phd defence utwente

Research Voyage

Research Tips and Infromation

PhD Defence Process: A Comprehensive Guide

Embarking on the journey toward a PhD is an intellectual odyssey marked by tireless research, countless hours of contemplation, and a fervent commitment to contributing to the body of knowledge in one’s field. As the culmination of this formidable journey, the PhD defence stands as the final frontier, the proverbial bridge between student and scholar.

In this comprehensive guide, we unravel the intricacies of the PhD defence—a momentous occasion that is both a celebration of scholarly achievement and a rigorous evaluation of academic prowess. Join us as we explore the nuances of the defence process, addressing questions about its duration, contemplating the possibility of failure, and delving into the subtle distinctions of language that surround it.

Beyond the formalities, we aim to shed light on the significance of this rite of passage, dispelling misconceptions about its nature. Moreover, we’ll consider the impact of one’s attire on this critical day and share personal experiences and practical tips from those who have successfully navigated the defence journey.

Whether you are on the precipice of your own defence or are simply curious about the process, this guide seeks to demystify the PhD defence, providing a roadmap for success and a nuanced understanding of the pivotal event that marks the transition from student to scholar.

Introduction

A. definition and purpose:, b. overview of the oral examination:, a. general duration of a typical defense, b. factors influencing the duration:, c. preparation and flexibility:, a. preparation and thorough understanding of the research:, b. handling questions effectively:, c. confidence and composure during the presentation:, d. posture of continuous improvement:, a. exploring the possibility of failure:, b. common reasons for failure:, c. steps to mitigate the risk of failure:, d. post-failure resilience:, a. addressing the language variation:, b. conforming to regional preferences:, c. consistency in usage:, d. flexibility and adaptability:, e. navigating language in a globalized academic landscape:, a. debunking myths around the formality of the defense:, b. significance in validating research contributions:, c. post-defense impact:, a. appropriate attire for different settings:, b. professionalism and the impact of appearance:, c. practical tips for dressing success:, b. practical tips for a successful defense:, c. post-defense reflections:, career options after phd.

Embarking on the doctoral journey is a formidable undertaking, where aspiring scholars immerse themselves in the pursuit of knowledge, contributing new insights to their respective fields. At the pinnacle of this academic odyssey lies the PhD defence—a culmination that transcends the boundaries of a mere formality, symbolizing the transformation from a student of a discipline to a recognized contributor to the academic tapestry.

The PhD defence, also known as the viva voce or oral examination, is a pivotal moment in the life of a doctoral candidate.

PhD defence is not merely a ritualistic ceremony; rather, it serves as a platform for scholars to present, defend, and elucidate the findings and implications of their research. The defence is the crucible where ideas are tested, hypotheses scrutinized, and the depth of scholarly understanding is laid bare.

The importance of the PhD defence reverberates throughout the academic landscape. It is not just a capstone event; it is the juncture where academic rigour meets real-world application. The defence is the litmus test of a researcher’s ability to articulate, defend, and contextualize their work—an evaluation that extends beyond the pages of a dissertation.

Beyond its evaluative nature, the defence serves as a rite of passage, validating the years of dedication, perseverance, and intellectual rigour invested in the research endeavour. Success in the defence is a testament to the candidate’s mastery of their subject matter and the originality and impact of their contributions to the academic community.

Furthermore, a successful defence paves the way for future contributions, positioning the scholar as a recognized authority in their field. The defence is not just an endpoint; it is a launchpad, propelling researchers into the next phase of their academic journey as they continue to shape and redefine the boundaries of knowledge.

In essence, the PhD defence is more than a ceremonial checkpoint—it is a transformative experience that validates the intellectual journey, underscores the significance of scholarly contributions, and sets the stage for a continued legacy of academic excellence. As we navigate the intricacies of this process, we invite you to explore the multifaceted dimensions that make the PhD defence an indispensable chapter in the narrative of academic achievement.

What is a PhD Defence?

At its core, a PhD defence is a rigorous and comprehensive examination that marks the culmination of a doctoral candidate’s research journey. It is an essential component of the doctoral process in which the candidate is required to defend their dissertation before a committee of experts in the field. The defence serves multiple purposes, acting as both a showcase of the candidate’s work and an evaluative measure of their understanding, critical thinking, and contributions to the academic domain.

The primary goals of a PhD defence include:

• Presentation of Research: The candidate presents the key findings, methodology, and significance of their research.
• Demonstration of Mastery: The defence assesses the candidate’s depth of understanding, mastery of the subject matter, and ability to engage in scholarly discourse.
• Critical Examination: Committee members rigorously question the candidate, challenging assumptions, testing methodologies, and probing the boundaries of the research.
• Validation of Originality: The defence validates the originality and contribution of the candidate’s work to the existing body of knowledge.

The PhD defence often takes the form of an oral examination, commonly referred to as the viva voce. This oral component adds a dynamic and interactive dimension to the evaluation process. Key elements of the oral examination include:

• Presentation: The candidate typically begins with a formal presentation, summarizing the dissertation’s main components, methodology, and findings. This presentation is an opportunity to showcase the significance and novelty of the research.
• Questioning and Discussion: Following the presentation, the candidate engages in a thorough questioning session with the examination committee. Committee members explore various aspects of the research, challenging the candidates to articulate their rationale, defend their conclusions, and respond to critiques.
• Defence of Methodology: The candidate is often required to defend the chosen research methodology, demonstrating its appropriateness, rigour, and contribution to the field.
• Evaluation of Contributions: Committee members assess the originality and impact of the candidate’s contributions to the academic discipline, seeking to understand how the research advances existing knowledge.

The oral examination is not a mere formality; it is a dynamic exchange that tests the candidate’s intellectual acumen, research skills, and capacity to contribute meaningfully to the scholarly community.

In essence, the PhD defence is a comprehensive and interactive evaluation that encapsulates the essence of a candidate’s research journey, demanding a synthesis of knowledge, clarity of expression, and the ability to navigate the complexities of academic inquiry. As we delve into the specifics of the defence process, we will unravel the layers of preparation and skill required to navigate this transformative academic milestone.

How Long is a PhD Defence?

The duration of a PhD defence can vary widely, but it typically ranges from two to three hours. This time frame encompasses the candidate’s presentation of their research, questioning and discussions with the examination committee, and any additional deliberations or decisions by the committee. However, it’s essential to note that this is a general guideline, and actual defence durations may vary based on numerous factors.

