Computers and Chemical Engineering 25 (2001) 683– 692

www.elsevier.com/locate/compchemeng

A computer aided tool for heavy oil thermal cracking process

simulation
R. Maciel Filho a,*, M.F. Sugaya b
a
Laboratory of Optimization, Design and Ad6anced Control, Department of Chemical Processes, Faculty of Chemical Engineering,
State Uni6ersity of Campinas (UNICAMP), CP 6066, CEP 13081 -970 Campinas, SP, Brazil
b
Petrobrás, Ilha do Fundão, CEP 21949 -900, Rio de Janeiro, RJ, Brazil

Received 10 May 2000; accepted 5 January 2001

Abstract

This work presents the model for the development of a computer aided tool for heavy oil thermal cracking process simulation.
It is proposed a dual plug flow reactor representation for the light pyrolysis of petroleum distillation residues in coil-type reactors.
The resulting reactor model consists of two parallel plug flows, one vapor and the other liquid, traveling at different speeds in a
coil. Reaction is assumed to be the rate controlling process with equilibrium between the phases. Because of the pyrolysis reactions
and pressure drop, vaporization takes place continuously along the coil so there is a decrease in the liquid hold-up. The model
derived uses a heuristic lumping approach based on pilot plant data and the resulting pseudokinetic scheme presents a certain feed
independence within the range of stocks available for the study. An industrial case study (delayed coking) is explored to provide
insight into the problem of reconciling the kinetics of pyrolysis and carbonization for the upgrade of distillation residues. © 2001
Elsevier Science Ltd. All rights reserved.

Keywords: Delayed coking; Plug flow reactor; Pyrolysis; Thermal cracking; Coking

1. Introduction times used. After mixing with a recycle stream in the

The presence of metals and asphaltenic molecules in
the distillation residues has been a serious obstacle to
the use of catalytic processes. Progress in this area has
been significant but most processes are still limited to
deasphalted oils and atmospheric residues of light
petroleums, together with mixtures of vacuum gasoils
with atmospheric or vacuum residues (Le Page, Chatila
& Davidson, 1990). Hence, thermal cracking remains
the major option and because of the severe carboniza-
tion which characterizes the thermal upgrade of heavy
hydrocarbon fractions the usual practice is to split the
conversion between a coil reactor and a soaking unit
downstream where coke accumulates, as in the delayed
coking process.
The delayed coking process is illustrated in Fig. 1.
The feed is usually a vacuum distillation residue al-
though atmospheric residues and decant oils are some-
* Corresponding author.
E-mail address: maciel@feq.unicamp.br (R.M. Filho).
bottoms of the fractionator, the combined feed goes to
a fired heater where the pyrolysis reactions start. By
carefully designing the tubes for high velocities and by
using large surface to volume ratios, the reactions can
be delayed until the reactants reach the coking drums,
thus restraining the coke deposition in the furnace as
much as possible. The products are fractionated and
sent to other parts in the refinery for further treatment.
The process is semi-continuous because condensation
reactions cause coke to accumulate in the drum. When
full, the output from the furnace diverts to a parallel
drum, which has already been through decoking and
then tested and pre-heated. The drum removed from
the operation is steam stripped, quenched with water,
drained and cleaned.
The furnaces are the most important and expensive
pieces of equipment in the unit and usually have a box
geometry with two radiant sections connected to a
single convection zone. The tubes are horizontal and
located next to the walls in the radiant section. They
are separated by a wide pitch to improve the angular

