Home Few-Step Kinetic Model of Gaseous Autocatalytic Ethane Pyrolysis and Its Evaluation by Means of Uncertainty and Sensitivity Analysis
Article
Licensed
Unlicensed Requires Authentication

Few-Step Kinetic Model of Gaseous Autocatalytic Ethane Pyrolysis and Its Evaluation by Means of Uncertainty and Sensitivity Analysis

  • Liana F. Nurislamova EMAIL logo , Olga P. Stoyanovskaya , Olga A. Stadnichenko , Irek M. Gubaidullin , Valeriy N. Snytnikov and Anastasia V. Novichkova
Published/Copyright: September 4, 2014
Become an author with De Gruyter Brill

Abstract

A kinetic scheme of radical chain reactions in autocatalytic pyrolysis of ethane was studied using a sensitivity analysis method, bringing in the experimental data. In the gas-phase kinetic experiments, ethane pyrolysis was carried out in laboratory reactors with the reaction mixture heated by CO2 laser irradiation. It was shown that the scheme with autocatalytic routes includes as few steps as possible and adequately describes the ethane pyrolysis with high ethylene yield at 900–1,150 K. Admissible variation ranges of preexponential factors and activation energies for the kinetic model of the reactions were found using the Monte Carlo statistical method. Reducibility of the scheme was examined by means of the Sobol’s variance based strategy applied for the sensitivity analysis evaluation.

Funding statement: Research funding: Russian Foundation for Basic Research (Grant/Award Number: “Projects Nos. 12-07-31029, 12-07-00324, 12-08-0087”).

Acknowledgments

A part of this research was performed under the UNIHEAT project. The authors wish to acknowledge the Skolkovo Foundation and BP for financial support.

The study was also partially supported by the Russian Foundation for Basic Research (Project Nos 12-07-31029, 12-07-00324, 12-08-00871, and 12-08-31095) and RF President grant MK-2737.2013.3. The work is supported by the Ministry of Education and Science of the Russian Federation.

References

1. MatheuDM, GrendaJM. Pathways to the minor products. J Phys Chem A2005;109:533242.10.1021/jp0451804Search in Google Scholar PubMed

2. MatheuDM, GrendaJM. Radical disproportionations, missing reaction families, and the consequences of pressure dependence. J Phys Chem A2005;109:534351.10.1021/jp0451647Search in Google Scholar PubMed

3. PonomarevAV, TsivadzeAA. Gas-to-liquid conversion of alkanes by electron beam radiolysis. Dokl Phys Chem2006;411:34551.10.1134/S0012501606120062Search in Google Scholar

4. PushkarevAI, Ai-MinZ, Xiao-SongLi, SazonovRV. Methane conversion in low-temperature plasma. High Energy Chem2009;43:15662.10.1134/S0018143909030023Search in Google Scholar

5. ChavadejS, RueangjittN, SreethawongT. Reforming of CO-containing natural gas with partial oxidation using an AC gliding arc system. In: Proceedings of 18th international symposium on plasma chemistry, Kyoto, 2007;55261.Search in Google Scholar

6. MantashyanAA, KhachatryanLA, EduardAA. Slozhnyye gazofaznyye reaktsii prevrashcheniya uglevodorod-kislorodnykh smesey v usloviyakh lazernogo nagreva. Kinetika I Kataliz1989;30:2726 (Russian).Search in Google Scholar

7. KarlovNV, KirichenkoNA, Luk’yanchukBS. Laser thermochemistry: fundamentals and applications. Cambridge: Cambridge International Science Publishing, 2000:370.Search in Google Scholar

8. SnytnikovVN, MishchenkoTI, SnytnikovVN, StoyanovskayaOP, ParmonVN. Autocatalytic gas-phase ethane dehydrogenation in a wall-less reactor. Kinet Catalysis2010;51:1017.10.1134/S0023158410010039Search in Google Scholar

9. SnytnikovVN, MischenkoTI, SnytnikovVN, ChernykhIG. A reactor for the study of homogeneous processes using laser radiation energy. Chem Eng J2009;150:2316.10.1016/j.cej.2009.02.028Search in Google Scholar

10. SnytnikovVN, MishchenkoTI, SnytnikovVN, MalykhinSE, AvdeevVI, ParmonVN. Autocatalytic gas-phase dehydrogenation of ethane. Res Chem Intermed2012;38:113347.10.1007/s11164-011-0449-xSearch in Google Scholar

