Accuracy of different thermodynamic software packages in predicting hydrate dissociation conditions

Gas hydrate blockage is a longstanding problem in the oil and gas industry, responsible for the interruption of hydrocarbon flow, posing economic and safety risks. Computational modeling methods are required to estimate the dissociation pressure of the original system and its shifting in the presence of thermodynamic inhibitors so as to avoid excessive inhibitors dosages, high operating costs and serious environmental impacts. On the other hand, the properties and characteristics of clathrate hydrates have paved the way to new technological solutions such as energy storage, gas separation, carbon capture and desalination, which also require accurate estimates of hydrate stability conditions. Various commercial PVT software packages serve as established computational tools to model hydrate phase equilibria and predict dissociation conditions. Those products exhibit major differences in the underlying computations such as the hydrate modeling framework, the EoS models used to calculate components fugacity in fluid phases, the thermodynamic approaches in the presence of salts and inhibitors, and the phase models of potential hydrate solid coexisting phases (e.g., ice). Additionally, the fitted parameters of the utilized computational models (i.e., the Kihara potentials) are set differently by each developer, depending on the experimental data used to tune their models.In this work, the performance of some of the industry-standard commercial software packages is evaluated. The evaluation is performed by using several systems, varying from single-component ones to highly inhibited ones. The comparative evaluation is based on a large database of 400 experimental dissociation pressure data points which has been published over the last 5 years. The results of this work provide valuable insights for industry professionals and academics interested in obtaining accurate predictions of hydrate dissociation conditions. It is shown that each package exhibits its own performance profile with individual strengths and weaknesses in calculating hydrate dissociation conditions of different gas mixture systems. The evaluation is supplemented with the detailed description of the modeling principles, thermodynamics, and algorithms used by each developer. Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:

Autor*in:	Ismail Ismail [verfasserIn] Vassilis Gaganis [verfasserIn] Dimitris Marinakis [verfasserIn] Ramin Mousavi [verfasserIn] Bahman Tohidi [verfasserIn]

Format:	E-Artikel
Sprache:	Englisch

Erschienen:	2023

Schlagwörter:	Gas hydrates Dissociation conditions Phase equilibria Van-der-Waals-Platteeuw theory Flow assurance

Übergeordnetes Werk:	In: Chemical Thermodynamics and Thermal Analysis - Elsevier, 2021, 9(2023), Seite 100103-
Übergeordnetes Werk:	volume:9 ; year:2023 ; pages:100103-

Links:	Link aufrufen Link aufrufen Link aufrufen Journal toc

DOI / URN:	10.1016/j.ctta.2022.100103

Katalog-ID:	DOAJ07982188X

Internformat


LEADER	01000caa a22002652 4500
001	DOAJ07982188X
003	DE-627
005	20230410113012.0
007	cr uuu---uuuuu
008	230310s2023 xx \|\|\|\|\|o 00\| \|\|eng c
024	7		\|a 10.1016/j.ctta.2022.100103 \|2 doi
035			\|a (DE-627)DOAJ07982188X
035			\|a (DE-599)DOAJ803aa0f745674f1a8ba3840fed17cea7
040			\|a DE-627 \|b ger \|c DE-627 \|e rakwb
041			\|a eng
050		0	\|a QC310.15-319
100	0		\|a Ismail Ismail \|e verfasserin \|4 aut
245	1	0	\|a Accuracy of different thermodynamic software packages in predicting hydrate dissociation conditions
264		1	\|c 2023
336			\|a Text \|b txt \|2 rdacontent
337			\|a Computermedien \|b c \|2 rdamedia
338			\|a Online-Ressource \|b cr \|2 rdacarrier
520			\|a Gas hydrate blockage is a longstanding problem in the oil and gas industry, responsible for the interruption of hydrocarbon flow, posing economic and safety risks. Computational modeling methods are required to estimate the dissociation pressure of the original system and its shifting in the presence of thermodynamic inhibitors so as to avoid excessive inhibitors dosages, high operating costs and serious environmental impacts. On the other hand, the properties and characteristics of clathrate hydrates have paved the way to new technological solutions such as energy storage, gas separation, carbon capture and desalination, which also require accurate estimates of hydrate stability conditions. Various commercial PVT software packages serve as established computational tools to model hydrate phase equilibria and predict dissociation conditions. Those products exhibit major differences in the underlying computations such as the hydrate modeling framework, the EoS models used to calculate components fugacity in fluid phases, the thermodynamic approaches in the presence of salts and inhibitors, and the phase models of potential hydrate solid coexisting phases (e.g., ice). Additionally, the fitted parameters of the utilized computational models (i.e., the Kihara potentials) are set differently by each developer, depending on the experimental data used to tune their models.In this work, the performance of some of the industry-standard commercial software packages is evaluated. The evaluation is performed by using several systems, varying from single-component ones to highly inhibited ones. The comparative evaluation is based on a large database of 400 experimental dissociation pressure data points which has been published over the last 5 years. The results of this work provide valuable insights for industry professionals and academics interested in obtaining accurate predictions of hydrate dissociation conditions. It is shown that each package exhibits its own performance profile with individual strengths and weaknesses in calculating hydrate dissociation conditions of different gas mixture systems. The evaluation is supplemented with the detailed description of the modeling principles, thermodynamics, and algorithms used by each developer.
650		4	\|a Gas hydrates
650		4	\|a Dissociation conditions
650		4	\|a Phase equilibria
650		4	\|a Van-der-Waals-Platteeuw theory
650		4	\|a Flow assurance
653		0	\|a Thermodynamics
700	0		\|a Vassilis Gaganis \|e verfasserin \|4 aut
700	0		\|a Dimitris Marinakis \|e verfasserin \|4 aut
700	0		\|a Ramin Mousavi \|e verfasserin \|4 aut
700	0		\|a Bahman Tohidi \|e verfasserin \|4 aut
773	0	8	\|i In \|t Chemical Thermodynamics and Thermal Analysis \|d Elsevier, 2021 \|g 9(2023), Seite 100103- \|w (DE-627)1777994101 \|x 26673126 \|7 nnns
773	1	8	\|g volume:9 \|g year:2023 \|g pages:100103-
856	4	0	\|u https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ctta.2022.100103 \|z kostenfrei
856	4	0	\|u https://doaj.org/article/803aa0f745674f1a8ba3840fed17cea7 \|z kostenfrei
856	4	0	\|u http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2667312622000694 \|z kostenfrei
856	4	2	\|u https://doaj.org/toc/2667-3126 \|y Journal toc \|z kostenfrei
912			\|a GBV_USEFLAG_A
912			\|a SYSFLAG_A
912			\|a GBV_DOAJ
912			\|a GBV_ILN_20
912			\|a GBV_ILN_22
912			\|a GBV_ILN_23
912			\|a GBV_ILN_24
912			\|a GBV_ILN_31
912			\|a GBV_ILN_39
912			\|a GBV_ILN_40
912			\|a GBV_ILN_60
912			\|a GBV_ILN_62
912			\|a GBV_ILN_63
912			\|a GBV_ILN_65
912			\|a GBV_ILN_69
912			\|a GBV_ILN_70
912			\|a GBV_ILN_73
912			\|a GBV_ILN_95
912			\|a GBV_ILN_105
912			\|a GBV_ILN_110
912			\|a GBV_ILN_151
912			\|a GBV_ILN_161
912			\|a GBV_ILN_170
912			\|a GBV_ILN_213
912			\|a GBV_ILN_224
912			\|a GBV_ILN_230
912			\|a GBV_ILN_285
912			\|a GBV_ILN_293
912			\|a GBV_ILN_602
912			\|a GBV_ILN_2001
912			\|a GBV_ILN_2003
912			\|a GBV_ILN_2005
912			\|a GBV_ILN_2006
912			\|a GBV_ILN_2007
912			\|a GBV_ILN_2008
912			\|a GBV_ILN_2009
912			\|a GBV_ILN_2010
912			\|a GBV_ILN_2011
912			\|a GBV_ILN_2014
912			\|a GBV_ILN_2015
912			\|a GBV_ILN_2020
912			\|a GBV_ILN_2021
912			\|a GBV_ILN_2025
912			\|a GBV_ILN_2026
912			\|a GBV_ILN_2027
912			\|a GBV_ILN_2034
912			\|a GBV_ILN_2038
912			\|a GBV_ILN_2044
912			\|a GBV_ILN_2048
912			\|a GBV_ILN_2049
912			\|a GBV_ILN_2050
912			\|a GBV_ILN_2055
912			\|a GBV_ILN_2056
912			\|a GBV_ILN_2059
912			\|a GBV_ILN_2061
912			\|a GBV_ILN_2064
912			\|a GBV_ILN_2088
912			\|a GBV_ILN_2106
912			\|a GBV_ILN_2110
912			\|a GBV_ILN_2112
912			\|a GBV_ILN_2122
912			\|a GBV_ILN_2129
912			\|a GBV_ILN_2143
912			\|a GBV_ILN_2152
912			\|a GBV_ILN_2153
912			\|a GBV_ILN_2190
912			\|a GBV_ILN_2232
912			\|a GBV_ILN_2336
912			\|a GBV_ILN_2470
912			\|a GBV_ILN_2507
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4012
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4035
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4037
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4112
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4125
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4126
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4242
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4249
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4251
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4305
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4306
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4307
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4313
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4322
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4323
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4324
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4325
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4326
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4333
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4334
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4335
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4338
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4367
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4393
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4700
951			\|a AR
952			\|d 9 \|j 2023 \|h 100103-

