Recuperative coupling of exothermic and endothermic reactions in a

Plug Flow Reactor

A project report submitted towards complete fulfillment of the requirement for the award
of degree of
Bachelor of Technology
in
Chemical Engineering

Submitted
by
RAJLAKSHMI(14010002)
ARINDAM DAS(14010003)
DIBYASHREE JYOTI ROUT(14010035)

Under the Supervision

of
Dr. Lipika Parida

Department of Chemical Engineering

Veer Surendra Sai University of Technology, Burla, Odisha

Page | 1
 Department of Chemical Engineering

VEER SURENDRA SAI UNIVERSITY OF TECHNOLOGY, BURLA.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

CERTIFICATE

----------------------------------------------------------------

This is to certify that the Report entitled Recuperative coupling of exothermic and
endothermic reactions in a Plug Flow Reactor submitted by Rajalakshmi(14010002,)Arindam
Das (14010003) and Dibyashree Jyoti Rout(14010035) in complete fulfillment of the
requirement for the award of degree of BACHELOR OF TECHNOLOGY in CHEMICAL
ENGINEERING is a bonafide work of research carried out by him under my supervision and
guidance. The realities of the work have not been submitted for the award of any other degree by
the candidates.

Dr. Lipika Parida

Assistant Professor
Department of Chemical Engineering
Veer Surendra Sai University of Technology, Burla.

Page | 2
 ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
It is our privilege to express our sincerest regards to our project coordinator, Dr.
Lipika Parida, for her invaluable inputs, able guidance, encouragement, whole-
hearted cooperation and constructive criticism throughout the duration of our
project.

We deeply express our sincere thanks to our Head of Department Dr. Sumant
Padhi for encouraging and allowing us to present the project on the topic
“SIMULATION OF RECUPERATIVE COUPLING OF EXOTHERMIC AND ENDOTHERMIC
REACTION IN PLUG FLOW REACTOR “ in our department premises for the partial
fulfillment of the requirements leading to the award of B-Tech degree.

We take this opportunity to thank all our facaulty members Dr. KP Sarangi, Dr.
Nibedita Patel, Mr Ved Prakash, Mr Amit kr Behera and Mr Anil Murmu who have
directly and indirectly helped in our project. We appreciate the guidance given by
them in our project presentation that has improved our presentation skills thanks
to their comment and advices.

We pay our respects and love to our parents for their love and encouragement
through out our career. Last but not the least we express our thanks to our
friends for their cooperation and support.

RAJLAKSHMI(14010002)
ARINDAM DAS(14010003)
DIBYASHREE JYOTI ROUT(14010035)

Page | 3
 List of Abbreviations
concentration of the reactant
inlet/reference concentration of the reactant
Da Damkohler number
E activation energy
K1 rate constant of the endothermic reaction
K2 rate constant of the exothermic reaction
L reactor length
R universal gas constant
t time
T gas phase temperature
Tref reference temperature
velocity of the gas flow
U overall wall heat transfer coefficient
x dimensionless concentration
z axial position along the reactor

Greek letters
α activity of the catalyst bed at exothermic side
β dimensionless heat of reaction
γ dimensionless activation energy
εb void fraction
η activity of the catalyst bed at endothermic side
θ dimensionless temperature
؏ dimensionless axial position
ρ density
τ dimensionless time
ψ ratio of rate of endothermic reaction to the rate of
exothermic reaction at the reference temperature

Subscripts/Superscripts
c endothermic reaction
h exothermic reactions

Page | 4
 List of figures

Sl Title Page No.

No.
01 Schematic of various reactor configurations for 08
couplingexothermic and endothermic reactions
02 Recuperative Co-Current Reactor- DME 09
production(endothermic) coupled with aromatization of
hexene to benzene
03 Combination of Exothermic Reactor, Heat Exchanger and 10
Endothermic Reactor
04 Concentration Profile of Plug Flow Reactor 18

05 Cross-Sectional View of Recuperative Plug Flow 19

06 Conversion Profile in Cocurrent Recuperative Reactor 33

07 Conversion Profile in Adiabatic Recuperative Reactor 33

08 Temperature Profile in Cocurrent Reactor 34

09 Effect of Damkohler number for the exothermic reaction 35

on the conversion of the exothermic reaction
10 Effect of Damkohler number for the endothermic reaction 35
on the conversion of the exothermic reaction
11 Effect of wall heat transfer coefficient on the temperature 36
of the exothermic reaction
12 Effect of wall heat transfer coefficient on the conversion 36
of the endothermic reaction
13 Effect of wall heat transfer coefficient on the conversion 37
of the endothermic reaction

Page | 5
 Abstract

Coupling energy intensive endothermic reaction systems with suitable

exothermic reactions improves the thermal efficiency of processes and
reduces the size of the reactors. It is to be noted that the efficient coupling
of exothermic and endothermic reactions increases the profitability of the
reactor operation. To examine and compare the performance of co-current
and counter-current heat exchanger reactors a one-dimensional pseudo-
homogeneous plug flow model is used.

