See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/309411348

Comparison of Catalytic Reforming Processes for Process Integration

Opportunities: Brief Review

Article  in  International Journal of Applied Engineering Research · January 2016

CITATIONS READS

3 9,423

6 authors, including:

Badiea S. Babaqi Mohd Sobri Takriff

Hadhramout University Universiti Kebangsaan Malaysia
10 PUBLICATIONS   35 CITATIONS    157 PUBLICATIONS   3,819 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

S.K. Kamarudin Nur Tantiyani Binti Ali Othman

Universiti Kebangsaan Malaysia Universiti Kebangsaan Malaysia
248 PUBLICATIONS   10,149 CITATIONS    31 PUBLICATIONS   83 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:

ERGS 2012 View project

Direct Ethanol Fuel Cell View project

All content following this page was uploaded by Badiea S. Babaqi on 25 October 2016.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

 International Journal of Applied Engineering Research ISSN 0973-4562 Volume 11, Number 19 (2016) pp. 9984-9989
© Research India Publications. http://www.ripublication.com

Comparison of Catalytic Reforming Processes for Process Integration

Opportunities: Brief Review

Badiea S. Babaqi Mohd S. Takriff*

Department of chemical and process Engineering, Department of chemical and process Engineering
Faculty of Engineering and Built Environment Faculty of Engineering and Built Environment
Universiti Kebangsaan Malaysia, Universiti Kebangsaan Malaysia,
Bangi, Selangor, Malaysia. Bangi, Selangor, Malaysia.

Siti K. Kamarudin Nur T. Ali Othman

Department of chemical and process Engineering Department of chemical and process Engineering
Faculty of Engineering and Built Environment Faculty of Engineering and Built Environment
Universiti Kebangsaan Malaysia, Universiti Kebangsaan Malaysia,
Bangi, Selangor, Malaysia. Bangi, Selangor, Malaysia.

Muneer M. Ba-Abbad
Department of chemical and process Engineering
Faculty of Engineering and Built Environment
Universiti Kebangsaan Malaysia,
Bangi, Selangor, Malaysia.

Abstract
Catalytic reforming process is one of the most important
processes in oil refineries that produce high octane number
gasoline. Catalytic reforming processes are commonly
classified into three types based on the regeneration systems
of the catalyst, namely (i) semi-regenerative catalytic
reformer process (SRCRP), (ii) cyclic regenerative catalytic
reformer process (CRCRP) and (iii) continuous catalytic
regeneration reformer process (CCRRP). The major
difference among the three processes is the requirement to
shut down for catalyst regeneration. The mechanism for the
regeneration steps could be classified into fixed-bed catalyst
system; fixed-bed catalyst combined a swing reactor and a
move-bed catalyst with special regenerator of SRCRP,
CRCRP or CCRRP type respectively. The CCRRP produces
a higher octane reformates in the range 95–108 with a low
feed quality compared to the other reactors types.
Furthermore, the process produces hydrogen gas
continuously at higher catalyst activity. High yield of
hydrogen is also achieved at lower recycle ratio and lower
operating pressure (50 psig). As the process requires
continuous energy supply to maintain the optimum
temperature of the reactor, simultaneous integration of mass
and heat can be used as means to identify opportunities for
design improvement.
Keywords: Catalytic Reforming Process, Comparison,
Process Integration Opportunities.
INTRODUCTION
Catalytic reforming plays significant role in petroleum
refinery and petrochemical industries that transforms low-
octane naphtha into higher octane number reformate for
gasoline blending and aromatics rich reformate for
petrochemicals production. It also produces high purity
hydrogen gas as a by-product. Generally, the main purpose of
the catalytic reforming process is to improve the octane
number of the feedstock, especially of heavy naphtha.
Reducing antiknock quality of naphtha as a blending stock
for motor fuels is the strong reason for installing catalytic
reforming. Gasoline is widely used as a transportation fuel,
however, the current environmental regulations requires that
the levels of benzene and total of aromatics in gasoline
should be lower than 0.62 vol% due their carcinogenic
properties [1-3].
Several reactions occur in catalytic reforming process in
order to increase the gasoline octane number. These reactions
are: (i) dehydrogenation of naphthenes compounds (ii)
dehydrocyclization of paraffins compounds, (iii)
isomerization of normal paraffins, (iv) hydrocracking
reaction of paraffins and converted into lower molecular
weight paraffins, and (v) hyrodealkylation of aromatics. The
dehydrogenation, dehydrocyclization and isomerization
reactions are desired reactions because it controls the octane
number and hydrogen purity. In contrast, hydrocracking
reaction is undesirable because it cracks paraffins into small
paraffins which produce light gases (low octane, LPG).
Additionally, hydrocracking reaction consumes hydrogen that
decreases the reformate yield. The undesired reaction causes
the coke formation and coke deposition on catalyst surface
[4-6]. The best operating conditions of the reaction in

