Please wait a minute...
Shopping Cart Email List Chinese
Advanced Search Fig/Tab
Frontiers in Energy

ISSN 2095-1701

ISSN 2095-1698(Online)

CN 11-6017/TK

Postal Subscription Code 80-972

2018 Impact Factor: 1.701

Featured Articles  |  Most Downloaded  |  Most Reading
Online Submission Subscribe to Our RSS Content Feed
Front. Energy    2020, Vol. 14 Issue (2) : 213-223    https://doi.org/10.1007/s11708-020-0672-5
RESEARCH ARTICLE
A novel methodology for forecasting gas supply reliability of natural gas pipeline systems
Feng CHEN, Changchun WU()
National Engineering Laboratory for Pipeline Safety, China University of Petroleum, Beijing 102249, China
 Download: PDF(790 KB)   HTML
 Export: BibTeX | EndNote | Reference Manager | ProCite | RefWorks
Abstract

In this paper, a novel systematic and integrated methodology to assess gas supply reliability is proposed based on the Monte Carlo method, statistical analysis, mathematical-probabilistic analysis, and hydraulic simulation. The method proposed has two stages. In the first stage, typical scenarios are determined. In the second stage, hydraulic simulation is conducted to calculate the flow rate in each typical scenario. The result of the gas pipeline system calculated is the average gas supply reliability in each typical scenario. To verify the feasibility, the method proposed is applied for a real natural gas pipelines network system. The comparison of the results calculated and the actual gas supply reliability based on the filed data in the evaluation period suggests the assessment results of the method proposed agree well with the filed data. Besides, the effect of different components on gas supply reliability is investigated, and the most critical component is identified. For example, the 48th unit is the most critical component for the SH terminal station, while the 119th typical scenario results in the most severe consequence which causes the loss of 175.61×104 m3 gas when the 119th scenario happens. This paper provides a set of scientific and reasonable gas supply reliability indexes which can evaluate the gas supply reliability from two dimensions of quantity and time.
Keywords natural gas pipeline system      gas supply reliability      evaluation index      Monte Carlo method      hydraulic simulation     
Corresponding Author(s): Changchun WU   
Online First Date: 07 May 2020    Issue Date: 22 June 2020
 Cite this article:   
Feng CHEN,Changchun WU. A novel methodology for forecasting gas supply reliability of natural gas pipeline systems[J]. Front. Energy, 2020, 14(2): 213-223.
 URL:  
https://academic.hep.com.cn/fie/EN/10.1007/s11708-020-0672-5
https://academic.hep.com.cn/fie/EN/Y2020/V14/I2/213
Fig.1  Gas supply reliability indexes.
Fig.2  Framework of gas supply reliability evaluation.
Number 0 1 2 3
Probability 0.8703 0.1209 0.0084 0.0004
Tab.1  Probability of different numbers of failed units
Fig.3  Sampling schematic for failed units.
