Journals →  Tsvetnye Metally →  2020 →  #10 →  Back

ArticleName Comparison of coking additives obtained from different types of oil stock
DOI 10.17580/tsm.2020.10.05
ArticleAuthor Kameshkov A. V., Kondrasheva N. K., Gabdulkhakov R. R., Rudko V. A.

KINEF LLC, Kirishi, Leningrad Region, Russia1 ; Saint Petersburg Mining University, Staint Petersburg, Russia2:

A. V. Kameshkov, Technical Director1, Associate Professor at the Department of Chemical Technology and Oil and Gas Processing2, Candidate of Technical Sciences, e-mail:


Saint Petersburg Mining University, Staint Petersburg, Russia
N. K. Kondrasheva, Head of the Department of Chemical Technology and Oil and Gas Processing, Doctor of Technical Sciences, Professor, e-mail:
R. R. Gabdulkhakov, Postgraduate Student at the Department of Chemical Technology and Oil and Gas Processing, e-mail:
V. A. Rudko, Head of the Laboratory of Innovative Refining Technology, Candidate of Technical Sciences, e-mail:


Coke producers often face a shortage of valuable grades of coals, i.e. coking coals. This paper examines the possibility to obtain a coking additive by applying delayed coking to various types of heavy petroleum residues. The paper also gives a comparative description. Five types of heavy petroleum residue from the KINEF oil refinery were used in the experiments that aimed to produce carbon material. They included vacuum residue ELOU-AVT-6, vacuum residue S-1000 resultant from the hydrocracking process, visbreaker bottoms from the S-3000 unit, and two mixtures of the ELOU-AVT-6 unit products: a mixture of vacuum residue and third vacuum cut; and a mixture of vacuum residue, third vacuum cut and atmospheric residue. The carbon material obtained from all the above types of raw materials was analyzed for quality; an X-ray diffraction analysis was carried out; and the interplanar spacings d002 and d110 were calculated, as well as the linear sizes of Lc and La crystallites. The coking additive obtained instead of the typical petroleum coke was found to meet the specification. Thus, the volatile matter content in it is within the range from 15 to 25 wt%. This additive can be used in steel production instead of coking coal. The coking additive from a mixture of vacuum residue, third vacuum cut and atmospheric residue has the highest content of volatile matter (19.30%), while the coking additive from the visbreaking residue from the S-3000 has the lowest volatile matter content (16.15%). The latter is due to the fact that the primary petroleum material was subjected to light thermal cracking. It is shown that as the composition of the heavy petroleum residue changes, so do the properties of the resultant coking additive: a higher fraction of the low-boiling components in the feedstock is associated with a higher volatile matter content; the carbon materials produced from vacuum residue have a higher microhardness; the coking product produced from the visbreaker bottoms has a lower porosity compared with the product obtained from the vacuum residue.
This research was carried out as part of a governmental assignment of the Ministry of Education and Science of the Russian Federation in the framework of the following research project: 0792-2020-0010 “Fundamentals of innovative processing techniques to obtain environmentally-friendly motor fuels and innovative carbon materials with variable macro- and microstructure of the mesophase from heavy hydrocarbon materials”. The research was carried out at the laboratory of the Shared Knowledge Centre of the Saint Petersburg Mining University.

keywords Petroleum-based coking additive, coking coals, delayed coking, X-ray diffraction, petroleum coke, vacuum residue, atmospheric residue, visbreaker bottoms

