SRK Grayson physical properties method
Thread Content
Hello everyone: In the absorption stable aspen model, there is a stable overhead reflux tank, in which the components are mainly liquefied hydrocarbons (C2, C3, C4, C5, H2S, light virtual components, etc.). I performed calculations using the SRK method and Grayson method respectively. As a result, there was no non-condensable gas on the top of the tank using the SRK physical property method, but some non-condensable gas was generated on the top of the tank using Grayson calculation (containing about 15% (mol%) of H2S). So which of the two results is more accurate? Thanks. reward_7ree
In the help file, both SRK and Grayson can be used for the above composition systems.
Although the accuracy needs to be compared with the actual situation, I hope to hear everyone's opinions.
I think it’s srk. Low-level hydrocarbons should be the substances that best satisfy the equation of state.
:funk: Do you know me? Are you from Nanjing too?
I am also from Nanjing, are you from Nanhua? Personally, I think the SRK calculation is more stringent than that. Use Grayson oil more often.
This post was last edited by qhhqhh on 2016-10-19 12:07 SRK is also widely used in oil products. I checked and found out that SRK came out in 1972, and Grayson seemed to come out in 1963. The phase balance accuracy of SRK is said to be higher than that of previous products.
Grayson is an empirical algorithm and is more suitable for handling hydrogen-containing gases. For your working condition, I think SRK is better than Grayson.