Next Article in Journal
Panoramic Digital Image Correlation for 360-Deg Full-Field Displacement Measurement
Previous Article in Journal
Cleaning Phenolic Compounds Present in Water Using Salting-Out Effect with DCA-Based Ionic Liquids
 
 
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:
Background:
Article

Revamping Fluid Catalytic Cracking Unit, and Optimizing Catalyst to Process Heavier Feeds

1
LUKOIL Neftohim Burgas, 8104 Burgas, Bulgaria
2
Institute of Biophysics and Biomedical Engineering, Bulgarian Academy of Sciences, 1113 Sofia, Bulgaria
3
Kinetics Technology SpA, 00148 Rome, Italy
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Appl. Sci. 2023, 13(3), 2017; https://doi.org/10.3390/app13032017
Submission received: 20 January 2023 / Revised: 30 January 2023 / Accepted: 2 February 2023 / Published: 3 February 2023

Abstract

:
H-Oil gas oils have a higher density and higher nitrogen content, and consequently much lower reactivity than straight-run vacuum gas oils during fluid catalytic cracking (FCC). The conversion of H-Oil gas oils observed in a laboratory catalytic cracking unit at constant operating conditions showed a 20 wt.% lower conversion rate than straight-run hydrotreated vacuum gas oil. Thus, a revamp of commercial FCC units, and the selection of a higher activity catalyst with lower coke selectivity is needed to provide the stable trouble-free operation of the unit. The performed revamp of the commercial FCC unit allowed a stable operation at a higher throughput. It also allowed an increased riser outlet temperature from 532 to 550 °C; increased maximum allowable regenerator temperature from 705 to 730 °C; decreased afterburning from 12 to 6 °C; decreased NOx emissions in the flue gas from 250 to 160 mg/Nm3; improved catalyst regeneration; decreased catalyst losses to 0.0142 kg/t feed; and improved catalyst circulation at a higher throughput. It was confirmed in the commercial FCC unit that the H-Oil light vacuum gas oil is the least reactive H-Oil gas oil during catalytic cracking.

1. Introduction

Over the years, fluid catalytic cracking has been extensively used and investigated as the main producer of high octane gasoline [1], middle distillate [2,3,4,5,6], ethylene and propylene [7,8,9,10,11], and bio-fuel [12,13,14,15,16], and as a waste (scrap tire, plastics) processor [17,18,19]. Its flexibility in the processing of feeds with a different quality has allowed the high penetration of FCC technology into petroleum refining. Worldwide, more than 350 FCC units, out of 650 refineries, are operated in petrochemical complexes, converting vacuum gas oil (VGO) and high-boiling residues into lighter fuel products and chemical feedstocks [20]. Now, when mankind has started to replace internal combustion engines with electromobiles and a drop in passenger vehicle production using petrol-based fuel has already been registered [21], the place and meaning of FCC technology as an automotive fuel maker is going to change to it being a chemical producer [22,23]. The most prevalent are the recent studies devoted to the role of FCC as an ethylene and propylene producer [7,8,9,10,11], and bio-fuel producer [11,12,13,14,15,16]. In the next two decades, oil demand for petrochemicals is expected to increase by ca. 4 Mb/d per year, reaching 34% of the total oil market in 2040, in contrast to the current 15% rate [22]. In this respect, FCC technological solutions directed to process whole crude oils have been explored [23,24]. However, the general trend in the extraction of petroleum has been towards heavy and low-quality oil [25,26]. Thus, a combination of FCC and vacuum residue upgrading units seems to best utilize the potential hidden behind the refining of heavy petroleum. The vacuum gas oil generated in the vacuum residue upgrading units can be processed in the FCC unit. Unfortunately, the secondary VGOs coming from cokers or vacuum residue hydrocrackers are characterized by a higher amount of refractory poly-nuclear aromatics and nitrogen compounds [20,27,28,29], which leads to a substantial decrease in the FCC unit conversion. The content of basic nitrogen compounds has an influence on hydrocarbon cracking during the secondary vacuum gas oil (coker and H-Oil VGO) FCC reaction [30,31]. Furthermore, the compositional and structural identification of basic extracts by positive-ion electrospray Fourier-transform ion cyclotron resonance mass spectrometry (FT-ICR MS) shows that basic nitrogen compounds in the secondary vacuum gas oils include N, N2, NO, N2O1, and NS class species [30]. The N1 class species centered at 9 < DBE < 13 with a carbon number ranging from 20 to 24 is the most abundant, and it is a key for coker and H-Oil VGO retarding performance. The effect of the structure and composition of basic nitrogen compounds was found to be much more obvious than that of content, and it was stronger with the increase in their rings plus double-bond equivalence [30]. The secondary vacuum gas oil, nitrogen, determines the ratio between available metal and acid sites of the hydrocracking catalyst. The aromatics generate coke precursors on the available acid sites. Both factors play a coupled role that promotes coke deposition on the catalyst surface, which leads to an increase in the deactivation rate [32]. Thus, both the higher polynuclear aromatic content, and the higher nitrogen content of the coker and H-Oil vacuum gas oils, make them undesirable components of the feed for vacuum gas oil hydrocracking. That is the reason why their processing seems most suitable in fluid catalytic cracking because it is less vulnerable to the higher content of nitrogen and aromatics than fixed-bed vacuum gas oil hydrocracking.
It is a challenge to find the optimum catalyst and operating conditions to maximize conversion during the processing of secondary VGOs [28,33,34]. Another issue when processing secondary vacuum gas oils is the higher coke load of the commercial FCC unit regenerator, which requires more air that can impair cyclone efficiency, and results in higher catalyst losses and poor unit performance [35]. The poor cyclone performance was found to affect catalyst aging that resulted in a lower inventory catalyst activity [35]. All of this was experienced in the LUKOIL Neftohim Burgas FCC unit since it has started processing heavier, more refractory H-Oil vacuum gas oils [36]. That was the reason to revamp the LNB FCCU with the aim of reducing catalyst losses, improving catalyst retention in the reactor–regenerator vessels, increasing catalyst activity, and enhancing conversion by operating at a higher severity during the processing of blends of straight-run and H-Oil vacuum gas oils.
The aim of this article is to discuss how the revamped LNB FCCU improved its performance during the processing of H-Oil gas oils of different quality.

