mpd paper

© All Rights Reserved

Als PDF, TXT **herunterladen** oder online auf Scribd lesen

1 Aufrufe

mpd paper

© All Rights Reserved

Als PDF, TXT **herunterladen** oder online auf Scribd lesen

- MIT16_30F10_lec01
- Control System Tutorial-1
- Swnm20 en Pss Netomac Graphical Model Builder s4
- UT Dallas Syllabus for ee4310.001.11f taught by Nicholas Gans (nrg092000)
- FM_355-2_e
- Control Systems
- EE-179-2012-13_1Term
- SCADAURS[1]
- ECEg5234 Robotics
- 1#Chap1
- Matlab and Simulink for Control System
- Fuzzy Logic Based Thickness Control System Anti
- Combining State-Dependent Riccati Equation (SDRE) methods with Model Predictive Neural Control (MPNC).pdf
- Optimal COntrol
- Process Control a First Course With MATLAB Cambridge_Series_in_Chemical_Engineering
- S2 Bidang Keahlian TSP
- Gyro Position Control - Student Manual
- Linear_System_Notes_2015.pdf
- [ELEC3114] Course.outline
- CSexss11

Sie sind auf Seite 1von 6

com

ScienceDirect

Procedia Computer Science 20 (2013) 134 139

Cihan H. Dagli, Editor in Chief

Conference Organized by Missouri University of Science and Technology

2013- Baltimore, MD

Muhittin Yilmaza*, , Salman Mujeeba, Naren Reddy Dhansria

Abstract

This paper presents a robust optimization framework to improve the Managed Pressure Drilling (MPD) process for

safer and superior economical and environmental operations while removing risk-prone conventional drilling

limitations such as a need for constant monitoring of the system parameters. The nonlinear MPD process considers

the mud pump flow rate and the differential flow rate of the backpressure pump and the choke as the two inputs

while the process downhole pressure rate as the output. The MPD process unmodeled disturbances, uncertain

geological parameters and related model nonlinearities are considered to be the corresponding system uncertainties

in a closed loop robust control and optimization framework for real-time operations. Moreover, the MPD process

inputs are formulated to remain within practical bounds by introducing performance weighting functions.

The proposed framework numerical results demonstrate the efficiency of the closed loop robust control

implementations for efficient drilling operations in operator guidance systems and provide a low-computational

complexity design algorithm for safer drilling operations in regions with a-priori unknown geological properties.

2013 The Authors. Published by Elsevier B.V.

Selection and peer-review under responsibility of Missouri University of Science and Technology

managed pressure drilling; robust control; drilling uncertainties; feedback control tracking problems

_____________________________________________________________________________________________

1. Introduction

Oil drilling optimization systems have targeted the overall system performance in terms of safety advancements,

economical cost, and sustainability [1]. The Managed Pressure Drilling (MPD) approach is an adaptive drilling

process to control the annular downhole pressure throughout the bore well continuously, with the existence of

critical constraints and uncertainties in models and variables. Based on each drilling site soil types and formations, a

unique MPD setup is implemented such as an off-shore marine site or a site with soluble materials in the rock

formation using the Pressurized Mud Cap drilling [2, 3]. The reactive MPD refers to the operation of conventional

bore drilling with an extra equipment is added to the rig to handle unforeseen pressure variations in an open-loop

control manner [2] whereas the proactive MPD implies proper equipment configurations to dynamically control the

downhole pressure in the bore, possibly throughout the annulus, while constantly getting feedback. The most widely

implemented constant bottom hole pressure MPD [2, 4-6] aims to maintain a constant annular pressure profile

during the drilling operations under disturbances such as Fracture Gradient/Pore Pressure [2] for a risk of kick or

mud loss by using accurate hydraulic models to satisfactorily track the pressure gradient, enabling an operator to

manipulate narrow pressure margins that lack in conventional drilling operations. A Gradient Dual variant of MPD

[7] involves pressuring with a lower density fluid with respect to the mud in the bore in order to appropriately

: muhittin.yilmaz@tamuk.edu.

