furnace design

Upload: neel-nitin-sheth

Post on 14-Oct-2015

52 views

Category:

Documents


0 download

TRANSCRIPT

  • Advances in Advances in CrackingCracking Furnace Technology Furnace Technology

    Karl [email protected]

    John [email protected]

    Jeff [email protected]

    Cheah Phaik [email protected]

    Cyron Anthony [email protected]

    Refining Technology ConferenceDubai Crown Plaza Hotel

    14-18 December 2002

  • Advances in Cracking FurnaceAdvances in Cracking FurnaceTechnologyTechnology

    Outline

    1. Introduction2. Historical Development3. Design Constraints4. Comparison of Current Designs5. Furnace Run lengths6. Anti Coking7. Future Opportunities8. Conclusions

  • IntroductionIntroduction

    Furnace technology is an area of activeresearch. The high-energy consumption,capital and maintenance cost of thecurrent cracking furnace are a drivingforce to develop improved conversionroutes.

  • IntroductionIntroduction

    The pyrolysis ofhydrocarbons for theproduction ofpetrochemicals isalmost exclusivelycarried out intubular coils locatedin fired heaters.

  • IntroductionIntroduction

    Steam is added tothe feedstock toreduce the partialpressure of thehydrocarbon in thecoil.

  • IntroductionIntroduction

    The reactions that result in thetransformation of saturatedhydrocarbons to olefins are highlyendothermic and require temperaturesin the range of 750 to 900 degrees Cdepending on the feedstock and designof the pyrolysis coil.

  • HistoryHistory

    The first commercial unit for pyrolysiscracking of hydrocarbons wascommissioned at Essos facility in BatonRouge, Louisiana during 1943.

    The feedstock was Gas Oil and theButadiene extracted from the crackedproducts was used to make Butylrubber.

  • HistoryHistory

    Ethylene, propylene and other productswere flared.

    Shortly thereafter, two morecommercial pyrolysis-cracking unitswere constructed along with ethanoland ethylene glycol plants to utilize theethylene.

  • HistoryHistory

    All pyrolysis cracking furnacesconstructed during the 40s and 50shad horizontal radiant tubes andresidence times in excess of 0.5 seconds.

    Radiant tube materials were 310stainless (wrought 25 Chrome 20 Nickel)or incoloy. Cast tubes were not yetinvented.

  • HistoryHistory Prior to the mid

    60s all furnaceswere fired with avery large numberof wall burnersspaced on aboutsix foot centers inthe horizontalwalls and facingthe row of radianttubes.

  • HistoryHistory

    Thereafter most designers working withburner manufacturers developed thecapability of firing cracking furnacesmainly or exclusively with a muchsmaller number of floor burners.

  • HistoryHistory

    Some Technologies still utilizes wallburners for a small portion of the heatfired. This change made possiblebecause of much better control of theexcess air within the firebox.

  • HistoryHistory

    During 1960 the first vertical radianttube pyrolysis cracking furnace wascommissioned at Essos plant in Koln,Germany.

    Shortly thereafter essentially all newcracking furnaces were designed withvertical tubes.

  • HistoryHistory

    The driving force was the much lowerinvestment cost required for verticaltube furnaces.

    The residence time for these furnaceswas about 0.3 seconds. Typical tube IDwas about 4 to 5 inches.

  • HistoryHistory

    By 1965 manufacturers (initiallyDuraloy in the US) started to producecast tubes.

    A number of plants tried them withlittle success.

  • HistoryHistory

    Finally it was realized that the dross atthe tube ID was causing very rapidcoking and very poor tube life.

    Then the manufacturers found a way tomachine the tube ID to a smooth,imperfection free, surface and theirperformance greatly improved.

  • HistoryHistory

    During the late 70s and 80s the radianttube diameters used in crackingfurnaces decreased.

    The smaller diameter tubes had ahigher surface to volume ratio, whichallowed the heat necessary for crackingto enter the tubes in a much shortertube length.

  • HistoryHistory

    This allowed the cracking to take placein a much shorter residence time whichgave much better yields of the desiredproducts (mainly ethylene, propyleneand butadiene).

