Beruflich Dokumente
Kultur Dokumente
A new approach for the optimal design of mixed refrigerant cycles is presented. It is based on mathematical
programming and offers significant improvements in relation to previous approaches. It includes multistage
refrigerant compression, full enforcement of the minimum temperature difference in heat exchangers,
simultaneous optimization of variables, consideration of capital costs, and the use of stochastic optimization
(genetic algorithm) to overcome local optima. The approach can be applied to either single mixed refrigerant
cycles or to systems consisting of two of these in cascade. The effectiveness of the method is illustrated by
revisiting previously published liquified natural gas case studies, for which better and feasible solutions are
produced, and which prove the importance of considering multistage compression and capital costs during
optimization. The application of genetic algorithms in the design of mixed refrigerant cycles permits a greater
confidence in the optimality of the results.
Figure 2. A MR cycle.
before expanding, allowing the cold refrigerant to reach a lower equipment. This process is known as the Pritchard cycle and is
temperature and/or a lower vapor fraction after the expansion. described in more detail by Walsh.1
Such a benefit is achieved at the expense of a higher heat transfer Repeated partial condensation and separation of the refrigerant
area, since the total duty in the heat exchanger increases stream has been reported to achieve a better match between the
significantly. A multistream heat exchanger can be used to temperature profiles.2 However, this should not be taken as a
handle all hot streams and the cold stream in a single piece of general rule. Figure 4 shows a MR cycle with three refrigeration
Ind. Eng. Chem. Res., Vol. 47, No. 22, 2008 8727
stages, as an extension of Figure 3a. Although increasing the intermediate temperatures were not addressed, neither was
number of stages may reduce the power consumption, the design cascading heat to a different refrigeration cycle.
also grows in complexity and probably in capital cost. This Lee4 (part of this work was also published as Lee et al.5)
results in an important tradeoff for designers. worked on the optimal design of multistage MR cycles. Given
2.3. Multistage Compression. As compressors used in a refrigeration task in the form of a hot composite curve (a
industry have a practical maximum stage pressure ratio of combined temperature-enthalpy profile of all hot streams) and
around 4-5, it is very common to find compression tasks the number of refrigeration stages, his approach allows for the
performed in multiple stages. Further, if there is an appropriate optimization of key variables in a process flowsheet of the type
cold utility, the partially compressed gas originating from a given shown in Figure 4. In principle, the optimization variables are
stage may be cooled down before entering the next compression the refrigerant composition and flowrate (at compressor inlet),
stage (intercooling). The lower temperature of the partially the compressor inlet and outlet pressures, and the intermediate
compressed gas reduces the volumetric flowrate and in conse- temperatures (at which refrigerant is separated into vapor and
quence reduces the compression power of the next stage. If part liquid streams). However, the decision variables are not
of the gas condenses, then it is necessary to remove the liquid optimized simultaneously. Instead, the refrigerant compositions
so that a dry vapor stream enters the next compression stage. are optimized at fixed refrigerant flowrate and pressures using
The liquid removed is then pumped and mixed with the fully nonlinear programming (NLP). Once the optimal composition
compressed gas and with any liquid streams from other is obtained, the hot and cold temperature profiles are checked
intercoolers at the outlet of the last compression stage at same for feasibility. If they do not cross, then new refrigerant flowrate
pressure. Condensate removal and pumping also helps in saving and pressures are proposed on the basis of heuristics, judgment,
power, as increasing the pressure of liquids is much cheaper in or optimization. And the procedure is repeated until no further
power (and capital) than doing so with gases. improvementispossiblewithoutincurringtemperatureinfeasibilities.
Lee4 also used three different types of objective function.
3. Literature Review Two of them tried to match the temperature profile of the cold
refrigerant to an ideal profile (the hot composite curve shifted
Although there are many publications on the analysis of MR down by Tmin) by minimizing either the maximum violation
systems, only a few exist on their optimal design using of the minimum temperature difference or the sum of such
mathematical programming. The earliest attempt to optimize violations along the profile. The third possible objective function
these systems in a systematic manner was carried out by Ait- was the minimization of compressor power, but its use was not
Ali.3 This work tackled the optimization of an MR system with recommended until the final part of the overall optimization.
the same configuration as a two-level pure refrigerant system. That is because, since there is no constraint on the vapor fraction
The focus was largely on minimizing total compression power at the inlet of the compressor, it is less likely to have wetness
by trying to enforce a constant temperature difference through at the compressor inlet toward the end of the overall optimization
the cryogenic heat exchangers. Although rich in practical due to a probable lower value of the refrigerant flowrate.
considerations and insights relevant to LNG production, refrig- The design of MR cycles is a highly nonlinear problem with
erant pressures and flowrates were not the result of optimization, many local optima. One of the main drawbacks of Lees
but rather set heuristically. Different solution procedures were approach is that the nonsimultaneous optimization of variables
required depending on the number of components present in coupled with the dependence of the final solution on the initial
the refrigerant. Also, to handle the complexity of the problem, guess, on the nonsystematic selection of refrigerant flowrate and
only binary and tertiary mixtures were considered and the pressures (especially if updated using heuristics or judgment)
thermodynamic accuracy had to be sacrificed by using an and on the switching of the objective function, makes reaching
equation of state based on ideal solution assumptions and the global optimal solution (or a good near-optimal solution,
Raoults law for vapor-liquid equilibrium, which restrict the for practical purposes) very unlikely.