0098-1354/01/$ - see front matter © 2001 Elsevier Science Ltd. All rights reserved.
PII: S 0 0 9 8 - 1 3 5 4 ( 0 1 ) 0 0 6 6 9 - X
684 R.M. Filho, M.F. Sugaya / Computers and Chemical Engineering 25 (2001) 683–692
distribution of heat and are connected by ‘U’ bends at
one side and ‘mule-ear’ heads on the opposite side, so
as to facilitate cleaning. Because of this, not all of the
furnace tube length is exposed to heat exchange in
either the radiant or convection sections. The dead ends
increase the pressure drop and soaking volume, which
needs to be accounted for. The modern approach is to
further improve the distribution of heat by placing the
tubes at the center of the radiant boxes, double fired
(Barros, Bernardo, Chan & Bria, 1997). Feed flow is
downwards, counter to the combustion gases, since this
reduces the maximum wall temperatures, which limit
design.
This contribution proposes a reaction-reactor
configuration framework for the pyrolysis of distillation
residues in coil reactors formed by a 16-lump kinetic
scheme and a dual plug flow reactor description
(DPFR) which is composed of two parallel plug flows
of vapor and liquid traveling axially at different rates.
This configuration is important because the pyrolysis
reactions take place mainly in the liquid and it is
necessary to take account of the residence times for
each phase.
The resulting framework is then assessed with respect
to the mild pyrolysis of petroleum distillation residues
in a complex geometry under non-isothermal condi-
tions. The application of this model to delayed coking
furnaces provides a useful case study which not only is
necessary for validation but gives insight to the com-
plex interactions in this process technology. It is possi-
ble then to explore the significance of design parameters
and use the predicted information on the conditions of
the feed as input to soaking reactors.
Fig. 1. The delayed coking process.
2. Process model
2.1. Feed characterization
Reaction modeling for the pyrolysis and carboniza-
tion of petroleum distillation residues is characterized
by a considerable uncertainty concerning the represen-
tation of the composition of the feed. Sophisticated
analytical techniques contribute marginally in describ-
ing a few structural properties of the charge and they
provide only average parameters. The characterization
procedure adopted here uses the methodology devel-
oped by Dente, Bozzano and Bussani (1997), Bozzano
et al. (1998) and McGreavy and Sugaya (1998) which
fairly predicts molecular weights and boiling points as
well as some structural characteristics of the feed from
simple properties, namely, initial boiling point, sulfur
content, average molecular weight and density. Essen-
tial results of the complex Altgelt and Boduszynski
(1994) approach are surprisingly well reproduced. The
method is a valuable tool when complex and lengthy
analyses are unavailable, as is usually the case.
2.2. Characterization of products
A material balance from D-86 and D-1160 ASTM
distillations gives the total consolidated effluent indi-
cated in Tables 1–3. Small quantities of 2C4 and
1,3C4 reported in the chromatographic analyses have
been distributed over the remaining C4 components.
The equivalent TBP distillation of feeds and products
are divided into 50°C intervals which, gives and ade-
quate smooth phase equilibrium curve. Other tempera-
tures are used depending on the product specification
(boiling ranges).
2.3. Kinetics
The pyrolysis of distillation residues at low tempera-
tures is usually assumed to be a liquid phase phe-
nomenon because the heavier and most reactive
molecules concentrate in his phase. The reaction is
assumed to follow the first order, 16-lump scheme in
Fig. 2 and Eqs. (1) and (2) below:
dci,T hLATzL
= ki cR,L (1)
dx WT
dPi hLATzL
= ki cR,L (2)
dx WL
where ci is the mass fraction of species i, h the hold-up,
W the mass flow rate, and P stands for SPGR or MW.
Subscripts L and T refer to the liquid and total streams,
respectively.
Kinetic parameters are determined from experimental
data obtained from Bria and Filgueiras (1982) who
 R.M. Filho, M.F. Sugaya / Computers and Chemical Engineering 25 (2001) 683–692 685

