Next Article in Journal
Comparison of the Methods for Predicting the Critical Temperature and Critical Pressure of Petroleum Fractions and Individual Hydrocarbons
Previous Article in Journal
The Development of a Kinetic Model for Biochar Gasification with CO2: Comparison Between a Thermogravimetric Analyzer and a Fluidized Bed Reactor
 
 
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:
Background:
Article

Hydrocracking of Various Vacuum Residues

1
LUKOIL Neftohim Burgas, 8104 Burgas, Bulgaria
2
Institute of Biophysics and Biomedical Engineering, Bulgarian Academy of Sciences, Georgi Bonchev 105, 1113 Sofia, Bulgaria
Fuels 2025, 6(2), 35; https://doi.org/10.3390/fuels6020035
Submission received: 15 April 2025 / Revised: 25 April 2025 / Accepted: 28 April 2025 / Published: 7 May 2025

Abstract

:
The residue conversion processes, coking, visbreaking, and fluid catalytic cracking (FCC), have demonstrated that feedstock quality is the single factor that most affects process performance. While, for the FCC, it is known that the heavy oil conversion at a maximum gasoline yield point can vary between 50 and 85 wt. %, for the vacuum residue hydrocracking, no reports have appeared yet to reveal the dependence of conversion on the quality of vacuum residue being hydrocracked. In order to search for such a dependence, eight vacuum residues derived from medium, heavy, and extra heavy crude oils have been hydrocracked in a laboratory unit at different reaction temperatures. The current study has witnessed that the vacuum residue hydrocracking obeys the same rule as that of the other residue conversion processes, confirming that the feedstock quality has a great influence on the process performance. A conversion variation between 45 and 85 wt. % can be observed when the sediment content in the hydrocracked atmospheric residue is within the acceptable limit, guaranteeing the planned cycle length. An intercriteria analysis was performed, and it revealed that the vacuum residue conversion has negative consonances with the contents of nitrogen and metals. Correlations were developed which predict the conversion at constant operating conditions within the uncertainty of conversion measurement of 1.7 wt. % and correlation coefficient of 0.964. The conversion at constant hydrocracked atmospheric residue (HCAR) sediment content was predicted with a correlation coefficient of 0.985. The correlations developed in this work disclosed that the higher the contents of metals, nitrogen, and asphaltenes, and the lower the content of sulfur, the lower the conversion in the hydrocracking process is. It was also shown that vacuum residues, which have the same reactivity (the same conversion at identical operating conditions), can indicate significant difference in the conversion at the same HCAR sediment content due to their diverse propensity to form sediments in the process of hydrocracking.

1. Introduction

Petroleum is a mineral resource that consists of a myriad of hydrocarbons [1,2,3] and hydrocarbon derivatives, which contain sulfur [4], nitrogen [5], oxygen [6,7,8,9], and metals [10] such as vanadium, nickel [11,12], sodium, calcium, magnesium, iron [13], mercury [14], and others [13]. Transportation fuels, products of petroleum refining, make up the majority of industrial production volume and provide more than 80% of current global primary energy demand [15]. Petroleum is used as a feedstock for manufacturing many products of chemical and pharmaceutical industry [15]. Oil is extremely important for many countries, as it is needed for numerous sectors and to maintain industrial civilization in its current form. Distribution of various types of oil all over the world has shown that the conventional oils (these are the crude oils with density at 15 °C ≤ 0.932 g/cm3, which are produced by conventional methods) presents 30% of oil resources, while the unconventional oils (heavy, extra heavy oils, and bitumen) contribute to about 70% of global proven oil reserves [16,17,18]. The significantly higher share of heavy oils, which contain a higher amount of residue fraction, as a crude oil resource makes those dealing with petroleum refining to employ processes, which can convert the bottom of the barrel in high value automotive fuels and feed for petrochemistry [19,20,21,22]. Table 1 summarizes the worldwide distribution of residue conversion technologies [23].
For the residue conversion process coking, the conversion and yields of products can be calculated on the base of information about the microcarbon residue content of the residue feed [24]. For the residue, FCC Navarro et al. [25] have shown that the FCC feed conversion is best predicted from its hydrogen content. They reported that for the range of hydrogen contents in the FCC feeds from 9.6 to 14.8 wt. %, the fluctuation of conversion at the point of maximum gasoline point is between 50 and 85 wt. % [25]. The aim of the visbreaker is to reduce the residue viscosity by a mild thermal cracking and decrease in this way the quantity of distillates used as cutter stocks [26]. Stratiev et al. [27] communicated about the presence of a correlation between the viscosity of the vacuum residue feed for a commercial visbreaker and the viscosity of the visbroken residue. Thus, one may conclude that the performance of coking, visbreaking, and FCC can be predicted on the base of information about characteristics (microcarbon residue content, hydrogen content, and viscosity) of the residue feed. Prajapati et al. [28] investigated the slurry-phase hydrocracking of six vacuum residues. They compared the catalytic activities with the thermal activities for all examined feedstocks. They observed that the lightest vacuum residue MGL-VR (density at 15.6 °C of 0.9174) that has the highest saturate content (38.1 wt. %) demonstrated the maximum catalytic conversion. The results of their study suggest that the residue conversion can be predicted from the microcarbon residue content MCR in the vacuum residue feed. However, they did not report a definite quantitative relation of vacuum residue conversion to the MCR as Muñoz et al. [24] did in their research devoted to the delayed coking. To the best of this author’s knowledge, similar reports dealing with the conversion prediction in the process of ebullated bed vacuum residue hydrocracking from feed properties has not yet appeared in the literature. For this reason, the author of this study discusses the pilot plant results obtained during the ebullated bed hydrocracking of eight distinct vacuum residues obtained from medium, heavy, and extra heavy crude oils with the aim of defining these residue characteristics, which affect the conversion level in vacuum residue ebullated bed hydrocracking. Based on a rich, positive previous experience with application of the intercriteria analysis (ICrA) to define statistically meaningful relations between different properties of feeds in various heavy oil conversion processes and the operating conditions, conversions, and yields summarized in a monograph [29], a decision was made to employ ICrA in this research too. ICrA established on the foundation of intuitionistic fuzziness and index matrices as a tool to support decision making in multiobject multivariable problems found successful applications in medicine, biology, economics, physics, etc., and it can be considered a component of the artificial intelligence tool [30,31,32]. ICrA was used in this study to investigate the presence or absence of statistically meaningful relations between the vacuum residue characteristics and the conversion obtained at the same operating conditions and at the same sediment level in the hydrocracked atmospheric residue.