2. Materials and Methods

The properties of the vacuum gas oil feedstock streams (straight-run hydrotreated VGO; H-Oil heavy atmospheric gas oil (HAGO); H-Oil light VGO (LVGO); and H-Oil heavy VGO (HVGO)) feeding the LNB FCCU under study are summarized in Table 1.
Before the revamp, six catalyst candidates were tested in a laboratory FCC unit with the aim of selecting the most active, and least coke-selective catalyst. Figure 1 presents the results of the catalyst tests concerning activity (catalyst-to-oil ratio versus conversion, Figure 1a) and coke selectivity (coke yield versus conversion, Figure 1b).
The properties of the catalyst employed at the LNB FCCU before and after the revamp (catalyst G), and that of the selected, most active and coke-selective catalyst, designated as catalyst H, to employ in the LNB FCCU after the revamp are presented in Table 2.
The conversion was estimated as 100-LCO-HCO-Slurry, wt.%
Where, LCO = light cycle oil yield, wt.%; HCO = heavy cycle oil yield, wt.%; and Slurry = slurry oil yield, wt.%. The main technical and technological problems in the LNB FCCU before the revamp were:
High catalyst losses;
Increased APS of equilibrium catalyst (from 90 to 108 µm). Reduction in the content of the catalyst working fraction (20–80 µm decreasing from 39 to 19%) in the catalyst composition [36];
High temperatures in the regenerator [34];
Shortage of regeneration air;
Unsatisfactory condition of reactor and regenerator lining of internals;
Exhausted service life of internal devices.
Loss of conversion;
Low yields of target products (gasoline, BBF, PPF, LCO);
High olefin content in FCC gasoline;
Increased catalyst Δ coke;
Low catalyst circulation;
Unstable Δp of regenerated and spent catalyst valves at high throughput.
To limit the negative effects of a degraded feedstock quality, the FCCU operated at a load of 240 t/h (design capacity, 250 t/h) [34].
In late 2021, a revamp of the FCCU was carried out, the main objectives of which were:
Adaptation of the FCCU to the processing of heavier vacuum gas oils from H-Oil;
Increasing the mechanical reliability of the equipment by replacing the internal devices in the reactor and regenerator, which were significantly depreciated with expired service life.
Reducing catalyst losses from the reactor and regenerator cyclone systems. Improvement in the environmental situation.
In our earlier research [37], a process diagram of the whole LNB FCCU is presented. During the revamp, only the FCC reactor–regenerator section was modified. The modifications of the reactor–regenerator section made during the revamp are presented in Figure 2.

3. Results

3.1. Modifications of the FCC Reactor–Regenerator Section Performed during the Revamp

During the revamp carried out in late 2021, the following scope of modifications was implemented:
For the FCC rector P-201 (Figure 2):
-
Replacement of the separator at the end of the riser (VSS = vortex separation system);
-
Replacement of riser and reactor inner and outer liner, U-shaped section, and reactor plenum;
-
Replacement of feed nozzles;
-
Replacement of the cyclone system in the reactor including the upper plenum and the VSS chamber;
-
Replacement of the internal components and devices of the reactor stripping section (AF Packing™ was used to fill the reactor section);
-
Replacement of the steam distributors which were adapted to the internal devices of the stripper section in the reactor;
-
Installation of an isolation gate on the transfer line between the reactor and the main fractionation column in the plant and a new reactor vent valve;
-
Replacement of spent and regenerated catalyst transfer lines and installation of new valves to regulate catalyst flow rates between the reactor and regenerator;
-
Installation of new instrumentation and adaptation of existing instrumentation.
For regenerator P-202 (Figure 2):
-
Replacement of the air distributor;
-
Replacement of the regenerator bottom cone;
-
Replacement of the cyclone system in the regenerator and installation of a new upper bottom and a new collection chamber;
-
Installation of a new distributor for the spent catalyst flowing from the reactor (P-201) into the regenerator (P-202);
-
New extraction system for the regenerated catalyst;
-
Replacement of liquid fuel injectors (LFI);
-
Installation of new instrumentation and adaptation of existing instrumentation.
-
Supply and installation of a new air compressor:
-
Installation of a new air compressor, CC-202, and connection of the latter to the technological scheme of the installation.
-
Construction of a new air line to the spent catalyst distributor in the regenerator.
-
Installation of control system for the direct fired air heater (DFAH)-P-201:
-
Replacement of the main and pilot burners of the DFAH;
-
Installation of new instrumentation and construction of an automatic control system for the combustion process.

