Cavitation Hydrocarbon Cracking

© 2012 Quantum Potential Corporation | www.quantum-‐potential.com | CONFIDENTIAL 1

Investigation of Hydrodynamic Cavitation as a Means of Natural Crude Oil and Synthetic Biofuel Upgrading

Max Fomitchev-‐Zamilov1,2

Sergei Godin2 1 Quantum Potential Corporation, State College, PA 16803 2 Pennsylvania State University, University Park, PA 16802

Abstract Cavitational treatment of liquid hydrocarbon such as crude oil, fuel oil, bitumen, and

various biofuels is known to reduce their viscosity and increase the yield of light fraction extractable via subsequent atmospheric and/or vacuum distillation. Such treatment of hydrocarbons (which is not limited to cavitation) with the objective to increase their quality is generally referred to as upgrading.

The upgrading due to cavitation becomes economically viable and commercially attractive if the following three necessary conditions are met: 1) the process must produce energy densities that are high enough to brake molecular bonds and create free radicals; 2) when recombining the radicals must form new chemical species with the desired properties, which were deficient in the original mix; 3) the energy costs must be competitive compared to the established upgrading methods such as thermal, catalytic, or hydrocracking.

Fortunately, hydrodynamic cavitation reactors satisfy these conditions. When powered by 15-‐200kW electric motors these devices can generate acoustic energy density in excess of 1MW/m2, which is sufficiently high to break long hydrocarbon chains and upgrade crude. The problem of the radical recombination is solved via the introduction of hydrogen donors such as water, naphtha, gas, or light crude.


Although the technique of cavitational oil cracking has been known in the Soviet Union since the early sixties, the technology is virtually unknown in the West, and there are only a few small companies in Russia and Ukraine that develop, manufacture, and export the cavitation equipment mostly to customers in China, India, Spain, and Brazil. The U.S. petroleum industry and the American economy too stand to benefit from industrial applications of cavitation to hydrocarbon processing and reap substantial economical benefits such as energy savings, reduced fuel costs, and cleaner emissions.

Because of potential importance of the applications of hydrodynamic cavitation in oil and gas industry we propose to study the operation of a hydrodynamic cavitation reactor of Kladov/Selivanov design also known as ‘the activator’ or ‘the ultrasonic activator’. The Kladov/Selivanov activator is a representative member of the family of hydrodynamic cavitation devices employed in crude oil and fuel oil upgrading. The ultrasonic activator of Kladov/Selivanov design is a perfect experimentation tool due to availability of the experimental data, the existence of the detailed design plans, relative ease of construction, and high density of acoustic energy that it generates (up to 10 MW/m2).

The objectives of the investigation are to study the cavitation-‐induced hydrocarbon cracking, determine the range of potential applications in natural and synthetic crude processing and bio-‐fuel production, and verify their economic viability. The long-‐term goal is to achieve better understanding of the underlying sonochemical processes and to design new cavitation-‐based hydrocarbon processing equipment for U.S. petroleum industry.

Background – Crude Oil Refining Crude oil is a natural mixture of a wide variety of light and heavy hydrocarbons such as

paraffins, naphthenes, aromatics, and asphaltenes, which must be separated (e. g. distilled) from the crude.

Distillation-‐based oil refining to this day remains to be the main step in petroleum processing and the core process of every refinery operation. Distillation amounts to heating of crude with subsequent evaporated fraction condensation in a distillation tower. Light fractions such as gasoline, kerosene, and diesel are given higher priority due to their immense economical importance since they form the basis of virtually all motor fuels. Unfortunately, straight-‐run distillation yields only 25-‐35% gasoline while transportation demands alone require at least 50% yield of gasoline from crude [1].

To recover additional gasoline the distilled heavier fractions (heavy oil to bitumen) are subjected to thermal or catalytic cracking, which amounts to heating to 450-‐650°C in the presence of catalyst powder (such as alumina) with subsequent vapor condensation in a distillation tower. The catalytic cracking (or its variations such as hydrocracking or steam cracking) allows boosting gasoline yield to 50% with the remaining fractions corresponding to kerosene (~5%), light & heavy fuel oil (~34%), and ~10% of the residuals such as bitumen, asphalt and coke [2]. In most cases the catalytic cracking allows recovering all but 5-‐10% of useful hydrocarbons locked in crude oil. However, not all


refineries are equipped with the state-‐of-‐the art catalytic cracking systems as companies often lack capital or incentives to upgrade to the latest technological process. For instance, in Russia only 43% of refineries are outfitted with the latest catalytic cracking technology versus 58% of the U.S. and 76% of Japanese refineries [3]. Typical capital expenditures associated with the construction of state-‐of-‐the art refinery outfitted with catalytic cracking could be in excess of $1 billion USD. Clearly, large capital expenditures required for catalytic cracking equipment as well as substantial energy requirements for powering of the catalytic cracking process and high maintenance costs (e.g. the catalyst and the furnaces are susceptible to coking) negatively impact the economics of the light fraction recovery. Moreover the worldwide depletion of light sweet crude reserves forces petroleum companies to extract more and more of heavier crude, which in turn either yields less light fractions during the refining process or requires larger energy input and more expensive technology to recover the same amount of light fractions as from the light crude. Clearly, other economically viable alternatives for boosting the light fraction yield from crude and other opportunities to maximizing the efficiency of the tower bottom residue processing (such as heavy fuel oil, bitumen and asphalt) must be explored. Hydrodynamic cavitation cracking is one such alternative.

