Ind. Eng. Chem. Res.

1999, 38, 4507-4512 4507

CORRELATIONS

Estimation of Sulfur Content of Petroleum Products and Crude Oils

Mohammad R. Riazi,* Nasrin Nasimi, and Yousef A. Roomi
Chemical Engineering Department, Kuwait University, P.O. Box 5969, Safat 13060, Kuwait

In this paper simple estimation methods are presented to predict sulfur weight percentage in
petroleum fractions and crude oils. Input data needed to use this method are molecular weight,
refractive index, and specific gravity (SG). In cases in which molecular weight and refractive
index are not available they can be estimated from the boiling point and SG of the fraction
using appropriate methods. For crude oils, the C7+ part of the crude mixture was split into several
See https://pubs.acs.org/sharingguidelines for options on how to legitimately share published articles.

pseudocompounds using the two-parameter distribution model proposed by Riazi (Ind. Eng.
Chem. Res. 1997, 36, 4299-4307), and then for each fraction sulfur content was determined.
The sulfur content of crude was then determined from its carbon number distribution (or boiling
Downloaded via UNIV OF CALGARY on February 12, 2020 at 23:31:11 (UTC).

point distribution) and the estimated sulfur content of each pseudocompound. For 132 different
fuels and petroleum products with molecular weight ranging from 75 to 1500 and sulfur contents
up to 6%, an average deviation of about 0.15% was obtained to estimate sulfur weight percentage
from the proposed method. For seven crude oils with sulfur contents up to 2.4%, the proposed
methods gave an average deviation of 0.31%.

Introduction fractions have higher RI values, and those fractions rich

Sulfur in various fuels and petroleum products pro-
mote corrosion of engine parts and contribute to the
formation of engine deposits. A high content of sulfur
compounds in lubricating oil lower resistance to oxida-
tion and increase the deposition of solids. Knowledge
of the amount of sulfur present in a fuel is important
in appropriate design and operation of burners and
related equipment. In refineries, knowledge of sulfur
content of crude oil and its products is important in
design and operation of various units.
As discussed in detail by Speight,2 most sulfur
compounds in a petroleum mixture are in asphaltenes
and heavy aromatics. Heavy fractions [low API or high
specific gravity (SG)] contain more sulfur than light
fractions. In addition, fractions that have higher amounts
of asphaltene and resin contain more sulfur compounds.
Van Nes and van Westen3 have shown that sulfur
weight percentage in a petroleum fraction is related to
the percentage of carbon in naphthenic compounds of
the fraction. Riazi and Daubert4,5 developed methods
for prediction of composition and molecular type analy-
sis of petroleum fractions in terms of molecular weight,
refractive index, density, and viscosity. These methods
were also included in the American Petroleum Institute
(API) Technical Data Book.6 One parameter that well
characterizes different types of hydrocarbon compounds
is the refractivity intercept (RI), defined as:4
RI ) n - d/2 (1)
where n is the refractive index at 20 °C and d is the
liquid density at 20 °C and 1 atm. Highly aromatic
* To whom all correspondence should be addressed. Fax:
(+965) 4839498; tel: (+965) 4817662; e-mail: riazi@
kuc01.kuniv.edu.kw.
in paraffins have lower RI values. For pure hydrocar-
bons RI varies from 1.03 to 1.07. Another useful
characterization parameter is parameter m defined as5
m ) M(n - 1.475) (2)
where M is the molecular weight. For pure compounds
m varies from -10 to 45. Aromatics have positive values
of m and paraffins have negative m values. In addition,
values of m for benzenes and monoaromatics are much
lower than values of m for condensed multicyclic
aromatics as shown in Table 1. Other characterization
parameters for description of molecular types of petro-
leum fractions as examined by Riazi and Daubert5 are
carbon-to-hydrogen weight ratio (CH), SG, and viscosity
gravity constant (VGC). These parameters are the basis
for development of a method to estimate sulfur content
of a fraction.
Characterization techniques for crude oils and reser-
voir fluids have been discussed in details by Riazi.1,7 In
this method a simple distribution model is used to
estimate property distributions in crude oils and then
the C7+ portion of the crude is split into several (usually
three or five) pseudocompounds by using the distribu-
tion model and carbon number range chosen for each
pseudocompound. The minimum information needed for
this technique are molecular weight and SG of the
Table 1. Values of Parameter m for Different Types of
Hydrocarbons
hydrocarbon type m
paraffins -8.79
cyclopentanes -5.41
cyclohexanes -4.43
benzenes 2.64
naphthenes 19.5
condensed tricyclics 43.6

