Modeling and Comparison a Thermally Coupled Reactor of Methane Tri – Reforming and Dehydrogenation of Cyclohexane Reactions for Syngas Production in Both Co- & Counter-Current Modes

E. Dehghanfard; Z. Arab Aboosadi

doi:10.1515/ijcre-2017-0207

Artikel

Modeling and Comparison a Thermally Coupled Reactor of Methane Tri – Reforming and Dehydrogenation of Cyclohexane Reactions for Syngas Production in Both Co- & Counter-Current Modes

E. Dehghanfard und Z. Arab Aboosadi

Veröffentlicht/Copyright: 28. November 2018

Veröffentlicht von

Veröffentlichen auch Sie bei De Gruyter Brill

Manuskript einreichen Informationen für Autor*innen

Aus der Zeitschrift International Journal of Chemical Reactor Engineering Band 17 Heft 1

Abstract

The aim of this work is a comparison of different inlets (Co- and Counter-current modes) to feed a thermally coupled reactor (TCR) in producing syngas as a valuable chemical. The novel thermally coupled reactor has been designed as a double pipe reactor where tri-reforming of methane for syngas production has been considered in the exothermic side of fixed bed plug reactor, and dehydrogenation of cyclohexane reaction occur in the endothermic side. The heat generated in the exothermic part by the walls of the tube side is transferred to the endothermic section. A steady-state homogeneous one-dimensional model predicts the performance of this reactor for simultaneous production of synthesis gas and benzene in an economical approach for both co- and counter-current modes of operation. The reversed flow of cyclohexane has been considered for the counter-current flow regime. The simulation results of co- and counter-current modes of TCR and also an optimized tri-reforming of methane (OTRM) single reactor are investigated and compared with each other. The results showed that methane conversion, hydrogen yield and H2/Co ratio in the exothermic side of TCR reached to 91.1 %, 1.82 and 2.1 in co-current mode and 87.8 %, 1.77 and 2.3 in counter-current mode, respectively. Additionally, the results showed that cyclohexane conversion at the endothermic side of the reactor in co- and counter-current modes achieved to 98.6 % and 99.9 %, respectively. So, the results for counter-current mode showed superior performance in hydrogen and benzene production in the endothermic side of TCR. Also, Changes in various operating parameters during the reactor have been studied.

Keywords: thermally coupled reactor; tri - reforming of methane; dehydrogenation of cyclohexane; fixed bed reactor; co- & counter-current modes; recuperative coupling method

