Ind. Eng. Chem. Res.

1993,32, 2201-2207 2201

Adsorptive Separation of Propylene-Propane Mixtures

H a r r i Jarvelint and J a m e s R. Fair’
Separations Research Program, The University of Texas at Austin, Austin, Texas 78712

The separation of propylene-propane mixtures is of great commercial importance and is carried

out by fractional distillation. It is claimed to be the most energy-intensive distillation practiced
in the United States. The purpose of this paper is to describe experimental work that suggests a
practical alternative to distillation for separating the C3 hydrocarbons: adsorption. As studied, the
process involves three adsorptive steps: initial separation with molecular sieves with heavy dilution
with an inert gas; separation of propylene and propane separately from the inert gas, using activated
carbon; and drying of the product streams with any of several available desiccants. The research
information presented here deals with the initial step and includes both equilibrium and kinetic
data. Isotherms are provided for propylene and propane adsorbed on three zeolites, activated
alumina, silica gel, and coconut-based activated carbon. Breakthrough data are provided for both
adsorption and regeneration steps for the zeolites, which were found to be superior to the other
adsorbents for breakthrough separations. A flow diagram for the complete proposed process is
included.

The separation of propylene-propane mixtures is one
of the most important operations in the petrochemical
industry. Such mixtures usually result from the thermal
or catalytic cracking of hydrocarbons, and the majority of
them represent coproducts with ethylene. Their separa-
tion is of great economic consequence, since the separated
propylene has many uses, one of the most important being
as monomer feedstock for polypropylene elastomer pro-
duction. For most end uses the propylene must have a
purity of at least 99.5 mol % . The propane fraction can
be recycled to the cracking step or used separately, e.g.,
as liquefied petroleum gas (LPG) for household heating.
The conventional method for separating the propylene
propane mixture is fractional distillation. The relative
volatility for the mixture is in the range of 1.09-1.15
(Laurance and Swift, 1972), depending on composition
and pressure of operation. A large number of contacting
stages are required (over 1001, and the associated high
reflux ratio requires a large input of energy. The U.S.
Department of Energy has reported that the propylene/
propane separation is the most energy-intensive single
distillation practiced commercially (Wiley, 1992). While
the distillation separation can be carried out at above-
ambient temperatures, where water can be used as the
coolant for the condenser, it is more economical to operate
at subambient temperatures with a refrigerated overhead
vapor, often utilizing heat pumping techniques. The ratio
of propylene to propane in the mixture varies according
to cracking conditions, but for research purposes the
composition can be assumed to be equimolar. The
separation operation is often called “C3 splitting”.
The present paper describes an alternate approach to
distillation for making the C3 separation: selective ad-
sorption in the gas phase. Studies of the kinetics and
equilibria for propane and propylene, singly and in
admixture, have been carried out at The University of
Texas at Austin and will be described. Although pre-
liminary evaluations of the total adsorptive separation
process have been conducted, the emphasis here will be
on the research results of the adsorption steps. These
results should enable others to make their own evaluations
according to their specific cost conditions.
In essence, in the proposed process the propylene/
propane mixture is diluted with nitrogen and separated
+ Neete Oy,Porvoo, Finland.
0888-5885/93/2632-2201$04.00/00 1993 American Chemical Society
using molecular sieves. Downstream adsorption steps
separate the propylene and propane from nitrogen and
remove water vapor introduced in the process. The work
in our laboratories has been done with research grade
chemicals, and no hydrocarbon diluents (e.g., ethane and
Cq compounds) have been used. However, allowance for
diluents is straightforward and will be discussed. A flow
diagram of the envisioned process is shown in Figure 1.
Previous Work
The adsorptive separation of propylene-propane mix-
tures has been of interest for some years, but very little
of a nature useful for design has been published. In most
cases, individual component isotherm data and break-
through kinetics have been measured, but little success
with mixtures has been found. Lewis et al. (1950)included
propylene and propane in a series of adsorption studies
using silica gel and Columbia G activated carbon adsor-
bents. Their work was limited to isotherm measurements,
with the indication that silica gel would be the more
selective adsorbent if mixtures were to be used. In 1968
Peterson et al. proposed separating the Cs mixture with
zeolite molecular sieves, finding the 5A type to give
preferential adsorption of propylene. Their scheme was
to use an eluent such as butane or pentane for regeneration,
followed by recovery of propylene by distillation. Their
experiments were made at temperatures of 105-175 “C
and a pressure of 1450 kPa, with bulk mixtures of propane
and propylene, under which conditions the polymerization
of propylene on the zeolite was a problem. Their work
emphasized the regeneration step; in fact, no breakthrough
data for the initial propanepropylene adsorption were
given.
Smith and Burnet (1971) explored the individual
component adsorptions on Columbia LC carbon, and
reported both equilibrium and kinetic data. They also
deduced effective mass-transfer coefficients for the ad-
sorption step. Friederich (1970) measured mixture iso-
therms for propylene-propane, and his data were used by
Brown et al. (1978)to model breakthrough results for each
of the components. Costaet al. (1981) measured individual
and mixture isotherms for propylene and propane as well
as other binary mixtures on Witco L-1667 carbon, and
modeled their results using a real adsorption theory;
excellent results were obtained using Wilson and UNI-
2202 Ind. Eng. Chem. Res., Vol. 32, No. 10, 1993