Table 1
Consolidated yields for eight pilot plant runsa

Feed VR-1 VR-2

Run nb. 1 2 3 4 1 2 3 4

T (°C) 480 500 508 485 470 512 520 530

P (atm.) 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1
Rate (kg/h) 2.07 2.07 2.07 2.07 2.28 1.24 1.24 1.24
H2 2.97 0.00 2.39 0.00 1.13 1.22 1.83
H2S 4.17 4.17 4.17 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
C1 34.00 31.36 33.31 29.73 31.37 28.00 23.70
C2 7.63 7.77 6.74 15.34 11.16 11.75 11.67
C2 16.63 16.93 16.54 15.03 16.31 15.72 14.85
C3 10.41 16.55 10.21 19.91 19.43 17.68 19.87
C3 12.03 12.57 12.16 8.06 10.63 13.85 14.82
1C4 6.08 4.91 7.59 4.69 4.81 5.82 6.90
iC4 0.77 0.63 0.79 0.72 0.60 0.68 0.68
nC4 5.32 5.12 6.11 6.51 4.57 5.27 5.67
H2–C4 1.72 2.50 2.77 1.27 0.30 0.76 1.10 1.62
C5–75 0.50 0.97 1.40 1.75 0.00 0.11 1.18 1.93
75–125°C 1.40 1.66 2.03 2.37 0.00 0.50 0.61 0.77
125–150°C 0.82 0.90 1.09 1.33 0.00 0.32 0.36 0.48
150–185°C 1.10 1.24 1.50 1.90 0.36 0.42 0.54 0.83
185–204°C 0.72 0.71 0.81 1.09 0.30 0.30 0.33 0.43
204–250°C 1.98 1.89 2.07 2.85 0.63 0.93 0.94 1.09
250–300°C 2.21 2.47 2.65 3.57 1.22 1.36 1.37 1.72
300–350°C 2.93 2.90 2.90 4.26 1.44 1.74 1.95 2.28
350–400°C 3.58 3.72 4.08 5.54 2.21 2.66 2.86 3.58
400–450°C 5.40 5.54 5.51 6.82 2.82 3.28 3.65 5.33
450–475°C 4.63 4.73 5.00 4.97 1.91 2.13 2.42 3.86
475–500°C 5.61 5.82 6.55 5.76 1.92 2.17 2.45 3.93
500–550°C 17.58 18.15 17.24 12.75 3.89 4.43 5.00 8.05
550°C+ 49.81 46.81 44.39 43.80 83.00 78.88 75.23 64.10

a
Compositions in wt.%, gases in mol %.

Table 2
Specific gravities for eight pilot plant runs

Feed VR-1 VR-2

Run 1 2 3 4 1 2 3 4

C5–75 0.5690 0.6697 0.6933 0.6560 0.6609 0.7354 0.6594 0.6609

75–125°C 0.6572 0.7238 0.7328 0.7432 0.7093 0.7503 0.7194 0.7093
125–150°C 0.743 0.7678 0.7657 0.7972 0.7313 0.7682 0.7475 0.7313
150–185°C 0.7905 0.7963 0.7887 0.8203 0.7339 0.7813 0.7707 0.7539
185–204°C 0.8109 0.8109 0.8104 0.8443 0.7628 0.7923 0.7945 0.7753
204–250°C 0.8314 0.8294 0.8294 0.8676 0.7972 0.8054 0.8086 0.8003
250–300°C 0.8660 0.8602 0.8529 0.8990 0.8353 0.8241 0.8265 0.8265
300–350°C 0.8894 0.8855 0.8751 0.9260 0.8581 0.8398 0.8545 0.8428
350–400°C 0.9141 0.9088 0.8939 0.9465 0.8783 0.8576 0.8586 0.8602
400–450°C 0.9371 0.9321 0.9170 0.9600 0.8967 0.8800 0.8778 0.8833
450–475°C 0.9516 0.9478 0.9358 0.9672 0.9100 0.8956 0.8944 0.9047
475–500°C 0.9606 0.9593 0.9503 0.9712 0.9182 0.9123 0.9059 0.9218
500–550°C 0.9752 0.9752 0.9672 0.9765 0.9285 0.9303 0.9242 0.9444
550°C+ 0.9972 0.9979 0.9868 0.9868 0.9665 0.9847 0.9861 0.9972

looked at the thermal cracking of vacuum distillation product tank arranged as in Fig. 3. Various crudes have
residues in a pilot. The overall flowsheet comprised a been processed and for each of them an average of four
feed tank, pump, pre-heater, coil reactor, cooler and runs at different temperatures have been reported.
686 R.M. Filho, M.F. Sugaya / Computers and Chemical Engineering 25 (2001) 683–692