10.1021/ie990262d CCC: $18.00 © 1999 American Chemical Society

Published on Web 10/08/1999
4508 Ind. Eng. Chem. Res., Vol. 38, No. 11, 1999
Table 2. Prediction of Sulfur Content of Petroleum
Fractions
fraction no. of mol. wt. sp. gr. sulfur wt %
errora
type points range range range AAD% MAD%
light 76 76-247 0.57-0.86 0.01-1.6 0.09 0.7
heavy 56 230-1500 0.80-1.05 0.07-6.2 0.24 1.6
overall 132 76-1500 0.57-1.05 0.01-6.2 0.15 1.6
a AAD% ) abs. average deviation %. MAD% ) max. average
deviation %.
heptane-plus fraction of the crude. However, if true
boiling point for a crude is known, more accurate
pseudocomponents can be obtained from the distribution
model. We use this technique in this work for develop-
ment of a method for estimation of sulfur content of
crude oils and reservoir fluids. The main objective of
this work is to propose a method for accurate estimation
of the amount of sulfur in a crude oil or various
petroleum products and fuels using easily measurable
or readily available properties. To the best of our
knowledge such methods do not currently exist in the
literature.
Technical Development
As discussed earlier, parameters RI, m, SG, CH, and
VGC have the ability to describe molecular type analysis
of petroleum fractions. Overall, 132 petroleum fractions
with information on the amount of sulfur as well as
some general properties such as SG, viscosity at one or
two temperatures, and boiling point have been collected
using private and open literature sources. Upon exten-
sive analysis of data we found that parameters RI, m,
and SG best describe sulfur composition of petroleum
fractions, and the following equations were obtained
from the data bank.
For fractions with M < 250
S% ) 177.4482 - 170.9463RI + 0.2258m +
4.054SG (3)
For fractions with M > 200
S% ) -58.02 + 38.4628RI - 0.0229m + 22.4SG (4)
where RI and m are defined by eqs 1 and 2. For fractions
with molecular weights between 200 and 250 both eqs
3 and 4 may be used. In this range of molecular weight,
the difference between accuracies of these two equations
is within the accuracy of these equations. For light
fractions in which eq 3 may give very small negative
values, S% would be considered as zero. General infor-
mation for the fractions used to develop eqs 3 and 4 are
given in Table 2. Sulfur weight percentage in the
fractions varies from 0.01 to 6.2%. Equation 3 can
estimate S% with an average deviation of 0.09%,
whereas eq 4 predicts S% with average deviation of
0.24%. Overall average error for all 132 fractions is
0.15%. Values of R2 for these equations were 0.95. As
sulfur generally is present more in heavier fractions,
eq 4 is more important than eq 3. For example, for the
fractions used in this work, sulfur content of fractions
with molecular weight less than 200 was usually less
than 1%. A detailed evaluation of eq 4 with complete
information on various fractions used to evaluate eq 4
are given in Table 3. Generally for heavy fractions, data
on API gravity (or SG), sulfur content, and viscosity
were available from the literature. Other properties
were estimated through appropriate correlations.
In using the proposed method the only input data
needed are molecular weight, refractive index at 20 °C,
liquid density at 20 °C, and SG at 15.5 °C (or API
gravity). In cases in which these data are not available
they can be predicted from appropriate correlations. For
example, molecular weight of heavy fractions can be
estimated from viscosity at two temperatures as pro-
posed by Riazi and Daubert.8 If boiling point and SG
are known, then methods given by Riazi Daubert9,10 that
are also included in the API Technical Data Book6 can
be used to estimate parameters M, n, and d needed to
calculate RI and m from eqs 1 and 2.
For heavy fractions, usually SG and one viscosity data
(either at 100 or at 210 °F) are known. The following
equations proposed by Riazi and Daubert8 which are
also recommended by the API, were used to estimate
viscosity at other temperatures and molecular weights:
0.1157 0.1157
SG ) 0.7717 × [ν100 ][ν100 ] (5)
M ) 223.56 ×
(-1.245+1.1228SG)
[ν100 (3.4758-3.038SG)
][ν210 ][SG-0.6665] (6)
in which ν100 and ν210 are kinematic viscosities at 100
and 210 °F (37.8 and 98.9 °C), respectively. Equation 5
can be used to estimate ν100 if ν210 and SG are known
and it has accuracy of 1.5%. Then eq 6 can be used to
estimate molecular weight M. Equation 6 can estimate
molecular weight of petroleum fractions with an average
deviation of 2.7% for 158 fractions. Having M and SG,
the following equation given by Riazi and Daubert10 can
be used to estimate average boiling point (Tb):
Tb ) 3.76587 exp(3.7741 × 10-4M + 2.98404SG -
4.252 × 10-3MSG)M0.40167SG-1.58262 (7)
where Tb is in K. Accuracy of eq 7 is 1%. Once Tb and
SG are known for any fraction the following equations
proposed by Riazi and Daubert9 may be used to estimate
density (d) and refractive index (n) at 20 °C.
d ) 0.98372Tb0.00202SG1.0055 (8)
I ) 0.3773Tb-0.02269SG0.9182 (9)
where Tb is in K, d is liquid density at 20 °C in g/cm3,
and n can be calculated from the following equation.
(11+-2II )
1/2
n) (10)
Average errors for eqs 8 and 9 are 0.03% and 0.5%,
respectively. For light fractions in which Tb is known
from distillation data, M can be estimated from the
following equation given by Riazi and Daubert.9
M ) 1.6607 × 10-4Tb2.1962SG-1.0164 (11)
where Tb is in K. Accuracy of this equation is about
2.5%. However, for fractions with molecular weights
greater than 300, the following equations may be used
to estimate I and M as recommended by Riazi and
Daubert.10
I ) 1.8429 × 10-2 exp(1.16352 × 10-3Tb +
5.1445G - 5.9202 × 10-4TbSG)Tb-0.407SG-3.333 (12)
 Ind. Eng. Chem. Res., Vol. 38, No. 11, 1999 4509