Selection and peer-review under responsibility of Missouri University of Science and Technology

doi:10.1016/j.procs.2013.09.251

Muhittin Yilmaz et al. / Procedia Computer Science 20 (2013) 134 139 135

modify the pressure profile in part of the bore, without altering the mud weight to avoid gross overbalance that could

lead to a fracture of the formation. Although the MPD approach reduces a number of drilling-related problems such

as lost circulation, struck pipe, well bore instability, or well-control incidents [8] and improves the economics of

drilling operations, deeper-water drilling wells amplify the nature of drilling problems, implying a need for

advanced theoretical and practical tools.

A number of control approaches for MPD processes have been proposed. The traditional drilling operation is

typically controlled by Proportional-Integral type controllers that may need retuning for different soil features or that

may not respond satisfactorily against sudden pressure changes, mud loss, drill bit extension abnormalities or

disturbances, hinting a need for advanced control mechanisms. Unlike traditional drilling, the MPD is about

controlling the pressure in the well without altering the mud density. The Model Predictive Control was proposed as

an MPD control solution [5, 6]. The dependent variables are adjusted based on the behavioural history and the

independent variables are controlled based on an optimization algorithm. Iterations are done at regular intervals of

time, i.e. the independent variables are adjusted whereas the dependent variables are held at fixed values. The

corresponding analysis indicates that this approach for controlling the pump and choke rates improves precision in

control of bottom hole pressure. A multi-level approach is the most widely used aspect in MPD [9], with its three

levels allowing operators to focus on the decision making and safety aspects of drilling in different control loops. An

adaptive observer-based control in MPD scenarios [4, 10, 11] involves measuring the unpredictable or fast varying

parameters and adjusting the control law according to variations in the system. However, data estimation in real-

time systems may prove infeasible for a fairly complex MPD system [1, 2]. In addition, an intelligent hybrid fuzzy-

PI controller in a drilling rig with performance and stability improvements [12], and an intelligent MPD control

framework for real-time decision mechanisms were proposed [13].

A robust control framework can overcome important MPD problems such as the assumption of constant

geological structures, improving the process performance, efficiency and real-time implementation capability.

Robust system theory [14] can overcome detrimental performance and stability effects of model variations and

related uncertainties by designing a controller for a given set of a-priori system coefficients. In the presence of

internal/external disturbances as well as norm-bounded model uncertainties, robust control frameworks with H

controllers for unstructured uncertainty cases [15, 16] and -controllers for structure uncertainty cases [17] have

proven to be effective in real-time implementations [4, 18, 19], with very efficient convex [20] and state-space

solution techniques [21].

This study presents a robust optimization framework for MPD processes, by designing a H-infinity controller in a

closed loop tracking problem and by manipulating the process control variables to achieve the desired MPD process

annular down hole pressure in well bores for real-time operations, supporting the operator actions. Section I

introduces the MPD systems and related control approaches, the robust control concept is described in Section II.

The baseline nonlinear MPD process model and associated system operations, the robust control framework, MPD

modelling and uncertainty determination, and numerical simulations are presented in Section III while Section IV

summarizes and provides potential future research directions.

Robust system theory designs a worst-case controller for a robust performance under model, signal or

performance uncertainties. Since Linear, Time-Invariant (LTI) models of a plant/process is required during the

controller design, nonlinear or complex models of the process are approximated by an LTI linear model, with an

uncertainty term that consists of an uncertainty LTI weighting function and a norm-bounded uncertainty. The

multiplicative uncertainty description is frequently used, i.e., , where Gn(s)

denotes the LTI nominal plant, Wn(s) denotes the model uncertainty LTI weighting function characterizing the

known nature of n(s) denotes the norm bounded uncertainty, i.e., , encircling the real

plant family dynamics around the nominal plant. Also, robust performance implies that a stable system operation

and acceptable performance for all possible actual plant models are achieved. The model uncertainty weighting

function is determined by typically studying the frequency responses of worst-case plant behaviours and by

identifying a candidate function to cover the family of plants to satisfy . The performance

weighting functions are properly chosen (and possibly fine-tuned during the controller design) to achieve the desired

system performance such as a minimal steady-state error, acceptable transient response or satisfactory bandwidth. The

resultant feedback control system is transformed into a linear fractional transformation (LFT) and the H control

136 Muhittin Yilmaz et al. / Procedia Computer Science 20 (2013) 134 139

formulation either determines a controller for the unstructured plant and performance uncertainty case or proves that

no controller exists for the given specifications.

