MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1993911385 · doi:10.2118/2009-152

Non-isothermal Kinetics of the Pyrolysis of the Whole Oil and its Asphaltene Derived from Fosterton Oil

2009· article· en· W1993911385 on OpenAlexafffund
Nader Mahinpey, Thilakavathi Mani

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian International Petroleum Conference · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldChemistry
TopicPetroleum Processing and Analysis
Canadian institutionsUniversity of CalgaryUniversity of Regina
FundersPetroleum Technology Research Centre
KeywordsAsphaltenePyrolysisKineticsIsothermal processPetroleum engineeringChemical engineeringMaterials sciencePyrolysis oilThermodynamicsChemistryOrganic chemistryGeologyEngineeringPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Coke formation from heavy oil has been extensively studied and various kinetic models have been proposed in the literature. In this study, thermal behavior of crude oil and its asphaltene obtained from Fosterton field was investigated using thermogravimetric analysis. Non-isothermal pyrolysis experiments of whole oil and its asphaltene was performed in nitrogen atmosphere at different heating rates of 5, 10, 15 and 20 ?C/min. Although, much difference was not observed in the weight loss profile for whole oil and its asphaltene, the final amount of coke formed changes with the heating rate. Nonisothermal experiments were better described by Distributed Activation Energy Model (DAEM) compared to other applicable models. The non-isothermal pyrolysis kinetics of whole oil and its asphaltene were studied with DAEM equation. The activation energy for whole oil pyrolysis spreads over a range from 7 to 129 kJ/mol and the pre-exponential factor varies from 102 to 10 11 min−1. The asphaltene fraction separated from the oil has the activation energy from 50 to 183 kJ/mol and the pre-exponential factor ranges from 10 7 to 1014 min-1. Results from the kinetic analysis suggest that asphaltene requires more activation energy compared to the whole oil. Introduction Thermal cracking of heavy oil feedstocks results in the formation of a wide range of gaseous, liquid and solid products. During pyrolysis, several reactions take place, which influence the overall kinetics and the resulting coke formation. It is well known that thermal treatment of hydrocarbons follows a free radical mechanism, where cracking reactions take place in the initiation step, condensation and polymerization reactions comprise the final step [1]. The final step reactions explain the formation of products such as coke. Among the SARA fraction present in the whole oil, asphaltenes are precursors of coke formation. Asphaltenes are complex associated species typically isolated as a solubility class obtained by precipitation with a weak solvent [2]. Coke formations from both whole oil and its fractions like asphaltene have been extensively studied [3, 4]. However, the coke formation characteristics vary with the different sources of oil. The kinetics of the thermal decomposition of various oil from different regions of the world, have been investigated and various suggestions as to the decomposition mechanism have been reported [5, 6]. Many thermogravimetric studies have been carried out under isothermal conditions, but this method involves some inaccuracies. It is more accurate to use a nonisothermal method to determine the kinetic parameters of the pyrolysis process, employing a TGA apparatus, with the sample heated at a constant rate and recording its weight change. This is mainly because of the shorter experimental time and the fewer encountered difficulties. But the principal reason for their popularity in the field of oil pyrolysis is that it more closely simulates the conditions expected in commercial scale. Thus, such a technique for determining the reaction kinetics, such as activation energy, has been preferred by many researchers [7–9]. Hence, the kinetics of thermal degradation of whole oil and its asphaltene from fosterton region can be obtained using a TGA apparatus.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.003

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.012
GPT teacher head0.217
Teacher spread0.205 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations1
Published2009
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian International Petroleum ConferenceSame topicPetroleum Processing and AnalysisFrench-language works237,207