Cavitation and Sonochemistry Cavitation-‐induced chemical processing was originally developed in Russia in the early

1960s [4]. Cavitation is a process of bubble formation in liquids subjected to variable pressure. Cavitation occurs when pressure of the liquid falls below its vapor pressure and is characterized by a high temperature (104K typical, 105K and higher possible) and high pressure (10-‐100MPa) occurring with in the cavitation-‐induced collapsing bubbles [5, 6].

Cavitation forms the basis of sonoluminescence – the process by which cavitation bubbles give off visible light, and sonochemistry, the discipline for studying acoustically induced chemical reactions [7].

The physics and chemistry of ultrasound-‐induced inorganic chemical reactions is well understood and amounts to reaction activation due to locally increased temperature and pressure and molecular radicalization due to molecular disassociation that occurs within the cores of the collapsing cavitation bubbles. While sonochemistry of inorganic liquids is well studied, sonolysis of hydrocarbons is less studied and the sonochemistry of solutes dissolved in organic liquids remains largely unexplored [7]. Ironically, because of the rising energy costs applications of sonochemistry to hydrocarbon resource processing corresponds the area of science with the largest practical importance.

Regardless of the type of the processed liquid (or a mixture of liquids) these are the most common effects of cavitation [4, 7, 8]:

-‐ Homogenization of liquids (important for emulsion preparation); -‐ Breakage of solid particles (important for suspension preparation); -‐ Radicalization of molecules (important for depolymerization, lysis);


-‐ Chemical reaction acceleration (due to the locally increased temperature in collapsing bubbles and the availability of radicals).

All of these effects have a numerous commercial application from wastewater treatment and sterilization to cement manufacturing and food processing. For the remainder of the discussion we will focus on petrochemical and hydrocarbon applications of cavitation.

Application of Cavitation to Hydrocarbons – Depolymerization As far as the established petrochemical and the emerging biofuel industry concerned

depolymerization and hydrocarbon cracking are the most important effects that follow directly from the process of cavitation. Naturally occurring crude oil is characterized not only by the composition of the compounding hydrocarbons but also by the van der Waals interaction between the molecules, which gives oil elastic polymer-‐like structure that negatively impacts the viscosity. Thick viscous oil requires more energy for transportation and processing (e.g. in terms of pump station power and heating necessary to prevent oil from solidifying in winter). In the same time heavy polymerized fuels burn less efficiently and produce more pollutants [9].

Therefore depolymerization of crude or the resulting petroleum products (such as diesel and fuel oil) due to the breakage of van der Waals forces between the molecules is an important use of cavitation – Fig. 1.

E.g. according to Kavitus [9] fuel oil deploymerization used by heavy trucks results in smoother engine operation, increased fuel economy (up to 18%), and reduced emission of ash and soot (reduction of up to 50%).

The cavitation-‐induced depolymerization also impacts crude oil rheology. E.g. [10] reports 5-‐fold reduction of viscosity in crude oil at room temperature after 5-‐hour cavitation processing – Fig. 2.


Fig. 1. Depolymerization of fuel under the influence of ultrasonic cavitation.

)))


Fig. 2. Reduction of the viscosity of crude oil after cavitational treatment in the ultrasonic activator [10].

EkoEnergoMash reports fuel 20-‐30% fuel oil viscosity reduction and 5-‐10% flash point temperature increase after cavitational treatment [11] – Table 1. Corroborating the claims by Kavitus [9], EkoEnergoMash [11] also reports 3-‐5% reduction in soot and ash emission from burning of the cavitationally processed fuel oil.

Table 1. Fuel oil viscosity decrease and flash point temperature increase after cavitation treatment.

Application of Cavitation to Hydrocarbons – Cracking The possibility of hydrocarbon break up by ultrasonic cavitation has been well known

for several decades [12]. The only contentions point is the efficiency of such process: since sonochemical reactions are enacted by collapsing bubbles the efficiency of the process is directly proportional to the density of bubbles, which in turn is proportional to the density

0 20 40 60 80

100 120 140 160 180 200 220 240 260

70 60 50 40 30 20

Visc

osity

, cSt

Temperature, C

Crude oil viscosity vs. temperature

Processed crude heated to 90C (best result), Tsolid=-10C Processed crude heated to 90C (worst result), Tsolid=+10C Unprocessed crude, Tsolid=+18C

Fuel Oil Sample

Fuel Oil Parameters

Viscosity flow equivalent, St, T=60°С Flash point, °С Density, kg/m3

Start Finish Delta, % Start Finish Delta, % Start Finish Delta, %

Karabashsky 155 90 42 120 127 5 925 920 0,5

Shukrovsky 38 23 39 105 115 9 915 915 0

Nizhnekamsky 165 120 25 145 135 -‐ 7 920 920 0


of the acoustic energy. According to [13] an energy approaching 1MW/m2 will render further increase of acoustic power useless due to vapor cusion formation around the acoustic transducer in contact with the liquid while at lower energy densities the efficiency of the bond breaking process is minuscule (due to insufficient energy of bubble collapse) and economically non-‐viable. The objection, however, applies only to conventional ultrasonic equipment that relies on piezoelectric transducers or sonotorodes for liquid excitation. To achieve the requisite acoustic energy densities on the order of 1-‐10 MW/m2 hydrodynamic cavitation apparata [4, 8] should be used where acoustic excitation is generated by means of a rapidly rotating perforated rotor. Such designs produce high density of acoustic energy over a wide surface area (i.e. around the rotor) thus producing much larger cavitation volume and higher energy density when compared to the traditional piezoelectric transducer or sonotrode-‐based devices.