validity of the numerical results to low pressure and warm In Lees method, the minimum temperature difference
temperature conditions. The optimization method was limited between the hot and cold temperature profiles is not fully
to a two-dimensional numerical search. Refrigerant subcooling enforced, which often leads to very tight profiles, apart from
and separation of liquid and vapor refrigerant streams at relying on human intervention at each iteration to check for
8728 Ind. Eng. Chem. Res., Vol. 47, No. 22, 2008
temperature feasibility. It is assumed that the refrigerant robust procedure for the optimal design of low temperature
compression takes place in one stage with no intercooling, processes is proposed in the next section.
regardless of the compression ratio. No capital costs are
considered during the optimization procedure. 4. Design and Optimization Frameworks
Lee4 also explored the synthesis of more complex systems
Figure 6 shows a generic multistage MR cycle and a
such as MR cycles in cascade with pure refrigerant cycles. In
multistage compression system with intercooling, indicating
his approach, although the partition temperature between the
some of the nomenclature used in the formulation. Variables
two cycles was subject to optimization, each cycle was
for the hypothetical refrigeration stage 0 and compression stage
optimized separately to minimize compression power for an
0 were included in order to simplify the formulation. Also, for
assumed value of partition temperature. The partition temper-
the sake of a compact formulation, some calculations are not
ature was then iterated manually in an outer loop until the total described explicitly. These are represented as functions of the
power was considered optimal. Again, this nonsimultaneous, type f(x1,..., xN) and are mainly routine physical property
nonsystematic optimization of variables is likely to lead to calculations (e.g., enthalpy for a given set of compositions,
nonoptimal solutions, as discussed before. temperature, and pressure) and temperature profile operations.
Another relevant precedent in the synthesis of multistage It is assumed that all hot streams leaving each multistream heat
MR cycles is that by Vaidyaraman and Maranas,6 which is exchanger are at the same temperature.
also based on NLP. The cycle topology used by them is the Objective Function. Equation 1 represents the objective
one shown in Figure 5a. Although in principle it may look function as a generic function of the main process variables.
very different, it is just a slight variation of the type of This objective function may well change from case to case
structure in Figure 4, only that the liquid refrigerant stream according to the purpose of the designer (e.g., minimum
is not subcooled after each flash step, as shown in Figure 5b compressor power, minimum capital investment, minimum total
as an alternative representation. The variables being opti- cost, etc.) and to the economic models used.
mized in this case were the refrigerant composition (at the
OBJECTIVE )
stream being expanded in the last stage), the compressor inlet
and outlet pressures and the vapor fraction at flash drums 2 OBJ(WC, QCMP, THCOMP, HHCOMP, TCCOMP, HCCOMP, ...) (1)
to N. All the design variables (each with a fixed number of Stage Material and Energy Balances. Equations 2-7
stages) were optimized simultaneously. establish the relationship between the total flows of the streams
Two key assumptions were made by Vaidyaraman and around the system. Equations 2-4 describe the continuity of
Maranas.6 The first one was that the hot refrigerant leaving stage vapor and liquid hot refrigerant stream flows from stage to stage.
N was at its bubble point, and the second one was that the cold The hot vapor refrigerant stream is made unavailable at the NRth
refrigerant streams leaving each stage were at their dew point. stage because of the inexistence of a flash drum at stage NR-1
These assumptions, although not unreasonable, constrain the (eq 5). All the material arriving to stage NR from stage NR -1
solution space unnecessarily and could lead to good opportuni- is put through the hot refrigerant liquid stream for formulation
ties missed by the optimizer. Another major shortcoming of the purposes, although part of it might not be in the liquid state.
method proposed is that temperature feasibility is only enforced Equations 6 and 7 represent the material balance of the mixers.
at the ends of the heat exchangers. This opens the possibility Fn ) FVn + FLn (2)
of not only minimum temperature difference violations but also
of temperature crossovers being overlooked during the optimi- Fn ) FVn-1 (3)
zation. Although the authors suggest that, if violated, feasibility FVn ) VF(Yn-1, TIn-1, PHn-1
OUT
) n e NR - 1 (4)
might be regained after the optimization by correcting the
refrigerant pressures, doing so could lead the solution to lose FVNR ) 0 (5)
its optimality.
FCn ) FLn + FCn+1 n e NR - 1 (6)
As in Lee,4 Vaidyaraman and Maranas6 assumed single stage
compression without intercooling and did not consider capital FCNR ) FNR (7)
costs. However, they made a further effort in trying to overcome
Vapor and liquid compositions are obtained from phase
local optima by performing a number of optimizations with
equilibrium calculations at each flash drum (eq 8 and 9) although
different starting points. The effect of refrigerant pressure drops
in practice the vapor and liquid compositions are obtained
was not covered in their formulation. simultaneously from a single flash subroutine. The composition
In overall, the review of previous work on MR systems of the only hot refrigerant stream in stage NR must be the same
reveals a quite significant potential for improvement. An ideal as that of the hot vapor refrigerant at the previous stage (eq
design approach would be one that combines (a) flexibility 10). Equation 11 states that the total composition of the cold
to handle flowsheet options such as multiple refrigeration refrigerant at each stage is the same as that of the hot vapor
stages, refrigerant subcooling, and cascade systems, (b) refrigerant at the previous stage and is derived from component
energy-efficient features, such as multistage compression, (c) balances carried out around the first n - 1 stages as a group.