Table 3 rates and densities of the two phases. This requires

Methods for physical properties used in the model
suitable correlations (e.g. Dukler Wicks & Cleveland,
Vapor phase Liquid phase 1964; Beggs & Brill, 1973; Agrawal Gregory & Govier,
1973). The method of Hughmark (1962) is the preferred
Density Equation of state Gunn and Yamada choice for handling horizontal and vertical ascending
(1971) flows and has been adopted here. It is particularly
Thermal Stiel and Thodos Mallan Michaelian and
effective when the flow regime is bubble, slug or annu-
conductivity (1964) Lockhart (1972)
Viscosity Dean and Stiel Twu (1985) lar. The flow regime naturally changes as the reaction
(1965) proceeds, with the increasing vaporization in the coil.
In the case of vertical flow, the contribution of the
static head to the pressure drop is calculated using

 
dP
= (LzL + VzV)sin q (3)
dx el

and the flow regime is estimated from the map provided

Fig. 2. Kinetic scheme. R, residue (550°C + ), G, gases, N, naphtha
(C5 –204°C), L, liglit gasoil (204–350°C), 350–400, yield of gasoil
boiling between 350 and 400°C, SPGR 350–400, specific gravity of
gasoil boiling between, 350 and 400°C, MW, molecular weight.
2.4. Residence times
The conversion process is assumed to be controlled
by the reaction in the liquid, with a thermodynamic
equilibrium between the phases. However, the vapor
phase moves through the coil at higher speeds than the
viscous, heavy liquid so the hold-up of the phases is
different from the fraction calculated based on flow
by Griffith and Wallis (1961). Pressure drop is com-
puted following Dukier et al. (1964).
Phase equilibrium predictions are based on the
Redlich –Kwong equation of state, as modified by
Soave (1972). Flash calculations use a modified Rach-
ford and Rice (1952) procedure. Physical properties can
be estimated from the methods listed in Table 3.
The contribution of the supercritical components to
the liquid phase density assumes ideal mixture and uses
expansion coefficients from the API Technical Data
Book (1988). The effect of the temperature over the
liquid viscosities is computed with the ASTM method
modified by Wright (1969). This allows all physical
properties for each component and pseudocomponent
in the system to be calculated so the total liquid or
vapor property can be averaged using appropriate mix-
ing rules.
Hence, the resulting reactor model consists of two
parallel plug flows, one vapor and the other liquid,
traveling at different speeds in a coil (under isothermal

Fig. 3. Pilot plant CR-0 where most of the experimental work has been performed.
 R.M. Filho, M.F. Sugaya / Computers and Chemical Engineering 25 (2001) 683–692 687

Because of the pyrolysis reactions and pressure drop,

vaporization takes place continuously along the coil so
there is a decrease in the liquid hold-up.

2.5. Energy balance

For industrial coil reactors, the tube wall tempera-

tures can be estimated from the API Recommended
Practice 530 document (1988), given the heat flux.
Enthalpies are calculated from a modified BWR equa-
tion (Lee and Kesler, 1975), using a reference state of
Fig. 4. Ethane in the light gases.
saturated liquid at − 129°C. A heat of reaction of 800
Table 4
J/g of products boiling below 204°C (ASTM D-86) is
Light gases average compositiona assumed.

Molar composition
3. Results and discussion
H2 4.85
H2S 2.622 SF–0.1541 SF
C1 30.03 The composition of the light gases (H2 –C4) and
C2 5.68 naphthas (C5 –204) produced by the pyrolysis reactions
C2 16.22 in five different vacuum residues is nearly independent
C3 10.48 of the feed and extent of conversion (Fig. 4 below is
C3 12.36
C4 6.21 typical). Because of this the average values indicated in
iC4 0.73 Table 4 can be used.
nC4 5.76 For the light gas oils composition and quality are
a
also independent of conversion (Figs. 5 and 6 are
Note, SF is the sulfur wt.% in feed.
typical) but a slight variation exists between the specific
gravities obtained from different feedstocks (Fig. 7).
The differences need to be explored if the quality of
products is an important issue.
Here, the focus is on processes where conversion and
quality are mainly defined in soaking reactors down-
stream, the coil reactor being important as a prepara-
tory step. The coil model should deliver appropriate
design parameters such as duties, vaporization, pressure
drop and overall conversion. Therefore, small varia-
tions such as those in Fig. 7 can be neglected and the
averages in Table 5 are assumed.
Fig. 5. Light gasoil obtained from one of the feedstock. Reaction constants (kG, kN, kL, etc.) are obtained by
curve fitting the data using a Newton –Raphson proce-
dure to minimize an objective function based on the

