Engineering Aspects of Catalytic Cracking

  • H. de Lasa
Chapter
Part of the NATO ASI Series book series (NSSE, volume 80)

Abstract

The technology of fluidized bed catalytic cracking (FCC) has shown a remarkable change in the last 30 years. The conventional FCC process, intensively applied during the 50’s, being basically the combination of two dense fluidized beds (the reactor and the regenerator) and two transport lines, may be considered as the first generation of catalytic crackers. The heat required for the endothermic cracking reactions was supplied by the exothermal coke combustion. From an overall view point the industrial process was operated under conditions close to the thermal equilibrium where the silica-alumina catalyst was transferring the heat from the hot regions (regenerator) to the cold regions (reactor) and vice-versa. (Fig.1).
Open image in new window
Fig. 1

Schematic Description of the First Generation of Crude Oil Catalytic Cracking Process

Keywords

Coke Formation Fluid Catalytic Crack Aging Catalyst Coke Yield AIChE Journal 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    Miale, J.C., N.Y. Chen and P.B. Weisz, “Catalysis by Crystalline Alumino Silicates IV Attainable Catalytic Cracking Rate Constants and Superacidity”. J. Catal., 6, 278 (1966).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Blazek, J.J., “Gains from FCC Revival Evident Now”, Oil and Gas Journal, Oct., 65 (1973)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Strother, C.W., Vermillion, W.L. and A.J. Conner, “FCC getting boost from all-riser cracking”. Oil and Gas Journal, May, 103 (1972).Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Whittington, E.L., Murphy, J.R. and I.H. Lutz. “Striking advances show up in modern FCC design”. Oil and Gas Journal Oct., 49 (1972).Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Parasakos, J.A., Shah, Y.T., McKinney, J.D. and N.L. Carr. “A Kinematic Model for Catalytic Cracking in a Transfer line Reactor”. Ind. Engng. Chem. Process Design Dev. 15; 165 (1976)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Bunn, D.P., Gruenke, G.F., Jones, H.B., Luessenthop, D.C. and D.J. Youngblood. “Texaco’s Fluid Catalytic Cracking Process”. Chem. Eng. Progress, 65; 6, 88 (1969).Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Gussov, S., Higginson, G.W. and I.A. Schwint. “New FCC Catalyst score high commercially”. Oil and Gas Journal 70, 25, 71 (1972).Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Montgomery, J.A., “Recycle Rates Reflect FCC Advances” Oil and Gas Journal 70, 50, 81 (1972).Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Gates, B.C., Katzer, J.R. and G.C.A. Schuit, “Chemistry of Catalytic Processes” McGraw-Hill Inc. (1979).Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Johnson, M.F.L., Kreger, W.E. and H. Erickson. “Gas Oil Cracking by Silica-Alumina Bead Catalysts”. Ind. Engng. Chem. 49; 283 (1957).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Plank, C.J., Rosinski, E.J. and W.P. Hawthorne, “Acidic Crystalline Aluminosilicates”. Ind. Engng. Chem. Prod. Res. Develop. 3; 165 (1964).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Nace, D.M., “Catalytic Cracking over Crystalline Aluminosilicates II. Application of Microreactor Technique to the Investigation of Structural Effects of Hydrocarbon Reactants”. Ind. Engng. Chem. Prod. Res. Develop. 8; 31 (1969).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Strother, C.W., Vermillion, W.L. and A.J. Conner “Riser cracking gives advantages”. Hydrocarbon Processing May, 89 (1972).Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Hemler, C.L. and W.L. Vermillion. “New Jobs for FCC”, Oil and Gas Journal. 71, 45, 88 (1973).Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Murcia, A.A., Soudek, M., Quinn, G.P. and G.J. D’Souza, “Add Flexibility to FCC’s”. Hydrocarbon Processing Sept., 131 (1979).Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Murphy, J.R. and M. Soudek. “Modern FCC units incorporate many design advances”. Oil and Gas Journal Jan. 71 (1977)Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Finneran, J.A., Murphy, J.R. and E.L. Whittington. “Heavy-Oil cracking boost distillates”. Oil and Gas Journal, Jan. 53 (1974).Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Pierce, W.L., Souter, R., Kaufman, T.G. and D.F. Ryan, “Innovations in Flexicracking”, Hydrocarbon Processing, May 92 (1972).Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Bryson, M.C and G.P. Huling, “Gulf explores riser cracking”, Hydrocarbon Processing May, 85 (1972).Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Bryson, M.C., Hulling, G.P., Glausser, W.E. and C.F. Braun, “New Gulf FCC process in five units”, Oil and Gas Journal, May, 97 (1972).Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Aalund, L.R. “Custom Building a Riser Cracker”, Oil and Gas Journal 72, 42, 105 (1974).Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Chester, A.W. and W.A. Stover, “Steam Deactivation Kinetics of Zeolitic Cracking Catalysts”, Ind. Engng. Chem. Prod. Res. Develop. 16; 285 (1977).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Rheaume, L., Ritter, R.E., Blazek, J.J. and J.A. Montgomery, “New FCC catalysts cut energy and increase activity”, Oil and Gas Journal, May, 103 (1976).Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Magee, J.S., Ritter, R.E. and L. Rheaume, “A Look at FCC Catalyst Advances”. Hydrocarbon processing, Sep., 123 (1979).Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    de Lasa, H.I., Errazu, A., Barreiro, E. and S. Solioz, “Analysis of fluidized bed catalytic cracking regenerators models in an industrial scale unit”. Can. J. Chem. Engrg. 54; 549, (1981).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Wollaston, E.G., Haflin, W.J., Ford, W.D. and G.J. D’Souza, “What influences catalytic cracking”, Hydrocarbon Process Sep., 93 (1975).Google Scholar
  27. 27.