The managed pressure drilling system nonlinear model and process control operation is described [1] in terms of

control-oriented system approach after ignoring fast system dynamics, lumping similar effects and assuming slow

varying parameters as constants. The simplified MPD model presents a practical dynamical relationship for the mud

pump and choke pressures and for the flow in the bit. A control device in terms of a mud pump acts as the sealer of

the top of the annulus. As the bore is sealed, the desired well pressure is maintained by using a choke and main as

well as backpressure pumps.

(a) (b)

Fig.1. The Managed Pressure Drilling System a) Block Diagram, and b) Process Diagram

The simplified MPD model in Fig. 1 includes two inputs, namely, the differential of the backpressure and choke

flow rates and the mud pump flow rate, and one output, the annular down hole pressure rate, and yields

(1)

where Pp denotes the inlet mud pump pressure (bar), qpump indicates the mud pump flow rate (m3/sec) and qbit

represents the flow rate through the drill bit (m3/sec) while the a1 coefficient is defined as , d and vd

are the bulk modulus and volume of the drill string, respectively. The choke pressure Pc (bar) variation is written as

(2)

where qres is the reservoir influx rate (m3/sec), va is the annulus volume (m3), is equal to the bulk modulus of the

annulus ( , and the differential control input u is defined as

where qback denotes the backpressure pump flow rate (m3/sec) and qchoke denotes the choke flow rate (m3/sec).

The flow rate through the drill bit qbit nonlinear dynamics can be obtained by using Eqns. 1-2, and given as

(3)

where hbit denotes the vertical depth of the bit, and the coefficients are expressed as

, , ,

where Md, Ma are the density per meter of the drill string and annulus, respectively, Fd, d are the friction factor and

the density of the drill string, respectively, and Fa, a are the friction factor and density of the annulus, respectively.

The Eqns. 1-4 are derived under the assumptions that qres is a constant value, i.e., usually an unknown disturbance,

and qbit > 0, i.e., the bit always well circulated with mud, qbit + qres > 0. Finally, the nonlinear annular down hole

pressure dynamics is given as

(4)

The two-input one-output MPD process is utilized to obtain the superior borehall pressure tracking performance

in a closed loop robust control configuration, as shown in Fig. 2-a with descriptions in Table 1, that effectively deals

with MPD system multiplicative model uncertainties and internal/external disturbances. In addition to the typical

performance weighting functions, two individual performance weighting functions are introduced for both

Muhittin Yilmaz et al. / Procedia Computer Science 20 (2013) 134 139 137

differential pressure and pump flow rate, represented by u1 and u2 in Fig. 2-a, respectively, to approach the practical

control action conditions instead of using hardlimiters during the a-posteriori design analysis.

(a) (b)

Fig. 2 The MPD Process a) Robust Feedback Control Diagram, and b) Linear Fractional Transformation

Table 1. The MPD System Robust Control Parameters and Their Descriptions

Parameter Description Parameter Description

G1(s) The nominal plant relating the differential input p1 p2(s) The MPD process control input performance

G2(s) The nominal plant relating the pump flow rate 1(s), 2(s) The MPD process dynamics uncertainty terms

C(s) The robust controller Wp(s) The MPD process performance weighting

E(s) The error signal p(s) The MPD process plant performance uncertainty

W1(s), W2(s) The nominal plant uncertainty weighting U1(s), U2(s) The MPD process control inputs