Fig. 6. Specific gravities for the components of a light gasoil obtained

from a single feedstock.

conditions, in the particular case of the pilot plant

experiments). Reaction is assumed to be the rate con- Fig. 7. SPGR for the constituents of the light gasoil lump obtained
trolling process with equilibrium between the phases. from two different feedstocks.
688 R.M. Filho, M.F. Sugaya / Computers and Chemical Engineering 25 (2001) 683–692

Table 5 the coil outlet. If the kinetic constants are small, re-
Internal composition and quality of the light gasoil lump
duced conversions result. As the temperature is in-
Component NBP (°C) SPOR Composition (wt.%) creased, the pyrolysis reactions increase in rate, but the
residence time decreases because of vaporization. The
204–250 227 0.818 24.2 first effect is superior and the calculated kinetic con-
250–300 275 0.845 33.5 stants display a monotonic tendency to increase with
300–350 325 0.872 42.4
the operating temperature. However, as the tempera-
ture is raised, the conversion gradually increases to a
smaller extent. High coil conversions are ultimately
limited by the available reactor length at constant
pressure.
Robust methods of calculating equilibrium are essen-
tial. Convergence problems often occur near the inlet,
where the pyrolysis reactions produce small quantities
of supercritical gases. Small changes in the amount of
gases can cause large variations in the bubble pressure.
Such problems can be avoided if the state of the
mixture (subcooled or not) is checked before the proper
flash calculation routine. Non-polar hydrocarbons at
low pressures show ideal behavior but the use of cubic
Fig. 8. Kinetic constants for feed VR-4. methods (SRK) is justified to establish a reliable phase
equilibrium routine since tiny amounts of light hydro-
Table 6 carbons can be expected to cause large variations in the
Conditions employed during processing of VR-4 residence time because of the large vapor specific vol-
umes at low pressures.
Run number Temperature Pressure (MPa) Conversion
(°C) (wt.%)
To ensure no grid resolution problems thousands of
flash calculations are necessary. This requires knowl-
1 490 0.2 13.2 edge of the composition of the previous calculation as a
2 495 0.2 15.0 starting point for the next step. Typical calculated
3 500 0.2 18.7
kinetic constants are presented in Fig. 8 as an example.
4 475 2.0 16.6
As can be seen, the activation energies are similar.
Moreover, linear relationships are obtained in spite of
the large differences in pressure between some runs. For
VR-4, for example, run number 4 has been performed
at a much lower temperature. Because the pressure
employed during this run is much higher than in others,
the residence time increases and compensates for the
lower temperature. The overall result is an intermediate
conversion (Table 6).
Fig. 9 below presents an equivalent set of kinetic
constants for another feed. The results are very similar
and show the same dependency when compared with
Fig. 8. This suggests feed independence in spite of the
significant although not strong differences in feedstock
Fig. 9. Kinetic constants for feed VR-3.
quality (Table 7).
Table 7
Properties of feeds VR-3 and VR-4 3.1. Case study: delayed coking

