Simulation of a visbreaking unit

T
he visbreaking unit
utilises vacuum residue
as a feed and converts it
into fuel oil. In this study, the
visbreaking unit of Tehran refn-
ery was simulated and then a
parametric sensitivity analysis
was carried out. KBCs Petro-
Sim simulator was used in this
study. Initially, the simulator
was validated using actual plant
test runs and, after tuning, the
simulations provided errors of
less than 3%. Using the vali-
dated simulator, the sensitivity
of the yield of fuel oil, gasoline
and fuel oil viscosity to varia-
tions in furnace temperature
(reaction temperature) was
investigated. The validated
simulator can be used to opti-
mise the units operating
conditions, to obtain the
required product specifcations
or to study possible changes in
the feed conditions, such as the
use of diluents.
Visbreaking is a non-catalytic
thermal process that converts
atmospheric or vacuum residues
via thermal cracking to gas,
naphtha, distillates and visbro-
ken residue. Atmospheric and
vacuum residues are typically
charged to a visbreaker to
Simulation of a commercial visbreaking unit supports optimisation of
the units performance
S Reza Seif Mohaddecy, SepehR Sadighi, oMid ghabuli and Mahdi RaShidzadeh
Research Institute of Petroleum Industry
www.digitalrening.com/article/1000396 PTQ Q2 2011 1
Furnace
Feed
480C
Quench
Fractionator
Gas oil
stripper
Overhead
drum
Gas
Gasoline
Gas oil
Visbroken
residue
CW
figure 1 Coil visbreaker
Furnace
Soaker
drum
Feed
450C
Quench
Fractionator
Gas oil
stripper
Overhead
drum
Gas
Gasoline
Gas oil
Visbroken
residue
CW
430C
figure 2 Soaker visbreaker
reduce fuel oil viscosity and
increase the distillate yield in
the refnery. The process will
typically achieve conversion to
gas, gasoline and distillates of
1050%, depending on the
severity and feedstock charac-
teristics. Visbreaking reduces
the quantity of cutter stock
required to meet the fuel oil
specifcations and, depending
upon the sulphur specifcations,
can decrease fuel oil production
by 20%. Additionally, this proc-
ess can be attractive when it
comes to producing feedstock
for catalytic cracking plants.
1

The process severity is control-
led by the interchangeable
operational variables (being
essentially a frst-order reaction)
such as temperature and resi-
2 PTQ Q2 2011 www.digitalrening.com/article/1000396
dence time.
2
There are two types of
commercial visbreaking units:
the coil or furnace type
3
and the
soaker process. The coil
visbreaker is operated at high
temperatures (885930F, 473
500C) and low residence times
(one to three minutes), while in
a soaker unit, by adding an
adiabatic drum after the coil
furnace, the product is held for
a longer time so that the coil is
kept at a relatively lower
temperature (800830F, 427
443C). Therefore, the heater
duty and, in turn, the fuel
consumption is only 70% of that
for the coil visbreaking process.
4