9984
 International Journal of Applied Engineering Research ISSN 0973-4562 Volume 11, Number 19 (2016) pp. 9984-9989
© Research India Publications. http://www.ripublication.com

catalytic reforming process to produce high octane of
aromatic compounds are high temperatures, low pressures
and low hydrogen/feed ratio. However the hydrogen pressure
must be high enough in order to avoid deactivation of catalyst
surfaces [7, 8].
Typical catalysts that are used in catalytic reforming are
mono-metallic, bi-metallic or tri-metallic catalysts supported
on aluminum, such as platinum (Pt/Al2O3), Platinum-Iridium
(Pt-Ir/Al2O3) or Platinum-Iridium-Tin (Pt-Ir-Sn/Al2O3)
respectively. The catalysts performance in terms of its
stability, selectivity and activity can be improved through
modification of its properties. The best approach to achieve
high yields and high quality of reformate is increasing the
selectivity of desirable reactions via balance between acidic
and metallic sites [9-13].
CLASSIFICATION OF CATALYTIC REFORMER
PROCESSES
The catalytic reforming process was first introduced by
Universal Oil Products (UOP) in 1940 and then developed
many different types of reforming processes to date. The
performance of catalytic reforming process depended on
feedstock and converts it into high octane reformate and
gasoline products. In general, there are several versions of
major reforming processes that have been developed by some
of the major oil companies and other organizations [14-16].
i. Semi-Regenerative Catalytic Reformer Process
(SRCRP)
SRCRP is the oldest reforming process that is used for the
production of gasoline and rich aromatic compounds as
shown in Figure 1. It usually has three or four reactors in
series with a fixed-bed catalyst system, that require shut-
down approximately once every six month to two years for
in-situ regeneration of the catalyst. The catalyst activity
decreases gradually due to the formation of coke and affects
the yield of aromatics and the hydrogen by-product. In order
to keep the reaction conversion relatively constant, the
reactor temperature is raised as catalyst activity drop. To
maximize the time between two regenerations intervals, these
early units were operated at high pressures (200 to 300 psig)
that help to reduce catalyst deactivation rate by coking.
This process can achieve an octane number in range of 85-
100, depending on the feedstock, gasoline qualities, and
required additives. In SRCRP, the Pt–Re catalyst is usually
used because it allows high tolerance to coke levels with
simple regeneration process and allows for lower operating
pressure [2, 4, 17, 18].

Figure 1. Schematic Process Diagram of SRCR

ii. Cyclic Regenerative Catalytic Reformer Process

Current catalytic reforming processes are commonly
classified into three types based on regeneration systems
work of the catalyst. These includes: (i) semi-regenerative
catalytic reformer process (SRCRP), (ii) cyclic regenerative
catalytic reformer process (CRCRP) and (iii) continuous
catalytic regeneration reformer process (CCRRP).
(CRCRP)
CRCRP is the least in terms of its utilization for the
production of high octane number gasoline and rich aromatic
compounds. Its schematic is as shown in Figure 2. It usually
has four reactors in series with a fixed-bed catalyst system.
The swing configuration allows for one of the reactor to
undergo in-situ regeneration while the other reactors are in