Nesterenko and Berlizov [14] estimate that even if the cavitation bubbles occupy 10% of the volume of the processed liquid then 360 liters of petroleum products will be necessary to create one mole of lighter hydrocarbons (µ = 100-‐300) equivalent to 100-‐300g. Thus highly efficient multiple-‐stage cavitation processing is required in order to achieve economically attractive cracking. Fortunately, according to [4, 8] such multi-‐stage processing is possible with the help of loop-‐back hydrodynamic cavitation devices, especially those of rotary type.

Such devices are manufactured by EkoEnergoMash, Russia (Fig. 3), Kavitus, Ukiraine (Fig. 4), ITER, Russia (Fig. 5), and others. The performance of hydrodynamic cavitation cracking varies from 3% to 90% yield of light fractions depending on the feedstock and the technology. E.g. Kavitus reports 3-‐5% increase in kerosene fraction after cavitation processing of high-‐viscosity maritime fuel oil with their KAP-‐300 system (Fig. 6).

Fig. 3. Commercial hydrodynamic cavitation apparatus manufactured by EkoEnergoMash (Russia).


Fig. 4. Commercial hydrodynamic cavitation reactor-‐homogenizer KAP-‐1500 manufactured by Kavitus (Ukraine).

Fig. 5. Commercial hydrodynamic cavitation and hydrocracking pilot plant ITER HYDRO 200 near Belgorod (Russia) powered by 200kW electric motors. The plant was designed by ITER (Russia) and manufactured by Belnafta (Russia). ITER HYDRO 200 claims to achieve direct crude / waste oil to diesel conversion at 90% efficiency. Hydrogen and/or water is used as a source of hydrogen donors.


Fig. 6. Kerosene fraction increase in high-‐viscosity maritime fuel oil after cavitation processing with Kavitus KAP-‐300 system.

Out of all hydrodynamic cavitation equipment manufacturers ITER claims the most impressive results: 90% conversion of heavy crude (or waste oil) directly to diesel (9% amount to bitumen and 1% losses) [28]. During one particular demonstration bituminous crude from “Russkoye” well (Russia) with the following characteristics:

• Density @ 20C = 940 kg/m3; • Sulfur = 0.8% wt; • Distillation yield @ 500C = 40%

was converted into diesel (160-‐360C fraction) with the following specs:

• Density @ 20C = 825 kg/m3; • Sulfur = 0.1% wt.

ITER achieves direct crude to diesel conversion by first preheating the feedstock to high temperature (420C in the above example), mixing the feedstock with hydrogen (0.1% wt in the above example) and passing the feedstock through the proprietary 200kW vortex cavitation reactor (the reactor residency time is 5 seconds; pressure = 5 atmospheres; rotor speed 3900 RPM) [28]. Belnafta (Russia), the commercial partner if ITER estimates the conversion power requirements of 100 kWh/ton.


Another approach to boosting the efficiency of cavitation is to conduct the ultrasonic excitation in the presence of an electric field [15]. Electrostatic charge generated within the bubbles assists radical formation due to covalent bond breaking, which generate chain reactions in hydrocarbons with the end-‐result being low molecular-‐weight compounds and aromatics [15].

More recently the use of ultrasound was proposed for the petroleum residue upgrading [17], including asphaltenes [18]. In these studies study ~20% of asphaltenes was converted into smaller molecules after 60-‐120 minute of processing. These heavy resinous residues are a byproduct of catalytic cracking, which cannot be easily decomposed due to boiling temperatures far in excess of 500-‐600°C used in catalytic cracking. While ultrasonic cracking of these substances is possible economic viability is yet to be demonstrated.

Promtov [16] draws the attention to the efficiency of the rotary apparata in breaking C-‐C bonds under vigorous long-‐term cavitation conditions and gives the results of the experimental investigation of one such machine at Tambov State University. The study found that ultrasonic processing of a mixture of a heavy fuel oil with small addition of kerosene or light diesel results in a modest decrease of the kinematic viscosity by 1-‐2 mm2/s and equally small decrease in the flash point temperature by 4-‐6°C. In the same time cavitation cracking of crude allows reducing atmospheric distillation temperature of crude by 10°C, while reducing the 50% distillation temperature by 63°C, a huge energy saving – Table 2.

Table 2. The reduction of distillation temperatures of the cavitationally treated crude with respect to untreated one.

Laboratory findings of Promtov lend some credence to the claims made by other equipment manufacturers: e. g. Kavitus (Ukraine) claims 50-‐60% pour point temperature reduction and 20-‐25% of viscosity reduction of heavy fuel oils processed through their KAP-‐series cavitation reactors [9]; in the end the hydrodynamic cavitation results in 8.3% fuel economy and 30% reduction in harmful emissions as reported by their MobiLine customer (Italy); another customer – Zaporozhstal (Ukraine) – reported 10.2% fuel economy after cavitational treatment of fuel oil for their diesel locomotive train depot [9].

Independently, another Russian company New Technologies 2000 [10] publicizes the increased light diesel yield from the hydrodynamically ‘activated’ heavy crude – Fig. 7.


Fig. 7. The increased yield of light diesel after the installation of an ultrasonic activator at La Libertad refinery, Ecuador [10]. In 2006-‐2007 trials diesel fraction output increases from 26% to 40% or by 1000-‐1400 barrels per day. The increase was attained solely by ultrasonic excitation of crude at the expense of 37 kWh of continues power required for operation of the ultrasonic activator pump.