Fig.4  Schematic of control models used in hydraulic simulation.
Fig.5  Topology of the pipeline network.
Number of system failures 0 1 2 3 4 5 6
Probability 0.7972 0.1807 0.0205 1.5E–3 8.76E–5 3.97E–6 1.50E–7
Tab.2  Probability of failures
Distribution station/Terminal station Consumer Satisfaction index/(100%) Consumer continuity index
LEGA
/(m3·(7d)–1)		 LEGF
/(times·(7d)–1))		 LEGD
(h·(7d) –1))
BA 0.9951 15854.48 0.527 0.004
XD 0.9955 8136.48 0.595 0.011
LXZ 0.9990 2391.86 0.607 0.003
DY 0.9959 2074.45 0.576 0.006
CZ 0.9952 2286.46 0.608 0.003
LC 0.9947 42710.37 0.516 0.011
LT 0.9949 4462.60 0.539 0.003
ZJ 0.9962 7804.43 0.722 0.023
ChangZ 0.9961 16009.24 0.605 0.025
WX 0.9961 7926.67 0.541 0.004
FR 0.9963 21491.45 0.749 0.016
DQ 0.9931 17688.67 0.772 0.024
LZ 0.9962 50042.33 0.599 0.016
SH terminal station 0.9956 118845.44 1.031 0.121
Tab.3  Calculation result of gas supply reliability of the main line
Distribution station/Terminal station Consumer satisfaction index/(100%)
Theoretical data		 Consumer satisfaction index/(100%)
Actual data
BA 0.9951 0.9969
XD 0.9955 0.9958
LXZ 0.9990 1
DY 0.9959 0.9733
CZ 0.9952 0.9812
LC 0.9947 0.9784
LT 0.9949 0.9898
ZJ 0.9962 0.9834
ChangZ 0.9961 0.9899
WX 0.9961 0.9858
FR 0.9963 0.9862
DQ 0.9931 0.9623
LZ 0.9962 0.9916
SH terminal station 0.9956 0.9925
Tab.4  CSI calculation results of theoretical data and actual data
Fig.6  Calculation result of gas supply reliability in SH terminal station.
CSIj Satisfaction degree of user
Demandj Gas demand needed by the user
Supplyj Gas amount supplied to the user
Pi Probability that the gas pipeline system in the ith (ind, ist) scenario
Qj-i Gas amount that gas pipelines transports to the user
LEGA Loss gas amount for users during the evaluation period
Aj Sufficient gas amount for user j in the evaluation period
LQij Sufficient gas amount for jth (jnd, jst) user in the ith (ind, ist) scenario
LEGF Frequency that gas supply shortages happen in the evaluation period
Fj Frequency that the gas shortages happen for user j in the evaluation period
LDij Number of gas supply interruption to jth (jnd, jst) user under the ith (ind, ist) scenario
LEGD Time when the gas supply insufficient to user during the evaluation period
Dj Time that the gas shortages happen in jth (jnd, jst) user in the evaluation period
Numi Number of the failure units in the ith (ind, ist) sample
FEi Failed unit in the ith (ind, ist) sample
FTi Failure time of units associated with FEi
RTi Maintenance time of units associated with FEi
l A constant and represents the failure rate of gas pipelines system
R Random number that generated in the interval [0, 1]
Q Flow rateof the natural gas supplied to the users
P Pressure of the natural gas supplied to the users
Qr Required flow rate of the natural gas supplied to the users
Pr Required pressure of the natural gas supplied to the users
Pmin Minimum required pressure of the natural gas supplied to the users
  