Nomenclature

Symbols
Ac: cross section area of reactor (m2)
Cpg: specific heat of the gas at constant pressure (j.mol−1)
dp: particle diameter (m)
Do: outside diameter of tube side of reactor (m)
Di: inside diameter of tube side of reactor (m)
Ft: total flow rate per each reaction (mol.S−1)
Fi: Flow rate of component (mol.S−1)
hi: Heat transfer coefficient between fluid phase and reactor wall in exothermic side (W.m−2K−1)
ho: Heat transfer coefficient between fluid phase and reactor wall in endothermic side (W.m−2K−1)
k1: reaction rate constant for the first rate equation (mol.kg−1.s−1)
k2: reaction rate constant for the second rate equation (mol.kg−1.s−1)
k3: reaction rate constant for the third rate equation (mol.kg−1.s−1)
k4a: first reaction rate constant for the fourth rate equation (mol.kg−1.s−1)
k4b: second reaction rate constant for the fourth rate equation (mol.kg−1.s−1)
Kw: thermal conductivity of reactor wall (W.m−1.K−1)
L: length of reactor (m)
MWi: molecular weight of component i (g.mol−1)
N: Number of components
P: Total pressure (bar)
Pi: partial pressure of component i in reaction side (bar)
ri: reaction rate of component i (mol.kg−1.s−1)
R1: first rate of reaction for steam reforming of CH4(mol.kg−1.s−1)
R2: second rate of reaction for steam reforming of CH4(mol.kg−1.s−1)
R3: Rate of reversed water–gas shift reaction(mol.kg−1.s−1)
R4: Rate of complete oxidation of methane (mol.kg−1.s−1)
R: Universal gas constant (j.mol−1k−1)
Rp: Particle radius (m)
Re: Reynolds number
T: Temperature (K)
u: Linear velocity of fluid phase (m.s−1)
U: Overall heat transfer coefficient between exothermic and endothermic sides (w.m2.k−1)
vci: Critical volume of component i cm3mol−1
yi: mole fraction of component i (mol.mol−1)
z: Axial reactor coordinate (m)
Greek letters
α: Activity of catalyst (where α= 1 for fresh catalyst)
ΔHf,i: Enthalpy of formation of component i (j.mol−1)
εB: Void fraction of catalytic bed
η: Effectiveness factor
μ: Viscosity of fluid phase (kg.m−1.s−1)
ρ: Density of fluid phase (kg.m−3)
ρb: Density of catalytic bed (kg.m−3)
Superscripts
g: In bulk gas phase
0: entrance of reactor
Acronyms
TCR: thermally coupled reactor
TCMR: thermally coupled membrane reactor
TRM: tri-reforming of methane
OTRM: optimized tri-reforming of methane
DME: dimethyl ether
COM: complete oxidation of methane
POM: partial oxidation of methane
SRM: steam reforming of methane reaction
DRM: dry reforming of methane reaction
WGSR: water-gas shift reaction
DE: differential evolution

Acknowledgements

The authors are grateful to Marvdasht Islamic Azad University for supporting this research.

References

Abashar, M. E. E. 2004. “Coupling of Ethylbenzene Dehydrogenation and Benzene Hydrogenation Reactions in Fixed Bed Catalytic Reactors.” Chemical Engineering Science 43: 1195–202.10.1016/j.cep.2003.11.004Suche in Google Scholar

Annaland, M. V. S., H. A. R. Scholts, J. A. M Kuipers, and W. P. M. V. Swaaij. 2002a. “A Novel Reverse-Flow Reactor Coupling Endothermic and Exothermic Reactions, Part I: Comparison of Reactor Configurations for Irreversible Endothermic Reactions.” Chemical Engineering Science 57: 833–54.10.1016/S0009-2509(01)00422-5Suche in Google Scholar

Annaland, M. V. S., H. A. R. Scholts, J. A. M. Kuipers, and W. P. M. V. Swaaij. 2002b. “A Novel Reverse-Flow Reactor Coupling Endothermic and Exothermic Reactions, Part II: Sequential Reactor Configuration for Reversible Endothermic Reactions.” Chemical Engineering Sciences 57: 855–72.10.1016/S0009-2509(01)00423-7Suche in Google Scholar

Arab Aboosadi, Z., A. Jahanmiri, and M. Rahimpour. 2011. “Optimization of Tri-Reformer Reactor to Produce Synthesis Gas for Methanol Production Using Differential Evolution (DE) Method.” Applications Energy 8: 2691–701.10.1016/j.apenergy.2011.02.017Suche in Google Scholar

Arab Aboosadi, Z., M. R. Rahimpour, and A. Jahanmiri. 2011. “A Novel Integrated Thermally Coupled Configuration for Methane-Steam Reforming and Hydrogenation of Nitrobenzene to Aniline.” International Journal of Hydrogen Energy 36: 2960–68.10.1016/j.ijhydene.2010.12.005Suche in Google Scholar

Cho W., Song T., Mitsos A., McKinnon J. T., Ko G. H., Tolsma J. E., et al. 2009. “Optimal Design and Operation of a Natural Gas Tri-Reforming Reactor for DME Synthesis.” Catalysis Today 139: 261–67.10.1016/j.cattod.2008.04.051Suche in Google Scholar