3.2. Performance of the FCC Unit before and after the Revamp

The H-Oil gas oils are heavier, with higher aromatic and nitrogen contents, which makes them more difficult to crack, and produce more coke during fluid catalytic cracking than the straight-run hydrotreated vacuum gas oils [38,39]. Table 3 exemplifies the difference in the reactivities of the straight-run VGO and the H-Oil gas oils: HAGO, LVGO, and HVGO obtained on the base of laboratory ACE (advanced cracking equipment) unit operating at 527 °C, with 30 s time on stream, and a catalyst-to-oil ratio = 7.5 wt.
Their quality is a function of the H-Oil reaction temperature, H-Oil throughput, the content of FCC slurry oil (SLO) in the H-Oil feed, and the content of the recycling in the H-Oil feed [40]. The H-Oil LVGO is the most difficult to crack, probably because it has the highest nitrogen content, aromatic carbon content, and lowest Kw-characterization factor (see Table 1) [28,33,41]. The H-Oil HVGO is the most coke-producing gas oil, probably because it contains the highest level of heavy higher-molecular-weight poly-nuclear aromatic hydrocarbons [28,33,41]. The average content of HAGO, LVGO, and HVGO in H-Oil VGO for the 178 studied cases was 19%, 27%, and 54%, respectively, with a variation in HAGO between 5 and 33%; LVGO between 15 and 43%; and HVGO between 36 and 74%. The content of H-Oil VGO in the FCC feed varied between 17 and 37% [39]. As a result of processing, the higher coke made the H-Oil VGO catalyst losses vary between 2.4 and 8.1 t/d before the revamp in 2021, as shown in Figure 3. After the revamp, they fell to 0.9 t/d (Figure 3). The average particle size (APS) of the equilibrium catalyst (E-Cat) increased from 90 to 114 μm from the maintenance turnaround in 2018 until the next turnaround in 2021, which coincided with the FCCU revamp (Figure 4). After the revamp, the APS of E-Cat decreased to the normal level of 90 μm (Figure 4). Having in mind that the catalyst losses affect the content of the working fraction of the catalyst (0–80 μm) and, hence, the catalyst age distribution and activity [35], we decided to compare the LNB FCCU performance at normal catalyst losses before and after the revamp. In this way, the effect of modifications made in the reactor and regenerator section on the FCC unit performance could be evaluated. Table 4 presents data of the operation of the LNB FCCU before and after the revamp.

4. Discussion

4.1. Effects of Performed Revamp on the Operation of the FCC Unit

As a result of the performed revamp of the reactor–regeneration section, the following effects were observed:
  • Increasing riser outlet temperature from 540 to 550 °C;
  • Increasing maximum allowable regenerator temperature from 705 to 730 °C;
  • Decreasing afterburning (ΔT between TRGdilute–TRGdense) from 12 to 6 °C;
  • Reduction in NOx emissions in the flue gas from 250 to 160 mg/Nm3;
  • Improvement in catalyst regeneration (coke on the regenerated catalyst before revamp = 0.18 wt.%; after revamp = 0.12 wt.%);
  • Reduction in catalyst losses from average losses of 4.28 t/d (0.89 kg/t feed) in 2021 before the revamp to 0.85 t/d (0.0142 kg/t feed) in 2022 after the revamp
  • Improved catalyst circulation at higher throughput (lower fluctuations in ΔP of regenerated and spent catalyst valves);
Before the revamp in 2021, the LNB FCCU was not in position to run at a capacity higher than 200 t/h because the catalyst losses were increasing linearly with throughput magnification [35], while after the revamp, it ran smoothly and was trouble-free at a capacity of 250 t/h.