9985
 International Journal of Applied Engineering Research ISSN 0973-4562 Volume 11, Number 19 (2016) pp. 9984-9989
© Research India Publications. http://www.ripublication.com

operation. The interval between two regenerations for each
reactor is between a few weeks to a few months. In this
configuration, only one reactor is taken out of operation for
regeneration at a given time, while the other reactors continue
with the operation for producing high octane reformates.
This configuration allows for the reforming process to be
operated continuously and a high octane number in the range
of 100-104 can be achieved. The CRCRP allows for more
severe operation conditions such as low operational pressure
(200 psig), wide boiling range feed, and low hydrogen-to-
feed ratio were applied which contributes to high deactivation
rate of the catalyst.
The main advantages of the CRCRP are the overall catalyst
activity, conversion, consistent hydrogen purity and low
operational pressure. In contrast, the disadvantage of CRCRP
is the complex nature of the reactor switching control and the
need for higher safety precautions. The cyclic catalytic
reformer units are rarely used for naphtha reforming process
[18-20]
system where the catalyst regeneration occurs continuously in
a special regenerator and returned to the operating reactors.
This design has provided the CCRRP a step change in
reforming technology compared to SRCRP and CRCRP.
The main advantages of CCRRP against previous methods
are the ability to produce of higher octane reformate in the
range 95–108 with a low feed quality. Furthermore, the
process produces hydrogen gas continuously at higher
catalyst activity and yield. Finally, high yield of hydrogen
with lower required recycle ratio and the lower operational
pressure (50 psig) are obtained in the reforming process.
In the CCRRP, the catalyst flows from top to bottom of the
stacked reactors by gravity. The spent catalyst is continuously
withdrawn from the last reactor and transferred to the top of
the regenerator to burn off the coke then returned to the top
stack-reactor. This process includes transmission of the
catalyst between the regenerator and reactors that are known
as the gas lift method.
The CCRRP uses the platinum/tin alumina type as main
catalyst. The addition of tin regeneration ability of Pt/Al2O3
enhances the selectivity of aromatics and stability.

Figure 2. Schematic Process Diagram of CRCR

iii. Continuous Catalytic Regeneration Reformer Process
(CCRRP)
CCRRP (Figure 3) is the most modern process used in the
world for producing high octane number gasoline and rich
aromatic compounds. This system has four reactors in series
or stacks one above the other with a move-bed catalyst
This catalyst regenerates continuously in CCRRP, in which
the selectivity to aromatics of the catalyst is more significant
compared to resistance to deactivation [21-23].
The main features, advantages and disadvantages of each
type of catalytic reforming processes are presented in Table1.

9986
 International Journal of Applied Engineering Research ISSN 0973-4562 Volume 11, Number 19 (2016) pp. 9984-9989
© Research India Publications. http://www.ripublication.com

Figure 3. Schematic Process Diagram of CCRR

Table 1. Some of the Main Features, Advantages and Disadvantages of each Type of Catalytic Reforming Processes

Features and Conditions

Type of
Advantages Disadvantages
Process Octane
Catalyst
Pressure Temperature number of
system
reformate
*Process needs to shut-down
High of the operation for catalyst
High fixed-bed
pressure regeneration.
SRCRP Temperature 85-100 catalyst ______
(200 to 300 * Once every six month to
(480-510oC) system two years for regenerating of
psig)
the catalyst in situ.
*Process does not need shut-
down of the operation for
*The interval between two
catalyst regeneration, but it
regenerations for each reactor
uses a swing reactor which
Low High fixed-bed is requested a few weeks to a
allows for one of the reactor
few months.
CRCRP pressure Temperature 100-104 catalyst to undergo in-situ
*Complex nature of the
(200 psig) (515-520oC) system regeneration while the other
reactor switching control as
reactors are in operation.
well as needs for higher
*Overall catalyst activity,
safety precautions
conversion, consistent
hydrogen purity.
* Process does not need shut-
down of the operation for
catalyst regeneration, where
the catalyst regeneration
Low High move-bed occurs continuously in a
CCRRP pressure Temperature 95–108 catalyst special regenerator. ________
(50 psig) (515-528oC) system * Process produces hydrogen
gas continuously at higher
catalyst activity and yield.
* High yield of hydrogen with
lower required recycle ratio.

