Issue
Korean Journal of Chemical Engineering,
Vol.35, No.11, 2157-2163, 2018
Tubular reactor design for the oxidative dehydrogenation of butene using computational fluid dynamics (CFD) modeling
Catalytic reactors have been essential for chemical engineering process, and different designs of reactors in multi-scales have been previously studied. Computational fluid dynamics (CFD) utilized in reactor designs have been gaining interest due to its cost-effective advantage in designing the actual reactors before its construction. In this work, butadiene synthesis via oxidative dehydrogenation (ODH) of n-butene using tubular reactor was used as a case study in the CFD model. The effects of coolant and reactor diameter were investigated in assessing the reactor performance. Based on the results of the CFD model, the conversion and selectivity were 86.5% and 59.5% respectively in a fixed bed reactor under adiabatic condition. When coolants were used in a tubular reactor, reactor temperature profiles showed that solar salt had lower temperature gradients inside the reactor than the cooling water. Furthermore, higher conversion (90.9%) and selectivity (90.5%) were observed for solar salt as compared to the cooling water (88.4% for conversion and 86.3% for selectivity). Meanwhile, reducing the reactor diameter resulted in smaller temperature gradients with higher conversion and selectivity.
[References]
  1. Park JH, Shin CH, J. Ind. Eng. Chem., 21, 683, 2015
  2. Park JH, Noh H, Park JW, Row KH, Jung KD, Shin CH, Res. Chem. Intermed., 37, 1125, 2011
  3. Rischard J, Franz R, Antinori C, Deutschmann O, AIChE J., 63(1), 43, 2017
  4. Lee H, Jung JC, Kim H, Chung YM, Kim TJ, Lee SJ, Oh SH, Kim YS, Song IK, Catal. Commun., 9, 1137, 2008
  5. Hong E, Park JH, Shin CH, Catal. Surv. Asia, 20, 23, 2016
  6. Huang K, Wang L, Lin S, Xu Y, Wu D, J. Taiwan Inst. Chem. Eng., 63, 61, 2016
  7. Park JH, Shin CH, Appl. Catal. A: Gen., 495, 1, 2015
  8. Yan W, Kouk QY, Luo J, Liu Y, Borgna A, Catal. Commun., 46, 208, 2014
  9. Zhang JH, Wang ZB, Zhao H, Tian YY, Shan HH, Yang CH, Appl. Petrochem. Res., 5, 255, 2015
  10. Park S, Lee Y, Kim G, Hwang S, Korean J. Chem. Eng., 33(12), 3417, 2016
  11. Ren T, Patel MK, Blok K, Energy, 33(5), 817, 2008
  12. Sterrett JS, McIlvried HG, Ind. Eng. Chem. Process Des. Dev., 13, 54, 1974
  13. Makshina EV, Dusselier M, Janssens W, Degreve J, Jacobs PA, Sels BF, Chem. Soc. Rev., 43, 7917, 2014
  14. Wu XG, Liu HQ, Ind. Eng. Chem. Res., 35(8), 2570, 1996
  15. Dumez FJ, Froment GF, Ind. Eng. Chem. Process Des. Dev., 15, 291, 1976
  16. Trimm DL, Gabbay DS, Trans. Faraday Soc., 67, 2782, 1971
  17. Park JH, Shin CH, Korean J. Chem. Eng., 33(3), 823, 2016
  18. Heidari A, Hashemabadi SH, J. Taiwan Inst. Chem. Eng., 45, 1389, 2014
  19. Hukkanen EJ, Rangitsch MJ, Witt PM, Ind. Eng. Chem. Res., 52(44), 15437, 2013
  20. Asadi-Saghandi H, Karimi-Sabet J, Korean J. Chem. Eng., 34(7), 1905, 2017
  21. Singh RI, Brink A, Hupa M, Appl. Therm. Eng., 52, 585, 2013
  22. Tian L, Hu GH, Du WL, Qian F, Can. J. Chem. Eng., 94(12), 2427, 2016
  23. Huang K, Lin S, Wang J, Luo Z, J. Ind. Eng. Chem., 29, 172, 2015
  24. Cornelissen JT, Taghipour F, Escudie R, Ellis N, Grace JR, Chem. Eng. Sci., 62(22), 6334, 2007
  25. Liu XH, Hu SW, Jiang YF, Li JH, Chem. Eng. J., 278, 492, 2015
  26. Bakshi A, Altantzis C, Glicksman LR, Ghoniem AF, Powder Technol., 316, 500, 2017
  27. Wgialla KM, Helal AM, Elnashaie SSEH, Math. Comput. Model., 15, 17, 1991
  28. Zhai Z, Wang X, Licht R, Bell AT, J. Catal., 325, 87, 2015
  29. Rothenberg RI, Smith JM, AIChE J., 12, 213, 1966
  30. Serrano-Lopez R, Fradera J, Cuesta-Lopez S, Chem. Eng. Process., 73, 87, 2013