Catalysis Letters

, Volume 149, Issue 2, pp 513–521 | Cite as

Texture Evolution of Hard-Templated Hierarchically Porous Alumina Catalyst in Heavy Oil Hydroprocessing

  • Viktoriya S. SemeykinaEmail author
  • Alexander V. Polukhin
  • Anton I. Lysikov
  • Andrey V. Kleymenov
  • Konstantin V. Fedotov
  • Ekaterina V. Parkhomchuk


The study is devoted to the deactivation behavior of alumina “guard-type” mesoporous and hierarchical catalysts in long-term 800 h hydroprocessing of heavy oil under conditions close to industrial ones. The purely mesoporous sample had only 10–15 nm mesopores by Hg porosimetry whereas the hierarchical catalyst possessed a bimodal pore size distribution with maximum at 15 nm (55 vol%) and 40 nm (45 vol%, related to the mouths of 200 nm spherical macropores). Both catalysts had similar activities for the first 200 h of hydroprocessing. The mesoporous catalyst underwent the rapid deactivation in hydrodesulfurization (HDS) and hydrodemetallization (HDM) of V after 200 h on stream, and the remarkable decrease in hydrodeaspaltenization (HDAs) and Ni removal after 300–400 h on stream due to the intensive mesopore plugging by 55% of the total volume. The hierarchical catalyst did not show any decline in HDS and HDAs during the 800 h experiment, though its HDM activity also reduced due to the surface poisoning and coke deposition, albeit to a lesser extent. The intrinsic mesopores of the hierarchical alumina were shown to narrow down to 10 nm but did not experience substantial blocking observed for the mesoporous catalyst. Hierarchical texture seems not only to provide wide macro- and mesopores less prone to plugging by coke species, but to ensure effective transport of reaction products out of the small pores which prevents them from blockage.

Graphical Abstract


Heavy oil Hydroprocessing Deactivation Hierarchical Heterogeneous catalysis Texture 



The work was carried out within the framework of the budget project АААА-А17-117041710077-4 for Boreskov Institute of Catalysis. The authors would like to thank S. V. Cherepanova, N. A. Rudina, T. Ya. Efimenko, V. A., L. N. Atamanova, N. N. Malyarchuk, Trunova, G. S. Lytvak for the characterization of the catalysts and Yu. V. Larichev, P. P. Dik, D. D. Uvarkina and D. O. Novikov for their help with the characterization of the feed and oil products.

Compliance with Ethical Standards

Conflict of interest

There are no conflicts to declare.

Supplementary material

10562_2018_2646_MOESM1_ESM.docx (2 mb)
Supplementary material 1 (DOCX 2092 KB)


