International Journal of Advanced Engineering Research and Studies E-ISSN2249 8974

Review Article
INDUSTRIAL APPLICATION OF MONOLITH CATALYSTS/
REACTORS
Mosleh M. Manfea*, K. S. Kulkarnib, A. D. Kulkarnic

Address for Correspondence

a*bc
Department of Chemical Engineering, Bharati Vidyapeeth University College of Engineering, Pune-43.
ABSTRACT
Monolithic catalysts are the standard catalyst shape in most environmental applications. In the processes of the
chemical industry, however, their current use is very limited. In this paper, advantage and disadvantages of
monolith catalysts/reactors with convectional reactors and monolith technology for applications in the chemical
industry is reviewed.
INTRODUCTION:
Monoliths are structures that contain various types of
interconnected or separated channels (straight, wavy
or crimped) in a single block of material (e.g.
honeycombs, foams or interconnected fibers). The
channels of the most common honeycomb monoliths
normally have circular, square or triangular cross-
sections. Monolithic reactors are those filled with
monoliths that are either made of porous catalytic
material or the catalytic material is deposited (wash-
coated) in the channels of an inert monolithic
support. In both arrangements, the channel walls
function as catalyst and the channels provide space
for flow of gas and/or liquid. Currently, ceramic and
metallic monoliths are the two major types of
monolith supports used in industry and research.
Ceramic monoliths are mostly prepared by extrusion
while metallic monoliths are normally made by
corrugation.
In the case of the square-channel monolith, the
monolith geometry is fully defined by two
parameters: channel size (dh) and either wall
thickness (tw) or cell density (n), which is defined as
number of cells per square inch (CPSI). If the
monolith is extruded from a catalytic material, the
amount of catalyst in the unit volume of the reactor is
fully determined by the monolith geometry. If the
catalyst is wash-coated, another parameter, the wash
coat thickness (Tw) is necessary. All other parameters
commonly used to characterize the monolith structure
(i.e. open front area (OFA) geometry surface area
(GSA) and hydraulic diameter (Dh)) can be calculated
from the above set. The specific definitions can be
found in the open literature. Among these parameters,
channel size and shape affect the pressure drop across
the channel and the hydrodynamics of the fluid
phases. The channel wall thickness or wash coat
thickness affect the catalyst effectiveness factor. To
compare the performance of the monolithic reactors
with reactors holding the catalyst in different forms,
it is important to define another parameter that would
quantify the reactor volume utilization. This is
particularly important in the case of high-pressure
reactors where a unit reactor volume is more
expensive. One way to compare the reactor volume
utilization is to define the reactor effectiveness factor,
which is the product of the volumetric catalyst
fraction and catalyst effectiveness factor. The reactor
effectiveness factor can be optimized to get the
maximum catalyst efficiency per unit volume of the
reactor by manipulating the parameters describing
monolith geometry subject to hydrodynamic and
CPSI constrains.
ADVANTAGES AND DIS ADVANTAGES:
Monolith catalysts or monolith reactors have some
common features in most of the applications for
which they are used. Compared with pellet-packed
fixed-bed reactors commonly used in the petroleum
refining industry, or other multiphase reactors, they
have the following advantages for typical
applications:
1. Lower pressure drop especially under high
fluid throughputs;
2. Higher specific external catalyst surface area
for mass transfer and reactions;
3. Reduction of external mass transfer when
used for multiphase reactors and elimination
of internal diffusion limitations when thin
walls are used;
4. Lower axial dispersion and back-mixing,
and therefore high product selectivity;
5. Reduction of fouling and plugging, and thus
extended catalyst lifetime;
6. Easier cleaning of particulates accumulated
on the channel walls; and
7. Easy scale-up.
For a specific application, this list would have to be
carefully re-examined since some of the advantages
mentioned above have to be considered in relation to
the rate of the chemical reaction of interest. Monolith
reactors could also have disadvantages:
1. Potential low radial heat transfer rate and,
thus, difficulty in temperature control for
thin-wall ceramic monolith supports;
2. Heat transfer from the monolith to the
internal reactor wall;
3. Potential non-uniform fluid distribution and,
thus, lower reactor effectiveness;
4. Difficulty and higher cost in extruding and
installation of large industrial scale;
5. Lack of experience in large-scale processes.
One has to balance the advantages and disadvantages

