# Impact and Technical Solutions of Hydrodynamic and Thermodynamic Processes in Liquefied Natural Gas Regasification Process

^{1}

^{2}

^{*}

## Abstract

**:**

## 1. Introduction

^{2}·s) to 621.6 kg/(m

^{2}· s), and it improves further at bend angles of 10° and lower compared to 15° at mass fluxes exceeding 414.4 kg/(m

^{2}· s). Ref. [9] presents a 3D numerical model of a PCHE utilising the SST k-ω turbulent model. This model aims to enhance the understanding of the flow and heat transfer mechanisms of subcooled-liquid natural gas (S-LNG) in the sinusoidal wavy semi-circuit channel.

## 2. Research Methodology

#### 2.1. Symbols and Notations

- Hydrodynamic and thermodynamic processes can be described as one-dimensional systems.
- Thermo-physical properties of LNG and propane are used as functions of pressure and temperature in the mathematical model of the regasification system, based on the work of other researchers.
- All flow channels are used with the same geometry and with parallel flow in the PCHE.
- The composition of LNG is assumed to be more than 90 mol% methane.
- LNG is described as unsteady flow in the LNG regasification system.
- The outlet pressure of the LNG regasification system is variable in time, ranging from the initial pressure value to the maximum pressure values.
- A mathematical model of the PCHE is described as one LNG channel and two propane channels and 4 walls between these channels.

#### 2.2. Description of the LNG Regasification System

_{1}in—liquid phase, y

_{2}in—vapour phase) observed in the mathematical model during the simulation time are introduced in the following sections.

#### 2.3. Mathematical Model of High-Pressure LNG Booster Pump and System of Equations of Pipelines Using Method of Characteristics

^{3}/s; ${D}_{in}$—inside diameter if the pipe is circular, m; $v$—kinematic viscosity, m

^{2}/s; $A$—pipe’s cross-sectional area, m

^{2}.

^{2}· K).

^{3}and m/s; $\mathrm{A}\left(\mathrm{x}\right)$—cross-sectional area of a pipe, m

^{2}.

_{L}, v

_{L}and p

_{R}, v

_{R}:

**Boundary condition:**when the point is known $x=0$, pressure is known variable $p\left(t\right)={p}_{D}$, then LNG flow velocity is determined by the formula:

**Boundary condition:**when the point is known $x=0$, LNG flow velocity is known variable $v\left(t\right)={v}_{D}$, then pressure is determined by the formula:

**Boundary condition:**when the point is known $x=L$, pressure is known variable $p\left(t\right)={p}_{D}$, then LNG flow velocity is determined by the formula:

**Boundary condition:**when the point is known $x=L$, NG flow velocity is known variable $v\left(t\right)={v}_{D}$, then pressure is determined by the formula:

#### 2.4. Thermal Conductivity Equations Determining the Change in Temperature

**Boundary conditions:**Convective heat exchange with the environment takes place on the side surfaces of the pipe or tube. On the surface S, the known heat flow rate q in the x-direction is as follows [26]:

^{2}K)$;{T}_{amb}$—surrounding temperature; T—temperature.

^{−5}m) so that we can examine high-speed hydrodynamic processes and assess the propagation of pressure waves in the medium.

#### 2.5. Technical Parameter Observation in the Printed Circuit Heat Exchanger

_{y1}—fraction of the liquid phase, and $\alpha $

_{y2}—fraction of the gas phase) are made. Boundary conditions are selected inputs (p

_{in}, T

_{in}, G

_{in}, α

_{xin}, α

_{yin}) that initiate the regasification process in the heat exchanger.

_{in}

_{1,LNG}, T

_{in}

_{1,LNG}, G

_{in}

_{1,LNG}, $\alpha $

_{yin}

_{1,LNG}, $\alpha $

_{yin}

_{2,LNG}) are described by equations in the I Zone for LNG:

^{3}; ${\mathrm{G}}_{\mathrm{in},\mathrm{LNG}}$—input of LNG mass flow rate to the heat exchanger, kg/s; ${\rho}_{in,LNG}$—input LNG density, kg/m

^{3}; ${\rho}_{0,LNG}$—output LNG density of i section of the heat exchanger tube, kg/m

^{3};${G}_{0,LNG}$—output of LNG mass flow rate to i section of the heat exchanger tube, kg/s.

