Kinetic model for hydrocracking of heavy oil in a CSTR involving short term catalyst deactivation
[Display omitted] ► An atmospheric residue (312°C+) was hydroprocessed. ► Experiments were performed in continuous stirred tank basket reactor. ► A five-lump kinetic model to represent the hydrocracking reactions was used. ► A time-dependant non-selective catalyst deactivation expression was conside...
Saved in:
Published in | Fuel (Guildford) Vol. 100; pp. 193 - 199 |
---|---|
Main Authors | , |
Format | Journal Article Conference Proceeding |
Language | English |
Published |
Kidlington
Elsevier Ltd
01.10.2012
Elsevier |
Subjects | |
Online Access | Get full text |
Cover
Loading…
Summary: | [Display omitted]
► An atmospheric residue (312°C+) was hydroprocessed. ► Experiments were performed in continuous stirred tank basket reactor. ► A five-lump kinetic model to represent the hydrocracking reactions was used. ► A time-dependant non-selective catalyst deactivation expression was considered. ► Activation energies and kinetic constants for heavy oil hydrocracking are reported.
A five-lump model previously reported in the literature was used for the kinetic modeling of an atmospheric residue (312°C+) hydrocracking. The model has ten reaction rate coefficients, makes a distinction of different hydrocarbon groups based on boiling ranges, and includes the following lumps: unconverted vacuum residue (538°C+), vacuum gas oil (VGO; 343–538°C), middle distillates (204–343°C), naphtha (IBP-204°C), and gases. The kinetic study was carried out in a CSTBR at the following operating conditions: 380–420°C, 100kgf/cm2, 5000std ft3 H2/bbl of oil, and 0.5–1.25mlfeed/(mlcath). Experiments were performed with a commercial size tetra lobular catalyst. The model also incorporates the effectiveness factor, and a time-dependant deactivation function for obtaining the intrinsic kinetic parameters. The hydrocracking of vacuum residue, VGO and middle distillates exhibited a higher selectivity toward the heavier lumps as temperature is increased. The predicted product composition is in good agreement with experimental values with an average absolute error less than 5%. |
---|---|
Bibliography: | ObjectType-Article-1 SourceType-Scholarly Journals-1 ObjectType-Feature-2 content type line 23 |
ISSN: | 0016-2361 1873-7153 |
DOI: | 10.1016/j.fuel.2012.05.032 |