Worldwide, about 200 visbreak-
ing units are in operation, and
Europe alone accounts for about
55% of the total visbreaking
capacity.
4
Process fows of coil
and soaker units are shown in
Figures 1 and 2.
The product yields and prop-
erties are similar, but the soaker
operation, with its lower furnace
outlet temperatures, has the
advantages of lower energy
consumption and longer run
times before having to shut
down to remove coke from the
furnace tubes. Run times of 36
months are common for furnace
visbreakers, and 618 months is
usual for soaker visbreakers.
This apparent advantage for
soaker visbreakers is at least
partially balanced by the greater
diffculty encountered in clean-
ing the soaking drum.
5
To effectively design and
perfect the control of any proc-
ess, a simulation of the process
is needed to predict product
yields and qualities against vari-
ables such as space velocity and
temperature. The aim of this
research was to develop a
simple yield predictor model,
according to a process simula-
tion, to predict the products
with the highest added value
gas, LPG, gasoline, diesel and
visbroken fuel oil in a
commercial soaker unit. The
main advantage of this work is
the investigation of the infu-
ence of operating conditions on
the yield of products such as
LPG and gasoline. The soaker
visbreaking unit of the Tehran
Variable Value
Number of tubes 128
Number of convection tubes 76
Number of radiation tubes 52
Tube length, m 18.745
Outside diameter, m 0.114
Specifcations of the coil of the
visbreaking unit
Table 1
Variable Value
Outside diameter, m 2.405
Length, m 16.5
Specifcations of the soaker of the
visbreaking unit
Table 2
Variable Value
Feed rate, kg/hr 13 2500
Feed density, kg/m
3
1006
Feet temperature, C 93
Feed pressure, bar 11.89
distillation analysis (aSTM d1160)
IBP, C 203
5 vol%, C 409
10 vol%, C 457
20 vol%, C 503
30 vol%, C 543
50 vol%, C 585
Nitrogen content, wt% 0.4
Sulphur content, wt% 3.19
Asphaltic content, wt% 5.1
Kinematic viscosity (100C), cSt 430
Nickel content, ppm 53
Vanadium content, ppm 135
Specifcations of the feed
Table 3
Furnace Soaker
S
t
r
i
p
p
e
r
S
t
a
b
i
l
i
s
e
r
F
r
a
c
t
i
o
n
a
t
o
r
Feed
Steam
Light
gas
Light gas
LPG
Tar
Gasoline
figure 3 Block fow diagram of visbreaking process
2 PTQ Q2 2011 www.digitalrening.com/article/1000396
refnery has been simulated,
and the effects of operating
variables on the yield and qual-
ity of products have been
studied.
process description
The vacuum residuum, which is
stored in two tanks at 93C, is
charged to the unit. It picks up
heat from the partly cooled
product in the cold charge heat
exchanger and accumulates in
the charge surge drum. The
charge from the surge drum
splits and goes through two
parallel coils of the heater. The
fow through each coil is on
fow control. In the hip section
of each coil is a steam injection
point. The visbreaking furnace
is constructed in two sections,
which are fred independently.
After the coil furnace, the two
hot streams converge in a trans-
fer line, then the mixed product
Table 6
Variable Value
Inlet temperature, C 345.8
Outlet temperature, C 440.5
Inlet pressure, bar 7
Outlet pressure, bar 31
Number of tubes 128
Number of tubes (convection zone) 76
Number of tubes (radiation zone) 52
Specifcations of the furnace
Table 4
Variable Value
Rate, kg/hr 150
Temperature, C 316
Pressure, bar 44.82
Specifcations of the injected
steam
Table 5
Variable Value
Flow rate, barrel/day 901
Density 0.001
composition
Methane, vol% 36.9
Ethane, vol% 24.38
Propane, vol% 20.56
Isobutene, vol% 4.94
n-butane, vol% 5.03
Isopentane, vol% 0.77
n-pentane, vol% 0.52
Hydrogen sulphide, vol% 6.91
Specifcations of gas production
Variable Value
Flow rate, barrel/day 1222
Density 0.744
Sulphur, wt% 3.4
distillation analysis (aSTM d86)
IBP, C 48
5 vol%, C 67
10 vol%, C 76
30 vol%, C 110
50 vol%, C 141
70 vol%, C 163
90 vol%, C 184
95 vol%, C 190
FBP, C 201
Specifcations of gasoline
production
Table 7
VB
Feed
VB
steam 1
Fractionator
V-302
Furnace
301A
VB
steam 2
Fuel
oil
Water
To Visbreaker
heater
Furnace
301B
E301 E302
E306
Steam
C
1
C
2
Off
gas
LPG
Gasoline
Stripper
V-303
Stabiliser
V-306
R
R
figure 4 Simulation of visbreaking unit at Tehran refnery
is fed into the soaker drum. A
quench stream of cooled prod-
uct is added on fow control,
and the combined stream enters
the fash section of the fash
fractionators. In the fash
section, operating at 80 psig
pressure, much of the gas, gaso-
line and distillate formed during
the cracking process fashes off.
To split some of the light gas
content in the fuel oil and gaso-
line products, stripper and
stabiliser columns are used. A
simplifed process fow diagram
www.digitalrening.com/article/1000396 PTQ Q2 2011 3
shown in Tables 38.
As Figure 4 shows, off-gases
including C
1
and C
2
, as well as
LPG, gasoline and tar are the
output streams from the
visbreaking plant. It is possible
to take the gas oil product from
the stripper tower, but it is
usually blocked so that the gas
oil can be mixed as a cutter
blend with the fuel oil.
A comparison of operating
data from the Tehran refnery
and from the simulation runs
was made to evaluate the simu-
lation of the visbreaking unit
(see Tables 9 and 10). These
results confrmed the ability of
a simulation to predict the
desired outputs.