  • HistoryHistory

    Ultimately, about 1979 both Kellogg andEsso (Exxon) developed furnaces withmultiple parallel radiant tubes eachabout 40 feet long and 1 to 1.5 inches ID.

  • Design ConstraintsDesign Constraints

    The typical modern pyrolysis furnacesconsist of a rectangular (important)firebox with a single or double row ofvertical tubes located in the center planebetween two radiating refractory walls.

  • Design ConstraintsDesign Constraints

    The heat transfer to the tube is effectedlargely by radiation and only to a smalldegree by convection.

    The firebox temperature is typically inthe range of 1200 degrees Centigrade.

  • Design ConstraintsDesign Constraints

    1. Process Chemistry

    2. Heat of Reaction

    3. Metallurgy

    4. Flame pattern / Fire Box

  • Design ConstraintsDesign Constraints

    Process Chemistry

    To fully understand the furnace designconstraints a review of processchemistry is required.

  • Design ConstraintsDesign Constraints

    When a hydrocarbon feedstock isundergoing pyrolysis a multitude ofreactions are happening simultaneously,but for practical purposes a simplifiedoutlook will explain many of the endresults in which are of primary interest.

  • Design ConstraintsDesign Constraints

    Hydrocracking - Decomposition byfree radical chain mechanisms intothe primary products: hydrogen,methane, ethylene, propylene andlarger olefins.

  • Design ConstraintsDesign Constraints

    Hydrogenation anddehydrogenation reactions whereparaffins, di-olefins, and acetylenesare produced from olefins.

  • Design ConstraintsDesign Constraints

    Condensation reactions wheretwo or more small fragmentscombine to produce larger stablestructures such as cyclo-di-olefinsand aromatics.

  • Design ConstraintsDesign Constraints

    Hydrocracking of Ethane

    C2H6 = CH3* + CH3* (1)

    CH3* + C2H6 = CH4 + C2H5* (2)

    C2H5* = C2H4 + H* (3)

    H* + C2H4 = H2 + C2H5* (4)

    C2H6 = C2H4 + H2 (5)

  • Design ConstraintsDesign Constraints

    The process chemistry review revealsat least three design requirements:

    1. Low Pressure

    2. Low Hydrogen Partial Pressures

    3. Short Residence Time

  • Design ConstraintsDesign Constraints

    1. Low Pressure

    The predominately desired reactionis: C2H6 = C2H4 + H2

    Any time the moles of products arelarger than the moles of reactantsthe equilibrium favors lowpressures.

  • Design ConstraintsDesign Constraints

    2. Low Hydrogen Partial Pressure

    To reduce the unwantedhydrogenation reaction, lowerhydrogen partial pressures wouldproduce more of the desiredproducts.

  • Design ConstraintsDesign Constraints

    3. Short Residence Time

    To reduce the unwantedcondensation reaction, shorterresidence times would producemore of the desired products.

  • Design ConstraintsDesign Constraints

    Heat of Reaction

    The reaction is endothermic andrequires high temperatures.

    Couple the heat of reaction with thelow pressure requirement - size andlength of coils are dictated.

  • Design ConstraintsDesign ConstraintsDiameter To Length Ratio

    Q = U A DT

    1. If the pressure drop is fixed Q is set by thediameter of the coil.

    2. U and DT are fixed.

    3. A determines the length of the coil.

  • Design ConstraintsDesign Constraints

    Diameter To Length Ratio

    1. 1 inch diameter is approximately 40 feet.

    2. 2 inch diameter is approximately 80 feet.

    3. 3 inch diameter is approximately 120 feet.

    4. 4 inch diameter is approximately 160 feet.

  • Design ConstraintsDesign ConstraintsTypical Metallurgy Constraints

    Trade Name Composition Temperaturelimits

    Developed Carbon PickUp

    HK 40 25/20 : Cr/Ni 1830 F1000 C

    Late1960s

    1% at1055 C

    HP Modified 25/35 : Cr/Ni 2,060 F1125 C

    Early1970s

    1% at1125 C

    35/45 35/45 : Cr/Ni 2100 F1150 C

    Mid1980s

    1% at1155 C

  • Design ConstraintsDesign ConstraintsFlame Pattern Constraints

  • Design ConstraintsDesign Constraints

    Flame Pattern Constraints

    The pyrolysis reaction are endothermic andtime dependant reactions.