2. Materials and Methods

Properties of eight crude oils from which the vacuum residues were employed as feeds for the hydrocracking are presented in Table 2.
The characteristics of the eight vacuum residues being hydrocracked in this study are summarized in Table 3.
The density of the vacuum residual oils was measured indirectly from the densities of a series of solutions of vacuum residues in toluene at different concentrations, as described in [33]. Solutions of vacuum residues in toluene at concentrations up to a vacuum residue mass fraction of 6% were prepared. Sulfur content of vacuum residues was measured using energy-dispersive X-ray fluorescence spectrometry in accordance with the ASTM D 4294 method [34,35]. The asphaltene (C7 and C5) content was determined as heptane and pentane insolubles following the procedure described in the ASTM D 6560 standard method [35,36]. SARA composition of vacuum residue fractions was measured in accordance with the ASTM D 4124 [35,37]. The Conradson carbon content of the studied oils was measured in accordance with ASTM D 189 [35,38]. The nitrogen content of the residual oils was determined following the ASTM D 5291 [35,39] requirements. The total sediment existent content (TSE) of the hydrocracked atmospheric residue (ATB) was measured using hot filtration in accordance with the ISO 10307-1 method [35,40]. The contents of Ni and V were measured in accordance with the standard IP 501 [41].
The 540 °C+ vacuum residue conversion was calculated using Equation (1):
C o n v e r s i o n   wt . % = F e e d   540   ° C + P r o d u c t   540   ° C + F e e d   540   ° C + × 100
Feed 540 °C+ = mass of the VR feed fraction boiling above 540 °C determined by the high-temperature simulated distillation method, ASTM D 7169 [42,43], of the feed and multiplied by the mass of the feed;
Product 540 °C+ = mass of liquid product fraction boiling above 540 °C determined using a high-temperature simulated distillation method, ASTM D 7169 [42,43].
Details about the laboratory hydrocracking unit and the hydrocracking-operating conditions employed are presented in [44,45]. The uncertainty of the measurement of the pilot plant vacuum residue hydrocracking conversion was 1.7 wt. %. A low-sediment Ni-Mo-supported commercial catalyst was availed in this research.
The assessment of relationships between the characteristics of the vacuum residual oils and conversion level was performed by using the intercriteria analysis (IcrA) [35]. Details of the theory and application of IcrA are presented in [46]. As input data, IcrA needs an m × n table with the measurements of m objects against n criteria. As a result, it returns a n × n table with intuitionistic fuzzy pairs, determining the degrees of relation between each pair of criteria, hence the name “intercriteria”, and allows for making informed decisions, which render accounts of the inherent uncertainty that complex real-life problems exhibit. For the sake of terminological precision, in IcrA, the term “correlation” between the criteria is avoided but the terms “positive consonance”, “negative consonance”, and “dissonance” are being used instead. The IcrA approach calculates two intuitionistic fuzzy functions: μ and υ, whose values define the degree of the relationship between the criteria [35]. For μ = 0.75 ÷ 1.00 and υ = 0 ÷ 0.25, a region of statistically meaningful positive consonance is determined, while at μ = 0 ÷ 0.25 and υ = 0.75 ÷ 1.00, an area of statistically meaningful negative consonance is derived. All other cases are considered to be dissonance. A strong consonance is considered at values of μ = 0.95 ÷ 1.00, υ = 0.00 ÷ 0.05 (positive), μ = 0.00 ÷ 0.05, and υ = 0.95 ÷ 1.00 (negative), while a weak consonance is deemed at μ = 0.75 ÷ 0.85, υ = 0.15 ÷ 0.25 (positive), μ = 0.15 ÷ 0.25, and υ = 0.75 ÷ 0.85 (negative). Two software packages for IcrA were established, were freely available as open source from https://intercriteria.net/software/ (accessed on 25 April 2025), and were detailed in [47,48,49,50]. IcrA was successfully applied in the field of economy [51,52,53], biology [54,55,56], medicine [57,58,59], education [60,61], environmental protection [62,63,64], and mathematics [65,66,67].
Before IcrA evaluation, all variables are normalized using the normalization formula (Equation (2)):
X n e w = X X m i n X m a x X m i n
The decision to apply IcrA is due to the fact that it can register the presence of statistically meaningful relations that are both linear and nonlinear, while conventional correlation analysis uncovers the presence only of linear relations [22,67].
Two types of regression models, linear and nonlinear, were employed in this research. The optimal parameters of regression coefficients were established by using the nonlinear least squares method (LSM) [68]. An optimization tool, the Differential Evolution (DE) algorithm, was used to search for the best parameter values in compact subsets in parameter space [68]. The DE algorithm does not require differentiability or even continuity of the optimized function. Moreover, it is very applicable to construct some necessary bounds in the parameter space. All calculations have been realized by the use of CAS Maple 2024.2, Global Optimization Tool (method = diffevol), and verified by a simple Python script, based on differential evolution package from scipy.optimize library [68].
The methodology used in this study is summarized in Figure 1.