^{3}; ${\mathrm{G}}_{\mathrm{in}1,\mathrm{LNG}}$—input of LNG mass flow rate to the heat exchanger, m

^{3}/s; ${\rho}_{in,LNG}$—input LNG density of i section of the heat exchanger tube, m

^{3}/kg; ${\rho}_{0,LNG}$—output LNG density of i section of the heat exchanger tube, m

^{3}/kg;${G}_{in1,LNG}$—output of LNG mass flow rate to i section of the heat exchanger tube, m

^{3}/s; N

_{pipes}—number of pipes;$\xb7{S}_{0,LNG}$—the pipe’s cross-sectional area of the LNG tube (see Figure 7), m

^{2}.

_{1}) and gas phases (y

_{2}) of LNG are determined by the following equation:

_{1}and y

_{2}—LNG densities of liquid and gas phases, m

^{3}/kg.

^{3}.

#### 2.6. Phase of Liquefied Natural Gas Determination Using Finite Element Method

## 3. Results of LNG Regasification System Dynamic and Hydrodynamic Processes

^{−6}s, the discretisation step of pipe L6 is 0.05 m, and the LNG and propane flows’ discretisation step of the PCHE tube is 0.01615 m. The simulation of a mathematical model for the LNG regasification process was conducted to verify changes in hydrodynamics (velocity and pressure) throughout the total regasification system (including the pump, in pipe L6, and headers and channels of the PCHE), changes in dynamics (angular velocity and pressure changes) as the multistage pump operates, and their impact on the overall system. The regasification process of LNG begins when the LNG starts transferring by a high-pressure pump to the LNG PCHE. This involves initiating the electric motor EM3, causing the LNG to be transferred by the HP booster pump 3 through pipe L6 to the LNG PCHE. Figure 9 shows the changes in angular velocity (ω

_{EM3}). The angular velocity values stabilise after 10 s, with ω

_{EM3}reaching 376 rad/s.

_{1}, and the red line represents p

_{2}, illustrating that LNG starts transferring from the L6 pipe to the input of HP booster pump 3 (pressure p

_{1}) and the outlet of HP booster pump 3 (pressure p

_{2}). Figure 10b shows pressure changes over the course of the simulation, indicating that from the beginning, pressure p

_{1}starts at a value of 0.1 · ${10}^{6}$ Pa and reaches around 7 · ${10}^{6}$ Pa after 30 s at p

_{2}.

_{in1,LNG}, T

_{in1,LNG}, G

_{in1,LN}G, y

_{in1,LNG}, y

_{in2,LNG}etc.) when LNG enters the PCHE. Firstly, to prevent the misdistribution of the LNG flow rate from causing a large pressure drop in the core channels, pressure changes (P

_{0,LNG}, P

_{out,NG}) are monitored in the headers. Figure 13a shows that in the headers, the pressure reaches 1.7 · ${10}^{6}$ Pa after 1 s. Figure 13b presents results indicating that after 4 s, the pressure reaches the critical value of 4.59 · ${10}^{6}$ Pa, and after 20 s, it reaches 7 · ${10}^{6}$ Pa. The calculated difference from Figure 13a between P

_{0,LNG}band P

_{out,LNG}after 1 s is around 50 kPa.

_{0,LNG}, G

_{out,LNG}) represent the input and output of headers. It can be seen from Figure 14a that the mass flow reaches its maximum of around 19 kg/s after 0.16 s, then starts decreasing until 0.3 s. After 20 s, the mass flow stabilises at 14 kg/s (Figure 14).

_{1}) and LNG vapour (y

_{2}) are observed in the headers during the solution time. In Figure 15a, only the liquid phase is represented by the blue line. After 5 s, it starts decreasing, while the vapour phase (y

_{2}) begins to increase (shown in red, as depicted in Figure 15b).

_{1}decreases from 460 kg/m

^{3}to 410 kg/m

^{3}, while the vapour density increases from 0 to 50 kg/m

^{3}.