• Sciences and Engineering: Defenses in these fields might lean towards the shorter end of the spectrum, often around two hours. The focus is often on the methodology, results, and technical aspects.
• Humanities and Social Sciences: Given the theoretical and interpretive nature of research in these fields, defences might extend closer to three hours or more. Discussions may delve into philosophical underpinnings and nuanced interpretations.
• Simple vs. Complex Studies: The complexity of the research itself plays a role. Elaborate experiments, extensive datasets, or intricate theoretical frameworks may necessitate a more extended defence.
• Number of Committee Members: A larger committee or one with diverse expertise may lead to more extensive discussions and varied perspectives, potentially elongating the defence.
• Committee Engagement: The level of engagement and probing by committee members can influence the overall duration. In-depth discussions or debates may extend the defence time.
• Cultural Norms: In some countries, the oral defence might be more ceremonial, with less emphasis on intense questioning. In others, a rigorous and extended defence might be the norm.
• Evaluation Practices: Different academic systems have varying evaluation criteria, which can impact the duration of the defence.
• Institutional Guidelines: Some institutions may have specific guidelines on defence durations, influencing the overall time allotted for the process.

Candidates should be well-prepared for a defence of any duration. Adequate preparation not only involves a concise presentation of the research but also anticipates potential questions and engages in thoughtful discussions. Additionally, candidates should be flexible and responsive to the dynamics of the defense, adapting to the pace set by the committee.

Success Factors in a PhD Defence

• Successful defence begins with a deep and comprehensive understanding of the research. Candidates should be well-versed in every aspect of their study, from the theoretical framework to the methodology and findings.
• Thorough preparation involves anticipating potential questions from the examination committee. Candidates should consider the strengths and limitations of their research and be ready to address queries related to methodology, data analysis, and theoretical underpinnings.
• Conducting mock defences with peers or mentors can be invaluable. It helps refine the presentation, exposes potential areas of weakness, and provides an opportunity to practice responding to challenging questions.
• Actively listen to questions without interruption. Understanding the nuances of each question is crucial for providing precise and relevant responses.
• Responses should be clear, concise, and directly address the question. Avoid unnecessary jargon, and strive to convey complex concepts in a manner that is accessible to the entire committee.
• It’s acceptable not to have all the answers. If faced with a question that stumps you, acknowledge it honestly. Expressing a willingness to explore the topic further demonstrates intellectual humility.
• Use questions as opportunities to reinforce key messages from the research. Skillfully link responses back to the core contributions of the study, emphasizing its significance.
• Rehearse the presentation multiple times to build familiarity with the material. This enhances confidence, reduces nervousness, and ensures a smooth and engaging delivery.
• Maintain confident and open body language. Stand tall, make eye contact, and use gestures judiciously. A composed demeanour contributes to a positive impression.
• Acknowledge and manage nervousness. It’s natural to feel some anxiety, but channelling that energy into enthusiasm for presenting your research can turn nervousness into a positive force.
• Engage with the committee through a dynamic and interactive presentation. Invite questions during the presentation to create a more conversational atmosphere.
• Utilize visual aids effectively. Slides or other visual elements should complement the spoken presentation, reinforcing key points without overwhelming the audience.
• View the defence not only as an evaluation but also as an opportunity for continuous improvement. Feedback received during the defence can inform future research endeavours and scholarly pursuits.

In essence, success in a PhD defence hinges on meticulous preparation, adept handling of questions, and projecting confidence and composure during the presentation. A well-prepared and resilient candidate is better positioned to navigate the challenges of the defence, transforming it from a moment of evaluation into an affirmation of scholarly achievement.

Failure in PhD Defence

• While the prospect of failing a PhD defence is relatively rare, it’s essential for candidates to acknowledge that the possibility exists. Understanding this reality can motivate diligent preparation and a proactive approach to mitigate potential risks.
• Failure, if it occurs, should be seen as a learning opportunity rather than a definitive endpoint. It may highlight areas for improvement and offer insights into refining the research and presentation.
• Lack of thorough preparation, including a weak grasp of the research content, inadequate rehearsal, and failure to anticipate potential questions, can contribute to failure.
• Inability to effectively defend the chosen research methodology, including justifying its appropriateness and demonstrating its rigour, can be a critical factor.
• Failing to clearly articulate the original contributions of the research and its significance to the field may lead to a negative assessment.
• Responding defensively to questions, exhibiting a lack of openness to critique, or being unwilling to acknowledge limitations can impact the overall impression.
• Inability to address committee concerns or incorporate constructive feedback received during the defense may contribute to a negative outcome.
• Comprehensive preparation is the cornerstone of success. Candidates should dedicate ample time to understanding every facet of their research, conducting mock defences, and seeking feedback.
• Identify potential weaknesses in the research and address them proactively. Being aware of limitations and articulating plans for addressing them in future work demonstrates foresight.
• Engage with mentors, peers, or advisors before the defence. Solicit constructive feedback on both the content and delivery of the presentation to refine and strengthen the defence.
• Develop strategies to manage stress and nervousness. Techniques such as mindfulness, deep breathing, or visualization can be effective in maintaining composure during the defence.
• Conduct a pre-defense review of all materials, ensuring that the presentation aligns with the dissertation and that visual aids are clear and supportive.
• Approach the defence with an open and reflective attitude. Embrace critique as an opportunity for improvement rather than as a personal affront.
• Clarify expectations with the examination committee beforehand. Understanding the committee’s focus areas and preferences can guide preparation efforts.
• In the event of failure, candidates should approach the situation with resilience. Seek feedback from the committee, understand the reasons for the outcome, and use the experience as a springboard for improvement.

In summary, while the prospect of failing a PhD defence is uncommon, acknowledging its possibility and taking proactive steps to mitigate risks are crucial elements of a well-rounded defence strategy. By addressing common failure factors through thorough preparation, openness to critique, and a resilient attitude, candidates can increase their chances of a successful defence outcome.

PhD Defense or Defence?

