A number of studies have been conducted to reduce the overall level of catalyst deactivation in heterogeneous catalytic reactors, and improve the performance of reactors, such as yield, conversion or selectivity. The methodology generally includes optimization of the following: (1) operating conditions of the reaction system, such as feed temperature, normal operating temperature, pressure, and composition of feed streams; (2) reactor design parameters, such as dimension of the reactor, side stream distribution along the axis of the reactor beds, the mixing ratio of inert catalyst at each bed; and (3) catalyst design parameters, such as the pore size distribution across the pellet, active material distribution, size and shape of the catalyst, etc. Few studies have examined optimization of the overall catalyst reactor performance throughout the catalyst lifetime, considering catalyst deactivation. Furthermore, little attention has been given to the impact of various configurations of reactor networks and scheduling of the reactor operation (i.e., online and offline-regeneration) on the overall reactor performance throughout the catalyst lifetime. Therefore, we developed a range of feasible sequences of reactors and scheduling of reactors for operation and regeneration, and compared the overall reactor performance of multiple cases. Furthermore, a superstructure of reactor networks was developed and optimized to determine the optimum reactor network that shows the maximum overall reactor performance. The operating schedule of each reactor in the network was considered further. Lastly, the methodology was illustrated using a case study of the MTO (methanol to olefin) process.

Modeling Optimization Kinetics Reactor Deactivation

Gayubo AG, Benito PL, Aguayo AT, Castilla M, Bilbao J, Chem. Eng. Sci., 51(11), 3001 (1996)
Gayubo AG, Aguayo AT, Olazar M, Vivanco R, Bilbao J, Chem. Eng. Sci., 58(23-24), 5239 (2003)
Froment GF, Appl. Catal. A: Gen., 212(1-2), 117 (2001)
Gayubo AG, Arandes JM, Aguayo AT, Olazar M, Bilbao J, Chem. Eng. J. Biochem. Eng. J., 55(3), 125 (1994)
Billimoria RM, Butt JB, Chem. Eng. J., 22(1), 71 (1981)
Somasi S, Witt PM, Calverley EM, Livingston DA, Herceg E, Ind. Eng. Chem. Res., 52(44), 15330 (2013)
Megiris CE, Butt JB, Chem. Eng. Sci., 43(8), 2239 (1988)
Fortunatti C, Sarmoria C, Brandolin A, Asteasuain M, Macromolecular Reaction Engineering, Published on-line (DOI:10.1002/mren.201200084), May (2013)
Schipper PH, Krambeck FJ, Chem. Eng. Sci., 41(4), 1013 (1086)
Szwast Z, Sieniutycz S, Catal. Today, 66(2-4), 461 (2001)
Hwang SW, Linke P, Smith R, Chem. Eng. Sci., 59(20), 4245 (2004)
Hwang S, Smith R, Chem. Eng. Technol., 31(3), 384 (2008)
Pota M, Russob L, Mancusic E, Crescitellia S, 16th European Symposium on Computer Aided Process Engineering and 9th International Symposium on Process Systems Engineering (2006)
Lucia R, Silvestro C, Erasmo M, Luca MP, Int. J. of Biff. and Chao. in App. Sci. and Eng., 14(4), 1325 (2004)
Sheintuch M, Nekhamkina O, Chem. Eng. Sci., 59(19), 4065 (2004)
Rzesnitzek T, Mullerschon H, Gunther FC, Wozniak M, Infotag-nichtlineare optimierung und stochastische analysen mit LS-OPT, Stuttgart (2003)
El-Kafafy M, Mech. Syst. Signal. Pr., 35(1-2), 52 (2013)
Friedlander MP, Schmidt M, SIAM J. Sci. Comput., 34(3), 1380 (2012)
Aguayo AT, Gayubo AG, Ortega JM, Olazar M, Bilbao J, Catal. Today, 37(3), 239 (1997)
Gayubo AG, Ortega JM, Aguayo AT, Arandes JM, Bilbao J, Chem. Eng. Sci., 55(16), 3223 (2000)