Indexfelder

author_variant	i i ii v g vg d m dm r m rm b t bt
matchkey_str	article:26673126:2023----::cuayfifrntemdnmcotaeakgsnrdcigyrt
hierarchy_sort_str	2023
callnumber-subject-code	QC
publishDate	2023
allfields	10.1016/j.ctta.2022.100103 doi (DE-627)DOAJ07982188X (DE-599)DOAJ803aa0f745674f1a8ba3840fed17cea7 DE-627 ger DE-627 rakwb eng QC310.15-319 Ismail Ismail verfasserin aut Accuracy of different thermodynamic software packages in predicting hydrate dissociation conditions 2023 Text txt rdacontent Computermedien c rdamedia Online-Ressource cr rdacarrier Gas hydrate blockage is a longstanding problem in the oil and gas industry, responsible for the interruption of hydrocarbon flow, posing economic and safety risks. Computational modeling methods are required to estimate the dissociation pressure of the original system and its shifting in the presence of thermodynamic inhibitors so as to avoid excessive inhibitors dosages, high operating costs and serious environmental impacts. On the other hand, the properties and characteristics of clathrate hydrates have paved the way to new technological solutions such as energy storage, gas separation, carbon capture and desalination, which also require accurate estimates of hydrate stability conditions. Various commercial PVT software packages serve as established computational tools to model hydrate phase equilibria and predict dissociation conditions. Those products exhibit major differences in the underlying computations such as the hydrate modeling framework, the EoS models used to calculate components fugacity in fluid phases, the thermodynamic approaches in the presence of salts and inhibitors, and the phase models of potential hydrate solid coexisting phases (e.g., ice). Additionally, the fitted parameters of the utilized computational models (i.e., the Kihara potentials) are set differently by each developer, depending on the experimental data used to tune their models.In this work, the performance of some of the industry-standard commercial software packages is evaluated. The evaluation is performed by using several systems, varying from single-component ones to highly inhibited ones. The comparative evaluation is based on a large database of 400 experimental dissociation pressure data points which has been published over the last 5 years. The results of this work provide valuable insights for industry professionals and academics interested in obtaining accurate predictions of hydrate dissociation conditions. It is shown that each package exhibits its own performance profile with individual strengths and weaknesses in calculating hydrate dissociation conditions of different gas mixture systems. The evaluation is supplemented with the detailed description of the modeling principles, thermodynamics, and algorithms used by each developer. Gas hydrates Dissociation conditions Phase equilibria Van-der-Waals-Platteeuw theory Flow assurance Thermodynamics Vassilis Gaganis verfasserin aut Dimitris Marinakis verfasserin aut Ramin Mousavi verfasserin aut Bahman Tohidi verfasserin aut In Chemical Thermodynamics and Thermal Analysis Elsevier, 2021 9(2023), Seite 100103- (DE-627)1777994101 26673126 nnns volume:9 year:2023 pages:100103- https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ctta.2022.100103 kostenfrei https://doaj.org/article/803aa0f745674f1a8ba3840fed17cea7 kostenfrei http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2667312622000694 kostenfrei https://doaj.org/toc/2667-3126 Journal toc kostenfrei GBV_USEFLAG_A SYSFLAG_A GBV_DOAJ GBV_ILN_20 GBV_ILN_22 GBV_ILN_23 GBV_ILN_24 GBV_ILN_31 GBV_ILN_39 GBV_ILN_40 GBV_ILN_60 GBV_ILN_62 GBV_ILN_63 GBV_ILN_65 GBV_ILN_69 GBV_ILN_70 GBV_ILN_73 GBV_ILN_95 GBV_ILN_105 GBV_ILN_110 GBV_ILN_151 GBV_ILN_161 GBV_ILN_170 GBV_ILN_213 GBV_ILN_224 GBV_ILN_230 GBV_ILN_285 GBV_ILN_293 GBV_ILN_602 GBV_ILN_2001 GBV_ILN_2003 GBV_ILN_2005 GBV_ILN_2006 GBV_ILN_2007 GBV_ILN_2008 GBV_ILN_2009 GBV_ILN_2010 GBV_ILN_2011 GBV_ILN_2014 GBV_ILN_2015 GBV_ILN_2020 GBV_ILN_2021 GBV_ILN_2025 GBV_ILN_2026 GBV_ILN_2027 GBV_ILN_2034 GBV_ILN_2038 GBV_ILN_2044 GBV_ILN_2048 GBV_ILN_2049 GBV_ILN_2050 GBV_ILN_2055 GBV_ILN_2056 GBV_ILN_2059 GBV_ILN_2061 GBV_ILN_2064 GBV_ILN_2088 GBV_ILN_2106 GBV_ILN_2110 GBV_ILN_2112 GBV_ILN_2122 GBV_ILN_2129 GBV_ILN_2143 GBV_ILN_2152 GBV_ILN_2153 GBV_ILN_2190 GBV_ILN_2232 GBV_ILN_2336 GBV_ILN_2470 GBV_ILN_2507 GBV_ILN_4012 GBV_ILN_4035 GBV_ILN_4037 GBV_ILN_4112 GBV_ILN_4125 GBV_ILN_4126 GBV_ILN_4242 GBV_ILN_4249 GBV_ILN_4251 GBV_ILN_4305 GBV_ILN_4306 GBV_ILN_4307 GBV_ILN_4313 GBV_ILN_4322 GBV_ILN_4323 GBV_ILN_4324 GBV_ILN_4325 GBV_ILN_4326 GBV_ILN_4333 GBV_ILN_4334 GBV_ILN_4335 GBV_ILN_4338 GBV_ILN_4367 GBV_ILN_4393 GBV_ILN_4700 AR 9 2023 100103-
spelling	10.1016/j.ctta.2022.100103 doi (DE-627)DOAJ07982188X (DE-599)DOAJ803aa0f745674f1a8ba3840fed17cea7 DE-627 ger DE-627 rakwb eng QC310.15-319 Ismail Ismail verfasserin aut Accuracy of different thermodynamic software packages in predicting hydrate dissociation conditions 2023 Text txt rdacontent Computermedien c rdamedia Online-Ressource cr rdacarrier Gas hydrate blockage is a longstanding problem in the oil and gas industry, responsible for the interruption of hydrocarbon flow, posing economic and safety risks. Computational modeling methods are required to estimate the dissociation pressure of the original system and its shifting in the presence of thermodynamic inhibitors so as to avoid excessive inhibitors dosages, high operating costs and serious environmental impacts. On the other hand, the properties and characteristics of clathrate hydrates have paved the way to new technological solutions such as energy storage, gas separation, carbon capture and desalination, which also require accurate estimates of hydrate stability conditions. Various commercial PVT software packages serve as established computational tools to model hydrate phase equilibria and predict dissociation conditions. Those products exhibit major differences in the underlying computations such as the hydrate modeling framework, the EoS models used to calculate components fugacity in fluid phases, the thermodynamic approaches in the presence of salts and inhibitors, and the phase models of potential hydrate solid coexisting phases (e.g., ice). Additionally, the fitted parameters of the utilized computational models (i.e., the Kihara potentials) are set differently by each developer, depending on the experimental data used to tune their models.In this work, the performance of some of the industry-standard commercial software packages is evaluated. The evaluation is performed by using several systems, varying from single-component ones to highly inhibited ones. The comparative evaluation is based on a large database of 400 experimental dissociation pressure data points which has been published over the last 5 years. The results of this work provide valuable insights for industry professionals and academics interested in obtaining accurate predictions of hydrate dissociation conditions. It is shown that each package exhibits its own performance profile with individual strengths and weaknesses in calculating hydrate dissociation conditions of different gas mixture systems. The evaluation is supplemented with the detailed description of the modeling principles, thermodynamics, and algorithms used by each developer. Gas hydrates Dissociation conditions Phase equilibria Van-der-Waals-Platteeuw theory Flow assurance Thermodynamics Vassilis Gaganis verfasserin aut Dimitris Marinakis verfasserin aut Ramin Mousavi verfasserin aut Bahman Tohidi verfasserin aut In Chemical Thermodynamics and Thermal Analysis Elsevier, 2021 9(2023), Seite 100103- (DE-627)1777994101 26673126 nnns volume:9 year:2023 pages:100103- https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ctta.2022.100103 kostenfrei https://doaj.org/article/803aa0f745674f1a8ba3840fed17cea7 kostenfrei http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2667312622000694 kostenfrei https://doaj.org/toc/2667-3126 Journal toc kostenfrei GBV_USEFLAG_A SYSFLAG_A GBV_DOAJ GBV_ILN_20 GBV_ILN_22 GBV_ILN_23 GBV_ILN_24 GBV_ILN_31 GBV_ILN_39 GBV_ILN_40 GBV_ILN_60 GBV_ILN_62 GBV_ILN_63 GBV_ILN_65 GBV_ILN_69 GBV_ILN_70 GBV_ILN_73 GBV_ILN_95 GBV_ILN_105 GBV_ILN_110 GBV_ILN_151 GBV_ILN_161 GBV_ILN_170 GBV_ILN_213 GBV_ILN_224 GBV_ILN_230 GBV_ILN_285 GBV_ILN_293 GBV_ILN_602 GBV_ILN_2001 GBV_ILN_2003 GBV_ILN_2005 GBV_ILN_2006 GBV_ILN_2007 GBV_ILN_2008 GBV_ILN_2009 GBV_ILN_2010 GBV_ILN_2011 GBV_ILN_2014 GBV_ILN_2015 GBV_ILN_2020 GBV_ILN_2021 GBV_ILN_2025 GBV_ILN_2026 GBV_ILN_2027 GBV_ILN_2034 GBV_ILN_2038 GBV_ILN_2044 GBV_ILN_2048 GBV_ILN_2049 GBV_ILN_2050 GBV_ILN_2055 GBV_ILN_2056 GBV_ILN_2059 GBV_ILN_2061 GBV_ILN_2064 GBV_ILN_2088 GBV_ILN_2106 GBV_ILN_2110 GBV_ILN_2112 GBV_ILN_2122 GBV_ILN_2129 GBV_ILN_2143 GBV_ILN_2152 GBV_ILN_2153 GBV_ILN_2190 GBV_ILN_2232 GBV_ILN_2336 GBV_ILN_2470 GBV_ILN_2507 GBV_ILN_4012 GBV_ILN_4035 GBV_ILN_4037 GBV_ILN_4112 GBV_ILN_4125 GBV_ILN_4126 GBV_ILN_4242 GBV_ILN_4249 GBV_ILN_4251 GBV_ILN_4305 GBV_ILN_4306 GBV_ILN_4307 GBV_ILN_4313 GBV_ILN_4322 GBV_ILN_4323 GBV_ILN_4324 GBV_ILN_4325 GBV_ILN_4326 GBV_ILN_4333 GBV_ILN_4334 GBV_ILN_4335 GBV_ILN_4338 GBV_ILN_4367 GBV_ILN_4393 GBV_ILN_4700 AR 9 2023 100103-