Table 3. Evaluation of Eq 4 for Estimation of Sulfur Content of Heavy Fractions with Estimated Properties
no. fraction SGa ν210Fa (cst) T b, K M d20 n20 RI m S%, exp S%, pred abs. dev. %
1 Kuwait crude cut # 1 0.8370 - 543a 202 0.8331 1.4676 1.0511 -1.4849 1.03 1.19 0.16
2 Kuwait crude cut # 2 0.8425 - 553a 209 0.8386 1.4707 1.0514 -0.9012 1.21 1.31 0.10
3 Kuwait crude cut # 3 0.8477 - 563a 216 0.8438 1.4735 1.0516 -0.3133 1.37 1.42 0.05
4 Kuwait crude cut # 4 0.8528 - 573a 223 0.8490 1.4764 1.0519 0.3165 1.50 1.54 0.04
5 Kuwait crude cut # 5 0.8577 - 583a 230 0.8539 1.4791 1.0522 0.9479 1.60 1.64 0.04
6 Kuwait crude cut # 6 0.8624 - 593a 238 0.8586 1.4817 1.0524 1.5925 1.67 1.74 0.07
7 Kuwait crude cut # 7 0.8712 - 613a 253 0.8675 1.4866 1.0528 2.930 1.86 1.92 0.06
8 Kuwait crude cut # 8 0.8753 - 623a 261 0.8716 1.4888 1.0530 3.606 2.05 2.05 0.0
9 vacuum gas oil crude 0.9189 - 662a 337 0.9154 1.5028 1.0451 9.375 2.81 2.55 0.26
assay 94
10 vacuum gas oil crude 0.9240 - 676a 360 0.9206 1.5068 1.0465 11.4436 2.70 2.67 0.03
assay 91
11 atmospheric residue crude 0.9710 50.9 748 573 0.9679 1.5516 1.0677 43.8892 4.20 3.79 0.41
assay 94
12 atmospheric residue crude 0.9800 81.8 752 628 0.9769 1.5629 1.0745 55.2273 4.20 3.99 0.21
assay 91
13 atmospheric residue crude 0.9760 68.2 752 609 0.9729 1.5580 1.0716 50.5717 4.20 3.90 0.30
assay 84
14 kerosene 31 API # 1 0.7772 0.95 (100) 585 246 0.7734 1.4326 1.0459 -10.4499 0.07 0.0 0.07
15 kerosene 31 API # 2 0.8001 1.43 (100) 574 237 0.7962 1.4448 1.0467 -7.1641 0.30 0.33 0.03
16 kerosene 31 API # 3 0.8066 1.63 (100) 573 236 0.8027 1.4483 1.0469 -6.3171 0.36 0.46 0.10
17 kerosene 31 API # 4 0.8110 1.79 (100) 573 237 0.8072 1.4507 1.0471 -5.7596 0.41 0.55 0.14
18 gasoline 31 API # 1 0.8316 2.71 (100) 572 236 0.8278 1.4619 1.0481 -3.0794 0.93 0.99 0.06
19 gasoline 31 API # 2 0.8551 4.79 (100) 583 244 0.8513 1.4747 1.0491 -0.0706 1.54 1.49 0.05
20 vacuum gas oil 31 API # 1 0.9065 25.4 (100) 651 321 0.9030 1.4947 1.0432 6.3146 2.56 2.26 0.3
21 vacuum gas oil 31 API # 2 0.9367 13.04 713 429 0.9334 1.5177 1.0510 18.3263 3.10 2.97 0.13
22 vacuum gas oil 31 API # 3 0.9189 49.4 (100) 677 359 0.9155 1.5034 1.0456 10.1811 2.81 2.55 0.26
23 residue 31 API # 1 1.0025 324 740 793 0.9994 1.5970 1.0973 96.8158 4.80 4.42 0.38
24 residue 31 API # 2 1.0285 2134 681 1006 1.0253 1.6483 1.1356 174.2679 5.20 4.70 0.50
25 marine diesel oil T-093-96 0.8217 2.306 (100) 576 239 0.8179 1.4564 1.0474 -4.4575 0.69 0.77 0.09
26 marine diesel oil T-075-96 0.8232 2.361 (100) 576 239 0.8194 1.4572 1.0475 -4.2444 0.75 0.81 0.05
27 diesel oil T-106-96 0.8114 1.898 (100) 578 241 0.8076 1.4507 1.0470 -5.8533 0.54 0.56 0.02
28 diesel oil T-097-96 0.8104 1.849 (100) 578 241 0.8066 1.4502 1.0469 -5.9681 0.52 0.54 0.02
29 marine diesel oil (avg.) 0.8222 2.32 (100) 576 239 0.8184 1.4567 1.0475 -5.9681 0.73 0.79 0.05
30 D-1 diesel oil (avg.) 0.8118 1.913 (100) 578 241 0.8080 1.4510 1.0470 -4.3821 0.55 0.57 0.02
31 petroleum cut # 1 0.7930 1.49 (100) 576 257 0.7887 1.4406 1.0462 -5.7997 0.20 0.19 0.01
32 petroleum cut # 2 0.8010 2.00 (100) 578 269 0.7968 1.4444 1.0460 -8.8412 0.41 0.34 0.07