a systematic optimization framework powerful enough to
exploit the relevant degrees of freedom and to overcome the Yn ) ZVAP(Yn-1, TIn-1, PHn-1
OUT
) (8)
challenges of a highly nonlinear problem, (d) no assumptions
on the thermodynamic state of refrigerant streams just for Xn ) ZLIQ(Yn-1, TIn-1, PHn-1
OUT
) n e NR - 1 (9)
the sake of a simplified calculation procedure, (e) full XNR ) YNR-1 (10)
feasibility enforcement, and (f) the cost consequences of the
Zn ) Yn-1 (11)
design decisions. A design approach like this is not yet
available in the open literature, and in order to overcome The heat removed from hot refrigerant streams at each stage
shortcomings addressed in above, a novel, systematic and is calculated in eq 12 and 13. The initial and final values of the
Ind. Eng. Chem. Res., Vol. 47, No. 22, 2008 8729
IN
vector of intermediate temperatures (TI) are set to TR and at the inlet of stage NR, the inlet cold refrigerant temperature
TPOUT, respectively, for consistency with the input data (eqs is the same as the one after expansion (eq 27).
14 and 15), although TI0 and TINR are not actual intermediate
temperatures. Since the refrigeration task is assumed to be given hCnIN )
in the form of a precalculated process composite curve (PR, FLn hTP(Xn, TnEXPN, PLnIN) + FCn+1hTP(Zn+1, TCn+1
OUT
, PLnIN)
HPR), eq 16 calculates the heat removed from the process
FCn
stream(s) at each stage according to the enthalpy difference of
such a curve between the respective pair of adjacent intermediate n e NR - 1 (25)
temperatures, the exception being stage 1 (eq 17), because in
n ) ThP
TCIN Zn, hCIN n e NR - 1
IN
( n , PLn ) (26)
principle the initial process temperature (TPIN) might be different
from the initial hot refrigerant temperature (TI0 ) TRIN).
IN
TCNR ) TNR
EXPN
(27)
Equation 18 ensures that the total heat removed from the hot
Pressure, Temperature, And Enthalpy Profiles. Accurate
streams is absorbed by the cold refrigerant stream at each stage.
pressure drop predictions across heat exchangers, especially of the
As a result, the cold refrigerant outlet enthalpies and temper-
compact type, may result in a quite lengthy calculation task, since
atures can be determined as a result of an energy balance (eqs
details of the actual exchanger geometry and internals (e.g., type
19 and 20).
of fins), as well as a set of additional fluid transport properties, are
QVn ) FVn[hTP(Yn, TIn, PHOUT required for such a purpose.7 If a rigorous calculation of such kind
n ) - hTP(Yn, TIn-1, PHn-1
OUT
)] was implemented in the present formulation it would increase the
(12) mathematical complexity considerably, taking the focus away form
the main design variables. On the other hand, neglecting the
QLn ) FLn[hTP(Xn, TIn, PHOUT
n ) - hTP(Xn, TIn-1, PHn-1
OUT
)] pressure drops in the cycle could lead to overlooked infeasibilities
(13) because of an inaccurate prediction of temperature profiles and/or
to a nonoptimal and/or subdesigned system. In the present for-
TI0 ) TRIN (14) mulation, an intermediate point is adopted. The total hot refrigerant
pressure drop (PHNR OUT
-PH0OUT) has a fixed value defined by the
TINR ) TPOUT (15) user before the optimization (PHOT), which allows the estimation
of intermediate hot refrigerant pressures by approximating them
QPn ) EVAL(TPR, HPR, TIn) - as a linear function of the respective temperature, as shown in eq
EVAL(TPR, HPR, TIn-1) n g 2 (16) 28. A similar approximation is performed to obtain the intermediate
cold refrigerant pressures (eq 29). However, these are assumed as
QP1 ) EVAL(TPR, HPR, TI1) - EVAL(TPR, HPR, TPIN) a linear function of the temperature of the hot refrigerant, instead
(17) of that of the cold refrigerant for convenience in the sequential
simulation approach.
QCn ) - (QVn + QLn + QPn) (18)
TIn - TRIN
FCnhTP( Zn, TCIN IN
n, PLn ) + QCn PHOUT
n ) PHOUT
0 - PHOT (28)
hCOUT
n ) (19) TP OUT
- TR IN
FCn
TCOUT ) ThP(hCOUT IN
, PLn-1 ) (20) TIn - TRIN
n ) PL0 +
PLIN IN
n n PCOLD (29)
The enthalpy of the refrigerant after expansion is calculated TP OUT
- TR IN
in eq 21. Depending on the value of the user defined binary For a given composition and inlet and outlet temperatures, the
parameter YLEX, such an enthalpy will be set equal to either temperature-enthalpy profiles at each refrigeration stage are ob-
the inlet enthalpy (for YLEX ) 0, corresponding to Joule- tained by evaluating the stream enthalpy repeatedly at a number
Thompson valves) or to a function of the isentropic enthalpy of intermediate points, previously defined by the designer (i.e., the
of expansion and a constant isentropic efficiency (for YLEX ) number of points, not the points themselves), within the respective
1, corresponding to liquid expanders). The enthalpy of isentropic temperature range. A linear behavior of refrigerant pressure with
expansion is calculated in eq 22. The refrigerant temperature temperature is also assumed during the calculation of the
after expansion is given in eq 23. When expanders are used, eq temperature-enthalpy profiles. Cold refrigerant pressures, this time,
24 will calculate the associated power produced. Otherwise this are estimated according to the cold refrigerant temperatures and
power would be implicitly forced to zero as in such case there not those of the hot refrigerant as done previously. Extra evaluation
is no enthalpy difference. points are added at the exact dew and/or bubble points of the
mixture if found within the temperature and pressure range. The
hEXPN
n ) (1 - YLEX)hTP(Xn, TIn, PHOUT
n )+ functions TPROF and HPROF are in practice one single function
YLEX(1 - LEX)hTP(Xn, TIn, PHOUT
n ) + LEXhISLEX
n (21) being shown separately for formulation purposes. The hot vapor
refrigerant, hot liquid refrigerant, and cold refrigerant profiles are
hISLEX
n ) hsP(Xn, sTP(Xn, TIn, PHOUT
n ), PLIN
n ) (22) defined in eq 30 to 35.