allfields_unstemmed	10.1016/j.ctta.2022.100103 doi (DE-627)DOAJ07982188X (DE-599)DOAJ803aa0f745674f1a8ba3840fed17cea7 DE-627 ger DE-627 rakwb eng QC310.15-319 Ismail Ismail verfasserin aut Accuracy of different thermodynamic software packages in predicting hydrate dissociation conditions 2023 Text txt rdacontent Computermedien c rdamedia Online-Ressource cr rdacarrier Gas hydrate blockage is a longstanding problem in the oil and gas industry, responsible for the interruption of hydrocarbon flow, posing economic and safety risks. Computational modeling methods are required to estimate the dissociation pressure of the original system and its shifting in the presence of thermodynamic inhibitors so as to avoid excessive inhibitors dosages, high operating costs and serious environmental impacts. On the other hand, the properties and characteristics of clathrate hydrates have paved the way to new technological solutions such as energy storage, gas separation, carbon capture and desalination, which also require accurate estimates of hydrate stability conditions. Various commercial PVT software packages serve as established computational tools to model hydrate phase equilibria and predict dissociation conditions. Those products exhibit major differences in the underlying computations such as the hydrate modeling framework, the EoS models used to calculate components fugacity in fluid phases, the thermodynamic approaches in the presence of salts and inhibitors, and the phase models of potential hydrate solid coexisting phases (e.g., ice). Additionally, the fitted parameters of the utilized computational models (i.e., the Kihara potentials) are set differently by each developer, depending on the experimental data used to tune their models.In this work, the performance of some of the industry-standard commercial software packages is evaluated. The evaluation is performed by using several systems, varying from single-component ones to highly inhibited ones. The comparative evaluation is based on a large database of 400 experimental dissociation pressure data points which has been published over the last 5 years. The results of this work provide valuable insights for industry professionals and academics interested in obtaining accurate predictions of hydrate dissociation conditions. It is shown that each package exhibits its own performance profile with individual strengths and weaknesses in calculating hydrate dissociation conditions of different gas mixture systems. The evaluation is supplemented with the detailed description of the modeling principles, thermodynamics, and algorithms used by each developer. Gas hydrates Dissociation conditions Phase equilibria Van-der-Waals-Platteeuw theory Flow assurance Thermodynamics Vassilis Gaganis verfasserin aut Dimitris Marinakis verfasserin aut Ramin Mousavi verfasserin aut Bahman Tohidi verfasserin aut In Chemical Thermodynamics and Thermal Analysis Elsevier, 2021 9(2023), Seite 100103- (DE-627)1777994101 26673126 nnns volume:9 year:2023 pages:100103- https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ctta.2022.100103 kostenfrei https://doaj.org/article/803aa0f745674f1a8ba3840fed17cea7 kostenfrei http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2667312622000694 kostenfrei https://doaj.org/toc/2667-3126 Journal toc kostenfrei GBV_USEFLAG_A SYSFLAG_A GBV_DOAJ GBV_ILN_20 GBV_ILN_22 GBV_ILN_23 GBV_ILN_24 GBV_ILN_31 GBV_ILN_39 GBV_ILN_40 GBV_ILN_60 GBV_ILN_62 GBV_ILN_63 GBV_ILN_65 GBV_ILN_69 GBV_ILN_70 GBV_ILN_73 GBV_ILN_95 GBV_ILN_105 GBV_ILN_110 GBV_ILN_151 GBV_ILN_161 GBV_ILN_170 GBV_ILN_213 GBV_ILN_224 GBV_ILN_230 GBV_ILN_285 GBV_ILN_293 GBV_ILN_602 GBV_ILN_2001 GBV_ILN_2003 GBV_ILN_2005 GBV_ILN_2006 GBV_ILN_2007 GBV_ILN_2008 GBV_ILN_2009 GBV_ILN_2010 GBV_ILN_2011 GBV_ILN_2014 GBV_ILN_2015 GBV_ILN_2020 GBV_ILN_2021 GBV_ILN_2025 GBV_ILN_2026 GBV_ILN_2027 GBV_ILN_2034 GBV_ILN_2038 GBV_ILN_2044 GBV_ILN_2048 GBV_ILN_2049 GBV_ILN_2050 GBV_ILN_2055 GBV_ILN_2056 GBV_ILN_2059 GBV_ILN_2061 GBV_ILN_2064 GBV_ILN_2088 GBV_ILN_2106 GBV_ILN_2110 GBV_ILN_2112 GBV_ILN_2122 GBV_ILN_2129 GBV_ILN_2143 GBV_ILN_2152 GBV_ILN_2153 GBV_ILN_2190 GBV_ILN_2232 GBV_ILN_2336 GBV_ILN_2470 GBV_ILN_2507 GBV_ILN_4012 GBV_ILN_4035 GBV_ILN_4037 GBV_ILN_4112 GBV_ILN_4125 GBV_ILN_4126 GBV_ILN_4242 GBV_ILN_4249 GBV_ILN_4251 GBV_ILN_4305 GBV_ILN_4306 GBV_ILN_4307 GBV_ILN_4313 GBV_ILN_4322 GBV_ILN_4323 GBV_ILN_4324 GBV_ILN_4325 GBV_ILN_4326 GBV_ILN_4333 GBV_ILN_4334 GBV_ILN_4335 GBV_ILN_4338 GBV_ILN_4367 GBV_ILN_4393 GBV_ILN_4700 AR 9 2023 100103-
allfieldsGer	10.1016/j.ctta.2022.100103 doi (DE-627)DOAJ07982188X (DE-599)DOAJ803aa0f745674f1a8ba3840fed17cea7 DE-627 ger DE-627 rakwb eng QC310.15-319 Ismail Ismail verfasserin aut Accuracy of different thermodynamic software packages in predicting hydrate dissociation conditions 2023 Text txt rdacontent Computermedien c rdamedia Online-Ressource cr rdacarrier Gas hydrate blockage is a longstanding problem in the oil and gas industry, responsible for the interruption of hydrocarbon flow, posing economic and safety risks. Computational modeling methods are required to estimate the dissociation pressure of the original system and its shifting in the presence of thermodynamic inhibitors so as to avoid excessive inhibitors dosages, high operating costs and serious environmental impacts. On the other hand, the properties and characteristics of clathrate hydrates have paved the way to new technological solutions such as energy storage, gas separation, carbon capture and desalination, which also require accurate estimates of hydrate stability conditions. Various commercial PVT software packages serve as established computational tools to model hydrate phase equilibria and predict dissociation conditions. Those products exhibit major differences in the underlying computations such as the hydrate modeling framework, the EoS models used to calculate components fugacity in fluid phases, the thermodynamic approaches in the presence of salts and inhibitors, and the phase models of potential hydrate solid coexisting phases (e.g., ice). Additionally, the fitted parameters of the utilized computational models (i.e., the Kihara potentials) are set differently by each developer, depending on the experimental data used to tune their models.In this work, the performance of some of the industry-standard commercial software packages is evaluated. The evaluation is performed by using several systems, varying from single-component ones to highly inhibited ones. The comparative evaluation is based on a large database of 400 experimental dissociation pressure data points which has been published over the last 5 years. The results of this work provide valuable insights for industry professionals and academics interested in obtaining accurate predictions of hydrate dissociation conditions. It is shown that each package exhibits its own performance profile with individual strengths and weaknesses in calculating hydrate dissociation conditions of different gas mixture systems. The evaluation is supplemented with the detailed description of the modeling principles, thermodynamics, and algorithms used by each developer. Gas hydrates Dissociation conditions Phase equilibria Van-der-Waals-Platteeuw theory Flow assurance Thermodynamics Vassilis Gaganis verfasserin aut Dimitris Marinakis verfasserin aut Ramin Mousavi verfasserin aut Bahman Tohidi verfasserin aut In Chemical Thermodynamics and Thermal Analysis Elsevier, 2021 9(2023), Seite 100103- (DE-627)1777994101 26673126 nnns volume:9 year:2023 pages:100103- https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ctta.2022.100103 kostenfrei https://doaj.org/article/803aa0f745674f1a8ba3840fed17cea7 kostenfrei http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2667312622000694 kostenfrei https://doaj.org/toc/2667-3126 Journal toc kostenfrei GBV_USEFLAG_A SYSFLAG_A GBV_DOAJ GBV_ILN_20 GBV_ILN_22 GBV_ILN_23 GBV_ILN_24 GBV_ILN_31 GBV_ILN_39 GBV_ILN_40 GBV_ILN_60 GBV_ILN_62 GBV_ILN_63 GBV_ILN_65 GBV_ILN_69 GBV_ILN_70 GBV_ILN_73 GBV_ILN_95 GBV_ILN_105 GBV_ILN_110 GBV_ILN_151 GBV_ILN_161 GBV_ILN_170 GBV_ILN_213 GBV_ILN_224 GBV_ILN_230 GBV_ILN_285 GBV_ILN_293 GBV_ILN_602 GBV_ILN_2001 GBV_ILN_2003 GBV_ILN_2005 GBV_ILN_2006 GBV_ILN_2007 GBV_ILN_2008 GBV_ILN_2009 GBV_ILN_2010 GBV_ILN_2011 GBV_ILN_2014 GBV_ILN_2015 GBV_ILN_2020 GBV_ILN_2021 GBV_ILN_2025 GBV_ILN_2026 GBV_ILN_2027 GBV_ILN_2034 GBV_ILN_2038 GBV_ILN_2044 GBV_ILN_2048 GBV_ILN_2049 GBV_ILN_2050 GBV_ILN_2055 GBV_ILN_2056 GBV_ILN_2059 GBV_ILN_2061 GBV_ILN_2064 GBV_ILN_2088 GBV_ILN_2106 GBV_ILN_2110 GBV_ILN_2112 GBV_ILN_2122 GBV_ILN_2129 GBV_ILN_2143 GBV_ILN_2152 GBV_ILN_2153 GBV_ILN_2190 GBV_ILN_2232 GBV_ILN_2336 GBV_ILN_2470 GBV_ILN_2507 GBV_ILN_4012 GBV_ILN_4035 GBV_ILN_4037 GBV_ILN_4112 GBV_ILN_4125 GBV_ILN_4126 GBV_ILN_4242 GBV_ILN_4249 GBV_ILN_4251 GBV_ILN_4305 GBV_ILN_4306 GBV_ILN_4307 GBV_ILN_4313 GBV_ILN_4322 GBV_ILN_4323 GBV_ILN_4324 GBV_ILN_4325 GBV_ILN_4326 GBV_ILN_4333 GBV_ILN_4334 GBV_ILN_4335 GBV_ILN_4338 GBV_ILN_4367 GBV_ILN_4393 GBV_ILN_4700 AR 9 2023 100103-
