催化裂化装置跑剂过程中催化剂平均粒径的变化规律

doi:10.16085/j.issn.1000-6613.2024-0636

化工进展 ›› 2025, Vol. 44 ›› Issue (6): 3364-3371.DOI: 10.16085/j.issn.1000-6613.2024-0636

• 化工过程与装备 • 上一篇

催化裂化装置跑剂过程中催化剂平均粒径的变化规律

杨琦¹(), 王峰², 韩胜显³, 詹庆丽⁴, 贺娇¹, 方勤珠¹, 彭威¹()

^1.中国石油大学（北京）克拉玛依校区，新疆克拉玛依 834000
^2.中国石油天然气股份有限公司大港石化分公司，天津 300270
^3.中石油克拉玛依石化公司，新疆克拉玛依 834003
^4.玉门油田分公司炼油化工总厂，甘肃玉门 735200

收稿日期:2024-04-16 修回日期:2024-06-17 出版日期:2025-06-25 发布日期:2025-07-08
通讯作者: 彭威
作者简介:杨琦（1999—），女，硕士研究生，研究方向为催化裂化技术。E-mail：2022216816@student.cup.edu.cn。
基金资助:
中国石油大学（北京）克拉玛依校区人才引进科研启动经费(KL01JB20230006);克拉玛依市-创新人才专项(XQZX20230064);克拉玛依市-创新人才专项(XQZX20230079)

Changing law of catalyst average particle size during catalyst loss in fluid catalytic cracking units

YANG Qi¹(), WANG Feng², HAN Shengxian³, ZHAN Qingli⁴, HE Jiao¹, FANG Qinzhu¹, PENG Wei¹()

^1.China University of Petroleum-Beijing at Karamay, Karamay 834000, Xinjiang, China
^2.PetroChina Dagang Petrochemical Company, Tianjin 300270, China
^3.Karamay Petrochemical Company, Karamay 834003, Xinjiang, China
^4.Yumen Oilfield Company of China National Petroleum Corporation, Yumen 735200, Gansu, China

Received:2024-04-16 Revised:2024-06-17 Online:2025-06-25 Published:2025-07-08
Contact: PENG Wei

摘要/Abstract

摘要：

催化剂跑损是影响催化裂化（FCC）装置长周期运行的关键因素，目前对于各类跑剂故障特点，仍缺少系统性的分析总结。对此，总结了不同装置跑剂期间平衡剂平均粒径（APS）的变化。受原料性质、装置操作条件、加剂速度和旋风分离器效率的影响，平衡剂APS变化主要分为三类：波动变化、逐渐增大和逐渐减小，可以作为分析装置跑剂原因的依据。分析了三套工业FCC装置跑剂过程中催化剂的物性变化，A装置由于催化剂中毒，采用新鲜剂置换过程中平衡剂APS发生大幅度波动；B装置由于旋风分离器磨损、穿孔，平衡剂APS升高13.3%；C装置由于汽提环管断裂导致催化剂受到冲击发生磨损破碎，APS逐渐降低至52μm。上述案例证明了基于催化剂APS变化分析故障源理论的可靠性，可为工业装置的故障判断和操作调整提供指导。

关键词: 催化裂化, 细粉跑损, 平均粒径, 旋分器故障, 颗粒破碎

Abstract:

Catalyst loss significantly affects the long-term operation of fluid catalytic cracking (FCC) units. However, system analysis and summarization of the characteristics of different catalyst loss faults are lacking. This study aimed to address this gap by summarizing changes in the average particle size (APS) of equilibrium catalysts during catalyst loss. The changes in APS could be categorized into fluctuation, increase, and decrease, influenced by factors such as raw material nature, unit operating conditions, catalyst addition rate, and cyclone efficiency. These factors served as the basis for analyzing catalyst loss faults. Physical properties of catalysts were investigated during catalyst loss in three industrial FCC units. Unit A exhibited significant APS fluctuations due to catalyst poisoning and fresh catalyst replacement. Unit B experienced a 13.3% increase in APS due to the cyclone separator wear and perforation. In unit C, APS decreased to 52μm due to catalyst abrasion and fragmentation caused by the broken steam distributor in the stripper. These cases validated the reliability of fault source analysis theory based on equilibrium catalyst APS changes, guiding fault evaluation and operation adjustment in FCC industrial units.

