Comparison Of Product Density Of Hydrotreated JO

809 Words 4 Pages
Fig 4.12 shows the comparison of product density of hydrotreated GO obtained using CAT-E and CAT-C. The density of hydrotreated GO from CAT-C at 370◦C was 0.8148g/ml whereas at the same temperature the density of hydrotreated GO obtained from CAT-E was 0.8302 g/ml despite sulphur and nitrogen in the GO has been reduced to less than 50 ppm and 1 ppm respectively. The reason for higher density would be due to higher aromatic content in the hydrotreated product obtained from CAT-E. This indicates that the nature of support of the hydrotreating catalyst affects the product formation. The catalytic activity therefore not only depends on the active metal concentration, but the nature of interaction between support-catalyst which ultimately affects …show more content…
Density of hydrotreated JO at 370◦C was found to be 0.7963g/ml. The product density of hydrotreated 20% JO in GO mixtures were found to be low in comparison to product density of hydrotreated GO and this reduction of density of was attributed to the addition of JO as hydrotreating of JO mostly produces C15-C18 range hydrocarbons. However for 5 and 10% JO in GO the hydrotreated product density was similar to the product density of hydrotreated GO. The densities of all the products were found to be below the density values of the hydrotreated GO at 370◦C. The result had shown that addition of JO in GO resulted in lowering of the product density which might be attributed to the formation of higher amount of saturates formed from JO …show more content…
The pre-requirement of any hydrotreating catalysts is it should not crack carbon-carbon bond so severely since cracking may yield gasoline range products (<180◦C). Also hydrotreating catalyst should eliminate S, N and O of the feed to be hydrotreated along with saturation of aromatics. From the boiling point distribution of the liquid products obtained from hydrotreatment of GO, the product quality can be ascertained i. e the potential of the catalyst to crack carbon-sulphur, carbon-nitrogen and carbon-oxygen cleavage and the aromatic saturation efficiency of the catalyst could be established. Table 4.6 has shown boiling point distribution (SimTBP) of hydrotreated GO obtained from CAT-A and CAT-C catalyzed reactions. The data had shown that the boiling point of distribution (Temperature Vs % volume recovered) of hydrotreated GO obtained from CAT-A and CAT-C catalyzed reactions were found to be lower than that of GO feed. This shows that aromatics in the GO feed has been saturated and sulphur and nitrogen in GO has been eliminated due to which the density and boiling point of hydrotreated GO was found to be lower than that of the feed GO. However, boiling point distribution (Temperature against % volume recovered) and density of hydrotreated GO obtained from CAT-E catalyzed reaction was found to be higher in comparison to density and boiling point of

Related Documents