HYSYS can perform both static and dynamic simulations, so it should be better than ASPEN, right?
Thread Content
Then why does everyone prefer to use ASPEN?
In general, what ASPEN can do, HYSYS can also do
The overall strengths of Aspen~ When used in combination with Aspen Basic Engineering for the entire foundation design, it offers certain advantages.
It seems that Aspen has now deliberately directed these two software solutions toward specific applications: Plus is generally used in the chemical and environmental protection industries, while HYSYS is used in the oil and gas sector. Hehe
I’m using both of them, but I feel that Aspen is better. Although HYSYS allows for conversion from static to dynamic mode directly, many things get messed up during this process, and there’s a significant difference compared to actual industrial practices; Aspen is more accurate~~~ But again, this is just my personal opinion. . . . But HYSYS is a bit easier to use. . .
According to what was said upstairs, HYSYS is like a car with an automatic transmission, while ASPEN is manual, oh~ haha~
According to what was said upstairs, HYSYS is like a car with an automatic transmission, while ASPEN is manual, oh~ haha~
The explanation from upstairs is quite vivid; it makes some sense. With HYSYS, it’s enough to click a button to switch from static to dynamic mode, while Aspen requires setting many things up first before making that transition. There are advantages to manual operation, and there are advantages to automatic operation as well, haha
Which software is good for tower simulation of crude oil stabilization and light hydrocarbon recovery, as well as glycol dehydration?
HYSYS is indeed good for performing steady-state simulations in oil refining; although it is relatively simple to switch to dynamic mode, the results are not satisfactory.