Selection of Material for Construction Report

Material of
Corrosion Mechanical Cost- Compatibility with
Constructio
Resistance Strength Effectiveness Reaction Conditions
n

Compatible with mild

Stainless acidic and basic
Excellent Good Moderate
Steel 304 conditions at higher
temperature.
Compatible with mild
Stainless acidic and basic
Excellent Good Higher
Steel 316 conditions at higher
temperature.
Moderate compatibility
Less than with mild acidic and basic
Carbon Steel stainless Good Economical conditions may require
steel thicker walls or protective
coatings
Highly compatible with
aggressive chemical
Hastelloy
Excellent Excellent Higher environments, including
C-276
acids and chlorides, at
elevated temperatures
Excellent resistance to
corrosion in various
Titanium Excellent Excellent Higher aggressive media,
suitable for severe
operating conditions
Excellent resistance to
corrosion and high-
Inconel 625 Excellent Excellent Higher temperature
environments, suitable
for aggressive conditions

Stainless steel:

It is a popular choice for chemical reactor construction due to its excellent corrosion
resistance, mechanical strength, and durability. It can withstand the mildly acidic and basic
conditions involved in the transesterification process. Stainless steel is also relatively cost-
effective compared to other high-performance materials like hastelloy or titanium.
When selecting stainless steel for the reactor construction, consider grades such as 304
stainless steel or 316 stainless steel. These grades are commonly used in the chemical
industry and offer good corrosion resistance to a wide range of chemicals, including
methanol and biodiesel.

Here are some reasons why stainless steel is a suitable choice:

Corrosion Resistance: Stainless steel has inherent corrosion resistance properties, which
make it suitable for handling corrosive reactants and products.

Mechanical Strength: Stainless steel provides adequate mechanical strength to withstand

the pressure and stresses within the reactor.

Longevity: Stainless steel is durable and has a long service life, which can result in lower
maintenance and replacement costs over time.

Cost-effectiveness: Compared to more exotic materials like hastelloy or titanium, stainless

steel is more cost-effective, making it a popular choice for industrial applications.

Advantages of Carbon Steel:

Cost-Effectiveness: Carbon steel is generally more cost-effective than stainless steel or

other corrosion-resistant alloys, making it an attractive option for large-scale industrial
applications.

Mechanical Strength: Carbon steel offers good mechanical strength and can handle the
pressure and stresses involved in the reactor operation.

Availability: Carbon steel is widely available, making it easier to source for reactor
construction.

However, there are some significant drawbacks and challenges associated with using
carbon steel in this type of reaction:

Corrosion Susceptibility: Carbon steel is not as corrosion-resistant as stainless steel or

other alloy materials. The transesterification reaction involves methanol, which is corrosive,
especially at elevated temperatures. Over time, the reaction mixture can cause corrosion
and degradation of the carbon steel reactor, potentially leading to leaks, structural issues,
and contamination of the product.
Catalytic Poisoning: The Cao/Al2O3 catalyst used in transesterification reactions can be
sensitive to impurities, including metal ions. Carbon steel may release metal ions into the
reaction mixture due to corrosion, which could potentially poison the catalyst and reduce its
activity, impacting the reaction efficiency.

Reactor Lifetime: The corrosive nature of the reaction mixture can lead to a shorter
lifespan of the carbon steel reactor compared to stainless steel or other corrosion-resistant
materials. Frequent replacements or maintenance may increase operational costs in the
long run.

To mitigate some of the corrosion-related issues, thicker carbon steel walls or employing
protective coatings can be used, but these solutions may add to the overall cost and may
not completely eliminate the risk of corrosion.

Aluminium Alloy:
Drawbacks of using Aluminium Alloy:
Corrosion: Aluminum is susceptible to corrosion in the presence of methanol, which is one
of the main reactants in the transesterification process. The reaction mixture typically
contains methanol, which can react with aluminum and cause corrosion, potentially leading
to structural integrity issues and contamination of the product.

Compatibility: Aluminum is not compatible with the mildly acidic and basic conditions of
the transesterification reaction at elevated temperatures. The reaction environment can
lead to accelerated corrosion and deterioration of the aluminum reactor.

Catalytic Poisoning: Aluminum can release metal ions into the reaction mixture, which can
potentially poison the catalyst, especially if a heterogeneous catalyst like Cao/Al2O3 is
used.

Mechanical Strength: While aluminum does have good mechanical strength, it may not be
as robust as other materials like stainless steel, titanium, or certain high-performance
alloys, especially in corrosive environments.

Due to these limitations and potential issues, it is generally recommended to avoid using
aluminum as the material of construction for the reactor in biodiesel production through the
transesterification reaction.
Instead, materials like stainless steel (e.g., 304 or 316), carbon steel, hastelloy, titanium, or
inconel are preferred for their better corrosion resistance, mechanical strength, and
compatibility with the reaction conditions.

Suggested Material for Cost and Efficiency: Considering the parameters of cost-
effectiveness and efficiency, Stainless Steel 304 is a good option for the construction of the
reactor. It provides excellent corrosion resistance to the reaction mixture, good mechanical
strength, and moderate cost-effectiveness compared to more expensive alloys like
Stainless Steel 316, Hastelloy C-276, Titanium, and Inconel 625.

Stainless Steel 304 is widely used in various industrial applications due to its balanced
properties and cost-effectiveness. It offers a good compromise between performance and
cost, making it a reliable choice for a transesterification reactor in the given conditions.

Reference:
Perry, R. H., Green, D. W., & Maloney, J. O. (1999). Perry's Chemical Engineers'
Handbook (7th ed.). McGraw-Hill Education.
Coulson, J. M., Richardson, J. F., Backhurst, J. R., & Harker, J. H. (1999). Chemical
Engineering Volume 2: Particle Technology and Separation Processes. Butterworth-
Heinemann.