33 petroleum cut # 3 0.8440 2.90 (100) 447 221 0.8400 1.4694 1.0494 -1.2398 1.16 1.28 0.12
34 petroleum cut # 4 0.8460 3.70 (100) 475 238 0.8420 1.4699 1.0489 -1.2173 1.35 1.30 0.05
35 petroleum cut # 5 0.8500 4.80 (100) 508 253 0.8461 1.4714 1.0484 -0.9005 1.50 1.36 0.14
36 deasphalting unit feed 1.0030 345 525 804 0.9999 1.5982 1.0983 99.0491 4.05 4.42 0.37
37 deasphalting unit DAO C4 0.9590 631 548 658 0.9559 1.5431 1.0652 44.8482 3.30 3.40 0.10
38 deasphalting unit DAO C5 0.9740 105 772 704 0.9709 1.5599 1.0744 59.7173 3.65 3.75 0.10
39 deasphalting unit feed 1.0246 1565 693 972 1.0214 1.6396 1.1289 160.0637 4.9 4.68 0.22
lube oil
40 deasphalting unit DAO 0.9321 35.4 804 633 0.9291 1.5181 1.0536 27.3183 2.7 2.76 0.06
(lube oil)
41 F. C. C. heavy gas oil M. C. 0.9529 12 688 390 0.9495 1.5286 1.0539 20.9175 3.1 3.38 0.28
42 hydroc. VGO 0.9242 - 683 370b 0.9208 1.5072 1.0468 11.9166 2.5 2.67 0.17
43 hydroc. Feed VGO 0.9250 9 697 393 0.9216 1.5083 1.0475 13.0997 3 2.69 0.31
44 FCC H. G.O cut M. C. 0.9529 12 688 390 0.9495 1.5286 1.0539 20.9175 3.1 3.38 0.28
45 Deasphalting unit feed 1.0030 345 739 804 0.9999 1.5982 1.0983 99.0491 4.05 4.42 0.37
46 DAO C4 0.9590 63 781 658 0.9559 1.5431 1.0652 44.8482 3.3 3.40 0.10
47 DAO C5 0.9740 105 772 704 0.9709 1.5599 1.0744 59.7173 3.65 3.75 0.10
48 D. A. feed lube oil 1.0246 1565 693 972 1.0214 1.6396 1.1289 160.0637 4.9 4.68 0.22
49 D. A. feed crack stock 1.0254 1870 687 1006 1.0222 1.6433 1.1322 169.3553 3 4.61 1.61
50 DAO L.O 0.9321 35.4 804 633 0.9291 1.5181 1.0536 27.3183 2.7 2.76 0.06
51 Kuwait vacuum 1.0328 1900 682 939 1.0297 1.6498 1.1349 164.1416 5.45 5.00 0.45
52 Buzurgan 1.0513 3355 661 881 1.0481 1.6737 1.1497 175.1727 6.2 5.73 0.47
53 Cambimas vacuum 1.0231 7800 622 1439 1.0198 1.6711 1.1613 282.1741 3.26 3.09 0.17
54 Arabian light atmosphere 0.9541 27 740 510 0.9510 1.5341 1.0586 30.1384 3 3.38 0.38
55 Saudi Arabia vacuum 1.0366 2700 670 977 1.0334 1.6590 1.1423 179.7868 5.2 5.01 0.19
56 Boscan 0.9979 20000 (100) 746 762 0.9948 1.5895 1.0921 87.2318 5.6 4.34 1.26
57 tar sand triangle 0.9923 7000 (100) 743 649 0.9892 1.5770 1.0824 66.2079 4.38 4.32 0.06
58 Athambasaca 1.0298 110 697 509 1.0267 1.6088 1.0954 68.0595 4.9 5.62 0.72
59 Cold Lake 1.0000 79.0 722 553 0.9969 1.5796 1.0812 57.8722 4.4 4.64 0.24
60 Jobo 1.0100 515.4 728 844 1.0069 1.6098 1.1063 113.7255 3.9 4.55 0.65
61 TIA Juan vacuum 1.0209 7959 620 1484 1.0175 1.6699 1.1611 289.2786 2.6 2.87 0.27
a Properties are measured values (such as SG, ν, and some values of T ). Viscosity data (ν
b 210) are given at 210 °F (98.9 °C); for kinematic
viscosity data at 100 °F (37.8 °C), values of temperature (100 °F) are specified in the parentheses. b For this fraction the aniline point was
180 °F. Using API method,6 M was estimated from aniline point and SG. References: Fractions 1-24, private communication, industrial
source, Kuwait;13 fractions 25-30, private communication, industrial source, Saudi Arabia;14 fractions 31-35, Jones;15 fractions 36-43,
Refining Handbook;16 fractions 44-50, Refining Processes;17 fractions 51-61, Speight.2