TEXPN
n ) ThP(Xn, hEXPN
n , PLIN
n ) (23) THVn ) TPROF(TIn-1, TIn, PHn-1
OUT
, PHOUT
n , Yn)
WLEXn ) FLn(hEXPN
n - hTP(Xn, TIn, PHOUT
n )) (24) n e NR - 1 (30)
The inlet cold refrigerant temperature to any given stage HHVn ) HPROF( OUT
TIn-1, TIn, PHn-1 , PHOUT
n , Yn, FVn )
featuring an inlet mixer (stages 1 to NR -1) can be calculated n e NR - 1 (31)
(Equation 26) after its enthalpy is known through an energy
balance around the mixer (Equation 25). Since there is no mixer THLn ) TPROF( OUT
TIn-1, TIn, PHn-1 , PHOUT
n , Xn ) (32)
8730 Ind. Eng. Chem. Res., Vol. 47, No. 22, 2008
PR ) PH
COMP
HH ) HCOMP(THLNRTPNR, HHLNR, HPNR) (43) PLIN
0 j
OUT
0 (47)
NR j)1
PR
n
PCMP
i ) PLIN
0 j (48)
HCCOMP
n ) HCOMP(TCn, HCn) (45) j)1
Once the hot and cold composite curves are known at each PRi e PRMAX (49)
stage, the temperature feasibility at each stage can be evaluated
by comparing the temperature of the hot composite curve to
PRi g PRMIN (50)
that of the cold one for a given enthalpy. Such comparison is
performed at each enthalpy point belonging to the hot composite NC-1
curve. If the temperature of the cold composite evaluated at a PHOUT
0 > PLIN
0 PR
j)1
j (51)
given enthalpy is greater than that of the hot composite then a
temperature cross occurs. If the temperature of the cold Equation 52 avoids any wetness in the cold refrigerant stream
composite is lower than that of the hot composite by less than from refrigeration stage 1, which is the stream entering the
Tmin then a violation of the minimum temperature difference compression train. Equations 53 and 54 make the compression
occurs. If the temperature of the cold composite is lower than nomenclature consistent with that of the remainder of the
that of the hot composite by at least Tmin then the point is cycle.
perfectly feasible. This temperature feasibility check is per-
formed by eq 46 and further illustrated in Figure 7. Checking TCOUT
1 g TDEW(Y0, PLIN
0 ) (52)
feasibility for a couple of points only will not ensure overall
feasibility for heat transfer throughout overall temperature range, PCMP
0 ) PLIN
0 (53)
whereas employing a large number of discrete points with very
YCMP
0 ) Y0 (54)
small interval will significantly increase computational time in
the optimization. Various numbers of points have been tested, Equations 55-59 establish refrigerant flowrates and composi-
and in this study, around 30 points (together with extra tions around the compression system in consistency with
evaluation points, depending on the characteristics of composite phase equilibrium and stage material balances. It is assumed
curves) were taken, which was enough to check feasibility of that all the partially compressed streams can be cooled down
heat recovery in exchangers without using excessive computa- to a temperature TRIN by an external heat sink and that any
tional resources. liquid that is formed is separated, pumped to the final
Ind. Eng. Chem. Res., Vol. 47, No. 22, 2008 8731
pressure, and remixed before the final cooler, in accordance WLEXn ) FLn(hEXPN - hTP(Xn, TIn-1, PHn-1
OUT
)) (24b)
n
with Figure 6b.
THCOMP
n ) TCOMP(THVn, TPn, HHVn, HPn)
YCMP
i ) ZVAP (CMP
Yi-1 , TRIN, PCMP
i ) i e NC - 1 (55) n e NR - 1 (40b)
XCMP
i ) ZVAP Yi-1
CMP
, TRIN, PCMP
i ( ) (56) HHCOMP
n ) HCOMP(THVn, TPn, HHVn, HPn)
n e NR - 1 (42b)
FCMP
i ) Fi-1
CMP CMP
VF Yi-2 (
CMP
, TRIN, Pi-1 ) ng2 (57)
5. Solution Strategy
FCMP
1 ) F1 (58)
The optimization problem, as formulated in the previous
FPi ) FCMP
i - Fi+1
CMP
i e NC - 1 (59) section, is of the NLP type: Minimize eq 1, subject to constraints
Stage compression power is calculated in eqs 60 and 61on the 2-64 (with variations 13b, 21b, 29b, 30b, and 37b-40b, if
basis of the stage flowrate and enthalpy difference. Stage outlet appropriate).
