Catalytic reactor engineering ⇒ information-driven design of packed (operando), fluidized, multi-functional, and -phase reactors

Problem statement

At lab-scale, the ultimate goal of a catalytic reactor is to provide (1) reliable kinetic information, neglecting or controlling other phenomena (heat-mass transfer and hydrodynamics); (2) high-throughput data to amplify the results, accelerate model and catalyst discoveries; and (3) results with the minimum requirements of reactants and wastes generated. The pillars of these reactors are quality, quantity, and safety.

We design, build and test different laboratory-scale reactors. Our strategy involves creating and testing reactor prototypes while modeling these using our workflow. We have high-speed cameras, probes, and other measuring instruments to understand the reactor behavior. We focus on packed-, fluidized-bed, and multiphase reactors:

In packed bed reactors, we focus on forced dynamic and operando reactors. These are the quintessence of information-driven reactors where the dynamics can involve flow changes, temperature, pressure, partial pressure, presence of activity modifiers (poissons, H2O…). In operando reactors, we follow a spectro-kinetic-deactivation-hydrodynamic approach to resolve the individual steps involved. In fluidized bed reactors, we focus on downers and multifunctional reactors (circulating, multizone or two-zone, Berty reactors) We focus on trickle-bed, slurry, and bio-electrochemical reactors in multiphase bed reactors.

Al pilot-plant scale, we aim to reach the maximum productivity levels while solving the growing pains: the scale-up. Based on a robust kinetic model obtained in the intrinsic kinetic reactor (lab-scale) and using computational fluid dynamics, we design, build, and operate pilot plants. At this stage, we seek partnerships with investment or industrial enterprises to make these pilot plants.

Goals

  • Multifunctional fluidized bed reactors ⇒ multizone, circulating...
  • Packed bed membrane reactors
  • Forced dynamic reactors ⇒ pulsing, SSITKA...
  • Forced dynamic operando reactors ⇒ DRIFTS, TPSR...
  • Operando reactors
  • Spray fluidized bed reactors
  • Downer reactor I ⇒ micro downer
  • Downer reactor II ⇒ counter-current and scale-up
  • Batch Berty reactor ⇒ short contact time
  • Multiphase reactors ⇒ trickle bed and slurry
  • High throughput experimentation (HTE) reactors
  • Photo-thermal and bioreactors
  • Reactor visualization and prototyping lab
  • Spatio-temporal hydrodynamic characterization and validation

Related People

Related Covers

Related Publications

Operating Ranges of Coupled–Decoupled Counter-current Downer and Riser Reactors

by Cui, Alfilfil, Morales-Osorio, Almajnouni, Gascon, Castaño
ACS Eng. Au Year: 2025 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1021/acsengineeringau.4c00041

Abstract

The counter-current downers have the potential to combine the hydrodynamic characteristics of co-current risers and downers with less back-mixing and improved solid holdup. However, flooding may occur when particles suspend or reverse the flowing direction under increasing superficial gas velocity or solid mass flux. Here, we evaluate transported bed configurations by coupling the counter-current downer with a riser reactor to take advantage of the flooding behaviors. We analyze the theoretical hydrodynamics in risers and co- and counter-current downers from particle mechanics to cluster development. By validation with experimental results from the literature, we determine the proper simulation strategy for counter-current downers using computational particle fluid dynamics by replacing the particle size with empirically calculated cluster size. We investigate the effects of superficial gas velocity and solid mass flux with Geldart group A particles until beyond the flooding point of the counter-current downer. The coupled riser–counter-current downer reactor configuration offers more uniform axial and dynamic radial solid distribution while keeping a relatively high solid holdup to better utilize the reactor volume for enhanced gas–solid contact. The fluidization regime diagram by the Richardson–Zaki equation fails to capture the counter-current operation, so we provide a separate graph to mark the limitation of the coupled and decoupled riser and counter-current downer reactor configurations.

Keywords

C2C FCC CRE MKM