Nikolay Selivanov (the co-‐founder of New Technologies 2000) has obtained additional encouraging data when he was processing heavy heavy sour fuel oil through his rotary cavitation apparatus (‘the ultrasonic activator’). Fig. 8. shows that after the hydrodynamic cavitation treatment the processed fuel oil thermally cracks into lighter fractions at markedly reduced temperatures: e.g. 18% yield occurs for the treated (‘activated’) fuel oil at much lower temperature of 350°C as opposed to 650°C for the untreated oil [10]. These intriguing results point to economic viability of ultrasonically / cavitationally assisted hydrocarbon cracking and clearly warrant further study combined with an independent laboratory confirmation of the reported results. T,°C

% Vol Fig. 8. The results of thermal cracking of the cavitationally processed (red line) and the original unprocessed heavy fuel oil (yellow line). The ultrasonically treated compound yields 6% of light fractions almost with no heating (100°C) and gives off 19% of light fractions when heated to 440°C (compare to over 700°C required by the untreated oil). Blue line is a mixture of the original and processed oil.


Selivanov has conducted additional experiments on hydrodynamically processing heavy crude and fuel oil with his ultrasonic activator and conducted ASTM D86 distillation testing of the processed feedstock. Typical results are shown on Fig. 9 [29]. According to the people involved in the project, hydrodynamic processing of heavy crude and fuel oils with Selivanov’s activator usually results in light fraction increase of 5-‐20% depending on the type of feedstock (according to ASTM D86 testing).

Fig. 9. ASTM D86 distillation curves of the unprocessed (blue curve) and hydrodynamically processed (red curve) fuel oil. Note that the unprocessed fuel oil yields only 22% at 350C while the processed fuel oil yields 52% at the same temperature.

The Equipment – Ultrasonic Activator Our interest in cavitation-‐based devices stems from the work by Russian inventor A. F.

Kladov (1939-‐2003) on a device he dubbed ‘ultrasonic activator’ [19]. Kladov graduated from Moscow State Aviation Institute (MAI) majoring in nuclear rocket propulsion systems and worked at Lavrentiev Hydrodynamics Institute at Novosibirsk. The focus of Kladov’s work was ultrasonic / cavitational cracking of hydrocarbons and his patent application [20] claims the ability to make crude yield up to 90% of light fractions by repeated

0

50

100

150

200

250

300

350

400

BT 5% 10% 15% 20% 25% 30% 35% 40% 45% 50%

Tem

pera

ture

, C

Yield, %

Processed vs. Raw Fuel Oil Distillation

Unprocessed Fuel Oil Processed Fuel Oil


pumping of crude through the ultrasonic activator under 2-‐5 MPa pressure and with addition of 2-‐3% by volume of dispersing gas.

The key feature of Kladov’s apparatus is the ability to generate enormous sonic energy densities on the order of 1-‐10MW/m2 by virtue of both ultrasonically and hydrodynamically-‐induced cavitation. Furthermore, the multi-‐stage design of Kladov’s ultrasonic activator allows repeated processing of the same liquid to maximize the cracking effect. Another clever feature of Kladov’s design is the addition of dispersing gas (e.g. hydrogen, carbon dioxide, air, or methane) that facilitates bubble formation and participates in chemical reactions with the cracked hydrocarbon radicals thus preventing them from recombining into their original form. The infusion of H2 or CH4 effectively enables C-‐H bond formation in place of ruptured C-‐C bonds. Another key feature of Kladov’s design is the claimed ‘resonant’ mode of operation, which maximizes the conversion of the mechanical energy of rotors mixing the fluid into the ultrasonic energy of cavitating bubbles, which in turn results in cracking of C-‐C bonds.

From the design point of view Kladov’s activator is essentially a centrifugal pump where the processed liquid is accelerated by a rapidly rotating perforated rotor wheel (9) and then forced by the impellor (8) through slots (12) in the perforated cylindrical stator (9) – Fig. 10 and 11.

Fig. 10. Kladov’s ultrasonic activator’s rotor and stator cross-‐section (left) and the rotor’s slots (right). The impeller (8) forces the liquid through the slots (10) in the rotor (9); the accelerated liquid flows through slots (12) in the perforated stator (12).


Fig. 11. Kladov’s four-‐stage activator featuring a shaft with four perforated rotors mounted within each own perforated stator. En electric AC motor drives the shaft (not shown). Four impellers (8) drive the liquid through rotors’ slots and then through stators’ slots. The rotor and the stator slots are of the same size; the width of blanks between the slots is the same as the width of the slots. Circulation line (13) with valve (17) can be used to send a portion of the pumped liquid into repeated processing through the activator.

In addition to four-‐stage activator a single-‐stage apparatus is also possible. In the case of a single-‐stage design sufficient rate of cavitation processing is achieved by looping back portion of the processed fluid back into the activator (e.g. via the loopback line (13) on Fig. 11). In all cases 30-‐300 kW (depending on the number of stages) 3-‐phase electric AC motor drives the shaft housing the rotor(s) and the impeller(s).

Kladov’s design is representative of a wide variety of rotary cavitation machines employed in Russia and Ukraine, and their hydrodynamic and ultrasonic characteristics are described in depth in [4] and [8]. These rotary devices feature perforated rotors and cylindrical or conical stators and are capable of generating of massive amounts of cavitation far in excess (>100 times) of the amounts accessible via conventional ultrasonic excitation via a piezoelectric transducer or sonotrode. Hence if cavitation hydrocarbon cracking is to be economically viable a rotary cavitation machine has to be used.