enthalpy is calculated using a constant isentropic efficiency in However, not all the formulation has been explicit (e.g., phase
eq 62 and 63, the last one being derived from the definition of equilibrium and physical property calculations), and in practice
isentropic efficiency. Stage pumping power is calculated in a part of the calculations may take place in external subroutines
similar way by eqs 64-66 (e.g., interfacing with commercial process simulators). Also, as
stated before, the problem is nonlinear and features many local
WCi ) FCMP
i (hCMP
i - hTP Yi-1
CMP CMP
, TRIN, Pi-1 ( ) ng2 optima. Traditional deterministic optimization methods would
(60) get readily trapped in these. On the other hand, stochastic
methods (e.g., genetic algorithm, simulated annealing) may offer
WC1 ) FCMP (hCMP - hTP(YCMP , TCOUT , PCMP )) (61) more confidence on the optimality of the final solution at the
1 1 0 1 0
expense of computational time. A genetic algorithm (GA) has
hISCMP
i ) hSP Yi-1
CMP
( CMP
, sTP Yi-1 CMP
, TRIN, Pi-1 (
, PCMP
i ) ) (62) been chosen as the main optimizer in this work. Genetic
algorithms try to copy nature regarding the evolution of species.
hCMP
i ) (1 - c)hTP Yi-1
CMP
(
CMP
, TRIN, Pi-1 + chISCMP
i (63) ) They perform iterations not on a single candidate solution but
on a population of candidate solutions (individuals) instead. The
(
WPi ) FPi hPi - hTP XCMP
i (
, TRIN, PCMP
i )) i e NC - 1 path toward optimality is built by sharing information between
individuals (reproduction) and by evaluating and ranking the
(64)
resulting offspring according to their relative optimality (fitness)
in a given number of major iterations (generations). The
i (
hPi ) (1 - p)hTP XCMP , TRIN, PCMP
i + phISPi ) information defining a particular individual (chromosome)
i e NC - 1 (65) consists of a set of values of the chosen independent variables
(genes), over a discretized solution space, encoded as a string
(
hISPi ) hsP XCMP
i , sTP XCMP
i (
, TRIN, PCMP
i , PHOUT
0 ) ) (e.g., binary encoding, real encoding). Another key advantage
i e NC - 1 (66) of GA is that no initial guess is needed to start up the
Finally, eq 67 calculates the heat removed at each intercooler optimization process. Further details on how genetic algorithms
except for the one after the last compression stage, which is work can be found in books such as Goldberg8 and Stender et
calculated in eq 68 based on an energy balance around the last al.9
intercooler and all the mixers in conjunction. Pikaia,10 a genetic algorithm by the U.S. National Center for
Atmospheric Research, has been adopted in this work and
QCMP
i ) FCMP
i ( (
hTP Yi-1
CMP
, TRIN, PCMP
i - hCMP
i ) ) modified in order to improve the quality of the initial generation.
i e NC - 1 (67) Randomly generated individuals are now evaluated before being
allowed into the initial generation. They qualify as a member
CMP
QNC ) F1hTP(ZCMP
i , TRIN, PH) - of the initial generation only if excessive infeasibilities are not
incurred (e.g., average crossovers of no more than 3 C and a
NC-1
i)1
(hPi FPi ) - FNC
CMP CMP
hNC (68)
compressor inlet temperature at most 2 C below dew point),
Adaptation for Hot Liquid Refrigerant without Subco- otherwise they are rejected. This filter, although it increases the
oling. MR cycles without hot liquid refrigerant subcooling, as computational time for the first generation considerably, ensures
in Figure 5, are a particular case in the formulation above. If a departure from a better set of candidate solutions, shortening
such a cycle was to be represented, some constraints would the path to optimality. For case studies in this paper, 9095%
change: Namely, all QLs would be equal to zero; the refrigerant of candidates are rejected during the filtration step.
expansions would start at conditions TIn-1 and PHn-1 OUT
, instead Figure 8 illustrates the flow of information within the general
OUT
of TIn and PHn ; there would not be need for calculating any optimization framework. The optimizer (GA in this case)
hot liquid refrigerant profile (i.e., eqs 32, 33, 41, and 43). The proposes a series of candidate solutions and relies on the
equations to be modified are shown below as variations b of simulator for their assessment. How the optimization task
the original equations: evolves is decided by the optimizer on the basis of the
assessment of the candidate solutions. The interactions between
QLn ) 0 (13b) the GA and the simulator result in a set of the best solutions
found over a discretized solution space. Standard NLP optimiza-
hEXPN
n ) (1 - YLEX)hTP(Xn, TIn-1, PHn-1
OUT
)+ tion(s) can be carried out afterward having the best discretized
YLEX(1 - LEX)hTP(Xn, TIn-1, PHn-1
OUT
) + LEXhISLEX
n (21b) solution(s) as initial guess in order to fine-tune and finally report
the optimal solution on the basis of a continuous solution space.
hISLEX
n ) hsP(Xn, sTP(Xn, TIn-1, PHn-1
OUT
), PLIN
n ) (22b) Both the optimizer and the simulator have been implemented
8732 Ind. Eng. Chem. Res., Vol. 47, No. 22, 2008
Figure 8. Optimization strategy. Figure 9. Composite curves for the base case optimal solution.