1 W Qiao, H Lu, G Zhou, M Azimi, Q Yang, W Tian. A hybrid algorithm for carbon dioxide emissions forecasting based on improved lion swarm optimizer. Journal of Cleaner Production, 2020, 244: 118612
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2019.118612
2 W Qiao, W Tian, Y Tian, Q Yang, Y Wang, J Zhang. The forecasting of PM2.5 using a hybrid model based on wavelet transform and an improved deep learning algorithm. IEEE Access: Practical Innovations, Open Solutions, 2019, 7: 142814–142825
https://doi.org/10.1109/ACCESS.2019.2944755
3 M Flouri, C Karakosta, C Kladouchou, J Psarras. How does a natural gas supply interruption affect the EU gas security? A Monte Carlo simulation. Renewable & Sustainable Energy Reviews, 2015, 44: 785–796
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2014.12.029
4 S Lochner. Modeling the European natural gas market during the 2009 Russian–Ukrainian gas conflict: ex-post simulation and analysis. Journal of Natural Gas Science and Engineering, 2011, 3(1): 341–348
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jngse.2011.01.003
5 W Huang. Reliability of large-scale natural gas pipeline network. Acta Petrolei Sinica, 2013, 34: 401–404
6 Q Yuan, J Li, H Liu, B Yu, D Sun, Y Deng. Parametric regression of a multiparameter thixotropic model for waxy crude oil based on multiobjective strategy. Journal of Petroleum Science Engineering, 2019, 173: 287–297
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.petrol.2018.10.002
7 W Yu, S Song, Y Li, Y Min, W Huang, K Wen, J Gong. Gas supply reliability assessment of natural gas transmission pipeline systems. Energy, 2018, 162: 853–870
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.energy.2018.08.039
8 Q Yuan, H Liu, J Li, B Yu, C Wu. Study on parametric regression of a complex thixotropic model for waxy crude oil. Energy & Fuels, 2018, 32: 5020–5032
https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.energyfuels.8b00626
9 H Su, J Zhang, E Zio, N Yang, X Li, Z Zhang. An integrated systemic method for supply reliability assessment of natural gas pipeline networks. Applied Energy, 2018, 209: 489–501
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apenergy.2017.10.108
10 S Rimkevicius, A Kaliatka, M Valincius, G Dundulis, R Janulionis, A Grybenas, I Zutautaite. Development of approach for reliability assessment of pipeline network systems. Applied Energy, 2012, 94: 22–33
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apenergy.2012.01.015
11 W Yu, J Zhang, K Wen, W Huang, Y Min, Y Li, X Yang, J Gong. A novel methodology to update the reliability of the corroding natural gas pipeline by introducing the effects of failure data and corrective maintenance. International Journal of Pressure Vessels and Piping, 2019, 169: 48–56
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijpvp.2018.11.001
12 K Kołowrocki, B Kwiatuszewska-Sarnecka. Reliability and risk analysis of large systems with ageing components. Reliability Engineering & System Safety, 2008, 93(12): 1821–1829
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ress.2008.03.008
13 E Zio. Reliability engineering: old problems and new challenges. Reliability Engineering & System Safety, 2009, 94(2): 125–141
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ress.2008.06.002
14 M Sukharev, A Karasevich. Reliability models for gas supply systems. Automation and Remote Control, 2010, 71(7): 1415–1424
https://doi.org/10.1134/S0005117910070155
15 D Faertes, L Saker, L Heil, F Vieira, F Risi, J Domingues, T Alvarenga, P Mussel, E Carvalho. Reliability modelling: petrobras 2010 integrated gas supply chain. In: 2010 8th International Pipeline Conference, Calgary, Alberta, Canada, 2010: 497–505
16 M Fan, J Gong, Y Wu, W Kong. The gas supply reliability analysis of natural gas pipeline network based on simplified topological structure. Journal of Renewable and Sustainable Energy, 2017, 9(4): 045503
https://doi.org/10.1063/1.4997490
17 D Heuberger, P Wittenberg, A Moser. Optimization of natural gas distribution networks considering the reliability of supply. In: PSIG Annual Meeting, Pipeline Simulation Interest Group, 2011
18 H Jensen, D Jerez. A stochastic framework for reliability and sensitivity analysis of large scale water distribution networks. Reliability Engineering & System Safety, 2018, 176: 80–92
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ress.2018.04.001