    The flame pattern and the resulting heat fluxcan have the net effect of changing theeffective length of the coil.

  • Design ConstraintsDesign Constraints

    Flame Pattern Constraints

    If the heat flux is not uniform the coileffective length can be reduced.

    If heat flux is not uniform hot areas can causeover-cracking and shorting coil life.

  • Design ConstraintsDesign ConstraintsFlame Pattern Constraints

    HEAT FLUX DISTRIBUTION

    0

    1

    2

    3

    4

    5

    6

    7

    8

    9

    20 40 60 80 100

    RELATIVE HEAT FLUX (% OF MAX)

    R

    A

    D

    I

    A

    N

    T

    S

    E

    C

    T

    I

    O

    N

    H

    E

    I

    G

    H

    T

    (

    M

    E

    T

    R

    E

    S

    )

    Existing

    Improved

  • Design ConstraintsDesign Constraints

    Flame Pattern Constraints

    The shape of the flameis determined byburner designersaccording to heatinput requirements bythe technologyprovider.

  • Design ConstraintsDesign Constraints

    Flame Pattern Constraints

    The shape of the fire box will effect the flamepattern and heat flux.

    Deviation from rectangular have not provedto be successful.

  • Design ConstraintsDesign ConstraintsFlame Pattern ConstraintsFire Box Shape CONVECTION

    SECTION

    SHP STEAMDRUM

    CROSSOVERLINES

    PRIMARYQUENCH

    EXCHANGERS

    DOUBLEIN-LINE

    TUBEROWS

    BOTTOMFIREDEACHSIDEINLET

    MANIFOLD

  • Design ConstraintsDesign Constraints

    Flame Pattern Constraints

    Steam may be added to the fuel gas to reducethe NOx emissions.

    This steam has been shown to even the heatflux distribution resulting in higher yields andrun lengths.

  • Com parison of Current DesignsCom parison of Current Designs

    It is the diameter and length of thetubes and the manner in which they areinterconnected to and from thepyrolysis coil which determine to whatextent a particular design will becharacterized by an optimumcombination of pyrolysis parameters.

  • Com parison of Current DesignsCom parison of Current Designs

    The design calculations applied topyrolysis coils are necessarily complexsince heat transfer and chemicalreaction are involved.

  • Com parison of Current DesignsCom parison of Current Designs

    Various options exist for the specificdesign of a pyrolysis coil, and thisaccounts for the variety of industrialpyrolysis furnaces presently inoperation.

  • Com parison of Current DesignsCom parison of Current Designs

    Types of Furnace Coils

    SINGLEPASS

    U- COIL orTWO PASS

    W- COIL orM - COIL

    HYBRID COIL

  • Com parison of Current DesignsCom parison of Current Designs

    If short residence time is considered thesingle most important objective, then ashort coil with tubes of small diameterwill be considered.

  • Com parison of Current DesignsCom parison of Current Designs

    If a combination of high capacity,medium resident time and lowhydrocarbon partial pressure is judgedto be most beneficial, then a relativelylarger tube will result.

  • Com parison of Current DesignsCom parison of Current Designs

    For this presentation the comparisonwill be limited to four designs:

    1. Short Residence Time - One pass of uniform size- Fire box floor to roof orientation

  • Com parison of Current DesignsCom parison of Current DesignsTypical End ViewSingle Pass

    CONVECTIONSECTION

    SHP STEAMDRUM

    CROSSOVERLINES

    PRIMARYQUENCH

    EXCHANGERS

    DOUBLE IN-LINE TUBE

    ROWS

    BOTTOMFIRED

    EACH SIDE

    INLETMANIFOLD

  • Com parison of Current DesignsCom parison of Current Designs

    2. U Sweep Bends - one or more passes of uniform size - U configuration - fire box roof to roof orientation

  • Com parison of Current DesignsCom parison of Current DesignsTypical End ViewTwo Pass CONVECTION