Wp1(s), Wp2(s) The MPD process control input performance

The robust control framework is typically formulated by using the LFT representation of the control block

diagram, as shown in Fig. 2-b, where the augmented plant P(s) contains all a-priori known and fixed plant and

weighting function terms, C(s) denotes the robust controller to be designed, and denotes the norm-bounded

model and performance uncertainties. As the multiplicative model uncertainties are derived from the nonlinear MPD

process Eqns. 1-4, the system performance specifications are defined by using proper weighting functions for

minimum steady-state error and satisfactory transient responses. Using Fig. 2-a, the augmented plant expression

(5)

can be written. Also, the uncertainty term is assumed to be unstructured, i.e., all individual uncertainty relationships

are interrelated with all other uncertainty terms for an easy problem with conservative results, as the assumption for

the H control framework that can be formulated as, for a given control system in Fig. 2-a and the corresponding

LFT and uncertainty matrix in Fig. 2-b,

design a controller C(s)

such that

for 2 1, , , ] and z = [z2, z1, , , ] (6)

Since the MPD process model is inherently nonlinear, the linearization technique was applied to Eqns. 1-4 to

obtain the linear, time-invariant (LTI) state space representation of the system, by considering the qpump and u, the

pump flow rate and the differential pressure, respectively, as the system inputs and , the pump pressure,

choke pressure and bit flow rate, respectively, as the system states and Pbit, the downhole pressure or pressure at the

bit, as the system output. Different MPD LTI dynamics at various bit flow rate operating points between 0.0001 and

0.0009 were studied in the frequency domain to identify the corresponding nominal model and associated plant

uncertainty for the downhole pressure-differential pressure (Pbit-U) and downhole pressure-pump flow rate (Pbit-

138 Muhittin Yilmaz et al. / Procedia Computer Science 20 (2013) 134 139

Qpump) relationships, as shown in Fig. 3-a-b, and associated worst-case deviations in the multiplicative uncertainty

configuration and corresponding uncertainty weighting functions in Figs. 3-c-d.

Fig. 3 The MPD LTI Model Differential Pressure and Downhole Pressure Dynamics a) Frequency Responses, c) Worst-case and

Uncertainty Weighting Functions, and the Pump Flow Rate and Downhole Pressure Dynamics b) Frequency Response, d) Worst-case and

Uncertainty Weighting Functions

The extension of the drill bit presents the most common control system challenge to the MPD system and is a

good measure of efficiency of the control framework, i.e., the flow in the annulus must be ramped up from

atmospheric pressure to the desired value as efficiently as possible with safety and cost considerations. The LFT

form in Fig. 2-b of the proposed MPD process optimization framework was implemented in Matlab Robust Control

Toolbox [22] by using typical values [4], with a negligible perturbation to satisfy the H-infinity condition, to obtain

a controller for the robust performance. The MPD system performance weighting function was determined to

achieve mainly the steady-state performance with acceptable transient responses since the subjective performance

weighting function selections only serve for guidelines between the time-frequency domain relationships. If any

performance specification is not achieved or an unstable system is obtained, performance specifications and

associated weighting functions become subject to relaxations. In addition to the overall MPD process closed loop

tracking performance weighting function, shown in Fig. 4-a, to ensure superior steady-state operations with

acceptable transient responses, i.e., penalizing the low frequencies of the weighting function, two fictitious and

identical performance weighting functions, shown in Fig. 4-b, are selected to consider the potential control input

saturation nonlinearity in the practical implementation.

(a) (b)

Fig. 4 The MPD Process a) Overall Performance Weighting Function, and b) Control Input Weighting Function

Fig. 5 The MPD Process a) Constrained Control Inputs after the Initial Design, b) Constrained Control Inputs after Further Penalizing the

Corresponding Weighting Functions, and c) Constrained Control Inputs with Hard-limiters

The robust controller design yielded , with the constrained control inputs as shown

in Fig. 5-a, and yielded after further penalization of the constrained control inputs as

shown in Fig. 5-b. Since the control inputs were penalized, the corresponding closed-loop tracking performance

included a larger steady-state error with suboptimal transients, eventually leading to an unstable system that hints

the ultimate need of hard-limiters, as shown in Fig. 5-c. Moreover, as expected, the robust control design was

observed to result in impractical and infeasible values for the unconstrained control input case.