#### Simulation with Different Pressure Value Variations

_{1}and y

_{2}is analysed. The phase transition, as depicted in Figure 21 and Figure 22, indicates that a higher outlet pressure leads to a more favourable phase transition. Consequently, with a pressure of 7 MPa during the simulation time, the liquid phase density changes from 450 kg/m

^{3}to 356 kg/m

^{3}, whereas with an outlet pressure of 5 MPa, it remains near the same value at 448 kg/m

^{3}. To compare the beginning of the simulation, where the density value of vapour is 0, with the end of the solution time, it can be observed that the vapour density values are approximately 90 kg/m

^{3}at the 7 MPa outlet pressure. Conversely, when the pressure is 2 or 5 MPa, the evaporation process is slow, and the density of vapour remains around 3 kg/m

^{3}.

^{3}) is determined during the simulation time due to the reason that, in this case, the velocity of LNG reaches the highest values, as shown in Figure 23.

^{3}at the end of the solution time. By observing the results in Figure 24 after 30 s, it can be obtained that hydraulic energy losses in the total LNG regasification system were achieved at ~41.3 kW when the outlet pressure was 2 MPa, ~12.75 kW when the outlet pressure was 5 MPa, and ~4.24 kW when the outlet pressure was 7 MPa. From the investigation, it could be concluded that increasing the outlet pressure of the system results in a decrease in the velocity of LNG. In this case, the evaporation process accelerates, and hydraulic losses decrease.