    Ritter, R.E., “Tests make case for coke-free regenerated FCC catalyst”, Oil and Gas Journal, Sep., 41 (1975).Google Scholar
  28. 28.
    Yeh, J., and B.W. Wojciechowski, “Comparison of Catalytic Cracking on LaX and LaY Catalysts”, Can. Journal of Chem. Engng. 56; 599 (1978).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Appleby, W.G., Gibson, J.W. and G.M. Good, “Coke Formation in Catalytic Cracking”, Ind.Engng.Chem. Process Design Develop, 1: 102 (1962).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Yeh, J. and B.W. Wojciechowski, “Comparison of the Product Distribution in the Catalytic Cracking of Dewaxed Natural Distillate over Lanthanum-Exchanged X and Y type Zeolites”, Can. Journal of Chem. Engng. 57; 292 (1979).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Rudder, J.K., “Up Octanes and fuel Oil in FCC”, Hydrocarbon Process, 57; 207 (1978).Google Scholar
  32. 32.
    Murphy, J.R., Whittington, E.L., and C.P. Chang, “Review ways to upgrade resids”, Hydrocarbon Processing, Sept. (1979).Google Scholar
  33. 33.
    Edison, R.R., Siemssen, J.O. and G.P. Masologites, “Crude and Residua can be cat-cracker feeds”, Oil and Gas Journal, Dec. 55 (1976).Google Scholar
  34. 34.
    Masagutov, R.M., Danilona, R.A. and G.A. Berg, “Dry demetallization of a poisoned silica-alumina catalyst”. Int.Chem. Engng. 10; 368 (1970).Google Scholar
  35. 35.
    Edelman, A.M., Lipuma, C.R. and F.G. Turpin, “Developments in Thermal and Catalytic Cracking Processes for Heavy Feeds, 10th World Petroleum Congress,Bucharest, Rumania (1979).Google Scholar
  36. 36.
    Habib, E.T., Owen, H., Synder, P.W., Streed, C.W. and P.B. Venuto, “Artificially Metals-Poisoned Fluid Catalysts. Performance in Pilot Plant Cracking of Hydrotreated Resid”. Ind. Eng. Chem., Prod. Res. Div., 16, 4, 291 (1977).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. 37.
    Cimbalo, R.N., Foster, R.L. and S.J. Wachtel, “Deposited Metals Poison FCC catalyst”, Oil and Gas Journal, 70, 20, 120, (1976).Google Scholar
  38. 38.
    Mills, G.A., “Aging of Cracking catalysts. Loss of Selectivity”, Ind. Engng. Chem. 42, 182, (1950).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. 39.
    Connor, J.E., Rothrock, J.J., Birkheimer, E.R., and L.N. Leum, “Fluid Cracking Catalyst Contamination. Some Fundamental Aspects of Metal Contamination”. Ind.Engng. Chem. 49, 276 (1957).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. 40.
    Dale, G.H. and D.L. McKay, “Passivate Metals in FCC feeds”, Hydrocarbon Processing, 56, Sept., 97 (1977).Google Scholar
  41. 41.