Technical Description The extremely interesting results of cavitation-‐induced hydrocarbon cracking and oil

upgrading listed in the previous sections of this proposal merit an independent laboratory confirmation of the results reported by the manufacturers. Positive confirmation will justify the adoption of the cavitation-‐induced oil cracking technology in the U.S. with the economic advantages amounting to the reduced power requirements for catalytic


cracking and the increased yield of light fractions (e.g. due to heavy crude and heavy fuel oil upgrading).

Fig. 12. Selivanov’s variant of Kladov’s activator (far left), electric motor (right) and bearing unit (middle) is also shown. In Selivanov’s version of the activator the stator is not perforated and corresponds to an entirely smooth cylinder enclosing the perforated rotor. The replacement of perforated stator with a smooth one is the only principle modification from Kladov’s original design.

To conduct the study we propose to build an ultrasonic activator, which corresponds to Selivanov’s modification of the original Kladov’s design [24] – Fig. 12.

The choice of Selivanov’s design was dictated by the following key factors:

-‐ Availability of detailed construction plans with exact measurements [24]; -‐ Relative ease of construction: to recreate the design one can simply retrofit an

existing centripetal pump; -‐ Consultation and availability of the inventor (Selivanov); -‐ Familiarity of our company with this particular design due to our prior involvement

with Selivanov’s activator and cavitation technology; -‐ Availability of proprietary data indicative of the successful activator applications

for oil cracking / upgrading projects in Russia, Ecuador and India [10]; -‐ The industrial deployment of the Selivanov’s activator technology in India backed

by Swiss-‐Indian financiers indicates real savings and clear economical viability of the cavitation-‐induced upgrading (economic effect from a single refinery is estimated to exceed $150,000/day [27]).

The only principal difference between a single-‐stage Kladov’s and Selivanov’s activator is in the replacement of the perforated stator with a smooth cylindrical one in Selivanov’s version. From our extensive operational experience this modification does not affect the activator’s primary function: for many years Selivanov has been building the activators, which differ only by their resonant properties as defined by rotor and stator measurements and have successfully applied the technology for crude oil cracking and petroleum processing in Russia, Ecuador, and India [10]. Overall view of Selivanov’s activator in industrial setting is shown on Fig. 13, and a close up of another model


highlighting the perforated rotor design is shown on Fig. 14. In a typical implementation the rotor is driven at 3,600 RPM by a 30kW 3-‐phase electric AC motor. According to Kladov and Selivanov’s own work [24] only rotor and stator configuration and rotor revolution speed is critical to activator’s operation.

Fig. 13. Slivanov’s activator in industrial setting at a refinery in Ecuador.

Fig. 14. Close-‐up of Selivanov’s activator demonstrating perforated rotor (top left) and mysterious marks on internal stator surface (top tight) probably caused by the standing ultrasonic waves.

Our initial investigation of Selivanov’s activator revealed a surprisingly large excess heat. The evidence of extreme heating was present even on the outer surface of the activator: the stator developed thermal discoloration spots evenly distributed along the stator’s outer surface – Fig. 15. While these marks can probably be attributed to the


cavitation-‐induced heating no such marks were present on the inside surface of the stator or rotor. On the other hand the rotor was also perfectly intact.

Fig. 15. Thermal oxidization marks evenly distributed on the outer surface of the activator’s stator. Inner stator surface was free of thermal oxidization films, which could have been chemically removed. Both the stator and the rotor are made of the same brand of stainless steal equivalent to U.S. type 420.

Other unusual phenomena recorded in our initial trials of the activator included:

-‐ The presence of substantial magnetic field (10-‐50 mT) around the operating activator – Fig. 16 – indicative of charged plasma (charged chemical radicals?) circulating within the activator. We suspect the formation of the Ranque-‐Hilsch vortex tube;

-‐ Occasional unexpected excess pressure build up within the activator resulting in damage (i.e. cracking) of the activator’s rotor and stator;

-‐ Odd coloration marks on the internal surface of the stator. The coloration marks correspond to images of rotor slots and are somehow synchronized to activator’s ground position and orientation and cannot be disturbed even by a groove machined in the stator’s surface in attempt to disrupt the pattern – Fig. 17. The pattern, however, did shift when the activator was moved to a new location. Our conclusion is that the marks are indicative of a standing acoustic wave possibly locked onto a resonant Ranque-‐Hilsch vortex tube, which is ‘pinned down’ by magnetic field of the Earth or laboratory.

Fig. 17. Magnetic field generated by the operational activator.


Fig. 17. Mysterious coloration marks on the internal surface of the stator corresponding to rotor slots. Note that the marks are simply changes in color and not indentations. The dark groove in the middle of the picture was machined in attempt to influence the pattern. However, the coloration pattern did not

The Working Hypothesis Kladov’s/Selivanov’s activator generates acoustic waves when the fluid exits through