4.2. Performance of the FCC Unit before and after the Revamp

By processing the data from the commercial LNB FCCU after the revamp, the variation in the content of H-Oil HAGO, LVGO, and HVGO in the H-Oil VGO blend was as follows:
17.8 wt.% ≤ HAGO ≤ 33.2 wt.%; 19.7 wt.% ≤ LVGO ≤ 37.5 wt.%; 36.1 wt.% ≤ LVGO ≤ 57.2 wt.%; and the H-Oil VGO blend content in the FCC feed varied between 15.7 wt.% and 34.5 wt.%. The following multiple regression was developed:
LNB   FCCU   conversion   = 8.8 + 0.1212 × Riser   Temperature + 0.5873 × Catalyst   to   oil   ratio   ( kg kg ) 0.0756 × Content   of   HAGO   in   FCC   feed ,   % 0.2215 × Content   of   LVGO   in   FCC   feed ,   % 0.1093 × Content   of   HVGO   in   FCC   feed ,   % R = 0.875 ,   abs .   rel .   error = 0.8 %
Figure 5 shows the parity graph of the estimated versus observed conversion. This data shows a very good agreement between observed conversion and that predicted by Equation (1), keeping in mind that this is commercial data, where the noise of the data is relatively high. Equation (1) indicates that the commercial FCCU data confirms the H-Oil gas oil reactivity data (see the data in Table 3) obtained in the laboratory ACE unit, showing that the least reactive H-Oil gas oil is LVGO. The data in Table 3, and that shown in Figure 1, suggest that the most appropriate catalyst to process the heavier gas oils from H-Oil is that possessing both the highest activity and the lowest coke selectivity.
The data in Table 4 shows that the H-Oil VGO suppresses hydrogenation in the FCC feed hydrotreater (pretreater = FCCPT). This is evident from the lower density reduction in the hydrotreated VGO (9 kg/m3 at 8.9% H-Oil VGO content in the FCCPT feed) than that during processing only straight-run VGO (21 kg/m3 at zero content of H-Oil VGO in the FCCPT feed). The data in Table 4 also indicate that the quality and quantity of the H-Oil VGO in the FCC feed for the three studied cases are different. The highest share in the FCC feed and the lowest Kw-characterization factor of the H-Oil VGO was observed for Case: 11–13 September 2022 (after FCC revamp). The FCC feed for this case was also characterized by the lowest Kw-characterization factor. This means that the feed for this case is the most refractory among the studied three cases. Considering the relation of FCC feed containing H-Oil VGO established in our earlier research [28] and shown in Equation (2):
C o n v e r s i o n = 0.1787 × e 0.5013 K w R = 0.99 ,   av .   error = 1.7 %
The estimated conversions which reflect FCC feed reactivity are as follows:
-
Case: 10 September –11 September 2018 (before revamp) = 71.2 wt.% estimated conversion;
-
Case: 11 September –13 September 2022 (after revamp) = 67.3 wt.% estimated conversion;
-
Case 2.10–3.10.2022 (after revamp) = 70.4 wt.% estimated conversion.
These data suggest that Case: 11 September –13 September 2022 (after revamp) has the lowest reactivity feed, while the other two cases have the same reactivity feeds (the difference between estimated conversions is 1.1%, which is lower than the error of prediction of Equation (2)). Despite the poor quality of the feed for the Case: 11 September –13 September 2022 (after the revamp), it demonstrated the same conversion level as that observed in Case: 10 September –11 September 2018 (before revamp). Comparing the cases which have the same quality of FCC feed, Case: 10 September –11 September 2018 (before the revamp) and Case 2.10–3.10.2022 (after the revamp), one can see that the case after the revamp registered a 2.5 wt.% higher conversion. Another big advantage of the revamp is the higher octane number of the gasoline (+0.8 points for both RON and MON).
Concerning the olefinicity of the PPF and BBF, the revamp does not affect it, showing the same propylene content in the PPF, and the same content of C4 olefins in the BBF.
The quality of the E-Cat after the revamp in terms of micro-activity shows stabilization with a slight tendency to increase from 73.4 to 74.5% with the replacement of the lower-activity catalyst G with the higher-activity catalyst H (Figure 6). Before the revamp the micro-activity of E-Cat varied across a very wide range (between 61 and 76%), which was caused by the higher catalyst losses, and the resulting higher catalyst addition rate, and the retention in the inventory of the more aged catalyst with a lower content of the working fraction 0–80 μm.

5. Conclusions

The processing of heavier H-Oil gas oils in FCC is associated with conversion reduction and coke-made augmentation. Thus, a higher activity catalyst with lower coke selectivity can deliver a higher conversion of feeds containing H-Oil gas oils. The finding that H-Oil LVGO is the least reactive H-Oil gas oil observed in a laboratory FCC ACE unit was confirmed during processing of the H-Oil VGO blend consisting of HAGO, LVGO, and HVGO in the commercial FCCU.
The revamp of the LNB FCCU performed in late 2021 allowed an increase in riser outlet temperature from 532 to 550 °C; an increase in maximum allowable regenerator temperature from 705 to 730 °C; a decrease in afterburning from 12 to 6 °C; a decrease in NOx emissions in the flue gas from 250 to 160 mg/Nm3; an improvement in catalyst regeneration; a decrease in catalyst losses to 0.0142 kg/t of feed; and improved catalyst circulation at a higher throughput.
The experience gained during the processing of H-Oil gas oils in both laboratory and commercial FCC units has shown that a commercial FCC unit which is intended to process H-Oil vacuum gas oils with different quantity and quality badly needs a revamp. The revamp should consist of modifications of internal parts in both the reactor and regenerator to guarantee good catalyst regeneration, retention in the inventory, and higher catalyst circulation, to provide a higher vacuum gas oil conversion. A future investigation in this area is directed to increasing the propylene yield by selecting a proper catalyst and additives, and the modification of the main fractionator and vapor recovery unit while processing feeds containing H-Oil gas oils.

Author Contributions

Conceptualization, D.S. and I.C.; methodology, D.S. and M.I.; software, G.S.; validation, G.A.; formal analysis, M.I.; investigation, M.I. and G.S.; resources, I.C.; data curation, G.A.; writing—original draft preparation, D.S.; writing—review and editing, D.S.; supervision, I.C. and G.S.; project administration, I.C. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Funding

This research received no external funding.

Institutional Review Board Statement

Not applicable.

Informed Consent Statement

Not applicable.

Data Availability Statement

Not applicable.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflict of interest.

Nomenclature

ACEAdvanced cracking evaluation
APSAverage particle size of FCC catalyst
BBFButane-butylene fraction
C2-Yield of dry gas, wt.%
C3Yield of propane-propylene fraction, wt.%
C3=Propylene
C4=Butylenes
C4Yield of butane-butylene fraction, wt.%
CTOCatalyst-to-oil ratio, wt./wt.
DHAHDirect heating air heater
E-CatEquilibrium catalyst
FBPFinal boiling point
FCCFluid catalytic cracking
FCCPTFluid catalytic cracking pretreater (feed hydrotreater)
FCCUFluid catalytic cracking unit
HAGOHeavy atmospheric gas oil
HCOHeavy cycle oil
HTVGOHydrotreated vacuum gas oil
HVGOHeavy vacuum gas oil
IBPInitial boiling point
iC4=Iso-butylene
iC4Iso-butane
KwCharacterization Watson factor
LCOLight cycle oil
LFILiquid fuel injector
LNBLUKOIL Neftohim Burgas
LVGOLight vacuum gas oil
MONMotor octane number
PPFPropane-propylene fraction
RONResearch octane number
RVPReid vapour pressure
SRHTVGOStraight-run hydrotreated vacuum gas oil
TOSTime on stream
VGOVacuum gas oil