    Meisenheimer, R.G., “A Mechanism for the Deactivation of Trace Metal Contaminants on Cracking Catalysts”. J. of Catalysis, 1: 356 (1962).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. 42.
    Rothrock, J.J., Birkhimer, E.R., and L.N. Leum, “Fluid Cracking Catalyst Contamination. Development of a Contamination Test”. Ind. Engng. Chem., 49; 272 (1957).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. 43.
    Davis, J.C., “FCC Units get crack catalysts”. Chem. Engng. 84, 12, 77 (1977).Google Scholar
  44. 44.
    Ford, W., Reineman, R.C., Vasalos, I.A. and R.J. Fahrig, “Operation Cat Crackers for Maximum Profit”. Chem. Engng. Prog. 73 (4), 92, (1977).Google Scholar
  45. 45.
    Prescott, J.H., “FCC Regeneration Routes Boots Yields, Cut Energy”. Chem. Engng. Sep., 64 (1974).Google Scholar
  46. 46.
    Hartzell, F.D., and A.W. Chester, “CO burn promotor produces multiple FCC benefits”. Oil and Gas Journal, 77, 16, 33, (1979).Google Scholar
  47. 47.
    Ewell, R.B. and G. Gadner, “Design cat crackers by computer”, Hydrocarbon Processing, April, 125 (1978).Google Scholar
  48. 48.
    Weekman, V.W. and D.M. Nace, “Kinetics of Catalytic Cracking Selectivity in Fixed, Moving and Fluid Bed Reactors”, AIChE Journal, 16; 397 (1970).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. 49.
    Pachovsky, R.A., and B.W. Wojciechowski, “Temperature Effects of Gasoline Selectivity in the Cracking of a Neutral Distillate:, J. of Catalysis, 37; 368 (1975).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. 50.
    Gross, B., Nace, D.M., and S.E. Sterling, “Application of a Kinetic Model for Comparison of Catalytic Cracking in Fixed Bed Microreactor and a Fluidized Dense Bed”. Ind. Engng. Chem. Process Design Dev. 13; 199 (1974).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. 51.
    Nace, D.M. “Catalytic Cracking over Crystalline Aluminosilicates, I. Instantaneous rate measurements for hexadecane cracking”. Ind.Eng. Chem. Prod. Res. Develop. 8; 24 (1969).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. 52.
    Weekman, V.W., “Kinetics and Dynamics of Catalytic Cracking Selectivity in Fixed Beds”. Ind.Engng. Chem. Process Design Develop. 8; 385 (1969).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. 53.
    Campbell, D.R., and D.W. Wojciechowski, “Theoretical Patterns of Selectivity in Aging Catalysts with Special Reference to the Catalytic Cracking of Petroleum”, Can. J. Chem. Engng. 47, 413 (1969).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. 54.
    John, T.M. and B.W. Wojciechowski, “On Identifying the Primary and Secondary Products of the Catalytic Cracking of Neutral Distillates”, J. Catalysis 37; 240, (1975).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. 55.
    Pachovsky, R.A., and B.W. Wojciechowski, “Theoretical Interpretation of Gas Oil Conversion Data on X-Sieve Catalyst”, Can. J. Chem. Engng. 49; 365 (1971).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. 56.
    John, T.M., Pachovsky, R.A., and B.W. Wojciechowski, “Coke and Deactivation in Cracking Catalyst”. Advances in Chemistry Series 133, 422 (1974).Google Scholar
  57. 57.
    Weekman, V.W., “A Model of Catalytic Cracking Conversion in Fixed, Moving and Fluid-Bed Reactors”. Ing. Engng. Chem. Process Design Dev, 7; 90 (1968).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. 58.
    Weekman, V.W., and D.M. Nace, “Kinetics of Catalytic Cracking Selectivity in Fixed, Moving and Fluid Bed Reactors”, A.I.Ch.E Journal, 16, 397, (1970).Google Scholar
  59. 59.
    Gustafson, W.R., “Evaluation Procedure for Cracking Catalysts”. Ind. Eng. Chem. Process Design Develop., 11; 507 (1972).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  60. 60.
    Blanding, F.H., “Reaction Rates in Catalytic Cracking of Petroleum”, Ind. Engng. Chem. 45; 1186 (1953).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  61. 61.
    Jacob, S.M., Gross, B., Voltz, S.E., and V.W. Weekman, “A Lumping and Reaction Scheme for Catalytic Cracking”. AIChE Journal 22; 701 (1976).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  62. 62.
