Process Optimization

Real Time Optimization of Process Plant Utility Systems - Part - 1

Ravi Nath
Real Time Optimization (RTO) of process plant utility systems is an often ignored area. One reason for this complacency is that a process plant utility system is usually a cost center in a production plant and its operating cost is typically prorated amongst the various production units, so it suffers from what at times is referred to as the tragedy of the commons. This paper will discuss various aspects of real time optimization of plant utility systems; the solution will be illustrated with a recently completed project for a US refinery. Unlike most refineries, this refinery purchases steam from a neighboring cogeneration facility to supplement their own steam production. This project was completed in June 2012 and has been in operation since then; it has been instrumental in streamlining the operation and decreasing the plant utility system operating cost.

Concepts
process plant comprises one or more process units and a plant utility system. The process units transform raw materials to products and in doing so consume energy (or utilities) in the form of steam, fuel, electricity, compressed air, cooling water, etc. The plant utility system, also referred to as the plant energy system, is responsible for providing utilities to the process units. Typically the utility system self generates some of the utilities and purchases others from external sources. Typically all of the cooling water and compressed air is self generated, much of the steam is self generated

Ravi Nath is an Optimization Specialist in the Project Engineering organization of Honeywell Process Solutions in Houston, Texas. His responsibilities include developing advanced solutions and leading and supporting optimization projects for Honeywell industrial clients. Naths current focus is on real time optimization of energy production, energy distribution and petrochemical processing processes.

Chemical Industry Digest. November 2013

75

Process Optimization and at least some of the electrical power and much of the fuel is purchased. Electrical power is typically purchased from the local power grid. Fuel is purchased from one or more local fuel suppliers. Steam, if purchased, is usually from a neighboring process or cogeneration facility. External purchases are usually governed by legal contracts which tend to be complex with provisions for minimum take or pay, tier pricing, time of use rates etc. Figure 1 is a conceptual representation of a process plant showing the interactions between the process units and the utility system. This paper describes a methodology for real time optimization of process plant utility systems that has wide applicability and guarantees a global optimum.

Raw material Steam Sub-system

Steam import/export

Fuel import/export

Fuel Sub-system

Electric power Subsystem

Products

Electric power import/export

Fig 1: Conceptual Representation of an Industrial Process Plant systems: the steam subsystem, the fuel subsystem and the electric power subsystem. Each of the subsystems is briefly described below:

A typical process plant utility system

For illustrative purposes, we will consider a simplified process plant utility system with only three subFuel HP blrs Turbine and motor drivers

HP PR1 Fuel MP blrs MP Electric PR2 Vent LP BD BD flash DMW Deaerators BFW COND

P R O C E S S P L A N T

bfw p

Fig 2: Process Plant Utility System: Steam subsystem 76 Chemical Industry Digest. November 2013

