Optimization and analysis of natural gas liquefaction process in mixed fluid cascade

doi:10.11949/0438-1157.20240448

Abstract

Abstract:

The mixed fluid cascade (MFC) process is one of the most competitive processes for large-scale base-loaded natural gas liquefaction process, which consists of three mixed refrigeration cycles of natural gas pre-cooling, liquefaction, and subcooling, which involves key parameters such as refrigerant ratios, refrigeration temperatures, and pressures, which makes the process complex and sensitive. For the MFC liquefaction process, an optimization function with specific power consumption as the objective is established, and with the help of Aspen HYSYS process simulation and physical property calculation, the sequential quadratic programming (SQP) optimization algorithm is used to globally optimize the MFC process and conduct energy efficient analysis of the process. The optimization results show that after the global optimization, the specific power consumption of the MFC liquefaction process is 899.36 kJ/kg, which is 7.38% lower. The cold-heat composite curve of the multi-strand flow heat exchanger is better matched. Through the effective energy analysis, it is found that the effective energy loss of the refrigeration compressor unit accounts for the largest proportion, and the effective energy loss of the multi-strand flow heat exchanger is significantly reduced after the optimization, and the effective energy efficiency of the liquefaction process is increased from 38.17% to 41.21%, and the energy utilization efficiency is improved obviously.

Key words: natural gas liquefaction, unit power consumption, optimization, effective energy analysis

摘要：

混合制冷级联（MFC）工艺是大型基地负荷型天然气液化过程最具竞争力的工艺之一，其工艺由天然气预冷、液化和过冷三个混合制冷循环构成，涉及冷剂配比、制冷温度及压力等关键参数，使其过程复杂和敏感。针对MFC液化工艺，建立了以比功耗为目标的优化函数，借助Aspen HYSYS流程模拟与物性计算，采用序列二次规划法（SQP）优化算法对MFC工艺进行全局优化，并对工艺过程进行有效能分析。优化结果表明，全局优化后，MFC液化过程的比功耗为899.36 kJ/kg，降低了7.38%；多股流换热器冷热复合曲线匹配得更好。通过有效能分析发现，制冷压缩机机组的有效能损失占比最大，优化后多股流换热器的有效能损失显著降低，液化过程的有效能效率由38.17%提高到41.21%，能量利用效率提高明显。

关键词: 天然气液化, 比功耗, 优化, 有效能分析

CLC Number:

TE 6

Liming PU, Gui WANG, Chunlai ZHENG, Ke WANG, Tenglong XIANG, Zhihong WANG. Optimization and analysis of natural gas liquefaction process in mixed fluid cascade[J]. CIESC Journal, 2024, 75(S1): 267-275.

蒲黎明, 汪贵, 郑春来, 王科, 向腾龙, 王治红. 混合制冷级联天然气液化工艺优化及分析[J]. 化工学报, 2024, 75(S1): 267-275.

Figures/Tables 13

Table 1 Natural gas composition(mole fraction)