API density MW Kw The model is evaluated by using it to examine the

performance of and industrial delayed coking unit op-
VR-3 8.60 810 11.45
VR-4 3.73 1120 11.32 erated by Petrobrás at Betim in Brazil. The furnaces of
this unit comprise two radiation chambers connected to
a single convection section. The feed is split into four
error between calculated and measured properties and passes per furnace. Tubes in the radiation boxes are
compositions for the different species (G, N, L, etc.) at located horizontally in two symmetric lines near the
 R.M. Filho, M.F. Sugaya / Computers and Chemical Engineering 25 (2001) 683–692 689

walls and are fired from the center. Each furnace feeds
a pair of drums. The flow is from top to bottom in the
furnace and the first tube row in the convection section
is 17.5 m high. Because vaporization takes place, this
static head is not totally recovered as flow proceeds
downwards through the furnace.
Furnace B contains more coke than A, since the
measured pressure drop is 30% higher. The campaign
time for furnace B has not been reported but furnace A
had recently been decoked. To reconcile these, the
pressure drop for B is corrected using a multiplier
(1.23). For furnace A the multiplier of 0.69 has to be
used to match the plant pressure drop.
3.2. Duty
Because the conversion is nearly the same (Fig. 10d)
as is the temperature distribution (Fig. 10f), the vapor
fraction remains unchanged (Fig. 10e). Overall, there is
to be no significant change in terms of duty (as can be
concluded from the similarity between the outlet tem-
peratures and vaporized fractions in the two cases) and
conversion due to the uncertainty in the estimate of the
pressure loss. This result also helps to explain why no
significant changes in product quality and yield are
observed during a furnace campaign, as would have
been expected if a change in the vapor fraction at the
inlet to the soaking reactors had occurred. Moreover, it
helps to explain why the design can be successful in
terms of duty and conversion in spite of the large
uncertainty in the estimated pressure loss.

The heat duty and fuel gas consumption match the 3.4. Soaking reactors
industrial data very well, as can be seen in Table 8.
Changes in temperature in the tubes predicted by the The feed to the soaking drums predicted by the
model also compare with plant data. In making the model is given in Table 9 below. A comparison with the
comparison it is necessary to take account of uncertain- feed (577 a.m.u.) reveals that a substantial molecular
ties arising from instrument error or coke deposition. weight reduction takes place in the furnaces, i.e. the
Generally, the outlet temperatures can be regarded as reaction delay is reasonable. In practical terms, delayed
being important operating parameters. The reaction is coking does not mean delayed pyrolysis.
significant only in the last third of reactor, where the The effluent of the soaking reactors can be estimated
temperature is above 400°C. No significant reaction using standard procedures (Barros et al., 1997) and is
occurs in the convection zone. presented in Table 10. Although the boiling ranges for
the gasoils are not exactly the same in Table 9, it can be
3.3. Error in pressure drop correlation seen that a significant reduction of molecular weight
takes place in the case of the heavy gasoil, mainly
Fig. 10a –f compare the furnace conditions for differ- because the value in Table 9 includes non-distillable
ent pressure losses. The inlet and outlet temperatures fractions while the value in Table 10 is free from such
are kept constant and a multiplier is added to the fractions.
calculated local pressure drop to verify the sensitivity of
the results. Although the average pressure in the ‘coked’
furnace is much higher because of the increased pres- 4. Conclusions
sure drop (Fig. 10a), the conversion has not increased
(Fig. 10d), as would be expected from the increase in The linear relation observed between the kinetic con-
residence time (Fig. 10c) at constant temperature (Fig. stants derived from the proposed heuristic lumping
10c), caused by the increased liquid hold-up (Fig. 10b). methodology and DPFR representation indicates a
This is because the differences in hold-up are most pressure, temperature and even feedstock independence
significant at the inlet, where the reaction rate is low. of the corresponding Arrhenius parameters. Therefore,
the results presented here indicate that coil reactor
Table 8
Results used to compare model predictions with industrial dataa
modeling at low con6ersions can be performed with a
single set of Arrhenius parameters within a limited
52-F-1 A Model 52-F-1 B Model feedstock range.
Some pyrolysis processes for the upgrade of distilla-
Tin convection 238 238 238 238 tion residues are performed in two sequential units in
Tout convection 396 396 372 372
Dutyconvection n.a. 7.2 n.a. 6.0
order to optimize the delicate balance between selectiv-
Tout, radiation 502 502 502 503 ity and campaign time caused by the parallelism be-
Dutyradiation n.a. 6.6 n.a. 7.6 tween radical decomposition and condensation
Dutyfurnace 12.9 13.8 13.4 13.6 reactions (e.g. delayed coking). Since differences in
Fuel gas 1380 1470 1420 1450 product quality at high conversions are known to be
Tswitch valve n.a. 490 n.a. 490
feed and conversion dependent, the results presented
a
Pressures in bar, temperatures in °C, duties in GW and fuel gas here suggest that the changes responsible for the differ-
consumption in Nm3 per day. ences take place mainly in the downstream unit, in spite
690 R.M. Filho, M.F. Sugaya / Computers and Chemical Engineering 25 (2001) 683–692