allfieldsSound	10.1016/j.ctta.2022.100103 doi (DE-627)DOAJ07982188X (DE-599)DOAJ803aa0f745674f1a8ba3840fed17cea7 DE-627 ger DE-627 rakwb eng QC310.15-319 Ismail Ismail verfasserin aut Accuracy of different thermodynamic software packages in predicting hydrate dissociation conditions 2023 Text txt rdacontent Computermedien c rdamedia Online-Ressource cr rdacarrier Gas hydrate blockage is a longstanding problem in the oil and gas industry, responsible for the interruption of hydrocarbon flow, posing economic and safety risks. Computational modeling methods are required to estimate the dissociation pressure of the original system and its shifting in the presence of thermodynamic inhibitors so as to avoid excessive inhibitors dosages, high operating costs and serious environmental impacts. On the other hand, the properties and characteristics of clathrate hydrates have paved the way to new technological solutions such as energy storage, gas separation, carbon capture and desalination, which also require accurate estimates of hydrate stability conditions. Various commercial PVT software packages serve as established computational tools to model hydrate phase equilibria and predict dissociation conditions. Those products exhibit major differences in the underlying computations such as the hydrate modeling framework, the EoS models used to calculate components fugacity in fluid phases, the thermodynamic approaches in the presence of salts and inhibitors, and the phase models of potential hydrate solid coexisting phases (e.g., ice). Additionally, the fitted parameters of the utilized computational models (i.e., the Kihara potentials) are set differently by each developer, depending on the experimental data used to tune their models.In this work, the performance of some of the industry-standard commercial software packages is evaluated. The evaluation is performed by using several systems, varying from single-component ones to highly inhibited ones. The comparative evaluation is based on a large database of 400 experimental dissociation pressure data points which has been published over the last 5 years. The results of this work provide valuable insights for industry professionals and academics interested in obtaining accurate predictions of hydrate dissociation conditions. It is shown that each package exhibits its own performance profile with individual strengths and weaknesses in calculating hydrate dissociation conditions of different gas mixture systems. The evaluation is supplemented with the detailed description of the modeling principles, thermodynamics, and algorithms used by each developer. Gas hydrates Dissociation conditions Phase equilibria Van-der-Waals-Platteeuw theory Flow assurance Thermodynamics Vassilis Gaganis verfasserin aut Dimitris Marinakis verfasserin aut Ramin Mousavi verfasserin aut Bahman Tohidi verfasserin aut In Chemical Thermodynamics and Thermal Analysis Elsevier, 2021 9(2023), Seite 100103- (DE-627)1777994101 26673126 nnns volume:9 year:2023 pages:100103- https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ctta.2022.100103 kostenfrei https://doaj.org/article/803aa0f745674f1a8ba3840fed17cea7 kostenfrei http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2667312622000694 kostenfrei https://doaj.org/toc/2667-3126 Journal toc kostenfrei GBV_USEFLAG_A SYSFLAG_A GBV_DOAJ GBV_ILN_20 GBV_ILN_22 GBV_ILN_23 GBV_ILN_24 GBV_ILN_31 GBV_ILN_39 GBV_ILN_40 GBV_ILN_60 GBV_ILN_62 GBV_ILN_63 GBV_ILN_65 GBV_ILN_69 GBV_ILN_70 GBV_ILN_73 GBV_ILN_95 GBV_ILN_105 GBV_ILN_110 GBV_ILN_151 GBV_ILN_161 GBV_ILN_170 GBV_ILN_213 GBV_ILN_224 GBV_ILN_230 GBV_ILN_285 GBV_ILN_293 GBV_ILN_602 GBV_ILN_2001 GBV_ILN_2003 GBV_ILN_2005 GBV_ILN_2006 GBV_ILN_2007 GBV_ILN_2008 GBV_ILN_2009 GBV_ILN_2010 GBV_ILN_2011 GBV_ILN_2014 GBV_ILN_2015 GBV_ILN_2020 GBV_ILN_2021 GBV_ILN_2025 GBV_ILN_2026 GBV_ILN_2027 GBV_ILN_2034 GBV_ILN_2038 GBV_ILN_2044 GBV_ILN_2048 GBV_ILN_2049 GBV_ILN_2050 GBV_ILN_2055 GBV_ILN_2056 GBV_ILN_2059 GBV_ILN_2061 GBV_ILN_2064 GBV_ILN_2088 GBV_ILN_2106 GBV_ILN_2110 GBV_ILN_2112 GBV_ILN_2122 GBV_ILN_2129 GBV_ILN_2143 GBV_ILN_2152 GBV_ILN_2153 GBV_ILN_2190 GBV_ILN_2232 GBV_ILN_2336 GBV_ILN_2470 GBV_ILN_2507 GBV_ILN_4012 GBV_ILN_4035 GBV_ILN_4037 GBV_ILN_4112 GBV_ILN_4125 GBV_ILN_4126 GBV_ILN_4242 GBV_ILN_4249 GBV_ILN_4251 GBV_ILN_4305 GBV_ILN_4306 GBV_ILN_4307 GBV_ILN_4313 GBV_ILN_4322 GBV_ILN_4323 GBV_ILN_4324 GBV_ILN_4325 GBV_ILN_4326 GBV_ILN_4333 GBV_ILN_4334 GBV_ILN_4335 GBV_ILN_4338 GBV_ILN_4367 GBV_ILN_4393 GBV_ILN_4700 AR 9 2023 100103-
language	English
source	In Chemical Thermodynamics and Thermal Analysis 9(2023), Seite 100103- volume:9 year:2023 pages:100103-
sourceStr	In Chemical Thermodynamics and Thermal Analysis 9(2023), Seite 100103- volume:9 year:2023 pages:100103-
format_phy_str_mv	Article
institution	findex.gbv.de
topic_facet	Gas hydrates Dissociation conditions Phase equilibria Van-der-Waals-Platteeuw theory Flow assurance Thermodynamics
isfreeaccess_bool	true
container_title	Chemical Thermodynamics and Thermal Analysis
authorswithroles_txt_mv	Ismail Ismail @@aut@@ Vassilis Gaganis @@aut@@ Dimitris Marinakis @@aut@@ Ramin Mousavi @@aut@@ Bahman Tohidi @@aut@@
publishDateDaySort_date	2023-01-01T00:00:00Z
hierarchy_top_id	1777994101
id	DOAJ07982188X
language_de	englisch
fullrecord	<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><collection xmlns="http://www.loc.gov/MARC21/slim"><record><leader>01000caa a22002652 4500</leader><controlfield tag="001">DOAJ07982188X</controlfield><controlfield tag="003">DE-627</controlfield><controlfield tag="005">20230410113012.0</controlfield><controlfield tag="007">cr uuu---uuuuu</controlfield><controlfield tag="008">230310s2023 xx \|\|\|\|\|o 00\| \|\|eng c</controlfield><datafield tag="024" ind1="7" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">10.1016/j.ctta.2022.100103</subfield><subfield code="2">doi</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="035" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">(DE-627)DOAJ07982188X</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="035" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">(DE-599)DOAJ803aa0f745674f1a8ba3840fed17cea7</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="040" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">DE-627</subfield><subfield code="b">ger</subfield><subfield code="c">DE-627</subfield><subfield code="e">rakwb</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="041" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">eng</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="050" ind1=" " ind2="0"><subfield code="a">QC310.15-319</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="100" ind1="0" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Ismail Ismail</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="245" ind1="1" ind2="0"><subfield code="a">Accuracy of different thermodynamic software packages in predicting hydrate dissociation conditions</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="264" ind1=" " ind2="1"><subfield code="c">2023</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="336" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Text</subfield><subfield code="b">txt</subfield><subfield code="2">rdacontent</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="337" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Computermedien</subfield><subfield code="b">c</subfield><subfield code="2">rdamedia</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="338" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Online-Ressource</subfield><subfield code="b">cr</subfield><subfield code="2">rdacarrier</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="520" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Gas hydrate blockage is a longstanding problem in the oil and gas industry, responsible for the interruption of hydrocarbon flow, posing economic and safety risks. Computational modeling methods are required to estimate the dissociation pressure of the original system and its shifting in the presence of thermodynamic inhibitors so as to