• The choice between “defense” and “defence” is primarily a matter of British English versus American English spelling conventions. “Defense” is the preferred spelling in American English, while “defence” is the British English spelling.
• In the global academic community, both spellings are generally understood and accepted. However, the choice of spelling may be influenced by the academic institution’s language conventions or the preferences of individual scholars.
• Academic institutions may have specific guidelines regarding language conventions, and candidates are often expected to adhere to the institution’s preferred spelling.
• Candidates may also consider the preferences of their advisors or committee members. If there is a consistent spelling convention used within the academic department, it is advisable to align with those preferences.
• Consideration should be given to the spelling conventions of scholarly journals in the candidate’s field. If intending to publish research stemming from the dissertation, aligning with the conventions of target journals is prudent.
• If the defense presentation or dissertation will be shared with an international audience, using a more universally recognized spelling (such as “defense”) may be preferred to ensure clarity and accessibility.
• Regardless of the chosen spelling, it’s crucial to maintain consistency throughout the document. Mixing spellings can distract from the content and may be perceived as an oversight.
• In oral presentations and written correspondence related to the defence, including emails, it’s advisable to maintain consistency with the chosen spelling to present a professional and polished image.
• Recognizing that language conventions can vary, candidates should approach the choice of spelling with flexibility. Being adaptable to the preferences of the academic context and demonstrating an awareness of regional variations reflects a nuanced understanding of language usage.
• With the increasing globalization of academia, an awareness of language variations becomes essential. Scholars often collaborate across borders, and an inclusive approach to language conventions contributes to effective communication and collaboration.

In summary, the choice between “PhD defense” and “PhD defence” boils down to regional language conventions and institutional preferences. Maintaining consistency, being mindful of the target audience, and adapting to the expectations of the academic community contribute to a polished and professional presentation, whether in written documents or oral defences.

Is PhD Defense a Formality?

• While the PhD defence is a structured and ritualistic event, it is far from being a mere formality. It is a critical and substantive part of the doctoral journey, designed to rigorously evaluate the candidate’s research contributions, understanding of the field, and ability to engage in scholarly discourse.
• The defence is not a checkbox to be marked but rather a dynamic process where the candidate’s research is evaluated for its scholarly merit. The committee scrutinizes the originality, significance, and methodology of the research, aiming to ensure it meets the standards of advanced academic work.
• Far from a passive or purely ceremonial event, the defence involves active engagement between the candidate and the examination committee. Questions, discussions, and debates are integral components that enrich the scholarly exchange during the defence.
• The defence serves as a platform for the candidate to demonstrate the originality of their research. Committee members assess the novelty of the contributions, ensuring that the work adds value to the existing body of knowledge.
• Beyond the content, the defence evaluates the methodological rigour of the research. Committee members assess whether the chosen methodology is appropriate, well-executed, and contributes to the validity of the findings.
• Successful completion of the defence affirms the candidate’s ability to contribute meaningfully to the academic discourse in their field. It is an endorsement of the candidate’s position as a knowledgeable and respected scholar.
• The defence process acts as a quality assurance mechanism in academia. It ensures that individuals awarded a doctoral degree have undergone a thorough and rigorous evaluation, upholding the standards of excellence in research and scholarly inquiry.
• Institutions have specific criteria and standards for awarding a PhD. The defence process aligns with these institutional and academic standards, providing a consistent and transparent mechanism for evaluating candidates.
• Successful completion of the defence is a pivotal moment that marks the transition from a doctoral candidate to a recognized scholar. It opens doors to further contributions, collaborations, and opportunities within the academic community.
• Research presented during the defence often forms the basis for future publications. The validation received in the defence enhances the credibility of the research, facilitating its dissemination and impact within the academic community.
• Beyond the academic realm, a successfully defended PhD is a key credential for professional advancement. It enhances one’s standing in the broader professional landscape, opening doors to research positions, teaching opportunities, and leadership roles.

In essence, the PhD defence is a rigorous and meaningful process that goes beyond formalities, playing a crucial role in affirming the academic merit of a candidate’s research and marking the culmination of their journey toward scholarly recognition.

Dressing for Success: PhD Defense Outfit

• For Men: A well-fitted suit in neutral colours (black, navy, grey), a collared dress shirt, a tie, and formal dress shoes.
• For Women: A tailored suit, a blouse or button-down shirt, and closed-toe dress shoes.
• Dress codes can vary based on cultural expectations. It’s advisable to be aware of any cultural nuances within the academic institution and to adapt attire accordingly.
• With the rise of virtual defenses, considerations for attire remain relevant. Even in online settings, dressing professionally contributes to a polished and serious demeanor. Virtual attire can mirror what one would wear in-person, focusing on the upper body visible on camera.
• The attire chosen for a PhD defense contributes to the first impression that a candidate makes on the examination committee. A professional and polished appearance sets a positive tone for the defense.
• Dressing appropriately reflects respect for the gravity of the occasion. It acknowledges the significance of the defense as a formal evaluation of one’s scholarly contributions.
• Wearing professional attire can contribute to a boost in confidence. When individuals feel well-dressed and put-together, it can positively impact their mindset and overall presentation.
• The PhD defense is a serious academic event, and dressing professionally fosters an atmosphere of seriousness and commitment to the scholarly process. It aligns with the respect one accords to academic traditions.
• Institutional norms may influence dress expectations. Some academic institutions may have specific guidelines regarding attire for formal events, and candidates should be aware of and adhere to these norms.
• While adhering to the formality expected in academic settings, individuals can also express their personal style within the bounds of professionalism. It’s about finding a balance between institutional expectations and personal comfort.
• Select and prepare the outfit well in advance to avoid last-minute stress. Ensure that the attire is clean, well-ironed, and in good condition.
• Accessories such as ties, scarves, or jewelry should complement the outfit. However, it’s advisable to keep accessories subtle to maintain a professional appearance.
• While dressing professionally, prioritize comfort. PhD defenses can be mentally demanding, and comfortable attire can contribute to a more confident and composed demeanor.
• Pay attention to grooming, including personal hygiene and haircare. A well-groomed appearance contributes to an overall polished look.
• Start preparation well in advance of the defense date. Know your research inside out, anticipate potential questions, and be ready to discuss the nuances of your methodology, findings, and contributions.
• Conduct mock defenses with peers, mentors, or colleagues. Mock defenses provide an opportunity to receive constructive feedback, practice responses to potential questions, and refine your presentation.
• Strike a balance between confidence and humility. Confidence in presenting your research is essential, but being open to acknowledging limitations and areas for improvement demonstrates intellectual honesty.
• Actively engage with the examination committee during the defense. Listen carefully to questions, respond thoughtfully, and view the defense as a scholarly exchange rather than a mere formality.
• Understand the expertise and backgrounds of the committee members. Tailor your presentation and responses to align with the interests and expectations of your specific audience.
• Practice time management during your presentation. Ensure that you allocate sufficient time to cover key aspects of your research, leaving ample time for questions and discussions.
• It’s normal to feel nervous, but practicing mindfulness and staying calm under pressure is crucial. Take deep breaths, maintain eye contact, and focus on delivering a clear and composed presentation.
• Have a plan for post-defense activities. Whether it’s revisions to the dissertation, publications, or future research endeavors, having a roadmap for what comes next demonstrates foresight and commitment to ongoing scholarly contributions.
• After successfully defending, individuals often emphasize the importance of taking time to reflect on the entire doctoral journey. Acknowledge personal and academic growth, celebrate achievements, and use the experience to inform future scholarly pursuits.