the rotor’s slots – Fig. 18. In such configuration each slot can be viewed as a Helmholtz resonator forming a chain capable of accumulating large ultrasonic energy. The so-‐trapped ultrasonic energy stimulates powerful cavitation that in turn causes chemical disassociation / radicalization of molecules, which is evident from the creation of a stationary magnetic field around the operating activator – Fig. 16. While ionization of vapors (e.g. the creation of plasma [26]) inside collapsing bubbles will create a momentary magnetic field one can reasonably expect no net effect due to random orientation of the transient magnetic fields caused by the multitude of bubbles. However, the actual distribution of bubbles may not be random due to stable vortices pinned in the rotor’s slots. Due to cavitation these vortices will be full of streaming bubbles. If we view each individual bubble as a microscopic capacitor where the charged ‘plates’ are formed by ionized gasses, the bubble vortex becomes analogous to a multi-‐stage Marx generator where the breakdown of dielectric in between the bubbles will result in massive discharges with voltages easily reaching into MV range [27]. Assuming modest polarization energy of 1 eV (which is consistent with our estimate of bubble charge based off oscilloscopic measurement of cavitation-‐induced discharges in mineral oil – Fig. 14), Rodionov estimates that the bubble growth during the expansion phase will result in voltage build-‐up up to 10kV per bubble [27]. Consequently it takes only 100 closely packed bubbles forming a multi-‐stage Marx generator-‐like discharge to reach the voltages on the order of 1MV, which no doubt assists molecular ionization/radicalization and contributes to the increased efficiency of the activator when compared to conventional sonotrode-‐based ultrasonic activators.

In our own work with cavitation in mineral oil we were able to verify experimentally that Rodionov’s estimate was not far off-‐the mark: we have observed 40kV/cm discharges between the glowing stream of cavitation-‐induced bubbles and the grounded brass nozzle


by pumping mineral oil through the narrow opening in the nozzle at 50 m/s – Fig. 14. The presence of the bubble discharge currents is the most likely cause of the magnetic field detected around the activator.

Fig. 18. Liquid flow through activator’s slots. The liquid existing the slots forms resonant vortices. Rotor motion direction is given by V.

Fig. 19. 40 kV/cm discharge (short and thin zigzagging line) between the charged luminous cavitation-‐induced bubbles (long blue streak) and the grounded nozzle (cone on the right) emitting a 50 m/s flow of mineral oil.

Conclusion The ultrasonic activator of Kladov/Selivanov is capable of highly efficient

transformation of mechanical energy into ultrasonic energy with density on the order of 1-‐10 MW/m2. This colossal energy stimulates profuse cavitation, confined to slots of the rotor. The massive sonic energy forms plasma within the bubbles, the bubbles form Marx generator-‐like discharges, which further contribute to molecular radicalization and hydrocarbon cracking. To prevent recombination of radicals and reduce the formation of aromatics the addition of hydrogen or methane is required to the processed mixture. Fortunately, the addition of gasses also stimulates cavitation thus further intensifying the process. Therefore, the combination of all these factors makes efficient cavitation-‐

Rotor

Stator

The flow directing from the rotor’s

center


induced hydrocarbon cracking feasible (at least in principle) and thus potentially economically important.

Experimental Setup and Objectives of the Research We propose to study a replica of the ultrasonic activator according to Kladov /

Selivanov and study cavitation-‐induced hydrocarbon cracking in lab conditions. The main objective of the study is to determine the amount of hydrocarbon cracking (e.g. via gas chromatography and distillation testing), measure the viscosity and density changes, measure the energy requirements and estimate the economical viability of the application of the method at refineries for crude upgrading or as a step for post-‐catalytic upgrading of distillation residue.

The experimental hardware is shown on Fig. 15. The activator is powered by 3-‐phase 50-‐HP electric motor connected to a variable frequency drive (not shown). The input-‐output pipes are equipped with ports for pressure gauges, flow meters, redox and pH sensors. The activator stator is outfitted with a pressure transducer to detect high frequency acoustic vibrations and ascertain the intensity of cavitation. Additional analytical equipment includes ASTM D86 automatic distillation station, ModCon MOD-‐8000 inline real-‐time NMR process analyzer, magnetic sensors (to probe the activator’s magnetic field), and viscometers.

Fig. 20. Experimental setup.


Additionally we will implement a line to feed the dispersing gases such as H2, air, and CH4 to be mixed into the feedstock pumped through the activator.

We will experiment with a broad range of hydrocarbons, including various types of heavy crude and heavy fuel oil.

During Phase I funding of the project we plan to achieve the following:

1) Build a replica of the ultrasonic activator according to Kladov and Selivanov using the construction plans in our possession and the inventor’s consultation;

2) Detect the necessary resonant modes of operation and attune the activator to them my varying rotational frequency of the motor;

3) Measure electromagnetic fields generated by the operating activator; 4) Vary pressure within the activator; 5) Vary gas feed rate and the dispersing gas composition; 6) Determine viscosity and gravity changes in the processed liquid depending on the

processing time; 7) Determine hydrocarbon content in the processed liquids (via gas chromatography)

depending on the processing time; 8) Measure electric power consumption and calculate the fluid processing rate; 9) Repeat measurements 4-‐7 for various types of hydrocarbons including common

grades of heavy crude and heavy fuel oil. 10) Perform distillation analysis of the processed samples.

At the end of Phase I of the project we plan to obtain conclusive data with regard to economical viability of the crude and heavy fuel oil upgrading.

During Phase II of the project we plan to launch an expanded inquiry into the application of the cavitation processing to bio-‐diesel production and engage the U.S. petroleum industry (via our university contacts) in field trials of the activator in order to demonstrate economic viability of the technology in industrial setting. The objective of the Phase II of the project is to develop commercially viable activator prototypes for useful for U.S. petroleum industry.

Potential Post-‐Applications The confirmation of economical viability of hydrodynamic cavitation treatment of

hydrocarbons will correspond to a significant step towards the increased fuel economy, the increased light fraction yield, and the reduced energy requirements of the refining process, thus giving the U.S. petroleum industry and the American nation an economic advantage over the global competition via more efficient utilization of hydrocarbon resources while enabling the reduced carbon footprint.


