Boreskov Institute of Catalysis of the Siberian Branch of Russian ...

OP-I-185 (II-b)6 (III-a)///(K P )H21+KPPrP'k (PP−KeqPH20.5 // P/// 0.52[ 1 + K + K0.5 PrPPr+ (K PH) + K P ]2H2H2PH2Ppr prP P'pr Hk ( P − 2 )p Keq+ ( K P )0.5+ K P PH H Pr H Pr H2 22 2)11 (V-b)k' (Pp1+−K Pp pP Ppr H2+)KeqK PH H2 2P P'pr Hk ( P − 2 )p Keq12 (VI-a) 0.5(1( )'0.5+ K P + K P + K P P + K P P )pr pr H H pr H prH pr H2 22 2 217P: Propane(A)Pr: Propylene(B)H 2 =Hydrogen(C )P P'pr Hk ( P − 2 )p Keq(1 + ( K P )0.5)2H H2 2k': Rate ConstantK eq : Equilibrium ConstantK: Adsorption ConstantsResults and DiscussionOptimization programs in MATLAB software were used to minimize the absolute error andfind the optimum values for rate equation constants. The results were presented in Table 3:Model 178.69k /−= 3088.7exp( )RT/kModel 7−49.83= 136.2exp()RT−22 355.2K pr = 1.25×10 exp( )RT.K H =28 480.0027 exp( )2 RT−8 102.19K p = 9.11×10 exp( )RTMSE = 0.015Model 13/− 66.09k = 1064.6exp( )RT18.92Kp= 0.0067 exp( )RT−569.31Kpr= 1.43×10 exp( )RT51.24KH= 0.0002 exp( )2RTK = 0.2019 , MSE = 0.011prH 2Model 2/− 86.25k = 28681.3exp ( )RT4.72Kpr= 0.8443 exp( )RT0.07KH= 4.3211exp( )2RTK = 13325 .prH 2MSE = 0.015Model 8/−83.95k = 7811.9exp()RT36.03K = H0.0016 exp( )2RTK prH = 0.10132' = 0.0982 KMSE = 0.015Model 14/−80.04k = 3799.8exp()RT36.62K pr = 0.0006exp()RTKprH2= 0.4821MSE = 0.023Table 3: Optimization results.Model 3/− 64.67k = 1631.1exp( )RT17.29Kp= 0.0609exp( )RT7.43Kpr= 0.3123exp( )RT18.99KH= 0.0822exp( )2RTMSE = 0.015Model 9/−66.82k = 1146.1exp()RT.K H = 45 780.0004exp()2RT35.46K p = 0.0008exp()RTK' = 0.2012 ,MSE = 0.015Model 15/−76.79k = 2509.2exp()RT12.45K pr = 0.0374exp()RT−682.14K H = 1.02 × 10 exp(2RTMSE = 0.023Model 4/6 −113.74k = 5.32×10 exp( )RTK = 7.45×1089.07exp( )RT−7prK9.36= 0.2179exp( )RTH 2'K = 0.1952 , K = 10.917'''MSE = 0.011Model 10/−77.09k = 2647.6exp()RT−552.22K H = 9.7×10 exp( )2RTK prH = 0.20932MSE = 0.023Model 16/− 72.56k = 1432.1exp( )RT−17252.55Kp= 1.67×10 exp( )RT−680.69Kpr= 2.95×10 exp( )RT−791.06KH= 5.25×10 exp( )2RTMSE = 0.015Model 5k4 − 85.45= 4.67 × 10 exp( )RT/K = 5.91×1054.89exp( )RT−6prK2.84= 0.9398exp( )RTH 2K = 0.5158 , K = 1.5814'''''MSE = 0.011Model 11/ −42.74k = 36.7exp()RT−17 248.65K p = 3.33×10 exp( )RT−694.92K H = 2.77 × 10 exp( )2RTMSE = 0.023Model 17/−64.69k = 781.6exp()RT−563.52K H = 3.3×10 exp( )2RTMSE = 0.046Model 6/ − 46.09k = 48exp( )RT−8108.47Kpr= 2.27×10 exp( )RT−17263.25KH= 4.78×10 exp( )2RTKprH= 0.16162MSE = 0.015Model 12/−70.66k = 1395.5exp()RT18.06K pr = 0.0087exp()RT−680.79K H = 3.54 × 10 exp( )2RTK' = 0.2341 , ''K = 0.2006MSE = 0.011In this study, F-test (Fishers test) method was used for evaluation of kinetic models. So,for each model, analysis of variance table (ANOVA table) was prepared. MSE (Mean ofSquares Error) that has been presented in Table 3 is a parameter which was calculated inANOVA table. Based on ANOVA Table for investigated models, all models from statisticalpoint of view are acceptable but based on MSE values, models 4, 5, 12, 13 are better than theothers.References1. Airaksinen, S.M.K., Harlin, M.E., Krause, A.O.I., «Kinetic Modeling of Dehydrogenation of Isubutane onChromia/Alumina Catalyst», Ind. Eng. Chem., 41, 5619 (2002).2. Lyu, K.L., Gaidai, N.A., Gudkov, B.S., «Investigation of the Kinetics and Mechanism of theDehydrogenation of Isobutane on Pt and Pt-In Catalysts», Kinetika Kataliz, 27(6), 1371 (1986).3. Lyu, K.L., Gaidai, N.A., Gudkov, B.S., «Investigation of The Kinetics and Mechanism of theDehydrogenation of Isobutane on platinum-Tin Catalysts», Kinetika Kataliz, 27(6), 1365 (1986).4. Lyu, K.L., Gaidai, N.A., Kiperman, S. L., «Kinetics of Propane Dehydrogenation on AluminoplatinumCatalysts», Kinetika Kataliz, 32(1), 72 (1991).5. Mohagheghi, M., Bakeri, Gh., Saeedizad, M., «Study of External and Internal Diffusion Effects on PropaneDehydrogenation Reaction over Pt-Sn/Al 2 O 3 Catalyst», Chem. Eng. Technol, 30(12),1721 (2007).61