Journal of Canadian Petroleum Technology
Volume 51, Number 6, November 2012, pp. 457-463

SPE-161014-PA

Coking Behaviour During Visbreaking

View full textPDF ( 405 KB )

DOI  More information 10.2118/161014-PA http://dx.doi.org/10.2118/161014-PA

Citation

  • Saxena, A., Diaz-Goano, C., and Dettman, H. 2012. Coking Behaviour During Visbreaking. J Can Pet Technol 51 (6): 457-463. SPE-161014-PA. http://dx.doi.org/10.2118/161014-PA.

Summary

Previously, nuclear-magnetic-resonance (NMR) carbon-type-analysis data were used to develop a mathematical model of mild thermal conversion (visbreaking) of Athabasca bitumen (Chan et al. 2006). In that work, the major reaction pathways followed during visbreaking were identified. This approach is being extended in the current work to model the visbreaking behaviour of five different oils from different geographical locations around the world. This paper shows the correlation of residue conversion with the contents of different carbon types for five heavy oils from four continents.

During visbreaking runs, operators intend to maximize process yields. This is achieved through increasing process severity by raising temperature. However, if the temperature is too high, coke forms. This maximum temperature varies with different crude oils; therefore, as refinery feedstock composition changes, so does the onset of coking temperature. Coke is a hydrocarbon material that has low hydrogen content and is insoluble in the oil. Consequently, this precipitates in the reactor, eventually causing an unscheduled unit shutdown. We have found that contents of specific carbon types in the feed oils correlate with coke formation. This correlation allows prediction of the quantities of coke that will form under the chosen visbreaking (mild thermal) conditions and the "maximum" quantities of coke that would form under coking (severe thermal) conditions.

View full textPDF ( 405 KB )

History

  • Original manuscript received: 19 June 2007
  • Meeting paper published: 13 June 2007
  • Revised manuscript received: 31 May 2011
  • Manuscript approved: 15 April 2012
  • Published online: 1 November 2012
  • Version of record: 20 November 2012