    Kemp, R.R.D., and B.W. Wojciechowski, “The Kinetic of Mixed Reactions”, Ind. Engng. Chem. Fundam. 13; 332 (1974).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  63. 63.
    Pachovsky, R.A., John, T.J., and B.W. Wojciechowski, “Theoretical Interpretation of Gas Oil Selectivity Data on X-Sieve Catalyst”. AIChE Journal 19; 8Q2 (1973).Google Scholar
  64. 64.
    Pachovsky, R.A., Best, D.A., and B.W. Wojciechowski, “Applications of the time-on-stream theory of Catalyst Decay”, Ind. Eng. Chem., Process Des. Develop. 12; 254 (1973).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  65. 65.
    Pachovsky, R.A., and B.W. Wojciechowski, “Effects of Diffusion Resistance on Gasoline Selectivity in Catalytic Cracking”, AIChE. Journal 19; 1121 (1973).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  66. 66.
    Pachovsky, R.A. and B.W. Wojciechowski, “Effects of Charge Stock Composition on the Kinetic Parameters in Catalytic Cracking”, Can. J. Chem. Engng., 53; 308 (1975).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  67. 67.
    Pachovsky, R.A. and B.W. Wojciechowski, “Temperature Effects on Conversion in the Catalytic Cracking of a Dewaxed Neutral Distillate”. J. of Catalysis 37; 120 (1975).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  68. 68.
    Venuto, P.B., Hamilton, L.A. and P.S. Landis, “Organic Reactions Catalyzed by Crystalline Alumino Silicates II. Alkylation Reactions. Mechanistic and Aging Considerations”. J. of Catalysis 5, 484 (1966)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  69. 69.
    John, T.M., and B.W. Wojciechowski, “Effect of Reaction Temperature on Product Distribution in the Catalytic Cracking of Neutral Distillates”, J. Catalysis 37; 348 (1975)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  70. 70.
    Eberly, P.E., Kimberlie, C.N., Miller, W.H., and H.V. Drushel, “Coke Formation on Silica-Alumina Cracking Catalysts” Inc. Engng. Chem. Proc. Design Develop, 5;193 (1966).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  71. 71.
    Andrews, J.M., “Cracking Characteristics of Catalytic Cracking Units”, Ind. Eng. Chem. 51; 507 (1959).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  72. 72.
    Voorhies, A., “Carbon Formation in Catalytic Cracking”, Ind. Engng. Chem. 37; 318 (1945).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  73. 73.
    Ruderhausen, C.G. and C.C. Watson, “Variables affecting activity of molybdena-alumina hydroforming catalyst in aromatization of cyclohexane”, Chem. Eng. Sci., 3; 110 (1954).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  74. 74.
    Tan, C.H. and O.M. Fuller, “A Model of Fouling in Zeolite Catalyst”. Can. J. Chem. Engng., 48; 174 (1970).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  75. 75.
    Wojciechowski, B.W., ‘A Theoretical Treatment of Catalyst Decay”. Can. J. Chem. Engng. 46; 48 (1968).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  76. 76.
    Campbell, D.R., and B.W. Wojciechowski, “Theoretical Patterns of Selectivity in Aging Catalysts with special reference to the Catalytic Cracking of Petroleum”. Can. J. Chem. Engng. 47; 413 (1969).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  77. 77.
    Campbell, D.R., and B.W. Wojciechowski, “Selectivity of Aging Catalysts in Static, Moving and Fluidized Bed Reactors”, Can. J. Chem. Engng. 48; 224 (1970).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  78. 78.
    Campbell, D.R. and B.W. Wojciechowski, “The Catalytic Cracking of Cumene on Aging Catalysts II. An Experimental Study”. J. of Catalysis, 23; 307 (1971).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  79. 79.
    Froment, G.F., and K.M. Bischoff, “Non-Steady state behaviour of fixed bed catalytic reactors due to catalyst fouling”, Chem. Engng. Sci. 16; 189 (1961).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  80. 80.
    Froment, G.F. and K.B. Bischoff, “Kinetic data and product distribution from fixed bed catalytic reactors subject to catalyst fouling”, Chem. Engng. Sci. 17; 105 (1962).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  81. 81.
    Corella, J., Asua, J.M., and J. Bilbao, “Kinetic of the Deactivation of a 10% Cu-0,5% Cr2O3 asbestos catalyst for benzyl alcohol dehydrogenation”. Chem. Eng. Science, 35; 1447 (1980).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  82. 82.
