Academia.eduAcademia.edu

Figure 2 – uploaded by Farris Idaham

See full PDFdownloadDownload figure
Figure 1-2: GTL process block diagram [2] further explained and discussed in the next part of this report.

Figure 1 -2: GTL process block diagram [2] further explained and discussed in the next part of this report.

Related Figures (53)

1-1 shows a simplified process scheme of the FTS.[3]
1-1 shows a simplified process scheme of the FTS.[3]
Table 1-1: Effect of changing of parameters on chain growth probability, olefin/parafin ratio, carbon deposition and methane selectivity [3]
Table 1-1: Effect of changing of parameters on chain growth probability, olefin/parafin ratio, carbon deposition and methane selectivity [3]
Figure 1-5: Multitubular fixed-bed reactor used in FTS [18] model a fixed-bed reactor for the FTS. Figure 1-5 depicts a multitubular fixed-bed reactor used in FTS
Figure 1-5: Multitubular fixed-bed reactor used in FTS [18] model a fixed-bed reactor for the FTS. Figure 1-5 depicts a multitubular fixed-bed reactor used in FTS
process includes a pre-reformer, fired heater and ATR.
process includes a pre-reformer, fired heater and ATR.
Table 3-1: Application of different catalysts used in FTS and their corressponding value of a [2] In this study, the FTS synthesis was modeled as a PFR in Aspen HYSYS as the idea is to simulate it as a a. depends on a number of things including temperature and type of catalyst used. Table 3-1 show: the typical value of o for different catalysts and products. [2] multitubular fixed bed reactor. K.Moen[2] and Otaraku et al.[6] also did the same by modelling the FTR as PER in their simulation study. However, O.Kristian [8] modeled the FTR as a CSTR citing that he
Table 3-1: Application of different catalysts used in FTS and their corressponding value of a [2] In this study, the FTS synthesis was modeled as a PFR in Aspen HYSYS as the idea is to simulate it as a a. depends on a number of things including temperature and type of catalyst used. Table 3-1 show: the typical value of o for different catalysts and products. [2] multitubular fixed bed reactor. K.Moen[2] and Otaraku et al.[6] also did the same by modelling the FTR as PER in their simulation study. However, O.Kristian [8] modeled the FTR as a CSTR citing that he
Table 4-1: Molar composition of natural gas [1],[2]
Table 4-1: Molar composition of natural gas [1],[2]
Table 4-2: Chemical reactions in pre-reformer and corresponding enthalypy values [6] The pre-reformer was simulated as an equilibrium reactor and the reactions as an equilibrium set
Table 4-2: Chemical reactions in pre-reformer and corresponding enthalypy values [6] The pre-reformer was simulated as an equilibrium reactor and the reactions as an equilibrium set
Table 4-3: Feed process conditions [9], [2]
Table 4-3: Feed process conditions [9], [2]
The ATR was modelled as a kinetic reactor with heterogenous catalyst. The reaction set for ATR was consequently also modelled as kinetic reactions. The kinetic data was obtained from J. Xu et al and D. the ATR. The three main reactions and their corresponding enthalpy of reaction is listed in table 4- Hoang et al[11], [22]. The kinetic data needed to model in Aspen HYSYS is shown in the following tabl In the ATR is where syngas was produced from natural gas and oxygen which was fed together into 4-4. The kinetic rate equations for reaction (1)-(3) are shown below.[11]
The ATR was modelled as a kinetic reactor with heterogenous catalyst. The reaction set for ATR was consequently also modelled as kinetic reactions. The kinetic data was obtained from J. Xu et al and D. the ATR. The three main reactions and their corresponding enthalpy of reaction is listed in table 4- Hoang et al[11], [22]. The kinetic data needed to model in Aspen HYSYS is shown in the following tabl In the ATR is where syngas was produced from natural gas and oxygen which was fed together into 4-4. The kinetic rate equations for reaction (1)-(3) are shown below.[11]