## 4. Conclusions

## Author Contributions

## Funding

## Institutional Review Board Statement

## Informed Consent Statement

## Data Availability Statement

## Conflicts of Interest

## References

- Bilgili, F.; Balsalobre-Lorente, D.; Kuşkaya, S.; Alnour, M.; Önderol, S.; Hoque, M.E. Are research and development on energy efficiency and energy sources effective in the level of CO
_{2}emissions? Fresh evidence from EU data. Environ. Dev. Sustain. 2023. Available online: https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s10668-023-03641-y (accessed on 5 July 2024). - Fan, J.; Yeom, E. Numerical investigation on thermal hydraulic performance of supercritical LNG in PCHEs with straight, zigzag, and sinusoidal channels. J. Vis.
**2021**, 25, 247–261. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] - Strobel, M.; Mortean, M.V.V. Pressure drop and fluid maldistribution analysis of a compact heat exchanger manufactured by 3D printing. Int. J. Therm. Sci.
**2022**, 172, 107331. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] - Xie, L.; Zhuang, D.; Li, Z.; Ding, G. Technical Characteristics and Development Trend of Printed Circuit Heat Exchanger Applied in Floating Liquefied Natural Gas. Front. Energy Res.
**2022**, 10, 885607. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] - Cai, W.-H.; Li, Y.; Li, Q.; Wang, Y.; Chen, J. Numerical investigation on thermal–hydraulic performance of supercritical LNG in a Zigzag mini-channel of printed circuit heat exchanger. Appl. Therm. Eng.
**2022**, 214, 118760. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] - Wang, C.; Zhang, Y.; Hou, H.; Zhang, J.; Xu, C. Entropy production diagnostic analysis of energy consumption for cavitation flow in a two-stage LNG cryogenic submerged pump. Int. J. Heat Mass Transf.
**2019**, 129, 342–356. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] - Wang, J.; Shi, H.; Zeng, M.; Ma, T.; Wang, Q. Investigations on thermal–hydraulic performance and entropy generation characteristics of sinusoidal channeled printed circuit LNG vaporizer. Clean Techn. Environ. Policy
**2022**, 24, 95–108. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] - Zhao, Z.; Zhou, Y.; Ma, X.; Chen, X.; Li, S.; Yang, S. Numerical study on thermal hydraulic performance of supercritical LNG in zigzag-type channel PCHEs. Energies
**2019**, 12, 548. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] - Bai, J.; Pan, J.; He, X.; Wang, K.; Tang, L.; Yang, R. Numerical investigation on thermal hydraulic performance of supercritical LNG in sinusoidal wavy channel based printed circuit vaporiser. Appl. Therm. Eng.
**2020**, 175, 115379. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] - Hu, J.; Khan, F.; Zhang, L. Dynamic resilience assessment of the Marine LNG offloading system. Reliab. Eng. Syst. Saf.
**2021**, 208, 107368. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] - Kanbur, B.B.; Xiang, L.; Dubey, S.; Choo, F.H.; Duan, F. Cold utilization systems of LNG: A review. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev.
**2017**, 79, 1171–1188. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] - Pan, J.; Wang, J.; Tang, L.; Bai, J.; Lia, R.; Lub, Y.; Wua, G. Numerical investigation on thermal-hydraulic performance of a printed circuit LNG vaporiser. Appl. Therm. Eng.
**2020**, 165, 114447. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] - Lee, J.H.; Kim, Y.J.; Hwang, S. Computational study of LNG evaporation and heat diffusion through a LNG cargo tank membrane. Ocean Eng.
**2015**, 106, 77–86. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] - Saleem, A.; Farooq, S.; Karimi, I.A.; Banerjee, R. A CFD simulation study of boiling mechanism and BOG generation in a full-scale LNG storage tank. Comput. Chem. Eng.
**2018**, 115, 112–120. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] - Semaskaite, V.; Paulauskiene, T.; Uebe, J.; Šaltytė-Vaisiauskė, L. Management of liquefied natural gas. In Proceedings of the 25th International Scientific Virtual Conference, Transport Means 2021, Kaunas University of Technology, Kaunas, Lithuania, 6–8 October 2021; Part I. pp. 322–327. Available online: https://transportmeans.ktu.edu/wp-content/uploads/sites/307/2018/02/Transport-Means-2021-Part-I.pdf (accessed on 5 July 2024).
- Li, J.; Hu, H.; Wang, H. Numerical investigation on flow pattern transformation and heat transfer characteristics of two-phase flow boiling in the shell side of LNG spiral wound heat exchanger. Int. J. Therm. Sci.
**2020**, 152, 106289. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] - Bogdevicius, M.; Semaskaite, V.; Paulauskiene, T.; Uebe, J.; Danilevicius, A. Modelling and simulation hydrodynamics processes in liquefied natural gas transportation systems. J. Mar. Sci. Eng.
**2022**, 10, 1960. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] - Karyakina, E.D.; Shammazov, I.A.; Shalygin, A.V. Main aspects of liquefied natural gas process line thermal and hydraulic calculations. IOP Conf. Ser. Earth Environ. Sci.
**2021**, 677, 052056. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] - KN Energies. Klaipėda Terminal—Characteristics of the Terminal. Klaipėda, Lithuania. 2020. Available online: https://www.kn.lt/en/our-activities/lng-terminals/klaipeda-lng-terminal/559 (accessed on 5 July 2024).
- Semaskaite, V.; Bogdevicius, M.; Paulauskiene, T.; Uebe, J.; Filina-Dawidowicz, L. Improvement of Regasification Process Efficiency for Floating Storage Regasification Unit. J. Mar. Sci. Eng.
**2022**, 10, 897. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] - Koo, B. A novel implicit method of characteristics using pressure-referenced correction for transient flow in natural gas pipelines. J. Nat. Gas Sci. Eng.
**2022**, 104, 104665. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] - Koo, B. Comparison of finite-volume method and method of characteristics for simulating transient flow in natural-gas pipeline. J. Nat. Gas Sci. Eng.
**2022**, 98, 104374. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] - Jiang, Y.; Ren, Z.; Yang, X.; Li, Q.; Xu, Y. A steady-state energy flow analysis method for integrated natural gas and power systems based on topology decoupling. Appl. Energy
**2022**, 305, 118007. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] - Newton Method. Encyclopedia of Mathematics. Available online: http://encyclopediaofmath.org/index.php?title=Newton_method&oldid=47968 (accessed on 5 July 2024).
- Yang, X.-S. Chapter 20—Numerical Methods. In Engineering Mathematics with Examples and Applications; Yang, X.-S., Ed.; Academic Press: Cambridge, MA, USA, 2017; pp. 231–241. [Google Scholar]
- Migliore, C.; Tuvilleja, C.; Vesovic, V. Weathering prediction model for stored liquefied natural gas (LNG). J. Nat. Gas Sci. Eng.
**2015**, 26, 570–580. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] - Ritz, W. Ueber eine neue Methode zur Lösung gewisser Variationsprobleme der mathematischen Physik. J. Reine Angew. Math.
**1909**, 135, 1–61. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] - Ritz Method. Encyclopedia of Mathematics. Available online: http://encyclopediaofmath.org/index.php?title=Ritz_method&oldid=52432 (accessed on 5 July 2024).
- Galerkin Method. Encyclopedia of Mathematics. Available online: http://encyclopediaofmath.org/index.php?title=Galerkin_method&oldid=53016 (accessed on 5 July 2024).
- Chan, T.S.; Gresho, M.P.; Lee, L.R. Simulation of LNG vapour spread and dispersion by finite element methods. Appl. Math. Model.
**1980**, 4, 335–344. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] - Crank-Nicolson Method. Encyclopedia of Mathematics. Available online: http://encyclopediaofmath.org/index.php?title=Crank-Nicolson_method&oldid=55358 (accessed on 5 July 2024).
- Euler Method. Encyclopedia of Mathematics. Available online: http://encyclopediaofmath.org/index.php?title=Euler_method&oldid=46859 (accessed on 5 July 2024).
- Ruan, B.; Lin, W.; Li, W.; Hu, G. Numerical simulation on heat transfer and flow of supercritical methane in printed circuit heat exchangers. Cryogenics
**2022**, 126, 103541. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] - Ruan, C.; Wang, X.; Wang, C.; Zheng, L.; Li, L.; Lin, J.; Liu, X.; Li, F.; Wang, X. Selective catalytic oxidation of ammonia to nitric oxide via chemical looping. Nat. Commun.
**2022**, 13, 718. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]