Key words: fluid catalytic cracking, fine powder loss, average particle size, cyclone separator fault, particle fragmentation

中图分类号:

TE624

杨琦, 王峰, 韩胜显, 詹庆丽, 贺娇, 方勤珠, 彭威. 催化裂化装置跑剂过程中催化剂平均粒径的变化规律[J]. 化工进展, 2025, 44(6): 3364-3371.

YANG Qi, WANG Feng, HAN Shengxian, ZHAN Qingli, HE Jiao, FANG Qinzhu, PENG Wei. Changing law of catalyst average particle size during catalyst loss in fluid catalytic cracking units[J]. Chemical Industry and Engineering Progress, 2025, 44(6): 3364-3371.

图/表 14

图1 APS变化趋势

图2 基于催化剂APS变化的故障分类

图3 A装置平衡剂重金属含量变化曲线

图4 中毒催化剂形貌

图5 A装置旋风分离器压降变化曲线

图6 A装置平衡剂APS变化曲线

图7 A装置平衡剂粒度分布曲线

图8 旋风分离器运行阶段

图9 B装置三旋细粉形貌

图10 B装置平衡剂APS变化曲线

图11 B装置平衡剂粒度分布曲线

图12 C装置平衡剂SEM图

图13 C装置平衡剂APS曲线

图14 C装置平衡剂粒度分布曲线

参考文献 20

[1]	李鹏, 任晔, 陈学峰. 中国石化催化裂化装置运行状况分析[J]. 石油炼制与化工, 2022, 53(1): 53-59.
	LI Peng, REN Ye, CHEN Xuefeng. Analysis of operation status of catalytic cracking unit in sinopec[J]. Petroleum Processing and Petrochemicals, 2022, 53(1): 53-59.
[2]	CHEW Jia Wei, LAMARCHE W Casey Q, COCCO Ray A. 100 years of scaling up fluidized bed and circulating fluidized bed reactors[J]. Powder Technology, 2022, 409: 117813.
[3]	陈俊武, 许友好. 催化裂化工艺与工程[M]. 3版. 北京: 中国石化出版社, 2015.
	CHEN Junwu, XU Youhao. Catalytic cracking process and engineering[M]. 3rd ed. Beijing: China Petrochemical Press, 2015.
[4]	刘新林, 许友好, 崔守业. 催化剂粒径分布对催化裂化产物选择性的影响[J]. 石油炼制与化工, 2011, 42(2): 42-46.
	LIU Xinlin, XU Youhao, CUI Shouye. Effects of catalyst particle size distribution on the selectivity of catalytic cracking products[J]. Petroleum Processing and Petrochemicals, 2011, 42(2): 42-46.
[5]	王斌, 沈聪, 王佳音, 等. 旋风分离器内细颗粒浓度分布及运动分析[J]. 化工学报, 2020, 71(S2): 201-209.
	WANG Bin, SHEN Cong, WANG Jiayin, et al. Analysis on concentration distribution and trajectory of fine particles in cyclone separator[J]. CIESC Journal, 2020, 71(S2): 201-209.
[6]	伍林, 于化龙, 胡霞, 等. 鼓泡流化床稀相空间颗粒粒度分布的时变特性[J]. 中国粉体技术, 2023, 29(3): 12-20.
	WU Lin, YU Hualong, HU Xia, et al. Time-varying characteristics of particle size distribution in dilute phase space in bubbling fluidized bed[J]. China Powder Science and Technology, 2023, 29(3): 12-20.
[7]	陈文武, 王建军, 张伟亚, 等. 催化裂化装置关键设备故障分析及对策[J]. 石油化工设备技术, 2022, 43(5): 23-27.
	CHEN Wenwu, WANG Jianjun, ZHANG Weiya, et al. Failure analysis of the key equipment in FCC unit and countermeasures[J]. Petrochemical Equipment Technology, 2022, 43(5): 23-27.
[8]	马明亮, 卢朝鹏, 赵静. 催化裂化装置旋风分离器运行情况分析及对策[J]. 石油与天然气化工, 2020, 49(6): 34-39.
	MA Mingliang, LU Zhaopeng, ZHAO Jing. Operation situation analysis and countermeasures of the cyclone separator for catalytic cracking unit[J]. Chemical Engineering of Oil & Gas, 2020, 49(6): 34-39.
[9]	孙博, 王珏, 赵佳一, 等. 重油催化裂化装置结焦部位分析[J]. 化学工程与装备, 2021(12): 159-161.
	SUN Bo, WANG Jue, ZHAO Jiayi, et al. Analysis of coking position in heavy oil catalytic cracking unit[J]. Chemical Engineering & Equipment, 2021(12): 159-161.