avoid excessive inhibitors dosages, high operating costs and serious environmental impacts. On the other hand, the properties and characteristics of clathrate hydrates have paved the way to new technological solutions such as energy storage, gas separation, carbon capture and desalination, which also require accurate estimates of hydrate stability conditions. Various commercial PVT software packages serve as established computational tools to model hydrate phase equilibria and predict dissociation conditions. Those products exhibit major differences in the underlying computations such as the hydrate modeling framework, the EoS models used to calculate components fugacity in fluid phases, the thermodynamic approaches in the presence of salts and inhibitors, and the phase models of potential hydrate solid coexisting phases (e.g., ice). Additionally, the fitted parameters of the utilized computational models (i.e., the Kihara potentials) are set differently by each developer, depending on the experimental data used to tune their models.In this work, the performance of some of the industry-standard commercial software packages is evaluated. The evaluation is performed by using several systems, varying from single-component ones to highly inhibited ones. The comparative evaluation is based on a large database of 400 experimental dissociation pressure data points which has been published over the last 5 years. The results of this work provide valuable insights for industry professionals and academics interested in obtaining accurate predictions of hydrate dissociation conditions. It is shown that each package exhibits its own performance profile with individual strengths and weaknesses in calculating hydrate dissociation conditions of different gas mixture systems. The evaluation is supplemented with the detailed description of the modeling principles, thermodynamics, and algorithms used by each developer.</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Gas hydrates</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Dissociation conditions</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Phase equilibria</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Van-der-Waals-Platteeuw theory</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Flow assurance</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="653" ind1=" " ind2="0"><subfield code="a">Thermodynamics</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="0" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Vassilis Gaganis</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="0" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Dimitris Marinakis</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="0" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Ramin Mousavi</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="0" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Bahman Tohidi</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="773" ind1="0" ind2="8"><subfield code="i">In</subfield><subfield code="t">Chemical Thermodynamics and Thermal Analysis</subfield><subfield code="d">Elsevier, 2021</subfield><subfield code="g">9(2023), Seite 100103-</subfield><subfield code="w">(DE-627)1777994101</subfield><subfield code="x">26673126</subfield><subfield code="7">nnns</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="773" ind1="1" ind2="8"><subfield code="g">volume:9</subfield><subfield code="g">year:2023</subfield><subfield code="g">pages:100103-</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="856" ind1="4" ind2="0"><subfield code="u">https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ctta.2022.100103</subfield><subfield code="z">kostenfrei</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="856" ind1="4" ind2="0"><subfield code="u">https://doaj.org/article/803aa0f745674f1a8ba3840fed17cea7</subfield><subfield code="z">kostenfrei</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="856" ind1="4" ind2="0"><subfield code="u">http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2667312622000694</subfield><subfield code="z">kostenfrei</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="856" ind1="4" ind2="2"><subfield code="u">https://doaj.org/toc/2667-3126</subfield><subfield code="y">Journal toc</subfield><subfield code="z">kostenfrei</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_USEFLAG_A</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">SYSFLAG_A</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_DOAJ</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_20</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_22</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_23</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_24</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_31</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_39</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_40</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_60</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_62</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_63</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_65</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_69</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_70</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_73</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_95</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_105</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_110</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_151</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_161</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_170</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_213</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_224</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_230</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_285</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_293</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_602</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2001</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2003</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2005</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2006</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2007</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2008</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2009</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2010</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2011</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2014</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2015</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2020</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2021</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2025</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2026</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2027</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2034</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2038</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2044</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2048</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2049</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2050</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2055</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2056</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2059</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2061</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2064</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2088</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2106</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2110</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2112</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2122</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2129</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2143</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2152</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2153</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2190</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2232</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2336</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2470</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2507</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4012</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4035</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4037</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4112</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4125</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4126