Shaoxiong Wang, Yuxing Li  , Cuiwei Liu, Zhaoxue Cui

Shandong Key Laboratory of Oil-Gas Storage and Transportation Safety, China University of Petroleum, Qingdao 266580, Shandong, China


 

Received: July 23, 2019
Accepted: December 23, 2019
Download Citation: ||https://doi.org/10.6180/jase.202003_23(1).0015  

ABSTRACT


The leak experiment for underwater gas leakage was carried out by using self-designed circular pipeline and air as experimental medium. The diffusion characteristics of gas in water and the variation of flow rate as a function of different water depth, hole diameter and leakage pressure were studied. The results show that the bubble plume has experienced three stages after the leakage: the initial stage, the full development stage and the surface flow stage. During the rise of the bubble plume, the phenomenon of entrainment, necking and recoil are accompanied. The leakage rate has a linear relation, second order relation with the leakage pressure and diameter of hole respectively, while it decreases with the increase of water depth. The change of the hole diameter has the greatest influence on the leakage rate, followed by the pressure, while the effect of water depth is the smallest. The nonlinear fitting of the experimental data is carried out to obtain the quantitative relationship between the release flow rate and the hole diameter, leakage pressure and water depth. At the same time, by introducing coefficient ,a quantitative formula for predicting the leakage rate of underwater gas pipelines under the conditions of small hole diameter (d ≤ 20 mm) and subsonic flow (p ≤ 90 kPa) is obtained.


Keywords: underwater pipelines; leakage; bubble plume; diffusion law; flow rate



REFERENCES


 

  1. [1]Sklavounos S, Rigas F. Estimation of safety distances in the vicinity of fuel gas pipelines. Journal of Loss Prevention in the Process Industries, 2006, 19(1):24-31.
  2. [2]Poojitha D.Yapa, Anusha L. Dissanayake. Bubble plume modelling with new functional relationships. Journal of Hydraulic Research, 2012, 50(6):646-648.
  3. [3]Loes M, Fannelop T K. Fire Hazard From an Underwater Release of Natural Gas. Society of Petroleum Engineers Offshore Europe - Aberdeen, United Kingdom, 1987: 97-104.
  4. [4]Yapa P D, Zheng L, Chen F. A model for deepwater oil/gas blowouts. Marine Pollution Bulletin, 2002, 43(7):234-241.
  5. [5]Batzias F A, Siontorou C G, Spanidis P-M P. Designing a reliable leak bio-detection system for natural gas pipelines. Journal of Hazardous Materials, 2010, 186(1):35-58.
  6. [6]Liu C W, Li Y X, Fang L P, et al. Leakage monitoring research and design for natural gas pipelines based on dynamic pressure waves. Journal of Process Control, 2017, 50:66-76. Doi: 1016/j.jprocont.2016.12.003
  7. [7]Amir Ebrahimi-Moghadam. CFD analysis of natural gas emission from damaged pipelines: Correlation development for leakage estimation. Journal of Cleaner Production, 2018.
  8. [8]Ditmars J D, Cederwall K. Analysis of Air-Bubble Plumes International Conference on Coastal Engineering. 1974:2209-2226.
  9. [9]Milgram, Van Houten, Plumes from subsea well blowouts Proceedings of 3rd Tnt Conf.1982:659-684.
  10. [10]Billeter L, Fanneløp T K. Gas concentration over an underwater gas release. Atmospheric Environment, 1989, 23(8):1683-1694.Doi: 1016/0004-6981(89)90053-X
  11. [11]Cloete S, Olsen J E, Skjetne P. CFD modeling of plume and free surface behavior resulting from a sub-sea gas release. Applied Ocean Research, 2009, 31(3):220-225.Doi: 1016/j.apor.2009.09.005
  12. [12]Olsen J E, Skjetne P. Modelling of underwater bubble plumes and gas dissolution with an Eulerian-Lagrangian CFD model. Applied Ocean Research, 2016, 59:193-200.Doi: 1016/j.apor.2016.06.001
  13. [13]Wu, S. Cunningham, S. Sivandran. Modelling subsea gas releases and resulting gas plumes using Computational Fluid Dynamics. Journal of Loss Prevention in the Process Industries, 2017, 49(03):411-417.Doi: 10.1016/j.jlp.2017.08.008
  14. [14]Tessarolo L F, Innocentini V. Evaluation of entrainment formulations for liquid/gas plumes from underwater blowouts. Journal of Geophysical Research Oceans, 2016, 121(7):5530-5366.Doi: 1002/2016JC011735
  15. [15]Li X H, Chen G M, Zhang R. Simulation and assessment of underwater gas release and dispersion from subsea gas pipelines leak. Process Safety and Environmental Protection, 2018, 14(05):17-22.
  16. [16]R. Topham. Hydrodynamics of an oil well blowout. Applied Ocean Research, 1975, 15(5):269-280.
  17. [17]Kobus H E. Analysis of the flow induced by air-bubble systems Coastal Engineering. ASCE, 2012.
  18. [18]WANG Z G,SUN K L,LIU H X. Experimental study on gas leakage of underwater pipelines.Port Engineering Technology, 2013, 50(1):52-54
  19. [19]Arnaldos J, Casal J, Montiel H, et al. Design of a computer tool for the evaluation of the consequences of accidental natural gas releases in distribution pipes. Journal of Loss Prevention in the Process Industries, 1998, 11(2):135-148.Doi:10.1016/S0950-4230(97)00041-7
  20. [20]Kishawy H A, Gabbar H A. Review of pipeline integrity management practices. International Journal of Pressure Vessels & Piping, 2010, 87(7):373-380.Doi: 1016/j.ijpvp.2010.04.003
  21. [21]Helena Montiel, Juan A.Vilchez, Josep Arnaldos. Historical analysis of accidents in the transportation of natural gas. Journal of Hazardous Materials, 1996, 51(1):77-92.
  22. [22]Helena Montiel, Juan A. Vilchez, Joaquim Casal. Mathematical modelling of accidental gas releases. Journal of Hazardous Materials, 1998, 59(2):211-233.Doi:10.1016/S0304-3894(97)00149-0
  23. [23]Lu L, Zhang X, Yan Y, et al. Theoretical Analysis of Natural-Gas Leakage in Urban Medium-pressure Pipelines. Journal of Environment & Human, 2014, 1(2): 71-86.Doi: 15764/EH.2014.02009
  24. [24]DOU Z Y. Analysis of leakage and diffusion rule and consequence of natural gas pipeline in water. Southwest Petroleum University, 2015.
  25. [25]Ebrahimi-Moghadam A, Farzaneh-Gord M, Deymi-Dashtebayaz M. Correlations for estimating natural gas leakage from aboveground and buried urban distribution pipelines. Journal of Natural Gas Science and Engineering, 2016, 34:185-196.Doi: 1016/j.jngse.2016.06.062


    
 

0.7
2020CiteScore
 
 
33rd percentile
Powered by  Scopus

SCImago Journal & Country Rank

Enter your name and email below to receive latest published articles in Journal of Applied Science and Engineering.