[10]	何涛, 何立柱, 郑云锋, 等. 催化裂化装置油浆固体质量浓度升高原因分析及对策[J]. 石化技术与应用, 2022, 40(2): 126-131.
	HE Tao, HE Lizhu, ZHENG Yunfeng, et al. Cause analysis and countermeasures of slurry solid mass concentration increase in fluid catalytic cracking unit[J]. Petrochemical Technology & Application, 2022, 40(2): 126-131.
[11]	费达, 侯峰, 陈辉, 等. 催化裂化装置烟气轮机积垢及其增厚机理[J]. 化工学报, 2015, 66(1): 79-85.
	FEI Da, HOU Feng, CHEN Hui, et al. Analysis of mechanism of fouling increase on blades of FCCU power recovery expander[J]. CIESC Journal, 2015, 66(1): 79-85.
[12]	李宁, 彭芳, 崔守业. 催化裂化装置烟机结垢原因分析及应对措施[J]. 石油炼制与化工, 2018, 49(2): 29-34.
	LI Ning, PENG Fang, CUI Shouye. Causes of FCCU flue gas turbine fouling and countermeasures[J]. Petroleum Processing and Petrochemicals, 2018, 49(2): 29-34.
[13]	宋健斐, 王迪, 孙立强, 等. 基于颗粒谱的FCC旋风分离器故障诊断技术的初步探索[J]. 石油学报(石油加工), 2017, 33(3): 588-594.
	SONG Jianfei, WANG Di, SUN Liqiang, et al. Preliminary analysis of FCC cyclone fault diagnosis technology based on particles information[J]. Acta Petrolei Sinica (Petroleum Processing Section), 2017, 33(3): 588-594.
[14]	王迪, 孙立强, 严超宇, 等. 基于催化剂粒度分布分析催化裂化装置催化剂跑损的原因[J]. 石油炼制与化工, 2019, 50(7): 47-51.
	WANG Di, SUN Liqiang, YAN Chaoyu, et al. Analysis of catalyst loss in FCCU based on particle size distribution[J]. Petroleum Processing and Petrochemicals, 2019, 50(7): 47-51.
[15]	陈铎. 催化裂化装置催化剂跑损的原因及对策分析[J]. 中国石油和化工标准与质量, 2020, 40(4): 42-43.
	CHEN Duo. Causes and countermeasures of catalyst loss in catalytic cracking unit[J]. China Petroleum and Chemical Standard and Quality, 2020, 40(4): 42-43.
[16]	刘仁桓, 魏耀东. 催化裂化装置跑损催化剂的颗粒粒度分析[J]. 石油化工设备, 2006, 35(2): 9-11.
	LIU Renhuan, WEI Yaodong. Analysis of the particle size distributions of the loss catalyst in FCC[J]. Petro-Chemical Equipment, 2006, 35(2): 9-11.
[17]	罗辉, 常增明, 陈文龙, 等. 催化裂化跑损催化剂的激光粒度及SEM分析[J]. 炼油技术与工程, 2009, 39(10): 53-56.
	LUO Hui, CHANG Zengming, CHEN Wenlong, et al. Study on catalyst loss in FCC by laser particle size and SEM analysis[J]. Petroleum Refinery Engineering, 2009, 39(10): 53-56.
[18]	刘璞生, 张忠东, 付满平, 等. 细粉粒度分布变化在FCCU催化剂跑损分析中的应用[J]. 炼油技术与工程, 2016, 46(7): 43-46.
	LIU Pusheng, ZHANG Zhongdong, FU Manping, et al. Application of particle size distribution variation of fine particles in analysis of FCCU catalyst loss[J]. Petroleum Refinery Engineering, 2016, 46(7): 43-46.
[19]	周复昌, 刘存柱, 郭毅葳, 等. 建立催化剂显微图库诊断催化裂化操作[J]. 石油炼制与化工, 2002, 33(7): 10-14.
	ZHOU Fuchang, LIU Cunzhu, GUO Yiwei, et al. Establishment of catalyst micrograph atlas for diagnosing FCC operation[J]. Petroleum Processing and Petrochemicals, 2002, 33(7): 10-14.
[20]	王迪, 孙立强, 严超宇, 等. 流化催化裂化(FCC)催化剂跑损机制及故障树分析[J]. 化工进展, 2019, 38(8): 3534-3539.
	WANG Di, SUN Liqiang, YAN Chaoyu, et al. Mechanisms and fault tree analysis of catalyst loss in fluid catalytic cracking (FCC) unit[J]. Chemical Industry and Engineering Progress, 2019, 38(8): 3534-3539.