    SECTION

    SHP STEAMDRUM

    PRIMARYQUENCH

    EXCHANGERS

    DOUBLEIN-LINE

    TUBEROWS

    BOTTOMFIRED

    EACH SIDE

    INLETMANIFOLD

  • Com parison of Current DesignsCom parison of Current Designs

    3. W Sweep Bends - one or more pass of increasing size - W configuration -fire box roof to roof orientation

  • Com parison of Current DesignsCom parison of Current Designs

    Coil Configuration

  • Com parison of Current DesignsCom parison of Current Designs

    4. Hybrids - one or more passes of increasing size - fire box roof to roof orientation -

  • Com parison of Current DesignsCom parison of Current Designs

    FEEDDISTRIBUTORS

    MANIFOLDS

    INLET TUBES

    OUTLETTUBES

    QUENCHERS

    Coil Configuration

    Hybrid Coil

  • Com parison of Current DesignsCom parison of Current Designs

    Size ResidenceTime

    (seconds)

    Design runLength onNaphtha

    DesignDecokeTime

    (hours)Coil One 1 inch by

    forty feet0.08 - 0.12 30-35 Days 18-24

    Coil Two 2 inch byeighty feet

    0.20 0.25 35-45 Days 24-30

    Coil Three 4 inch by120 feet

    0.35 0.45 45-60 Days 30-36

    Coil Four 2 inch to 6 inch by

    80 feet

    0.20 - 0.25 35-45 Days 24-30

  • Com parison of Current DesignsCom parison of Current DesignsTypical Residence Times Yields for Light Naphtha

    ResidenceTime

    (seconds)0.10 0.20 0.50

    Methane 15.48 15.78 16.16

    Ethylene 34.16 32.16 29.37

    Propylene 17.02 17.35 17.78

    Butadiene 5.2 5.1 5Benzene 5.89 6 5.75Toluene 2.59 2.65 2.52Fuel Oil 3.12 3.35 3.61

  • Com parison of Current DesignsCom parison of Current Designs

    Advantages of Coil 1

    1. Highest Olefin Conversion due to short residence time

    2. Down Stream Separation Section can be smaller.

  • Comparison of Current DesignsComparison of Current Designs

    Advantages Of Coil 2

    1. Moderate Olefin Conversion

    2. Operations Friendly

    3. Dilution Steam and Feed tolerant

    4. Moderate coil life

    4. Moderate Thermal shock

  • Radiant Coil Therm al ShockRadiant Coil Therm al Shock-theory-theory

    The coke layercan reach > 10mm thicknessdepending on thetype of feedstockand severity

    12 mm8 mm

  • Radiant Coil Therm al ShockRadiant Coil Therm al Shock-theory-theory

    The thickness ofthe coke is afunction of theTMT andconversion

  • Com parison of Current DesignsCom parison of Current Designs Thermal Shock

  • Com parison of Current DesignsCom parison of Current Designs Thermal Shock

  • Com parison of Current DesignsCom parison of Current Designs

    Advantages Of Coil 3

    1. Good run length between decokes

    2. Good coil life

    3. Moderate Thermal shock

  • Com parison of Current DesignsCom parison of Current Designs

    Advantages Of Coil 4

    1. Good run length between decokes

    3. Good coil life

    4. Good Thermal shock

    5. Dilution Steam and Feed tolerant

  • Com parison of Current DesignsCom parison of Current Designs

    Coil 1 Quench Exchanger

    1. Established reliable system

    2. Many units in operation

    3. Metallurgy of Quench Exchanger is very important - Should be sodium stress corrosion resistant

  • Comparison of Current DesignsComparison of Current DesignsTypical ElevationSingle Pass