• Multifunctional reactors are single piece of equipment in which, besides

the reaction, other functions are carried out simultaneously.
• Coupling energy endothermic reaction system with suitable exothermic
reaction improves the thermal efficiency and reduces the size of reactor.
Reactor suitable for this is heat exchanger reactor.
Pseudo-homogenous plug flow model is used to analyze and compare the
performance of co-current and counter-current heat exchanger reactors.
• Multifunctional reactors integrate, in one vessel, make the process more
efficient and compact and result in large savings in the operational and
capital cost

Page | 6
 Table of contents

Title Page 1
Certificate 2
Acknowledgement 3
List of Abbreviations 4
List of figures 5
Abstract 6
Contents 7

SL NO. TITLE PAGE NO .

1 Introduction 8
2 Literature Review 11
3 System Description 18
4 Assumptions 20
5 Model Development
A. Material Balance of Endothermic Reaction 21
B. Material Balance of Exothermic Reaction 23
C. Energy Balance of Endothermic Reaction 25
D. Energy Balance of Exothermic Reaction 28
6 Simulation 31
7 Results and Discussion 33
8 Conclusion 38
9 Future Scope 38
10 Appendix 39
11 References 42

Page | 7
 Introduction

A multifunctional reactor can be used for coupling exothermic and endothermic

reactions. Heat produced from exothermic reaction is used for endothermic
reaction.

The coupling of exothermic and endothermic reactions can be achieved in the

following reactor configurations:-

I. Direct coupling (adiabatic reactors)

II. Regenerative coupling (Reverse flow reactor)
III. Recuperative coupling

In direct coupling, both reactions take place simultaneously in same bed. In

reverse flow reactor, both reactions occur periodically in same bed. In first half
exothermic reaction takes place and in second half flow is reversed and
endothermic reaction takes place.

Fig 1:Schematic of various reactor configurations for coupling exothermic and

endothermic reactions

Page | 8
Recuperative or heat exchanger reactor offers several advantages over the
directly coupled adiabatic reactor and the reverse flow reactors:-

1. The products of the endothermic react

2. ion are always separated from the combustion products.
3. Since the exothermic side is spatially separated from the endothermic
side, air can also be used for combustion instead of oxygen and the
challenge of nitrogen separation from the product mixture does not
exist. This in turn avoids the capital cost.
4. There are other advantages such as the inlet velocity, feed
concentration etc., can be adjusted independently without affecting
the other stream.

Fig 2:Recuperative Co-Current Reactor- DME production(endothermic) coupled

with aromatization of hexene to benzene

Page | 9
Characteristics of ideal plug flow
• perfect mixing in the radial dimension
• no mixing in the axial direction, or no axial dispersion (segregated flow)

At steady-state, the concentration of a reactant at any single point along the PFR
is constant at Cx. Overall a stable concentration profile is obtained at steady state,
with the concentration varying in space as the reaction occurs along the flow
path.

In an ideal PFR, is the absolute residence time for mass flowing through the
reactor, not the average residence time as in a CSTR.

The equation for dispersed plug flow without a chemical reaction is:-

Ideal plug flow may not be realized in many packed-bed reactors. In the PFR a
change in the feed concentration travels as a perfect front. But measurements in
actual packed-bed reactors may show a fair amount of spreading or dispersion as
this front travels through the reactor.

Tendo-in

Texo-out T1endo-out, Xbench-mark

Texo-in Adiabatic Endothermic
Adiabatic Exothermic
Reactor
Reactor T1endo-in
Heat Exchange
(reversible)

Fig 3:Combination of Exothermic Reactor, Heat Exchanger and Endothermic

Reactor

The modified equation for dispersed plug flow to account for chemical reaction
is:-

Page | 10
 Literature review
This article present a brief background of the work reported in the literature on
the coupling of exothermic and endothermic reactions in different reactor
schemes and on the catalytic partial oxidation of methane to syngas. Several
reactor configurations have been tested and evaluated in the literature to couple
these two classes of reactions.
Some of the research are discussed below:-

• Hunter and McGuire (1980) were among the first to suggest the coupling of
an exothermic and endothermic reaction in a recuperative fashion.