M ) 42.965[exp(2.097 × 10-4Tb - 7.78712SG +
-3 1.26007
2.0848 × 10 TbSG)]Tb SG
where Tb is in K and SG is the specific gravity at 60 °F
(15.5 °C). Equations 12 and 13 give average errors of
about 0.5% and 2%, respectively.
To further evaluate the proposed method, four differ-
ent petroleum products (naphtha, kerosene, diesel oil,
and gas oil) were obtained from Shuaiba Refinery of
4.98308 Kuwait National Petroleum Company (KNPC). Mea-
(13) sured values of boiling point, SG, refractive index, and
sulfur content as well as estimated properties needed
for eqs 3 and 4 and predicted sulfur content are all given
in Table 4. These data were not used in development of
eqs 3 and 4, yet estimated sulfur contents are very close
to measured values. These equations can be also evalu-
4510 Ind. Eng. Chem. Res., Vol. 38, No. 11, 1999

Table 4. Estimation of Sulfur Content of Four Kuwaiti Petroleum Productsa

petroleum
product Tb,a K SGa n2Oa M n2O pred. dZO RI m Sa %, exp S%, pred. abs. dev. %
naphtha 373 0.715 1.405 104 1.400 0.710 1.045 -7.801 0.001 0 0
kerosene 468 0.791 1.441 154.4 1.442 0.787 1.049 -5.086 0.001 0.17 0.17
diesel oil 583 0.860 1.480 229.8 1.480 0.856 1.052 1.264 1.3 1.3 0
gas oil 707 0.928 1.526 324.8 1.510 0.925 1.048 11.307 2.4 2.8 0.4
a Values have been measured in laboratory. These data were not used in development of eqs 3 and 4. Samples were obtained from

Kuwait National Petroleum Company, Shuaiba Refinery.

ated indirectly through estimation of sulfur contents of Table 5. Prediction of Sulfur Content of Kuwaiti Crude
crude oils as outlined below. for Exporta
Estimation of Sulfur Content of Crude Oils. Data predicted
analyzed by Gary and Handwerk11 and Speight2 on cut wt % mol. wt. sp. gr. Tb, °C sulfur wt. %
sulfur content of crude oils indicate that the amount of C2 0.03 30.1 0.0
sulfur in various distillates from a crude increases with C3 0.39 44.1 0.0
increase in carbon number (or molecular weight or iC4 0.62 58.1 0.0
boiling point). Analysis of crude by gas chromatography nC4 1.08 58.1 0.0
iC5 0.77 72.2 0.0
gives weight fractions of pure hydrocarbons up to
nC5 1.31 72.2 0.0
n-pentane, hexanes (C6 fraction), and heptane-plus C6 1.93 82 0.690 64 0.2
fraction (C7+). The C7+ portion of the crude can be C7+(1) 9.1 112.0 0.753 123 0.1
presented by a distribution model proposed by Riazi,7 C7+(2) 15.2 169.1 0.810 216 0.7
and then using a technique proposed by Riazi,1 it can C7+(3) 26.4 267.1 0.864 333 1.9
be presented by a number of defined pseudocompounds. C7+(4) 18.5 405.8 0.904 438 2.9
C7+(5) 24.8 660.9 0.943 527 3.8
The distribution model is presented by the probability total 100 2.1
density function F(P*) given as:
7+ properties: mol. wt. ) 266.6, sp. gr. ) 0.891,
a Measured C