-
~ RECYQENllROGEN
A
.c.
WATER
FEED ADSORB , ADSORB DESORB

STEAM

CONDENSE ~ ~ ] - - P R O P f l . E N E

.c.
WATER

STEAM
Figure 1. Block flow diagram for the proposed process to separate propylene-propane mixtures by three-stage adsorption.

V.21A

FRN.101

Nilroom

LICIJID
V.22A -0-
FRN.102
c-121 h

4 I I 1
-9%
I
106
J

ADSORPTION TEST UNIT

-.- MAX.
MAX. PREBWRE
TEMPERATURE
COLUMN INSIDE DIAMETER
. EFFECTIVE LENQTH
2160 kPa
427%
8.S an
1.12 m

I I

P BIA
Figure 2. Flow diagram of the experimental equipment for adsorption and desorption breakthrough measurements. Key symbole: AV =
automatic valve;FIC = flow indicating controller;FRN = furnace;PI = pressure indicator;PIC = pressure indicating controller;TI = temperatutre
indicator.

QUAC models for the ternary (including adsorbent)
systems. Glanz and Findenegg (1984)studied equilibrium
adsorption on graphitized carbon black and found only a
weak preferential adsorption of propane from propylene-
propane mixtures. Shu et al. (1990) studied a variable
temperature stepwise desorption of propylenelpropane
mixtures from 13X molecular sieves, showing that with
careful control of temperature, and without the use of
diluents, a relatively concentrated stream of propylene
could be removed during a portion of the regeneration
cycle.
More recently the technology and economics of the Ca
separation have been discussed by Kumar et al. (1992).
They emphasized the commercial importance of the
separation and proposed a hybrid adsorptionldistillation
scheme to provide high-purity streams of propane and
propylene. Entering propanelpropylene would be given
an adsorptive pretreatment to remove contaminants, and
then the bulk mixture would be separated by an appro-
priate adsorbent. The total process scheme is "suggested",
but may have some backup experimental information that
has been kept confidential.
 Ind. Eng. Chem. Res., Vol. 32, No. 10,1993 2203
Table I. Properties of Adsorbents
molecular sieves activated activated activated
silica gel alumina carbon
type 4A 5A 13X 41 ST-4191-1 ST-AWA-13
&aP+ E E E G S G
particle size 1/8 in. 1/8 in. 1/8 in. 3/9me& 3.35mm 4/8 me&
bulk density, kg/m8 690 690 620 690 I40 430
nowce Union Carbide Union Carbide Union Carbide Davienn ALCOA Sorb-Tech
(1 E = extrudates; G = granular; S = npherea.

