Next Article in Journal
Conversion of Sugarcane Trash to Nanocrystalline Cellulose and its Life Cycle Assessment
Next Article in Special Issue
Experimental Investigation of Metal-Based Calixarenes as Dispersed Catalyst Precursors for Heavy Oil Hydrocracking
Previous Article in Journal
Synthesis of Durian-like TiO2@CdS Core-Shell Structure and Study on H2 Generation Properties
Previous Article in Special Issue
On a Response Surface Analysis: Hydrodeoxygenation of Phenol over a CoMoS-Based Active Phase
 
 
Article
Peer-Review Record

Impact of the Non-Uniform Catalyst Particle Size on Product Selectivities in Consecutive Reactions

Catalysts 2022, 12(10), 1214; https://doi.org/10.3390/catal12101214
by Juan Rafael García 1, Claudia María Bidabehere 2 and Ulises Sedran 1,*
Reviewer 1:
Reviewer 2: Anonymous
Catalysts 2022, 12(10), 1214; https://doi.org/10.3390/catal12101214
Submission received: 7 September 2022 / Revised: 5 October 2022 / Accepted: 9 October 2022 / Published: 12 October 2022

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

The paper deals with the investigation about how the particle size distribution can affect selectivity in consecutive reactions. The paper is formally well written and the mathematics is rigorous. The results are interesting, and they could be useful for future applications. Few concerns I have on the paper that should be addressed prior publication:

1.      The range of the investigated parameters. The model gives responses that show only minor effect on the main parameters investigated. I suggest to re-run the simulations widening the ranges of applications, to show the real potentialities of the model.

2.      The system description section includes some trivial information that could be removed.

Author Response

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 2 Report

In this manuscript (catalysts-1932250), the authors studied the catalyst particle size on the product selectivity for the consecutive reaction. It is a very interesting and important topic in heterogeneous catalysis.  The data are systematically displayed and explained. I can recommend the publication on this journal, but there are several small comments needed to be tackled before publication.

1. for a modeling paper, the error bars, confidence intervals should be included and reported, then people can have a better overview of the plot and data. And this is my only big concern about this manuscript.

2. for the figures, it is better if the authors can add the annotation to each figure.

Author Response

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Round 2

Reviewer 1 Report

The authors addressed the reviewer comments. It is now publishable.

Back to TopTop