11. SnytnikovPV, StoyanovskayaOP. Supercomputer simulation of laser-catalytic reactor of C2-C3 alkane pyrolysis. Proceedings of the International Conference “Advanced Mathematics, computations and applications – 2014”; 2014 June 8–11; Institute of Computational Mathematics and Mathematical Geophysics SBRAS; Akademgorodok, Novosibirsk, Russia. Novosibirsk: Academizdat, 2014:122.Search in Google Scholar

12. NorinagaK, DeutschmannO. Detailed kinetic modeling of gas-phase reactions in the chemical vapor deposition of carbon from light hydrocarbons. Ind Eng Chem Res2007;46:354757.10.1021/ie061207pSearch in Google Scholar

13. TomlinAS, PillingMJ, MerkinJH, BrindleyJ, BurgessN, GoughA. Reduced mechanisms for propane pyrolysis. Ind Eng Chem Res1995;34:374960.10.1021/ie00038a010Search in Google Scholar

14. TurányiT. Sensitivity analysis of complex kinetic systems. Tools and applications. J Math Chem1990;5:20348.10.1007/BF01166355Search in Google Scholar

15. SobolIM. Global sensitivity indices for nonlinear mathematical models and their Monte Carlo estimates. Math Comput Simulation2001;55:27180.10.1016/S0378-4754(00)00270-6Search in Google Scholar

16. MaselRI. Chemical kinetics and catalysis. New York: Wiley Interscience, 2001:952.Search in Google Scholar

17. PolakLS, GoldenbergMY, LevitskiyAA. Computational methods in chemical kinetics. Moscow: Nauka, 1984:280 (Russian).Search in Google Scholar

18. SaltelliA, RattoM, TarantolaS, CampolongoF. Sensitivity analysis for chemical models. Chem Rev2005;105:281128.10.1021/cr040659dSearch in Google Scholar

19. ZádorJ, ZsélyIG, TurányiT. Local and global uncertainty analysis of complex chemical kinetic systems. Rel Eng Sys Safety2006;91:123240.10.1016/j.ress.2005.11.020Search in Google Scholar

20. HeltonJC. Uncertainty and sensitivity analysis for models of complex systems. Comput Methods Transp Verification Validatio2008;62:20728.10.1007/978-3-540-77362-7_9Search in Google Scholar

21. TomlinAS, ZiehnT. The use of global sensitivity methods for the analysis, evaluation and improvement of complex modelling systems. In: GorbanAN, RooseD, editors. Coping with complexity: model reduction and data analysis. Heidelberg (Berlin): Springer, 2011:355.Search in Google Scholar

22. YouXQ, RussiT, PackardA, FrenklachM. The role of sensitivity and uncertainty analysis in combustion modeling. Proc Combust Inst2011;33:50916.Search in Google Scholar

23. FrenklachM, PackardA, SeilerP, FeeleyR. Collaborative data processing in developing predictive models of complex reaction systems. Int J Chem Kinet2004;36:5766.10.1002/kin.10172Search in Google Scholar

24. KantorovichLV. On some new approaches to computational methods and processing of observations. Sib Mat Zh1962;3:7019.Search in Google Scholar

25. TikhonovaMV, GarifullinaGG, GerchikovAY, SpivakSI. The kinetic model of n-decane oxidation in the presence of inhibitory composition. Int J Chem Kinet2014;46:22030.10.1002/kin.20848Search in Google Scholar

26. SaltelliA. Making best use of model evaluations to compute sensitivity indices. Comput Phys Commun2002;145:28097.10.1016/S0010-4655(02)00280-1Search in Google Scholar

27. SobolIM. Uniformly distributed sequences with an additional uniform property. Zh Vych Mat Mat Fiz1976;16:13327 (Russian).10.1016/0041-5553(76)90154-3Search in Google Scholar

28. SaisanaM, SaltelliA, UncertaintyTS. Sensitivity analysis techniques as tools for the quality assessment of composite indicators. J R Stat Soc A2011;168:30723.10.1111/j.1467-985X.2005.00350.xSearch in Google Scholar

29. TuranyiT, NagyT, ZselyIG, CserhatiM, VargaT, SzaboBT, et al. Determination of rate parameters based on both direct and indirect measurements. Int J Chem Kinet2012;44:284302.10.1002/kin.20717Search in Google Scholar

Published Online: 2014-9-4
Published in Print: 2014-12-1

©2014 by De Gruyter

Downloaded on 30.11.2025 from https://www.degruyterbrill.com/document/doi/10.1515/cppm-2014-0008/html
Scroll to top button