3. Results and Discussion

The conversion level at constant operating conditions (constant reaction temperature and liquid hourly space velocity) for the eight studied vacuum residues is shown in Figure 2.
These data indicate that reactivity of the examined vacuum residues is different, demonstrating a conversion variation between 64 and 76 wt. % at constant operating conditions.
The variation in the hydrocracked atmospheric residue (HCAR) sediment content with conversion alteration for the vacuum residues VR 2, VR 3, and VR 5 is depicted in Figure 3.
It is worth mentioning here that VR 2 and VR 3, as apparent from the data in Figure 2, have the same reactivity. However, as shown in the data of Figure 3, these two vacuum residues exhibit quite different sediment formation propensities. Considering that, the commercial ebullated bed vacuum residue hydrocracker operates at constant sediment content in the HCAR to provide a sufficient cycle length before two consecutive cleanings; the more important conversion is that at constant HCAR sediment content (Figure 4).
The data in Figure 4 show much wider variations in conversion among the vacuum residues studied (between 45 and 85 wt. %) in comparison to that at constant operating conditions. The reason for this difference lies in the diverse sediment formation affinity of the various vacuum residues. For example, VR 2, VR 3, and VR 4 demonstrate the same reactivity (conversion in the range 65–65.5 wt. % at constant operating conditions, Figure 2). While the same vacuum residues show a difference between conversions in the range 45–65 wt. % at the same HCAR sediment content (Figure 4). This implies that at commercial conditions, the vacuum residues VR 2 and VR 3 would exhibit substantial difference in conversions as opposed to their reactivity, which seems to be the same, but their sediment formation propensity is much different.
Table 4 and Table 5 present the μ and υ values of the IcrA evaluation of the vacuum residue characteristics and both conversions (at constant operating conditions and constant HCAR sediment content). It is evident from these data that three vacuum residue characteristics (nitrogen, Ni, and V contents) have negative consonances with both conversions. Therefore, their enhancement will affect negatively conversion levels. The regression of data for vacuum residue properties (the contents of sulfur (S), nitrogen (N), C7-asphaltenes (C7asp), and Conradson carbon content (CCR)), density at 15 °C (D15), and conversion at constant operating conditions has led to the development of two correlations, shown as Equations (3) and (4):
V R   c o n v e r s i o n c o n s t a n t   o p e r a t i n g   c o n d i t i o n s = 2.060268 × S 7.9594 × N 0.2955 × C 7 a s p 4.1493 C C R + 67.6589   R = 0.964 ,   st .   error = 0.87   wt .   %
V R   c o n v e r s i o n c o n s t a n t   o p e r a t i n g   c o n d i t i o n s = 1.1843 × S 12.7763 × N 0.2461 × C 7 a s p 54.1008 D 15 + 125.817   R = 0.947 ,   st .   error = 1.12   wt .   %
Equations (3) and (4) suggest that the reactivity of a vacuum residue in the hydrocracking process increases with the enhancement of sulfur content, increasing Conradson carbon content (CCR) or density, and decreasing nitrogen and asphaltene contents. The positive effect of sulfur on vacuum residue reactivity may be a result of the decomposition of the reactive sulfur species and increasing the rates of the initiation and propagation steps during the chain reaction mechanism of vacuum residue hydrocracking [69]. The positive effect of sulfur on the conversion in the vacuum residue hydrocracking has also been reported by Chang et al. [70]. According to the free radical chain reaction mechanism for liquid-phase cracking, in order to maximize residue conversion, maximizing the initiation and propagation steps and minimizing the termination step are required [69]. Increasing the content of free radical initiators in the vacuum residue has been shown to enhance conversion during hydrocracking [71]. It deserves mentioning that the increase in density (Conradson carbon content) has a positive effect on the vacuum residue hydrocracking reactivity. These findings are in line with the results reported by Fortain [72], who showed that the vacuum residue with higher density (higher Conradson carbon content, respectively, lower saturate content) have a higher reactivity during catalytic hydrocracking. The aromatic species containing in the vacuum residues examined in this work seem to improve the rates of the initiation and propagation steps and decrease the rates of the termination step. A possible explanation for their higher reactivity could lie in their higher content of sulfur, as shown in an earlier study [73], and this higher sulfur content should be more reactive. Nitrogen has been shown to act as an inhibitor in the residue hydroprocessing [74]. The nitrogen in the residual oils is included in the polycyclic aromatic structure of the higher-boiling-point material [69]. These polycyclic aromatic nitrogen-containing structures may form stable radicals during their thermal conversion and as such to result in a decrease in the rate of cracking of the residue and an increase in the rate of termination reactions [69]. The asphaltenes, the most aromatic and polar fraction in the vacuum residue, may also form stable radicals during their thermal conversion and decrease the rate of cracking of the residue and increase the rate of termination reactions. Asphaltenes have been reported to be the most refractive fraction to process during hydroconversion [75,76,77]. Equations (3) and (4) are in line with the findings of these studies.
Figure 5a,b illustrate the agreement between measured and calculated conversions at constant operating conditions.
The regression of data for vacuum residue properties (the contents of sulfur (S), nitrogen (N), C7-asphaltenes (C7 asp), and Conradson carbon content (CCR)) and conversion at constant HCAR sediment content has led to the development of the correlation, which is shown as Equation (5):
V R   c o n v e r s i o n c o n s t a n t   H C A R   s e d i m e n t = 87.1306 0.01306 × V + N i 13.3068 × N 0.92045 × C C R + 5.9613 × S 0.83468 × C 7 a s p   R = 0.985 ,   st .   error = 3.8   wt .   %
Figure 6 exhibits the agreement between conversions measured and calculated using Equation (5) at a constant HCAR sediment content.
The formation of coke-like sediments in the vacuum residue hydrocracking is believed to follow the mechanism of free radical recombination and polymerization, where unsaturated hydrocarbons react to form higher-molecular-weight components [78]. Equation (5) suggests that asphaltenes, metals, nitrogen, and heavy polynuclear aromatic components expressed by the Conradson carbon content promote this mechanism. The role of asphaltenes on the sedimentation is well documented [75,79]. The negative effect of nitrogen on sedimentation is also known [75]. Metals deactivate the catalyst by plugging the internal micro- and meso-structures and impair the catalyst function that inhibits the reactions of radical recombinations and polymerization [80,81]. A higher polynuclear aromatic structure content (CCR), that, as observed from the data in Table 4 and Table 5, has positive consonance with asphaltenes (μ = 0.79; υ = 0.21), seems to also promote the free radical recombination and polymerization, probably by the concentration effect of the species, which are more reactive in these reactions. In other words, Equation (5) indicates that the vacuum residues which have high asphaltene, CCR, nitrogen, and metal contents seem to have higher propensity to form coke-like sediments and therefore would exhibit a lower conversion level in a commercial ebullated bed vacuum residue hydrocracker.

