Two-Stage Fluid Catalytic Cracking Process

Resolve Bottlenecks,
Find Innovative Solutions
Generate Solutions

Solution Overview

Problem

Current Fluid Catalytic Cracking (FCC) processes face challenges in simultaneously maximizing the yield of light olefins like ethylene and propylene, middle distillates, and gasoline, while maintaining flexibility to adapt to varying market demands and catalyst activity degradation due to coke deposition.

Innovation Solution

A two-stage fluid catalytic cracking process using separate catalyst systems in a downer and riser reactor with intermediate separation of reactor effluents, employing zeolite-based catalysts with specific pore sizes and controlled residence times, and separate regenerators for catalyst regeneration.

Engineering Contradictions & Design Principles

VSEngineering Contradiction Analysis

1Productivity

If a single stage FCC process is used, then the process is simple to operate, but it cannot simultaneously maximize the yield of light olefins, middle distillates, and gasoline

Engineering Contradiction:
Improveyield of light olefins and middle distillatesVSAvoidprocess complexity
Core Design Contradiction:
ProductivityVSDevice complexity

Solution Approach 1:

The FCC process is divided into two separate stages: a first stage using an amorphous silica alumina catalyst optimized for producing middle distillates, and a second stage using a zeolite catalyst optimized for producing light olefins. Each stage has its own reactor, catalyst system, and regeneration system, allowing independent optimization of operating conditions for each product stream while maintaining overall process integration through the common fractionator.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #1Segmentation

2Reliability

If the same catalyst is used in both cracking zones, then the device complexity is reduced, but the catalyst activity reduces considerably after passing through one riser making it ineffective for the second cracking reactions

Engineering Contradiction:
Improvecatalyst activityVSAvoidcatalyst system complexity
Core Design Contradiction:
ReliabilityVSDevice complexity

Solution Approach 1:

Different catalyst formulations are used in different locations (cracking zones) of the process. The first cracking zone uses an amorphous silica alumina catalyst with specific properties optimized for middle distillate production, while the second cracking zone uses a zeolite catalyst with properties optimized for light olefin production. Each catalyst is tailored to the specific requirements of its location, maintaining high activity and selectivity throughout the process.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #3Local quality

Solution Approach 2:

The catalyst system is segmented into two independent circulation systems, each with its own regenerator. This allows each catalyst type to be optimized for its specific function without being compromised by the requirements of the other stage, while both systems are integrated through the common fractionator that separates and combines product streams.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #1Segmentation

3Productivity

If recycle of heavier bottom fractions is performed, then conversion is improved, but refractory material builds up in the system

Engineering Contradiction:
ImproveconversionVSAvoidrefractory material buildup
Core Design Contradiction:
ProductivityVSObject-generated harmful factors

Solution Approach 1:

The fractionation process is segmented into multiple columns with different separation functions. The first fractionator separates middle distillates from the cracked products, while a second fractionator handles the separation of light olefins and gasoline. This segmented approach allows heavier bottom fractions to be selectively recycled to specific cracking zones where they can be effectively converted without causing refractory buildup, as each fractionator-crumbling zone pair is optimized for specific feed compositions.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #1Segmentation

4Adaptability or versatility

If varying market demands are accommodated, then adaptability is improved, but maintaining optimal yield for all products simultaneously becomes difficult

Engineering Contradiction:
Improveflexibility to market demandsVSAvoidproduct yield optimization
Core Design Contradiction:
Adaptability or versatilityVSProductivity

Solution Approach 1:

The process incorporates dynamic control capabilities that allow operating parameters (temperature, catalyst-to-oil ratio, residence time, regeneration conditions) to be adjusted independently in each cracking stage according to market demands. The system can be dynamically reconfigured to prioritize middle distillate production during periods of high diesel demand, or shift to light olefin maximization when propylene prices are high, while the integrated design maintains overall process efficiency through the common fractionator and coordinated catalyst circulation systems.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #15Dynamics

Applied Scientific Principles

This section explains which scientific principles are used to turn an abstract innovation direction into a practical engineering solution.

Function Achieved in This Case

This approach enhances the selectivity and yield of middle distillates and light olefins, maintains catalyst activity, and allows for flexible operation to maximize gasoline production, addressing the demand imbalance and reducing coke yield.

Implementation Method 1

Fluid catalytic cracking (FCC) of feed hydrocarbons with a fluidized stream of solid catalyst

Methodology Applied
Scientific EffectFluidization: Fluidisation

Implementation Method 2

intermediate separation of reactor effluents in a first fractionator into three fractions

Methodology Applied
Scientific EffectDistillation: Distillation

Implementation Method 3

Catalyst is deactivated due to coke deposition which can be regenerated by burning with air or any oxygen containing gases in the regenerator

Methodology Applied
Scientific EffectOxidation: Oxidation

Implementation Method 4

employing zeolite-based catalysts with specific pore sizes and controlled residence times

Methodology Applied
Scientific EffectCatalysis: Catalysis

Data Source

PatentEP2591073B1Two stage fluid catalytic cracking process
Publication Date: 2019.07.03 INDIAN OIL CORP LTD
  • EP2591073B1 patent drawingFigure 1

AI summary

A two stage Fluid Catalytic Cracking process and an apparatus for simultaneous production of light olefins such as ethylene and propylene and middle distillate range hydrocarbons, wherein a first flow reactor, preferably a downer and a second flow reactor, preferably a riser are operating at varying reaction severities using different catalyst systems with the regenerated catalyst entering the reactors inlet through independent regenerators. Mild cracking of the fresh feedstock is carried out in the first flow reactor of short residence time and the effluent of first flow reactor is separated in an intermediate separator/ fractionator followed by re-cracking of the C4 hydrocarbons and naphtha range hydrocarbons, preferably C5-150°C from the second product separation section and unconverted hydrocarbons (370°C +) of first flow reactor, in the second flow reactor at higher severity employing different catalyst system.