CH₂	C₂H₆	C₃H₈	iC₄H₁₀	nC₄H₁₀	N₂	H₂+He
0.9481	0.0311	0.0085	0.0024	0.0017	0.0076	0.0006

Fig.1 MFC natural gas liquefaction process flow

Table 2 Simulated flow strand thermodynamic data

编号	气相分数	温度/℃	压力/MPa	摩尔流量/(kmol/h)	质量流量/(kg/h)	质量焓/(kJ/kg)	质量熵/(kJ/(kg·K))	质量有效能/(kJ/kg)
1	1.00	22.00	8.50	53740.43	910695.00	-4535.77	8.50	620.46
2	1.00	-35.35	7.98	53740.43	910695.00	-4720.45	7.82	637.88
3	0.00	-71.55	7.73	53740.43	910695.00	-4952.25	6.77	721.49
4	0.00	-155.00	5.18	41168.33	934825.83	-3734.10	3.41	739.97
5	0.04	-156.88	0.61	41168.33	934825.83	-3734.10	3.48	720.48
6	0.00	-159.29	0.20	51443.44	871752.12	-5336.94	4.59	1008.16
7	1.00	-159.29	0.20	2296.99	38942.88	-4328.54	8.74	237.92
8	0.00	-35.35	1.10	36717.32	1493609.51	-2991.72	2.23	165.59
9	0.02	-38.35	0.39	36717.32	1493609.51	-2991.72	2.24	164.02
10	1.00	18.00	0.33	36717.32	1493609.51	-2497.90	4.21	70.83
11	0.01	13.76	1.57	36717.32	1493609.51	-2862.16	2.72	149.29
12	1.00	102.59	1.78	18358.66	746804.76	-2364.32	4.30	177.36
13	1.00	102.59	1.78	18358.66	746804.76	-2364.32	4.30	177.36
14	0.00	15.00	1.64	36717.32	1493609.51	-2862.16	2.72	149.43
15	0.00	-35.35	3.81	31557.60	952561.51	-3373.16	3.75	298.71
16	0.00	-71.55	3.49	31557.60	952561.51	-3468.55	3.32	332.00
17	0.09	-81.50	0.41	31557.60	952561.51	-3468.55	3.35	321.07
18	1.00	-41.33	3.44	31557.60	952561.51	-2973.78	5.71	113.16
19	1.00	118.24	4.44	15778.80	476280.76	-2731.08	5.87	308.13
20	1.00	118.24	4.44	15778.80	476280.76	-2731.08	5.87	308.13
21	0.10	15.00	4.30	31557.60	952561.51	-3180.07	4.47	276.64
22	0.11	14.62	4.25	31557.60	952561.51	-3180.07	4.47	276.46
23	0.01	-71.55	6.18	41168.33	934825.83	-3492.25	4.93	529.36
24	0.00	-156.00	5.18	41168.33	934825.83	-3734.10	3.41	739.97
25	0.09	-160.80	0.39	41168.33	934825.83	-3734.10	3.49	716.69
26	1.00	-74.54	0.35	41168.33	934825.83	-3159.50	7.25	169.53
27	1.00	93.38	3.45	20584.16	467412.91	-2883.56	7.45	386.71
28	1.00	93.38	3.45	20584.16	467412.91	-2883.56	7.45	386.71
29	1.00	15.30	3.39	20584.16	467412.91	-3046.81	6.95	370.95
30	1.00	15.30	3.39	20584.16	467412.91	-3046.81	6.95	370.95
31	1.00	80.81	7.31	20584.16	467412.91	-2944.79	7.03	451.15
32	1.00	80.81	7.31	20584.16	467412.91	-2944.79	7.03	451.15
33	1.00	14.70	7.19	41168.33	934825.83	-3105.54	6.53	439.16
34	0.57	-35.35	6.79	41168.33	934825.83	-3311.12	5.74	468.11

