Materials Map

Discover the materials research landscape. Find experts, partners, networks.

  • About
  • Privacy Policy
  • Legal Notice
  • Contact

The Materials Map is an open tool for improving networking and interdisciplinary exchange within materials research. It enables cross-database search for cooperation and network partners and discovering of the research landscape.

The dashboard provides detailed information about the selected scientist, e.g. publications. The dashboard can be filtered and shows the relationship to co-authors in different diagrams. In addition, a link is provided to find contact information.

×

Materials Map under construction

The Materials Map is still under development. In its current state, it is only based on one single data source and, thus, incomplete and contains duplicates. We are working on incorporating new open data sources like ORCID to improve the quality and the timeliness of our data. We will update Materials Map as soon as possible and kindly ask for your patience.

To Graph

1.080 Topics available

To Map

977 Locations available

693.932 PEOPLE
693.932 People People

693.932 People

Show results for 693.932 people that are selected by your search filters.

←

Page 1 of 27758

→
←

Page 1 of 0

→
PeopleLocationsStatistics
Naji, M.
  • 2
  • 13
  • 3
  • 2025
Motta, Antonella
  • 8
  • 52
  • 159
  • 2025
Aletan, Dirar
  • 1
  • 1
  • 0
  • 2025
Mohamed, Tarek
  • 1
  • 7
  • 2
  • 2025
Ertürk, Emre
  • 2
  • 3
  • 0
  • 2025
Taccardi, Nicola
  • 9
  • 81
  • 75
  • 2025
Kononenko, Denys
  • 1
  • 8
  • 2
  • 2025
Petrov, R. H.Madrid
  • 46
  • 125
  • 1k
  • 2025
Alshaaer, MazenBrussels
  • 17
  • 31
  • 172
  • 2025
Bih, L.
  • 15
  • 44
  • 145
  • 2025
Casati, R.
  • 31
  • 86
  • 661
  • 2025
Muller, Hermance
  • 1
  • 11
  • 0
  • 2025
Kočí, JanPrague
  • 28
  • 34
  • 209
  • 2025
Šuljagić, Marija
  • 10
  • 33
  • 43
  • 2025
Kalteremidou, Kalliopi-ArtemiBrussels
  • 14
  • 22
  • 158
  • 2025
Azam, Siraj
  • 1
  • 3
  • 2
  • 2025
Ospanova, Alyiya
  • 1
  • 6
  • 0
  • 2025
Blanpain, Bart
  • 568
  • 653
  • 13k
  • 2025
Ali, M. A.
  • 7
  • 75
  • 187
  • 2025
Popa, V.
  • 5
  • 12
  • 45
  • 2025
Rančić, M.
  • 2
  • 13
  • 0
  • 2025
Ollier, Nadège
  • 28
  • 75
  • 239
  • 2025
Azevedo, Nuno Monteiro
  • 4
  • 8
  • 25
  • 2025
Landes, Michael
  • 1
  • 9
  • 2
  • 2025
Rignanese, Gian-Marco
  • 15
  • 98
  • 805
  • 2025

Skogestad, Sigurd

  • Google
  • 1
  • 3
  • 7

in Cooperation with on an Cooperation-Score of 37%

Topics

Publications (1/1 displayed)

  • 2017Comparison of Model-Based Control Solutions for Severe Riser-Induced Slugs7citations

Places of action

Chart of shared publication
Jahanshahi, Esmaeil
1 / 1 shared
Pedersen, Simon
1 / 2 shared
Yang, Zhenyu
1 / 3 shared
Chart of publication period
2017

Co-Authors (by relevance)

  • Jahanshahi, Esmaeil
  • Pedersen, Simon
  • Yang, Zhenyu
OrganizationsLocationPeople

article

Comparison of Model-Based Control Solutions for Severe Riser-Induced Slugs

  • Skogestad, Sigurd
  • Jahanshahi, Esmaeil
  • Pedersen, Simon
  • Yang, Zhenyu
Abstract

Control solutions for eliminating severe riser-induced slugs in offshore oil & gas pipeline installations are key topics in offshore Exploration and Production (E&P) processes. This study describes the identification, analysis and control of a low-dimensional control-oriented model of a lab-scaled slug testing facility. The model is analyzed and used for anti-slug control development for both lowpoint and topside transmitter solutions. For the controlled variables’ comparison it is concluded that the topside pressure transmitter (Pt) is the most difficult output to apply directly for anti-slug control due to the inverse response. However, as Pt often is the only accessible measurement on offshore platforms this study focuses on the controller development for both Pt and the lowpoint pressure transmitter (Pb). All the control solutions are based on linear control schemes and the performance of the controllers are evaluated from simulations with both the non-linear MATLAB and OLGA models. Furthermore, the controllers are studied with input disturbances and parametric variations to evaluate their robustness. For both pressure transmitters the H∞ loop-shaping controller gives the best performance as it is relatively robust to disturbances and has a fast convergence rate. However, Pt does not increase the closed-loop bifurcation point significantly and is also sensitive to disturbances. Thus the study concludes that the best option for single-input-single-output (SISO) systems is to control Pb with a H∞ loop-shaping controller. It is suggested that for cases where only topside transmitters are available a cascaded combination of the outlet mass flow and Pt could be considered to improve the performance.

Topics
  • impedance spectroscopy
  • simulation