↓ Skip to main content

Gas Hydrate Formation Probability Distributions: The Effect of Shear and Comparisons with Nucleation Theory

Overview of attention for article published in Langmuir, February 2018
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Readers on

mendeley
54 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Article details
Title
Gas Hydrate Formation Probability Distributions: The Effect of Shear and Comparisons with Nucleation Theory
Published in
Langmuir, February 2018
DOI 10.1021/acs.langmuir.7b03901
Pubmed ID
Authors
Abstract

Gas hydrate formation is a stochastic phenomenon of considerable significance for any risk-based approach to flow assurance in the oil and gas industry. In principle, well-established results from nucleation theory offer the prospect of predictive models for hydrate formation probability in industrial production systems. In practice, however, heuristics are relied on when estimating formation risk for a given flowline subcooling or when quantifying kinetic hydrate inhibitor (KHI) performance. Here, we present statistically significant measurements of formation probability distributions for natural gas hydrate systems under shear, which are quantitatively compared with theoretical predictions. Distributions with over 100 points were generated using low-mass, Peltier-cooled pressure cells, cycled in temperature between 40 and -5 °C at up to 2 K·min-1and analyzed with robust algorithms that automatically identify hydrate formation and initial growth rates from dynamic pressure data. The application of shear had a significant influence on the measured distributions: at 700 rpm mass-transfer limitations were minimal, as demonstrated by the kinetic growth rates observed. The formation probability distributions measured at this shear rate had mean subcoolings consistent with theoretical predictions and steel-hydrate-water contact angles of 14-26°. However, the experimental distributions were substantially wider than predicted, suggesting that phenomena acting on macroscopic length scales are responsible for much of the observed stochastic formation. Performance tests of a KHI provided new insights into how such chemicals can reduce the risk of hydrate blockage in flowlines. Our data demonstrate that the KHI not only reduces the probability of formation (by both shifting and sharpening the distribution) but also reduces hydrate growth rates by a factor of 2.

Login to access the Attention Digest and the Sentiment Analysis related to this output.

Timeline Attention over time Attention Score history
Login to access the full charts related to this output.
Activity
Login to access the full charts related to this output.
X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley demographics

Mendeley demographics

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 54 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Login to view Mendeley reader trends over time.

Geographical breakdown

Geographical breakdown
Country Count As %
Unknown 54 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status
Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 13 24%
Researcher 9 17%
Student > Master 6 11%
Student > Doctoral Student 5 9%
Professor 2 4%
Other 2 4%
Unknown 17 31%
Readers by discipline
Readers by discipline Count As %
Engineering 15 28%
Chemical Engineering 8 15%
Energy 4 7%
Business, Management and Accounting 3 6%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 1 2%
Other 2 4%
Unknown 21 39%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 28 February 2018.
All research outputs
#18,325,596
of 26,796,023 outputs
Outputs from Langmuir
#11,754
of 15,891 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#226,616
of 347,025 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Langmuir
#96
of 209 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 26,796,023 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 21st percentile – i.e., 21% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 15,891 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.8. This one is in the 19th percentile – i.e., 19% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 347,025 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 25th percentile – i.e., 25% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 209 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 46th percentile – i.e., 46% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.