Table 2 Simulated flow strand thermodynamic data

编号	气相分数	温度/℃	压力/MPa	摩尔流量/(kmol/h)	质量流量/(kg/h)	质量焓/(kJ/kg)	质量熵/(kJ/(kg·K))	质量有效能/(kJ/kg)
1	1.00	22.00	8.50	53740.43	910695.00	-4535.77	8.50	620.46
2	1.00	-35.35	7.98	53740.43	910695.00	-4720.45	7.82	637.88
3	0.00	-71.55	7.73	53740.43	910695.00	-4952.25	6.77	721.49
4	0.00	-155.00	5.18	41168.33	934825.83	-3734.10	3.41	739.97
5	0.04	-156.88	0.61	41168.33	934825.83	-3734.10	3.48	720.48
6	0.00	-159.29	0.20	51443.44	871752.12	-5336.94	4.59	1008.16
7	1.00	-159.29	0.20	2296.99	38942.88	-4328.54	8.74	237.92
8	0.00	-35.35	1.10	36717.32	1493609.51	-2991.72	2.23	165.59
9	0.02	-38.35	0.39	36717.32	1493609.51	-2991.72	2.24	164.02
10	1.00	18.00	0.33	36717.32	1493609.51	-2497.90	4.21	70.83
11	0.01	13.76	1.57	36717.32	1493609.51	-2862.16	2.72	149.29
12	1.00	102.59	1.78	18358.66	746804.76	-2364.32	4.30	177.36
13	1.00	102.59	1.78	18358.66	746804.76	-2364.32	4.30	177.36
14	0.00	15.00	1.64	36717.32	1493609.51	-2862.16	2.72	149.43
15	0.00	-35.35	3.81	31557.60	952561.51	-3373.16	3.75	298.71
16	0.00	-71.55	3.49	31557.60	952561.51	-3468.55	3.32	332.00
17	0.09	-81.50	0.41	31557.60	952561.51	-3468.55	3.35	321.07
18	1.00	-41.33	3.44	31557.60	952561.51	-2973.78	5.71	113.16
19	1.00	118.24	4.44	15778.80	476280.76	-2731.08	5.87	308.13
20	1.00	118.24	4.44	15778.80	476280.76	-2731.08	5.87	308.13
21	0.10	15.00	4.30	31557.60	952561.51	-3180.07	4.47	276.64
22	0.11	14.62	4.25	31557.60	952561.51	-3180.07	4.47	276.46
23	0.01	-71.55	6.18	41168.33	934825.83	-3492.25	4.93	529.36
24	0.00	-156.00	5.18	41168.33	934825.83	-3734.10	3.41	739.97
25	0.09	-160.80	0.39	41168.33	934825.83	-3734.10	3.49	716.69
26	1.00	-74.54	0.35	41168.33	934825.83	-3159.50	7.25	169.53
27	1.00	93.38	3.45	20584.16	467412.91	-2883.56	7.45	386.71
28	1.00	93.38	3.45	20584.16	467412.91	-2883.56	7.45	386.71
29	1.00	15.30	3.39	20584.16	467412.91	-3046.81	6.95	370.95
30	1.00	15.30	3.39	20584.16	467412.91	-3046.81	6.95	370.95
31	1.00	80.81	7.31	20584.16	467412.91	-2944.79	7.03	451.15
32	1.00	80.81	7.31	20584.16	467412.91	-2944.79	7.03	451.15
33	1.00	14.70	7.19	41168.33	934825.83	-3105.54	6.53	439.16
34	0.57	-35.35	6.79	41168.33	934825.83	-3311.12	5.74	468.11

Table 3 Lower and upper bounds of key/decision variables for the MFC process

关键/决策变量		单位	下限	上限
过冷循环	高压压力p₃₁	MPa	6.00	8.50
	制冷压力p₂₅	MPa	0.20	0.60
	过冷温度T₂₄	℃	-140.00	-160.00
	N₂流率 $m_{N_{2}}$	kmol/h	5500	6200
	CH₄流率 $m_{C_{1}}$	kmol/h	18000	25000
	C₂H₆流率 $m_{C_{2}}$	kmol/h	12000	18000
液化循环	高压压力p₁₉	MPa	4.00	5.00
	制冷压力p₁₇	MPa	0.20	0.60
	液化温度T₁₆	℃	-60.00	-85.00
	CH₄流率 $m_{C_{1}}$	kmol/h	4000	5000
	C₂H₆流率 $m_{C_{2}}$	kmol/h	20000	30000
	C₃H₈流率 $m_{C_{3}}$	kmol/h	3200	4500
预冷循环	高压压力p₁₂	MPa	1.50	2.50
	制冷压力p₉	MPa	0.20	0.60
	预冷温度T₈	℃	-27.00	-40.00
	C₂H₆流率 $m_{C_{2}}$	kmol/h	15000	18000
	C₃H₈流率 $m_{C_{3}}$	kmol/h	12000	18000
	C₄H₁₀流率 $m_{C_{4}}$	kmol/h	6000	9000