    Voltz, S.E., Nace, D.M., Jacob, S.M. and V.W. Weekman, “Application of a Kinetic Model for Catalytic Cracking III Some Effects of Nitrogen Poisoning and Recycle”, Ind. Engng. Chem., Process Design Develop. 11; 261 (1972).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  83. 83.
    Nace, D.M., Voltz, S.E. and V.W. Weekman, “Application of a Kinetic Model for Catalytic Cracking. Effects of Charge Stocks”. Ind. Engng. Chem. Processes Design and Develop 10; 530 (1971).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  84. 84.
    Voltz, S.E., Nace, D.M,, and V.W. Weekman, “Application of a Kinetic Model for Catalytic Cracking. Some Correlations of Rate Constants”, Ind. Engng. Chem. Process Design Develop. 10; 538 (1971).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  85. 85.
    Thomas, C.L., “Chemistry of Cracking Catalysts”, Ind. Engng. Chem., 41; 2564 (1949).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  86. 86.
    Weisz, P.B., and R.D. Goodwin, “Combustion of Carbonaceous Deposits Within Porous Catalyst Particles”, II Intrinsic Burning Rate. J. of Catalysis, 6: 227 (1966).Google Scholar
  87. 87.
    Eberly, P.E., Kimberlie, C.N., Miller, W.H. and H.V. Drushel, “Coke formation on Silica-Alumina Cracking Catalysts”. Ind. Engng. Chem. Proc. Design Develop. 5; 193 (1966).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  88. 88.
    Massoth, F.E., “Oxidation of Coked Silica Alumina Catalysts”. Ind. Engng. Chem. Proc. Design and Develop 6, 2 (1967).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  89. 89.
    Pansing, W.F., “Regeneration of Fluidized Bed Cracking Catalysts”, AIChE Journal, 2; 71 (1956).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  90. 90.
    de Lasa, H.I., Errazu, A., Barreiro, E., and S. Solioz, “Analysis of fluidized bed catalytic cracking regenerators models in an industrial scale unit”. Can. J. Chem. Engng. 54; 549 (1981)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  91. 91.
    Hano, T., Nakashio, F., and K. Kusonoki, “The Burning Rate of Coke Deposited on Zeolytic Catalyst”, J. Chem. Engng. Japan, 8; 127 (1975).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  92. 92.
    Metcalfe, T.B., “Kinetics of Coke Combustion on Catalyst Regeneration”. Brit. Chem. Engng. 12; 388 (1967).Google Scholar
  93. 93.
    Errazu, A.F., de Lasa, H.I., and F. Sarti, “A Fluidized Bed Catalytic Cracking Regenerator Model: Grid Effects”. Can. J. Chem. Engng. 57; 191 (1979).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  94. 94.
    Johnson, M.F.L., and H.G. Maryland,“Carbon Burning Rates of Cracking Catalyst in the Fluidized State”. Ind. Engng. Chem., 47; 127 (1955).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  95. 95.
    Arthur, J.R., “Reactions Between Carbon and Oxygen”, Trans. Faraday Soc. 47; 164 (1951).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  96. 96.
    Weisz, P.B., “Combustion of Carbonaceous Deposits Within Porous Catalyst Particles. III. The CO2/CO Product Ratio” J. of Catalysis 6, 425 (1966).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  97. 97.
    Fiero, W.J., and P.E. Kelly, “To optimize the FCC Unit”, Hydrocarbon Process, 56, 9, 117 (1977).Google Scholar
  98. 98.
    Shumskii, V.M., “Experimental determination of the steadystate characteristics of the fluidized-bed catalytic cracking process”. Int. Chem. Eng. 9; 508 (1969).Google Scholar
  99. 99.
    Shumskii, V.M., “Determination of a static model of catalytic cracking”. Int. Chem. Eng. 11; 64 (1971).Google Scholar
  100. 100.
    Tigrel, A.Z. and D.L. Pyle, “A model for a fluidized bee catalytic cracker”, Chem. Engng. Sci. 26; 133 (1977).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  101. 101.
    Kato, K., Inomata, M., Onoda, K., and M. Yamagishi, “Process Design for Packed Fluidized-Bed Catalytic Reactors” Int. Chem. Eng. 19; 96 (1979).Google Scholar
  102. 102.
    Shah, Y.T., Huling, G.P., Parasakos, J.A. and J.D. McKinney “A Kinematic Model for an Adiabatic Transfer Line Catalytic Reactor”, Ind. Engng. Chem., Process Design Dev. 16;89 (1977).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  103. 103.