**Figure 1.**The principal scheme of the mathematical model for the total continuity of the LNG regasification system.

**Figure 2.**Simplified scheme of the LNG regasification system in the FSRU. Note: 1—suction drum; 2—pipeline unit; 3—high-pressure booster pump; 4—electric motor; 5—LNG vaporiser (printed circuit heat exchanger); 6—propane tank; 7—NG trim heater.

**Figure 3.**Method of characteristics: (

**a**) schematic of the characteristic line for the MOC; (

**b**) calculation schemes of the first and the last points [17].

**Figure 5.**Structure of printed circuit heat exchangers [4].

**Figure 7.**Model of the heat exchanger. Note: I Zone: when LNG flow enters the heat exchanger, then the flow is collected in the header, which is marked as a dark blue bubble; II Zone: outlet 1 from the header to the 2 node of the tube; III Zone: outlet from the 1 node of the tube to the n node; IV Zone: Outlet from the n − 1 node to the inlet of header 2; V Zone: outlet from the n node to outlet header 2 for LNG.

**Figure 8.**Boundary conditions of LNG flow from the inlet of the heat exchanger to the header of the PCHE.

**Figure 10.**Pressure changes of LNG in HP booster pump 3 (

**a**) at the beginning of the simulation time, and (

**b**) during the simulation time.

**Figure 11.**Pressure and velocity in the 6th pipe (L6) of the LNG regasification system: (

**a**) pressure observation when the system starts working; (

**b**) pressure observation during the solution time; (

**c**) velocity observation when the system starts working; (

**d**) velocity observation during the solution time.

**Figure 13.**The pressure of headers of PCHE 2 (

**a**) when the system starts working, and (

**b**) during the simulation time.

**Figure 14.**Mass flows of headers of the PCHE 2 (

**a**) when the system starts working, and (

**b**) during the simulation time.

**Figure 15.**Density of liquid y

_{1}and density of vapour y

_{2}of headers (

**a**) in the interval from 0 to 10 s into the simulation time, and (

**b**) during the simulation time.

**Figure 16.**LNG saturation temperature changes in the LNG channels during the simulation time: (

**a**) when the system starts working; (

**b**) during the simulation time.

**Figure 19.**LNG temperature changes through the walls of the PCHE during the simulation time: (

**a**) Wall 4; (

**b**) Wall 3; (

**c**) Wall 2; (

**d**) Wall 1.

**Figure 20.**LNG velocity changes in the LNG channels during the simulation time with different outlet pressures.

**Figure 23.**Heat release due to LNG fluid friction in the LNG channels (channels) during the simulation time.

Symbol | Meaning |
---|---|

${\alpha}_{in}$ | convective heat transfer coefficient, which is calculated according to the Dittus Boelter equation [18]; |