infuence of furnace outlet
temperature on product fows
The effect of increasing the
furnace outlet temperature on
the fow rates of products at a
constant inlet feed rate (132 500
kg/hr) and operating conditions
was investigated. According to
the results of this exercise (see
Figures 5 and 6), increasing the
furnace outlet temperature leads
to a decrease in the rate of
production of fuel oil and an
increase in the rate of gasoline
production.
The effect of increasing the
furnace outlet temperature on
the viscosity of fuel oil was also
investigated and the results are
shown in Figure 7.
conclusion
Operating data from the Tehran
refnerys visbreaking unit was
gathered to calibrate a simula-
tion of the unit in Petro-Sim.
Following confrmation of the
results of the simulation, the
effect of increasing the furnace
outlet temperature on the rate
of production of fuel oil and
gasoline, and on fuel oil viscos-
ity, was investigated. A
sensitivity analysis for these
values showed that increasing
the furnace temperature leads
to an increase in the gasoline
production rate and a decrease
in the fuel oils production rate
and viscosity. These results and
other constraints, such as prod-
uct quality and furnace
operating temperature, can be
used to optimise the unit.
4 PTQ Q2 2011 www.digitalrening.com/article/1000396
of this confguration is shown in
Figure 3.
The specifcations of the coil
and the soaker drum at the
Tehran refnery are shown in
Tables 1 and 2. The output
product from the soaker drum
is quenched by the cooled prod-
uct to prevent more cracking
reactions after the soaker and so
inhibit coke formation. The
combined stream is transferred
to the fractionation tower and
side strippers to separate the
visbreaking products.
process simulation and
validation
Petro-Sim can simulate catalytic
and non-catalytic processes on
an industrial scale.
6
It can simu-
late a visbreaking unit with or
without a soaker drum and, in
this study, it was used for the
simulation and sensitivity anal-
ysis of the Tehran refnerys
visbreaking unit.
The soaker-visbreaker unit
was simulated as a case study
(see Figure 4). This unit was
designed to visbreak 20 000 b/d
of a mixture of vacuum resid-
uum and slop vacuum gas oil,
which are both taken from the
vacuum tower. The composition
of the fresh feed can vary
slightly with time from start of
run to end of run.
To prepare a simulation of the
visbreaking unit, data were
gathered during a test run of
the Tehran unit. The data are
Table 9 Table 10 Table 11
Variable Value
Flow rate, barrel/day 18180
Density 0.9995
distillation analysis (aSTM d1160)
IBP, C 452
5 vol%, C 502
10 vol%, C 528
20 vol%, C 559
30 vol%, C 584
Sulphur content, wt% 3.4
Asphaltic content, wt% 8.3
Kinematic viscosity (100C), cSt 80
Nickel content, wt% 0.004
Vanadium content, wt% 0.0153
Specifcations of fuel oil
production
Table 8
Variable Simulation actual
Rate, barrel/day 18 190 18 180
Hydrogen sulphide, vol% 3.1 3.4
Kinetic viscosity
(100C), cSt 80.23 79
comparison of fuel oil product
between actual data and
simulation results
Variable Simulation actual
Rate, barrel/day 1230 1222
Hydrogen sulphide, vol% 3.322 3.4
comparison of gasoline product
between actual data and simulation
results
Variable Simulation actual
Rate, barrel/day 887.8 901
Hydrogen sulphide, vol% 6.57 6.91
comparison of gas product
between actual data and
simulation results
4 PTQ Q2 2011 www.digitalrening.com/article/1000396
Since the simulation showed
high accuracy when compared
with real operating data, the
results of an optimisation based
on variations in operating
conditions and feed have
proved to be practical and
acceptable.
References
1 Benito A M, Martinez M T, Fernandez I,
Miranda J L, Visbreaking of an asphaltenic
coal residue, Fuel, 74, 1995.
2 Kataria K L, Kulkarni R P, Pandit A B,
Joshi J B, Kumar M, Kinetic studies of low
severity visbreaking, Ind. Eng. Chem. Res.,
43, 2004.
3 Wiehe I A, Process Chemistry of
Petroleum Macromolecules, CRC Press,
2008.
4 Joshi J B, Pandit A B, Kataria K L, Kulkarni
R P, Sawarkar A N, Petroleum residue
upgrading via visbreaking: a review, Ind.
Eng. Chem. Res., 47, 2008.
5 Upgrading Process of Heavy Oil, JCCP
Technical Training Course, Jun 2005.
6 Petro-Sim User Guide, KBC Advanced
Technologies, KBC Profmatic.
S Reza Seif Mohaddecy is a Senior
Researcher in the Catalytic Reaction
Engineering Department at the Catalyst
Research Centre, Research Institute of
Petroleum Industry (RIPI), Tehran, Iran.
Email: Seifsr @ ripi.ir
Sepehr Sadighi works in the Faculty
of Chemical and Natural Resources
Engineering, University of Technology,
Johor Bahru, Malaysia.
omid ghabuli is a Senior Researcher
in the Catalyst Synthesis Department,
Catalyst Research Centre, RIPI.
Mahdi Rashidzadeh is Head of the
Catalyst Research Center, RIPI.
www.digitalrening.com/article/1000396 PTQ Q2 2011 5
18 300
18 500
18 400
18 200
18 100
814 816 818 820 822 824 826
d
p
b

,
e
t
a
r

w
o
l
F

Temp, F
18 000
figure 5 Sensitivity of produced fuel oil vs the furnace outlet temperature
1200
1300
1100
814 816 818 820 822 824 826

F
l
o
w

r
a
t
e
,

b
p
d
Temp, F
1000
figure 6 Sensitivity of produced gasoline vs furnace outlet temperature
79.85
80.05
79.95
79.75
79.65
79.80
80.00
79.90
79.70
79.60
814 816 818 820 822 824 826

V
i
s
c
o
s
i
t
y
,

c
S
t
Temp, F
79.55
figure 7 Sensitivity of fuel oil viscosity vs furnace outlet temperature

linkS
More articles from the following
categories:
process Modelling & Simulation
Visbreaking