4. Conclusions

The ebullated bed vacuum residue hydrocracking similar to the other residue conversion processes, such as coking, FCC, and visbreaker, demonstrated that the feed properties have a tremendous impact on process performance. Conversion variation between 45 and 85 wt. % is feasible for the hydrocracking of various vacuum residues. The difference in vacuum residue conversion at constant operating conditions, which is an indicator for vacuum residue reactivity, is not as big as that between conversions obtained at the same hydrocracked atmospheric residue sediment content, which is due to the different sedimentation propensity of the various vacuum residues. The performed intercriteria analysis revealed that vacuum residue conversion has negative consonances with the contents of nitrogen and metals. Correlations were developed, showing that metals, nitrogen, and asphaltenes are inhibitors, while sulfur turns out to be a promotor during the vacuum residue hydrocracking process.

Funding

This research received no external funding.

Data Availability Statement

Data are contained within the article.

Conflicts of Interest

The author declares no conflicts of interest.

References

  1. Shi, Q.; Zhang, Y.; Chung, K.H.; Zhao, S.; Xu, C. Molecular Characterization of Fossil and Alternative Fuels Using Electrospray Ionization Fourier Transform Ion Cyclotron Resonance Mass Spectrometry: Recent Advances and Perspectives. Energy Fuels 2021, 35, 18019–18055. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  2. Li, S.; Wu, J.; Chen, J.; Li, Y.; Hu, M.; Huang, S.; Ren, X.; Zhang, W.; Zhang, Y.; Xu, C.; et al. Semiquantitative Molecular Characterization of Crude Oil. Energy Fuels 2024, 38, 3769–3783. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  3. Abdykarimov, B.; Alimzhanova, M.; Lopez-Serna, R.; Syrgabek, Y. Green analytical procedure index assessment for total petroleum hydrocarbons determination methods in soil and sediments. A review. Trends Environ. Anal. Chem. 2025, 46, e00262. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  4. Shi, Q.; Wu, J. Review on Sulfur Compounds in Petroleum and Its Products: State-of-the-Art and Perspectives. Energy Fuels 2021, 35, 14445–14461. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  5. Prado, C.H.C.; Rao, Y.; de Klerk, A. Nitrogen Removal from Oil: A Review. Energy Fuels 2017, 31, 14–36. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  6. Romanczyk, M.; Loegel, T. Qualitative characterization of oxygen-containing compounds in fuel extracts by using (-) electrospray ionization coupled to a linear quadrupole ion trap/orbitrap mass spectrometer. Fuel 2024, 359, 130502. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  7. Li, S.; Wu, J.; Chen, J.; Li, Y.; Hu, M.; Huang, S.; Ren, X.; Zhang, W.; Zhang, Y.; Xu, C.; et al. Rapid On-Column Esterification and Separation of Carboxylic Acids in Petroleum Fractions. Energy Fuels 2024, 38, 10737–10743. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  8. Zito, P.; Sihota, N.; Mohler, R.E.; Podgorski, D.C. The formation, reactivity, and fate of oxygen-containing organic compounds in petroleum-contaminated groundwaters: A state of the science review and future research directions. Sci. Total Environ. 2024, 918, 170619. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  9. Strelnikova, E.B.; Goncharov, I.V.; Serebrennikova, O.V. Concentration and distribution of oxygen-containing compounds in crude oils from the southeastern part of Western Siberia. Pet. Chem. 2012, 52, 278–283. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  10. Zhang, J.; Cao, J.; He, W. Porphyrin protonation induces decoupling of trace metals in petroleum. Org. Geochem. 2024, 198, 104878. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  11. López, L.; Mónaco, S.L. Vanadium, nickel and sulfur in crude oils and source rocks and their relationship with biomarkers: Implications for the origin of crude oils in Venezuelan basins. Org. Geochem. 2017, 104, 53–68. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  12. Chacon-Patino, M.I.; Nelson, J.; Rogel, E.; Hench, K.; Poirie, L.; Lopez-Linares, F.; Ovalles, C. Vanadium and nickel distributions in Pentane, In-between C5–C7 Asphaltenes, and heptane asphaltenes of heavy crude oils. Fuel 2021, 292, 120259. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  13. Attia, M.; Farag, S.; Jaffer, S.A.; Chaouki, J. Metal and sulfur removal from petroleum oil using a novel demetallization-desulfurization agent and process. J. Clean. Prod. 2020, 275, 124177. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  14. Wilhelm, S.M.; Bloom, N. Mercury in petroleum. Fuel Process. Technol. 2000, 63, 1–27. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  15. Vasudevan, H.; Zolghadri, S.; Makarem, M.A. Introduction to oil, gas, and petrochemical industries: Importance to the current world. In Crises in Oil, Gas and Petrochemical Industries; Volume 2: Loss Prevention and Disaster Management; Elsevier: Amsterdam, The Netherlands, 2023. [Google Scholar]
