114 Annesini
114 Annesini
114 Annesini
1. Introduction
Carbon formation on the reactor’s catalytic bed is a major problem in the methane steam
reforming process. Depending on the system conditions, side reactions such as methane
cracking or Boudouard reaction may occur at the catalyst surface, leading to carbon
deposition in different forms. Carbon may then encapsulate the catalyst surface or
dissolve and diffuse inside the catalyst pellet, reducing its activity. The Whisker
filamentous form of carbon is particularly noxious, because it can grow inside the
catalyst pellet and eventually break it, producing finer particles that alter the
fluidodynamics of the reactor.
In order to reduce the risk of carbon formation, industrial steam reformers are fed with
gas streams with a steam-to-carbon ratio of about 3, but important economical benefits
would be obtained if a lower steam-to-carbon ratio could be used. Therefore,
mechanisms and kinetics of carbon formation reactions have been thoroughly
investigated (Trimm, 1997; Snoek et al. 2002 ; Ginsburg et al., 2005), with the aim of
finding new process configurations that allow for the use of a lower steam content in
the feed.
The gas phase inside the reformer is, in general, made of five components (methane,
water, hydrogen, carbon monoxide, carbon dioxide), involved in many reactions, thus, it
is not easy to define synthetically the conditions that would favour carbon deposition,
even limiting the analysis to equilibrium conditions.
In this paper, a thermodynamic analysis based on the elemental composition of the
reacting system is presented. In the first part of the analysis, a closed system in which
steam reforming reactions take place is considered, and elemental compositions leading
to carbon formation are determined. In the second part, results of an industrial steam
reformer simulation are used to locate, inside the reactor, regions with a positive affinity
for carbon formation.
2. Thermodynamic analysis
2.1 Reactions
Several chemical reactions can take place during the steam reforming process. The most
important and thermodynamically probable ones are (Snoek et al., 2003):
CH 4 + H 2 O ↔ CO + 3H 2 (SR)
CH 4 + CO 2 ↔ 2CO + 2H 2 (DR)
CO + H 2 O ↔ CO 2 + H 2 (WGS)
CH 4 + 2H 2 O ↔ CO + 4H 2 (OSR)
CH 4 ↔ C + 2H 2 (MC)
2CO ↔ C + CO 2 (B)
CO + H 2 ↔ C + H 2 O (RG)
It can be easily shown that only 3 out of these 7 reactions are independent, thus, for the
following thermodynamic analysis only reactions (SR), (WGS) and (B) will be
considered.
Thermodynamic constants for the reactions as a function of temperature have been
calulated by ΔH and ΔG of reaction data at 298 K and specific heat c p (T ) of the
reactants. Graphite thermodynamic properties have been assumed for carbon.
4 yCH 4 + 2 y H 2 O + 2 y H 2
χH = (1)
5 yCH 4 + 3 y H 2 O + 2 y H 2 + 2 yCO + 3 yCO 2
⎧ χ H = χ H ( yi )
⎨ (2)
⎩ χ O = χ O ( yi )
where yi is the molar fraction of one of the gaseous reactants. Fig. 1 shows the
equilibrium curves obtained at different temperatures for a pressure of 15 atm. At high
temperature, all the reactions are shifted towards the formation of CO and H2, thus, the
equilibrium curve tends to the line joining the points representing these compounds.
The equilibrium curve divides the triangular diagram in two regions (fig. 1):
Temperature: 793 K
Pressure: 3.03 MPa
Molar flow-rate: 25.7 kmol/h
Molar composition:
CH4 31.15 %
H2O 62.30 %
H2 4.68 %
CO 0.31 %
CO2 1.56 %
Fig. 4 Affinity (eq. 3) for carbon formation by (MC) reaction in a fixed bed steam
reformer. Inlet stream conditions are reported next to the figure.
It must be pointed out that the model used doesn’t take into account carbon forming
reactions: this approach is based on the reasonable hypothesis, also assumed by Snoek
et al. (2003), that carbon formation has a negligible effect on mass and energy balances
inside the reactor.
Fig. 4 shows a shade plot of carbon formation affinity of reaction (MC), which, at the
conditions of the simulation, is the most important carbon formation reaction among
those considered. For the sake of clarity, only positive values of affinity have been
plotted, while negative affinities are plotted as zero. The plot is limited to the first 2 m
after the catalytic tube entrance, because a positive affinity for carbon formation is
obtained only in the first layers of the catalytic bed.
Acknowledgements
The authors whish to thank Prof. Luigi Marrelli and ing. Marcello De Falco for their
useful help. This work was financially supported by MIUR (FISR DM 17/12/2002).
References
De Falco M., L. Di Paola, L. Marrelli and P. Nardella, Chem. Eng. J., in Press
Ginsburg J. M., J. Pina, T. El Solh, and H. I. de Lasa, H. I., 2005, Ind. Eng. Chem. Res.,
44(14):4846-4854.
Snoek J., G. F. Froment, M. Fowles, 2002, Ind. Eng. Chem. Res., 41(17):4252-4265
Snoek J., G. Froment and M. Fowles, 2003, Int. J. Chem. Reac. Eng., 1:A7
Trimm, D. L., 1997, Catal. Today, 37, 233-238