PTQ Q4 2025 Issue

High-throughput testing for hydrocracking catalyst benchmarking

Finding the most suitable catalysts based on the feedstock used while dynamically evaluating data and adjusting test conditions according to experimental findings

Giada Innocenti, Xavier Sanz, Cansu Mai, and Ioan-Teodor Trotus hte Gmbh Carmen Angelini and Ben Miller CITGO

F ossil sources have been depleting over the past cen- tury, and new technologies have been developed to increase the efficiency of extracting valuable prod - ucts from what remains. Current fossil sources are more challenging to process due to the increased impurities present at the ‘bottom’ of the oil reserve, requiring, as such, the ongoing development of more resilient combinations of catalysts. Hydrocrackers are one of the conversion units in a refinery where selecting the optimal catalyst load from available proposals can lead to the highest incremental gains in generated value. Identifying the most suitable catalysts for a specific application requires testing various available options. Conducting these tests in a controlled environment allows a refinery to determine which system best meets its needs. In this context, testing multiple catalysts under different conditions using high-throughput technology allows for an objective comparison and saves a significant amount of time compared to testing a single catalyst. Data elaboration process During high-throughput testing, various catalysts operate under the same conditions, making it easier to compare any experimental errors or uncertainties. Leveraging a high-throughput R&D workflow that seamlessly integrates advanced reactor systems, precise analytics, intelligent software solutions, and deep application expertise, hte col - lects, processes, and prepares vast amounts of data for final reporting using its proprietary internal software, myhte. This article presents one example of finding the most suitable catalysts from eight different loading proposals tested with a high-throughput unit. It is a collaborative effort between hte and CITGO, aimed at identifying the most suita- ble catalyst loading for CITGO’s upcoming turnaround at the Lake Charles Refinery. The goal for hte was to achieve an objective ranking of catalysts based on the feedstock used, while dynamically evaluating data and making adjustments to the test conditions based on experimental findings. Why is such a collaboration between a refinery and an independent catalyst testing facility needed to begin with? Historically, CITGO’s process engineering department ini- tiated each hydrocracker catalyst bid by producing a doc- ument that details production goals and unit operability

Bleed oil

Fresh feed

TLP - HT

TLP - HC

Figure 1 Reactor configuration

limitations expected for the next catalyst run. This document was then submitted to catalyst manufacturers worldwide, who responded with technical packages detailing the best available catalyst systems that could suit CITGO’s needs. These technical packages contain estimates for product yields and an expected unit performance for each proposed catalyst. The estimates are developed from engineering data, proprietary research, and complex kinetic simulations. While CITGO’s technical department has always done a good job of vetting each catalyst manufacturer’s technical estimates on paper, there are drawbacks to this approach. The best paper estimate is only as good as the accuracy of user-specified metrics used to model the feed stream. Although this bidding methodology has been the histori- cal norm for the hydrocracker’s catalyst selection process, paper bids inherently leave some room for error and plenty of room for optimisation, refinement, and innovation. For this reason, pilot plant testing in an independent facility offers refineries the highest confidence in catalyst selection. Experimental setup and conditions The reactor setup for each participant catalyst loading proposal is displayed in Figure 1 . CITGO’s motivation for

PTQ Q4 2025