  16. Wang, Y.; Zhang, Y.; Wang, Y.; Zhang, Y.; Xu, C.; Xu, Z.; Shi, Q.; Zhang, L. C10–C50 Olefins in Thermal Cracking Products of Heavy Petroleum: Characterization Using Ag+ ESI High-Resolution Mass Spectrometry. Energy Fuels 2025, 39, 6803–6811. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  17. Kornienko, V.; Avtonomov, P. Application of Neutron Activation Analysis for Heavy Oil Production Control. Procedia—Soc. Behav. Sci. 2015, 195, 2451–2456. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  18. IEA. IEA Oil Market Report. May 2024. Available online: www.iea.org/reports/oil-market-report-may-2024 (accessed on 15 April 2025).
  19. Rana, M.S.; Saman, V.; Ancheyta, J.; Diaz, A.I. A review of recent advances on process technologies for upgrading of heavy oils and residua. Fuel 2007, 86, 1216–1231. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  20. Demirbas, A.; Bafail, A.; Nizami, A.-S. Heavy oil upgrading: Unlocking the future fuel supply. Petrol. Sci. Technol. 2016, 34, 303–308. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  21. Yatimi, Y.; Mendil, J.; Marafi, M.; Alalou, A.; Al-Dahhan, M.H. Advancement in heavy oil upgrading and sustainable exploration emerging technologies. Arab. J. Chem. 2024, 17, 105610. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  22. Stratiev, D.; Shishkova, I.; Argirov, G.; Dinkov, R.; Ivanov, M.; Sotirov, S.; Sotirova, E.; Bureva, V.; Nenov, S.; Atanassov, K.; et al. Roles of Catalysts and Feedstock in Optimizing the Performance of Heavy Fraction Conversion Processes: Fluid Catalytic Cracking and Ebullated Bed Vacuum Residue Hydrocracking. Catalysts 2024, 14, 616. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  23. Sahu, R.; Song, B.J.; Im, J.S.; Jeon, Y.-P.; Lee, C.W. A review of recent advances in catalytic hydrocracking of heavy residues. J. Ind. Eng. Chem. 2015, 27, 12–24. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  24. Muñoz, J.A.D.; Aguilar, R.; Castañeda, L.C.; Ancheyta, J. Comparison of Correlations for Estimating Product Yields from Delayed Coking. Energy Fuels 2013, 27, 7179–7190. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  25. Navarro, U.; Ni, M.; Orlicki, D. Understanding the Potential for FCC Feed to Generate Valuable Products and How This Knowledge Can Benefit Refinery Operation. Available online: www.digitalrefining.com/article/1001054 (accessed on 25 March 2025).
  26. Joshi, J.B.; Pandit, A.B.; Kataria, K.L.; Kulkarni, R.P.; Sawarkar, A.N.; Tandon, D.; Ram, Y.; Kumar, M.M. Petroleum residue upgradation via visbreaking: A review. Ind. Eng. Chem. Res. 2008, 47, 8960–8988. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  27. Stratiev, D.; Nedelchev, A.; Shishkova, I.; Ivanov, I.; Sharafutdinov, I.; Nikolova, R.; Mitkova, M.; Yordanov, D.; Rudnev, N.; Belchev, Z.; et al. Dependence of visbroken residue viscosity and vacuum residue conversion in a commercial visbreaker unit on feedstock quality. Fuel Process. Technol. 2015, 138, 595–604. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  28. Prajapati, R.; Kohli, K.; Maity, S.K. Residue upgradation with slurry phase catalyst: Effect of feedstock properties. Fuel 2019, 239, 452–460. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  29. Shishkova, I.; Stratiev, D.; Sotirov, S. Petroleum Chemistry and Processing Investigated by the Use of Intercriteria Analysis; Marin Drinov Publishing House of Bulgarian Academy of Sciences: Sofia, Bulgaria, 2024; pp. 124–141. [Google Scholar]
  30. Atanassov, K.; Vassilev, P. On the Intuitionistic fuzzy sets of n-th type. Advances in data analysis with computational intelligence methods. Stud. Comput. Intell. 2018, 738, 265–274. [Google Scholar]
  31. Roeva, O.; Vassilev, P.; Fidanova, S.; Paprzycki, M. InterCriteria Analysis of Genetic Algorithms Performance. Stud. Comput. Intell. 2016, 655, 235–260. [Google Scholar]
  32. Atanassov, K.; Szmidt, E.; Kacprzyk, J.; Atanassova, V. An approach to a constructive simplification of multiagent multicriteria decision making problems via intercriteria analysis. Comptes Rendus l’Acad. Bulg. Sci. 2017, 70, 1147–1156. [Google Scholar]
  33. Stratiev, D.; Shishkova, I.; Nikolaychuk, E.; Atanassova, V.; Atanassov, K. Investigation of relations of properties of straight run and H-Oil unconverted vacuum residual oils. Pet. Coal 2019, 61, 763–776. [Google Scholar]
  34. ASTM D4294-21; Standard Test Method for Sulfur in Petroleum and Petroleum Products by Energy Dispersive X-Ray Fluorescence Spectrometry. ASTM International: West Conshohocken, PA, USA, 2021.
  35. Shishkova, I.; Stratiev, D.; Kirov, P.; Dinkov, R.; Sotirov, S.; Sotirova, E.; Bureva, V.; Atanassov, K.; Toteva, V.; Vasilev, S.; et al. Root Cause Analysis for Observed Increased Sedimentation in a Commercial Residue Hydrocracker. Processes 2025, 13, 674. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  36. ASTM D6560-17; Standard Test Method for Determination of Asphaltenes (Heptane Insolubles) in Crude Petroleum and Petroleum Products. ASTM International: West Conshohocken, PA, USA, 2017.
  37. ASTM D4124-09; Standard Test Method for Separation of Asphalt into Four Fractions. ASTM International: West Conshohocken, PA, USA, 2018.
  38. ASTM D189-06; Standard Test Method for Conradson Carbon Residue of Petroleum Products. ASTM International: West Conshohocken, PA, USA, 2019.
  39. ASTM D5291-21; Standard Test Methods for Instrumental Determination of Carbon, Hydrogen, and Nitrogen in Petroleum Products and Lubricants. ASTM International: West Conshohocken, PA, USA, 2021.