Supporting the second step of the process herein

proposed are the kinetics of the propanelnitrogen sepa-
ration reported by Schork and Fair (1988) and Huang and
Fair (1988);in these studies Witco JXC carbon was used.
The present work includes the propylene1 nitrogen s e p
aration over activated carbon. Removal of water vapor
from propylene and propane by adsorption on activated
alumina or molecular sieves has been treated widely in
the journal and trade literature and does not merit further
experimental verification.
Guides to other literature adsorption equilibria for
propane and propylene have been published by Ray (1983)
and Valenzuela and Myers (1989).

Experimental Work
The propylenelpropane breakthrough measurements
were made in a continuous-flow pilot system, a flow
diagram of which is shown in Figure 2. The system can
be operated up to 427 "C and 2169 kPa, is highly
instrumented, and in operation is controlled by an Intel
SYP-310computer with extensive data logging capability.
Thiscomputer accepts allof the processsignals,maintains
a digital log of all variables, and updates the signals every
10 s. The inlet gas mixture is handled by blending valves
and checked by mass flowmeters and chromatographic
analyses. Samples can be taken at a number of places,
and for the present work the samples were analyzed by a
Varian 3700 gas chromatograph with a flame ionization
detector (FID). No attempt was made to recycle the
effluent gas. D E T U 'I'
The heart of the svstem is the adsorntion bed. shown
in Figure 3. It has & inside diameter i f 84.7 mm and a Figure 3. Details of the adsorber.
bed length of 1219 mm. Intermediate bed thermocouples hPssure
are provided, for following temperature gradients. The nansdueer-,
bed can be run essentially adiabatically through the use
of insulation and feedback shell heaters. The adsorbent
is supported on a perforated plate as shown in the figure.
All metal parta of the system are fabricated from type 316
stainless steel.
Breakthrough runs were made in the conventional
manner. Inlet concentrations of hydrocarbons were in
the range of 1.C-3.5 mol %, with nitrogen as the carrier
gas. For most cases, breakthrough was continued to full
bed saturation, as will be presented later in appropriate
plots. Regeneration runs were made with hot nitrogen at
150-200 "C, with adsorbate removal being monitored by and pump Cold
chromatographic analyses. w
Six adsorbenta were included in the study: types 4A, Figure 4. Equilibrium call for isotherm measurements.
5A,and 13X zeolite molecular sieves; silica gel; type ST-
4191-1 activated alumina; and Sorb-Tech AWX-13 acti- with the same impurities. One analysis of the propylene
vated carbon. Sources and essential properties of these showed the following: propane, 5580 ppmw; ethane, 97
materials are shown in Table I. ppmw; isobutane, <10 ppmw; n-butane, <10 ppmw.
The adsorbates were all research grade in purity. Equilibrium isotherms were measured in a gravimetric-
Nitrogen, propane, and propylene were obtained from type sorption cell. The adsorbent pan was suspended from
Union Carbide Corporation. For the propane, the sum of a Ruskaquartz spring,and the cell was jacketed to maintain
impurities was less than 1.0%by volume; these impurities a controlled temperature of 25 OC. A calibrated cathe-
were stated by the manufacturer to be ethane, propylene, tometer was used to measure the extension of the spring.
isobutane, and n-butane. Propylene was also CP grade Care was taken to ensure that equilibrium had been
2204 Ind. Eng. Chem. Res., Vol. 32, No. 10, 1993
6
6
ProDane 1 Propylene

4 I F
E"E
i
0

B
8
l t -I

0
0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1
0
0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8
1
1