• Matros et al., 1984 describe the Catalytic purification of waste gases

containing chlorinated hydrocarbons with precious metal catalysts in which
he study about the two-bed system, consisting of an activated alumina guard
catalyst and a bimetallic palladium/platinum-alumina oxidation catalyst, was
developed to purify waste gases from vinyl chloride manufacture. A large-
scale unit was built to handle a 15,000 Nm3/h gas stream, and is reported to
have been operating satisfactorily after more than 12,000 hours on stream.
The economics of the process are compared with those of conventional
thermal incineration.

• Koga and Watanabe (1991) described a plate type reformer that coupled
catalytic combustion and reforming, which took place in alternate channels.
Here, the catalysts filled the gaps between the plates and were not deposited
on the walls, which resulted in a higher heat-transfer resistance.

Page | 11
• Igarshi et al. (1992) described a wall reactor that used a heating medium to
supply heat to endothermic reactions which occur on walls in alternate
channels. Here the combustion side offered high heat transfer resistance.

• Hickman and Schmidt, 1993,described production of syngas by direct

catalytic oxidation of methane. A report on research results shows that,
given the high space-time yield of Pt / Rd monolith catalysts in the direct
oxidation of methane, a synthesis gas composition that has a higher CO, H2
content than the equilibrium of Shiftreaktion and methane / steam at these
temperatures (up to 1150 degrees C) corresponds. Note d. Ref .: The reaction
kinetic data are more detailed in an earlier article. This article draws
attention to the technical and economic benefits of the process. However,
comparative energy balances are not (yet) prepared. Technical reactor
configurations or the cooling of the synthesis gas without further reaction
are not investigated. The economic integration in known syntheses
(methanol, Fischer-Tropsch) is indeed asserted, but not demonstrated by an
energy balance or a material balance. Why methanol should be a better
energy carrier than natural gas and why the latter represents our 'most
productive, clean energy resource' ('most abundant'), remains unclear.

• J. R. Regalbuto,1994,study about methane conversion reactors, A literature

survey of methane reforming, partial oxidation, and oxidative coupling
reactors and processes has been conducted. Packed bed reactors, membrane
reactors, and other novel processes were compared in terms of absolute and
specific activity. Of most note in the area of reforming were a Rh continuing
monolithic reactor for the production of synthesis gas from methane and
oxygen, and a Palladium membrane reactor for steam reforming. Partial
oxidation to formaldehyde or methanol is seen to be best performed
homogeneously at elevated pressure in tubular reactors. While no success
for partial oxidation has been reported with membrane reactors, several

Page | 12
 novel reactors including a liquid phase reaction and a rapid quenching
technique do show potential.

• The “dual flow chemical reactor” of Kaminsky et al., (1997) employed

oxidative coupling of methane on catalytically coated surfaces to provide
heat for thermal hydrocarbon cracking. In this process, useful compounds are
obtained from both sides of the reactor.
• Ioannides and Verykios (1997, 1998) later introduced a new reactor concept,
where the reactor is an open ended non-porous ceramic tube whose surfaces
are coated with catalytic layers. In this scheme, the methane and oxygen
feeds enter the tube and part of it combusts on its inner catalytic surface.
Subsequently, the reaction mixture comes in contact with the outside wall
where the endothermic reforming reactions occur.

• Frauhammer et al., (1999) described a reactor that coupled catalytic

combustion and methane steam reforming in alternate channels with
catalysts coated on both sides of the walls. They studied the process both
experimentally and theoretically, mainly in a counter-current fashion using a
ceramic honey-comb monolith with specially designed distribution channels
for combustion and process gases. In the counter-current scheme, the cold
feeds are heated up by the respective hot effluents on the both sides of the
reactor. The temperature profiles for both the reactions exhibited a peak
around the same axial position in the reactor. These peaks usually occurred
near the reactor inlet for the exothermic reaction but, depending on the
kinetics, this high temperature region may be shifted to the middle of the
reactor. Kolios et al. (2001, 2002) showed that the hot spots could be
avoided by using a suitable co-current arrangement or by distributing the
fuel feed along the reactor.