Process Optimization for example one may be a long term supplier with a minimum take or pay agreement, anothPR1 HP FG consumers er may be short term supplier with a tiered pricing agreeLP FG HP FG ment and the third may be a suppliers Fuel compressors PR2 spot supplier with price tied HP FG consumers to Flare to a fuel price index. Fuel may Mixed FG be high pressure methane, low pressure methane or plant fuel Plant fuel which could be a mixture of Mixed FG consumers hydrogen and methane. There Fig 3: Process Plant Utility System: Fuel subsystem are several consumers of fuel such as fired heaters, compressors, furnaces, steam generaFrom / to steam subsystem tors, gas turbines etc. The fuel consumers may have certain restrictions, for example, some to Process Plant From / to could only consume a single consumers Grid type of fuel, while others From / to could consume any mix of fufuel subsystem els. Sometimes there are fuel compressors to uplift the fuel Fig 4: Process Plant Utility System: Electrical power subsystem pressure; the fuel compressors could be driven by electrical motors, steam turbines, internal combustion engine or Steam Subsystem gas turbines. There are letdown stations and a flare to The steam subsystem comprises a network of headers maintain fuel header pressures. One such fuel subsysthat transport steam to and from the production units. tem schematic is shown in Figure 3. As shown in Figure 2, there are three steam headers HP, MP and LP; one boiler feed water (BFW) header and a Electrical Power Sub-system steam condensate header. Steam is generated in mulThe electrical power subsystem is the simplest to contiple HP and MP boilers that supply to the HP and MP ceptualize. Usually a simple balance model (IN = OUT) headers respectively. There are back-pressure and con- is sufficient, and it is usually not necessary to model the densing steam turbo-generators that produce electrical transformer stations and various voltage sub-headers power. There also are several steam turbines and elec- unless they are constraining. One such electrical power trical motors that drive various fans, pumps and com- subsystem schematic is shown in Figure 4. pressors such as boiler fans, BFW pumps, cooling water pumps, plant air compressors etc. There are pressure re- Sub-system Interactions ducing stations that let down steam from higher to lower The above mentioned subsystems interact with the pressure and a steam vent to mainprocess units by supplying the entain header pressures. There is also ergy needs of the process. In ada blow down flash unit that recovers dition, the subsystems interact In most cases there will be many LP steam from the boiler blow down amongst each other; for instance alternate ways to operate the streams. The BFW used in the boilers the fuel subsystem supplies the fuel process plant utility system that is generated in one or more deaerarequired by the boilers in the steam will all satisfy the process entors that consume LP steam. subsystem and the electrical power
HP FG suppliers HP FG

Fuel Subsystem
Typically there is more than one fuel header at a site; for each fuel header there may be multiple suppliers. With each supplier there usually is a different contractual agreement;

ergy demands and be consistent with other operating constraints. The optimization problem then is to find the operations policy that is the best amongst all such feasible alternatives

subsystems accepts surplus power from the steam subsystem and supplies power to the fuel subsystem consumers. Such interactions are shown by curved arrowed lines in Figure 1.

Chemical Industry Digest. November 2013

77

Process Optimization
Fuel 133 112 HP blr 110 10 0 HP PR1 100

portunities for optimization; that is, at times, use of a particular drive may be less expensive to operate than the other drive.

Complex contracts with external suppliers: Most 3.0 plants are not self sufficient 50 MP 50 in their energy needs and have to purchase energy 0 from external suppliers. For electric power, almost 5 PR2 Vent all plants are tied to the electrical grid for reliabil23 LP ity reasons. And for fuel, 18 34 most plants have agreeDMW ments with one or more fuel supplier. For purchase of 60 electrical power, there usually are charges both for BFW the use of electrical energy as well for what is referred COND to as electrical demand. Electrical demand is the inFig 5: Simple steam subsystem operation: Base case stantaneous consumption peak that occurred over a specified period of time, usually the previous 12 to 24 Characteristics of process plant utility systems months. This means creating a new peak in electrical deThere are several characteristics unique to process mand will carry penalty not just for the current month plant utility system operations that are noteworthy; but for the next 11 to 23 months. Some process plant util Surplus generation capacity: Process plant utility sys- ity systems also have time of use contracts in which tem typically has more generation capacity than required case the price of electric power varies with the time of for normal operation. This is by design so that the process use, usually significantly higher during the peak hours plant utility system could accommodate the extremes in in a day and during the peak season in a year. demand that are usually encountered during the process Multiple fuel suppliers: For purchase of fuel, typiunit start ups and shut downs. The surplus generation cally there are multiple suppliers. Some with long term capacity is manifested in terms of surplus boilers, pumps contracts to have a reliable supply for which one would and compressors. For example, there may be four boil- usually pay a premium; for such supplier there usually ers that are required during start ups, but only two may would be a minimum take or pay type of agreement. be needed during normal operation and a third one may For short term suppliers, depending on the local natural be in hot standby to provide additional steam on a short gas market, there could be volume discount or penalty notice. During normal operation, the surplus boiler for excess purchase. equipment represents additional degrees of freedom and creates an opportunity to select the most economic set of Process plant utility system as a cost center: In an inboilers that could reduce the operating cost. Similarly dustrial setting, the process plant utility system is usually there would be more BFW pumps than normally needed. a cost center and their cost is prorated amongst the variSince each pump has different operating characteristics, ous process units. Such an arrangement, many a times an opportunity exists to select a set of BFW pumps to leads to short term thinking and discourages investment to improve the efficiency of process plant utility system, reduce the operating cost. which is unfortunate since energy costs in some oil refin Dual Drives: Typically a boiler house has spare driv- ing are second only to raw material cost. 1 ers for some of the larger fans, pumps and compressors. Typically one of the drives is a steam turbine while the Flowsheet simplicity: Compared to typical production other one is an electric motor. Such situations create op- processes, a process plant utility system has a consider78 Chemical Industry Digest. November 2013