Muhittin Yilmaz et al. / Procedia Computer Science 20 (2013) 134 139 139

The ability of the robust controller to adapt to the pipe connection condition was studied for different operation

levels as shown in Fig. 6-a-b. Moreover, the robust control framework indicates robustness in adjusting to sudden

changes in the downhole pressure gradients as shown in Fig. 6-c.

Fig. 6 The MPD Robust Control System Step Responses for a) 250 psi, b) 350 psi, and c) Sudden Changes in Pressures

4. Conclusions

A managed pressure drilling optimization approach has been successfully demonstrated by using the closed loop

robust system framework to obtain superior downhole pressure tracking under different real-time operation

conditions. A multiplicative uncertainty model of the nonlinear MPD process was obtained after linearization and

frequency response analysis, and control action constraints were introduced during the robust control design.

The simulation results are strong indicators of the efficiency of the proposed framework in terms of practical

significance, nonlinear optimization, and real-time implementation for operator support systems. The proposed

framework can be further extended by investigating the MPD process robust performances under different

uncertainty models and under different structured uncertainty cases.

References

[1] G.-O. Kaasa, "A Simple Dynamic Model of Drilling for Control," Technical Report, StatoilHydro Resarch Centre Porsgrunn, 2007.

[2] D. M. Hannegan, - SPE Annual Technical Conference and Exhibition, San Antonio,

TX, United States, September 2006.

[3] an,

and Cybernetics, Jan. 1973.

[4] N. Stamnes, J. Zhou, G.- the Bottomhole Pressure of a Managed Pressure

47th IEEE Conference on Decision and Control, Cancun, Mexico, December 2008.

[5] rence, Marriott

Waterfront, Baltimore, USA, July 2010.

[6] Development and Testing of a Fully Automated System to Accurately Control Downhole Pressure

during Drilling Operations Conference and Exhibition - Technology and Value: Achieving

the Right Balance, Abu Dhabi, United Arab Emirates, October 2003.

[7] Controlled Mud-Cap Drilling for Subsea Applications: Well- Society of

Petroleum Engineers Drilling and Completion, June 2006.

[8] -34.

[9] Managed Pressure Drilling- A Multilevel Approach,

Energy Conference, Utrecht, Netherlands, July, 2010.

[10] ,

Conference on Automation and Logistics, Jinan, China, 2007.

[11] , 4th International

Symposium on Communications, Control and Signal Processing, Limassol, Cyprus, March 2010.

[12] J. Cao, S. Zhao, C. Tao, brid Fuzzy-PI Control Model for Constant-pressure Automatic Bit-feeding System of Large-diameter Shaft

Drilling Rig, - 12, 2008, Changchun, China.

[13] M. Yilmaz, D. Naren, M. Salman,

October 2011.

[14] J. C. Doyle, B. A. Francis, and A. Tannenbaum, Feedback Control Theory (New York, Macmillan Publishing Company, 1992).

[15] T. Basar and P. Bernhard, H-infinity Optimal Control and Related Minimax Design Problems, Birkhauser, 1991.

[16] K. Zhou, J. Doyle, and K. Glover, Robust and Optimal Control, Prentice-Hall, 1996.

[17] R. S. Sanchez-Pea and M. Sznaier, Robust Systems: Theory and Applications, New York, John Wiley & Sons, 1998.

[18] - IEEE Control

Systems Magazine, August 2002.

[19] Managed-Pressure Drilling: Using Model Predictive Control to Improve Pressure Control

during Dual- Society of Petroleum Engineers Drilling and Completion, June 2011.

[20] ational Journal of Robust and Nonlinear Control,

4, 1994, 421-448.

[21] -Space Solutions to H2 and H-

Automatic Control, vol. 34, 1989, pp. 831-847.

[22] Matlab Robust Control Toolbox, Mathworks, Inc., Natick, MA.

