FCC Study of Canadian Oil-Sands Derived Vacuum Gas Oils. 1. Feed and Catalyst Effects on Yield Structure
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This paper demonstrates the important roles of feedstock and catalyst in determining the yield structure during fluid catalytic cracking (FCC) of bitumen-derived vacuum gas oils (VGOs). Three nonconventional VGOs, derived from Canadian oil-sands bitumen, were catalytically cracked in a fluid-bed microactivity test (MAT) reactor. Two commercial equilibrium catalysts were used: a bottoms-cracking catalyst containing rare earth exchanged Y zeolite (REY), and an octane-barrel catalyst containing rare earth ultrastable Y zeolite (REUSY) mixed with a small amount of ZSM-5. Both catalysts were embedded in active matrixes. Results indicated that the REY catalyst was more active, producing higher yields of valuable distillates and less coke for the same feed, whereas the catalyst containing REUSY/ZSM-5 gave more light gases and less gasoline (although the quality of this gasoline might be better). These results could be related to catalyst properties including zeolite type, rare earth content, matrix pore structure, zeolite-to-matrix ratio, and surface characteristics. The three feeds were ranked based on their yield structures, which could be explained through feed analyses, precursor concentrations determined by GC-MS, and product characterization data from a PIONA analyzer. MAT results were compared with riser pilot plant data at 55 and 65 wt % conversion. In general, at the same conversion, the difference in a given product yield from the two units could be maintained within 15%. Coke yield showed a greater disagreement, however, due to methodological differences in the analysis.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".