In summary, learning from the experiences of others who have successfully defended offers a wealth of practical wisdom. These insights, combined with thoughtful preparation and a proactive approach, contribute to a successful and fulfilling defense experience.

You have plenty of career options after completing a PhD. For more details, visit my blog posts:

7 Essential Steps for Building a Robust Research Portfolio

Exciting Career Opportunities for PhD Researchers and Research Scholars

Freelance Writing or Editing Opportunities for Researchers A Comprehensive Guide

Research Consultancy: An Alternate Career for Researchers

The Insider’s Guide to Becoming a Patent Agent: Opportunities, Requirements, and Challenges

The journey from a curious researcher to a recognized scholar culminates in the PhD defence—an intellectual odyssey marked by dedication, resilience, and a relentless pursuit of knowledge. As we navigate the intricacies of this pivotal event, it becomes evident that the PhD defence is far more than a ceremonial rite; it is a substantive evaluation that validates the contributions of a researcher to the academic landscape.

Upcoming Events

• Visit the Upcoming International Conferences at Exotic Travel Destinations with Travel Plan
• Visit for  Research Internships Worldwide

Recent Posts

• Best 5 Journals for Quick Review and High Impact in August 2024
• 05 Quick Review, High Impact, Best Research Journals for Submissions for July 2024
• Top Mistakes to Avoid When Writing a Research Paper
• Average Stipend for Research/Academic Internships
• These Institutes Offer Remote Research/Academic Internships
• All Blog Posts
• Research Career
• Research Conference
• Research Internship
• Research Journal
• Research Tools
• Uncategorized
• Research Conferences
• Research Journals
• Research Grants
• Internships
• Research Internships
• Email Templates
• Conferences
• Blog Partners
• Privacy Policy

Copyright © 2024 Research Voyage

Design by ThemesDNA.com

Select language

PhD Programmes

Finishing a phd track.

A PhD ceremony is the conclusion of a doctoral program. Before a PhD candidate and their supervisor or supervisors can complete a PhD track, they are required to carry out various actions. Without completion of the following actions, the PhD defence ceremony cannot take place.

PhD ceremony

During the ceremony, the PhD candidate defends the thesis before a doctoral committee. PhD candidates also make a promise to always act with scientific integrity. Afterwards, the PhD candidate receives a diploma (bull) written in Latin, an English translation and a legally valid English declaration of the doctorate. The PhD candidate receives only one original copy of the bull. See also the Instructions to the PhD candidate , Article 27.

For more information on the pledge, see:

• Appendix E: Text as spoken during the doctoral degree ceremony (pdf)
• Appendix E1: Frequently asked questions on pledge for doctoral students (pdf)

Which actions should the PhD candidate take?

The PhD candidate is required to take action on the following occasions.

1. At least four months before the intended date of the PhD ceremony

After consultation with the supervisor or supervisors, the PhD candidate can upload the pdf of the manuscript in MyPhD . After formal approval in MyPhD by all supervisors, the first supervisor will receive an email with the request to recommend the composition of an Assessment Committee.

As soon as the composition of the Assessment Committee in MyPhD has been approved, the Assessment Committee will receive a request for assessment via MyPhD with a link to the uploaded manuscript. The members of the Committee will have four weeks to provide their assessment. See also: Doctoral Degree Regulations  Article 14.

2. At least three and a half months before the intended date of the PhD ceremony

As soon as the composition of the Assessment Committee in MyPhD has been approved, the PhD candidate will receive confirmation by email. From this moment on the PhD candidate can set a preliminary date for for the PhD ceremony in consultation with the Beadle's Office . 

3. At least two and a half months before the date of the PhD defence

Register the title page and the reverse of the title page in MyPhD. The Beadle will inspect the registration and approve it, also in MyPhD. Apply the strict guidelines while making the title page and the reverse as indicated in the email that MyPhD sends automatically after the Assessment Committee has been approved. See also: Doctoral Degree Regulations  Article 19 and Instructions to the PhD candidate  (pdf) Article 2 and 3.

Send the thesis to the printer. This is only allowed after the Assessment Committee has approved the manuscript and the Beadle has approved the title page and the reverse. The PhD candidate will receive confirmation of  both approvals via MyPhD.

The aforementioned conditions do not take the time required to print the doctoral thesis into consideration separately. This (strict) time schedule allows for a period of seven weeks to have the doctoral thesis printed. See also: Doctoral Degree Regulations  Article 16 and 19 and Instructions to the PhD candidate  (pdf) Article 4, 5, 6, 9 and 11.

4. At least two months before the date of the PhD defence

For information on the possibilities of having a PhD ceremony online or in the Utrecht University Hall please contact the Beadle.

5. At least six weeks before the date of the doctoral thesis defence ceremony

Register information in MyPhD for Communications & Marketing and the University Library, as indicated in the email that MyPhD sends automatically after the Assessment Commission has approved the manuscript.

The requested information includes: popular Dutch and English summaries (no more than 250 words) of the doctoral thesis, and a Dutch scientific summary of the doctoral thesis. These summaries need to be approved by the supervisor or supervisors. See also: Doctoral Degree Regulations  Article 19 and Instructions to the PhD candidate (pdf) Article 7 and 25.

6. At least three weeks before the date of the doctoral thesis defence ceremony

Send one copy of the thesis the Beadle’s Office . For a defence ceremony in the Utrecht University Hall the PhD candidate needs to bring 11 copies of the thesis. For an online defence ceremony this is not necessary.

Upload the definitive pdf of the doctoral thesis and the cover (as sent to the printer) to MyPhD for the University Library and complete the form as indicated in the email that MyPhD sends automatically after the Assessment Committee has approved the manuscript. Note: this form also includes information on a possible embargo period on publication for the University Library. See also: Doctoral Degree Regulations  Article 19, Instructions to the PhD candidate (pdf) Article 8, 9, 10 and 11.

Send copies of the doctoral thesis to the chairperson and the members of the Doctoral Examination Committee.