De Groote, A. M., and G. F. Froment. 1996. “Simulation of the Partial Catalytic Oxidation of Methane to Synthesis Gas.” Applied Catalysis A 138: 245–64.10.1016/0926-860X(95)00299-5Suche in Google Scholar

De Groote, A. M., G. F. Froment, and T. H. Kobylinski. 1996. “Synthesis Gas Production from Natural Gas in a Fixed Bed Reactor with the Reversed Flow.” The Canadian Journal of Chemical Engineering 74: 735–42.10.1002/cjce.5450740525Suche in Google Scholar

De Smet, C. R. H., M. H. J. M. de Croon, R. J. Berger, G. B. Marin, and J. C. Schouten. 2001. “Design of Adiabatic Fixed-Bed Reactors for the Partial Oxidation of Methane to Synthesis Gas. Application to the Production of Methanol and Hydrogen-For-Fuel-Cells.” Chemical Engineering Sciences 56: 4849–61.10.1016/S0009-2509(01)00130-0Suche in Google Scholar

Farniaei, M., M. Abbasi, H. Rahnama, M. R. Rahimpour, and A. Shariati 2014a “Syngas Production in a Novel Methane Dry Reformer by Utilizing of a Tri-Reforming Process for Energy Supplying: Modeling and Simulation.” Natural Gas Science and Engineering 20: 132–46.10.1016/j.jngse.2014.06.010Suche in Google Scholar

Farniaei, M., H. Rahnama, M. Abbasi, and M. R. Rahimpour 2014b. “Simultaneous Production of Two Types of Synthesis Gas by Steam and Tri-Reforming of Methane Using an Integrated Thermally Coupled Reactor: Mathematical Modeling.” International Journal Energy Researcher 38: 1260–77.10.1002/er.3125Suche in Google Scholar

Farsi, M., M. H. Khademi, A. Jahanmiri, and M. R. Rahimpour. 2010. “Novel Recuperative Configuration for Coupling of Methanol Dehydration to Dimethyl Ether with Cyclohexane Dehydrogenation to Benzene.” Industrial & Engineering Chemistry Research 49: 4633–43.10.1021/ie1000086Suche in Google Scholar

Fiaschi, D., and A. Baldini. 2009. “Joining Semi-Closed Gas Turbine Cycle and Tri-Reforming: SCGT-TRIREF as a Proposal for Low CO2 Emissions Powerplants.” Energy Convers Managed 8: 2083–97.10.1016/j.enconman.2009.03.034Suche in Google Scholar

Fischer, F., and H. Tropsch. 1926. “The Synthesis of Petroleum at Atmospheric Pressures from Gasification Products of Coal.” Brennstoff-Chemie 7: 97–104.Suche in Google Scholar

Friedler, F. 2010. “Process Integration, Modeling and Optimization for Energy Saving and Pollution Reduction.” Applications Thermal Engineering 30: 2270–80.10.1016/j.applthermaleng.2010.04.030Suche in Google Scholar

Gosiewski, K., U. Bartmann, M. Moszczynski, and L. Mleczko. 1999. “Effect of Intraparticle Transport Limitations on Temperature Profiles and Catalytic Performance of the Reverse-Flow Reactor for the Partial Oxidation of Methane to Synthesis gas.” Chemical Engineering Sciences 54: 4589–602.10.1016/S0009-2509(99)00132-3Suche in Google Scholar

Graaf, G. H., H. Scholtens, E. J. Stamhuis, and A. A. C. M. Beenackers. 1990. “Intra-Particle Diffusion Limitations in Low-Pressure Methanol Synthesis.” Chemical Engineering Science 45: 773–83.10.1016/0009-2509(90)85001-TSuche in Google Scholar

Holman, Jack P. 2010. Heat Transfer, 10th ed. McGraw-Hill Series in Mechanical Engineering. McGraw-Hill.Suche in Google Scholar

Hunter, J. B., and G. McGuire,1980. Method and Apparatus for Catalytic Heat Exchange. US Patent.; 4: 214–867.Suche in Google Scholar