催化裂化装置跑剂过程中催化剂平均粒径的变化规律

Changing law of catalyst average particle size during catalyst loss in fluid catalytic cracking units

RichHTML

PDF (PC)

可视化

摘要/Abstract

引用本文

使用本文

图/表 14

参考文献 20

相关文章 15

编辑推荐

Metrics

本文评价

[1]	王恒, 卢春喜. 3.6Mt/a催化裂化旋风分离装置结构优选及运行效果分析[J]. 化工进展, 2025, 44(6): 3238-3246.
[2]	许友好, 何鸣元. 基于变径流化床的高效灵活的催化裂化技术开发[J]. 化工进展, 2024, 43(11): 5985-5994.
[3]	任申勇, 武宗会, 付国宁, 申宝剑. 小晶粒ZSM-11分子筛的合成及其正辛烷催化裂化反应性能[J]. 化工进展, 2024, 43(10): 5527-5532.
[4]	刘锋, 褚阳, 李会峰, 李明丰, 朱玫, 张润强. 汽油中大分子硫醇催化转化反应过程强化[J]. 化工进展, 2024, 43(1): 279-284.
[5]	许友好, 王维, 鲁波娜, 徐惠, 何鸣元. 中国炼油创新技术MIP的开发策略及启示[J]. 化工进展, 2023, 42(9): 4465-4470.
[6]	方东, 何怡, 崔笑晨. FCC重循环油选择性加氢改质-催化裂化多产高附加值产品[J]. 化工进展, 2022, 41(12): 6358-6363.
[7]	吕鹏刚, 刘涛, 叶行, 黄校亮, 段宏昌, 谭争国. FCC工艺中提升增产丙烯助剂性能研究进展[J]. 化工进展, 2022, 41(1): 210-220.
[8]	卢德庆, 辛靖, 朱元宝, 苏梦军. 流化催化裂化油浆综合利用的分析[J]. 化工进展, 2021, 40(S1): 142-149.
[9]	刘东阳, 白宇恩, 张霖宙, 张宇豪, 赵亮, 高金森, 徐春明. 分子尺度反应动力学模型构建在催化裂化/裂解过程中的应用进展[J]. 化工进展, 2021, 40(4): 2082-2091.
[10]	黄占凯, 赵福利, 王会, 赵迎秋, 梁雨翔. 端氨基嵌段聚醚类油浆沉降剂的制备与表征[J]. 化工进展, 2021, 40(2): 755-762.
[11]	彭威, 刘艳升, 韩胜贤, 黄炳庆. 影响FCC再生立管输送催化剂影响因素的分析[J]. 化工进展, 2020, 39(8): 2947-2953.
[12]	王慧, 张睿, 刘海燕, 孟祥海. 催化裂化汽油脱硫精制技术研究进展[J]. 化工进展, 2020, 39(6): 2354-2362.
[13]	黄杰,张颂红,贠军贤,姚克俭. 聚甲基丙烯酸缩水甘油酯疏水纳凝胶的制备与表征[J]. 化工进展, 2019, 38(12): 5435-5441.
[14]	鞠雅娜,李阳,刘坤红,王丽涛,李天舒,胡亚琼,冯琪,姜增琨,张然. 催化裂化汽油砷化物分布规律[J]. 化工进展, 2019, 38(08): 3688-3694.
[15]	王迪,孙立强,严超宇,魏耀东. 流化催化裂化（FCC）催化剂跑损机制及故障树分析[J]. 化工进展, 2019, 38(08): 3534-3539.