Schedule a meeting with the chairperson of the Doctoral Examination Committee. For the name of the chairperson please contact the faculty contactperson of your department or faculty. See also: Doctoral Degree Regulations  Article 21, Instructions to the PhD candidate (pdf) Article 13.

Which actions should the PhD supervisor take?

The supervisor or cosupervisors are required to take action on the following occasions.

1. At least four months before the intended date of the doctoral thesis defence ceremony

After consultation with the supervisor or co supervisor, the PhD candidate can upload the manuscript to the registration in MyPhD . After formal approval in MyPhD by all supervisors and co supervisors, the first supervisor will receive an email with the request to recommend the composition of an Assessment Committee..

As soon as the composition of the Assessment Committee in MyPhD has been approved, the Assessment Committee will receive a request for assessment via MyPhD. The members of the Committee will have four weeks to provide their assessment.

As soon as the composition of the Assessment Committee in MyPhD has been approved, the PhD candidate will receive a confirmation by email. From this moment the PhD candidate can set a preliminary date for for the PhD ceremony in consultation with the Beadle's Office . See also: Doctoral Degree Regulations  Article 12,13 and 14.

2. At least two and a halve months before the date of the doctoral thesis defence ceremony

As soon as the approval of the manuscript by the members of the Assessment Committee has been registered on MyPhD, the first supervisor will receive a request from MyPhD to register the Doctoral Examination Committee via MyPhD. After this registering has been done correctly, MyPhD will inform the Beadle, the chairperson of the Doctoral Examination Committee and the other members of the the Doctoral Examination Committee by email. The Beadle will inform the parties concerned via a separate mail about the procedures on the day of the doctoral thesis defence ceremony. See also: Doctoral Degree Regulations  Article 16 en 22.

3. At least four weeks before the date of the doctoral thesis defence ceremony

If there is a possibility for a cum laude , the Dean – after consultation with the chairperson of the Assessment Committee (this is the Dean in some faculties) and the supervisors – will pass on the names of at least two experts to the Rector Magnificus via MyPhD. See also: Doctoral Degree Regulations  Article 17.

4. At least five work days before the date of the doctoral thesis defence ceremony

If the experts who were invited via MyPhD agree in their assessment filed in MyPhD with a possible cum laude doctoral degree, all involved parties, including the Beadle, will be informed by email of this. See also: Doctoral Degree Regulations  Article 17 and 22.

Utrecht University Heidelberglaan 8 3584 CS Utrecht The Netherlands Tel. +31 (0)30 253 35 50

External member of PhD defense

• Schuberth, F. (Examiner)
• Product—Market Relations
• Digital Society Institute

Activity : Examination

• Perspective
• Conversation
• About the Blog
• More about CSP
• Careers at CSP

Erin Zimmerman

Plant biologist turned science writer and illustrator with a BSc in plant biology and physics from the University of Guelph and an MSc and PhD in fungal genetics and molecular systematics, respectively, from the Université de Montréal.

The Last Big Hurdle: How to Prepare for a Successful PhD Defence

It’s the moment almost everyone who completes a PhD both dreads and looks ahead to for years—the defence. It signals a major achievement, but in people’s imaginations, it can seem like the stuff of nightmares… standing frozen in front of everyone, unable to answer a tricky question posed by a committee member and feeling like you must look incompetent. The format of a doctoral defence varies from field to field, but the worst fears of the candidates remain largely the same. Though most people know it probably won’t go so badly, the open-ended-ness can certainly be intimidating- you’re up there alone in front of a panel of experts who get to ask you whatever they’d like, and you may have to deliver your answers in front of an audience of your peers. There are few experiences in academic life more geared to be stressful for the person at the centre of them.

It doesn’t have to be that bad. I spent the weeks leading up to my PhD defence in a state of near panic, but I can honestly say that once it actually got underway, I sort of enjoyed it. You’re the star of the show and get to walk your peers through the finer points of your research. It can be a really invigorating experience. So let’s try to break this down into bite-sized chunks and look at strategies and tips for making your defence an event you might actually look back fondly on.

What the committee wants

Let’s start with what the committee is actually looking for. They want to see a firm grasp of the subject matter, an understanding of the implications of the work, and the ability to see weaknesses in the methodology and possible routes to take for future work. This means creating a presentation that gives a clear, logical overview of your topic, the question you’re addressing, what you did, your results and conclusions, and where the research can go from here. Remember, your jury members are not out to get you. The questions you receive from them will generally fall under one of three headings- those that test your subject knowledge, those that clarify a confusing point, and those that arise from genuine curiosity. If your presentation does a good job of conveying your knowledge of your topic, you can expect more questions from the second and third categories, allowing you to think of the defense more as a conversation amongst experts than a test from on high.

How to prepare

Practice is obviously very important here. Once you’ve put your talk together, find a trusted friend or mentor (ideally, several of them) who knows your field to go through it with you. They can both help you to pare down unnecessary parts and point out logical leaps you may not have noticed because you’re so close to the subject matter. You also want this to be a person who will ask you tough questions and try to spot holes in your reasoning, so choose your test audience carefully. It can be tempting to spend a lot of time obsessing over your slides, trying to make them perfect, but there’s a lot of studying you’ll need to do to be ready for more tangential questions, so don’t lose too much time this way.

Even though you have lived and breathed your thesis topic for years, it’s a good idea to give your thesis a complete re-read just to make sure you really know what’s in there. It may have been months since you finished writing it, and parts may have gotten a little fuzzy since then. Make sure you know why you used the methodology that you did, be able to justify any conclusions you’ve made, and if there are mistakes, admit them openly at the defence and be able to talk about what you should have done differently—the committee isn’t looking for perfection, they’re looking for clear thinking and thorough consideration of methodology.

This is also a good time to review important topics that are peripheral to your work; this will allow you to answer some of the questions designed to test the limits of your broader knowledge of your field. One of the best pieces of defence preparation advice I’ve ever heard is to find out what each of your committee members’ professional interests are, and do a bit of reading on those topics. There’s a very good chance that they’ll ask you something that’s related to their own work, because that’s familiar ground to them, and you may be able to anticipate these questions this way.

Finally, though it’s less and less of a problem as technology improves, you’ll want to make very sure ahead of time that all your presentation gear works and connects properly to the display equipment in the room where your defence will be. No one wants to be running around at the last moment looking for a dongle they didn’t think they needed, or have their laptop’s battery run out partway through the defence. Check that your slides look the same way on the projection screen as they do on your computer- not cut off or too dark. It also doesn’t hurt just to spend time in the room in which you’ll be presenting, to get a feel for the place and see where everything will be positioned.