Itoh, N. 1987. “A Membrane Reactor Using Palladium.” AIChE Journal 33: 1576–78.10.1002/aic.690330921Suche in Google Scholar

Jeong, B. H., K. I. Sotowa, and K. Kusakabe. 2003. “Catalytic Dehydrogenation of Cyclohexanein an FAU-type Zeolite Membrane Reactor.” Journal Membrane Sciences 224: 151–58.10.1016/j.memsci.2003.08.004Suche in Google Scholar

Khademi, M., M. Farsi, M. Rahimpour, and A. Jahanmiri. 2011. “DME Synthesis and Cyclohexane Dehydrogenation Reaction in an Optimized Thermally Coupled Reactor.” Chemical Engineering Process 1 (50): 113–23.10.1016/j.cep.2010.12.004Suche in Google Scholar

Khademi, M. H., P. Setoodeh, M. R. Rahimpour, and A. Jahanmiri. 2009. “Optimization of Methanol Synthesis and Cyclohexane Dehydrogenation in a Thermally Coupled Reactor Using Differential Evolution (DE) Method.” International Journal of Hydrogen Energy 34: 6930–44.10.1016/j.ijhydene.2009.06.018Suche in Google Scholar

Mirvakili, A., M. Heravi, D. Karimipourfard, and M. R. Rahimpour. 2014. “Simultaneous Synthesis Gas and Styrene Production in the Optimized Thermally Coupled Reactor.” Journal of Natural Gas Science and Engineering 16: 18–30.10.1016/j.jngse.2013.11.005Suche in Google Scholar

Mirvakili, A., H. Khalilpourmeymandi, M. Heravi, and M. R. Rahimpour. 2017. “An Environmentally Friendly Configuration for Reduction of Toxic Products in a Thermally Coupled Reactor of Styrene and Tri-Reformer of Methane.” Journal of Environmental Chemical Engineering 5: 1048–59.10.1016/j.jece.2017.01.020Suche in Google Scholar

Ness, H. C. Van, J. M. Smith, and M. M. Abbott. 2001. Introduction to Chemical Engineering Thermodynamic, 6th ed. Boston: McGraw-Hill.Suche in Google Scholar

Nouryzadeh, H., and D. Iranshahi. 2014. “Hydrogen and Gasoline Production through the Coupling of Fischer–Tropsch Synthesis and Cyclohexane Dehydrogenation in a Thermally Coupled Membrane Reactor.” Petroleum & Coal 56: 231–48.Suche in Google Scholar

Perry, R. H., and D. W. Green. 1999. Perry's Chemical Engineering Handbook. New York: Mc Graw Hill.Suche in Google Scholar

Rahimpour, M., and E. Pourazadi. 2011. “A Comparison of Hydrogen and Methanol Production in A Thermally Coupled Membrane Reactor for Co-Current and Counter-Current Flows.” International Journal of Energy Research 35: 863–82.10.1002/er.1744Suche in Google Scholar

Rahimpour, M. R., M. R. Dehnavi, F. Allahgholipour, D. Iranshahi, and S. M. Jokar. 2012. “Assessment and Comparison of Different Catalytic Coupling Exothermic and Endothermic Reactions: A Review.” Applied Energy 99: 496–512.10.1016/j.apenergy.2012.04.003Suche in Google Scholar

Rahimpour, M. R., M. H. Khademi, and A. M. Bahmanpour. 2010. “A Comparison of Conventional and Optimized Thermally Coupled Reactors for Fischer–Tropschsynthesis in GTL Technology.” Chemical Engineering Science 65: 6206–14.10.1016/j.ces.2010.09.002Suche in Google Scholar

Rahnama, H., M. Farniaei, M. Abbasi, and M. R. Rahimpour. 2013. “Modeling of Synthesis Gas and Hydrogen Production in a Thermally Coupling of Steam and Tri-Reforming of Methane with Membranes.” Industrial and Engineering Chemistry 28: 1779–92.10.1016/j.jiec.2013.08.032Suche in Google Scholar