References

  1. Kegerreis, C.K.; Schweizer, A.E.; Welch, R.C.; Croela, J.; Wood-Black, F.K. The Fluid Bed Reactor; American Chemical Society, Division of the History of Chemistry and The Office of Communications: Baton Rouge, LA, USA, 1998. [Google Scholar]
  2. Corma, A.; Sauvanaud, L. Improving LCO yield and quality in FCC units: Cracking pathways analysis. In Fluid Catalytic Cracking VII: Materials. Methods and Process Innovations; Occelli, M., Ed.; Elsevier Science: Atlanta, GA, USA, 2007; pp. 41–54. [Google Scholar]
  3. Hunt, D.; Hu, R.; Ma, H.; Langan, L.; Cheng, W. Strategies for increasing production of light cycle oil. Pet. Technol. Q. 2009, 14, 71–89. [Google Scholar]
  4. Melin, M.; Baillie, C. Maximum operations. Hydrocarb. Eng. 2009, 14, 29–34. [Google Scholar]
  5. Stratiev, D.; Shishkova, I.; Obryvalina, A.; Telyashev, R. Feed properties impact on the fluid catalytic cracking unit—Key issues in a diesel market. Oil Gas Eur. Mag. 2011, 36, 25–28. [Google Scholar]
  6. Niccum, P.K. Diesel creation in the FCC centered refinery. In Proceedings of the Coking & CatCracking Conference, Galveston, TX, USA, 8–10 May 2013. [Google Scholar]
  7. Yakubu, J.M.; Patel, R.; Mujtaba, I.M. Maximization of propylene in an industrial FCC unit. Appl. Petrochem. Res. 2018, 8, 79–95. [Google Scholar]
  8. Singh, U.; Ziebarth, M.; Roberie, T.; Cheng, W.C.; Knöll, J.; Fougret, C.; Brandt, S.; Nicolich, J. Advances in propylene maximization from the FCC unit. Catalagram 2014, 115, 6–12. [Google Scholar]
  9. De Graaf, B.; Allahverdi, M.; Evans, M.; Diddams, P. ‘Snakes and ladders’ for maximising propylene. PTQ 2014, Q4, 1–7. [Google Scholar]
  10. Tian, Y.; Che, Y.; Chen, M.; Feng, W.; Zhang, J.; Qiao, Y. Catalytic upgrading of vacuum residue-derived cracking gas-oil for maximum light olefin production in a combination of a fluidized bed and fixed bed reactor. Energy Fuels 2019, 33, 7297–7304. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  11. Zhu, X.; Yu, M.; Cheng, M.; Wang, Y.; Zhang, H.; Wang, G.; Li, C. Conceptual fluid catalytic cracking process with the additional regenerated catalyst circulation path for gasoline reprocessing and upgrading with minimum loss. Energy Fuels 2020, 34, 235–244. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  12. Bertero, M.; Garcia, J.R.; Falco, M.; Sedran, U. Hydrocarbons from bio-oils: Performance of the matrix in FCC Catalysts in the immediate catalytic upgrading of different raw bio-oils. Waste Biomass Valorization 2017, 8, 933–948. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  13. Al Jamri, M.; Li, J.; Smith, R. Molecular modelling of co-processing biomass fast pyrolysis oil in fluid catalytic cracking unit. Ind. Eng. Chem. Res. 2020, 59, 1989–2004. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  14. Ochoa, A.; Vicente, H.; Sierra, I.; Arandes, J.M.; Castaño, P. Implications of feeding or co-feeding bio-oil in the fluid catalytic cracker (FCC) in terms of regeneration kinetics and energy balance. Energy 2020, 209, 118467. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  15. Vu, X.H.; Nguyen, S.; Dang, T.T.; Armbruster, U. Improved biofuel quality in catalytic cracking of triglyceride-rich biomass over nanocrystalline and hierarchical ZSM-5 catalysts. Biomass Convers. Biorefin. 2021, 11, 755–766. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  16. Eschenbacher, A.; Myrstad, T.; Bech, N.; Thi, H.D.; Auersvald, M.; Van Geem, K.M.; Jensen, A.D. Fluid catalytic co-processing of bio-oils with petroleum intermediates: Comparison of vapour phase low pressure hydrotreating and catalytic cracking as pretreatment. Fuel 2021, 302, 121198. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  17. Rodríguez, E.; Gutiérrez, A.; Palos, R.; Azkoiti, M.J.; Arandes, J.M.; Bilbao, J. Cracking of scrap tires pyrolysis oil in a fluidized bed reactor under catalytic cracking unit conditions. Effects of operating conditions. Energy Fuels 2019, 33, 3133–3143. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  18. Rodríguez, E.; Palos, R.; Gutiérrez, A.; Arandes, J.M.; Bilbao, J. Scrap tires pyrolysis oil as a co-feeding stream on the catalytic cracking of vacuum gasoil under fluid catalytic cracking conditions. J. Waste Manag. 2020, 105, 18–26. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  19. Knaus, F.; Lutz, H.; Büchele, M.; Reichhold, A.; Pazos-Costa, A. Municipal plastic waste recycling in fluid catalytic cracking units: Production of petrochemicals and fuel in an fluid catalytic cracking pilot plant from biogenic and recycled feedstocks. Chem. Eng. Process. Process Intensif. 