Page | 13
• Venkataraman et al., (2002) experimentally and theoretically explored
ethane dehydrogenation coupled with methane catalytic combustion in a
concentric tube configuration operating at about 1000 oC in both co-current
and counter-current fashions. They showed that the counter-current mode
of operation results in a hot spot with a higher conversion of ethane and a
lower selectivity to ethylene compared to the co-current reactor mode. The
system showed comparable performance to a conventional cracker, but at a
much shorter contact time. They also showed that by employing multiple
passes on the combustion side, the heat losses can be reduced and both the
conversion and selectivity can be increased. In addition, they extended the
above study to a parallel plate catalytic reactor (Venkataraman et al., 2003).
From this study, they found that the two pass parallel plate systems give
better conversion and selectivity than the one pass parallel plate system and
the respective two pass tubular system. Finally, they introduced the
extended two pass system, wherein the plates on the endothermic side are
larger than the plates on the combustion side. In the extended reactor
configuration, water-gas shift reaction is promoted and more hydrogen is
produced. In these reactors, the mass-transfer rates to the catalyst walls play
a key role in conversion and selectivity.

• A simple one-dimensional pseudohomogeneous plug-flow reactor model for

a multicatalyst system was developed by Kam et al. (2005) to study the
deactivation mechanisms of hydroprocessing catalysts in atmospheric
residue desulfurization (ARDS) units due to coking and metal deposition.
Three different stages of deactivation are considered: SOR, MOR, and EOR.
The reactions considered were HDS, HDM (the removal of vanadium and
nickel were considered separately), and HDAsph, the latter accounting for
catalyst deactivation. The equations for the mass and heat balances are
pseudo-steady-state because of catalyst deactivation. The model was applied
further to a parametric study that examines the effects of LHSV,
temperature, and maximum capacity on the performance catalyst systems.

Page | 14
• Forbes.J.F,2008,study about the characteristics ‐Based Model Predictive
Control of a Catalytic Flow Reversal Reactor. He described the formulation
and tuning of a model‐based controller for a catalytic flow reversal reactor
(CFRR). A plug flow non‐linear pseudo‐homogeneous mathematical
representation of the process is used to model the mass and energy
transport phenomena for the model‐based controller. A combination of the
method of characteristics and model predictive control (MPC) technology is
used to formulate the controller (Shang et al., Ind. Eng. Chem. Res. 43(9)
2140–2149 (2004)). Mass extraction from the midsection of the reactor is
used as the manipulated variable. Numerical simulations are used to show
the performance of the formulated controller. The performance of the
controller is evaluated on a simulated catalytic flow reversal reactor unit for
combustion of lean methane streams for reduction of greenhouse gases
emissions.

• Galiasso (2006) developed a simplified pseudohomogeneous plug-flow

model for isothermal TBR and gas- and liquid-phase reactors to optimize a
scheme of reactors and to minimize investment. The effect of adding reactor
volume to existing units to produce a low-emission diesel fuel was compared
by using the new scheme of reactors and the conventional TBR. The model
reproduced HDS, HDA, and HDN reactions. It was shown that by using the
new gas- and liquid-phase reactors, the aromatic hydrogenation and
hydrogenolysis reactions can be enhanced. Simplified kinetic rate models
(Langmuir-Hinshelwood type) in the gas and liquid phases for simple lumps
of HDA reactions were used in the simulations, and kinetics and fluid –
dynamic – related parameters were calculated previously through an
optimization algorithm.

• Dohler and Rupp (1987) performed laboratory-scale experiments with the

same feed and catalyst as those in an industrial VGO hydrotreating unit, in
order to simulate the adiabatic behavior of the industrial reactor using a
plug-flow pseudohomogeneous one-dimensional reactor model. The model

Page | 15
 was validated only with HDS, HDN, and hydrodearomatization (HDA) reaction
data. They pointed out that calculation of the weight-average bed
temperature (WABT) in an adiabatic reactor having a AT value of 55°C or
higher does not agree well with the isothermal temperature of experimental
reactors because there is a nonlinear relationship between the temperature
and the rate of reaction.

• A commercial kero-HDS reactor was simulated successfully by Sau et al.