Table 1. Temperature-Enthalpy Data of the Natural Gas Stream to Table 2. The Three Solutions for the Base Case
Be Liquefied
new method Lees method new method
temperature (C) enthalpy (MW)
Tmin (C) 5.0 1.2 1.2
25.0 20179 power (MW) 33.49 26.60 24.53
-6.0 18317 F1 (kmol/s) 3.47 3.2 3.53
-34.1 16353 PL0IN (bar) 2.40 3.7 4.84
-57.7 14468 PH0OUT (bar) 36.95 40.0 43.87
-70.1 11978 Z1 (mol %)
-74.6 10198 N2 15.32 11.0 10.08
-82.3 7114 CH4 17.79 27.3 27.12
-96.5 5690 C2H6 40.85 35.6 37.21
-115.0 3840 C3H8 0.41 5.20 0.27
-163.0 0 n-C4H10 25.62 20.9 25.31
in FORTRAN 77 and within WORK, part of the process design isentropic compression efficiency is 80%, and the physical
software suite available from the Centre for Process Integration properties calculations are based on the Peng-Robinson equa-
at the University of Manchester. This gives the user the choice tion of state (WORK built-in). Refrigerant expansion occurs in
of using either built-in thermodynamic property models or Joule-Thompson valves and the refrigerant pressure drop across
delegating these calculations to commercial process simulators the heat exchangers is neglected. The temperature-enthalpy data
such as HYSYS or Aspen Properties that would run in the of the natural gas are given in Table 1.
background. 6.1. Base Case Solution. The application of the new
The chosen independent variables for this application are the methodology results in an optimal solution with a compression
refrigerant flowrate (F1) and composition (Z1), the compressor power of 33.39 MW. The composite curves for this solution
inlet and outlet pressures (PHOUT and PLIN are given in Figure 9. The optimal solution reported by Lee,4
0 0 ) and the intermediate
temperatures (TI1 to TINR -1) for cycles with two stages or more. on the other hand, had a compression power of 26.60 MW,
Given the values for all these variables, the simulator is which is 20.6% lower than the one found with the new
responsible for calculating the remaining variables and the methodology. However, it must be considered that because the
magnitude of infeasibilities (e.g., temperature profiles and minimum temperature difference was not fully enforced, Lees
compressor inlet wetness) and evaluating the objective function. solution ended up with an effective Tmin of approximately 1.2
Penalties may be applied to the objective function according to C. Hence, for the comparison to be really meaningful, the base
the magnitude of the infeasibilities as a disincentive in the case was reoptimized with the new methodology and Tmin of
ranking of solutions incurring violations. However, during 1.2 C, finding an optimal solution that features 24.53 MW of
optimization, care should be taken in removing design candidates power, that is, 7.8% lower than in Lees solution. The three
with considerable magnitude of infeasibilities in the objective solutions discussed are reported in Table 2. Note that a
function since infeasible solutions (especially the slightly and temperature approach as tight as 1.2 C may result as impractical
moderately infeasible) may still contain features worthy to as it is unlikely to handle the normal operational variations that
inherit and evolve by offspring candidate solutions. may occur in the plant once constructed. In practice it is unlikely
that temperature approaches of less than 3 C are considered
during design. Solving the base case involved the optimization
6. Case Study 1
of seven variables and took 410 min in a Pentium IV processor
The problem formulation and optimization strategy discussed (3.0 GHz) with 512 Mb of RAM.
in the previous section are put into practice using the same LNG 6.2. Effect of Multistage Compression. It is worth noting
case study published by Lee.4 A pretreated natural gas stream that all three solutions presented in the previous section have a
is to be cooled from 25 C down to -163 C using a mixture compressor outlet temperature of no less than 140 C. A gas
of nitrogen, methane, ethane, propane, and n-butane as refriger- undergoing compression at such temperatures certainly occupies
ant in a single stage cycle (as in Figure 3a) using minimum a relatively high specific volume and hence demands a relatively
compression power as the objective function. Subcooling of high specific compression power. To illustrate the effect of
liquid refrigerant is allowed and compression takes place in one multistage compression, another design task was performed. This
stage. External cold utility is available to cool hot streams down time the maximum stage pressure ratio was set to 5 and the
to 30 C. The minimum temperature difference is 5 C, the minimum temperature difference back to 5 C. The resulting
Ind. Eng. Chem. Res., Vol. 47, No. 22, 2008 8733
Figure 10. Compression train for optimal solution with maximum stage pressure ratio of 5.
9. Conclusions
Table A1. Solutions with One Refrigeration Stage in the Lower Table A4. Solutions with four refrigeration stages in the lower cycle
Cycle
refrigeration stages in upper cycle
refrigeration stages in upper cycle
variable 0 (no cascade) 1 2 3
variable 0 (no cascade) 1 2 3
TP (C) - -11.67 11.55 -
TP (C) - -21.78 -16.39 -44.69 FL1 (kmol/s) 0.6337 0.5926 0.5060 -
FL1 (kmol/s) - 0.2019 0.2187 0.1834 PLIN
L 0 (bar) 2.461 2.499 2.499 -
PLIN
L 0 (bar) - 1.398 1.533 1.911 PHOUT
L 0 (bar) 9.690 4.397 7.193 -
PHOUT
