Peak 3/98
|
YIELD CORRELATIONS BETWEEN TWO EVALUATION TECHNIQUES Crude Oil Assay Distillation Versus HTSD By Dan Villalanti and Joe Raia, Triton Analytics Corporation; Jim Maynard and Aaron Arias, Shell Development Company To compare the laboratory techniques of Crude Assay Distillation to High-Temperature Simulated Distillation (HTSD), we analyzed approximately 85 crude oils using both techniques. The crudes had varying pitch, sulfur, nickel, vanadium, Conradson carbon, and asphaltene content. Our study demonstrated that HTSD offers tighter precision than conventional crude assay distillation. The ability to evaluate the variability of crude distillation yield curves rapidly and accurately has increasingly important economic considerations in refining margins -- especially with heavier crude oil, which produces larger quantities of low-value heavy residue. As the average gravity of crudes continues to decrease, the need to characterize heavier crude oil increases. In the past, refiners have had to rely on Crude Assay Distillation methods ASTM D 2892 and D 5236 for the characterization, but advances in gas chromatography techniques now allow these methods to be replaced by HTSD.
Figure 1. Assay and HTSD yields; light crude, API gravity 50.4 Figure 2. Assay and HTSD yields; intermediate crude, API gravity 24.2 Figure 3. Assay and HTSD yields; heavy crude, API gravity 9.7 Crude Assay Distillation
High-Temperature Simulated Distillation
To allow a meaningful comparison of the yield curves in our study, the crudes we analyzed were grouped into light, intermediate, and heavy categories, according to their API gravities (Table 2). The yield curves, expressed in % weight, were compared at 10 distillation cutpoints. Figures 1, 2, and 3 show the yield curves obtained for three typical crudes. This comparison shows good overall agreement between the two methods.
Figure 4. HTSD assay; weight % difference at each cut point Figure 4 contains the average difference for all the crudes in each of the three API categories obtained by D 2892/D 5236 and HTSD. In general, the difference observed at each cutpoint is less than ±2 % weight. The estimated precision of the correlation between crude assay distillation and HTSD yield at each cutpoint results in standard deviations of < 2 % weight. The precision of HTSD cutpoints up to 1000°F is better than 0.5 % weight. An exception occurs at the 750°F cutpoint for light and intermediate crudes and the region from 750 to 900°F for heavy crudes. The 750°F cutpoint is the first cutpoint following the crossover from ASTM D 2892 (TBP 15-plate) to D 5236 (vacuum potstill, 1-plate) conditions. This change in distillation conditions likely contributes most of the difference when compared to HTSD, which has no pressure-related crossover effects. A Dedicated SIMDIS Analyzer
Table 1. HTSD analysis range
Based on the Hewlett-Packard HP 6890 Series gas chromatograph, this system offers a high level of automation that simplifies the analyses, decreases analysis time, and minimizes operator involvement. Ease of use is an integral feature of the AC High Temp SIMDIS Analyzer. SIMDIS Replaces
To get in touch with AC Analytical Controls, Inc.: North America -- Telephone: +1-215-638-7078; Fax: +1-215-638-7096; E-mail: acinc@analytical-controls.com. Other parts of the world -- Telephone: +31-10-4624811; Fax: +31-10-4626330; E-mail: acbv@analytical-controls.com. Internet www.analytical-controls.com References
Villalanti, D.C., Janson, D., and Colle, P. Hydrocarbon Characterization by High Temperature Simulated Distillation (HTDS). Report prepared for Session 4b at the AIChE 1995 Spring National Meeting, Houston, TX, March 19 - 23, 1995. Golden, S.W., Villalanti, D.C., and Martin, G.R. Feed Characterization and Deepcut Vacuum Columns: Simulation and Design, Impact of High Temperature Simulated Distillation. Report prepared for Session 47a at the AIChE 1994 Spring National Meeting. Atlanta, GA, April 18 - 20, 1994. Golden, S.W., Craft, S., and Villalanti, D.C. Refinery Analytical Techniques Optimize Unit Performance. Hydrocarbon Processing, November 1995. |