1. Bogdanchik N. L. A hydrocracking complex. A new stage in the life of the refinery. Neftepererabotka i neftekhimiya. 2016. No. 3. pp. 9–17.
2. Kharlamov A. N. KINEF LLC: A long-awaited start-up. Mir nefteproduktov. Vestnik neftyanykh kompaniy. 2014. No. 1. pp. 38–39.
3. Wisecarver K. Delayed Coking. Springer Handbook of Petroleum Technology. Ed. C. S. Hsu, P. R. Robinson. Amsterdam : Springer International Publishing AG, 2017. pp. 903–913.
4. Kapustin V. M., Glagoleva V. F. Physicochemical aspects of petroleum coke formation (review). Petroleum Chemistry. 2016. Vol. 56, No. 1. pp. 1–9.
5. Zhu Y., Zhao C., Xu Y., Hu C., Zhao X. Preparation and Characterization of Coal Pitch-Based Needle Coke (Part I): The Effects of Aromatic Index (f a) in Refined Coal Pitch. Energy & Fuels. 2019. Vol. 33, No. 4. pp. 3456–3464.
6. Zhu Y., Hu C., Xu Y., Zhao C., Yin X., Zhao X. Preparation and Characterization of Coal Pitch-Based Needle Coke (Part II): The Effects of β Resin in Refined Coal Pitch. Energy & Fuels. 2020. Vol. 34, No. 2. pp. 2126–2134.
7. Gül Ö., Mitchell G., Etter R., Miller J. et al. Characterization of Cokes from Delayed Co-Coking of Decant Oil, Coal, Resid, and Cracking Catalyst. Energy & Fuels. 2015. Vol. 29, No. 1. pp. 21–34.
8. Zaporin V. P., Valyavin G. G., Rizvanov I. V., Akhmetov A. F. Decant-oil coking gasoils for production of industrial carbon. Chemistry and Technology of Fuels and Oils. 2007. Vol. 43, No. 4. pp. 326–329.
9. Kameshkov A. V., Kondrasheva N. K., Gabdulkhakov R. R., Rudko V. A. How the type of the raw material and the coking temperature influence the production of the coking additive. Bulletin of the Saint Petersburg State Institute of Technology (Technical University). 2020. No. 52. pp. 11–17.
10. Lavrova A. S., Vasilyev V. V., Strakhov V. M. Comparison of the Coking Products from Heavy Petroleum Tars and Heavy Catalytic-Cracking Gas-Oil. Coke and Chemistry. 2019. Vol. 62, No. 4. pp. 164–168.
11. TU 0258-229-00190437–2008. Coking additive.
12. GOST 22898–78. Low-sulphur petroleum cokes. Specifications. Introduced: 01.01.1979.
13. Vafin A. I., Zaporin V. P. Selecting a refining process for sulfurous oil that would allow to obtain a coking additive. Vestnik molodogo uchenogo UGNTU. 2015. No. 2. pp. 51–57.
14. Valyavin G. G., Zaporin V. P., Gabbasov R. G., Kalimullin T. I. Delayed coking and the production of petroleum cokes for specific applications. Territoriya Neftegaz. 2011. No. 8. pp. 44–49.
15. Bazhin V. Y., Kuskov V. B., Kuskova Y. V. Problems of using unclaimed coal and other carbon-containing materials as energy briquettes. Ugol. 2019. No. 04. pp. 50–54.
16. Bazhin V. Y., Kuskov V. B., Kuskova Y. V. Processing of Low-Demand Coal and Other Carbon-Containing Materials for Energy Production Purposes. Inzynieria Mineralna. 2019. No. 21. pp. 195–198.
17. Ochirbat P. Coal Industry in Mongolia: Status and Prospects of Development. Journal of Mining Institute. 2017. Vol. 226. pp. 420–427.
18. Morozov A. N., Khayrudinov I. R., Zhirnov B. S., Fatkullin M. R. Research methods to study sintering additive production process. Mir nefteproduktov. Vestnik neftyanykh kompaniy. 2007. No. 1. pp. 14–15.
19. Malaquias B., Flores I.V., Bagatini M. Effect of high petroleum coke additions on metallurgical coke quality and optical texture. REM – International Engineering Journal. 2020. Vol. 73, No. 2. pp. 189–195.
20. GOST 25543–2013. Brown coals, hard coals and anthracites. Classification according to genetic and technological parameters. Introduced: 01.01.2015.
21. GOST 32464–2013. Brown coals, hard coals and anthracites. General technical requirements. Introduced: 01.01.2015.
22. Ibrahim H. A.-H. Analysis and Characterization of High-Volatile Petroleum Coke. Recent Advances in Petrochemical Science. 2018. Vol. 6, No. 1. pp. 1–3.
23. Kondrasheva N. K., Rudko V. A., Nazarenko M. Y., Gabdulkhakov R. R. Influence of parameters of delayed asphalt coking process on yield and quality of liquid and solid-phase products. Journal of Mining Institute. 2020. Vol. 241, No. 1. pp. 97–104.
24. GOST 27589–91. Coke. Method for determination of moisture content in analytical sample. Introduced: 01.07.1992.
25. GOST 33503–2015. Solid mineral fuel. Methods for determination of moisture in the analysis sample. Introduced: 01.04.2017.
26. GOST 22692–77. Carbon materials. Method for determination of ash. Introduced: 01.07.1978.
27. GOST R 55660–2013. Solid mineral fuel. Determination of volatile matter. Introduced: 01.01.2015.
28. GOST 10220–82. Coke. Methods for the determination of true relative density, apparent relative density and porosity. Introduced: 01.01.1984.
29. GOST 26132–84. Petroleum and pitch cokes. Microstructure evaluation method. Introduced: 01.07.1985.