  40. ISO 10307-1; Petroleum Products—Total Sediment in Residual Fuel Oils—Part 1: Determination by Hot Filtration. ISO: Geneva, Switzerland, 1993.
  41. IP 501-19; Determination of Aluminium, Silicon, Vanadium, Nickel, Iron, Sodium, Calcium, Zinc and Phosphorus in Residual Fuel Oil by Ashing, Fusion and Inductively Coupled Plasma Emission Spectrometry. EI: London, UK, 2019.
  42. ASTM D7169-20; Standard Test Method for Boiling Point Distribution of Samples with Residues Such as Crude Oils and Atmospheric and Vacuum Residues by High Temperature Gas Chromatography. ASTM International: West Conshohocken, PA, USA, 2020.
  43. Stratiev, D.; Nenov, S.; Shishkova, I.; Georgiev, B.; Argirov, G.; Dinkov, R.; Yordanov, D.; Atanassova, V.; Vassilev, P.; Atanassov, K. Commercial investigation of the ebullated bed vacuum residue hydrocracking in the conversion range 55–93%. ACS Omega 2020, 51, 33290. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  44. Stratiev, D.; Shishkova, I.; Argirov, G.; Yankov, V.; Mountainland, D.; Silverman, B.; Toteva, V. Improving H-Oil ebullated bed vacuum residue hydrocracking performance by the use of molecularly dispersed HCAT Catalyst. Pet. Coal 2021, 63, 655–667. [Google Scholar]
  45. 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]
  46. Atanassov, K.; Mavrov, D.; Atanassova, V. Intercriteria Decision Making: A New Approach for Multicriteria Decision Making, Based on Index Matrices and Intuitionistic Fuzzy Sets. In Issues in Intuitionistic Fuzzy Sets and Generalized Nets; Atanassov, K., Kacprzyk, J., Krawczak, M., Szmidt, E., Eds.; Warsaw School of Information Technology: Warsaw, Poland, 2014; Volume 11, pp. 1–8. [Google Scholar]
  47. Atanassov, K.; Atanassova, V.; Gluhchev, G. Intercriteria Analysis: Ideas and Problems. NIFS 2015, 21, 81–88. [Google Scholar]
  48. Mavrov, D. Software for InterCriteria Analysis: Implementation of the Main Algorithm. NIFS 2015, 21, 77–86. [Google Scholar]
  49. Mavrov, D. Software for Intercriteria Analysis: Working with the Results. Annu. Inform. Sect. Union Sci. Bulg. 2015, 8, 37–44. [Google Scholar]
  50. Ikonomov, N.; Vassilev, P.; Roeva, O. ICrAData—Software for InterCriteria Analysis. Int. J. Bioautomation 2018, 22, 1–10. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  51. Atanassova, V.; Doukovska, L.; De Tré, G.; Radeva, I. Intercriteria analysis and comparison of innovation-driven and efficiency-to-innovation driven economies in the European Union. NIFS 2017, 23, 54–68. [Google Scholar]
  52. Atanassova, V.; Doukovska, L.; Sotirova, A.; Kacprzyk, E.; Radeva, I.; Vassilev, P. Inter-Criteria analysis of the global competitiveness reports: From efficiency-to innovation-driven economies. J. Mult.-Valued Log. Soft Comput. 2018, 31, 469–494. [Google Scholar]
  53. Atanassova, V.; Doukovska, L.; Krawczak, M. Intercriteria analysis of countries in transition from factor-driven to efficiency-driven economy. NIFS 2018, 24, 84–96. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  54. Angelova, M.; Pencheva, T. Intercriteria analysis of multi-population genetic algorithms performance. Ann. Comput. Sci. Inf. Syst. 2017, 13, 77–82. [Google Scholar]
  55. Jereva, D.; Pencheva, T.; Tsakovska, I.; Alov, P.; Pajeva, I. Exploring applicability of inter-criteria analysis to evaluate the performance of MOE and GOLD scoring functions. In Advanced Computing in Industrial Mathematics; Georgiev, I., Kostadinov, H., Lilkova, E., Eds.; BGSIAM 2018; (Studies in Computational Intelligence); Springer: Cham, Switzerland, 2021; Volume 961. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  56. Roeva, O.; Zoteva, D. Knowledge discovery from data: InterCriteria analysis of mutation rate influence. NIFS 2018, 24, 120–130. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  57. Krumova, S.; Todinova, S.; Mavrov, D.; Marinov, P.; Atanassova, V.; Atanassov, K.; Taneva, S. Intercriteria analysis of calorimetric data of blood serum proteome. Biochim. Biophys. Acta Gen. Subj. 2017, 1861, 409–417. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  58. Ribagin, S.; Grozeva, A.; Popova, G.; Stoyanova, Z. InterCriteria analysis of body composition measurements data, associated with obesity among college students. NIFS 2019, 25, 78–82. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  59. Ribagin, S.; Stavrev, S. InterCriteria analysis of data from intellectual and physical evaluation tests of students practicing sports activities. NIFS 2019, 25, 83–89. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  60. Bureva, V.; Michalíková, A.; Sotirova, E.; Popov, S.; Riecan, B.; Roeva, O. Application of the InterCriteria analysis to the universities rankings system in the Slovak Republic. In Proceedings of the 21st International Conference on Intuitionistic Fuzzy Sets, Burgas, Bulgaria, 22–23 May 2017; Volume 23, pp. 128–140. [Google Scholar]
  61. Parvathi, R.; Atanassova, V.; Doukovska, L.; Yuvapriya, C.; Indhurekha, K. InterCriteria analysis of rankings of Indian universities. NIFS 2018, 24, 99–109. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  62. Georgieva, V.; Angelova, N.; Roeva, O.; Pencheva, T. Intercriteria analysis of wastewater treatment quality. J. Int. Sci. Publ. Ecol. Saf. 2016, 10, 365–376. [Google Scholar]
  63. Ilkova, T.; Petrov, M. Application of Intercriteria analysis to the Mesta river pollution modelling. NIFS 2015, 21, 118–125. [Google Scholar]
