5 4 3
B 3 3
C 4 3 2
Zero clettnup limes.
3. Given is a product A that. is to be manufactured in four processing stages. Detennine
with a Gantt chart the makespan and cycle time for the manufacturing of three
batches of A for the foll owing cases:
3. Zero-wait policy with onc unit per stage.
200
Design and Scheduling of Batch Processes Chap. 6
b. Zero-wait policy with two parallel units in stage 3 and one unit in stages 1,2.4.
c. Zero-wait policy with one unit per stage but with merging of tasks in stages 1
and 2.
Processing t i m ~ s (hr)
Stage 1 Sta!?e 2 Stage 3 Stage 4
A 4 3 6 2
4. Derive Eq. (6.3) for the cycle time for a jobshop plant consisting of one unit per
stage and with unlimited intermediate storage (UlS) transfer.
5. For the example given in section 6.6 and Table 6.3, compute the size of the two ves-
sels and the average inventories for the following lengths of produc.:tion (,;ydcs: (a)
50 hrs, (b) 500 hrs, (c) 2000 hrs.
6. Show that the time allocation t;, for N products, J = I, 2, .. , N, in single product
campaigns can be determined through a system of N linear equations in N un-
knowns t;, assuming the same batch size is used for all products (see Eqs. (6. 13) ,md
(6.14, and that the production requirements and cycle times are given for each
product i.
7. Determine the size of the vessels of a multiproduct batch plant that consists of three
stages ror manufacturing products A and B. Only one vessel is to be used in each
stage. Consider the two following cases:
a. Production cycles of 500 hIS consi sting of two campaigns: one [or A and one
for B.
b. Cycli c sequence of production AABAABAAB ..
Data
Demands: A:
B:
Hori zon time =
600,000 kg/yr
300,000 kglyr
6000 hrs
A
B
A
B
Processing Times (hr)
Stage I
4
3
Stage 2
2
2
Size factors (kg)
Stage I
2
1.S
Stage 2
5
6
Stage 3
3
5
Stage 3
3
2
Note: Assume that both products have
the same batch siLeo
Exercises
201
8. Consider a flowshop plant that is to be designed for manufacturing [our dif-
ferent products. Data on demands, processing times, and other parameters arc
gi ven below.
a. Determine the design and its net present value for the case that each task is as-
signed to a separate unit, and the plant 1S operated with 8 cycles during the year
using single-product campaigns with zero-wait transfer.
h. Propose a design that can improve the net present value of the alternative in (a).
Data
Product Demands (kg/yr)
A
B
C
D
400,000
200,000
200,000
600,000
Net profit ($/kg)*
0.60
0.65
0.70
0.55
* Accounts for raw material cost, processing cost
ami indirect costs. Does not account for inventory.
Operating time per year:::;:: 8000 hrs
Product cannot be held in inventOlY for more than 90 days.
lnvcntory cost = $2.40/kg per yr
Interest Rate: 10%
Tax rate: 45%
Service Life: 10 years
Depreciation: Straight line with no salvage value
Production Recipe
The four products require the following processing steps:
Step 1. ReaClion.
Mix solutions FI and Fl, and heat at 40C. Solution ,.,3 is formed with x
weight percentage of product.
Equipment Stainless steel jacketed vessel with agitator
Storage not allowed
Step 2. Recovery of product with solvent.
Mix F3 and solvent F4 in equal volume for 30 minutes to recover product
from F3. Mixture is allowed to settle for 2 hours to fonn F3 and F4 phases. F3
phase is drained (F5) and sent to wastewater treatment. 95% of product is recovered
in phase F4 (stream F6).
202
Design and Scheduling of Batch Processes
Equjpment: Stainless steel vessel with agitator.
Storage allowed
Step 3. Purification of solvem with water.
Chap. 6
Mix F6 wilh 2.5 volume of water (F7) for 20 minutes. Mixture is allowed to
settle for 90 minutes 10 form F6 and water phases. Water phase is drained (F8) and
sent to wastewater treatment. 98% of product is recovered in phase F6 (stream F9).
Equipment: Cast iron vessel with agitator.
Storage allowed
Step 4. Crystallization.
F9 is cooled to 15C. The mixture is aged for a specified length of time giv-
ing a slurry of product crystals with 95% recovery.
Equipment: Cast iron jacketed vessel with agitator.
Storage not allowed
Step 5. Centrifuge.
The slurry FlO is centrifuged for 50 minutes to give a solution with y%
weight of product. The liquid Fll is sent to a solvent recovery unit.
Equipment: Automatic basket centrifuge.
Specific data .for each product
Addition of solulion 1'2 (kg) for I kg of F1.
A
0.4
B
0.6
C
0.7
D
0.5
Weight % (x) of product formed in step I.
A BC D
B 9 ~ 5 7
Weight % (y) of product in final solutioll.
ABC D
45 38 55 42
The following densities can be assumed to be the same for the manufacturing of the
four products.
Specific gravity (kg/L)
Fl 0.8
F2 1.0
F4 0.7
F7 1.0
Exercises
Processing times (hrs)
Step I Reaction
A B
4.5 5.5
C
3.75
Step 4. Crystallization
D
7.25
ABC D
3.75 1.5 5.75 8.5
Cleanup Times
203
It is assumed that they are the same for each piece or equipment. However, cleanup
times depend on the scquence of products according to the following (time in hrs):
A B C D
A 0 0.2 0.5 2
B 0.2 0 0.5 2
C 0.5 0.5 a 0.5
D 2 2 0.5 0
Equipment Cost:
Cost = Fixed charge + a*(Volume)**b
Equipment
Fixed chargerS) a($) b
Min size = 2000 liters, Max size = 20,000 liters, increments 2000 liters
Stainless stecl
jacketed/agitator 105,000 650 0.6
Stainless steel
agitator
82,000
550 0.6
Cast iron
jacketed/agitator
65,000 350 0.6
Cast iron
agitator 48,000 2XO 0.6
Min size = 3000 liters, Max size = 15,000 liters, increments 3000 liters
Centrifuge 150,000 350 0.8
Min size = 1000 liters, Max size = 10,000 liters, increments 1000 liters
Cast iron storage vessel 22,000 120 0.6
Stainless steel storage vessel 35,000
120 0.6