Process Optimization ably simpler flowsheet. Other than steam and power generation, other unit operations could be modeled as simple mixers and splitters, there are no chemical reactors and distillation columns. In terms of number of components, we mainly have just one (water) in the steam subsystem.
Fuel 172 145 HP blr 143 43 6.0 50 0 PR2 0 0 PR1 MP 50 HP 100

Vent Equipment performance curves: Detailed, 23 LP first principles modeling 23 30 of steam and power genDMW erators (boilers, turbrogenerators, GT/HRSG 93 etc) could be complicated. However, for real time BFW optimization of existing systems, detailed modelCOND ing is not justified and instead the usual practice Fig 6: Simple steam subsystem operation: Alternative A is to use equipment performance curves, such as ous variables. boiler efficiency curves, turbine water ratios and gas turbine iso-charts to predict Discrete decision variables: are variables that could their behavior in the normal operating range. take only discrete values such as the number of boilers.

In summary, characteristics of process plant utility system are simplicity in flowsheet but complexity in purchased energy contracts and opportunities for equipment selection. These characteristics have profound implications on the design of a real time optimizer for a process plant utility system.

The optimization problem

The optimization problem for utility systems operations comprises determining the most economical (usually least cost) operations policy that satisfies the energy demands of the process units and is consistent with operating constraints and external energy supply contracts. From an implementation perspective, the optimizer determines the set of desired values for the decision variables that gives the most economic operation. There are several decision variables in a process plant utility system. These can be broadly classified in two groups; Continuous decision variables: are variables that could operate over a range, such as boiler and turbo-generator loadings. From an optimization point of view, continuous variables are simpler to handle as the traditional optimization methods apply to problems with continu

The simplest of the discrete variables are the binary variables that could take one of possible two values. Examples include on/off status of a boiler and selection of turbine versus motor drive for a dual drive pump. From an optimization point of view, discrete decision variables are computationally demanding. Although systematic procedures for discrete optimization exist, each additional binary decision has the potential to double the computation time. 2

In most cases there will be many alternate ways to operate the process plant utility system that will all satisfy the process energy demands and be consistent with other operating constraints. The optimization problem then is Min Max EU 100 10 20 2 300 85 50 10 MPPH MPPH MPPH MW 79

HP Boiler STG HP inlet STG MP inlet STG generation

Chemical Industry Digest. November 2013

Process Optimization
Fuel 211 178 HP blr 175 75 8.6 45 5 PR2 5 Vent 0 PR1 MP 50 HP 100

50 MPPH MP steam from the headers. Note that the boiler fuel consumption is 133 MMBtu/hr. and power generation is 3 MW. Note that there is steam vent of 5 MPPH, which is an obvious inefficiency and one may seek alternatives to prevent it.