  64. Ilkova, T.; Petrov, M. Using intercriteria analysis for assessment of the pollution indexes of the Struma river. Adv. Intell. Syst. Comput. 2016, 401, 351–364. [Google Scholar]
  65. Angelova, M. InterCriteria analysis of control parameters relations in artificial bee colony algorithm. WSEAS Trans. Math. 2019, 18, 123–128. [Google Scholar]
  66. Atanassova, V.; Roeva, O. Computational complexity and influence of numerical precision on the results of intercriteria analysis in the decision making process. NIFS 2018, 24, 53–63. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  67. Marinov, P.; Fidanova, S. Intercriteria and correlation analyses: Similarities, differences and simultaneous use. Ann. Inf. Sect. 2015, 8, 45–53. [Google Scholar]
  68. Shiskova, I.; Stratiev, D.; Sotirov, S.; Sotirova, E.; Dinkov, R.; Kolev, I.; Stratiev, D.D.; Nenov, S.; Ribagin, S.; Atanassov, K.; et al. Predicting Petroleum SARA Composition from Density, Sulfur Content, Flash Point, and Simulated Distillation Data Using Regression and Artificial Neural Network Techniques. Processes 2024, 12, 1755. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  69. Gray, M.R.; McCaffrey, W.C. Role of Chain Reactions and Olefin Formation in Cracking, Hydroconversion, and Coking of Petroleum and Bitumen Fractions. Energy Fuels 2002, 16, 756–766. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  70. Chang, J.; Tsubaki, N.; Fujimoto, K. Elemental sulphur as an effective promoter for the catalytic hydrocracking of Arabian vacuum residue. Fuel 2001, 80, 1639–1643. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  71. Chang, J.; Fan, L.; Fujimoto, K. Enhancement Effect of Free Radical Initiator on Hydro-Thermal Cracking of Heavy Oil and Model Compound. Energy Fuels 1999, 13, 1107–1108. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  72. Fortain, P.D. Étude de la réactivité des résidus pétroliers en hydroconversion. Ph.D. Thesis, University of Bordeaux, Talence, France, 18 October 2010. [Google Scholar]
  73. Stratiev, D.; Dinkov, R.; Shishkova, I.; Sharafutdinov, I.; Ivanova, N.; Mitkova, M.; Yordanov, D.; Rudnev, N.; Stanulov, K.; Artemiev, A.; et al. What is behind the high values of hot filtration test of the ebullated bed residue H-Oil hydrocracker residual oils? Energy Fuels 2016, 30, 7037–7054. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  74. Ovalles, C.; Rogel, E.; Hurt, M.; Duma, V.; Morazan, H.; Hench, K.; Moir, M.E. Nitrogen speciation: Application to reactivity of feeds to hydroprocessing and catalyst deactivation. Chem. Solut. Chall. Pet. Ind. 2019, 1320, 261–280. [Google Scholar]
  75. Rogel, E.; Ovalles, C.; Pradhan, A.; Leung, P.; Chen, N. Sediment formation in residue hydroconversion processes and its correlation to asphaltene behavior. Energy Fuels 2013, 27, 6587–6593. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  76. Chung, K.H.; Xu, C. Narrow-cut characterization reveals resid process chemistry. Fuel 2001, 80, 1165–1177. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  77. Yang, C.; Du, F.; Zheng, H.; Keng, H.C. Hydroconversion characteristics and kinetics of residue narrow fractions. Fuel 2005, 84, 675–684. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  78. Manek, E.; Haydary, J. Hydrocracking of vacuum residue with solid and dispersed phase catalyst: Modeling of sediment formation and hydrodesulfurization. Fuel Process. Technol. 2017, 159, 320–327. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  79. Stanislaus, A.; Hauser, A.; Marafi, M. Investigation of the mechanism of sediment formation in residual oil hydrocracking process through characterization of sediment deposits. Catal. Today. 2005, 109, 167–177. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  80. Nguyen, T.-H.; Nguyen, Q.-A.; Cao, A.N.T.; Ernest, T.; Nguyen, T.B.; Pham, P.T.; Nguyen, T.M. Hydrodemetallization of heavy oil: Recent progress, challenge, and future prospects. J. Pet. Eng. 2022, 216, 110762. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  81. Tailleur, R.G.; Caprioli, L. Catalyst pore plugging effects on hydrocracking reactions in an ebullated bed reactor operation. Catal. Today 2005, 109, 185–194. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Figure 1. Experimental methodology.
Figure 1. Experimental methodology.
Fuels 06 00035 g001
Figure 2. Conversion at constant operating conditions for the eight studied vacuum residues.
Figure 2. Conversion at constant operating conditions for the eight studied vacuum residues.
Fuels 06 00035 g002
Figure 3. Hydrocracked atmospheric residue sediment content change with conversion enhancement.
Figure 3. Hydrocracked atmospheric residue sediment content change with conversion enhancement.
Fuels 06 00035 g003
Figure 4. Conversion at constant sediment content in the hydrocracked atmospheric residue for the eight studied vacuum residues.
Figure 4. Conversion at constant sediment content in the hydrocracked atmospheric residue for the eight studied vacuum residues.
Fuels 06 00035 g004
Figure 5. Agreement between measured and calculated using Equation (3) (a) and Equation (4) (b) conversions at constant operating conditions.
Figure 5. Agreement between measured and calculated using Equation (3) (a) and Equation (4) (b) conversions at constant operating conditions.