Common questions and ideas to think about

• What makes your project original, and how does it answer a previously unanswered question? What have you contributed to the body of knowledge on this topic?
• Why was this question important to ask? Why do we care about what your findings reveal? (Hint: “Just for the sake of knowing” is not an acceptable answer here.)
• Did the focus of your project change over its course? If so, explain how and why.

Methodology

• Why did you choose your methodological approach (including your statistical analyses)? Why is it superior to or more appropriate than all other methodologies?
• Talk about the difficulties you experienced with your methodology and how you addressed them.
• What are the limitations of your study design/methodology?
• Explain how your data represent an appropriate source of measurement to address your question.
• Is the amount of data gathered sufficient to address your question? Why or why not?
• If you could do it again with unlimited time and funds, how would your methodology change?

Conclusions

• What would you say is the most important “take-away” message of your work?
• Does your work have wider implications for other disciplines in your field?
• How do your conclusions support or contradict the existing literature?
• Are there alternative ways your data could have been interpreted?
• Speculate about what broader implications your research could have, but which aren’t addressed by your data, or were outside the scope of your project.
• If you were to continue on with this area of research, what would you do next to further your results? Is there a closely related “spin-off” question that needs to be answered?
• Propose an experimental design to test this related question. What results might you expect to see?
• Where do you think this field of study is headed in the next five to ten years?

Tips, tricks, and stress management

• Practice the first few minutes of your talk until you can do it on ‘autopilot’; this will give you a bit of time to relax into your presentation, get your thoughts in order, and begin talking more confidently.
• If your defence is open to the public, ask a few supportive friends or colleagues to sit where you can easily make eye contact while you’re talking. Seeing a friendly, smiling face can be encouraging and help you to relax.
• Don’t forget to review the newest literature in the weeks leading up to your defence—one or more important papers may have been published in your field since you wrote your thesis, and you’ll want to know about them.
• Have a hard copy of your thesis on hand during the defence. It’s much faster to flip to a physical page when asked about a particular section of the text. If this really isn’t for you, be sure you have a quick way to move through pages on your computer.
• Eat and drink the same things you normally would on the day of your defence. Your stomach may be extra sensitive in response to the stress, and you don’t want to surprise it with anything new. And go easy on the caffeine… jittery-ness will not help you to manage your stress!
• Try to let your enthusiasm for your subject matter show; your audience will feel more positive about your talk if they can see that you really find the work fascinating.
• It’s fine to take a moment to think about your answer before responding. The silence isn’t as long or as deafening as you think it is. And if you don’t know, just admit you don’t know—it’s okay to not know everything.
• Dress well, but comfortably, and try to project confidence. If you can speak to your committee as a group of your peers, it will reflect well on your growth as a scientist in training- and demonstrate you are someone who deserves to be awarded their doctorate.
• Don’t forget to publicly thank your advisor, your committee, and any other key people involved with your project for their time commitment and investment in your career.
• When planning post-defence festivities, be aware that you may be more tired, both mentally and emotionally, than you expected. Don’t ask too much of yourself in the hours following the event.

A bit of encouragement

Above all, there are two things you need to remember while preparing for your defence. First, your advisor and committee would not have allowed you to proceed to this point if they didn’t think you were ready. They want to see you succeed and, altruism aside, it would reflect badly on them as well if you were to fail. Trust that they’ve made the right decision. Second, after years of delving into your little corner of the scientific world, no one knows your thesis topic better than you do—not even your committee. Marshall your facts and feel confident in knowing that on this topic, you’re the world expert.

What is your best advice to prep for a PhD defence?

You might also like

Exploring genetic frontiers: An interview with Andrew Simmonds

Dr. Lisa Venier takes on a new role at the Canadian Journal of Forest Research

Chasing Arctic dreams: A conversation with Dr. Mark Mallory

Preparing for your thesis defence

As you start thinking about the end stages of your PhD, it’s important to understand the processes and timelines related to the thesis defence.

Even if your defence feels far away, there are steps you can take early on in order to ensure that the end of your PhD and defence process runs smoothly.

Jump to: What is a PhD defence? | Who's at the defence? | What happens at the defence? | What are the possible outcomes of the defence?  

What is a PhD defence?

The thesis defence is a unique opportunity to share with other experts what you did as part of your PhD research, what you found or discovered, and why it’s important. Although there are a lot of regulations guiding the defence process, remember that this process is really about you and your work.  

Goals of the PhD defence:

• Allow you to show your mastery of the subject matter
• Prove you are the author of the world
• Demonstrate your ability to engage in scholarly discourse in your research area

Who's at the PhD defence?

The primary attendees of your PhD defence are the Chair of the defense and your examining committee. The Chair is an impartial faculty member from outside your department who is well-versed in the rules and proceedings of thesis examinations. The Chair does not question you and does not assess your work.

Examining committee:

• Supervisor(s) - Your thesis supervisor(s) that have supervised your research.
• Internal member - A member of your department; typically part of your advisory committee.
• Internal/external member - An "internal" member of the university, but "external" to your home department. This person has suitable knowledge of the subject matter, even though they are from another discipline.
• Additional member - Typically a member from your advisory committee.
• External examiner - A person with a doctoral degree and expertise in the subject matter who evaluates the thesis from a fair an impartial perspective.

At University of Waterloo, it is also standard to have defences open to the public, so you can invite your friends, family and colleagues to be there! Check with your department to figure out what options are available to you.  

In some cases, such as when there are intellectual property concerns, a closed thesis examination can be requested. This means that all those in attendance at the thesis examination, including the examining committee members, must sign a non-disclosure agreement.  Closed examinations must be requested as early as possible.

What happens at the defence?

The first component of the defence is the welcome. The Chair will open up the defence, go over the order of proceedings, introduce the examining committee, and welcome the attendees.

After the welcome, the examination will formally begin with your oral presentation. The presentation is no more than 30 minutes, but the exact length and format can vary by department or discipline. It's best to check with your supervisor to confirm departmental expectations, but overall, the presentation should focus on your main contributions and conclusions. 

The final component of the defence is the questioning period. This is not meant to be an interrogation, rather, a discussion amongst colleagues about the subject of your thesis.

• The examination Chair monitors the question period, which goes in "rounds".
• During the first round of questioning, each committee member will have 15 minutes to ask their questions, provide their comments, and discuss these with you.
• After each committee member has had their turn to ask questions, there may be additional rounds for more questions. The Chair and committee decide when the questions will end.
• Typically, the Chair will reserve some time at the end to accept questions from non-committee members.