IJAERS/Vol. I/ Issue I/October-December, 2011/1-3

 International Journal of Advanced Engineering Research and Studies
when considering a specific application.
APPLICATION OF MONOLITH CATALYSTS/
REACTORS:
Monolith reactors were initially developed and
applied in mid 1970s for the automotive industry as
vehicle engine emission converters to remove NOx,
CO and hydrocarbons through gas-solid reactions.
Compared to the traditional catalysts used for gas
phase reactions, monolith offered much lower
pressure drop, which obviously was very
advantageous in this application. Beyond the low
pressure drop, the application of the monolith results
in high selectivity, elimination of hot-spots, and
improving catalyst effectiveness factor. With the fast
development of computer technology and numerical
computation tools, computational fluid dynamics
(CFD) and other modeling/simulation methods have
been successfully used to optimize the design and
operation of monolith catalytic converters to achieve
highest performance.
In the last two decades, the success of monoliths as
engine emission converters has encouraged
researchers to investigate how to improve other gas
reactions by using monolithic reactors. Such
applications include catalytic combustion of methane,
catalytic oxidation, hydrogenation or dehydro-
genation of aromatic compounds, hydrogen
generation for fuel cells, steam reforming of light
hydrocarbons and methanol, water-gas shift
reactions, etc. Although most of these applications
have not been implemented commercially, great
progresses have been made in research and
development (R&D) in these areas.
In recently years, monoliths have received significant
attention as multiphase reactors to replace trickle-bed
and slurry reactors. With multiphase flow, the
monolith reactor can be operated in either co-current
down-flow, co-current up-flow or counter-current
flow mode. Depending on the operating mode and
flow rates of the phases involved, the channel size
and shape, and the physical properties of both gas
and liquid, the possible flow regimes present inside
the channel include annual flow, Taylor flow (slug
flow), bubbly flow, churn flow and channeling flow.
Taylor flow and annual flow are mostly used in
practice to achieve high mass transfer rate from the
bulk gas and liquid to the monolith wall surface. One
of the major challenges of multiphase monolithic
reactors is even distribution of gas and liquid among
the monolith channels. The failure to do so will lead
to maldistribution, which will lower the reactor
effectiveness factor (as defined earlier). To overcome
this problem, good design and fabrication of
gas/liquid distributors are necessary.
One successful application of monoliths to carry
multiphase reactions is the commercial production of
hydrogen peroxide by catalytic hydrogenation of
anthraquinone to the corresponding hydroquinones.
IJAERS/Vol. I/ Issue I/October-December, 2011/1-3
E-ISSN2249 8974
In this application, SiO2 is used as the monolith
support material and Palladium as the active catalyst
component. Pd is deposited onto the monolith wall
surface by a method called electro less deposition.
Compared with packed bed and slurry reactors, the
monolith reactor offers significantly higher product
selectivity and longer catalyst life with high activity.
The monolith reactor is operated in co-current down
flow mode in the Taylor flow regime. Other
applications of monoliths in multiphase reactors that
have been proposed or are being explored include:
1. Hydro processing of petroleum fractions and
liquefied coals;
2. Hydrogenation or dehydrogenation
associated with various aromatic compounds
and other organic compounds, such as
nitrobenzene, cyclo-hexene, acetylene and
ethyl benzene, etc.; and
3. Oxidation of aqueous phenols, acetic acid,
glucose and cellulose, etc. Applications of
monolith structured packed beds used in
distillation and adsorption have also been
reported.
CONCLUSION
Monolith catalysts have been playing a major role in
the automotive industry as vehicle engine emission
converters. As a novel type of chemical rectors with
significant advantages over conventional types of
reactors, monoliths will likely find more applications
that may involve gas phase, gas-liquid phase or gas-
liquid-solid phase reactions in the environmental,
chemical/petrochemical/biochemical and petroleum
refining industries. To successfully realize
commercial applications, much R&D work has to be
done in the areas of monolith preparation,
hydrodynamics, mass and heat transfer, reactor
engineering design and reactor modeling and
simulation.
REFERENCES
1. Williams, J. L. Monolith structures, materials,
properties and uses. Catal. Today 2001, 69, 3.
2. Irandoust, S.; Andersson, B. Monolithic catalysts for
non- automobile applications. Catal. Rev.sSci. Eng.
1988, 30 (3), 314.
3. Kapteijn, F.; Nijhuis, T. A.; Heiszwolf, J. J.; Moulijn,
J. A. New nontraditional multiphase catalytic reactors
based on mono- lithic structures. Catal. Today 2001,
66, 133.
4. Nijhuis, T. A.; Beers, A. E. W.; Vergunst, T.;
Hoek, I.; Kapteijn, F.; Moulijn, J. A. Preparation of
Monolithic catalysts. Catal. Rev. 2001, 43 (4), 345.
5. Kreutzer, M. T.; Du, P.; Heiszwolf, J. J.; Kapteijn,
F.; Moulijn, J. A. Mass transfer characteristics of
three-phase mono- lith reactors. Chem. Eng. Sci.
2001, 56, 6015.
6. Heibel, A. K.; Scheenen, T. W. J.; Heiszwolf, J. J.; Van As,
H.; Kapteijn, F.; Moulijn, J. A. Gas and liquid-phase
distribution and their effect on reactor performance in the
monolith film flow reactor. Chem. Eng. Sci. 2001, 56, 5935.
7. Heibel, A. K.; Kapteijn, F.; Moulijn, J. Flooding Performance
of Square Channel Monolith Structures. Ind. Eng. Chem.
Res. 2002, 41 (26), 6759.
 International Journal of Advanced Engineering Research and Studies E-ISSN2249 8974