2022, 182, 109204. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  20. Li, Z.; Wang, G.; Liu, Y.; Gao, J.; Xu, C.; Liang, Y.; Wang, X. Study on reaction performance and competitive adsorption effect during coker gas oil catalytic cracking. Fuel Process. Technol. 2013, 115, 1–10. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  21. Greencarcongress.com. Adamas. China Rare Earth Consumption for Catalytic Converters Down on Weak Passenger Vehicle Production. Available online: https://www.greencarcongress.com/2019/08/20190807-admas.html (accessed on 7 August 2019).
  22. Alabdullah, M.A.; Gomez, A.R.; Vittenet, J.; Bendjeriou-Sedjerari, A.; Xu, W.; Abba, I.A.; Gascon, J. A viewpoint on the refinery of the future: Catalyst and process challenges. ACS Catal. 2020, 10, 8131–8140. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  23. Corma, A.; Corresa, E.; Mathieu, Y.; Sauvanaud, L.; Al-Bogami, S.; Al-Ghrami, M.S.; Bourane, A. Crude oil to chemicals: Light olefins from crude oil. Catal. Sci. Technol. 2017, 7, 12–46. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  24. Al-Khattaf, S.; Saeed, M.R.; Aitani, A.; Klein, M.T. Catalytic cracking of light crude oil to light olefins and naphtha over ECat and MFI: MAT versus ACE and effect of high reaction temperature. Energy Fuels 2018, 32, 6189–6199. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  25. Dittmeyer, R.; Klumpp, M.; Kant, P.; Ozin, G. Crowd oil not crude oil. Nat. Commun. 2019, 10, 1818. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  26. Liu, Y.; Lu, S.; Yan, X.; Gao, S.; Cui, X.; Cui, Z. Life cycle assessment of petroleum refining process: A case study in China. J. Clean. Prod. 2020, 256, 120422. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  27. Li, Z.; Wang, G.; Gao, J. Effect of retarding components on heavy oil catalytic cracking and their corresponding countermeasures. Energy Fuels 2019, 33, 10833–10843. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  28. Stratiev, D.; Shishkova, I.; Ivanov, M.; Dinkov, R.; Georgiev, B.; Argirov, G.; Atanassova, V.; Vassilev, P.; Atanassov, K.; Yordanov, D.; et al. Catalytic cracking of diverse vacuum residue hydrocracking gas oils. Chem. Eng. Technol. 2021, 44, 997–1008. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  29. Jia, B.; Xian, C.; Tsau, J.-S.; Zuo, X.; Jia, W. Status and outlook of oil field chemistry-assisted analysis during the energy transition period. Energy Fuels 2022, 36, 12917–12945. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  30. Li, Z.; Wang, G.; Shi, Q.; Xu, C.; Gao, J. Retardation effect of basic nitrogen compounds on hydrocarbons catalytic cracking in coker gas oil and their structural identification. Ind. Eng. Chem. Res. 2011, 50, 4123–4132. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  31. Yankov, V. Dependence of Performance of Processes “Vacuum Residue Hydrocracking H-Oil”, and “Fluid Catalytic Cracking of Vacuum Gas Oil” on Feedstock Properties, and Severity of Operation in H-Oil. Ph.D. Thesis, University Prof. Dr. Assen Zlatarov, Burgas, Bulgaria, 13 January 2023. [Google Scholar]
  32. Vivas-Báez, J.C.; Pirngruber, G.D.; Servia, A.; Dubreuil, A.-C.; Pérez-Martínez, D.J. Impact of Feedstock Properties on the Deactivation of a Vacuum Gas Oil Hydrocracking Catalyst. Energy Fuels 2021, 35, 12297–12309. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  33. Stratiev, D.; Shishkova, I.; Ivanov, M.; Dinkov, R.; Georgiev, B.; Argirov, G.; Atanassova, V.; Vassilev, P.; Atanassov, K.; Yordanov, D.; et al. Role of Catalyst in Optimizing Fluid Catalytic Cracking Performance during Cracking of H-Oil-Derived Gas Oils. ACS Omega 2021, 6, 7626–7637. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  34. Stratiev, D.; Shishkova, I.; Ivanov, M.; Chavdarov, I.; Yordanov, D. Dependence of Fluid Catalytic Cracking Unit Performance on H-Oil Severity, Catalyst Activity, and Coke Selectivity. Chem. Eng. Technol. 2020, 43, 2266–2276. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  35. Stratiev, D.S.; Ivanov, M.; Shishkova, I.; Dinkov, R.; Petrov, I. Commercial FCC experience with processing blends of straight run hydrotreated VGO and H-Oil VGO and employing different catalysts. Oil Gas Eur. Mag. 2021, 4, 20–27. [Google Scholar]