- MIT16_30F10_lec01Hochgeladen vonNizar Tayem
- Control System Tutorial-1Hochgeladen vontrek june
- Swnm20 en Pss Netomac Graphical Model Builder s4Hochgeladen vonshyamda
- UT Dallas Syllabus for ee4310.001.11f taught by Nicholas Gans (nrg092000)Hochgeladen vonUT Dallas Provost's Technology Group
- FM_355-2_eHochgeladen vonGeorge Cristian Ceapa
- Control SystemsHochgeladen vonGanesh Anil
- EE-179-2012-13_1TermHochgeladen vonJohn Paul Garcia
- SCADAURS[1]Hochgeladen vonRandall Bleijie
- ECEg5234 RoboticsHochgeladen vongurusaravana
- 1#Chap1Hochgeladen von王佐軒
- Matlab and Simulink for Control SystemHochgeladen vonLakshmi
- Fuzzy Logic Based Thickness Control System AntiHochgeladen vonAlan
- Combining State-Dependent Riccati Equation (SDRE) methods with Model Predictive Neural Control (MPNC).pdfHochgeladen vonamin342
- Optimal COntrolHochgeladen vonKirti Deo Mishra
- Process Control a First Course With MATLAB Cambridge_Series_in_Chemical_EngineeringHochgeladen vonMateo Quispe
- S2 Bidang Keahlian TSPHochgeladen vonEsa Apriaskar
- Gyro Position Control - Student ManualHochgeladen vonBruno Martins Leite
- Linear_System_Notes_2015.pdfHochgeladen vonsandychichu
- [ELEC3114] Course.outlineHochgeladen vonPeter Ho
- CSexss11Hochgeladen vonankushbraj
- Control Engineering in Drying Technology - Review and TrendsHochgeladen vonfrank_grimes
- Active stability control strategies for a high speed bogie.pdfHochgeladen vonnpfh
- 32 MI313 Control of Mining OperationsHochgeladen vonharryhess
- Lecture 4 - Model MekanikHochgeladen vonBudi Prayitno
- Controller CharacteristicsHochgeladen vonIOCPC
- Procesos de automatizaciónHochgeladen vonIsrael
- Block DiagramsHochgeladen vonnidalrafi
- Unit 4Hochgeladen vonpratik shinde
- Gurung2019.pdfHochgeladen vonJaol1976
- Tuning of Multivariable PID Controllers Based on Charesteristic Matrix Eigenvalues, Lyapunov Fuctions and Robustnees CriteriaHochgeladen vonEsther Cozar

- Well PlanningHochgeladen vonSibte Hassan Butt
- Nguyen, Don TuanHochgeladen vonAnonymous H9n5g3aaCE
- Annudeep Dhiman, RHEOLOGICAL PROPERTIES & CORROSION CHARACTERISTICS OF.pdfHochgeladen vonbharathpe
- Greek Alphabet ChartsHochgeladen vonRs Jeqims
- Drilling BooksHochgeladen vonEngineer.Koplak
- An HP starch used.pdfHochgeladen vonAnonymous H9n5g3aaCE
- Polymer Chemistry.pdfHochgeladen vonAnonymous H9n5g3aaCE
- Viscometer Model 35 12SpeedHochgeladen vonAnonymous H9n5g3aaCE
- 3_DrillingFluidComponents.pptHochgeladen vonRay Romey
- Preliminary Study on Air Injection in Annuli to Manage Pressure During CementingHochgeladen vonAnonymous H9n5g3aaCE
- Preliminary Study on Air Injection in Annuli to Manage Pressure during Cementing.pdfHochgeladen vonAnonymous H9n5g3aaCE
- Managed pressure drilling — what’s in a name.pdfHochgeladen vonAnonymous H9n5g3aaCE
- Managed Pressure Drilling (SPE MPD seminar abstracts).pdfHochgeladen vonAnonymous H9n5g3aaCE
- Reelwell Drilling method.pdfHochgeladen vonAnonymous H9n5g3aaCE
- WELL DESIGN ISSUES.pdfHochgeladen vonAnonymous H9n5g3aaCE
- Understanding Advanced Drilling TechniquesHochgeladen vonAnonymous H9n5g3aaCE
- Deepwater Managed Pressure Drilling and Casing While DrillingHochgeladen vonAnonymous H9n5g3aaCE
- Deepwater Managed Pressure Drilling and Casing While Drilling.pdfHochgeladen vonAnonymous H9n5g3aaCE
- 224266089 Email PhrasesHochgeladen vonAnonymous H9n5g3aaCE
- 224266089-Email-Phrases.pdfHochgeladen vonAnonymous H9n5g3aaCE
- 224266089-Email-Phrases.pdfHochgeladen vonAnonymous H9n5g3aaCE
- A Numerical Investigation of Wellbore Stability Problems Using AnHochgeladen vonAnonymous H9n5g3aaCE
- Advanced Drilling Practices - Casing Design.pdfHochgeladen vonAnonymous H9n5g3aaCE
- Advanced Drilling Practices - Casing DesignHochgeladen vonAnonymous H9n5g3aaCE
- Chuong 5 - Casing Design.ppt Compatibility ModeHochgeladen vonAnonymous H9n5g3aaCE
- Download ListsHochgeladen vonAnonymous H9n5g3aaCE
- Download List 2Hochgeladen vonAnonymous H9n5g3aaCE

