10 replies to this topic

[Michael K]

Where can I get some crash courses for HYSYS and PRO2 simulation softwares? I will appreciate any help with this topic.


Michael K

[Art Montemayor]

Michael:

You can use the HELP Feature on your Main ASPEN HYSYS Menu Page and click on Training.

If you want to go directly to the training facilities and opportunities for Aspen HYSYS, then use:

http://support.aspen...c...ll&id4=2006

That should keep you busy just evaluating all the various and multiple training classes that Aspen HYSYS offers its licensed users.

Good Luck.

[Andrei]

I do not understand the term crash courses. Do you really want to learn how to crash Hysys and PRO/II?
I think you will never find those kind of courses: to literally CRASH a software.

[smalawi]

Hi,

The samples / tetorials are very good as starter.

If you actually want to crash a software then I suggest pro II, lettle effort is needed, the company has been fixing the bugs for ever and its still unstable !

Really sad to see that companies keep milking software without improvemnts !

Cheers,

SM

[Art Montemayor]

Andrei / Smalawi:

A "crash course" is strictly an American term meaning a course to learn everything you need to know about the subject matter (HYSYS and PROII simulation) in the shortest amount of time. I used the term while in high school - and that was in 1952!

It definitely does not mean to crash a course.

[djack77494]

From what I've seen, it's about as easy to crash Hysys as it is to crash PROII. I'd guess other general purpose simulation software isn't much different. So it's agreed that we know all that's needed to crash the software. (I don't have anything to do with any simulation software, but I don't think it's right for anything unfair to be said about any particular products compared to their competitors.)

As far as learning how to use the software, I believe that both Hysys and PROII have excellent resources available within the programming environment. Specifically, both offer very useful and complete on-line help and more. I find the paper User's Manuals useful and easier to use than the electronic versions (maybe more comfortable for me to use is more accurate). In any case, it will always be difficult trying to learn how to use software like this from a book (paper or electronic). What you really need to do is start using the software. Hopefully you'll have a more experienced user available to consult with as you run into new unfamiliar situations. Have fun.

[smalawi]

I was just kidding about the "creash course thing", I still think its best to see the samples that comes with the softeware and build on them.

As for which software is easy to crash (Hysys or Pro II), I still think its Pro II ! For such a simple (compared to Hysys its very simple) its not very stable. If you ever had to use the custom version (built to compay preferance) then its even more unstable.

If you ever used Pro II then you will know it did not improve much since for a long time, there is simply not effort, the only thing that you see is patches to correct bugs !

Hysys on the other hand also stayed dorment since Aspen tookover, but mainly due to legal issues as they have to forward any improvments to unisim (Honeywell).

Other may disagree on the stability thing but thats what I think. They both do the job most of the time, simply tools to me.

Cheers,

SM

[sheiko]

FYI

I have just experienced a bug wih HYSYS that has been confirmed by ASPEN TECH support: It concerns the Sour Peng-Robinson thermodynamic model.
They told me that the issue has been corrected in HYSYS version V8.0.
BTW, if you need infos on HYSYS, try this link: http://webwormcpt.bl...-for-hysys.html

I am now using Pro/II and it is fine.

I find also Aspen Plus very user friendly.

From my point of view, the only differences between the softwares are related to their interfaces with the user, ie: the unit operation models, the way to specify them and the way to generate convergence reports in order to diagnose errors and warnings.
The mathematics behind the convergence methods remain basically the same.

The user knowledge (material balance and thermodynamics basics,...), judgement (is there any recycles?, what are the tear streams chosen by the simulator?, shall i change them?, with what initial values?, ...), and experience with the tool (which block to choose?, how to specify this block?, how to make sensitivity analysys, design specifications or optimization?, how to generate the convergence report?, understand the important infos in it?...) are most important.

[Andrei]

Sheiko,

Please tell the guys from Aspentech that somebody is intrigued how they could fix a problem in Hysys Version 8.0, when their latest release is version 7. Or maybe what you said should be interpreted at future tense.
As of the differences between Hysys, PRO/II and AspenPlus, I can assure you, they are much more than only the user interface. When you have simple applications things look pretty similar. But when you go into complicated and exotic things, you will start to discover the differences.

[sheiko]

Sheiko,

Please tell the guys from Aspentech that somebody is intrigued how they could fix a problem in Hysys Version 8.0, when their latest release is version 7. Or maybe what you said should be interpreted at future tense.
As of the differences between Hysys, PRO/II and AspenPlus, I can assure you, they are much more than only the user interface. When you have simple applications things look pretty similar. But when you go into complicated and exotic things, you will start to discover the differences.

ASPEN TECH support told me it has been corrected in V8.0, but apparently it is not released yet. We shall see...

What i said regarding simulators is taken from my academic and short industrial experience...but why simulators should be so different when you realize that the convergence methods are basically the same (Broyden, Weigstein,....) and the main thermodynamics models (SRK, NRTL, PR,...) are pretty close? I agree that for some exotic flowsheets or mixtures the user shall be more vigilent...However i do believe that simulation experts can work and obtain reliable results with any simulators...

[smalawi]

I dont think Hysys and Pro II have the same thermodynamic packages ! even if the name is similar the resutls sometimes are very defernt. One of the known facts that Hysys is centered around the PR package but Pro II is not.

When dealing with large proejcts the deferences are critical to the workflow and I'd rather have a stable and reliable solution rather than any things else. I learnt how to use some of the workarounds, even if external calacutions are needed, but maintain the stability of the system.

As for bugs, I think both Hysys and Pro II are filled with them ! Just this year I personally discovered few in each. However, I blame Pro II more because its been for such a long time and did not really change, unlike Hysys.

I remeber when I first used Petro-sim and it was filled with bugs and errors. It crashed every 10 min ! and I ended upforcing them to change the lincese refersh rate to about that so I dont back out ! The develpment team has done a good job and in the later release things were much better, yet not prefect

Some time its personal preferance which software to use, but when you have customers and established workflow, the situation dectaes the chioce of tool you have to use for specific project. The client does not want to hear about any "bugs" and workarounds, only results !!!

you learn to use the tool and understand how to utilize its strength and weaknesses,

cheers,

sm