  36. Stratiev, D.; Shishkova, I.; Dinkov, R.; Dobrev, D.; Argirov, G.; Yordanov, D. The Synergy between Ebullated Bed Vacuum Residue Hydrocracking and Fluid Catalytic Cracking Processes in Modern Refining—Commercial Experience; Prof. Marin Drinov Publishing House of Bulgarian Academy of Sciences: Sofia, Bulgaria, 2022. [Google Scholar]
  37. Stratiev, D.; Shishkova, I.; Ivanov, M.; Dinkov, R.; Argirov, G.; Vassilev, S.; Yordanov, D. Validation of Diesel Fraction Content in Heavy Oils Measured by High Temperature Simulated Distillation and Physical Vacuum Distillation by Performance of Commercial Distillation Test and Process Simulation. Appl. Sci. 2022, 12, 11824. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  38. Stratiev, D.; Shishkova, I.; Petrov, I.; Yordanov, D.; Toteva, V. Petroleum crude slate, catalyst properties and H-Oil VGO properties effects on a commercial FCC unit performance. J. Chem. Technol. Metall. 2021, 56, 488–498. [Google Scholar]
  39. Stratiev, D.; Shishkova, I.; Ivanov, M.; Petrov, I.; Atanassova, V.; Ribagin, S.; Atanassov, K.; Toteva, V.; Stratiev, D. Commercial and laboratory experience with catalytic cracking of straight run hydrotreated vacuum gas oil and H-Oil gas oils. J. Chem. Technol. Metall. 2022, 57, 215–223. [Google Scholar]
  40. Stratiev, D.S.; Shishkova, I.K.; Dinkov, R.K.; Petrov, I.P.; Kolev, I.V.; Yordanov, D.; Sotirov, S.; Sotirova, E.; Atanassova, V.; Ribagin, S.; et al. Crude Slate, FCC slurry oil, Recycle, and Operating Conditions Effects on H-Oil product quality. Processes 2021, 9, 952. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  41. Stratiev, D.; Shishkova, I.; Yankov, V.; Kolev, I.; Mitkova, M. Impact of H-Oil vacuum residue hydrocracking severity on fluid catalytic cracking unit performance. Petrol. Sci. Technol. 2020, 38, 565–573. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Figure 1. Laboratory tests with six catalyst candidates to select the most active (a) and coke selective (b) catalyst to employ in the revamped FCC unit.
Figure 1. Laboratory tests with six catalyst candidates to select the most active (a) and coke selective (b) catalyst to employ in the revamped FCC unit.
Applsci 13 02017 g001
Figure 2. A diagram of reactor–regenerator section of the FCC unit, whose parts shown with inscriptions were revamped.
Figure 2. A diagram of reactor–regenerator section of the FCC unit, whose parts shown with inscriptions were revamped.
Applsci 13 02017 g002
Figure 3. Variation in catalyst losses before and after the revamp of the LNB FCCU.
Figure 3. Variation in catalyst losses before and after the revamp of the LNB FCCU.
Applsci 13 02017 g003
Figure 4. Variation in average particle size (APS) of E-Cat before and after the revamp.
Figure 4. Variation in average particle size (APS) of E-Cat before and after the revamp.
Applsci 13 02017 g004
Figure 5. Parity graph of conversion estimated by Equation (1) versus observed conversion at the LNB FCCU.
Figure 5. Parity graph of conversion estimated by Equation (1) versus observed conversion at the LNB FCCU.
Applsci 13 02017 g005
Figure 6. Micro-activity of E-Cat variation in time before and after the revamp.
Figure 6. Micro-activity of E-Cat variation in time before and after the revamp.
Applsci 13 02017 g006
Table 1. Properties of the FCC feed streams studied in this work.
Table 1. Properties of the FCC feed streams studied in this work.
FCC Feed PropertiesMethodsSRHTVGOH-Oil HVGOH-Oil LVGOH-Oil HAGO
Density at 15 °C, g/cm3ASTM D 40520.90140.97840.96390.9393
Sulphur, wt.%ASTM D 42940.17630.670.480.37
Nitrogen, wt.%ASTM D 57620.080.250.320.21
Basic nitrogen, mg/kgUOP269 3938191070686
Conradson carbon, wt.%ASTM D 1890.242.670.340.15
Refractive Index, 60 °CASTM D 17471.4991.5511.5401.521
C_Aromatics, wt.%ASTM D323824.441.343.638.7
C_Paraffins, wt.%ASTM D323860.148.647.650.7
C_Naphthenes, wt.%ASTM D323815.510.18.910.7
Molecular Weight, g/molVPO396416323296
Sim. Dist., °CASTM D 2887-extended
IBP 287213254234
5% wt. 353395316300
10% wt. 371416336322
50%wt. 444484403373
90% wt. 529541479433
95% wt. 556556503455
FBP 595555517
Kw-factor 12.1011.6111.4811.53
Table 2. Properties of the FCC catalyst employed in the commercial LNB FCC unit during this study.
Table 2. Properties of the FCC catalyst employed in the commercial LNB FCC unit during this study.
The Period of Using the
Catalyst at the LNB FCCU
2021–August 2022
(before and after the
Revamp)
After August 2022
(after the
Revamp)
Catalyst GCatalyst H
