Benchmarking hydrotreating and hydrocracking catalysts is often difficult due to the similar performance levels of commercial catalysts. To meaningfully rank catalysts from different suppliers, it’s essential to either run replicate reactor tests or draw from long-term experience to understand expected variability.

This study highlights the importance of recognizing intrinsic experimental errors — not gross errors like feed channeling or improper reactor loading, but inherent variations that affect every test. By analyzing results from repeated experiments, the researchers at hte demonstrated that these intrinsic errors are consistent across testing units.

This statistical proof-of-concept is valuable, as it helps define what differences in catalytic activity can truly be considered significant.

Authors: Giada Innocenti, Jochen Berg, Kai Dannenbauer, Felix Hilpert, Ioan-Teodor Trotus and Jean-Claude Adelbrecht