- DS Viva QuestionsHochgeladen vonDaniel Mariadass
- Manuale Sony A7RII.pdfHochgeladen vonBlackTorment
- Operation Manual 3A E-0309Hochgeladen vonjjgonzalezquina
- JAVA NotesHochgeladen vongouse1210
- 805 SW4 Installation InstructionsHochgeladen vonLucianoDosSantos
- Check BookHochgeladen vonMarwa Ghoz
- Cloud Computing Unit-3(a)Hochgeladen vonnabeel
- Kobi-IP-TVI-SDI-User-Manual.pdfHochgeladen vonJosh Christensen
- R13 MAY 2017Hochgeladen vonAnil Kumar B
- Hardware Assignment 1Hochgeladen vonTimvane Tim C Chabaluka
- Kyocera 1820en Og-AdvancedHochgeladen vonManuel Rubalcava Mendoza
- BT485Hochgeladen vonJHON MILLA
- 2DSeismicHochgeladen vonMohd Faiz
- Foro RTWPHochgeladen vonFelix Pinto Macedo
- Static and Dynamic Power in CMOSHochgeladen vonDeep Singh
- 8.1.2Hochgeladen vontarga
- Madhavan CVHochgeladen vonMadhavan Rengaraj
- Rfid Project ReportHochgeladen vonDeepak Bora
- Classics-Hangar-Pilots-Manual-Fw190A5-A9-v1-00.pdfHochgeladen vonjuan
- FFIEC ITBooklet Information SecurityHochgeladen vonahong100
- oid_tuning_configuration_quickreference_01Hochgeladen vonKetan Patil
- OS X 10.10 vs. Ubuntu 15.04 vs. Fedora 21 Mac Mini Benchmarks - OpenBenchmarkingHochgeladen vonnegrotec
- Trafic Safety Data Bahir DarHochgeladen vonNakie Assefa
- hana expHochgeladen vonamanblr12
- Phase locked loop and synchronization methodsHochgeladen vonRaja Sekhar Batchu
- BC0043 SolvedHochgeladen vonVipul Desai
- RTF-Revit Architecture 2008Hochgeladen vonMartin Velickovski
- GBPPR 'Zine - Issue #25Hochgeladen vonGBPPR
- ultrasonic object detectionHochgeladen vonAmalesh Ravi
- Automatic Cab Signaling System for Rail EnginesHochgeladen vonsvijay_790

## Viel mehr als nur Dokumente.

Entdecken, was Scribd alles zu bieten hat, inklusive Bücher und Hörbücher von großen Verlagen.

Jederzeit kündbar.