Opportunities of process integration through the comparison
of catalytic reforming processes are presented in Table1. The
three types vary according to the nature of the operation,
synthesis design and economic cost.
The one of SRCRP disadvantages is required to stop of
operation in order to activate the catalyst. Also, the energy
conservation process may be difficult because of the frequent
breaks along the process operates beside the process works
under high pressure. At the same time, CRCRP has a

9987
 International Journal of Applied Engineering Research ISSN 0973-4562 Volume 11, Number 19 (2016) pp. 9984-9989
© Research India Publications. http://www.ripublication.com
complex design and high safety of process control. Therefore,
it is more difficult to control and requiring a high cost on the
part of safety when applied process integration. The third
type (CCRRP) can apply process integration because the
process is ongoing, it does not need to stop the operation.
Therefore, the energy source will become continuously so the
possibility of the application of heat integration. The
production of products such as reformates and hydrogen
continuously-introduce which possibility applied of mass
integration.
Advanced management of mass and heat in CCRRP for
design enhancement provides the best opportunity via
increasing efficiency which includes increase production
volume, minimizing energy consumption and mass savings.
CCRRP ENHANCEMENT VIA HEAT AND MASS
INTEGRATION
Most of the research works in catalytic reforming process
have focused on model development and simulation of the
reactors in order to improve the reforming process. Process
integration provides a means for optimizing the CCRRP.
However, a brief literature review that has been conducted
shows that no study has been conducted on the combined
mass and heat integration for catalytic reforming design
improvement. Possible strategy that may be adopted for
optimizing the CCRRP based on the heat and mass
integration are as the following:
• Mass integration provides the requited operation
flexibility for a given feed quantity and quality, operation
conditions to maximize production capacity. Therefore, the
mass integration in the reaction and separation units that
includes mass recovery network system could achieve high
yield and profitability. Pinch analysis technique (PAT) and
mathematical optimization technique (MOT) could be used to
achieve of this study objectives (e.g. minimize raw materials,
water-using operations, and waste reduction, etc.).
• Heat integration approach: The CCRRP requires
continuous energy supply to maintain the optimum
temperature of the reactor and source of heat for reaction by
energy stored in the reformate product that leaves from
reactor. Therefore, heat recovery system and heat exchanger
network could be provided for improving energy efficiency.
Pinch analysis technique (PAT) and mathematical
optimization technique (MOT) could be used to achieve the
study objectives (e.g. improving energy efficiency, energy
saving, minimize the cost of utility, decrease quantity of the
gases emissions, etc.) via integrated system of interconnected
processing units besides increased heat exchange area.
• As the both approaches are applied as simultaneous
combined heat and mass integration in the CCRRP, it could
be obtained the best design improvement of future study.
CONCLUSION
The types of catalytic reforming processes were compared to
identify opportunities for process integration as future study.
The CCRRP produces a higher octane reformates with low
feed quality compared to SRCRP and CRCRP. Furthermore,
this process generates hydrogen gas as by product
9988
continuously under higher catalyst activity at optimum
temperature of the reactor. Thus, the CCRRP showed more
improvement opportunities compared to SRCRP and
CRCRP. Therefore, simultaneous integration of mass and
heat could be used to identify opportunities for design
improvement of CCRRP in future.
REFERENCES
[1] G. J. Antos and A. M. Aitani, Catalytic Naphtha
Reforming, Revised and Expanded: CRC Press,
2004.
[2] J. H. Gary, G. E. Handwerk, and M. J. Kaiser,
Petroleum refining: technology and economics:
CRC press, 2010.
[3] R. E. K. Palmer, S.H.; Tang, C. & Shipman, D.R. ,
"Consider Options toLower Benzene Levels in
Gasoline," Hydrocarbon Processing, pp. 55-66,
2008.
[4] J. A. George and M. A. Abdullah, "Catalytic
naphtha reforming," Marcel Dekker, New York,
2004.
[5] S. Sadighi and R. S. Mohaddecy, "Simulation,
Sensitivity Analysis and Optimization of an
Industrial Continuous Catalytic Naphtha Reforming
process," European Chemical Bulletin, vol. 2, pp.
777-781, 2013.
[6] G. Zahedi, S. Mohammadzadeh, and G. Moradi,
"Enhancing gasoline production in an industrial
catalytic-reforming unit using artificial neural
networks," Energy & Fuels, vol. 22, pp. 2671-2677,
2008.
[7] D. S. Jones and P. R. Pujadó, Handbook of
petroleum processing: Springer Science & Business
Media, 2006.
[8] R. E. Maples, Petroleum refinery process
economics, Second ed.: Pennwell books, 2000.
[9] D. Iranshahi, M. Rahimpour , and A. Asgari,
"Anovel dynamic radial-flow,spherical- bed reactor
concept for naphtha reforming inthe presence
ofcatalyst deactivation,".Int JHydrogen Energy vol.
35, pp. 6261–6275, 2010.
[10] D. Iranshahi , E. Pourazadi , K. Paymooni, A.
Bahmanpour , M. Rahimpour , and A. Shariati,
"Modeling ofanaxial flow,spherical packed-bed
reactor for naphtha reforming process inthe presence
ofthe catalyst deactivation.," Int JHydrogen Energy
vol. 35, pp. 12784–12799, 2010.
[11] A. Poparad, B. Ellis, B. Glover, and S. Metro,
"Reforming Solutions for Improved Profits in an up-
Down World," UOP LLC, pp. 1-32, 2011.
[12] M. I. Rahimpour, D.; Pourazadi, E. & Paymooni ,K.,
"Evaluation of optimum design parameters and
operating conditions ofaxial- and radial-flowtubular
naphtha reforming reactors,using the differential
evolution method,considering catalyst
deactivation.," Energy Fuels, vol. 25, pp. 762–772,
2011.
 International Journal of Applied Engineering Research ISSN 0973-4562 Volume 11, Number 19 (2016) pp. 9984-9989
© Research India Publications. http://www.ripublication.com