19 S Surendran, T Tanyimboh, M Tabesh. Peaking demand factor-based reliability analysis of water distribution systems. Advances in Engineering Software, 2005, 36(11–12): 789–796
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.advengsoft.2005.03.023
20 A Ostfeld, D Kogan, U Shamir. Reliability simulation of water distribution systems – single and multiquality. Urban Water, 2002, 4(1): 53–61
https://doi.org/10.1016/S1462-0758(01)00055-3
21 W Qiao, Z Yang, Z Kang, Z Pan. Short-term natural gas consumption prediction based on Volterra adaptive filter and improved whale optimization algorithm. Engineering Applications of Artificial Intelligence, 2020, 87: 103323
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.engappai.2019.103323
22 W Qiao, K Huang, M Azimi, S Han. A novel hybrid prediction model for hourly gas consumption in supply side based on improved machine learning algorithms. IEEE Access: Practical Innovations, Open Solutions, 2019
23 W Yu, K Wen, Y Li, W Huang, J. Gong A methodology to assess the gas supply capacity and gas supply reliability of a natural gas pipeline network system. In: 2018 12th International Pipeline Conference Calgary, Alberta, Canada, 2018
https://doi.org/10.1115/IPC2018-78173
24 P Praks, V Kopustinskas, M Masera. Probabilistic modelling of security of supply in gas networks and evaluation of new infrastructure. Reliability Engineering & System Safety, 2015, 144: 254–264
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ress.2015.08.005
25 O Olanrewaju, M Chaudry, M Qadrdan, J Wu, N Jenkins. Vulnerability assessment of the European natural gas supply. In: Proceedings of the Institution of Civil Engineers—Energy, 2015, 168: 5–15
https://doi.org/10.1680/ener.14.00020
26 C Vasconcelos, S Lourenço, A Gracias, D Cassiano. Network flows modeling applied to the natural gas pipeline in Brazil. Journal of Natural Gas Science and Engineering, 2013, 14: 211–224
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jngse.2013.07.001
27 T Tran, S French, R Ashman, E Kent. Impact of compressor failures on gas transmission network capability. Applied Mathematical Modelling, 2018, 55: 741–757
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apm.2017.11.034
28 F Monforti, A Szikszai. A Monte Carlo approach for assessing the adequacy of the European gas transmission system under supply crisis conditions. Energy Policy, 2010, 38(5): 2486–2498
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enpol.2009.12.043
29 A Szikszai, F Monforti. GEMFLOW: a time dependent model to assess responses to natural gas supply crises. Energy Policy, 2011, 39(9): 5129–5136
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enpol.2011.05.051
30 G Liang, M Luo, C Zhang, H Pu, Y Zheng. Analysis methods for hydraulic reliability of gas transmission pipeline networks. Natural Gas Industry, 2006, 26: 125–127
31 F Shaikh, Q Ji, Y Fan. Evaluating China’s natural gas supply security based on ecological network analysis. Journal of Cleaner Production, 2016, 139: 1196–1206
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2016.09.002
32 M Su, M Zhang, W Lu, X Chang, B Chen, G Liu, Y Hao, Y Zhang. ENA-based evaluation of energy supply security: comparison between the Chinese crude oil and natural gas supply systems. Renewable & Sustainable Energy Reviews, 2017, 72: 888–899
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2017.01.131
33 K Pambour, B Cakir Erdener, R Bolado-Lavin, G Dijkema. SAInt—a novel quasi-dynamic model for assessing security of supply in coupled gas and electricity transmission networks. Applied Energy, 2017, 203: 829–857
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apenergy.2017.05.142
34 W Yu, K Wen, Y Min, L He, W Huang, J Gong. A methodology to quantify the gas supply capacity of natural gas transmission pipeline system using reliability theory. Reliability Engineering & System Safety, 2018, 175: 128–141
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ress.2018.03.007
35 X Fu, X Zhang. Failure probability estimation of gas supply using the central moment method in an integrated energy system. Applied Energy, 2018, 219: 1–10
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apenergy.2018.03.038
36 X Fu, G Li, X Zhang, Z Qiao. Failure probability estimation of the gas supply using a data-driven model in an integrated energy system. Applied Energy, 2018, 232: 704–714