${Q}_{LNG}$ | volumetric flow rate, m^{3}/s; |

$Din$ | inside diameter if the pipe is circular, m; |

$v$ | kinematic viscosity, m^{2}/s; |

$S$ | pipe’s cross-sectional area, m^{2}; |

${\rho}_{l}$ | density of LNG, kg/m^{3}; |

$\mu $ | fluid dynamic viscosity, Pa s; |

${c}_{p}$ | isobaric heat capacity, J/(kgK); |

$k$ | thermal conductivity of fluid, W/(mK); |

${\alpha}_{out}$ | external heat transfer coefficient characterising heat transfer from the environment to the outer surface of the insulation, W/(m^{2}·K); |

$\alpha $_{y1} | fraction of the liquid phase; |

$\alpha $_{y2} | fraction of the gas phase; |

$\mathrm{A}\left(\mathrm{x}\right)$ | cross-sectional area of a pipe, m^{2}; |

p | LNG pressure, MPa; |

$\mathsf{\Pi}\left(\mathrm{x}\right)$ | the perimeter of the cross-section of the pipeline, m; |

$\mathsf{\tau}$ | tangential fluid stress on the inner surface of the pipeline, Pa; |

${k}_{x}$ | thermal conductivity in the direction of the axis, W/(m · K); |

$\dot{Q}$ | the rate of heat generated per unit volume per unit time, W/m^{3}; |

T | temperature, K; |

$h$ | heat transfer coefficient, W/(m^{2} · K); |

${T}_{amb}$ | ambient temperature, T; |

$\theta $ | discretisation parameter of time, µs; |

${\mathrm{K}}_{0,\mathrm{LNG}}$ | bulk modulus of elasticity of LNG, Pa; |

${\mathrm{V}}_{0,\mathrm{LNG}}$ | volume of LNG, m^{3}; |

${\mathrm{G}}_{\mathrm{in},\mathrm{LNG}}$ | input of LNG mass flow rate to heat exchanger, kg/s; |

${\mathsf{\zeta}}_{\mathrm{TR},\mathrm{in}1,\mathrm{LNG}}$ | coefficient of transportation pressure losses, -; |

${\rho}_{in,LNG}$ | input LNG density, kg/m^{3}; |

${\rho}_{0,LNG}$ | output LNG density of i section of heat exchanger channel, kg/m^{3}; |

${\mathsf{\zeta}}_{\mathrm{Loc},\mathrm{in}1,\mathrm{LNG}}$, | coefficient of local pressure losses in point 1; |

${\mathsf{\zeta}}_{\mathrm{Loc},\mathrm{N},\mathrm{LNG}}$ | coefficient of local pressure losses in the output of point N. |

Equipment | Parameters |
---|---|

High-pressure booster pump | Maximum capacity: 510 m^{3}/h.Electric motor power: 1000 kW. Number of pump stages: 13. Mass inertial moment of electric motor rotor and pump wheel: 2234 kg/m ^{2}. |

LNG printed circuit heat exchanger | Diameter of inner channel: 1.20 mm. Number of channels (LNG): 66.590. Number of channels (C3H8): 180.653. Length of core: 0.646 m. Width of core: 0.540 m. Height of core: 1.520 m. |

Outlet Pressure, MPa | Total Electric Motor Power, kW | Hydraulic Energy Losses, % |
---|---|---|

2 | 313 | 13 |

5 | 526 | 2 |

7 | 471 | 1 |

Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content. |

© 2024 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).

## Share and Cite

**MDPI and ACS Style**

Bogdevicius, M.; Semaskaite, V.; Paulauskiene, T.; Uebe, J.
Impact and Technical Solutions of Hydrodynamic and Thermodynamic Processes in Liquefied Natural Gas Regasification Process. *J. Mar. Sci. Eng.* **2024**, *12*, 1164.
https://doi.org/10.3390/jmse12071164

**AMA Style**

Bogdevicius M, Semaskaite V, Paulauskiene T, Uebe J.
Impact and Technical Solutions of Hydrodynamic and Thermodynamic Processes in Liquefied Natural Gas Regasification Process. *Journal of Marine Science and Engineering*. 2024; 12(7):1164.
https://doi.org/10.3390/jmse12071164

**Chicago/Turabian Style**

Bogdevicius, Marijonas, Vigaile Semaskaite, Tatjana Paulauskiene, and Jochen Uebe.
2024. "Impact and Technical Solutions of Hydrodynamic and Thermodynamic Processes in Liquefied Natural Gas Regasification Process" *Journal of Marine Science and Engineering* 12, no. 7: 1164.
https://doi.org/10.3390/jmse12071164