</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4242</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4249</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4251</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4305</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4306</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4307</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4313</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4322</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4323</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4324</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4325</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4326</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4333</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4334</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4335</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4338</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4367</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4393</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4700</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="951" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">AR</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="952" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="d">9</subfield><subfield code="j">2023</subfield><subfield code="h">100103-</subfield></datafield></record></collection>
callnumber-first	Q - Science
author	Ismail Ismail
spellingShingle	Ismail Ismail misc QC310.15-319 misc Gas hydrates misc Dissociation conditions misc Phase equilibria misc Van-der-Waals-Platteeuw theory misc Flow assurance misc Thermodynamics Accuracy of different thermodynamic software packages in predicting hydrate dissociation conditions
authorStr	Ismail Ismail
ppnlink_with_tag_str_mv	@@773@@(DE-627)1777994101
format	electronic Article
delete_txt_mv	keep
author_role	aut aut aut aut aut
collection	DOAJ
remote_str	true
callnumber-label	QC310
illustrated	Not Illustrated
issn	26673126
topic_title	QC310.15-319 Accuracy of different thermodynamic software packages in predicting hydrate dissociation conditions Gas hydrates Dissociation conditions Phase equilibria Van-der-Waals-Platteeuw theory Flow assurance
topic	misc QC310.15-319 misc Gas hydrates misc Dissociation conditions misc Phase equilibria misc Van-der-Waals-Platteeuw theory misc Flow assurance misc Thermodynamics
topic_unstemmed	misc QC310.15-319 misc Gas hydrates misc Dissociation conditions misc Phase equilibria misc Van-der-Waals-Platteeuw theory misc Flow assurance misc Thermodynamics
topic_browse	misc QC310.15-319 misc Gas hydrates misc Dissociation conditions misc Phase equilibria misc Van-der-Waals-Platteeuw theory misc Flow assurance misc Thermodynamics
format_facet	Elektronische Aufsätze Aufsätze Elektronische Ressource
format_main_str_mv	Text Zeitschrift/Artikel
carriertype_str_mv	cr
hierarchy_parent_title	Chemical Thermodynamics and Thermal Analysis
hierarchy_parent_id	1777994101
hierarchy_top_title	Chemical Thermodynamics and Thermal Analysis
isfreeaccess_txt	true
familylinks_str_mv	(DE-627)1777994101
title	Accuracy of different thermodynamic software packages in predicting hydrate dissociation conditions
ctrlnum	(DE-627)DOAJ07982188X (DE-599)DOAJ803aa0f745674f1a8ba3840fed17cea7
title_full	Accuracy of different thermodynamic software packages in predicting hydrate dissociation conditions
author_sort	Ismail Ismail
journal	Chemical Thermodynamics and Thermal Analysis
journalStr	Chemical Thermodynamics and Thermal Analysis
callnumber-first-code	Q
lang_code	eng
isOA_bool	true
recordtype	marc
publishDateSort	2023
contenttype_str_mv	txt
container_start_page	100103
author_browse	Ismail Ismail Vassilis Gaganis Dimitris Marinakis Ramin Mousavi Bahman Tohidi
container_volume	9
class	QC310.15-319
format_se	Elektronische Aufsätze
author-letter	Ismail Ismail
doi_str_mv	10.1016/j.ctta.2022.100103
author2-role	verfasserin
title_sort	accuracy of different thermodynamic software packages in predicting hydrate dissociation conditions
callnumber	QC310.15-319
title_auth	Accuracy of different thermodynamic software packages in predicting hydrate dissociation conditions
abstract	Gas hydrate blockage is a longstanding problem in the oil and gas industry, responsible for the interruption of hydrocarbon flow, posing economic and safety risks. Computational modeling methods are required to estimate the dissociation pressure of the original system and its shifting in the presence of thermodynamic inhibitors so as to avoid excessive inhibitors dosages, high operating costs and serious environmental impacts. On the other hand, the properties and characteristics of clathrate hydrates have paved the way to new technological solutions such as energy storage, gas separation, carbon capture and desalination, which also require accurate estimates of hydrate stability conditions. Various commercial PVT software packages serve as established computational tools to model hydrate phase equilibria and predict dissociation conditions. Those products exhibit major differences in the underlying computations such as the hydrate modeling framework, the EoS models used to calculate components fugacity in fluid phases, the thermodynamic approaches in the presence of salts and inhibitors, and the phase models of potential hydrate solid coexisting phases (e.g., ice). Additionally, the fitted parameters of the utilized computational models (i.e., the Kihara potentials) are set differently by each developer, depending on the experimental data used to tune their models.In this work, the performance of some of the industry-standard commercial software packages is evaluated. The evaluation is performed by using several systems, varying from single-component ones to highly inhibited ones. The comparative evaluation is based on a large database of 400 experimental dissociation pressure data points which has been published over the last 5 years. The results of this work provide valuable insights for industry professionals and academics interested in obtaining accurate predictions of hydrate dissociation conditions. It is shown that each package exhibits its own performance profile with individual strengths and weaknesses in calculating hydrate dissociation conditions of different gas mixture systems. The evaluation is supplemented with the detailed description of the modeling principles, thermodynamics, and algorithms used by each developer.
abstractGer	Gas hydrate blockage is a longstanding problem in the oil and gas industry, responsible for the interruption of hydrocarbon flow, posing economic and safety risks. Computational modeling methods are required to estimate the dissociation pressure of the original system and its shifting in the presence of thermodynamic inhibitors so as to avoid excessive inhibitors dosages, high operating costs and serious environmental impacts. On the other hand, the properties and characteristics of clathrate hydrates have paved the way to new technological solutions such as energy storage, gas separation, carbon capture and desalination, which also require accurate estimates of hydrate stability conditions. Various commercial PVT software packages serve as established computational tools to model hydrate phase equilibria and predict dissociation conditions. Those products exhibit major differences in the underlying computations such as the hydrate modeling framework, the EoS models used to calculate components fugacity in fluid phases, the thermodynamic approaches in the presence of salts and inhibitors, and the phase models of potential hydrate solid coexisting phases (e.g., ice). Additionally, the fitted parameters of the utilized computational models (i.e., the Kihara potentials) are set differently by each developer, depending on the experimental data used to tune their models.In this work, the performance of some of the industry-standard commercial software packages is evaluated. The evaluation is performed by using several systems, varying from single-component ones to highly inhibited ones. The comparative evaluation is based on a large database of 400 experimental dissociation pressure data points which has been published over the last 5 years. The results of this work provide valuable insights for industry professionals and academics interested in obtaining accurate predictions of hydrate dissociation conditions. It is shown that each package exhibits its own performance profile with individual strengths and weaknesses in calculating hydrate dissociation conditions of different gas mixture systems. The evaluation is supplemented with the detailed description of the modeling principles, thermodynamics, and algorithms used by each developer.