Table 3 Lower and upper bounds of key/decision variables for the MFC process

关键/决策变量		单位	下限	上限
过冷循环	高压压力p₃₁	MPa	6.00	8.50
	制冷压力p₂₅	MPa	0.20	0.60
	过冷温度T₂₄	℃	-140.00	-160.00
	N₂流率 $m_{N_{2}}$	kmol/h	5500	6200
	CH₄流率 $m_{C_{1}}$	kmol/h	18000	25000
	C₂H₆流率 $m_{C_{2}}$	kmol/h	12000	18000
液化循环	高压压力p₁₉	MPa	4.00	5.00
	制冷压力p₁₇	MPa	0.20	0.60
	液化温度T₁₆	℃	-60.00	-85.00
	CH₄流率 $m_{C_{1}}$	kmol/h	4000	5000
	C₂H₆流率 $m_{C_{2}}$	kmol/h	20000	30000
	C₃H₈流率 $m_{C_{3}}$	kmol/h	3200	4500
预冷循环	高压压力p₁₂	MPa	1.50	2.50
	制冷压力p₉	MPa	0.20	0.60
	预冷温度T₈	℃	-27.00	-40.00
	C₂H₆流率 $m_{C_{2}}$	kmol/h	15000	18000
	C₃H₈流率 $m_{C_{3}}$	kmol/h	12000	18000
	C₄H₁₀流率 $m_{C_{4}}$	kmol/h	6000	9000

Table 4 Comparison of key parameters of liquefaction process before and after optimization

关键参数		单位	优化前	优化后
过冷循环	高压压力p₃₁	MPa	8.46	7.31
	制冷压力p₂₅	MPa	0.41	0.38
	过冷温度T₂₄	℃	-156.00	-156.00
	过热温度T₂₆	℃	-69.93	-74.54
液化循环	高压压力p₁₉	MPa	4.24	4.44
	制冷压力p₁₇	MPa	0.44	0.41
	液化温度T₁₆	℃	-65.50	-71.55
	过热温度T₁₈	℃	-42.01	-41.33
预冷循环	高压压力p₁₂	MPa	2.50	1.78
	制冷压力p₉	MPa	0.57	0.39
	预冷温度T₈	℃	-30.50	-35.35
	过热温度T₁₀	℃	11.96	18.00

Table 5 Optimized refrigerant blend composition （mole fraction） and flow rate

冷剂组成及循环量		优化前	优化后
混合制冷剂MR1	循环量/(kmol/)h	42457.92	36717.32
	C₂H₆	0.648638	0.454331
	C₃H₈	0.183213	0.335035
	C₄H₁₀	0.168149	0.210633
混合制冷剂MR2	循环量/(kmol/h)	31114.37	31557.60
	CH₄	0.088813	0.128623
	C₂H₆	0.800945	0.739691
	C₃H₈	0.110242	0.131686
混合制冷剂MR3	循环量/(kmol/h)	47319.36	41168.33
	N₂	0.149387	0.142229
	CH₄	0.479987	0.507300
	C₂H₆	0.370626	0.350471

Table 6 Process specific power consumption and heat exchanger performance index before and after optimization

换热器优化变量		单位	优化前	优化后
比功耗	单位质量LNG	kJ/kg	970.99	899.36
预冷换热器E-001	最小传热温差	℃	5.97	3.00
预冷换热器E-001	对数平均温差	℃	12.72	7.65
液化换热器E-002	最小传热温差	℃	3.63	3.00
液化换热器E-002	对数平均温差	℃	7.20	5.47
过冷换热器E-003	最小传热温差	℃	3.20	3.00
过冷换热器E-003	对数平均温差	℃	5.87	4.95

Fig.2 Cold-heat composite curve before and after optimization of MFC natural gas liquefaction process

Table 7 Power consumption and effective energy of MFC liquefaction process before and after optimization

单元系统	功耗/kW		物流	有效能/kW
单元系统	优化前	优化后	物流	优化前	优化后
合计	235128.70	217782.94	有效能效率/%	38.17	41.21
预冷循环	58356.77	55419.98	天然气进	156957.83	156957.83
液化循环	59123.69	64217.44	LNG离开	246703.67	246703.67
过冷循环	117648.24	98145.52	有效能变化	89745.84	89745.84

