Application you use to complment aspen../PROIII etc..and do you link ? 1

[jamesbanda]

dear all:

i'd like some input to see what different firms use to complement the simulator package to store vector properties..

> do people use a master pure component databank and maintain this and then convert to aspen ?
> how do you manage flash point type properties.. or can you use aspen or other program for these.
> Do you manage Binary data in aspen or dortmand or other program ?

If you have be-spoke inhouse empricial formulas? if so how do you convert to aspen..?

 

[JackWhite]

Hello James,

So far, we have used (according to client specifications), Aspen Hysys for just about anything involving process engineering. We usually check or fine tune our data with some in-house spread-sheets, PRO II, or other more speacialised calculators for certain applications.

All in all, Hysys is good for most calculations, but not perfect. Anything should be double checked with whatever else is available.

 

[sshep]

Hey James,

I have been using Aspen since the early 1980's as it was available at my university. This was keyword, well before Aspen-plus. One thing I have noticed in all this time is that Aspen-plus is continually changing. After they dropped their compiler in the mid 1990's, everything became more tedious with every change. I have seen features like "costing" go away and then come back in a different form. It seems like every extra type of file and addin causes compatibility hassels at a user level at some point. Although physical properties can still be managed via DFMS (data file management system) to define custom databanks which can be referenced from inside Aspen-plus; to transfer a simulation to someone, you must transfer all of these type extra files. Why do this if you don't need to?

For my money, Excel is the best way to store as well as regress pure component (for sure) and many binary properties. An added advantage is that the source data used for regression can be stored in Excel as well. I keep these regressions and parameters organized in set of simulation library folders via windows explorer. Inside Aspen-plus, I simply paste the needed parameters onto the appropriate parameter form. For my needs, this is so much easier. When sharing simulations everything is kept nicely compact in one *.bkp file.

FYI, for Aspen-plus version compatability problems, a simulation file without funny bits can usually be edited to the right "flavor" with wordpad to be compatable with the needed Aspen-plus version. This is a very useful trick.

best wishes,
sshep

 

[apetri]

I agree with sheep that Excel (and Matlab) are powerful tools for data analysis and process simulation,
in the past we had an agreement with another company to access Aspen but it was complex to use and the costs not justified,
finally we have decided to adopt Excel + Matlab + Prode Properties which does the all the work of thermodynamic calc's, I think it is a good solution, Excel is perfect to create templates for solving a lot of problems and Matlab permits to cover those areas (as optimization , data validation and reconciliation etc.) where process simulators don't offer real features.
One great point is that we have access to the source code (in fact we have written all the templates in Excel and the code in Matlab) and that gives us the possibility to validate results and keep the codes updated.
We store almost everything in Excel files, Prode offers a feature to store data in proprietary archives but data are accessible by program.
Matlab is another tool which I recommend, it offers many numerical methods to solve the problems in the area of data analysis and process optimization where Excel may appear limited.
All in all, we are satisfied with this solution which permits to preserve our proprietary technology, we hope that Microsoft doesn't decide to dismiss Excel