abstract_unstemmed	Gas hydrate blockage is a longstanding problem in the oil and gas industry, responsible for the interruption of hydrocarbon flow, posing economic and safety risks. Computational modeling methods are required to estimate the dissociation pressure of the original system and its shifting in the presence of thermodynamic inhibitors so as to avoid excessive inhibitors dosages, high operating costs and serious environmental impacts. On the other hand, the properties and characteristics of clathrate hydrates have paved the way to new technological solutions such as energy storage, gas separation, carbon capture and desalination, which also require accurate estimates of hydrate stability conditions. Various commercial PVT software packages serve as established computational tools to model hydrate phase equilibria and predict dissociation conditions. Those products exhibit major differences in the underlying computations such as the hydrate modeling framework, the EoS models used to calculate components fugacity in fluid phases, the thermodynamic approaches in the presence of salts and inhibitors, and the phase models of potential hydrate solid coexisting phases (e.g., ice). Additionally, the fitted parameters of the utilized computational models (i.e., the Kihara potentials) are set differently by each developer, depending on the experimental data used to tune their models.In this work, the performance of some of the industry-standard commercial software packages is evaluated. The evaluation is performed by using several systems, varying from single-component ones to highly inhibited ones. The comparative evaluation is based on a large database of 400 experimental dissociation pressure data points which has been published over the last 5 years. The results of this work provide valuable insights for industry professionals and academics interested in obtaining accurate predictions of hydrate dissociation conditions. It is shown that each package exhibits its own performance profile with individual strengths and weaknesses in calculating hydrate dissociation conditions of different gas mixture systems. The evaluation is supplemented with the detailed description of the modeling principles, thermodynamics, and algorithms used by each developer.
collection_details	GBV_USEFLAG_A SYSFLAG_A GBV_DOAJ GBV_ILN_20 GBV_ILN_22 GBV_ILN_23 GBV_ILN_24 GBV_ILN_31 GBV_ILN_39 GBV_ILN_40 GBV_ILN_60 GBV_ILN_62 GBV_ILN_63 GBV_ILN_65 GBV_ILN_69 GBV_ILN_70 GBV_ILN_73 GBV_ILN_95 GBV_ILN_105 GBV_ILN_110 GBV_ILN_151 GBV_ILN_161 GBV_ILN_170 GBV_ILN_213 GBV_ILN_224 GBV_ILN_230 GBV_ILN_285 GBV_ILN_293 GBV_ILN_602 GBV_ILN_2001 GBV_ILN_2003 GBV_ILN_2005 GBV_ILN_2006 GBV_ILN_2007 GBV_ILN_2008 GBV_ILN_2009 GBV_ILN_2010 GBV_ILN_2011 GBV_ILN_2014 GBV_ILN_2015 GBV_ILN_2020 GBV_ILN_2021 GBV_ILN_2025 GBV_ILN_2026 GBV_ILN_2027 GBV_ILN_2034 GBV_ILN_2038 GBV_ILN_2044 GBV_ILN_2048 GBV_ILN_2049 GBV_ILN_2050 GBV_ILN_2055 GBV_ILN_2056 GBV_ILN_2059 GBV_ILN_2061 GBV_ILN_2064 GBV_ILN_2088 GBV_ILN_2106 GBV_ILN_2110 GBV_ILN_2112 GBV_ILN_2122 GBV_ILN_2129 GBV_ILN_2143 GBV_ILN_2152 GBV_ILN_2153 GBV_ILN_2190 GBV_ILN_2232 GBV_ILN_2336 GBV_ILN_2470 GBV_ILN_2507 GBV_ILN_4012 GBV_ILN_4035 GBV_ILN_4037 GBV_ILN_4112 GBV_ILN_4125 GBV_ILN_4126 GBV_ILN_4242 GBV_ILN_4249 GBV_ILN_4251 GBV_ILN_4305 GBV_ILN_4306 GBV_ILN_4307 GBV_ILN_4313 GBV_ILN_4322 GBV_ILN_4323 GBV_ILN_4324 GBV_ILN_4325 GBV_ILN_4326 GBV_ILN_4333 GBV_ILN_4334 GBV_ILN_4335 GBV_ILN_4338 GBV_ILN_4367 GBV_ILN_4393 GBV_ILN_4700
title_short	Accuracy of different thermodynamic software packages in predicting hydrate dissociation conditions
url	https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ctta.2022.100103 https://doaj.org/article/803aa0f745674f1a8ba3840fed17cea7 http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2667312622000694 https://doaj.org/toc/2667-3126
remote_bool	true
author2	Vassilis Gaganis Dimitris Marinakis Ramin Mousavi Bahman Tohidi
author2Str	Vassilis Gaganis Dimitris Marinakis Ramin Mousavi Bahman Tohidi
ppnlink	1777994101
callnumber-subject	QC - Physics
mediatype_str_mv	c
isOA_txt	true
hochschulschrift_bool	false
doi_str	10.1016/j.ctta.2022.100103
callnumber-a	QC310.15-319
up_date	2024-07-04T00:57:49.069Z
_version_	1803608044679987200
fullrecord_marcxml	<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><collection xmlns="http://www.loc.gov/MARC21/slim"><record><leader>01000caa a22002652 4500</leader><controlfield tag="001">DOAJ07982188X</controlfield><controlfield tag="003">DE-627</controlfield><controlfield tag="005">20230410113012.0</controlfield><controlfield tag="007">cr uuu---uuuuu</controlfield><controlfield tag="008">230310s2023 xx \|\|\|\|\|o 00\| \|\|eng c</controlfield><datafield tag="024" ind1="7" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">10.1016/j.ctta.2022.100103</subfield><subfield code="2">doi</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="035" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">(DE-627)DOAJ07982188X</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="035" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">(DE-599)DOAJ803aa0f745674f1a8ba3840fed17cea7</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="040" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">DE-627</subfield><subfield code="b">ger</subfield><subfield code="c">DE-627</subfield><subfield code="e">rakwb</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="041" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">eng</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="050" ind1=" " ind2="0"><subfield code="a">QC310.15-319</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="100" ind1="0" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Ismail Ismail</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="245" ind1="1" ind2="0"><subfield code="a">Accuracy of different thermodynamic software packages in predicting hydrate dissociation conditions</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="264" ind1=" " ind2="1"><subfield code="c">2023</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="336" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Text</subfield><subfield code="b">txt</subfield><subfield code="2">rdacontent</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="337" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Computermedien</subfield><subfield code="b">c</subfield><subfield code="2">rdamedia</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="338" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Online-Ressource</subfield><subfield code="b">cr</subfield><subfield code="2">rdacarrier</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="520" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Gas hydrate blockage is a longstanding problem in the oil and gas industry, responsible for the interruption of hydrocarbon flow, posing economic and safety risks. Computational modeling methods are required to estimate the dissociation pressure of the original system and its shifting in the presence of thermodynamic inhibitors so as to avoid excessive inhibitors dosages, high operating costs and serious environmental impacts. On the other hand, the properties and characteristics of clathrate hydrates have paved the way to new technological solutions such as energy storage, gas separation, carbon capture and desalination, which also require accurate estimates of hydrate stability conditions. Various commercial PVT software packages serve as established computational tools to model hydrate phase equilibria and predict dissociation conditions. Those products exhibit major differences in the underlying computations such as the hydrate modeling framework, the EoS models used to calculate components fugacity in fluid phases, the thermodynamic approaches in the presence of salts and inhibitors, and the phase models of potential hydrate solid coexisting phases (e.g., ice). Additionally, the fitted parameters of the utilized computational models (i.e., the Kihara potentials) are set differently by each developer, depending on the experimental data used to tune their models.In this work, the performance of some of the industry-standard commercial software packages is evaluated. The evaluation is performed by using several systems, varying from single-component ones to highly inhibited ones. The comparative evaluation is based on a large database of 400 experimental dissociation pressure data points which has been published over the last 5 years. The results of this work provide valuable insights for industry professionals and academics interested in obtaining accurate predictions of hydrate dissociation conditions. It is shown that each package exhibits its own performance profile with individual strengths and weaknesses in calculating hydrate dissociation conditions of different gas mixture systems. The evaluation is supplemented with the detailed description of the modeling principles, thermodynamics, and algorithms used by each developer.