L 0 (bar) - 7.064 9.588 9.069 ZL 1 mol %
ZL 1 mol % C2H6 0.3820 0.3902 0.4154 -
C2H6 - 0.5069 0.5297 0.5649 C3H8 0.1626 0.4723 0.2893 -
C3H8 - 0.1878 0.2843 0.0474 n-C4H10 0.4554 0.1375 0.2953 -
n-C4H10 - 0.3053 0.1860 0.3877 TI L (C) 10.60, -21.08, -24.20, -39.60, -12.61, -33.05, -
TI L (C) - - - -50.51 -50.86 -50.58
Nomenclature
Subscripts
Table A2. Solutions with Two Refrigeration Stages in the Lower i ) compression stage index
Cycle
L ) lower refrigeration cycle
refrigeration stages in upper cycle n ) refrigeration stage index
variable 0 (no cascade) 1 2 3 U ) upper refrigeration cycle
TP (C) - 3.29 -6.82 -5.92 Parameters
FL1 (kmol/s) 0.4138 0.3445 0.3529 0.3209
PLIN
L 0 (bar) 1.421 2.261 1.675 2.494 PCOLD ) total cold refrigerant pressure drop
PHOUT
L 0 (bar) 9.618 7.980 4.623 8.310 PHOT ) total hot refrigerant pressure drop
ZL 1 mol % PLR ) total pressure drop of the lower refrigerant though the
C2H6 0.3636 0.4244 0.3241 0.5263
C3H8 0.0870 0.3255 0.4566 0.2639
upper cycle
n-C4H10 0.5494 0.2501 0.2193 0.2098 Tmin ) minimum temperature difference or temperature approach
TI L (C) -15.45 -29.52 -37.63 -36.24 c ) isentropic efficiency of compressor
LEX ) isentropic efficiency of liquid expander
FU 1 (kmol/s) - 0.2106 0.3804 0.5236 p ) isentropic efficiency of pump
PLUIN0 (bar) - 1.243 2.499 2.477
PHUOUT0 (bar) - 4.610 7.613 5.674
HPR ) set of enthalpy flows defining the overall process composite
ZU 1 mol % curve
C2H6 - 0.0216 0.0067 0.1759 NR ) number of refrigeration stages
C3H8 - 0.0468 0.5384 0.0973 PRMAX ) maximum pressure or compression ratio
n-C4H10 - 0.9315 0.4549 0.7268 PRMIN ) minimum pressure or compression ratio
TI U (C) - - 3.60 18.73, 0.06
TPIN ) process inlet temperature to the system
TPOUT ) process outlet temperature from system
TPR ) temperatures in the overall process composite curve
Table A3. Solutions with Three Refrigeration Stages in the Lower
Cycle TRIN ) temperature of hot streams after heat rejection to air or
cooling water
refrigeration stages in upper cycle
YLEX ) binary parameter indicating the use of liquid expanders
variable 0 (no cascade) 1 2 3 (when set to 1)
TP (C) - 0.18 5.04 0.32 Functions
FL1 (kmol/s) 0.5821 0.4430 0.4504 0.3959 CROP ) extracts a set of enthalpy flows or temperatures contained
PLIN
L 0 (bar) 2.490 2.479 2.428 2.363 within a given temperature range from a larger array
PHOUT
L 0 (bar) 9.935 5.800 6.140 7.024 HCOMP ) combines stream data and returns the set of enthalpy
ZL 1 mol %
C2H6 0.3797 0.3638 0.3617 0.4662 flows defining a hot composite curve
C3H8 0.1833 0.4399 0.3942 0.2958 HEV ) returns the enthalpy flow that corresponds to a sample
n-C4H10 0.4369 0.1963 0.2441 0.2380 temperature in a composite curve
TI L (C) 3.26, -20.87, -19.40, -29.09, HPROF ) returns a set of enthalpy flows defining the composite
-30.04 -40.75 -40.91 -51.17 curve of a stream with the given flowrate and compositions and
FU 1 (kmol/s) - 0.2548 0.3493 0.4747 within the given temperature and pressure range
PLUIN0 (bar) - 2.500 2.469 2.500 hsP ) returns the enthalpy of a stream given its composition,
PHUOUT0 (bar) - 8.601 5.519 5.224 entropy and pressure
ZU 1 mol % hTP ) returns the enthalpy of a stream given its composition,
C2H6 - 0.0076 0.0259 0.1598
temperature and pressure
C3H8 - 0.5412 0.2717 0.0681
n-C4H10 - 0.4512 0.7024 0.7721 OBJ ) user-defined objective function. may change from case to
TI U (C) - - 14.18 18.03, 3.44 case, including economic and/or performance criteria
Ind. Eng. Chem. Res., Vol. 47, No. 22, 2008 8739
sTP ) returns the entropy of a stream given its composition, ObjectiVe
temperature and pressure ) objective function value
TCOMP ) combines stream data and returns the temperatures in PLIN ) pressure of cold refrigerant at the inlet of a given
a hot composite curve refrigeration stage
TDEW ) returns the dew temperature of a stream given its PHOUT ) pressure of hot refrigerant at the outlet of a given
composition and pressure refrigeration stage
TEV ) returns the temperature that corresponds to a sample PR ) pressure ratio of a given compression stage when dissimilar
enthalpy flow in a composite curve values are allowed. unique stage pressure ratio otherwise
ThP ) returns the temperature of a stream given its composition, PCMP ) discharge pressure in a given compression stage
enthalpy and pressure QC ) heat received by the cold refrigerant in a given refrigeration
TPROF ) returns a set of temperatures defining the composite curve stage
of a stream with the given flowrate and compositions and within QCMP ) heat removed in intercooler after a given compression
the given temperature and pressure range stage
VF ) returns the vapor fraction of a stream given its composition, QL ) heat removed from the hot liquid refrigerant in a given
refrigeration stage
temperature and pressur
QP ) heat removed from the process stream(s) in a given
ZVAP ) returns the vapor composition of a partially vaporised
refrigeration stage
stream given its total composition, temperature and pressure
QV ) heat removed from the hot vapor refrigerant in a given
ZLIQ ) returns the liquid composition of a partially vaporised
refrigeration stage
stream given its total composition, temperature and pressure
TC ) set of temperatures defining the composite curve of the cold
Variables
refrigerant in a given refrigeration stage
F ) total molar flowrate of hot refrigerant entering a given TCCOMP ) set of temperatures defining the composite curve of