    Parasakos, J.A., Shah, Y.T., McKinney, J.D., and N.L. Carr, “A Kinematic Model for Catalytic Cracking in a Transfer Line Reactor”, Ind. Engng. Chem. Process Design Dev. 15; 165 (1976)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  104. 104.
    de Lasa, H.I., and J.R. Grace, “The Influence of the Freeboard Region in a Fluidized Bed Catalytic Cracking Regenerator”, AIChE Journal, 25; 984 (1979).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  105. 105.
    de Lasa, H.I. and A.F. Errazu, “Ignition of a Fluidized Bed Catalytic Cracking Regenerator. Freeboard Region Influence”, Proceedings of 1980 International Fluidization Conference, ed. J.R. Grace and J.M. Matsen, Plenum Publishing Corporation, New York (1980).Google Scholar
  106. 106.
    de Lasa, H.I., Errazu, A., Barreiro, E. and S. Solioz, “Analysis of Fluidized Bed Catalytic Cracking Regenerator Models in a Revamped Unit”, American Chemical Society Meeting, Las Vegas (1980)Google Scholar
  107. 107.
    de Lasa, H.I., “Simulation of and Industrial Scale Regenerator. Influence of the Different Constitutive Fluidized Bed Regions”. Proceedings World Chem. Engng. 54; 549 (1981).Google Scholar
  108. 108.
    Grace, J.R., and H.I. de Lasa, “Reaction Near the Grid in Fluidized Beds”. AIChE Journal, 24; 364 (1978).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  109. 109.
    de Lasa, H.I., Errazu, A., Porras, J., and E. Barreiro, “Influence of the pneumatic transport line in the simulation of a Fluidized Bed Catalytic Cracking Regenerator”. Lat. J. of Chem. Engng. 11, 139 (1981).Google Scholar
  110. 110.
    Errazu, A.F., Porras, J.A., and H.I. de Lasa, “Modelling a Catalytic Cracking Regenerator. Influence of the Pneumatic Transported Riser”, X Jornadas de Ingenieria Quimica. Santa Fe, Argentina (1978).Google Scholar
  111. 111.
    de Lasa, H.I. and G. Gau, “Influence des Agrgats sur le Rendement d,un reacteur a Transport Pneumatique”, Chem. Engng. Sci. 28; 1875 (1973).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  112. 112.
    Wollaston, E.G., Haflin, W.J., Ford, W.D., and G.J. D’Souza, “FCC Model Valuable Operating Tool”, Oil and Gas Journal Sep., 87 (1975).Google Scholar
  113. 113.
    de Lasa, H.I. and L.K. Mok, “Entrained Coal Gasifiers; Modeling the Particle Acceleration”. AIChE Meeting, Philadelphia (1980). Can. J. Chem. Engng. 56; 658 (1981).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  114. 114.
    George, S.E., and J.R. Grace, “Entrainment of Particles from Aggregative Fluidized Beds”, AIChE Symp. Ser., 74, 176, 67 (1978)Google Scholar
  115. 115.
    Do, H.T., Grace, J.R., and R. Clift, “Particle Ejection and Entrainment from Fluidized Beds”, Powder Technology, 6; 195 (1972)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  116. 116.
    Seko, H., Tone, S., and T. Otake, “Consideration of the Treatment of coke distribution in a fluid catalytic cracker”, J. Chem. Engng., Japan, 10; 493 (1977).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  117. 117.
    Ewe11, R.B., and G. Gadner, “Design cat crackers by computer”, Hydrocarbon Processing, April, 125 (1978).Google Scholar
  118. 118.
    Corella, J., Bilbao, R. and J. Delgado Puche “Modelo Macrocinetico del Process de Craqueo Catalitco del Gas Oil en Lecho Fluidizado (FCC) en Estado Estacionario” Ingenieria Quimica, October (1980).Google Scholar
  119. 119.
    Elnashaie, S.S.E.H. and I.M. El-Hennawi, “Multiplicity of the Steady State in Fluidized Bed Reactors — 4. Fluid Catalytic Cracking (FCC) Chem. Engng. Sci. 34; 1113 (1979)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Martinus Nijhoff Publishers, The Hague 1984

Authors and Affiliations

  • H. de Lasa
    • 1
  1. 1.Chemical Engineering Department Faculty of Engineering ScienceThe University of Western OntarioLondonCanada

Personalised recommendations