DOI: https://doi.org/10.9767/jcerp.20713

Process Simulation and Optimization of Propane Dehydrogenation over Pt-Sn/Al₂O₃: A Langmuir-Hinshelwood Approach

Department of Chemical Engineering, Universitas Diponegoro,Jl. Prof. Soedarto, S.H., Tembalang, Semarang 50275, Indonesia

Received: 18 Apr 2026; Revised: 1 May 2026; Accepted: 6 May 2026; Available online: 13 Jul 2026; Published: 26 Dec 2026.
Editor(s): Istadi Istadi
Open Access Copyright (c) 2026 by Authors, Published by Universitas Diponegoro and BCREC Publishing Group
Creative Commons License This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.
Fulltext View|Download

Citation Format:
Cover Image
Abstract

Propane dehydrogenation (PDH) has emerged as a critical process for propylene production due to increasing global propylene demand and limitations of conventional methods such as steam cracking and fluid catalytic cracking. This study develops a kinetic model for propane dehydrogenation over a Pt-Sn/Al₂O₃ catalyst using a Langmuir–Hinshelwood Hougen Watson (LHHW) framework, wherein the second hydrogen abstraction step is assumed to be the rate-determining step. The kinetic model incorporates non-dissociative propane adsorption, competitive adsorption of propane, propylene, and hydrogen, as well as reverse reactions and catalyst deactivation associated with coke formation. The model was implemented in Aspen Plus/HYSYS using a plug flow reactor (PFR) under steady-state, isothermal conditions. Operating parameters included temperatures of 823–923 K, pressures of 1–5 bar, and feed ratios ranging from 1:0 to 1:2. Base-case simulation results revealed extremely low propane conversion on the order of 10⁻⁸, indicating significant kinetic limitations despite the endothermic heat duty of approximately –6.78 × 10⁴ kJ/h. A temperature sensitivity analysis conducted between 760 °C and 1000 °C showed no improvement in conversion with increasing temperature; instead, a slight decreasing trend was observed. This anomaly suggests that adsorption effects dominate under the Langmuir–Hinshelwood formulation, and that the selected kinetic parameters may be inadequate for the simulated temperature range. The results indicate that temperature variation alone is insufficient to enhance reactor performance. Further model refinement is required, including re-evaluation of kinetic parameters (pre-exponential factor and activation energy), adjustment of adsorption constants, consideration of non-isothermal reactor behavior, and increased catalyst loading or residence time. Copyright © 2026 by Authors, Published by Universitas Diponegoro and BCREC Publishing Group. This is an open access article under the CC BY-SA License (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0).

Keywords: Propane dehydrogenation; tube length; temperature effect; process optimization

Article Metrics:

Article Info
Section: Original Research Articles
Language : EN
Recent articles
The Application of Transition Metal Nitride Catalyst in the HDO Reaction of Lignin and Its Model Compounds Lignocellulosic Biomass into Mass-Producible Fuels A Critical Review of Hydrothermal Liquefaction and Upgrading Strategies Process Optimization for Conversion Rate in NO Oxidation to NO2 over Co3O4 Catalyst Process Simulation and Optimization of Propane Dehydrogenation over Pt-Sn/Al₂O₃: A Langmuir-Hinshelwood Approach Lignite-Derived Activated Carbon: A Superior, Low-Cost Alternative to Coconut-Shell GAC for Tributyl Phosphate (TBP) Adsorption from Wastewater More recent articles
  1. Martino, M., Meloni, E., Festa, G., Palma, V. (2021). Propylene Synthesis: Recent Advances in the Use of Pt-Based Catalysts for Propane Dehydrogenation Reaction. Catalysts. 11(9), 1070. DOI: 10.3390/catal11091070
  2. Motagamwala, A. H., Almallahi, R., Wortman, J., Igenegbai, V.O., Linic, S. (2021). Stable and selective catalysts for propane dehydrogenation operating at thermodynamic limit. Science, 373, 217 - 222. DOI: 10.1126/science.abg7894
  3. Sun, N., Yu, H., Potapov, A., Sun, Y. (2023). Separation of Propylene and Propane Using Metal–Organic Frameworks. Comments on Inorganic Chemistry, 44, 203-233. DOI: 10.1080/02603594.2023.2261103
  4. Carter, J., Bere, T., Pitchers, J., Hewes, D., Vandegehuchte, B., Kiely, C., Taylor, S., Hutchings, G. (2021). Direct and oxidative dehydrogenation of propane: From catalyst design to industrial application. Green Chemistry. 23 (24), 9747–9799. DOI: 10.1039/d1gc03700e
  5. Festa, G., Serrano-Lotina, A., Meloni, E., Portela, R., Ruocco, C., Martino, M., Palma, V. (2024). Support Screening to Shape Propane Dehydrogenation SnPt-Based Catalysts. Industrial & Engineering Chemistry Research, 63, 16269-16284. DOI: 10.1021/acs.iecr.3c04089
  6. Hu, Z., Yang, D., Wang, Z., Yuan, Z. (2019). State-of-the-art catalysts for direct dehydrogenation of propane to propylene. Chinese Journal of Catalysis. 40(9), 1233-1254. DOI: 10.1016/s1872-2067(19)63360-7
  7. Li, Q., Sui, Z., Zhou, X., Chen, D. (2011). Kinetics of propane dehydrogenation over Pt–Sn/Al2O3 catalyst. Applied Catalysis A-General, 398, 18-26. DOI: 10.1016/j.apcata.2011.01.039
  8. Liang, B., Zhang, X., Xie, Y., Lin, R., Krishna, R., Cui, H., Li, Z., Shi, Y., Wu, H., Zhou, W., Chen, B. (2020). An Ultramicroporous Metal-Organic Framework for High Sieving Separation of Propylene from Propane. Journal of the American Chemical Society. 142(41), 17795–17801. DOI: 10.1021/jacs.0c09466
  9. Zangeneh, F.T., Taeb, A., Gholivand, K., Sahebdelfar, S. (2013). Kinetic study of propane dehydrogenation and catalyst deactivation over Pt-Sn/Al2O3 catalyst. Journal of Energy Chemistry, 22, 726-732. DOI: 10.1016/s2095-4956(13)60096-0
  10. Yang, H., Wang, X., Xie, Y.-D., Lu, A. (2024). Evolution of the Active Phase of Pt/Sn-Al2O3 Catalysts During Acidic Impregnation and Their Use in Propane Dehydrogenation. ACS Applied Materials & Interfaces. 16 (36), 47773–47783. DOI: 210.1021/acsami.4c11358
  11. Liu, H., Liu, K., Zhu, H., Guo, W.-F., Li, Y. (2024). Explainable machine-learning predictions for catalysts in CO2-assisted propane oxidative dehydrogenation. RSC Advances, 14, 7276-7282. DOI: 10.1039/d4ra00406j
  12. Li, Q., Sui, Z., Zhou, X., Chen, D. (2011). Kinetics of propane dehydrogenation over Pt–Sn/Al₂O₃ catalyst. Applied Catalysis A: General. 398 (1–2), 18-26. DOI: 10.1016/j.apcata.2011.05.015
  13. Li, G., Peng, M., Wang, Y., Chen, Y., Kou, J., Wang, K., Wang, X. (2026). Enhancing the propane dehydrogenation performance of PtSn/Al2O3 catalysts by constructing spherical Al2O3 with a hierarchical porous structure and high Al V content. New Journal of Chemistry. 50 (14), 5802–5814. DOI: 10.1039/d5nj04986e
  14. Huš, M., Kopač, D., Likozar, B. (2020). Kinetics of non-oxidative propane dehydrogenation on Cr2O3 and the nature of catalyst deactivation from first-principles simulations. Journal of Catalysis. 386, 126-138. DOI: 10.1016/j.jcat.2020.03.037
  15. Ruelas-Leyva, J., Maldonado-Garcia, L., Talavera-López, A., Santos-López, I., Picos-Corrales, L., Santolalla-Vargas, C., Torres, S., Fuentes, G. (2021). A Comprehensive Study of Coke Deposits on a Pt-Sn/SBA-16 Catalyst during the Dehydrogenation of Propane. Catalysts. 11(1), 128. DOI: 10.3390/catal11010128

Last update:

No citation recorded.

Last update:

No citation recorded.