<> "The repository administrator has not yet configured an RDF license."^^ . <> . . . "Biofuel upgrading via catalytic deoxygenation in trickle bed reactor: Crucial issue in selection of pressure regulator type"^^ . "Trickle bed reactors (TBRs) are commonly used in various chemical and associated processes. The selection of a proper back pressure regulator (BPR) is crucial for maintaining the system's upstream pressure. In this study, we investigate the impact of BPR selection on deoxygenation reaction in a TBR with two typical types of BPR, including gas-phase type back pressure regulator (Gas-BPR) and multiphase type back pressure regulator (Multi-BPR). Notably, Gas-BPR introduces interruptions and pressure drops during the sampling step, impacting the hydrogen flow rate, while Multi-BPR ensures more consistent hydrogen flow. To examine the performance of BPR systems, hydrotreating experiments were conducted at 330 °C, 50 bar of hydrogen over Ni/γ-Al2O3 catalyst using crude Pongamia pinnata oil as a feedstock and refined palm olein as a benchmark. Insignificant difference in the reaction performance between Multi-BPR and Gas-BPR systems was observed when using refined palm olein. Interestingly, there was a significant difference between the two systems when feeding with crude Pongamia pinnata oil. The multi-BPR system demonstrated superior performance, achieving 100 conversion of the feedstock over a prolonged period compared to the interrupted hydrogen flow in the Gas-BPR system. Further characterization of fresh and spent catalysts using N2 sorption, XRD, SEM-EDS and TGA-DTG-DSC techniques revealed that a gum and coke formation was a reason for the rapid catalyst deactivation. Furthermore, the interrupted flow in the Gas-BPR system led to substantial gum production, ultimately causing a blockage in the reactor bed. Consequently, for feedstocks with high impurities, a robust continuous flow of hydrogen is essential. Thus, the study strongly recommends selecting Multi-BPR for continuous operation in TBRs to enhance efficiency and avoid catalyst deactivation. © 2023 Elsevier Ltd"^^ . "2024" . . "355" . . "Fuel"^^ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . "K."^^ . "Kiatkittipong"^^ . "K. Kiatkittipong"^^ . . "A."^^ . "Srifa"^^ . "A. Srifa"^^ . . "A."^^ . "Eiad-ua"^^ . "A. Eiad-ua"^^ . . "S."^^ . "Wongsakulphasatch"^^ . "S. Wongsakulphasatch"^^ . . "K."^^ . "Pongsiriyakul"^^ . "K. Pongsiriyakul"^^ . . "S."^^ . "Boonyasuwat"^^ . "S. Boonyasuwat"^^ . . "J.W."^^ . "Lim"^^ . "J.W. Lim"^^ . . "W."^^ . "Kiatkittipong"^^ . "W. Kiatkittipong"^^ . . "V."^^ . "Najdanovic-Visak"^^ . "V. Najdanovic-Visak"^^ . . "S."^^ . "Assabumrungrat"^^ . "S. Assabumrungrat"^^ . . . . . "HTML Summary of #20274 \n\nBiofuel upgrading via catalytic deoxygenation in trickle bed reactor: Crucial issue in selection of pressure regulator type\n\n" . "text/html" . .