화학공학소재연구정보센터
Journal of Industrial and Engineering Chemistry, Vol.20, No.3, 1016-1021, May, 2014
The basic study of methanol to gasoline in a pilot-scale fluidized bed reactor
E-mail:
A fluidized bed reactor, used for methanol to gasoline (MTG), was designed followed the theory of gas-solid two-phase flow, and the effects of some factors, such as temperature, space velocity and the regeneration process, on the performance of MTG catalyst were systematically examined. The results show that: heat and mass transfer can be effectively conducted in the fluidized bed reactor; with the reaction temperature was increased, the methanol conversion rate maintained at 100% and the yield of gasoline gradually increased, then reached its highest value of 25.22% at 410 ℃, after that it began to decline; and the C5 aromatics content increased with temperature and reached its maximum value of 49.86% at 430 ℃. With the weight space velocity was increased, the yield of gasoline firstly increased and then decreased, while the C5 aromatics content was decreased; In addition, the effect of inner-regenerated process for used catalyst is very good. Low temperature can help to generate lighter olefin polymer, the higher extent of hydrogen transfer and cracking of large molecules at middle temperature, the carbon deposition reaction and aromatization reaction of low carbon olefin occurred at higher temperature, all of these contributed the above mentioned rules. While the weight space velocity acts on the performance of catalyst mainly via influencing the contact time and the carbon deposition reaction.
  1. Nolan P, Shipman A, Rui H, Eur. Manage. J., 22, 150 (2004)
  2. Liu ZY, Shi SD, Li YW, Chem. Eng. Sci., 65(1), 12 (2010)
  3. Guo ZX, Bai ZQ, Bai J, Wang ZQ, Li W, Fuel Process. Technol., 92(1), 119 (2011)
  4. Suzuki A, Nakamura T, Yokoyama SY, J. Chem. Eng. Jpn., 23, 6 (1990)
  5. Sun SL, Tsubaki N, Fujimoto K, J. Chem. Eng. Jpn., 33(2), 232 (2000)
  6. Kopyscinski J, Schildhauer TJ, Biollaz SMA, Fuel, 89(8), 1763 (2010)
  7. Zhang Q, Chang J, Wang TJ, Xu Y, Energy Conv. Manag., 48(1), 87 (2007)
  8. Ohmukai Y, Fujimoto K, Hasegawa I, Hayashi S, Mae K, J. Chem. Eng. Jpn., 41(4), 319 (2008)
  9. Doshi VA, Vuthaluru HB, Bastow T, Fuel Process. Technol., 86(8), 885 (2005)
  10. Mohan D, Pittman CU, Steele PH, Energy Fuels, 20(3), 848 (2006)
  11. Mahfud FH, Melian-Cabrera I, Manurung R, Heeres HJ, Process Saf. Environ. Protect., 85(B5), 466 (2007)
  12. Czernik S, Bridgwater AV, Energy Fuels, 18(2), 590 (2004)
  13. Zhi L, Hua G, Li Y, Coal Chem. Ind., 2, 1 (2009)
  14. Wang MH, Li Z, Ma LW, Modern Chem. Ind., 28, 13 (2008)
  15. Wilhelm DJ, Simbeck DR, Karp AD, Dickenson RL, Fuel Process. Technol., 71(1-3), 139 (2001)
  16. Yurchak S, Stud. Surf. Sci. Catal., 36, 251 (1988)
  17. Rownaghi AA, Hedlund J, Ind. Eng. Chem. Res., 50(21), 11872 (2011)
  18. Zhu LJ, Wang SR, Li X, Yin QQ, Li XB, Adv. Mater., 550-553, 109 (2012)
  19. Di Z, Yang C, Jiao X, Li J, Wu J, Zhang D, Fuel, 104, 878 (2012)
  20. Cao Y, Coal Chem. Ind., 4, 25 (2010)
  21. Jang HT, Park TS, Cha WS, J. Ind. Eng. Chem., 16(3), 390 (2010)
  22. Kaushal P, Abedi J, J. Ind. Eng. Chem., 16(5), 748 (2010)
  23. Calvo LF, Gil MV, Otero M, Moran A, Garcia AI, Bioresour. Technol., 109, 206 (2012)
  24. Wang W, Jiang YJ, Hunger M, Catal. Today, 113(1-2), 102 (2006)
  25. Huang Z, Li K, Jing F, Liu X, Zhang M, J. Mol. Catal., 22, 22 (2008)
  26. Qi GZ, Xie ZK, Yang WM, Zhong SQ, Liu HX, Zhang CF, Chen QL, Fuel Process. Technol., 88(5), 437 (2007)
  27. Kaarsholm M, Joensen F, Nerlov J, Cenni R, Chaouki J, Patience GS, Chem. Eng. Sci., 62(18-20), 5527 (2007)