8. Liu, W. Ministructured catalyst bed for gas-liquid-olid

multiphase catalytic reaction. AIChE J. 2002, 48 (7), 1519.
9. Irandoust, S.; Cybulski, A.; Moulijn, J. A. The use of
monolithic catalysts for three-phase reactions. In Structured
Catalysts and Reactors; Cybulski, A., Moulijn, J. A., Eds.;
Marcel Dekker: New York, 1998; Chapter 9.
10. Kritzinger, H. P.; Deelder, B. C.; Kleijn, C. R.; Derksen, J. J.;
Van den Akker, H. E. A. Turbulent flow in a stirred tank with
permeable impeller blades. Proceedings of FEDSM02.
ASME Fluids Eng. Div. Summer Meeting; Montreal,
Canada, 2002; Paper FEDSM2002-31360.
11. Lebens, P. J. M. Development and design of a monolith
reactor for gas-liquid countercurrent operation. Ph.D.
Dissertation, Technische Universiteit Delft, Delft, the
Netherlands, 1999.
12. Moritz, P.; Hasse, H. Fluid dynamics in reactive distillation
packing Katapak-S. Chem. Eng. Sci. 1999, 54, 1367.
13. Palmer, D. A.; Hagen, G. P. Catalytic distillation using rigid,
cellular monoliths as catalyst-packing material. U.S. Patent
5,235,102, 1990.
14. Nijhuis, T. A.; Beers, A. E. W.; Kapteijn, F.; Moulijn, J. A.
Water removal by reactive stripping for a solid-acid-
catalyzed esterification in a monolithic reactor. Chem. Eng.
Sci. 2002, 57, 1627.
15. Edvinsson Albers, R. K.; Houterman, M. J. J.; Vergunst, T.;
Grolman, E.; Moulijn, J. A. Novel monolithic stirrer reactor.
AIChE J. 1998, 44, 2459.
16. Air Products and Chemicals Inc. and Johnson Matthey Inc.
The monolith loop reactor, MLR: Practical process
intensification for the specialty and fine chemical industry;
product brochure, 2002.
17. Liu, W.; Addiego, W. P.; Sorensen, C. M.; Boger, T.
Monolith Reactor for the dehydrogenation of ethylbenzene to
styrene. Ind. Eng. Chem. Res. 2002, 41, 3131.
18. Groppi, G.; Tronconi, E. Simulation of structured catalytic
reactors with enhanced thermal conductivity for selective
oxidation reactions. Catal. Today 2001, 69, 63.
19. Carmello, D.; Marsella, A.; Forzatti, P.; Tronconi, E.;
Groppi, G. Metallic monolith catalyst support for selective
gasphase reactions in tubular fixed bed reactors. European
Patent Application 1 110 605 A1, 2000.
20. Vergunst, T.; Kapteijn, F.; Moulijn, J. A. Optimization of
geometric properties of a monolithic catalyst for the selective
hydrogenation of phenylacetylene. Ind. Eng. Chem. Res.
2001, 40, 2801.

IJAERS/Vol. I/ Issue I/October-December, 2011/1-3