[13] M. I. Rahimpour , D. Pourazadi , E. Paymooni , K.

& Bahmanpour, AM., "The aromatic enhancement
inthe axial-flowspherical packed-bed membrane
naphtha reformers inthe presence ofcatalyst
deactivation,".AIChE J, vol. 57 pp. 3182–3198,
2011.
[14] G. J. Antos, A. M. Aitani, and J. M. Parera,
"Catalytic naphtha reforming," Science and
Technology, New York, Marcel Dekker Inc., New
York, 1995.
[15] A.-F. Chang, K. Pashikanti, and Y. A. Liu, Refinery
engineering: Integrated process modeling and
optimization: John Wiley & Sons, 2013.
[16] D. M. Little, Catalytic reforming, First ed. United
States: Pennwell Books,Tulsa, OK, 1985.
[17] F. Ciapetta and D. Wallace, "Catalytic naphtha
reforming," Catalysis Reviews, vol. 5, pp. 67-158,
1972.
[18] M. R. Rahimpour, M. Jafari, and D. Iranshahi,
"Progress in catalytic naphtha reforming process: A
review," Applied Energy, vol. 109, pp. 79-93, 2013.
[19] M. Mahdavian, S. Fatemi, and A. Fazeli, "Modeling
and simulation of industrial continuous naphtha
catalytic reformer accompanied with delumping the
naphtha feed," International Journal of Chemical
Reactor Engineering, vol. 8, 2010.
[20] I. Mall, Petrochemical process technology, First ed.
New Delhi: Macmillan India, 2006.
[21] M. González-Marcos, B. Inarra, J. Guil, and M.
Gutierrez-Ortiz, "Development of an industrial
characterisation method for naphtha reforming
bimetallic Pt-Sn/Al 2 O 3 catalysts through n-
heptane reforming test reactions," Catalysis today,
vol. 107, pp. 685-692, 2005.
[22] J. M. Hill, R. Cortright, and J. Dumesic, "Silica-and
L-zeolite-supported Pt, Pt/Sn and Pt/Sn/K catalysts
for isobutane dehydrogenation," Applied Catalysis
A: General, vol. 168, pp. 9-21, 1998.
[23] R. A. Meyers, Handbook of petroleum refining
processes, Third ed. vol. 548: McGraw-Hill New
York, 2004.

9989

View publication stats