</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Gas hydrates</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Dissociation conditions</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Phase equilibria</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Van-der-Waals-Platteeuw theory</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Flow assurance</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="653" ind1=" " ind2="0"><subfield code="a">Thermodynamics</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="0" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Vassilis Gaganis</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="0" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Dimitris Marinakis</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="0" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Ramin Mousavi</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="0" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Bahman Tohidi</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="773" ind1="0" ind2="8"><subfield code="i">In</subfield><subfield code="t">Chemical Thermodynamics and Thermal Analysis</subfield><subfield code="d">Elsevier, 2021</subfield><subfield code="g">9(2023), Seite 100103-</subfield><subfield code="w">(DE-627)1777994101</subfield><subfield code="x">26673126</subfield><subfield code="7">nnns</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="773" ind1="1" ind2="8"><subfield code="g">volume:9</subfield><subfield code="g">year:2023</subfield><subfield code="g">pages:100103-</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="856" ind1="4" ind2="0"><subfield code="u">https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ctta.2022.100103</subfield><subfield code="z">kostenfrei</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="856" ind1="4" ind2="0"><subfield code="u">https://doaj.org/article/803aa0f745674f1a8ba3840fed17cea7</subfield><subfield code="z">kostenfrei</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="856" ind1="4" ind2="0"><subfield code="u">http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2667312622000694</subfield><subfield code="z">kostenfrei</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="856" ind1="4" ind2="2"><subfield code="u">https://doaj.org/toc/2667-3126</subfield><subfield code="y">Journal toc</subfield><subfield code="z">kostenfrei</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_USEFLAG_A</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">SYSFLAG_A</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_DOAJ</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_20</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_22</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_23</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_24</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_31</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_39</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_40</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_60</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_62</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_63</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_65</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_69</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_70</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_73</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_95</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_105</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_110</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_151</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_161</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_170</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_213</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_224</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_230</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_285</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_293</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_602</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2001</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2003</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2005</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2006</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2007</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2008</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2009</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2010</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2011</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2014</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2015</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2020</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2021</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2025</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2026</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2027</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2034</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2038</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2044</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2048</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2049</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2050</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2055</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2056</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2059</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2061</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2064</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2088</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2106</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2110</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2112</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2122</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2129</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2143</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2152</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2153</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2190</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2232</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2336</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2470</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2507</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4012</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4035</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4037</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4112</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4125</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4126</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4242</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4249</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4251</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4305</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4306</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4307</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4313</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4322</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4323</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4324</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4325</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4326</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4333</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4334</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4335</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4338</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4367</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4393</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4700</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="951" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">AR</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="952" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="d">9</subfield><subfield code="j">2023</subfield><subfield code="h">100103-</subfield></datafield></record></collection>
score	7.4002085

Nicht das Richtige dabei?

Schreiben Sie uns!

Accuracy of different thermodynamic software packages in predicting hydrate dissociation conditions

Nicht das Richtige dabei?

Zugang & Verfügbarkeit

Vorhandene Bände

Nicht das Richtige dabei?