Fuels 06 00035 g005
Figure 6. Agreement between measured and calculated by Equation (5) conversions at constant HCAR sediment content.
Figure 6. Agreement between measured and calculated by Equation (5) conversions at constant HCAR sediment content.
Fuels 06 00035 g006
Table 1. Worldwide distribution of employed residue conversion technologies [23].
Table 1. Worldwide distribution of employed residue conversion technologies [23].
Residue Conversion TechnologyPer Cent of Total
Coking32
Visbreaking30
Fluid catalytic cracking (FCC)19
Hydroprocessing15
Solvent deasphalting4
Table 2. Physical and chemical properties of crude oils under study.
Table 2. Physical and chemical properties of crude oils under study.
Crude Oil PropertiesCrude Oil 1 Crude Oil 2Crude Oil 3Crude Oil 4Crude Oil 5Crude Oil 6Crude Oil 7Crude Oil 8
Density at 15 °C, g/cm30.8780.9230.8770.9590.8891.0090.8580.877
Sulfur, wt. %2.853.401.533.382.914.641.891.93
Total acid number, mg KOH/g0.200.160.112.300.282.700.060.14
C5-asphaltenes, wt. %6.019.04.512.214.717.53.53.8
C7-asphaltenes, wt. %3.312.82.77.78.912.12.22.9
Pour point, °C−36.0−28.2−9.0−28.5−36.0 −36.0−17.1
kinematic viscosity at 40 °C, mm2/s36.182.612.699.610.8 10.119.7
True boiling point distillation fraction yields, wt. %
IBP–110 °C9.04.28.12.26.40.09.38.3
110–180 °C10.18.39.55.08.61.011.69.7
180–240 °C8.77.68.94.57.83.010.18.8
240–360 °C19.316.222.023.318.611.021.621.2
IBP−360 °C47.136.348.535.041.515.052.648.0
360–540 °C24.423.227.832.024.431.524.426.7
˃540 °C27.539.622.832.833.153.021.924.2
Table 3. Physical and chemical properties of vacuum residues—feeds for hydrocracking.
Table 3. Physical and chemical properties of vacuum residues—feeds for hydrocracking.
Vacuum Residue PropertiesVR 1VR 2VR 3VR 4VR 5VR 6VR 7VR 8
Density at 15 °C, g/cm31.0491.0801.0181.0401.0451.0611.0221.019
Sulfur, wt. %6.66.32.73.965.566.24.223.9
Nitrogen, wt. %0.3570.8530.7020.62530.3870.630.40110.56
Conradson carbon content, wt. %26.933.520.4192322.519.818.6
Saturates, wt. %5.013.415.0010.57.26.511.612
Aromatics, wt. %36.51737.332.738.926.448.639.7
Resins, wt. %48.04039.743.637.147.832.141.2
C5-asphaltenes, wt. %19.844.115.322.628.031.814.313.5
C7-asphaltenes., wt. %10.529.6813.216.819.37.77.1
Nickel, ppm491545820950952071.4
Vanadium, ppm17984119789015029060232.5
Table 4. μ—values obtained from IcrA evaluation of the data for vacuum residue properties and conversions at constant operating conditions and constant HCAR sediment content.
Table 4. μ—values obtained from IcrA evaluation of the data for vacuum residue properties and conversions at constant operating conditions and constant HCAR sediment content.
μD15SulNCCRSat.AroRes.C5-AspC7-AspNiVConv. at Constant Sediment LevelConv. at Constant Op. Cond.
D151.000.890.500.790.250.210.640.860.860.610.640.460.43
Sul0.891.000.390.820.210.320.680.750.750.500.540.570.54
N0.500.391.000.500.750.290.500.640.640.750.710.140.11
CCR0.790.820.501.000.390.290.570.790.790.460.500.500.50
Sat.0.250.210.750.391.000.540.250.390.390.570.540.210.29
Aro0.210.320.290.290.541.000.290.140.140.250.210.680.71
Res.0.640.680.500.570.250.291.000.570.570.680.710.460.43
C5-asp0.860.750.640.790.390.140.571.001.000.680.640.320.29
C7-asp0.860.750.640.790.390.140.571.001.000.680.640.320.29
Ni0.610.500.750.460.570.250.680.680.681.000.960.140.11
V0.640.540.710.500.540.210.710.640.640.961.000.180.14
Conv. at constant sediment level0.460.570.140.500.210.680.460.320.320.140.181.000.82
Conv. at constant op. cond.0.430.540.110.500.290.710.430.290.290.110.140.821.00
Table 5. ν—values obtained from IcrA evaluation of the data for vacuum residue properties and conversions at constant operating conditions and constant HCAR sediment content.
Table 5. ν—values obtained from IcrA evaluation of the data for vacuum residue properties and conversions at constant operating conditions and constant HCAR sediment content.
νD15SulNCCRSat.AroRes.C5-AspC7-AspNiVConv. at Constant Sediment LevelConv. at Constant Op. Cond.
D150.000.110.500.210.750.790.360.140.140.390.360.460.50
Sul0.110.000.610.180.790.680.320.250.250.500.460.360.39
N0.500.610.000.500.250.710.500.360.360.250.290.790.82
CCR0.210.180.500.000.610.710.430.210.210.540.500.430.43
Sat.0.750.790.250.610.000.460.750.610.610.430.460.710.64
Aro0.790.680.710.710.460.000.710.860.860.750.790.250.21
Res.0.360.320.500.430.750.710.000.430.430.320.290.460.50
C5-asp0.140.250.360.210.610.860.430.000.000.320.360.610.64
C7-asp0.140.250.360.210.610.860.430.000.000.320.360.610.64
Ni0.390.500.250.540.430.750.320.320.320.000.040.790.82
V0.360.460.290.500.460.790.290.360.360.040.000.750.79
Conv. at constant sediment level0.460.360.790.430.710.250.460.610.610.790.750.000.04
Conv. at constant op. cond.0.500.390.820.430.640.210.500.640.640.820.790.040.00
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. Hydrocracking of Various Vacuum Residues. Fuels 2025, 6, 35. https://doi.org/10.3390/fuels6020035

AMA Style

Stratiev D. Hydrocracking of Various Vacuum Residues. Fuels. 2025; 6(2):35. https://doi.org/10.3390/fuels6020035

Chicago/Turabian Style

Stratiev, Dicho. 2025. "Hydrocracking of Various Vacuum Residues" Fuels 6, no. 2: 35. https://doi.org/10.3390/fuels6020035

APA Style

Stratiev, D. (2025). Hydrocracking of Various Vacuum Residues. Fuels, 6(2), 35. https://doi.org/10.3390/fuels6020035

Article Metrics

Back to TopTop