Fig. 10. Sensitivity of results for an error in the estimated pressure loss.

of the fact that substantial conversion can occur in the
upstream unit, as revealed by the case study.
While coke formation can be successfully delayed to
the soaking reactors downstream, the pyrolysis reac-
tions cannot. This is because the energy required for the
cracking reactions and vaporization of products in the
soaking reactors is supplied by the furnace. If conver-
sion is delayed too much the vaporization is low and
this energy will have to be supplied as sensible heat, to
keep the distillate yields in the process at the same level.
This implies higher furnace process temperatures,
higher tube wall temperatures and lower velocities,
which will effectively increase the plugging tendency in
the furnace. Moreover, this may lead to the formation
of shot coke in the soaking stage (Ellis and Bacha,
1996).
 R.M. Filho, M.F. Sugaya / Computers and Chemical Engineering 25 (2001) 683–692
High temperatures in the soaking reactors result in
increased vaporization and a net reduction in coke
production. Hence, to minimize the production of coke
in both the furnace (to maximize the time of campaign)
and soaking drums (to maximize the production of
distillates), it is important to achieve a significant con-
version and vaporization of products in the furnace at
the lowest possible temperature (limited perhaps by the
coke VMC). At the same time, the soaking reactors
should be at the highest possible temperature (limited
perhaps by the coke hardness or the heavy gasoil
quality). These two conflicting objectives synthesize the
nature of the delayed coking process.
Reducing the total pressure, the pressure drop in the
system or the hydrocarbons partial pressure (increasing
steam) will improve the vaporization of products,
thereby increasing the transfer of latent heat to the
soaking reactors at the expense of sensible heat, thus
avoiding the conflict stated above. Unfortunately, any
of these options represents a substantial increase in
costs, which severely limits choices. Nevertheless, the
case study results (Fig. 10) indicate that most of the
conversion and pressure loss in the system takes place
at the few last tubes in the furnace and at the transfer
line to the soaking reactors. Clearly, design efforts to
reduce the pressure loss should be directed to these
sections, in particular by minimizing the length of the
transfer lines and the number of pipe fittings, which are
determined by plant layout.
Therefore, furnace tube plugging should be mini-
mized by using high velocities while not reducing resi-
dence times, e.g. by using small diameters, long lengths
and low heat fluxes. Unfortunately, these give rise to an
undesirable pressure increase which has to be handled
Table 9
Feed composition at the switch valve of a delayed coking drum
Component Molecular weight
Light gases 33
Naphtha (C5–204°C) 119
Light gasoil (204–350°C) 222
Medium gasoil (350–500°C) 369
Heavy gasoil (500+) 704
Total 317
Table 10
Soaking reactor top effluent
Component Molecular weight
Light gases (H2–C4) 25
Naphtha (C5–204°C) 115
Light gasoil (204–343°C) 242
Medium gasoil (343–510°C) 288
Heavy gasoil (510°C+) 318
Total 117
691
by using multiple passes and by reducing pressure losses
in critical areas as indicated above.
The case study has also revealed that in spite of the
large uncertainty in the estimate of the pressure loss in
the furnace and transfer line, mild changes in duty and
conversion result. As already mentioned, this helps to
explain why no significant changes in product quality
and yield are observed during a furnace campaign.
Moreover, it helps to explain why the design can be
successful in terms of duty and conversion in spite of