Fig.3 Comparison of effective energy loss of each equipment and system in MFC liquefaction process before and after optimization

Fig.4 Comparison of total effective energy loss before and after optimization of MFC natural gas liquefaction process

Table 8 Economic analysis of MFC liquefaction process before and after optimization

参数	单位	优化前	优化后	差值	变化率	升或降
总资本	USD	164272000	166297000	2025000	1.2327%	上升
公用工程	USD/a	172323000	165778000	-6545000	3.7981%	下降
总运行成本	USD/a	195599000	188585000	-7014000	3.5859%	下降
总设备成本	USD	166219800	168788900	2569100	1.5456%	上升
总安装成本	USD	184817700	187397200	2579500	1.3957%	上升
总投资成本	USD	515309500	522483100	7173600	1.3921%	上升
总生产成本	USD/a	367922000	354363000	-13559000	3.6853%	下降

Table 9 Analysis of CO2 emissions before and after optimization

参数	单位	优化前	优化后	差值	变化率	升或降
冷公用工程	kW	4.269×10⁵	4.095×10⁵	-1.740×10⁴	4.076%	下降
CO₂排放	kg/h	1.718×10⁵	1.648×10⁵	-0.700×10⁴	4.075%	下降

References 30

1	Howarth R W, Santoro R, Ingraffea A. Methane and the greenhouse-gas footprint of natural gas from shale formations[J]. Climatic Change, 2011, 106(4): 679-690.
2	Feser J S, Bassioni G, Gupta A K. Effect of naphthalene addition to ethanol in distributed combustion[J]. Applied Energy, 2018, 216: 1-7.
3	plc Shell. Shell LNG outlook 2024[R]. https://www.shell.com/energy-and-innovation/natural-gas/natural-gas-news-and-publications.html.
4	Revel D. BP statistical review of world energy [R]. http://www.bp.com/en/global/corporate/about-bp/energy-economics/statistical-review-of-world-energy.html.
5	Dudley B. BP statistical review of world energy[R]. https://www.bp.com/en/global/corporate/energy-economics/statistical-review-of-world-energy.html.
6	GU. International gas union world LNG report 2017[R]. http://www.igu.org/news/igu-releases-2017-world-lng-report.
7	Wood D A. A review and outlook for the global LNG trade[J]. Journal of Natural Gas Science and Engineering, 2012, 9: 6-27.
8	范峥, 姬盼盼, 林亮, 等. 天然气液化工艺系统模拟与节能优化[J]. 现代化工, 2018, 38(9): 219-223.
	Fan Z, Ji P P, Lin L, et al. System simulation and energy saving optimization of natural gas liquefaction process[J]. Modern Chemical Industry, 2018, 38(9): 219-223.
9	林畅, 白改玲, 王红, 等. 大型天然气液化技术与装置建设现状与发展[J]. 化工进展, 2014, 33(11): 2916-2922.
	Lin C, Bai G L, Wang H, et al. Development and trend of liquefaction technology and construction of large-scale natural gas liquefaction plant[J]. Chemical Industry and Engineering Progress, 2014, 33(11): 2916-2922.
10	Qyyum M A, Qadeer K, Lee S, et al. Innovative propane-nitrogen two-phase expander refrigeration cycle for energy-efficient and low-global warming potential LNG production[J]. Applied Thermal Engineering, 2018, 139: 157-165.
11	Moein P, Sarmad M, Ebrahimi H, et al. APCI-LNG single mixed refrigerant process for natural gas liquefaction cycle: analysis and optimization[J]. Journal of Natural Gas Science and Engineering, 2015, 26: 470-479.
12	Khan M S, Karimi I A, Lee M. Evolution and optimization of the dual mixed refrigerant process of natural gas liquefaction[J]. Applied Thermal Engineering, 2016, 96: 320-329.
13	Primabudi E, Morosuk T, Tsatsaronis G. Multi-objective optimization of propane pre-cooled mixed refrigerant (C3MR) LNG process[J]. Energy, 2019, 185: 492-504.