Pressure, bar Pressure, bar

1.6 3
Propylene
1.4

1.2
P
E"E 1
4A
SA
fE

-ti- 0.8 13X

s111cr ad g
Pe 0.6 A d . Alumln8
E
8
.-q-.-.-
0 0.02 0.04 0.06 0.08 0.1 0 0.02 0.04 0.06 0.08 0.1

Pressure, bar Pressure, bar

Figure 5. Propane isotherms for lower and higher capacity ranges. Figure 6. Propylene isotherms for lower and higher capacityranges.
Temperature = 25 "C. Temperature = 25 O C .
Table 11. Langmuir Equation Constants for Propane and
reached, and some experiments were allowed to run for as Propylene
long as 2 h so that successive readings did not differ.
Hysteresis effects were not measured, since the adsorption adsorbent adsorbate mi bi
step was under study. The equilibrium measurements ZMS 4A propane 0.226 9.770
were confirmed by the breakthrough run loadings. propylene 2.092 95.096
A diagram of the equilibrium measurement system is ZMS 5A propane 1.919 100.223
propylene 2.436 147.260
given in Figure 4. ZMS 13X propane 2.130 55.412
propylene 2.618 100.OOO
Results activated carbon propane 4.239 58.458
propylene 4.889 34.915
Measured isotherms at 25 "Care shown for propane in Langmuir equation: ni = mjbipJ(l+bipi), whereni = equilibrium
Figure 5 and for propylene in Figure 6. The differences adsorption of speciesi,mmovg;mi = saturationcapacityof adsorbent
in capacity of the adsorbents is striking. Activated carbon for species i, mmol/g; and pi = partial pressure, bar.
has the greatest holding power but suffers from a low
discrimination between the two adsorbates. Silica gel has the longest runs to breakthrough. The results of com-
intermediate capacity but inadequate discrimination. The bination adsorption/desorption runs made it clear that
capacity of activated alumina is too low to be of further significant amounts of dilutent nitrogen would be required
interest. The adsorbents passing this preliminary screen- for the development of a practical cyclic operation. Also,
ing are the three molecular sieves. Relative capacities for these runs indicated finally that only the molecular sieves
these adsorbents taken from Figures 5 and 6 are shown in should be considered further for the development of a
Figure 7. From these plots it would appear that adsorption separation process.
would be a good candidate for separation, possibly even
at bulk concentration conditions. Langmuir constants for Adsorption/regeneration breakthrough data for molec-
the sieves, with comparison values for activated carbon, ular sieves are shown in Figures 9-11. They have been
are given in Table 11. compared with predictions using a comprehensive break-
A total of 86 breakthrough runs were made with through model (Chu, 1991)which accounts for nonlinearity
propylene-propane mixtures plus 47 with propane and 39 of isotherm, mixture equilibrium, axial and radial diffusion,
with propylene. In all cases, nitrogen was the diluent. A and departure from isothermality. A representative
representative set of breakthrough curves for propylene comparison is shown in Figure 12, where the curves of
is shown in Figure 8. The shapes of the curves indicate Figure 10(adsorption)are followed closely by the simulated
that the bed of 4A sieves exhibited the poorest mass- results.
transfer characteristics, and the 5A and 13X sieves had A study of the breakthrough plots reveals the following:
 Ind. Eng. Chem. Res., Vol. 32,No. 10,1993 2206
3
13 X

-
\
0
0
E
2.5

2
I
E
c- 1.5
-+-Proprno
i
0
.- -e- Proprno
c.
-m- Propylono
$ 1 -m- Propylono
v)
I

0.5

0
0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1
Oq5
-
t
0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1

Pressure, bar
I I 1 #

5A Actlvated Carbon
2.5
I l l
4---i
OD
=:
zE 2 c
E

r" 1.5
I
0 -8- Proprno -a- Proprno
c.
g
cn
1
t i +Propylono -e- Propylon.