    ID FAN

    PRIMARYQUENCHERS

    RADIANTTUBE

    BANKS

    CONVECTIONSECTION

    STACK

    STEAMDRUM

    OUTLETMANIFOLDS

    CROSSOVERLINES

    RADIANTBOX

    INLET MANIFOLDS

  • Com parison of Current DesignsCom parison of Current Designs

    Coil 2 Quench Exchanger

    1. Established reliable system

    2. Many units in operation

    3. Metallurgy of Quench Exchanger is very important - Should be sodium stress corrosion resistant

  • Com parison of Current DesignsCom parison of Current Designs

    Coil 3 Quench Exchanger

    1. Established reliable system

    2. Many units in operation

    3. Metallurgy of Quench Exchanger is very important - Should be sodium stress corrosion resistant

  • Com parison of Current DesignsCom parison of Current Designs

    Coil 4 Quench Exchanger

    1. Recently changed system to reduce residence time

    2. Metallurgy of Quench Exchanger is very important - Should be sodium stress corrosion resistant

    3. Previous design required hydro blasting every 6 months

  • Com parison of Current DesignsCom parison of Current Designs

    Quencher

  • Furnace Run LengthsFurnace Run Lengths

    Many factors influence furnace run lengths.A partial list includes

    1. Decoke Procedure

    2. Sulfiding Procedure

    3. Tube size and metallurgy

    4. Feed and Steam impurities

    5. The ability to utilize steam only decokes

    6. Use of coke mitigating additives

  • Furnace Run LengthsFurnace Run Lengths

    Design runLength onNaphtha

    Actual runlength onEthane

    Actual runlength onNaphtha

    Cause of Deviation

    Coil One 30-35 Days 10-20 30 1. Feed Impurities2. Dilution Steam Impurities3. Flame / Fire Box Issues

    Coil Two 35-45 Days 20-25 30-35 1. Over sulfiding2. Low air during decokes

    Coil Three 45-60 Days 35-40 40

    Coil Four 35-45 Days 30-40 45-50 1. Sulfiding impurities

  • Furnace Run LengthsFurnace Run Lengths

    Mixing Element Radiant Tube (MERT)

    Developed by KUBOTA

    Aims to create additional turbulence resulting inefficient and homogeneous heating of gas

    Efficient heating allows lower Tube Skin Temperatures and Higher yield

  • Furnace Run LengthsFurnace Run Lengths

    Properties include:-1. Heat transfer Co-efficient increased by 20-50%

    compared to bare metal

    2. 2% larger surface area

    3. 3% weight gain

    4. 2.0-3.5 times higher pressure drop

    Mixing Element Radiant Tube (MERT)

  • Furnace Run LengthsFurnace Run Lengths

    PEP Cast Finned tubes

  • Anti-Coking TechnologiesAnti-Coking Technologies

    1. GE Betz - Pycoat

    2. Nalco - Cokeless

    3. Chevron / Phillips

    - CCA 500

    4. Westaim

    5. Nova / Kubota

  • Coking in Ethylene Furnace

    Reduce product yields

    Restrain cracking severity Increase

    Loss of production capacity

    Increase energy consumption

    Shorten coil service life

    Increase maintenance cost

    Add operator load

    Furnace Utilization, 90~95%

    Worldwide Production Loss 5% Improvement = $1 Billion/yr

    10% Improvement = $2 Billion/yr

    Coking Im pact in EthyleneCoking Im pact in Ethylene

  • Metal catalysisMetal catalyze dehydrogenation -->Carburized / metal boosted

    Radical reaction

    -->Filamentous coke growth

    Acetylene / Butadiene etc. , growth on radical active site

    C

    Alloy tube

    Linear growth

    Lateral growth

    Blocked metal cluster

    Still active metal cluster

    M echanism of Coke Form ationM echanism of Coke Form ation

  • Types of CokeTypes of Coke

  • Anti-Coking TechnologiesAnti-Coking Technologies

    1. GE Betz - Pycoat

    Advantages

    Treated off line - no unit contamination

    Silicon Based

  • Diffusion barrier- Adherent film : enhance binding film with m etal surface- Barrier film : prevent carbon & oxygen from penetrating

    Tube material

    Coke Precursor

    Diffusion Barrier

    No Diffusion No Catalytic

    Coke+ Minimize Pyrolytic Coke

    H2, CO, CO2

    + No Pyrolytic Coke

    Decoking Film

    Decoking Film : Gasify the remained coke (In Development)