30. GOST 9450–76. Measurements microhardness by diamond instruments indentation. Introduced: 01.01.1979.
31. GOST R 8.748–2011. Metals and alloys. Use of indentation tools to measure hardness and other material properties. Introduced: 01.05.2013.
32. ISO 14577–1:2015. Metallic materials. Instrumented intendation test for hardness and materials parameters. Part 1: Test method. Published: 07.2015.
33. Kondrasheva N. K., Rudko V. A., Nazarenko M. Y., Povarov V. G. et al. Influence of Parameters of Delayed Coking Process and Subsequent Calculation on the Properties and Morphology of Petroleum Needle Coke from Decant Oil Mixture of West Siberian Oil. Energy & Fuels. 2019. Vol. 33, No. 7. pp. 6373–6379.
34. Bragg W. L. The Structure of Some Crystals as Indicated by Their Diffraction of X-rays. Proceedings of the Royal Society A: Mathematical, Physical and Engineering Sciences. 1913. Vol. 89, No. 610. pp. 248–277.
35. Wulff G. Über die Kristallröntgenogramme. Physikalische Zeitschrift. 1913. Vol. 14. pp. 217–220.
36. Scherrer P. Bestimmung der inneren Struktur und der Gröβe von Kolloidteilchen mittels Röntgenstrahlen. Berlin, Heidelberg: Springer, 1912. pp. 387–409.
37. Warren B. E. X-ray diffraction in random layer lattices. Physical Review. 1941. Vol. 59, No. 9. pp. 693–698.
38. Feret F. R. Determination of the crystallinity of calcined and graphitic cokes by X-ray diffraction. The Analyst. 1998. Vol. 123, No. 4. pp. 595–600.
39. Kuznetsov P. N., Kuznetsova L. I., Kolesnikova S. M., Obukhov Y. V. Comparison of supramolecular organization of brown coal from different deposits. Chemistry for Sustainable Development. 2001. Vol. 9. pp. 255–261.
40. Belenkov E. A., Karnaukhov E. A. Influence of crystal dimensions on interatomic distances in dispersed carbon. Physics of the Solid State. 1999. Vol. 41, No. 4. pp. 672–675.
41. Tamarkina Yu. V., Kucherenko V. A., Shendrik T. G. Supramolecular compounds as precursors of activated carbons: A review. Zhurnal Sibirskogo federalnogo universiteta. Khimiya. 2015. Vol. 8, No. 1. pp. 99–128.
42. Popova A. N. Crystallographic analysis of graphite by X-Ray diffraction. Coke and Chemistry. 2017. Vol. 60, No. 9. pp. 361–365.
43. Ismagilov Z. R., Sozinov S. A., Popova A. N., Zaporin V. P. Structural Analysis of Needle Coke. Coke and Chemistry. 2019. Vol. 62, No. 4. pp. 135–142.

Language of full-text russian
Full content Buy