×
INTELLIGENT WORK FORUMS
FOR ENGINEERING PROFESSIONALS

Log In

Come Join Us!

Are you an
Engineering professional?
Join Eng-Tips Forums!
  • Talk With Other Members
  • Be Notified Of Responses
    To Your Posts
  • Keyword Search
  • One-Click Access To Your
    Favorite Forums
  • Automated Signatures
    On Your Posts
  • Best Of All, It's Free!
  • Students Click Here

*Eng-Tips's functionality depends on members receiving e-mail. By joining you are opting in to receive e-mail.

Posting Guidelines

Promoting, selling, recruiting, coursework and thesis posting is forbidden.

Students Click Here

Jobs

Coke Formation in Reactor Systems

Coke Formation in Reactor Systems

Coke Formation in Reactor Systems

(OP)
I have a project to install new heat transfer equipment in a paraffin dehydrogenation reaction loop (UOP Pacol Process) with a end of run reaction temperature of about 920F. I have recieved the recommendation that we should sulfide our substantial amount of new metal at start-up to reduce catalyzed coke formation. This recommendation is being challenged by operations, and now I must formulate some response to the question of what the consequences are if we forego sulfiding. Previous projects in this unit and in our other Pacol units have generally sulfided metal prior to putting into service so I have no reference points for not sulfiding.

The current process has some cracking products (CH4, C2's, C3's, etc) in the recycle H2, and our heat exchanger has a low density carbon build-up that must be cleaned every few years to reduce pressure drop and restore heat transfer. I have recieved some good but conflicting opinions from engineers in other units where I have worked that have coke formation histories (ethylene and hydrotreating units). One area of uncertainty is catalyzed vs thermal mechanisms since it is reasonable to believe that a one time sulfiding will not have any effect on thermal decomposition.

Can anyone point me to some literature on this subject?

thanks,
sshep

 

RE: Coke Formation in Reactor Systems

Sshep, I could not find an answer to your question in available literature, other than the remark that coke formation is a major issue in the Pacol process. Wouldn't you simply want to follow UOP recommendations in order to not lose their performance guarantee if there is one?
If in-situ sulfiding is a problem for Operations, this can generally be done off-site as well by companies like Eurecat.

RE: Coke Formation in Reactor Systems

Sshep
I would love to give you a differnt opinion but since my limited experience in oil was actually with UOP I would also say sulfide the bare metal to avoid catalyzed coke formation from "active sites" in the metal.

I would also comment that not doing it is certainly more risky than doing it and having the operators complain that you are wasting there time for a couple of weeks.   Donuts can always buy your way out of that.

I don't know of any book that comments on it but you might look in the oil & gas journals for articles.   I know it was often a subject of discussion at UOP when the temps reached the 900F mark.

Goodluck
StoneCold

RE: Coke Formation in Reactor Systems

once again with my glasses on. Aaaah.. it's not a new unit... In any case I would still consult UOP and follow their advice, which is probably sulfide it. If necessary/required go for ex-situ to gain time and avoid safety issues.

Red Flag This Post

Please let us know here why this post is inappropriate. Reasons such as off-topic, duplicates, flames, illegal, vulgar, or students posting their homework.

Red Flag Submitted

Thank you for helping keep Eng-Tips Forums free from inappropriate posts.
The Eng-Tips staff will check this out and take appropriate action.

Reply To This Thread

Posting in the Eng-Tips forums is a member-only feature.

Click Here to join Eng-Tips and talk with other members!


Resources