B2
B wt % in the crude ) 93.9.
F(P*) )
A
P*B-1 exp - P*B
A ( ) (14)
where P* is defined by:
P - Po
P* )
Po
in which P is a property such as M, Tb, SG, or I.
Parameters A, B, and Po can be determined from
properties of C7+ as described by Riazi.7 Once these
parameters are known, the gaussian quadrature tech-
nique can be used to estimate weight percentage,
molecular weight, boiling point, and SG of various
pseudocomponents. Using boiling point and SG, refrac-
tive index and density at 20 °C can be estimated from
methods previously discussed. After calculation of RI
and m from eqs 1 and 2 for each pseudocomponent, eqs
3 and 4 can be used to estimate sulfur content of each
pseudocomponent. Sulfur content of the whole crude
then is calculated from the following equation:
calculations are given in Table 5. Estimated sulfur
weight percentage for the crude is 2.1%, which differs
by 0.3% from the experimental value. As can be seen
from Table 5, sulfur content of C6 fraction is very low
(15) and sulfur compounds are mainly in the C7+ part of the
crude. For pure hydrocarbons up to C5, no sulfur
compound is present. Therefore, if only information on
C7+ part of a crude is available, its sulfur content can
be estimated through the proposed method.
In many cases analysis of a crude is given by boiling
point and SG of various cuts. Such data for Kuwaiti
crude for export are given in Table 6. Actually this is
the same crude that was presented in Table 5. Usually
in boiling point distribution of crudes or heavy fractions,
boiling point of the residue is not known. This boiling
point can be determined through the distribution model
presented by eq 14. On the basis of data available for
boiling point versus cumulative weight fraction, param-
eters A, B, and To (for Po) in eq 14 were determined as
A ) 1.989, B ) 1.5, and To ) 333 K. Then the average

∑i Xwi (sulfur wt %)i

boiling point is calculated by the following equation as
sulfur wt % of crude ) (16) given by Riazi:7

in which Xwi is the weight fraction of pseudocomponent
i in the crude. The method can be best explained by an
example with Kuwaiti crude for export. The crude has
API gravity of 31 and sulfur content of 2.4%. The C7+
portion of the crude has 93.9 wt % with molecular
weight of 266.6 and specific gravity of 0.891. The C7+
fraction was split into five pseudocomponents with
known molecular weight, boiling point, and SG accord-
ing to the method outlined by Riazi.1 The refractive
index and density for each pseudocomponent were
calculated by correlations of Riazi and Daubert9 given
by eqs 8 and 9 (or 12).
Parameters RI and m were calculated through eqs 1
and 2 and then sulfur content of each pseudocomponent
was determined using eqs 3 and 4. Sulfur content of the
whole crude was then calculated from eq 16. Details of
Tavg ) To(1 + 0.689AT2/3) (17)
where both To and Tavg are in K. This equation gives
an average boiling point of 696 °C. Knowing the average
boiling point of whole crude and boiling points of various
cuts with their weight percentage, one can determine
the boiling point of the residue. For the crude in Table
6, the boiling point of residue was determined to be
628.5 °C.
Having boiling point and SG of different cuts, various
properties and sulfur content of each cut can be esti-
mated as discussed earlier. Sulfur content of the whole
crude is calculated from eq 16. As shown in Table 6,
estimated sulfur content of crude is within 0.02% of
measured value. This method is more accurate than the
method shown in Table 5, because more detailed data
 Ind. Eng. Chem. Res., Vol. 38, No. 11, 1999 4511