Work Schedule: 6 months As a part of Phase I funding we plan to do the following:

Phase I funding received, project begins (week 1)

1) Comprehensive review of project documentation, equipment acquisition a. 20 hours of PI time b. 40 hours of engineer time

2) Materials and equipment ordered, prototype construction begins a. 40 hours of PI time b. 80 hours of co-‐investigator time c. 320 hours of machine shop time

Milestone 1: Activator built, equipment received, trials begin (week 6)

3) Construction, testing and refining of the experimental setup a. 40 hours of PI time b. 80 hours of co-‐investigator time

Milestone 2: Experimental setup complete, resonance search begins (week 8)

4) Resonant mode of operation search begins. Motor speed is varied, power consumption is measured until a spike in power consumption is detected and liquid throughout drops

a. 40 hours of PI time b. 80 hours of co-‐investigator time

Milestone 3: Resonant mode of operation identified (week 10)

5) Various hydrocarbon liquids are pumped through the activator, pressure within the activator and the gas feed rate varied, power input, viscosity and chromatography changes measured, magnetic field monitored; samples distilled

a. 100 hours of PI time b. 600 hours of co-‐investigator time

Milestone 4: Experiment concludes (week 25)

6) Final report preparation a. 40 hours of PI time b. 40 hours of co-‐investigator time

Milestone 5: Project concludes, nuclear fusion confirmed (week 26)


References [1] Ophardt, C.E., Virtual Chembook, Distillation oil refining, Elmhurst College, 2003, http://www.elmhurst.edu/~chm/vchembook/513refining.html

[2] Izatt, J., Asphalt, in Encyclopedia of Chemical Processing and Design, McKett, J.J., editor, New York, 1986, vol. 3, p.421

[3] Kovin et al., Catalytic Cracking Development and Its Role in Modern Russian Refinery, Ufa State Petroleum Technological University, UDK 665.773.5, 2009

[4] Promptov, M.A., Pulsation Apparata of Rotor Type: Theory and Practice, Moscow, Mashinostroyeniye, 2001

[5] Flannigan, D.J., Suslick, K.S., Plasma formation and temperature measurement during single-‐bubble cavitation, Nature, 434, 7029, p. 52–55, 2006

[6] Chen et al., Time-‐resolved spectra of single-‐bubble sonoluminescence in sulfuric acid with a streak camera, Phys. Rev. E 78, 035301(R), 2008

[7] Suslick, K.S., Sonoluminescence and Sonochemistry, in the Encyclopedia of Physical Science and Technology, 3rd Edition, Myers, R.A. (editor), Academic Press, 2001

[8] Chervyakov, V.M., Yudayev, V.F., Hydrodynamic and cavitation processes in rotor apparata, Moscow, Mashinostroyeniye, 2007

[9] Zhuk, V., The Cavitational Fuel Depolymerization, CT Kavitus, 2008

[10] Selivanov, N.I., Change of Viscosity of Oil, New Technologies 2000, 2002, http://www.newtech2000.ru/new_tech_eng1.php

[11] EkoEnergoMash, Cavitation Technologies, Kazan, Russia, 2009, http://www.eemkzn.ru/product/kavitac/

[12] Suslick et al., Alkane Sonochemistry, J. Phys. Chem., 87, p. 2299-‐2301, 1983

[13] Suslick, private communication

[14] Nesterenko, A.I., Berlizov, Yu.S., The Possibility of Cracking Hydrocarbons with Cavitation, Chemistry and Technology of Fuels and Oils, 43, 6, 2007

[15] Besov et al., Degradation of Hydrocarbons in the Cavitation Region Activated by Aqueous Electrolyte Solutions in the Presence of Electric Field, Technical Physics Letters, 29. 3. P. 207-‐209, 2003

[16] Promtov, M.A., Cavitation Technologies for Quality Improvement of Hydrocarbon Fuels, Chemical and Petroleum Engineering, 44, 1-‐2, 2008

[17] Sawarkar et al., Use of Ultrasound in Petroleum Residue Upgradation, The Canadian Journal of Chemical Engineering, 87, 3, pp. 329-‐342, 2009

[18] Lin, J.R., Yen, T.F., An Upgrading Process through Cavitation and Surfactant, Energy and Fuels, 7, pp. 111-‐118, 1993


[19] Kladov, A.F., Ultrasonic Activator, WO/1994/0009894, 1994

[20] Kladov, A.F., Process For Cracking Crude Oil And Petroleum Products And A Device For Carrying Out The Same, WO/1994/01026, 1994

[24] Selivanov, N.I., Method and Device for Conditioning Hydrocarbon Liquid, WO/2003/093398, 2003

[25] Selivanov, N.I., Private communication, 2010

[26] Flannigan, D.J., Suslick, K.S., Internally confined plasma in an imploding bubble, Nature Phyrics Letters, 6, 2010, DOI:10.1038/NPHYS1701

[27] Rodionov, B.U., Acceleration of ions and nuclear reactions in cavitating liquids, in proceedings of the 3rd All-‐Russian Conference on Science and Technology, p. 125-‐127, 2002, http://library.mephi.ru/data/scientific-‐sessions/2002/3_Konf/1132.html

[28] Schukin, V. A., The method for hydrocracking of oil feedstock with vortex reactor, Russian Federation Patent #2448153, Issued 7/30/2010

[29] Selivanov, K. N., Private communication, 2011.


Facilities Quantum Potential Corporation has necessary facilities to conduct the project work

outlined in this proposal for purpose of this project.

Equipment Quantum Potential Corporation has necessary tools and equipment to conduct the

project work outlined in this proposal, except for the ModCon MOD-‐8000 system, which must be purchased.