OoS
0 0 3 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1
0 0.2 0.4 0.6

Pressure, bar
0.8 1

Pressure, bar
Figure 7. Pure component isotherms for propane and propylene on A, SA, and 13X molecular sieves and activated carbon. Temperature
= 25 OC.
0 100 200 300
time, min
Figure8. Compoaitabreakthrough data for propylene. Conditions:
feed temperature = 23 O C ; pressure = 269 E a ; nitrogen flow rate =
12.6 kg/h; propylene concentration = 1.18 mol %. Normalized
concentration is with respect to feed.
1. The 4A sieves show early breakthrough and low mass
transfer-rates. For regeneration, separation is excellent.
2. The 5A and 13X sieves show about 70 min of sharp
separation on adsorption, m d excellent separation on
regeneration. The delay time for regeneration (period
during which a mixture of Cs's is removed) is shorter for
the 13X sieves.
Thus, for preliminary evaluations, 13X sieves were
chosen for further process development work.
As shown in Figure 1,the downstream adsorption steps
are conventional and involve the use of activated carbon
for the first step and any of the common desiccants for the
second step. The effluents from step 1 adsorption and
regeneration consist of nitrogen-propane and nitrogen-
propylene, respectively. For short periods these effluents
contain mixed Cis and thus must be recycled. As an
example, for 13X during the first 100 min or so only
propane is removed from the bed. The bed is then shifted
to regeneration where, for 10 min or so, both propane and
propylene are evolved. Following that, only propane and
nitrogen emerge from the bed. The possibilities of cyclic
operation are obvious.
The propanenitrogen stream (from the initial adsorp-
tion step) is separated by adsorption on activated carbon
followed by steam regeneration. Likewise, the propylene
nitrogen stream (from the initial step regeneration) is
separated by carbon adsorption plus steam regeneration.
The kinetics of the adsorption step are well documented
by the present work as well as by the studies of Schork
2206 Ind. Eng. Chem. Res., Vol. 32, No. 10, 1993
f,2
2,0 1
1,o
I Regeneration
--s 0,8
e
f 0-6
4 Propane
+ Propylene
8 8
6
z
0,4 E
E
4 Propane
+ Propylene
02

0.0
0 100 200 300
Time, min lime, min
Figure 9. Combination adsorption/regeneration data for a propylene-propane mixture on 4A molecular sieves. Conditions for adsorption:
feed temperature = 23 "C; pressure = 269 kPa ;nitrogen flow rate = 12.6 kg/h;inlet propane = 1.185 mol %; inlet propylene = 1.162 mol %.
Conditions for regeneration: inlet nitrogen temperature = 205 "C; pressure = 269 kPa; nitrogen flow rate = 12.4kg/h. Normalized concentration
is with respect to feed.
2 2
Adsorption
I Regeneration I

$10
0 100
4
4

200
lime, min
Propane
Propylene

I
300
E
8
z

0
0 100 200
Time, mln
300

Figure 10. Combination adsorption/regeneration data for a propylene-propane mixture on 5A molecular sieves. Condiditons for adsorption:
feed temperature = 23 OC; pressure = 269 kPa; nitrogen flow rate = 12.6 kg/h; inlet propane = 1.185 mol %; inlet propylene = 1.162 mol 5%.
Conditions for regeneration: inlet nitrogen temperature = 150"C; pressure = 269 kPa; nitrogen flow rate = 8.85kg/h. Normalized concentration
is with respect to feed.
2