Table 6. Boiling Point Distribution and Sulfur Content

of Kuwaiti Crude for Export
Tb, mass wt S%, S%, abs. (S%) ×
°C % % SG exp pred dev. wt %
20.00 1.70 1.70 0.57 0.006 0.000 0.006 0.00
25.00 1.96 0.26 0.58 0.006 0.000 0.006 0.00
30.00 2.25 0.29 0.60 0.006 0.000 0.006 0.00
35.00 2.56 0.31 0.61 0.006 0.000 0.006 0.00
40.00 2.89 0.33 0.62 0.006 0.000 0.006 0.00
45.00 3.26 0.37 0.63 0.007 0.000 0.007 0.00
50.00 3.64 0.38 0.64 0.007 0.000 0.007 0.00
55.00 4.06 0.42 0.65 0.007 0.002 0.005 0.00
60.00 4.50 0.44 0.66 0.007 0.008 0.001 0.00
65.00 4.97 0.47 0.67 0.008 0.013 0.005 0.00
70.00 5.46 0.49 0.68 0.008 0.017 0.009 0.00
75.00 5.98 0.52 0.69 0.008 0.021 0.013 0.00
80.00 6.53 0.55 0.70 0.008 0.025 0.017 0.00
85.00 7.11 0.58 0.70 0.008 0.028 0.020 0.00
90.00 7.71 0.60 0.71 0.009 0.032 0.023 0.00
95.00 8.34 0.63 0.71 0.009 0.036 0.027 0.00 Figure 1. Sulfur distribution of Kuwaiti crude for export from
100.00 9.00 0.66 0.72 0.009 0.040 0.031 0.00 Table 6.
105.00 9.40 0.40 0.72 0.01 0.015 0.035 0.00
110.00 9.92 0.52 0.73 0.011 0.050 0.039 0.00 Table 7. Results of Estimation of Sulfur Contents of
115.00 10.51 0.59 0.73 0.016 0.055 0.039 0.00 Kuwaiti Crude Oilsa
120.00 11.17 0.66 0.74 0.019 0.062 0.043 0.00 crude API gravity S%, exp S%, pred. abs. dev.%
125.00 11.88 0.71 0.74 0.022 0.068 0.046 0.00
130.00 12.61 0.73 0.75 0.026 0.076 0.050 0.00 1 31 2.4 2.1 0.3
135.00 13.37 0.76 0.75 0.031 0.085 0.051 0.00 2 40.2 1.08 1.58 0.5
140.00 14.13 0.76 0.75 0.036 0.094 0.058 0.00 3 37.2 1.74 1.7 0.04
145.00 14.90 0.77 0.76 0.041 0.104 0.063 0.00 4 36.3 1.9 1.57 0.33
150.00 15.66 0.76 0.76 0.047 0.115 0.068 0.00 5 32.7 2.14 1.71 0.43
155.00 16.41 0.75 0.76 0.054 0.128 0.074 0.00 6 36.4 1.8 1.67 0.13
160.00 17.16 0.75 0.77 0.061 0.141 0.080 0.00 7 32.7 2.2 1.76 0.44
165.00 17.90 0.74 0.77 0.068 0.155 0.087 0.00 total 31-40.2 1.1-2.4 - 0.31
170.00 18.63 0.73 0.77 0.077 0.171 0.091 0.00 a Data obtained from local industrial source.13
175.00 19.35 0.72 0.78 0.086 0.188 0.102 0.00
180.00 20.06 0.71 0.78 0.095 0.206 0.111 0.00
185.00 20.77 0.71 0.78 0.106 0.227 0.121 0.00 Using this technique, sulfur contents of seven differ-
190.00 21.48 0.71 0.79 0.117 0.249 0.132 0.00 ent Kuwaiti crudes were estimated. Experimental data
195.00 22.19 0.71 0.79 0.129 0.272 0.143 0.00 for these crudes were received from a local industrial
200.00 22.90 0.71 0.79 0.142 0.296 0.154 0.00 source,13 and summary of estimated and experimental
210.00 24.35 1.45 0.80 0.17 0.350 0.180 0.01 data are given in Table 7. As shown in this table,
220.00 25.82 1.47 0.80 0.201 0.411 0.210 0.01 estimated values are within 0.3% of experimental
230.00 27.33 1.51 0.81 0.31 0.481 0.171 0.01
240.00 28.89 1.56 0.82 0.46 0.556 0.096 0.01 values.
250.00 30.47 1.58 0.82 0.64 0.639 0.001 0.01
260.00 32.07 1.60 0.83 0.83 0.730 0.100 0.01 Conclusions
270.00 33.66 1.59 0.83 1.03 1.191 0.161 0.02
280.00 35.22 1.56 0.84 1.21 1.311 0.101 0.02 In this work a method is presented to estimate sulfur
290.00 36.71 1.49 0.84 1.37 1.424 0.054 0.02 weight percentage of various petroleum fractions and
300.00 38.13 1.42 0.85 1.5 1.535 0.035 0.02 products using molecular weight, refractive index, and
310.00 39.45 1.32 0.85 1.6 1.639 0.039 0.02
density as input parameters. Minimum information
320.00 40.68 0.23 0.86 1.67 1.738 0.068 0.00
330.00 41.86 1.18 0.86 1.75 1.831 0.081 0.02 needed for a fraction is its SG and boiling point or
340.00 43.04 1.18 0.87 1.86 1.922 0.062 0.02 viscosity. A method is also outlined to estimate sulfur
350.00 44.33 1.29 0.87 2.05 2.005 0.045 0.03 content of crude oils. The only information needed for
360.00 45.89 1.56 0.88 2.4 2.00 0.40 0.03 the crude is its distillation data or weight percentage
449.00 71.89 26.00 0.92 2.81 2.86 0.05 0.74 of C7+ fraction with molecular weight and SG at 15.5
628.46 100.09 28.20 1.0285 5.2 4.80 0.40 1.35
total predicted S ) 2.38
°C.
% dev. ) 0.02
Acknowledgment
were available for the crude. A graphical presentation
of estimated and experimental sulfur distribution versus This paper was presented at the Division of Petroleum
boiling point for the crude of Table 6 is shown in Figure Chemistry of the American Chemical Society (ACS)
1. In cases in which only boiling point for various cuts Annual Meeting, Boston, August 23-27, 1998. The
of crudes are known, SG of each cut can be calculated authors are grateful to KNPC for providing data and
using the relations given by Riazi and Al-Sahhaf.12 the petroleum samples.