Fresh catalyst properties
Total surface area, m2/g298288
Na2O, %0.300.29
RE2O3, %2.83.2
Al2O3, %42.042.0
APS, μ8676
ABD, g/cm30.720.72
Microactivity, %8183
Equilibrium catalyst properties
Total surface area, m2/g152150
Na2O, %0.210.19
RE2O3, %2.603.06
Al2O3, %45.444.8
APS, μm9191
ABD, g/cm30.880.85
Unit cell size, Å24.3124.32
Microactivity, %73.474.5
Coke factor0.840.76
Ni, ppm120103
V, ppm342265
Table 3. Conversion of SRHTVGO, H-Oil HAGO, LVGO, and HVGO obtained in a laboratory ACE unit during the use of catalyst G. The quality of the cracked gas oils was identical to that shown in Table 1.
Table 3. Conversion of SRHTVGO, H-Oil HAGO, LVGO, and HVGO obtained in a laboratory ACE unit during the use of catalyst G. The quality of the cracked gas oils was identical to that shown in Table 1.
Gas OilsConversion, wt.%Coke Yield, wt.%
SRHTVGO77.83.7
H-Oil HAGO58.75.0
H-Oil LVGO53.45.8
H-Oil HVGO58.58.6
Table 4. LNB FCCU performance before and after the revamp.
Table 4. LNB FCCU performance before and after the revamp.
Date10 September–11 September 2018
before Revamp
11 September–13 September 2022
after Revamp
2 October–3 October 2022
after Revamp
FCC Operating conditions
Straight-run VGO flow rate, t/h205222225
FCCPT trough-put, t/h225200230
H-Oil VGO in FCCPT feed, wt %2005
FCCPT Feed density at 15 °C, g/cm30.9150.92270.9198
5%, °C344354350
10%, °C367373369
50%, °C442445444
90%, °C518522520
95%, °C532539537
Kw11.8911.8111.84
Sulphur, %1.98N.D.N.D.
Concarbon, % m/m0.480.260.18
HTVGO flow rate, t/h203172203
HTVGO density at 15 °C, g/cm30.9060.9030.896
∆ Density, kg/m392123.8
Kw12.0512.0612.15
Sulphur, %0.1920.1020.14
H-Oil VGO flow rate, t/h527847
H-Oil VGO in the blend HTVGO-H-Oil VGO, wt %27.531.218.8
H-Oil VGO density at 15 °C, g/cm30.92730.95260.9403
5%, °C330300296
10%, °C353324322
50%, °C422397395
90%, °C494497474
95%, °C517523504
Kw11.6211.1711.31
Sulphur, %0.6240.6220.366
Concarbon, % m/m0.150.210.11
FCC feed flow rate, t/h255250250
FCC slurry in FCC feed, %000
H-Oil VGO in FCC feed
(coming from FCCPT and directly in FCCU), %
27.531.218.8
FCC feed density at 15 °C, g/cm30.91050.91570.9119
5%, °C368337348
10%, °C388359368
50%, °C442434442
90%, °C501514519
95%, °C519533537
Kw11.9511.8411.93
Sulphur, %0.2540.2810.19
Concarbon, % m/m0.140.140.26
Reactor temperature, °C535550543
Combined feed temperature, °C308307323
Regenerator dense bed temperature, °C694704710
Regenerator dilute phase temperature, °C708710718
Air, kNm3/h124,480136,745138,034
CTO wt/wt,6.608.57.3
Heat of reaction kJ/kg feed309412.2470
Hydrogen in coke, %8.56.37.2
∆ Coke, %0.630.590.65
TOS, s2.22.12.1
Yields on fresh feed basis, wt%
C23.626.45.42
C36.616.397.1
C410.810.8911.85
C5+ Gasoline (corrected to T90% = 170 °C)47.245.147.1
LCO10.137.68.54
HCO10.49.08.92
Slurry6.348.136.85
Coke4.184.964.72
Conversion73.273.175.7
C3 = in PPF, vol, %81.181.981.5
iC4 in BBF, vol, %31.530.031.9
iC4 = in BBF, vol, %16.217.115.6
C4 = in BBF, vol, %59.461.859.1
FCC gasoline properties
Density at 15 °C, kg/m3739.5738.4738.1
IBP, °C3634.334.9
10%, °C525051.8
50%, °C9286.988.9
90%, °C167163.5167.1
FBP, °C199200.3204.2
RON93.694.494.2
RVP, kPa 58.954.9
Sulphur content, ppm14413494
MON81.882.582.6
LCO Properties
Density at 15 °C, kg/m3928.4934.1926.9
IBP, °C209186183
10%, °C213204204
50%, °C237241239
90%, °C272273267
FBP, °C304299306
Kw10.5610.5710.57
HCO Properties
Density at 15 °C, kg/m31021.11045
IBP, °C 288
10%, °C 320
50%, °C 350
90%, °C 387
FBP, °C 409
Kw 9.94
Sulphur, wt,%0.8150.946
Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content.

Share and Cite

MDPI and ACS Style

Stratiev, D.; Ivanov, M.; Chavdarov, I.; Argirov, G.; Strovegli, G. Revamping Fluid Catalytic Cracking Unit, and Optimizing Catalyst to Process Heavier Feeds. Appl. Sci. 2023, 13, 2017. https://doi.org/10.3390/app13032017

AMA Style

Stratiev D, Ivanov M, Chavdarov I, Argirov G, Strovegli G. Revamping Fluid Catalytic Cracking Unit, and Optimizing Catalyst to Process Heavier Feeds. Applied Sciences. 2023; 13(3):2017. https://doi.org/10.3390/app13032017

Chicago/Turabian Style

Stratiev, Dicho, Mihail Ivanov, Ivan Chavdarov, Georgi Argirov, and Giulia Strovegli. 2023. "Revamping Fluid Catalytic Cracking Unit, and Optimizing Catalyst to Process Heavier Feeds" Applied Sciences 13, no. 3: 2017. https://doi.org/10.3390/app13032017

Note that from the first issue of 2016, this journal uses article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.

Article Metrics

Back to TopTop