the large uncertainty in the estimated pressure loss.
The choice of appropriate operating conditions is
crucial in seeking to increase the production of liquids
and needs to be anticipated at the design stage because
more options are then available. The model derived
here can be a useful tool to study the effect of some
design parameters.
References
Agrawal, S. S., Gregory, G. A., & Govier, G. W. (1973). An analysis
of horizontal stratified two phase flow in pipes. Canadian Journal
of Chemical Engineering, 51, 280.
Altgelt, K. H., & Boduszynski, M. M. (1994). Composition and
analysis of hea6y petroleum fractions. New York: Marcel Dekker.
Barros, F. C. C., Bernardo, F. C. A., Chan, A., and Bria, M. (1997).
‘Maximum distillates yields in a delayed coking unit’, 30b, Amer-
ican Institute of Chemical Engineers Spring Meeting, New
Orleans.
Beggs, H. D., and Brill, J. P. (1973). A study of two phase flow in
inclined pipes. Journal of Petroleum Technology, 17, 607.
Bozzano, G., Dente, M., Sugaya, M., McGreavy, C. (1998). The
characterization of residual hydrocarbon fractions with model
compunds — retaining the essential information, 216th ACS
National Meeting. Di6ision of Fuel Chemistry Preprints 43 (3), 653
Bria, M., and Filgueiras, R. (1982). Relatório Diter 18, Petrobras
R&D Center.
Dean, D. E., & Stiel, L. I. (1965). The viscosity of nonpolar gas
mixtures at moderate and high pressures. American Institute of
Chemical Engineering Journal, 11, 526.
wt.% Dente, M., Bozzano, G., & Bussani, G. A. (1997). Comprehensive
program for visbreaking simulation: products amount and their
2.5 properties prediction. Computers and Chemical Engineering, 21,
8.4 1125.
6.9 Dukler, A. E., Wicks, M., III, & Cleveland, R. G. (1964). Frictional
16.5 pressure drop in two-phase flow: B. An approach through similar-
65.7 ity analysis. American Institute of Chemical Engineering Journal,
100.0 10, 44.
Ellis, P. J., and Bacha J. D. (1996). Shot coke, Light Metals, 43, 477.
Griffith, P., & Wallis, G. B. (1961). Two-phase slug flow. Journal of
Heat Transfer, 83, 307.
Gunn, R. D., & Yamada, T. (1971). A corresponding states correla-
tion of saturated liquid volumes. American Institute of Chemical
wt.% Engineering Journal, 17, 1341.
Hughmark, G. A. (1962). Holdup in gas– liquid flow. Chemical
10.6 Engineering Progress, 58 (4), 62.
19.4 Le Page, J. F., Chatila, S. G., & Davidson, M. (1990). Raffinage et
30.9 Con6ersion des Produits Lourds du Pétrole. Paris: Éditions
27.9 Technip.
11.2 Lee, B. I., & Kesler, M. G. (1975). A generalized thermodynamic
100.0 correlation based on three-parameter corresponding states. Amer-
ican Institute of Chemical Engineering Journal, 21, 510.
692 R.M. Filho, M.F. Sugaya / Computers and Chemical Engineering 25 (2001) 683–692

Mallan, G. M., Michaelian, M. S., & Lockhart, F. J. (1972). Journal
of Chemical Engineering Data, 17, 412.
McGreavy, C., Sugaya, M. (1998). ‘The two phase, two plug reactor
— the separate phase residence times effect’, 216th ACS National
Meeting Di6ision of Fuel Chemistry Preprints 43 (3) 684.
Rachford, H. H., Rice, J. D., (1952). Journal of Petroleum Technol-
ogy, 4, s.1, 19, s.2, 3.
Soave, G. (1972). Equilibrium constants from a modified Redlich–
Kwong equation of state. Chemical Engineering Science, 27, 1197.
Stiel, L. I., & Thodos, G. (1964). The thermal conductivity of
nonpolar substances in the dense gaseous and liquid regions.
American Institute of Chemical Engineering Journal, 10, 26.
Twu, C. H. (1985). Internally consistent correlation for predicting
liquid viscosities of petroleum fractions. Industrial Engineering and
Chemical Processing Design and De6elopment, 24, 1287.
Wright, W. A. (1969). Journal of Materials, 4 (1), 19.