refrigeration stage the cold streams in a given refrigeration stage
FC ) total molar flowrate of cold refrigerant entering a given TCIN ) cold refrigerant temperature at the inlet of a given
refrigeration stage refrigeration stage
FCMP ) molar flowrate of refrigerant entering a given compression TCOUT ) cold refrigerant temperature at the outlet of a given
stage refrigeration stage
FL ) liquid molar flowrate of hot refrigerant entering a given TEXPN ) temperature of refrigerant after expansion in valve or
refrigeration stage liquid turbine in a given refrigeration stage
FP ) liquid molar flowrate of refrigerant after intercooler in a given th ) sample temperature for feasibility evaluation
compression stage THCOMP ) set of temperatures defining the composite curve of
FV ) vapor molar flowrate of hot refrigerant entering a given the hot streams in a given refrigeration stage
refrigeration stage THL ) set of temperatures defining the composite curve of the
HC ) set of enthalpy flows defining the composite curve of the liquid hot refrigerant stream in a given refrigeration stage
cold refrigerant in a given refrigeration stage THV ) set of temperatures defining the composite curve of the
hCIN ) cold refrigerant enthalpy at the inlet of a given refrigeration vapor hot refrigerant stream in a given refrigeration stage
stage TI ) temperature of the hot streams after a given refrigeration stage
HCCOMP ) set of enthalpy flows defining the composite curve of (intermediate temperature)
the cold streams in a given refrigeration stage TLR ) set of temperatures defining the composite curve of the
hCMP ) enthalpy of refrigerant after a given compression stage lower refrigerant through the upper cycle
hCOUT ) cold refrigerant enthalpy at the outlet of a given TP ) set of temperatures defining the composite curve of the
refrigeration stage process stream(s) in a given refrigeration stage
hEXPN ) enthalpy of refrigerant after expansion in valve or liquid TPREF ) set of temperatures defining the effective process
turbine in a given refrigeration stage composite curve in the upper cycle
HHCOMP ) set of enthalpy flows defining the composite curve of WLEX ) work produced in liquid turbine at a given refrigeration
the hot streams in a given refrigeration stage stage
HHL ) set of enthalpy flows defining the composite curve of the WC ) work required in a given compression stage
liquid hot refrigerant stream in a given refrigeration stage WP ) pumping work required after a given compression stage
X ) molar composition of hot liquid refrigerant in a given
HHV ) set of enthalpy flows defining the composite curve of the
refrigeration stage
vapor hot refrigerant stream in a given refrigeration stage
XCMP ) molar composition of liquid after intercooler in a given
HLR ) set of enthalpies defining the composite curve of the lower
compression stage
refrigerant through the upper cycle
Y ) molar composition of hot vapor refrigerant in a given
hP ) enthalpy of refrigerant after pumping in a given compression
refrigeration stage
stage
YCMP ) molar composition of vapor after intercooler in a given
HP ) set of enthalpy flows defining the composite curve of the compression stage
process stream(s) in a given refrigeration stage Z ) molar composition of cold refrigerant in a given refrigeration
HPREF ) set of enthalpy flows defining the effective process stage
composite curve in the upper cycle
hISCMP ) isentropic enthalpy of compression in a given compres-
sion stage Literature Cited
hISLEX ) isentropic enthalpy of expansion of cold liquid refrigerant
(1) Walsh, B. W. Mixed refrigerant process design. 21st Australasian
in a given refrigeration stage Chemical Engineering Conference, 1993, 1, 59/1-64/1.
hISP ) isentropic enthalpy of pumping in a given compression stage (2) Finn, A. J.; Johnson, G. L.; Tomlinson, T. R. Developments in
NC ) number of compression stages Natural Gas Liquefaction. Hydrocarbon Processing 1999, 78 (4), 47.
8740 Ind. Eng. Chem. Res., Vol. 47, No. 22, 2008
(3) Ait-Ali, M. A. Optimal mixed refrigerant liquefaction of natural gas. (9) Stender, J.; Hillebrand, E.; Kingdon, J. Genetic Algorithms in
Ph.D. Thesis. Stanford University, CA, 1979. Optimisation, Simulation and Modeling; IOS Press: Amsterdam, The
(4) Lee, G. C. Optimal design and analysis of refrigeration systems for Netherlands, 1994.
low temperature processes. Ph.D. Thesis. UMIST. U.K., 2001. (10) Charbonneau, P. Release Notes for PIKAIA 1.2, National Center
(5) Lee, G. C.; Smith, R.; Zhu, X. X. Optimal Synthesis of Mixed- for Atmospheric Research, Technical Note 451+STR, 2002.
refrigerant Systems for Low Temperature Processes. Ind. Eng. Chem. Res.
(11) Engineering Science Data Unit International PLC. Selection and
2002, 41, 5016.
Costing of Heat Exchangers-Plate-Fin Type; ESDU: London, 2003.
(6) Vaidyaraman, S.; Maranas, C. D. Synthesis of Mixed Refrigerant
Cascade Cycles. Chem. Eng. Commun. 2002, 189 (8), 1057.
(7) Pua, L. M.; Zhu, X. X. Integrated Heat Exchanger Network and ReceiVed for reView April 2, 2008
Equipment Design Using Compact Heat Exchangers. Heat Transfer Eng. ReVised manuscript receiVed August 4, 2008
2002, 23 (6), 18. Accepted August 12, 2008
(8) Goldberg, D. E. Genetic Algorithms in Search, Optimization and
Machine Learning; Addison-Wesley: Reading, MA, 1989. IE800515U