    GE Betz PY-COAT ConceptGE Betz PY-COAT Concept

  • Coated Film

    Tube Metal

    Coating CharacteristicsCoating Characteristics

  • Ethane Furnace Designed by KBR

    DescriptionLocated in North AmericaMillisecond Furnace27 T/Hr and 70 % Conversion160 1.3 tubesMain Criteria for Decoking : CoilInlet PressureOriginal R/L : 13-15 days

    Com m ercial ReferenceCom m ercial Reference

  • PY-COAT Perform ancePY-COAT Perform ance

    PY-COAT Performance Vs. Baseline

    0

    5

    10

    15

    20

    25

    30

    1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

    Run #

    R

    u

    n

    l

    e

    n

    g

    t

    h

    (

    d

    a

    y

    s

    )

    Baseline Treated

    Plant Upset

  • Gas Furnace Designed by KBRGas Furnace Designed by KBR

    Test started Mid OctoberTest started Mid October

    PY-COAT PERFORMANCE @ NORTH AMERICACOIL PRESSURE DROP_MAX

    0

    5

    10

    15

    20

    25

    30

    35

    40

    45

    50

    55

    0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24 26 28 30 32 34 36 38 40R un days

    PY-COAT RUN 1

    PY-COAT RUN 2

    BASE 1

    BASE 2

    BASE 3

    Still operating

  • Anti-Coking TechnologiesAnti-Coking Technologies

    2. Nalco - Cokeless

    Advantages

    First to develop on line coating - Severalgenerations of development

    Present generation has shown some success

    Applied on line - high furnace utilization

    Phosphorus based

  • TMT Profile ComparisonTMT Profile ComparisonTube Metal Temperature Coil 3

    1010

    1020

    1030

    1040

    1050

    1060

    1070

    1080

    1090

    1100

    1110

    1 6 11 16 21 26 31 36 41 46 51 56 61 66 71 76 81 86

    Day of Run

    D

    e

    g

    r

    e

    e

    s

    ,

    C

    Lummus

    Naphtha cracker

    Lummus

    Naphtha cracker

    4 Coke-Lessruns average

    4 Coke-Lessruns average

    3basecaserunsaverage

    3basecaserunsaverage

  • Anti-Coking TechnologiesAnti-Coking Technologies

    3. Chevron Phillips CCA 500

    Advantages

    Treated off line

    Tin / Silicon Based

  • 50

    55

    60

    65

    70

    75

    80

    85

    90

    0 2.5 6 11 16 21 26 31 36 41 46

    Time of Stream (days)

    %

    M

    a

    x

    i

    m

    u

    m

    C

    o

    i

    l

    P

    r

    e

    s

    s

    u

    r

    e

    D

    r

    o

    p

    Hydrogen Sulfide

    CCA 500

    Coil Pressure Drop (S-Coil, Ethane Feed)

  • Anti-Coking TechnologiesAnti-Coking Technologies

    3. Westaim COATALLOY

    Advantages

    1. Coating applied on new tubes - Furnace Utilization

    2. Carbonization Resistant

  • M ICROGRAPH OF COATALLOY ENGINEEREDM ICROGRAPH OF COATALLOY ENGINEEREDCOATING SYSTEM - BEFORE SERVICECOATING SYSTEM - BEFORE SERVICE

    EngineeredSurface

    EnrichmentPool

    DiffusionBarriers

    Bulk HighTemperatureAlloy

    50 microns

  • COATALLOY-1100 CASE HISTORY - FORMOSACOATALLOY-1100 CASE HISTORY - FORMOSA

    0.0

    0.5

    1.0

    1.5

    2.0

    2.5

    Typical Runs forUncoated Furnaces

    Runs 3-9 forCoatAlloy-1100

    coated Coil

    Days on Line

    M

    a

    x

    i

    m

    u

    m

    P

    r

    e

    s

    s

    u

    r

    e

    D

    r

    o

    p

    R

    a

    t

    i

    o

    96

  • HIGHLIGHTS OF OTHER CASE HISTORIESHIGHLIGHTS OF OTHER CASE HISTORIES

    Short Residence Time 2% increase in ethylene yield 3 x run length 5% increase in conversion

    Long Residence Time 4% increase in ethylene yield Min. Feed rate increase ofapprox.. 8%