-Ec
Adsorption
c
"1 Regeneration

-
0 0

-E
'L: 2

E l 0)
E
8 8
E 1
8 4 Propane
z 4 Propane + Propylene
+ Propylene
0 0
100 200 300 0 100 200 300
Time, min lime, min
Figure 11. Combination adsorption/regeneration data for a propylene-propane mixture on 13X molecular sieves. Conditione for adsorption:
feed temperature = 23 "C; pressure = 269 kPa; inlet propane = 1.185 mol %; inlet propylene = 1.162 mol %. Conditions for regeneration:
inlet nitrogen temperature = 206 OC; pressure = 269 kPa; nitrogen flow rate = 12.4 kg/h. Normalized concentration is with respect to feed.
and Fair (1988) and Huang and Fair (1988). The kinetics effects of diluent Ca and Cq hydrocarbons in commercial
of the steam regeneration have been studied in our propylene-propane mixtures. This has not been studied
laboratory; representative data are shown in Figure 13 experimentally, but one would expect the ethane to move
(Alvarez, 1992). The phase separation between regenerant with the propane stream in the three steps. The distri-
steam and desorbed propane is straightforward, with little bution of C i s would depend, of course, on their degree of
solubility loss of the C3 hydrocarbon in the condensate, unsaturation. Without question, polymerizable com-
but with an effluent propane or propylene that is saturated pounds such as butadiene could not be permitted in the
with water. Hence the need for a final drying step in the feed. n-Butane, as an example of an allowed contaminant,
process. should remain with the propylene stream, on the basis of
The propylene and propane used in these studies are of the Peterson et al. (1968) studies, but this has yet to be
research grade purities. The question can arise over the confirmed.