Alternative A
23

Figure 6 shows an alternative to prevent steam ventLP ing by using the surplus LP 28 31 steam to generate additional DMW boiler feed water that is used to generate additional steam 120 which could be expanded BFW through the condensing turbo-generator. Note that COND the boiler fuel consumption in this case increases to 172 MMBtu/hr. and power genFig. 7: Simple steam subsystem operation: Alternative B eration increases to 6 MW. The venting of steam is now to find the operations policy that is the best amongst all stopped. Now, we are consuming more fuel and prosuch feasible alternatives. The best operating policy may ducing more power; this could be profitable if electrical not always be obvious. Past experience could help but power is a high value commodity such as during peak not always. To gain an appreciation of the problem, let hours. In such a case, one may wish to increase power us consider a very simple scenario a steam subsystem generation further. that has only three steam headers, a HP boiler, a condensing turbo-generator CTG, two pressure reducing stations Alternative B (PR1 and PR2), a deaerator and a steam vent as shown Figure 7 shows an alternative operation to further in Figure 5. increase power generation by generating additional Note the following equipment constraints: And the process demands are as follows: HP MP Demand EU 100 -50 -23 MPPH MPPH MPPH steam and letting it down through the turbo-generator. Obviously the BFW demand and the deaerator LP steam demand will also increase which could be met by letting down 5 MPPH through PR2. Note that the boiler fuel consumption increases to 211 MMBtu/hr. and power generation increases to 8.6 MW. Depending on the purchased energy costs, one may wish to increase power generation further to the limits of the turbo-generator.

LP

Alternative C
Figure 8 shows an alternative operation that maximizes power generation by generating additional steam and admitting it to the turbo-generator. Obviously the BFW demand and the deaerator LP steam demand will also increase which will now come by letting down 8 MPPH HP steam all the way down to LP. Note that the boiler fuel consumption increases to 233 MMBtu/hr. and power generation increases to 10 MW which is the power gen-

Note that a negative number for demand means that the process plant is a net producer rather than consumer of steam at that pressure level.

Base case
Figure 5 also shows the base case operating conditions - the boiler produces 110 MPPH HP steam and the turbine throttles 10 MPPH HP steam and induces 80

Chemical Industry Digest. November 2013

Process Optimization
Fuel 233 197 HP blr 193 85 10.0 50 8 PR2 0 Vent LP 31 DMW 135 BFW COND 31 23 8 PR1 MP 50 HP 100

part of this article will be published in a forthcoming issue.

References
1. Anonymous, Refinery Energy Management Report, Hydrocarbon Publishing Co., PA. (2012). 2. Luenberger, D. G., Linear and Nonlinear Programming, Addison-Wesley (1984).

Fig. 8: Simple steam subsystem operation: Alternative C

eration limit of the condensing turbo-generator. Note that each of these alternatives is feasible because the steam demand of process units is completely satisfied and the turbo-generator and the boiler are operating within their respective operating limits. One may ask, Which of these four operations policy is the best? Answer to this question, is that any of these alternatives may be the best, it all depends on the relative cost of fuel and power. For relatively inexpensive power, the base case would be the best. As the relative cost of power increases (or fuel cost decreases), the alternative A will become the best. As the power cost increases further (or fuel cost decreases further) alternative B will become the optimum. And for even higher power cost (or lower fuel cost) the alternative C will become the optimum. The example shown here has been simplified for clarity; it only has 2 continuous degrees of freedom, has simple pricing for fuel and power and no surplus equipment. And even here the optimum is not obvious. For an industrial system, with multiple continuous degrees of freedom, complex contracts and multiple discrete degrees of freedom corresponding to surplus equipment, the problem can quickly become overwhelming and beyond back of the envelope analysis; a computerized solution will become a necessity to obtain a definitive solution in a reasonable amount of time. The second

CHEMICAL INDUSTRY DIGEST

Highlights - December 2013

Articles m Process Safety m Effective Alarm Management m Handling Chemical Industry Emergencies m Chemicals on banned /watch lists as per International Regulations m Safety Instrumentation Plus Regular Features and much more . . . . For Advertisement & Subscription contact:
15, Purshottam, 21 J. P. Rd, Andheri (W), Mumbai - 400058 Tel: 26207402 / 26254921 Email: chemindigest@gmail.com chemindigest@yahoo.com

BLOCKDALE PUBLISHING

64

Chemical Industry Digest. November 2013

81