Budget Justification 1. ModCon MOD-‐8000: $75,000 2. Activator Construction costs: $50,000 3. ASTM D-‐86 automatic distillation station: $20,000

Funds sought: $250,000-‐400,000


Max Fomitchev-‐Zamilov, Ph.D. President, Quantum Potential Corporation

200 Innovation Blvd, Suit 254, State College, PA 16803, 814-‐325-‐0148, max@quantum-‐potential.com

Assistant Professor of CS&E, Pennsylvania State University 111J IST, University Park, PA 16802, 814-‐863-‐1469, [email protected]

Dr. Fomitchev-‐Zamilov is a leading force behind Quantum Potential Corporation. Primary mission of the company is design, development and sales of cavitation equipment and high-‐risk/high-‐payoff research in science and technology. Physicist and computer engineer by training, Dr. Fomitchev-‐Zamilov’s designs the equipment produced by Quantum Potential Corporation. Dr. Fomitchev-‐Zamilov’s relevant experience includes theoretical and experimental physics, molecular dynamics, high-‐performance computing, ultrasonic pulse shaping and piezoelectric transducer frequency control.

Education

2001 PhD in Computer Engineering, Moscow Institute of Electronic Engineering

1999 PhD Candidate in Computer Science, University of Tulsa

1997 MS in Computer Engineering, Moscow Institute of Electronic Engineering

Employment

2002-‐present President, Quantum Potential Corporation

2006-‐present Assistant Professor of Computer Science, Pennsylvania State University

1997-‐2001 Software Engineer, LeapNet, Inc.

Selected Patents and Publications

Fomitchev, M. (2001). Ultrasound Imaging Device that Uses Optimal Lag Pulse Shaping Filters, US Patent #6,167,758,

Fomitchev, M., Grigorashvily, Yu., & Volkov S. (1999). Ultrasonic Pulse Shaping with Optimal Lag Filters. International Journal of Imaging Systems and Technology, 10 (5), 397-‐403

Grigorashvily, Yu., & Fomitchev, M. (2000). Ultrasound System with Pulse-‐Shape Control, Izvestija vuzov, 2, 70-‐74

Fomitchev, M. (1998). Introduction to Wavelets, Matematicheskaja Morfologija, 3 (1), 1998

Fomitchev, M., Grigorashvily, Yu., & Volkov S. (1999). Cost-‐Effective Ultrasound Imaging Apparatus that Uses Optimal-‐Lag Pulse Shaping Filters, 1999 IEEE International Ultrasonics Symposium Proceedings, 1, 691-‐694

Grigorashvily, Yu., & Fomitchev, M. (2000). Ultrasound System with Pulse-‐Shape Control, International Conference “Sensor-‐2000” Proceedings, Sudak, 112


Sergei Godin Chief Engineer

200 Innovation Blvd, Suit 254, State College, PA 16803, 814-‐325-‐0148, sergei@quantum-‐potential.com

Biographical Sketch

Mr. Godin is an experienced practitioner and an exceptional experimentalist. He will be responsible for mechanical design and for designing electronic circuits and control systems for the experiment. Mr. Godin is an expert in electrical engineering, digital / analog electronics, measurement devices and experimentation in general. He has vast experience working with both hydrodynamic and acoustic cavitation. Prior to joining Quantum Potential Mr. Godin has worked as an engineer at the Central Research Institute for Communications (Moscow), then as a research associate at IMASH (Moscow) and for the following 12 years as a research associate at the Institute for High Temperatures (IHT) of the Russian Academy of Sciences. During his tenure at IHT Mr. Godin was a key investigator in a number of research projects focused on sonoluminescence, cavitation, plasma discharges, and nuclear fusion.

Mr. Godin has a valuable experience of research commercialization and has a knack for discovering multiple practical applications of scientific ideas. He leads a diverse group of cross-‐disciplinary researchers. Besides his duties at Quantum Potential Mr. Godin servers as a consultant on a oil cracking research project for a large Russian oil and gas company.

Mr. Godin has co-‐authored a book on fundamental physics, numerous research papers and holds several patents.

Education

1989 PhD Candidate in Mechanics and Mathematics, Moscow State University

1983 Certificate in Signal Processing, Moscow Institute of Radio-‐engineering Electronics

1981 MS in Electrical Engineering, Moscow Institute of Communications and Informatics

Employment

2010-‐present Research Associate, Quantum Potential Corporation

1996-‐2008 Research Associate, Institute for High Temperatures of Russian Acad. of Sci.

Selected Publications

Karimov, A., & Godin, S. (2009). Coupled radial–azimuthal oscillations in twirling cylindrical plasmas, Physica Scripta, 80 (3), 035503

Godin, S., & Botvinsly, V. (2009). Measurements of displacement current with fammeter, Radiotechnology & Electronics, 54 (9), 1049-‐1152

Godin, S., Rodionov, B., & Savvatimova, I. (2007). Inspection method to check quality of nuclear transmutation media, 13th International Conference on Condensed Matter Nuclear Science, Dagomys


Roschin, V., & Godin, S. (2004). Orbiting Multi-‐Rotor Homopolar System, US Patent #6,822,361

Klimov et al. (2004). On the possibility of electrostatic relativistic dynamo, Radiotechnology & Electronics, 49 (11), 1237-‐1243

Cavitation Hydrocarbon Cracking

Documents

200kw electric

heavy fuel

heavy fuel

ultrasonic

induced hydrocarbon

hydrodynamic

operating

quantum potential