While there is no set time for defences at the University of Waterloo, they typically range from 2-3 hours. 

What are the possible outcomes?

Once your formal defence has concluded, the examination Chair will arrange for a private deliberation between the committee members. The examination committee's decision is ultimately based on your written thesis, as well as your ability to defend it, as the decision is determined by a majority vote.

In the event of a tie decision, or if the external examiner's vote is not in the majority, the decision will be deferred to the Associate Vice President (AVP), Graduate Studies and Postdoctoral Affairs. The AVP will consult the Faculty Associate Deans and come to a final decision. 

Once the deliberation has concluded, the Chair will inform you of your examining committee's decision.

There are three possible outcomes to a PhD defence:

• Accepted: The thesis is completed to the satisfaction of the examining committee. There may still revisions required, but they are likely minor and typographical or editorial in nature. In this case, you would have one month to complete all revisions and submit your approve thesis to UWspace.
• Accepted conditionally: The oral defence and the thesis are acceptable, but content changes are required that are time intensive. In this case, you would have four months to complete revisions to the approval of your committee and submit the final version to UWspace. A re-examination is not required. 
• Re-examination: The oral defence is not to the satisfaction of the committee and/or substantial changes to the thesis are required. In this case, the candidate must be re-examined within 1 year. 

Re-examination is very rare, and the vast majority of candidates have their thesis accepted at their first examination.

Related links

• Thesis and defence
• Timeline to defence
• Successful defence tips
• Remote defence tips

• UT as employer

A PhD as a springboard for your career

After your master’s, follow a PhD programme at the University of Twente. PhD is a paid job in addition to post-master studies. After four years of in-depth research, you will receive your doctorate and you will be officially awarded the title of doctor (Dr.). The foundation for the rest of your career and recognition in both academia and in business.

Working as a PhD

Earn your recognised title.

Four years of interesting work. With an in-depth study within a specific research area as end product. This involves your dissertation and at the end a presentation and defence of your research. Curious about which PhD programmes are available to you?

Featured postions

Watch the videos of our phd candidates reframe phd.

• 1 min, 26 sec Compilation
• 1 min, 14 sec Stephen
• 1 min, 14 sec Verena
• 1 min, 28 sec Natália
• 1 min, 20 sec Matteo
• 1 min, 7 sec

Doing your PhD at UT

Will be the most influential time in your personal development to prepare you for your future career

What are the career prospects? A career outside of science is an option after you've earned your PhD

For example, you can think of policy functions in government and management and consultancy functions in the business world. Research has shown that 80% of PhD students aspire to a career in science following their PhD. However, only 20% of all PhD students are employed at the university, and another 10% end up in research-related positions outside the university. After their promotion, the remaining 70% will end up in positions in the business community or in government.

Why should you do a PhD? All the benefits at a glance

√ Great opportunities on the job market, both inside and outside academia! √ Highest academic degree, after your PhD you can use 'dr.' put before your name. √ Varied work, besides your research you spend time supporting education. For example, supervising master's and bachelor's students is part of your work. √ Good working conditions, travel allowance, the possibility to work from home, flexible hours, vacation days that you can organise yourself and a 13th month! √ Working in a multidisciplinary environment and entrepreneurship is stimulated. √ You build an international network, you discover the latest trends in your field. And learn about (your own) publications. √ Based on your individual expertise, you have a great deal of freedom in your work.

Reframe PhD From assumptions to insights

Verena lives in Germany and gained her Bachelor’s degree in Chinese and Computer Science. During her Master’s, she focussed on developing cyber security for electricity grids. She has always been captivated by the sciences, especially maths and physics - a passion that features prominently in her PhD.

What can you expect? Become an independent researcher

You can actually do a lot and have a lot of freedom. But after four years you have to present your research. Most of it is up to you to decide how you do that. You need motivation and self-discipline. A PhD is especially hard, because it is never finished. Each question you answer raises new questions. That's tempting to a curious scientist. You have to stick to the big picture and not make your research too big.

The foundation for a wonderful career

begins at the University of Twente

• Stephen Akinremi ‘In this PhD, we’re imaging deeper structures of the Dutch subsurface than ever before’
• Natália Marinho ‘We’re changing design and maintenance practices for aerospace composites’
• Maryam Dodangeh 'When a research idea really works, it feels like the whole universe is on my side'

Apply to the University of Twente today

Have you completed a Master’s? Then a PhD is the powerful springboard to a wonderful career. Selected students are offered a contract of up to four years to follow courses and complete research programmes. Such a PhD programme includes both teaching and other departmental tasks. Varied? Absolutely!

Stay informed.

After registration you will regularly receive our new vacancies.

You are signed up for the Job alert

dr.ing. E.A.M. Klumperink (Eric)

Eric A. M. Klumperink (IEEE Member '98, Senior Member '06, Fellow '20)  was born on April 4th, 1960, in Lichtenvoorde, The Netherlands. He received a B.Sc. degree from HTS, Enschede (1982), worked in industry on digital hardware and software, and then joined the University of Twente, Enschede, in 1984, shifting focus to analog CMOS circuit research. This resulted in several publications and his Ph.D. thesis "Transconductance Based CMOS Circuits: Circuit Generation, Classification and Analysis" (1997). In 1998, Eric started as Assistant Professor at the IC-Design Laboratory in Twente and shifted research focus to RF CMOS circuits during a sabbatical in 2001 at Ruhr Universitaet Bochum, Germany. Since 2006, he is an Associate Professor, teaching Analog & RF IC Electronics and guiding PhD and MSc projects related to RF CMOS circuit design with focus on Software Defined Radio, Cognitive Radio and Beamforming. Eric served as an Associate Editor for the IEEE TCAS-II (2006-2007), IEEE TCAS-I (2008-2009) and the IEEE JSSC (2010-2014), and as member of the technical program committees of conferences ISSCC (2011-2016), RFIC Symposium (2011-2021) and ESSCIRC (2019-). He holds 16 patents, authored and co-authored over 200 internationally refereed journal and conference papers, and was recognized as 20+ ISSCC paper contributor over 1954-2013. He is a co-recipient of the ISSCC 2002 and the ISSCC 2009 "Van Vessem Outstanding Paper Award" and served as IEEE SSC Distinguished Lecturer.

