English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Zendy Plus

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Zendy Tools

Zendy Open

The process used for selecting a steady-state process simulator under conditions of high uncertainty and limited time is described. Multiple waste forms, treatment ambiguity, and the uniqueness of both the waste chemistries and alternative treatment technologies result in a large set of potential technical requirements that no commercial simulator can totally satisfy. The aim of the selection process was two-fold. First, determine the steady-state simulation software that best, albeit not completely, satisfies the requirements envelope. And second, determine if the best is good enough to justify the cost. Twelve simulators were investigated with varying degrees of scrutiny. The candidate list was narrowed to three final contenders: ASPEN Plus 10.2, PRO/II 5.11, and CHEMCAD 5.1.0. It was concluded from "road tests" that ASPEN Plus appears to satisfy the project's technical requirements the best and is worth acquiring. The final software decisions provide flexibility: they involve annual rather than multi-year licensing, and they include periodic re-assessment

Selection of Steady-State Process Simulation Software to Optimize Treatment of Radioactive and Hazardous Waste