J contributions to the work were Jose Luis Bravo, of SRP
1.5-
1 .o - for making available steam regeneration results.
0.5 - - -b-
HE Exp.
C3H6Exp
C3HSModel
0 50 100 1 5 0 200 250
Time (min)
Figure 12. Comparison of simulation and measurement for pro-
pylene/propane mixture breakthrough using SA molecular sieves.
Comparison should be made with Figure 10 (Chu, 1991). Normalized
concentration is with respect to feed.
35L"' ' I " " I ' " ' I "
0 imental Method and Results Adsorpt. Sci. Technol. 1984,1,41-
Figure 13. Representative steaming data for propane desorption
from Sorb-Tech activated carbon. The pilot-scale equipment de-
scribed in the text was used. The bed had been saturated with 2.5
mol % propane in nitrogen at 26 "C and 1.4 bar. Steam entering:
188 "C, 3.14 bar; superficial velocity = 0.39 m/s (Alvarez, 1992).
Summary and Conclusions
A study of the adsorption of propylene and propane,
separately and in admixture, had been conducted in our
laboratories. A pilot scale sorption test system has been
used for breakthrough experiments. A gravimetric system
has been used for isotherm measurements. Combination
adsorption and regeneration kinetics indicate that 5A or
13X zeolite molecular sieves can be used to make the
propylene-propane separation, so long as significant
amounts of diluent nitrogen are used. Accordingly,
utilization of the separation concept must involve the
circulation of fairly large quantities of nitrogen. Prelim-
inary estimates show that, for a plant separating 50 million
lb/year of a 50-Wmolar mixture of propylene and propane,
there would be required two adsorbers each having a
diameter of 18 ft and a bed depth of 12 ft.
Estimates of operating cycles show that for each of the
three steps a two-bed cyclic operation is feasible. The
degree of separation a t each adsorption step is strikingly
high, giving substance to the concept that, for a propylene-
propane mixture, very high purities of each compound are
possible.
Acknowledgment
This work was sponsored jointly by Neste Oy of Finland
and The Separations Research Program (SRP) at The
Ind. Eng. Chem. Res., Vol. 32,No. 10, 1993 2207
University of Texas at Austin. Individuals making major
and Xavier Py, of Rhhe-Poulenc in France. The authors
also thank Antonio Garcia-Martinez and Antonio Alvarez-
Trevit for assisting with the equilibrium data analysis and
Literature Cited
Alvarez-Trevit, J. A. Steam Regeneration of Activated Carbon
Adsorption Beds Ph.D. Research Report, Department of Chemical
300 350
Engineering, The University of Texas at Austin, 1992.
Brown, N. L.; Mullins, J. C.; Melsheimer, S. S. A Nonlinear
Equilibrium, Isothermal Fixed-Bed Adsorption ModelUsing Pulse
Chromatographic Rate Parameters AIChE Symp. Ser. 1978, 74,
(No. 179), 9-18.
Chu, C.4. Modeling and Simulation of Multicomponent, Noniso-
thermal Adsorption Cyclesfor Gas Separations PhD. Dissertation,
The University of Texas at Austin, 1991.
' ' 7 Costa, E.; Sotelo, J. L.; Calleja, G.; Marron, C. Adsorption of Binary
and Ternary Hydrocarbon Gas Mixtures on Activated Carbon:
Experimental Determination and Theoretical Prediction of the
Ternary Equilibrium Data AZChE J. 1981,27,612.
Costa, E.; Calleja, G.; Domingo, F. Adsorption of Gaseous Hydro-
carbons on Activated carbon: Characteristic Kinetic Curve AZChE
J. 1985,31, 982-991.
Freiderich, R. 0. Determination of Binary Adsorption Equilibria of
Ethylene-Ethane, Ethane-Propane, and Propylene-Propane on
Highly Graphitized Carbon at 25.0 OC and Pressures Below One
Atmosphere Ph.D. Dissertation, Clemson University, 1970.
Glanz, P.; K6rner, B.; Findenegg, G. H. Adsorption of Gas Mixtures
of Propene and Propane on Graphitized Carbon Black. I. Exper-
50.
Huang, C.-C.; Fair, J. R. Study of the Adsorption and Desorption of
Multiple Adsorbates in a Fixed Bed AZChE J. 1988,34, 1861.
Jiwelin, H. 'Adsorption of Propane and Propylene", Special Report,
Separations Research Program at The University of Texas at
Austin, Aug 16, 1990.
Kumar, R.;Golden,T. C.; White, T. R.;Rokicki, A. Novel Adsorption
Distillation Hybrid Scheme for Propane/Propylene Separation
Sep. Sci. Technol. 1992,27, 2157-2170.
Laurance D. R.;Swift, G. W. Relative Volatility of Propane-Propene
System from 100-160 OF J. Chem. Eng. Data 1972,17,333.
Lewis,W. K.; Gilliland,E. R.; Chertow, B.; Cadogan,W.P. Adsorption
Equilibria. Pure Gas Isotherms. Ind. Eng. Chem. 1950,42,1326.
Peterson, D. L.; Helfferich, F.; Griep, R.K. Separation of Propylene
and Propane on Molecular Sieves by Vicinal Exchange Sorption
SOC.Chem. Znd., London 1968,217-230.
Ray, M. S. The Separation and Purification of Gases using Solid
Adsorbents Sep. Sci. Technol. 1983,18, 96.
Schork,J. M.; Fair,J. R.Parametric Analysisof Thermal Regeneration
of Adsorption Beds Znd. Eng. Chem. Res. 1988,27,467.
Shu, C. M.; Kulvaranon, S.; Findley, M. E.; Liapis, A. I. Experimental
and Computational Studies on Propane-Propylene Separation by
Adsorptionand Variable-Temperature Stepwise Desorption Sep.
Technol. 1990, 1, 18.
Smith, F. B.; Burnet, G. R. DynamicExchangeAdsorptionof Propane-
Propylene on Activated Carbon AZChE Symp. Ser. 1971,67, (No.
117), 58.
Valenzuela, D. P.; Myers, A. L. Adsorption Equilibrium Data
Handbook; Prentice-Hak Englewood Cliffs, NJ, 1989.
Wiley, D. E. (US. Dept. of Energy) Priorities for Research in
Separations: A Government Perspective paper presented at the
Miami Beach AIChE Meeting, November 1992.
Receiued for reuiew December 28, 1992
Revised manuscript receiued June 22, 1993
Accepted June 25,1993.
0 Abstract published in Aduance ACS Abstracts, September
15, 1993.