M ) [355.395 - 50.9165 ln(1080 - Tb)]1.5 (18) Nomenclature

SG ) 1.07 - exp(3.56073 - 2.93886M0.1) (19)
For each cut, M can be estimated from eq 18 using
the given boiling point, and SG can be estimated from
eq 19. Therefore, for each cut Tb and SG are known.
d ) liquid density of fraction at 20 °C and 1 atm, g/cm3
I ) refractive index parameter
M ) molecular weight of the fraction
m ) parameter defined by eq 2
n ) refractive index of fraction at 20 °C and 1 atm
P ) parameter such as M, Tb, or SG
4512 Ind. Eng. Chem. Res., Vol. 38, No. 11, 1999
RI ) refractivity intercept defined by eq 1
Tb ) normal boiling point, K
S% ) sulfur weight percentage of the fraction
SG ) specific gravity of the fraction at 15.5 °C
Xwi ) weight fraction of pseudocomponent i in a crude oil
ν ) kinematic viscosity at 100 or 210 °F, cSt
Literature Cited
(1) Riazi, M. R. A Distribution Model for C7+ Fractions Char-
acterization of Petroleum Fluids. Ind. Eng. Chem. Res. 1997, 36,
4299-4307.
(2) Speight, J. G. The Chemistry and Technology of Petroleum,
2nd ed.; Marcel Dekker: New York, 1991.
(3) Van Nes, K.; Van Westen, H. A. Aspects of the Constitution
of Mineral Oils; Elsevier: New York, 1951.
(4) Riazi, M. R.; Daubert, T. E. Prediction of the Composition
of Petroleum Fractions. Ind. Eng. Chem. Process Des. Dev. 1980,
19, 289-294.
(5) Riazi, M. R.; Daubert, T. E. Prediction of Molecular Type
Analysis of Petroleum Fractions and Coal Liquids. Ind. Eng. Chem.
Process Des. Dev. 1986, 25, 1009-1015.
(6) API Technical Data Book - Petroleum Refining, 5th ed.;
Daubert, T. E., Danner, R. P., Eds., American Petroleum Insti-
tute: Washington, DC, 1989; Chapter 2, pp 15-30.
(7) Riazi, M. R. Distribution Model for Properties of Hydrocarbon-
Plus Fractions. Ind. Eng. Chem. Res. 1989, 28, 1831-1735.
(8) Riazi, M. R.; Daubert, T. E. Molecular Weight of Heavy
Fractions from Viscosity. Oil Gas J. 1987, 58, 110-113.
(9) Riazi, M. R.; Daubert, T. E. Simplify Property Predictions.
Hydrocarbon Process. 1980, 59, 115-116.
(10) Riazi, M. R.; Daubert, T. E. Characterization Parameters
for Petroleum Fractions. Ind. Eng. Chem. Res. 1987, 26, 755-759.
(11) Gary, J. H., Handwerk, G. E. Petroleum Refinings
Technology and Economics, 3rd ed.; Marcel Dekker: New York,
1994.
(12) Riazi, M. R.; Al-Sahhaf, T. A. Physical Properties of Heavy
Petroleum Fractions and Crude Oils. Fluid Phase Equilib. 1996,
117, 217-224.
(13) Industrial Source, Private Communication, Kuwait, 1997.
(14) Industrial Source, Private Communication, Saudi Arabia,
1997.
(15) Jones, D. S. J. Elements of Petroleum Processing; Wiley:
New York, 1995.
(16) Refining Handbook ’90, A Special Report. Hydrocarbon
Process. 1990, 69, 83.
(17) Refining Processes ’94, A Special Report. Hydrocarbon
Process. 1994, 73, 87.
Received for review April 13, 1999
Revised manuscript received July 12, 1999
Accepted August 18, 1999
IE990262D