(1997) by means of a pseudohomogeneous plug-flow model. The novel
continuum theory of lumping was employed for kinetics, and very good
predictions were observed. This work is a good example of how, with a
simple reactor model but following the chemistry closely, it is possible to
achieve reliable predictions with an important reduction in the total number
of model parameters

Page | 16
Reaction Systems Studied involving Recuperative Reactors

No. Reaction Systems Type of Study Reference

(Experiments /
Model)

1 CH4 steam reforming (water gas shift 1-D steady-state Frauham-mer et

reaction and reverse methanation) on Ni- dispersion al., 1999
Mg-Al2O3 coupled with CH4 oxidation model
(homogeneous and catalytic)

2 C2H6 dehydrogenation on Pd coupled 2D Steady state Zanfir & Gavrillidis,

with CH4 combustion on Pd dispersion 2001
model

Tin = 923 K

3 C2H6 dehydrogenation (homogeneous) Experiments Venkatar-aman et

coupled with CH4 combustion on Pt-Al2O3 (tubular reactor) al., 2002

And 1-D PFR

model

4 CH4 steam reforming (WGS and reverse 2-D steady-state Zanfir & Gavrillidis,
methanation) on Ni-Mg-Al2O3 coupled model 2003
with CH4 oxidation on Pt
Tin = 793 K

5 CH4 steam reforming on Rh (with Pt-ceria CFD simulations Venkatar-aman et

extended reactor for WGS) coupled with al., 2003
Tin=298,573 K
CH4 oxidation on Pt
(combustor,
reformer)

Page | 17
System Description:-
Steady-State Continuous Pseudo-homogeneous Models
Among different approaches, steady-state continuous pseudohomogeneous
models have been widely accepted. This is due to their reliability and simplicity. A
pseudohomogeneous model generally assumes a power–aw kinetic type,
although sometimes Langmuir-Hinshelwood expression has been employed.

Fig 4: Concentration Profile of Plug Flow Reactor

This model assumes that the interphase transport processes (gas-solid film heat
and mass transfer rates) are much faster than reaction processes and the gas
moves like a slug within the reactor. These assumptions result in the model
consisting of a set of first order differential equations. The steady state solutions
for co-current and directly coupled adiabatic reactors are obtained by integrating
these equations using the commercially available stiff solver from Netlib libraries.
For the counter-current reactor, a two point boundary value problem results and
can be solved by discretizing the spatial derivatives (convective terms) and solving
the resulting non-linear algebraic equations using a Newton-Powell type
algorithm. In this work, the pseudo-transient approach is used to obtain the
Page | 18
steady state solution. In this approach, the transient model equations are
integrated until the steady state solution is obtained. This method seems to be
faster and more robust for this reactor scheme.
The double-pipe heat exchanger is one of the simplest types of heat exchangers.
It is called a double-pipe exchanger because one fluid flows inside a pipe and the
other fluid flows between that pipe and another pipe that surrounds the first. This
is a concentric tube construction. Flow in a double-pipe heat exchanger can be co-
current or counter-current. There are two flow configurations: co-current is when
the flow of the two streams is in the same direction, counter current is when the
flow of the streams is in opposite directions.

Fig 5:Cross-Sectional View of Recuperative Plug Flow

As conditions in the pipes change: inlet temperatures, flow rates, fluid properties,
fluid composition, etc., the amount of heat transferred also changes. This
transient behavior leads to 2 change in process temperatures, which will lead to a
point where the temperature distribution becomes steady. When heat is
beginning to be transferred, this changes the temperature of the fluids. Until
these temperatures reach a steady state their behavior is dependent on time. In
this double-pipe heat exchanger a hot process fluid flowing through the inner
pipe transfers its heat to cooling water flowing in the outer pipe. The system is in
steady state until conditions change, such as flow rate or inlet temperature. These
changes in conditions cause the temperature distribution to change with time
until a new steady state is reached. The new steady state will be observed once

Page | 19
the inlet and outlet temperatures for the process and coolant fluid become
stable. In reality, the temperatures will never be completely stable, but with large
enough changes in inlet temperatures or flow rates a relative steady state can be
experimentally observed.

Assumptions:-
1. The resistance across the gas–solid film for heat and mass transfer is
assumed to be negligible.
2. Axial mass and heat dispersions are neglected.
3. Axial conduction in the wall is not included, and a constant heat transfer
coefficient has been assumed along the length of the reactor.
4. Physical properties of fluids and the heat of reactions are assumed to be
independent of the temperature, and the total pressure of the system is
constant.
5. Steady state condition is maintained throughout.

