Talk:Fluid catalytic cracking

Comment

petroleum coke —Preceding unsigned comment added by 203.197.250.51 (talk) 07:14, 24 December 2008 (UTC)

In Popular Culture

Anyone wanna add an In Popular Culture section referencing Portal? I'm not sure what current policy is on "In Popular Culture," which is why I didn't add the link directly to the article. (tinlv7 (Please copy a response here)) —Preceding undated comment was added at 19:13, 22 January 2009 (UTC).

Critique

The example diagram, Figure 2, gives octa-1,3,7-triene as the example 'aromatic' molecule. This molecule is not aromatic, it fails Huckel's rules. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 140.233.97.73 (talk) 13:25, 9 November 2009 (UTC)

You may want to talk to the maker of the diagram.--Environnement2100 (talk) 15:03, 9 November 2009 (UTC)

Where are Plank & Rosinski?

Obviously no article of this length can cover all aspects as broad as a topic like this one. Nevertheless, I was surprised to see no mention of the contributions of Plank and Rosinski at Socony-Vacumm (Mobil) Oil Co., since their catalyst development was THE crucial step in making FCC, an idea that had been around for a few decades, viable as an industrial process. Plank & Rosinski have been recognized for this contribution by induction into the Inventors Hall of Fame (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_National_Inventors_Hall_of_Fame_inductees), among only a small number of inventors (including Houdry) in the petroleum and chemical process industries so honored. Prof. A. Z. O'Trope (talk) 20:44, 31 October 2010 (UTC)

Barg or bar?

Can someone check if the pressure in the reactor & regenerator section is bar or barg? (1.72 barg vs 1.72 bar) There appears to be some conflict and I don't have access to the book to check. Bug (talk) 10:03, 17 May 2012 (UTC)

The reactor pressure should be 1.72 barg as shown in Figure 1 ... and I have revised the article to that effect. The pressure was 1.72 barg in May 9, 2008 when I first created the article and drew Figure 1. It was changed to 1.72 bar on June 2, 2010 by anonymous user 78.20.49.50 ... and no one picked up on it at that time. mbeychok (talk) 14:56, 17 May 2012 (UTC)

Maig Column

What is the Maig Column labelled in the photograph? That term not found elsewhere in the article. Casey (talk) 22:05, 24 October 2016 (UTC) It's "Main" column, not "Maig", which refers to the main fractionator.

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 5 external links on Fluid catalytic cracking. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added {{dead link}} tag to http://energy.gov/sites/prod/files/DOE_CMS_2011.pdf
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20080418004355/http://www.nacatsoc.org/history.asp?HistoryID=6 to http://www.nacatsoc.org/history.asp?HistoryID=6
• Added archive https://archive.is/20130112050017/http://portal.acs.org/portal/PublicWebSite/education/whatischemistry/landmarks/houdry/index.htm to http://portal.acs.org/portal/PublicWebSite/education/whatischemistry/landmarks/houdry/index.htm
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20060901131546/http://texasiof.ces.utexas.edu/texasshowcase/pdfs/tourbooks/tb_valero.pdf to http://texasiof.ces.utexas.edu/texasshowcase/pdfs/tourbooks/tb_valero.pdf
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20080906173321/http://www.cdtech.com/updates/Publications/Refining%20Papers/FCC%20Gasoline%20HDS%20papers/Sulfur%20Reduction%20with%20Increased%20Octane%20and%20Yields.pdf to http://www.cdtech.com/updates/Publications/Refining%20Papers/FCC%20Gasoline%20HDS%20papers/Sulfur%20Reduction%20with%20Increased%20Octane%20and%20Yields.pdf
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20090216195746/http://www.nacatsoc.org/edu_info.asp?edu_infoID=2 to http://www.nacatsoc.org/edu_info.asp?edu_infoID=2

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 22:47, 2 October 2017 (UTC)

Metals in feed

I removed this section because cat crackers use distillate feeds, which does not include this material: " Nickel, vanadium, iron, copper and other metal contaminants, present in FCC feedstocks in the parts per million range, all have detrimental effects on the catalyst activity and performance. Nickel and vanadium are particularly troublesome. There are a number of methods for mitigating the effects of the contaminant metals:

• Avoid feedstocks with high metals content: This seriously hampers a refinery's flexibility to process various crude oils or purchased FCC feedstocks.
• Feedstock feed pretreatment: Hydrodesulfurization of the FCC feedstock removes some of the metals and also reduces the sulfur content of the FCC products. However, this is quite a costly option.
• Increasing fresh catalyst addition: All FCC units withdraw some of the circulating equilibrium catalyst as spent catalyst and replaces it with fresh catalyst in order to maintain a desired level of activity. Increasing the rate of such exchange lowers the level of metals in the circulating equilibrium catalyst, but this is also quite a costly option.
• Demetallization: The commercial proprietary Demet Process removes nickel and vanadium from the withdrawn spent catalyst. The nickel and vanadium are converted to chlorides which are then washed out of the catalyst. After drying, the demetallized catalyst is recycled into the circulating catalyst. Removals of about 95 percent nickel removal and 67 to 85 percent vanadium have been reported. Despite that, the use of the Demet process has not become widespread, perhaps because of the high capital expenditure required.
• Metals passivation: Certain materials can be used as additives which can be impregnated into the catalyst or added to the FCC feedstock in the form of metal-organic compounds. Such materials react with the metal contaminants and passivate the contaminants by forming less harmful compounds that remain on the catalyst. For example, antimony and bismuth are effective in passivating nickel and tin is effective in passivating vanadium. A number of proprietary passivation processes are available and fairly widely used."

--Smokefoot (talk) 13:26, 8 May 2019 (UTC)

References