Table 4-5: Kinetic data of reactions in ATR [11],[22]
Table 4-5: Kinetic data of reactions in ATR [11],[22]
shown in figure 5-1 and figure 5-2 respectively. H2:CO=2. The flowsheet of the simulated syngas process configuration in HYSYS with CSTR and PFR is to each other. This was done to study the optimal contact model of the ATR to produce syngas with by the PFR and simulated again. The performance and results of both of the reactors were compared
shown in figure 5-1 and figure 5-2 respectively. H2:CO=2. The flowsheet of the simulated syngas process configuration in HYSYS with CSTR and PFR is to each other. This was done to study the optimal contact model of the ATR to produce syngas with by the PFR and simulated again. The performance and results of both of the reactors were compared
Figure 5-3: Simualtion of ATR modelled as adiabatic PFR
Figure 5-3: Simualtion of ATR modelled as adiabatic PFR
flowsheet as simulated in HYSYS is shown in figure 5-7.
flowsheet as simulated in HYSYS is shown in figure 5-7.
The results of all the proposed configurations and case studies are presented in the next chapter. A
The results of all the proposed configurations and case studies are presented in the next chapter. A
Table 6-2: Process condition data of configuration 1
Table 6-2: Process condition data of configuration 1
Table 6-4: Molar fraction data of configuration 2 The ATR was modelled as an isothermal PFR in configuration 2 as stated earlier. Table 6-4
Table 6-4: Molar fraction data of configuration 2 The ATR was modelled as an isothermal PFR in configuration 2 as stated earlier. Table 6-4
Table 6-5: ATR (Isothermal PFR) data
Table 6-5: ATR (Isothermal PFR) data
Table 6-6 Molar fraction data of configuration 3 Table 6-7: ATR (Adiabatic PFR) data
Table 6-6 Molar fraction data of configuration 3 Table 6-7: ATR (Adiabatic PFR) data
Table 6-8: Molar fraction data of multi stage ATR
Table 6-8: Molar fraction data of multi stage ATR
Table 6-9: Multi stage ATR data
Table 6-9: Multi stage ATR data
Table 6-10: Process condition data of multi stage ATR simulation
Table 6-10: Process condition data of multi stage ATR simulation
Table 6-11: Summary of case study 1
Table 6-11: Summary of case study 1
Table 6-12: Summary of case study 2
Table 6-12: Summary of case study 2
Table 6-13: Variation of molar fraction of desired product with catalyst void fraction in FTR Case 3: Influence of cobalt catalyst characteristic on product distribution
Table 6-13: Variation of molar fraction of desired product with catalyst void fraction in FTR Case 3: Influence of cobalt catalyst characteristic on product distribution
Figure 6-1: variation of molar fraction of desired product with catalyst void fraction in FTR
Figure 6-1: variation of molar fraction of desired product with catalyst void fraction in FTR
Table 6-15: Molar fraction data of multiple stage FTR simulation
Table 6-15: Molar fraction data of multiple stage FTR simulation
Table 6-16: Reactor data of multiple stage FTR
Table 6-16: Reactor data of multiple stage FTR
Table 6-17: Process condition of multiple stage FTr simulation
Table 6-17: Process condition of multiple stage FTr simulation
figure 6-2.
figure 6-2.
Figure 6-3: Effect of steam on H2:CO ratio in syngas Figure 6-3 shows the effect of steam:carbon ration on H2:CO ratio.
Figure 6-3: Effect of steam on H2:CO ratio in syngas Figure 6-3 shows the effect of steam:carbon ration on H2:CO ratio.
Table 6-20: Molar fraction of optimal ATR configuration
Table 6-20: Molar fraction of optimal ATR configuration
Related topics:
Materials ScienceGas to LiquidsOptimization of Chemical Processes
580 California St., Suite 400
San Francisco, CA, 94104
© 2025 Academia. All rights reserved