Page | 20
Material Balance for Endothermic Side

The overall material balance equation in the endothermic side for the steady
state PFR is written below:-

Page | 21
Hence, =-

Let τ= t & ؏=

dt= dz=Ld؏

Hence, the material balance without taking into account hotspot formation is :-

If we take hotspot formation into account the modified equation will be:-

Page | 22
Material Balance for Exothermic Side
The overall material balance equation in the exothermic side for the steady state
PFR is written below:-

Hence, =-

Page | 23
Let τ= t & ؏=

dt= dz=Ld؏

Hence, the material balance in exothermic side without taking into account
hotspot formation is :-

→co-current reactor

→counter-current reactor

If we take hotspot formation into account the modified equation will be:-

Page | 24
Energy Balance for Endothermic Side

Hence, =-

Page | 25
Let τ= t & ؏= & =

dt= dz=Ld؏ =

Page | 26
If we take hotspot formation into account the modified equation will be:-

Page | 27
Energy Balance for Exothermic Side

Page | 28
Hence, =-

Let τ= t & ؏= & =

dt= dz=Ld؏ =

Page | 29
Hence, the energy balance in exothermic side without taking into account hotspot
formation is:-
→co-current reactor

→counter-current reactor

If we take hotspot formation into account the modified equation will be:-

Page | 30
Simulation

The system involves solving a system of ode(two mass balances and two energy
balances). These odes have been solved by the use of pre-defined function ode23
of matlab. In this project, the cocurrent simulatin

Function Syntax: [t,y]=ode23(odefun,tspan,y0), where tspan = [t0 tf]. The ode23

function integrates the system of differential equations. y' =
f(t,y) from t0 to tf with initial conditions y0. Each row in the solution
array y corresponds to a value returned in column vector t.

The steady state equations used in the simulation are the following:-

• Mass balance of endothermic side (eq-1)

• Temperature balance of endothermic side (eq-2)

Page | 31
 • Mass balance of exothermic side (eq-3)

• Temperature balance of exothermic side (eq-4)

The positive sign is used for the co-current reactor and negative sign for the
counter-current reactor. Here, and are the position dependent catalyst
activity for the endothermic and exothermic reactions, respectively. Both
and are set as unity for the cases with no catalyst activity profiling.

The initial conditions used in the simulation are listed below-

• At =0 ; =0
=0 ; =0
• At

The base reference data that has been used in the simulation has been tabulated
below:-

Paramaters Endothermic Exothermic

Da 10 4

β -0.8 0.8

γ 15 15

Page | 32
U* 4 4

Activity η=1 α=1

The MATLAB codes for the conversion and temperature profiles of the concurrent
recuperative reactor have been attached in the Appendix section.

Result and Discussion

The conversion profile in the concurrent system is plotted below.

Fig 6:Conversion Profile in Cocurrent Recuperative Reactor

The exit conversion of the endothermic reaction in the co-current reactor is

greater than that in the counter-current reactor. ( R.C. Ramaswamy, P.A.
Ramachandran,2005) This higher conversion in the co-current reactor is due to the
endothermic stream spending more time in the reactor at higher temperature
than in the counter-current reactor.
Page | 33
 Fig 7: Conversion Profile in Adiabatic Recuperative Reactor

The conversion for the endothermic reaction in the adiabatic reactor is also
calculated (by setting U∗c =U∗h =0, in the model) for similar parameters used.

It is found that the recuperative reactors result in higher exit conversion for the
endothermic reaction compared to that in the adiabatic reactor because
of coupling with the exothermic reaction. The heat generated by the exothermic
reaction is not being carried to the endothermic section hence conversion in the
endothermic side is not high in adiabatic reactors.

Page | 34
 Fig 8:Temperature Profile in Cocurrent Reactor

For the co-current reactor, near the reactor inlet, there is a dip in temperature on
the endothermic side. This is because the rate of heat transfer from the
exothermic reaction to the endothermic reaction is smaller compared to the heat
of reaction required for the endothermic reaction (also note that the feed
temperatures of both streams are identical).

For cocurrent reactors and for the parameters chosen, near the reactor outlet
both the endothermic and the exothermic streams have almost identical
temperature.
Effect of Damkohler number (Dah) for exothermic reaction
The parametric sensitivity analysis to determine the effect of Dah on the
temperature profile and on the exit conversion of the endothermic reaction was
carried out.

Page | 35
Fig 9:Effect of Damkohler number for the exothermic reaction on the
conversion of the exothermic reaction

With an increase in Dah, the rate of exothermic reaction increases. And so the
temperature peak on the exothermic side also increases.

Fig 10:Effect of Damkohler number for the exothermic reaction on the

temperature of the exothermic reaction

Effect of wall heat transfer coefficient

The parametric sensitivity analysis to determine the effect of wall heat transfer
coefficient on the temperature of the exothermic reaction was carried out.