    9% increase in conversion

    Medium Residence Time 4.5% increase in ethylene

    yield 2 x run length 8% increase in conversion

    0

    0.2

    0.4

    0.6

    0.8

    1

    1.2

    1.4

    1.6

    1.8

    2

    Uncoated-BaseConversion

    Coated-BaseConversion

    Coated-10%Conversion Increase

    ShortResidence

    MediumResidence

    LongResidence

    C

    o

    k

    i

    n

    g

    r

    a

    t

    e

    (

    p

    s

    i

    r

    i

    s

    e

    /

    d

    a

    y

    )

  • Anti-Coking TechnologiesAnti-Coking Technologies

    4. Nova / Kubota - ANK 400

    Advantages

    Coating applied on new tubes -Furnace Utilization

    400 + Run lengths

  • Future OpportunitiesFuture Opportunities

    1. Better Coil Metallurgy

    Coil manufactures will continue todevelop new designs with highertemperature limits

  • Future OpportunitiesFuture Opportunities

    2. Better Coil Coatings

    Research is presently ongoing inceramics and other coke resistancematerials.

    Betz / SK is developing a coke filmingagent that will keep the coke in gasphase reducing accumulation on thetube.

  • Future OpportunitiesFuture Opportunities

    3. Catalyst Development

    Research is presently ongoing foroxidative coupling of methane toethane and ethylene by Li/MgOcatalyst at 700 degrees C.

  • ConclusionsConclusions

    1. Introduction

    2. Historical Development

    3. Design Constraints

    4. Comparison of Current Designs

    5. Furnace Run lengths

    6. Anti Coking

    7. Future Opportunities

    8. Conclusions

  • ConclusionsConclusions

    Thanks for your time

    Our goal was to give an overview of thecurrent advancements pyrolysiscracking furnaces

    Please contact us for additionalinformation or questions

    IntroductionIntroductionIntroductionIntroductionHistoryHistoryHistoryHistoryHistoryHistoryHistoryHistoryHistoryHistoryHistoryHistoryHistoryDesign ConstraintsDesign ConstraintsDesign ConstraintsDesign ConstraintsDesign ConstraintsDesign ConstraintsDesign ConstraintsDesign ConstraintsDesign ConstraintsDesign ConstraintsDesign ConstraintsDesign ConstraintsDesign ConstraintsDesign ConstraintsDesign ConstraintsDesign ConstraintsDesign ConstraintsDesign ConstraintsDesign ConstraintsDesign ConstraintsDesign ConstraintsDesign ConstraintsDesign ConstraintsDesign ConstraintsDesign ConstraintsComparison of Current DesignsComparison of Current DesignsComparison of Current DesignsComparison of Current DesignsComparison of Current DesignsComparison of Current DesignsComparison of Current DesignsComparison of Current DesignsComparison of Current DesignsComparison of Current DesignsComparison of Current DesignsComparison of Current DesignsComparison of Current DesignsComparison of Current DesignsComparison of Current DesignsComparison of Current DesignsComparison of Current DesignsComparison of Current DesignsRadiant Coil Thermal Shock -theoryRadiant Coil Thermal Shock -theoryComparison of Current DesignsComparison of Current DesignsComparison of Current DesignsComparison of Current DesignsComparison of Current DesignsComparison of Current DesignsComparison of Current DesignsComparison of Current DesignsComparison of Current DesignsComparison of Current DesignsFurnace Run LengthsFurnace Run LengthsFurnace Run LengthsFurnace Run LengthsFurnace Run LengthsAnti-Coking TechnologiesCoking Impact in EthyleneMechanism of Coke FormationTypes of CokeAnti-Coking TechnologiesGE Betz PY-COAT ConceptCoating CharacteristicsCommercial ReferencePY-COAT PerformanceAnti-Coking TechnologiesAnti-Coking TechnologiesCoil Pressure Drop (S-Coil, Ethane Feed)Anti-Coking TechnologiesMICROGRAPH OF COATALLOY ENGINEERED COATING SYSTEM - BEFORE SERVICEAnti-Coking TechnologiesFuture OpportunitiesFuture OpportunitiesFuture OpportunitiesConclusionsConclusions