Ramaswamy, R. C. 2006. "Steady-state and dynamic reactor models for coupling exothermic and endothermic reactions." D.Sc. diss., Missouri, USA: Saint Louis.10.1016/j.ces.2005.07.019Suche in Google Scholar

Rossiter, A. P.,2003. "Succeeding in Process Integration." In: Process industries expo user conference.Suche in Google Scholar

Smith, J. M. 1980. Chemical Engineering Kinetics. New York: McGraw-Hill.Suche in Google Scholar

Smith, R. 2000. “State of the Art in Process Integration.” Applications Thermal Engineering 20: 1337–45.10.1016/S1359-4311(00)00010-7Suche in Google Scholar

Song, C. 2001. “Tri-Reforming: A New Process for Reducing CO2 Emissions.” Chemical Innovation 31: 6–21.Suche in Google Scholar

Synthesis Gas Chemistry and Synthetic Fuels. 2015. "Syngas Chem BV. (N.D.)." Accessed February 5. http://www.syngaschem.com/syngaschem.Suche in Google Scholar

Trimm, D. L., and C. W. Lam. 1980. “The Combustion of Methane on Platinum-Alumina Fiber catalysts—I.” Kinetics and Mechanism Chemical Engineering Sciences 35: 1405–13.10.1016/0009-2509(80)85134-7Suche in Google Scholar

Vakili, R., E. Pourazadi, P. Setoodeh, R. Eslamloueyan, and M. Rahimpour. 2011. “Direct Dimethyl Ether (DME) Synthesis through a Thermally Coupled Heat Exchanger Reactor.” Applied Energy 4: 1211–23.10.1016/j.apenergy.2010.10.023Suche in Google Scholar

Viswanath, D. S., T. K. Ghosh, D. H. L. Prasad, N V. K. Dutt, and K. Y. Rani. 2007. The Viscosity of Liquids: Theory, Estimation, Experiment, and Data. Netherlands: Springer.Suche in Google Scholar

Xu, G., P. Li, and A. Rodrigues. 2002. “Sorption Enhanced Reaction Process with Reactive Generation.” Chemical Engineering Science 57: 3893–908.10.1016/S0009-2509(02)00245-2Suche in Google Scholar

Xu, J., and G. F. Froment. 1989. “Methane Steam Reforming, Methanation, and Water–Gas Shift: I. Intrinsic Kinetics.” AIChE Journal 35: 88–96.10.1002/aic.690350109Suche in Google Scholar

Yaws, C. L. 1995. Handbook of Thermal Conductivity. Gulf Professional Publishing (1632). ASIN: B01JNYJM48.Suche in Google Scholar

Yaws, C. L. 2009. Transport Properties of Chemicals and Hydrocarbons: Viscosity, Thermal Conductivity, and Diffusivity of Cl to Cl00 Organics and Ac to Zr Inorganic. Norwich: William Andrew Inc. ASIN: B01JQ907AI.Suche in Google Scholar

Zhu, Y. L., H. W. Xiang, G. S. Wu, L. Bai, and Y. W. Li. 2002. “A Novel Route for Synthesis of Gamma -Butyrolactonethrough the Coupling of Hydrogenation and Dehydrogenation.” Chemical Communicable 35: 254–55.10.1039/b109658nSuche in Google Scholar PubMed

Received: 2017-09-03

Revised: 2018-06-28

Accepted: 2018-09-15

Published Online: 2018-11-28

Sie haben derzeit keinen Zugang zu diesem Inhalt.

Artikel in diesem Heft

https://doi.org/10.1515/ijcre-2017-0207

Schlagwörter für diesen Artikel

thermally coupled reactor; tri - reforming of methane; dehydrogenation of cyclohexane; fixed bed reactor; co- & counter-current modes; recuperative coupling method