Page | 36
Fig 11:Effect of wall heat transfer coefficient on the temperature of the
exothermic reaction

The magnitude of the temperature peak on the exothermic side is the largest
when U∗=0 and is equal to the adiabatic temperature of the exothermic reaction.
As U∗ increases, the magnitude of the temperature peak on the exothermic side
decreases and the exothermic reaction is suppressed.

Fig 12:Effect of wall heat transfer coefficient on the conversion of the

endothermic reaction

Page | 37
Fig 13:Effect of wall heat transfer coefficient on the conversion of the
exothermic reaction

For very high values of wall heat transfer coefficient, the exothermic reaction is
strongly affected by the endothermic reaction as the rate of heat consumption by
the endothermic reaction is greater than the rate of heat generation. This results
in lower temperature along the reactor in both sides. This in turn yields lower
conversions for the endothermic and exothermic reactions at very high wall heat
transfer coefficient.

Page | 38
Conclusion
The steady-state behavior of co-current heat exchanger reactors coupling
exothermic and endothermic reactions was analyzed using the pseudo-
homogeneous plug flow model. In our model, varying the reactor length is
equivalent to varying the Damkohler numbers of both reactions and the
dimensionless heat transfer coefficients correspondingly and have been simulated
by the use of ode23 function of the MATLAB.

For the co-current reactors, with decrease in the reactor length, the conversion of
endothermic reaction decreases. This is because of the corresponding reduction
in the residence time.

At higher wall heat transfer coefficients, the exothermic reaction is suppressed

yielding poor conversion for the endothermic reaction. The heat exchanger
reactors yield higher exit conversion for the endothermic reaction than the
adiabatic reactor.

The temperature of the exothermic stream is higher than the endothermic stream
and they finally merge. This arrangement requires the preheating of the
exothermic stream and that can be carried out by utilizing the sensible heat of the
endothermic stream leaving the reactor.

Future Work
For the co-current and counter-current reactors, the design issues such as the
selection of tube material with desired heat transfer coefficients and the size and
spacing between the tubes are to be addressed as these parameters affect the
conversion of the desired reactions.

The steady state behaviour of counter current reactors cannot be represented

using ode23 but can be solved by Finite Difference Method.

Page | 39
Appendix

List of variables used in programming

Dac= Damkohler number for endothermic side
Dah= Damkohler number for endothermic side
Ec= void fraction of endothermic side
Eh= void fraction of exothermic side
gc= dimensionless activation energy foe endothermic side
gh= dimensionless activation energy foe exothermic side
Uc= overall wall heat transfer coefficient for endothermic side
Uh= overall wall heat transfer coefficient for exothermic side
Bc= dimensionless heat of reaction for endothermic side
Bh= dimensionless heat of reaction for exothermic side
xc= dimensionless concentration for endothermic side
xh= dimensionless concentration for exothermic side
Tc= endothermic side temperature
Th= endothermic side temperature

Source Code of the Conversion Profile

Called Function
function [ mat1 ] = Cocurrent( I,D )

Dac=10;
Dah=4;
ec=0.18;
eh=0.54;
gc=15;
gh=15;
Uc=4;
Uh=4;
Bc=-0.8;
Bh=0.8;
xc=D(1);
xh=D(3);
Tc=D(2);
Th=D(4);

Page | 40
mat1=[Dac*(1-ec)*(1-xc)*exp(gc*(Tc/(1+Tc)));
(-4*Uc*(Tc-Th))+(Dac*Bc*(1-ec)*(1-xc)*exp(gc*(Tc/(1+Tc))));
Dah*(1-eh)*(1-xc)*exp(gh*(Th/(1+Th)));
(4*Uh*(Tc-Th))+(Dah*Bh*(1-eh)*(1-xh)*exp(gh*(Th/(1+Th))))
];
end

Calling Function
z= 0:0.01:1 ; %considering steady-state, z is a parameter
Ic1=0;
Ic2=0;
Ic3=0;
Ic4=0;
Ic=[Ic1 Ic2 Ic3 Ic4];

[len, ans]=ode23('Cocurrent',z,Ic);

plot(len,ans(:,1));
hold on
plot(len,ans(:,3));
hold off
title('Conversion Profile');
xlabel('Axial Distance');
ylabel('Conversion');
legend('endothermic','exothermic');
text(0.7,0.75,'Dac= 10 Dah=4 ');
text(0.7,0.8,'gc= 15 gh=15 ');
text(0.7,0.9,'Bc= -0.8 Bh=0.8');
text(0.7,0.87,'Uc=4 Uh=4');