  1. 1.
    Organization of the Petroleum Exporting Countries (2017) Annual statistical bulletin. Organization of the Petroleum Exporting Countries, ViennaGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Ancheyta J, Alvarez-Majmutov A, Leyva C (2016) Hydrotreating of oil fractions. Multiphase catalytic reactors. Wiley, New York. pp 295–329CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Castañeda LC, Muñoz JD, Ancheyta J (2014) Current situation of emerging technologies for upgrading of heavy oils. Catal Today 220–222:248–273. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Ancheyta J, Speight JG (2007) Hydroprocessing of heavy oils and residua. CRC Press, Boca RatonGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Ancheyta J (2016) Deactivation of hydroprocessing catalysts. Deactivation of heavy oil hydroprocessing catalysts: fundamentals and modeling. Wiley, New York. pp 89–126CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Baltus RE, Anderson JL (1983) Hindered diffusion of asphaltenes through microporous membranes. Chem Eng Sci 38:1959–1969CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Chiang C-L, Tiou H-H (1992) Optimal design for the residual oil hydrodemetallation in a fixed bed reactor. Chem Eng Comm 117:383–399CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Ruckenstein E, Tsai HC (1981) Optimum pore size for the catalytic conversion of large molecules. AIChE J 27:697–699CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Shimura M, Shiroto Y, Takeuchi C (1986) Effect of Catalyst pore structure on hydrotreating of heavy oil. Ind Eng Chem Fundam 25:330–337. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Leyva C, Ancheyta J, Mariey L et al (2014) Characterization study of NiMo/SiO2-Al2O3 spent hydroprocessing catalysts for heavy oils. Catal Today 220–222:89–96. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Liu ZY, Chen SL, Dong P, Ge XJ (2012) Diffusion of heavy oil in SiO2 model catalyst and FCC catalyst. Adv Mater Res 550–553:158–163. Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Guichard B, Gaulier F, Barbier J et al (2018) Asphaltenes diffusion/adsorption through catalyst alumina supports—influence on catalytic activity. Catal Today 305:49–57. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Rao SM, Coppens MO (2012) Increasing robustness against deactivation of nanoporous catalysts by introducing an optimized hierarchical pore network-application to hydrodemetalation. Chem Eng Sci 83:66–76CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Dong Y, Xu Y, Zhang Y et al (2018) Synthesis of hierarchically structured alumina support with adjustable nanocrystalline aggregation towards efficient hydrodesulfurization. Appl Catal A Gen 559:30–39. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Dong Y, Chen Z, Xu Y et al (2017) Template-free synthesis of hierarchical meso-macroporous Γ-Al2O3 support: superior hydrodemetallization performance. Fuel Process Technol 168:65–73. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Absi-Halabi M, Stanislaus A, Al-Mughni T et al (1995) Hydroprocessing of vacuum residues: relation between catalyst activity, deactivation and pore size distribution. Fuel 74:1211–1215. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Sane RC, Tsotsis TT, Webster IA, Ravi-Kumar VS (1992) Studies of asphaltene diffusion and structure and their implications for resid upgrading. Chem Eng Sci 47:2683–2688CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Wang WP, Guin JA (1991) A comparison of unimodal and bimodal catalyst deactivation behavior in a model compound system with rapid coke deposition. Fuel Process Technol 28:149–166. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Khaleel A, Al-Mansouri S (2010) Meso-macroporous γ-alumina by template-free sol-gel synthesis: The effect of the solvent and acid catalyst on the microstructure and textural properties. Colloids Surfaces A Physicochem Eng Asp 369:272–280. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Yabuki M, Takahashi R, Sato S et al (2002) Silica–alumina catalysts prepared in sol–gel process of TEOS with organic additives. Phys Chem Chem Phys 4:4830–4837. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Stanislaus A, Al-Dolama K, Absi-Halabi M (2002) Preparation of a large pore alumina-based HDM catalyst by hydrothermal treatment and studies on pore enlargement mechanism. J Mol Catal A Chem 181:33–39. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Li Y, Peng C, Li L, Rao P (2014) Self-assembled 3D hierarchically structured gamma alumina by hydrothermal method. J Am Ceram Soc 97:35–39. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Dong Y, Yu X, Zhou Y et al (2018) Towards active macro-mesoporous hydrotreating catalysts: synthesis and assembly of mesoporous alumina microspheres. Catal Sci Technol 8:1892–1904. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Dupin T, Lavina J, Poisson R (1993) Process for the preparation of alumina agglomerates. United States patent USGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Mendoza-Nieto JA, Vera-Vallejo O, Escobar-Alarcón L et al (2013) Development of new trimetallic NiMoW catalysts supported on SBA-15 for deep hydrodesulfurization. Fuel 110:268–277. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Boahene PE, Soni KK, Dalai AK, Adjaye J (2011) Application of different pore diameter SBA-15 supports for heavy gas oil hydrotreatment using FeW catalyst. Appl Catal A Gen 402:31–40. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Ruud Snel (1988) Control of the porous structure of amorphous silica—alumina: V. The effect of compaction. Appl Catal 36:249–258CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Trimm DL, Stanislaus A (1986) The control of pore size in alumina catalyst supports: a review. Appl Catal 21:215–238. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    López-Salinas E, E JG, Hernández-Cortez JG et al (2005) Long-term evaluation of NiMo/alumina–carbon black composite catalysts in hydroconversion of Mexican 538 °C + vacuum residue. Catal Today 109:69–75CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Chen S-L, Dong P, Xu K et al (2007) Large pore heavy oil processing catalysts prepared using colloidal particles as templates. Catal Today 125:143–148CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Su B-L, Sanchez C, Yang X-Y (2012) Hierarchically structured porous materials: from nanoscience to catalysis, separation, optics, energy, and life science. Wiley, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Li H, Sheng-Li C, Peng D (2009) Preparation, characterization and catalytic performance of novel macroporous catalysts for heavy oil hydrogenation. Ranliao Huaxue Xuebao 37:444–447Google Scholar
  33. 33.
    Zi L, Sheng C, Peng D (2012) Novel macroporous residua FCC catalysts. Fuel Chem Technol 40Google Scholar
  34. 34.
    Nguyen-Huy C, Shin EW (2016) Hierarchical macro-mesoporous Al2O3-supported NiK catalyst for steam catalytic cracking of vacuum residue. Fuel 169:1–6. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Liu Z, Dong P (2012) Preparation of macroporous catalysts and their performance in catalytic cracking of heavy oil. J Fuel Chem Technol 40:1092–1097Google Scholar
  36. 36.
    Han D, Li X, Zhang L et al (2012) Hierarchically ordered meso/macroporous γ-alumina for enhanced hydrodesulfurization performance. Microporous Mesoporous Mater 158:1–6. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. 37.
    Semeykina VS, Malkovich EG, Bazaikin YV et al (2018) Optimal catalyst texture in macromolecule conversion: a computational and experimental study. Chem Eng Sci 188:1–10. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. 38.
    Larichev YV, Martyanov ON (2018) The dynamics of asphaltene aggregates in heavy crude oils on a nanometer scale studied via small-angle X-ray scattering in situ. J Pet Sci Eng 165:575–580CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. 39.
    Parkhomchuk EV, Semeykina VS, Sashkina KA et al (2016) Synthesis of polystyrene beads for hard-templating of three-dimensionally ordered macroporosity and hierarchical texture of adsorbents and catalysts. Top Catal. Google Scholar
  40. 40.
    Semeykina V, Parkhomchuk E, Polukhin A et al (2015) CoMoNi catalyst texture and surface properties in heavy oil processing. Part I: hierarchical macro/mesoporous alumina support. Ind Eng Chem Res 55:3535–3545. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. 41.
    Yumoto M, Kukes SG, Klein MT, Gates BC (1996) Catalytic Hydroprocessing of Aromatic Compounds: Effects of Nickel and Vanadium Sulfide Deposits on Reactivities and Reaction Networks. Ind Eng Chem Res 35:3203–3209. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. 42.
    Hubaut R (2007) Vanadium-based sulfides as hydrotreating catalysts. Appl Catal A Gen 322:121–128. CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC, part of Springer Nature 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  • Viktoriya S. Semeykina
    • 1
    Email author
  • Alexander V. Polukhin
    • 1
  • Anton I. Lysikov
    • 1
  • Andrey V. Kleymenov
    • 2
  • Konstantin V. Fedotov
    • 2
  • Ekaterina V. Parkhomchuk
    • 1
  1. 1.Boreskov Institute of Catalysis SB RASNovosibirskRussia
  2. 2.Gazprom NeftSt. PetersburgRussia

Personalised recommendations