Engineering

• Mixers (Machinery)
• Frequencies

Organisations

• Integrated Circuit Design (EEMCS-EE-ICD)

Publications

Jump to: 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020

Other contributions

If you are an IEEE member you can get a quick idea of  my research interests checking the review paper "Interference Robust CMOS Radio Receiver Circuits":  RFIC Virtual Journal issue by Klumperink and Molnar

Research profiles

• Google Scholar
• research.utwente.nl profile

Affiliated study programs

• Bachelor Electrical Engineering
• Master Electrical Engineering

Courses academic year 2024/2025

Courses in the current academic year are added at the moment they are finalised in the Osiris system. Therefore it is possible that the list is not yet complete for the whole academic year.

• 191211208 - Internship EE
• 191211219 - Master Thesis Project
• 191211650 - Multi-Disciplinary Design Project
• 201600187 - Individual Project
• 201900223 - Capita Selecta Electrical Engineering
• 202001162 - Bachelor Thesis EE
• 202001434 - Internship EMSYS
• 202300070 - Final Project EMSYS

Courses academic year 2023/2024

• 191210850 - Advanced Analog IC Electronics
• 191211500 - Wireless Transceiver Electronics
• 201600017 - Final Project Preparation
• 201900200 - Final Project EMSYS

Courses academic year 2022/2023

• 191210860 - Advanced Electronics Project
• 202200342 - Combined Final Project EE/I-Tech
• 202200401 - Combined Final Project I-Tech/BME

Current Research Projects:

• Interference Robust Beamforming (MIRABeam) - Tx: Joep Zanen
• N-Path Rx Architectures - Roel Plompen
• Arbitrary Digital Clock Generation - Nimit Jain
• N-Path Rx Circuit Techniques - Emiel Zijlma

Previous Research Projects:

• Flexible Receiver Architectures: Maikel Huiskamp, Labrinus van Manen, Harish Kundur Subramaniyan
• Hybrid Mixed Analog/Digital PLLs in 28nm FDSOI CMOS :  Claudia Palattella
• Filter-less Radio Receivers:  Yuan-Ching Lien
• Interference Robust RX:  Labrinus van Manen
• Interference Robust Receivers (IRUDIT):  Vijay Purushothaman
• Ultra Low Power transceivers for IoT (ULPIoT):  Bart Thijssen
• Interference Robust Beamforming (MIRABeam) - Rx:  Sajad Golabi
• Full-Duplex Radios for Local Access (DUPLO):  Dirk-Jan van den Broek
• Building Blocks for RF transceivers in 28nm FDSOI CMOS:  Hugo Westerveld
• Reconfigurable Phased Arrays (STARS):  Remko Struiksma
• Concurrent Multi-channel Receivers:  Kasri Reda
• Low Power RF-Downconverter front-end:  Harish Kundur Subramaniyan
• Next Generation Phased Array Transmitter Electronics:  Jasper Velner
• CMOS Cognitive Radio:  Saqib Subhan
• AD-REM: Ad-hoc Dynamic Radio-spectrum Exploitation via Multi-phase Radio:  Mark Oude Alink  &  Dlovan Mahrov  &  Amir Ghaffari
• CMOS Beamforming Techniques:  Michiel Soer  &  Kasra Garakoui
• Low Noise CMOS Satelite Receiver:  Paul Geraedts
• Low Jitter Clock Generation:  Xiang Gao
• Low Power Software Defined Radio -  Niels Moseley  &  Zhiyu Ru
• Ultra Wideband Techniques in CMOS:  Stephan Blaakmeer
• CMOS Nanowire Communication :  Eisse Mensink  &  Daniel Schinkel
• Software Defined Radio:  Vincent Arkesteijn
• 1/f - noise reduction:  Arnoud van der Wel
• RF-LNA in CMOS  &  Systematic Design of Linear HF CMOS Circuits: Federico Bruccoleri
• RF-synthesizer in CMOS:  Remco van der Beek
• High Speed Electrical Communication:  Jan Rutger Schrader
• +31 53 489 2736 (work)
• +31 53 489 4831 (if no answer)
• [email protected]
• research.utwente.nl
• Business card (vCard)

University of Twente

Carré (building no. 15), room C2631 Hallenweg 23 7522 NH Enschede Netherlands

Navigate to location

Carré C2631 P.O. Box 217 7500 AE Enschede Netherlands

PhD Defence Moaaz Shehab | Production of sustainable aviation fuel through biomass - Experimental and simulation approach

Production of sustainable aviation fuel through biomass - Experimental and simulation approach

Moaaz Shehab is a PhD student in the department Sustainable Process Technology. Promotors are prof.dr.ir. E. Zondervan and prof.dr.ing. M.B. Franke from the faculty of Science & Technology.

In this thesis, special attention is given to the influence of biomass characteristics and their uncertainties on the production of sustainable aviation fuel (SAF). As SAF mandates are being introduced to reach net-zero carbon emissions in the aviation sector, reliance on biomass feedstocks is growing; however, it comes with challenges and obstacles. Many pathways and configurations are being developed and scaled up to reach their full commercial potential. Resolving the challenges associated with biomass characterization will pave the way to the successful use of biomass in SAF production. Therefore, this thesis has two phases: an experimental and a simulation phase.

Firstly, the experimental phase aims to improve the measurements of the biomass characteristics in the laboratory by performing a key comparison of the measurement techniques between different metrological institutes in the EU. The overarching goal of this phase was to lower the measurement uncertainty by improving repeatability and reproducibility. Eventually, new modifications to the ISO standards will be proposed. The improvement in the measurement accuracy directly impacts the values of purchasing and taxing biomass, as aspects like the energy and moisture content play a significant role in setting these values. Moreover, these improvements are expected to enhance biorefinery processes' design, performance, and yield.

The second phase focuses on the impact of different types of biomass, their heterogeneity, and uncertainty on the production of SAF. Therefore, the various pathways of SAF production were comprehensively analyzed while considering technical and non-technical aspects to determine the most promising routes for producing SAF from biomass. Moreover, the analysis assessed the EU's biomass potential for SAF, focusing on its ability to meet proposed EU mandates for SAF uptake in the short and long term. After this analysis, several steady-state models for the Fischer Tropsch and Methanol to Jet were simulated in Aspen Plus commercial software. These models aimed to determine the influence of the experimentally determined biomass characteristics and their uncertainties on SAF production. Moreover, the models were used to determine the optimal and cost-effective pathway for SAF production through biomass. Different approaches, configurations, and tools were employed to achieve this objective, such as process simulation, sensitivity analysis, Monte Carlo simulation, and techno-economic analysis.

More events