Source Code of the Temperature Profile

Called Function
function [ mat1 ] = Cocurrent( I,D )

Dac=10;
Dah=4;
ec=0.18;
eh=0.54;
gc=15;
gh=15;
Uc=4;
Uh=4;

Page | 41
Bc=-0.8;
Bh=0.8;
xc=D(1);
xh=D(3);
Tc=D(2);
Th=D(4);

mat1=[Dac*(1-ec)*(1-xc)*exp(gc*(Tc/(1+Tc)));
(-4*Uc*(Tc-Th))+(Dac*Bc*(1-ec)*(1-xc)*exp(gc*(Tc/(1+Tc))));
Dah*(1-eh)*(1-xc)*exp(gh*(Th/(1+Th)));
(4*Uh*(Tc-Th))+(Dah*Bh*(1-eh)*(1-xh)*exp(gh*(Th/(1+Th))))
];
end

Calling Function
z= 0:0.01:1 ; %considering steady-state, z is a parameter
Ic1=0; %boundary-condition1
Ic2=0; %boundary-condition2
Ic3=0; %boundary-condition3
Ic4=0; %boundary-condition4
Ic=[Ic1 Ic2 Ic3 Ic4];

[len, ans]=ode23('Cocurrent',z,Ic);

plot(len,ans(:,2));
hold on
plot(len,ans(:,4));
hold off
title('Temperature Profile');
xlabel('Axial Distance');
ylabel('Conversion');
legend('endothermic','exothermic');
text(0.7,0.75,'Dac= 10 Dah=4 ');
text(0.7,0.8,'gc= 15 gh=15 ');
text(0.7,0.9,'Bc= -0.8 Bh=0.8');
text(0.7,0.87,'Uc=4 Uh=4');

Page | 42
References:-
1. Agar, D.W., 1999. Multifunctional reactors: old preconceptions and new
dimensions. Chemical Engineering Science 54, 1299.
2. A.K., Trimm, D.L., Ilsen Onsan, Z., 2001. Heterogeneous reactor modeling for
simulation of catalytic oxidation and steam reforming of methane. Chemical
Engineering Science 56, 641.
3. S.M.S., Balakotaiah, V., West, D.H., 1999. Analytical criteria for validity of
pseudo-homogeneous models of packed bed catalytic reactors. Industrial and
Engineering Chemistry Research 38, 767
4. R.C., Ramachandran, P.A., Dudukovic, M.P., 2006. Recuperative coupling of
exothermic and endothermic reactions. Chemical Engineering Science 61, 459.

5. Model Predictive Control for Quasi-linear Hyperbolic Distributed Parameter

Systems Huilan Shang,*†J. Fraser Forbes,‡ and Martin Guay§
School of Engineering, Laurentian University, Sudbury, Ontario, Canada P3E
2C6, Department of Chemical and Materials Engineering,
Ind. Eng. Chem. Res., 2004, 43 (9), pp 2140–2149
DOI: 10.1021/ie030653z

6. Model Predictive Control of a Catalytic Flow Reversal Reactor with heat

extraction.
DOI: 10.3182/20060402-4-BR-2902.01009

7. Millisecond catalytic wall reactors: dehydrogenation of ethane K.

Venkataraman, J. M. Redenius, L. D. Schmidt ∗ Department of Chemical
Engineering and Materials Science, University of Minnesota

8. Zanfir, M., & Gavriilidis, A., Modelling of a catalytic plate reactor for
dehydrogenation-combustion coupling, Chemical Engineering Science, 56,
2001, 2671.

Page | 43
9. Kolios, G., Frauhammer, J., & Eigenberger, G., Efficient reactor concepts for
coupling of endothermic and exothermic reactions. Chemical Engineering
Science, 57, 2002, 1505.

10.Ismagilov, Z.R., Pushkarev, V.V., Podyacheva, Yu. O., Koryabkina, N.A., &
Veringa, H., A catalytic heat-exchanging tubular reactor for combining of high
temperature exothermic and endothermic reactions. Chemical Engineering
Journal, 82, 2001, 355.

11.Iordanidis, A.A. Mathematical modeling of catalytic fixed bed reactors. Ph.D.

Dissertation. University of Twente, 2002.

12.Avci, A.K., Trimm, D.L., & Ilsen Onsan, Z., Heterogeneous reactor modeling for
simulation of catalytic oxidation and steam reforming of methane. Chemical
Engineering Science, 56, 2001, 641.

Page | 44