Modeling, Evaluating and Scaling up a Commercial Multilayer Claus Converter Based on Bench Scale Experiments

*Sepehr Sadighi orcid  -  1Catalysis Development Technologies Division, Research Institute of Petroleum Industry (RIPI), Iran, Islamic Republic of
Seyed Reza Seif Mohaddecy orcid  -  1Catalysis Development Technologies Division, Research Institute of Petroleum Industry (RIPI), Iran, Islamic Republic of
Mehdi Rashidzadeh orcid  -  1Catalysis Development Technologies Division, Research Institute of Petroleum Industry (RIPI), Iran, Islamic Republic of
Received: 6 Apr 2020; Revised: 23 May 2020; Accepted: 25 May 2020; Published: 1 Aug 2020; Available online: 30 Jul 2020.
Open Access Copyright (c) 2020 Bulletin of Chemical Reaction Engineering & Catalysis
License URL:

Citation Format:
Cover Image

Industrial scale reactors work adiabatically and measuring their performance in an isothermal bench scale reactor is faced with uncertainties. In this research, based on kinetic models previously developed for alumina and titania commercial Claus catalysts, a multilayer bench scale model is constructed, and it is applied to simulate the behavior of an industrial scale Claus converter. It is shown that performing the bench scale isothermal experiments at the temperature of 307 ºC can reliably exhibit the activity of catalytic layers of an industrial Claus converter operating at the weighted average bed temperature (WABT) of 289 ºC. Additionally, an adiabatic model is developed for a target industrial scale Claus reactor, and it is confirmed that this model can accurately predict the temperature, and molar percentages of H2S and CS2. Based on simulation results, 20% of excess amount of Claus catalysts should be loaded to compensate their deactivation during the process cycle life. Copyright © 2020 BCREC Group. All rights reserved


Keywords: Sulfur recovery plant; Claus converter; Catalyst evaluation; Kinetic modeling; Scale up

Article Metrics:

  1. Nawaf, A.T., Jarullah, A.T., Abdulateef, L.T. (2019). Design of a Synthetic Zinc Oxide Catalyst over NanoAlumina for Sulfur Removal by Air in a Batch Reactor. Bulletin of Chemical Reaction Engineering & Catalysis, 14(1): 79-92.
  2. Zarei, S. (2018). A Review of Investigations on Claus Reaction Furnace of Sulfur Recovery Unit. COJ Technical Scientific Research, 1(3): 1-3.
  3. Tasdemir, H.M. (2019). The Catalytic Activity Enhancement of Commercial TiO2 and Nb2O5 Catalysts by Iron for Elemental Sulfur Production from H2S. Catalysis letters, 149(2): 473-485.
  4. Nagamalleswara R.K., Haydary. J. (2019). Studies on Sulfur Recovery Plant Performance Using Aspen Hysys Sulsim Simulation. Petroleum & Coal, 61(2): 292-305.
  5. Zarei, S. (2018). A Modified Kinetic Reaction Scheme for Claus Reaction Furnaces in Oil Refineries. Innovative Energy & Research. 7(3): 2-9.
  6. ZareNezhad, B. (2009). An investigation on the most important influencing parameters regarding the selection of the proper catalysts for Claus SRU converters. Journal of Industrial and Engineering Chemistry, 15(2): 143-147.
  7. Clark, P.D., Dowling, N.I., Huang, M. (2008). Reversible deactivation of TiO2 in CS2 conversion associated with Claus reaction. Applied Catalysis A: General, 8(343): 104-108.
  8. Kerr, R.K., Paskal, H.G., Ballash, N. (1976). Claus Process: Catalytic Kinetics Part 1-Modified Claus Reaction. Energy Processing (Canada), Sept.-Oct: 66-72.
  9. Kerr, R.K., Paskal, H.G. (1976). Claus Process: Catalytic Kinetics Part 2- COS and CS2 Hydrolysis. Energy Processing (Canada), Nov.-Dec.: 38-44.
  10. Kerr, R.K., Paskal, H.G., Ballash, N. (1977). Claus Process: Catalytic Kinetics Part 3- Deactivation Mechanisms Evaluation and Catalyst. Energy Processing (Canada), Jan.-Feb.: 40-51.
  11. Mendioroz, S., Munoz, V., Alvarez, E., Palacios, J.M. (1995). Kinetic study of the Claus reaction at low temperature using γ-alumina as catalyst. Applied Catalysis A: General, 132 (1): 111-126.
  12. Nedez, C., Ray, J.L. (1997). Understanding Claus catalyst deactivation mechanisms: Optimization of Al2O3 using physic-chemical parameters, Catalyst Deactivation, ed. by C.H. Bartholomew and G.A. Fuentes, Elsevier Science, pp. 251−258.
  13. Zagoruiko, A.N., Matros, Y.S. (2002). Mathematical modeling of Claus Reactors Undergoing Sulfur Condensation and Evaporation. Chemical Engineering Journal, 87: 73-88.
  14. Gemmingen, U., Lahne, U. (1994). The Linde Clinsulf® process for sulfur recovery: Modelling and simulation. Gas Separation & Purification, 8: 241-246.
  15. Abedini, R., Koolivand, M., Ghasemian, S. (2010). Modeling and Simulation of Condensed Sulfur in Catalytic Beds of Claus Process: Rapid Estimation. Chemical Engineering Research Bulletin, 14: 110-114.
  16. Nabikandi, N.J., Fatemi, S. (2015). Kinetic modelling of a commercial sulfur recovery unit based on Claus straight through process: Comparison with equilibrium model. Journal of Industrial and Engineering Chemistry, 30: 50-63.
  17. Ghahraloud, H., Farsi, M., Rahimpour, M.R. (2017). Modeling and optimization of an industrial Claus process: Thermal and catalytic section. Journal of the Taiwan Institute of Chemical Engineers, 76: 1-9.
  18. Ghahraloud, H., Farsi, M., Rahimpour, M.R. (2018). Modification of Claus Sulfur Recovery Unit by Isothermal Reactors to Decrease Sulfur Contaminant Emission: Process Modeling and Optimization. Chemical Product and Process Modeling, 14(2): 1-12.
  19. Sadigh, S., Mohaddecy, S.R. (2018). Process Simulation and Optimization of Catalytic Reactors of Sulfur Recovery Unit (SRU) via Aspen Plus. Petroleum and Coal, 60(1): 71-78.
  20. Sadigh, S, Mohaddecy, S.R., Rashidzadeh, M., Nooriasl, P. (2020). Kinetic-based Models for Alumina and Titania Claus Catalysts Based on Experimental Data. Petroleum Chemistry, 60(3): 321-328.
  21. Abdel-Fattah, A., Seif-Eddeen, K.F., Tarek, M.M., Fouad Mai, M.K. (2016). Three-Dimensional CFD Simulation of Industrial Claus Reactors. Chemical Engineering Research and Design, 112: 78-87.
  22. Barderas, A.V., Stephania, B.S., Roda, G. (2016). How to calculate the volumes of partially full tanks. International Journal of Research in Engineering and Technology, 5: 1-7.
  23. Clark, P.D., Dowling, N.I., Huang, M. (2001). Conversion of CS2 and COS over Alumina and Titania under Claus Process Conditions: Reaction with H2O and SO2. Applied Catalysis B: Environmental, 31: 107-112.
  24. Khanaev, V.M., Borisova, E.S., Kalinkin, P.N., Kovalenko, O.N. (2018). Effect of the Porous Structure of a Catalyst on the Rate of Its Deactivation in the Claus Reaction. Theoretical foundations of Chemical Engineering, 52(4): 506-513.
  25. Istadi, I., Anggoro, D.D., Amin, N.A.S., Ling, D.H.W. (2011). Catalyst deactivation simulation through carbon deposition in carbon dioxide reforming over Ni/CaO-Al2O3 catalyst. Bulletin of Chemical Reaction Engineering & Catalysis, 6 (2), 129-136. DOI: 10.9767/bcrec.6.2.1213.129-136
  26. Platonov, O.I. (2019). Lifetime of Alumina Catalysts in the Claus Reactor during Sulfur Removal from Coke-Oven Gas. Coke & Chemistry, 62(3): 23-17.
  27. Patan, A.K., Mekala, M., Thamida, S.K. (2018). Dynamic Simulation of Heterogeneous Catalysis at Particle Scale to Estimate the Kinetic Parameters for the Pore Diffusion Model. Bulletin of Chemical Reaction Engineering & Catalysis, 13(3): 420-428.

No citation recorded.