14	Khan M S, Lee M. Design optimization of single mixed refrigerant natural gas liquefaction process using the particle swarm paradigm with nonlinear constraints[J]. Energy, 2013, 49: 146-155.
15	Ghorbani B, Mafi M, Shirmohammadi R, et al. Optimization of operation parameters of refrigeration cycle using particle swarm and NLP techniques[J]. Journal of Natural Gas Science and Engineering, 2014, 21: 779-790.
16	Hwang J H, Roh M I, Lee K Y. Determination of the optimal operating conditions of the dual mixed refrigerant cycle for the LNG FPSO topside liquefaction process[J]. Computers & Chemical Engineering, 2013, 49: 25-36.
17	Zhang J R, Meerman H, Benders R, et al. Technical and economic optimization of expander-based small-scale natural gas liquefaction processes with absorption precooling cycle[J]. Energy, 2020, 191: 116592.
18	AspenTech. Aspen Plus: getting started using equation oriented modeling, version number: V8.4[Z]. 2013.
19	Javaloyes- Antón J, Kronqvist J, Caballero J A. Simulation-based optimization of distillation processes using an extended cutting plane algorithm[J]. Computers & Chemical Engineering, 2022, 159: 107655.
20	Vikse M, Watson H A J, Kim D, et al. Optimization of a dual mixed refrigerant process using a nonsmooth approach[J]. Energy, 2020, 196: 116999.
21	Kamath R S, Biegler L T, Grossmann I E. An equation-oriented approach for handling thermodynamics based on cubic equation of state in process optimization[J]. Computers & Chemical Engineering, 2010, 34(12): 2085-2096.
22	Watson H A J, Khan K A, Barton P I. Multistream heat exchanger modeling and design[J]. AIChE Journal, 2015,61(10): 3390-3403.
23	Matovu F, Mahadzir S, Ahmed R, et al. Synthesis and optimization of multilevel refrigeration systems using generalized disjunctive programming[J]. Computers & Chemical Engineering, 2022, 163: 107856.
24	Wang M Q, Zhang J, Xu Q. Optimal design and operation of a C3MR refrigeration system for natural gas liquefaction[J]. Computers & Chemical Engineering, 2012, 39: 84-95.
25	Lee G C, Smith R, Zhu X X. Optimal synthesis of mixed-refrigerant systems for low-temperature processes[J]. Industrial & Engineering Chemistry Research, 2002, 41(20): 5016-5028.
26	郭揆常. 液化天然气(LNG)工艺与工程[M]. 北京: 中国石化出版社, 2014: 103.
	Guo K C. Liquefied Natural Gas (LNG) Technology and Engineering[M]. Beijing: China Petrochemical Press, 2014: 103.
27	Peng D Y, Robinson D B. A new two-constant equation of state[J]. Industrial & Engineering Chemistry Fundamentals, 1976, 15(1): 59-64.
28	Nawaz A, Qyyum M A, Qadeer K, et al. Optimization of mixed fluid cascade LNG process using a multivariate Coggins step-up approach: overall compression power reduction and exergy loss analysis[J]. International Journal of Refrigeration, 2019, 104: 189-200.
29	丁贺, 孙恒, 何明, 等. MFC液化流程的分析和优化[J]. 低温与超导, 2015, 43(9): 1-5.
	Ding H, Sun H, He M, et al. Analysis and optimization of mixed fluid cascade (MFC) process[J]. Cryogenics & Superconductivity, 2015, 43(9): 1-5.
30	尹全森, 李红艳, 季中敏, 等. 混合制冷剂循环的级数对制冷性能的影响[J]. 化工学报, 2009, 60(11): 2689-2693.
	Yin Q S, Li H Y, Ji Z M, et al. Effect of number of stages of mixed refrigerant cycle on refrigeration performance[J]. CIESC Journal, 2009, 60(11): 2689-2693.