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apenergy.2018.09.097
37 E Zio, P Baraldi, E Patelli. Assessment of the availability of an offshore installation by Monte Carlo simulation. International Journal of Pressure Vessels and Piping, 2006, 83(4): 312–320
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijpvp.2006.02.010
38 E Zio. The Monte Carlo Simulation Method for System Reliability and Risk Analysis. London: Springer, 2013
39 H Liu, Y Lu, J Zhang. A comprehensive investigation of the viscoelasticity and time-dependent yielding transition of waxy crude oils. Journal of Rheology (New York, N.Y.), 2018, 62(2): 527–541
https://doi.org/10.1122/1.5002589
40 H Liu, J Zhang, Y Lu. Yielding characterization of waxy gels by energy dissipation. Rheologica Acta, 2018, 57(6-7): 473–480
https://doi.org/10.1007/s00397-018-1094-8
41 W Yu, J Gong, S Song, W Huang, Y Li, J Zhang, B Hong, Y Zhang, K Wen, X Duan. Gas supply reliability analysis of a natural gas pipeline system considering the effects of underground gas storages. Applied Energy, 2019, 252: 113418
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apenergy.2019.113418
42 M Chaudry, J Wu, N Jenkins. A sequential Monte Carlo model of the combined GB gas and electricity network. Energy Policy, 2013, 62: 473–483
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enpol.2013.08.011
43 W Qiao, K Huang, M Azimi, S Han. A novel hybrid prediction model for hourly gas consumption in supply side based on improved whale optimization algorithm and relevance vector machine. IEEE Access: Practical Innovations, Open Solutions, 2019, 7: 88218–88230
https://doi.org/10.1109/ACCESS.2019.2918156
44 W Qiao, Z Yang. Modified dolphin swarm algorithm based on chaotic maps for solving high-dimensional function optimization problems. IEEE Access: Practical Innovations, Open Solutions, 2019, 7: 110472–110486
https://doi.org/10.1109/ACCESS.2019.2931910
45 W Qiao, Z Yang. An improved dolphin swarm algorithm based on Kernel Fuzzy C-means in the application of solving the optimal problems of large-scale function. IEEE Access: Practical Innovations, Open Solutions, 2020, 8: 2073–2089
https://doi.org/10.1109/ACCESS.2019.2958456
46 W Qiao, Z Yang. Solving large-scale function optimization problem by using a new metaheuristic algorithm based on quantum dolphin swarm algorithm. IEEE Access: Practical Innovations, Open Solutions, 2019, 7: 138972–138989
https://doi.org/10.1109/ACCESS.2019.2942169
47 A C Badea, C M Rocco S, S Tarantola, R. Bolado Composite indicators for security of energy supply using ordered weighted averaging. Reliability Engineering & System Safety, 2011, 96(6): 651–662
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ress.2010.12.025
48 W Qiao, Z Yang. Forecast the electricity price of US using a wavelet transform-based hybrid model. Energy, 2020, 193: 116704
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.energy.2019.116704
49 G Zhou, H Moayedi, L Foong. Teaching–learning-based metaheuri-stic scheme for modifying neural computing in appraising energy performance of building. Engineering with Computers, 2020, online, doi:10.1007/s00366-020-00981-5
https://doi.org/10.1007/s00366-020-00981-5
50 W Qiao, F Bing, Y Zhang. Differential scanning calorimetry and electrochemical tests for the analysis of delamination of 3PE coatings. International Journal of Electrochemical Science, 2019, 14: 7389–7400
51 H Cabalu. Indicators of security of natural gas supply in Asia. Energy Policy, 2010, 38(1): 218–225
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enpol.2009.09.008
[1] Yueshe WANG, Xunwei DONG, Jinjia WEI, Hui JIN. Numerical simulation of the heat flux distribution in a solar cavity receiver[J]. Front Energ, 2011, 5(1): 98-103.
[2] Yong SHUAI, Xinlin XIA, Heping TAN. Numerical simulation and experiment research of radiation performance in a dish solar collector system[J]. Front Energ Power Eng Chin, 2010, 4(4): 488-495.
[3] Ganglin YU , Kan WANG , . Development of MCBurn and its application in the analysis of SCWR physical characteristics[J]. Front. Energy, 2009, 3(3): 348-352.
[4] DUAN Wei. Probability strength design of steam turbine blade and sensitivity analysis with respect to random parameters based on response surface method[J]. Front. Energy, 2008, 2(1): 107-115.
Viewed
Full text


Abstract

Cited
  Shared   
  Discussed