4.6 Article

Overview of Catalysts with MIRA21 Model in Heterogeneous Catalytic Hydrogenation of 2,4-Dinitrotoluene

Journal

CATALYSTS
Volume 13, Issue 2, Pages -

Publisher

MDPI
DOI: 10.3390/catal13020387

Keywords

hydrogenation; catalyst ranking; catalyst comparison; 2; 4-dinitrotoluene; 4-toluenediamine

Ask authors/readers for more resources

The aim of this work is to characterize, rank, and compare the catalysts of 2,4-dinitrotoluene catalytic hydrogenation to 2,4-toluenediamine by applying the Miskolc Ranking 21 (MIRA21) model. This systematic overview provides a comprehensive picture of the reaction, technological process, and the previous and new research results. Eight catalysts achieved the highest ranking (D1), whereas the transition metal oxide-supported platinum or palladium catalysts led the MIRA21 catalyst ranking list.
Although 2,4-dinitrotoluene (DNT) hydrogenation to 2,4-toluenediamine (TDA) has become less significant in basic and applied research, its industrial importance in polyurethane production is indisputable. The aim of this work is to characterize, rank, and compare the catalysts of 2,4-dinitrotoluene catalytic hydrogenation to 2,4-toluenediamine by applying the Miskolc Ranking 21 (MIRA21) model. This ranking model enables the characterization and comparison of catalysts with a mathematical model that is based on 15 essential parameters, such as catalyst performance, reaction conditions, catalyst conditions, and sustainability parameters. This systematic overview provides a comprehensive picture of the reaction, technological process, and the previous and new research results. In total, 58 catalysts from 15 research articles were selected and studied with the MIRA21 model, which covers the entire scope of DNT hydrogenation catalysts. Eight catalysts achieved the highest ranking (D1), whereas the transition metal oxide-supported platinum or palladium catalysts led the MIRA21 catalyst ranking list.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.6
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available