[1]	Junfeng WANG, Junjie ZHANG, Wei ZHANG, Jiale WANG, Shuyan SHUANG, Yadong ZHANG. Liquid-phase discharge plasma decomposition of methanol for hydrogen production: optimization of electrode configuration [J]. CIESC Journal, 2024, 75(9): 3277-3286.
[2]	Ziyang LI, Nan ZHENG, Jiabin FANG, Jinjia WEI. Performance analysis and multi-objective optimization of recompression S-CO₂ Brayton cycle [J]. CIESC Journal, 2024, 75(6): 2143-2156.
[3]	Rufeng XU, Yucheng CHEN, Dan GAO, Jingyu JIAO, Dong GAO, Haibin WANG, Shanjing YAO, Dongqiang LIN. Model-assisted process optimization of ion-exchange chromatography for monoclonal antibody charge variant separation [J]. CIESC Journal, 2024, 75(5): 1903-1911.
[4]	Yujiao ZENG, Xin XIAO, Gang YANG, Yibo ZHANG, Guangming ZHENG, Fang LI, Fengling WANG. Surrogate modeling and optimization of wet phosphoric acid production process based on mechanism and data hybrid driven [J]. CIESC Journal, 2024, 75(3): 936-944.
[5]	Lingxian ZHANG, Bin LIU, Lin DENG, Yuhang REN. PEMFC fault diagnosis based on improved TSO optimized Xception [J]. CIESC Journal, 2024, 75(3): 945-955.
[6]	Jiapeng YU, Na XU, Wei ZHANG, Qingyuan KANG, Hong ZHANG, Muxuan QIN, Jiabin FANG. Modeling and multi-objective optimization of yield and energy consumption of gas-liquid sulfonation reaction in microreactor [J]. CIESC Journal, 2024, 75(10): 3681-3690.
[7]	Yang YU, Yiqing LUO, Ronghui WEI, Wenhui ZHANG, Xigang YUAN. A resilient supply chain design method considering node disruption risk [J]. CIESC Journal, 2024, 75(1): 338-353.
[8]	Xin YANG, Wen WANG, Kai XU, Fanhua MA. Simulation analysis of temperature characteristics of the high-pressure hydrogen refueling process [J]. CIESC Journal, 2023, 74(S1): 280-286.
[9]	Song HE, Qiaomai LIU, Guangshuo XIE, Simin WANG, Juan XIAO. Two-phase flow simulation and surrogate-assisted optimization of gas film drag reduction in high-concentration coal-water slurry pipeline [J]. CIESC Journal, 2023, 74(9): 3766-3774.
[10]	Lei XING, Chunyu MIAO, Minghu JIANG, Lixin ZHAO, Xinya LI. Optimal design and performance analysis of downhole micro gas-liquid hydrocyclone [J]. CIESC Journal, 2023, 74(8): 3394-3406.
[11]	Manzheng ZHANG, Meng XIAO, Peiwei YAN, Zheng MIAO, Jinliang XU, Xianbing JI. Working fluid screening and thermodynamic optimization of hazardous waste incineration coupled organic Rankine cycle system [J]. CIESC Journal, 2023, 74(8): 3502-3512.
[12]	Chengying ZHU, Zhenlei WANG. Operation optimization of ethylene cracking furnace based on improved deep reinforcement learning algorithm [J]. CIESC Journal, 2023, 74(8): 3429-3437.
[13]	Guoze CHEN, Dong WEI, Qian GUO, Zhiping XIANG. Optimal power point optimization method for aluminum-air batteries under load tracking condition [J]. CIESC Journal, 2023, 74(8): 3533-3542.
[14]	Wenzhu LIU, Heming YUN, Baoxue WANG, Mingzhe HU, Chonglong ZHONG. Research on topology optimization of microchannel based on field synergy and entransy dissipation [J]. CIESC Journal, 2023, 74(8): 3329-3341.
[15]	Wentao WU, Liangyong CHU, Lingjie ZHANG, Weimin TAN, Liming SHEN, Ningzhong BAO. High-efficient preparation of cardanol-based self-healing microcapsules [J]. CIESC Journal, 2023, 74(7): 3103-3115.