*Corresponding author

1 Copyright 2012 by ASME

A DYNAMIC SIMULATION STUDY OF OVERPRESSURE FOR PIGGING PROCESS

Tao Deng, Jing Gong*
National Engineering Laboratory, China
University of Petroleum-Beijing, Beijing
102249, China

XiaoPing LI
National Engineering Laboratory, China
University of Petroleum-Beijing, Beijing
102249, China

Yu Zhang
South East Asia Pipeline Company Limited,
China National Petroleum Corporation,
Beijing 100028, China



Yanan Yao ,Qing Quan
National Engineering Laboratory, China
University of Petroleum-Beijing, Beijing
102249, China
ABSTRACT
With the method of characteristic (MOC)
[1]
and analysis
for the dynamic state of trapped air, this study could be
performed on the basic theory of gas-liquid two phase unsteady
flow
[2]
, and cavitation and bubble dynamics
[3]
, to obtain the
overpressure value during pigging. For a long slope pipeline, a
severe rupture occurred in the vicinity of a drainage pipe
during a segmental pigging process. In contrast to earlier
accidents induced by hydraulic transients, the unique
combination of topography and geometry of the drainage pipe
was a key factor. Generally, a pipeline profile complexity has a
significant effect on both the liquid-fill flow behavior and the
state of trapped air, both of which are factors contributing to
cavitation and water hammer. Pigging is a common
technological process that has been studied for many years, but
has rarely been analyzed by hydraulic transient methods with
consideration for pig motion in a pipeline. From local data, it
is shown that transient pig motion has a huge influence on
operating conditions, especially outlet pressure. The purpose of
this study was to identify the damage mechanism. Following
extensive study, it was determined that cavitation and vapor
cavity collapse cause instantaneous overpressure due to the
interaction of topography, geometry of the drainage pipe, and
pig motion . It would be rather difficult to simulate the pig
motion by a conventional MOC and the simple water hammer
equation for the collapse of large vapor cavities at a high point.
Therefore, a new approach which describes the moving
boundary with a dual-grid model has been implemented, along
with an explicit solution procedure.
KEY WORDS: pigging cavitation overpressure
1. INTRODUCTION
Water pressure testing for tightness and strength is a
necessary step for long distance and large cross-section oil and
gas pipelines
[4][5]
to ensure pipeline safety. The purpose of
segmentation during pressure testing is to maintain pipeline
pressure within safe operation range by controlling maximum
altitude difference. For environmental protection, discharge
water should conform to local drainage standards. In reality,
there are often minor leaks during testing, but severe damages
seldom occur. However, for complex terrain, the current
standards cannot ensure the safety of pipeline during water
pressure testing.
Slack line flow sections can appear in a long slope
pipeline
[6]
. At a local high elevation, a turnover point may occur
and slack line flow may appear in the downhill segment due to
the increase in local velocity. When liquid column separation
occurs, the pressure would largely increase due to vapor cavity
collapse. Meanwhile, bubbles produce and eventually collapse
downstream in very short time
[7]
.

2. A BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF THE ACCIDENT
In July 2010, a severe rupture occurred in a gas pipeline in
central China after water pressure testing had been carried out
and the water had been in a state of rest for a period of time. As
Figure1, a couple of XHP1070 air compressors (rated operating
pressure 2.2MPa, air displacement of 30m
3
/min) and a DN150
valve were installed at point 1 and point 6 respectively. Initially,
the couple of air compressors started to work and the pig was
pushed forward. At the same time, water was discharged by a
159mm diameter drainage tube. After nearly 20 hours, an
Proceedings of the 2012 9th International Pipeline Conference
IPC2012
September 24-28, 2012, Calgary, Alberta, Canada
IPC2012-90354

2 Copyright 2012 by ASME
eruption of the mixture of water and gas occurred at the outlet
of the pipeline. The fracture was found at the last piece of steel
tube shown as point 6. As shown, point 4 is the high elevation
point and point 5 is low elevation point. It was determined from
Barlow's equation that instantaneous pressure for the damage
should be over 20.83MPa. However, rated operating pressure of
the air compressors was 2.2MPa, so the possibility that
conventional overpressure caused the accident was
eliminated
[8]
.

Figure 1. The Pipeline Profile

3. GOVERNING EQUATION
To simulate the pigging process, the pipeline is divided
into two sections containing gas and liquid respectively. The
upstream section is from the inlet to the pig, and the
downstream section is from the pig to the outlet of the pipeline.
Then, equations of mass, momentum, state for both fluids and
dynamic motion of the pig are solved simultaneously
[9]
. The
flow is considered to be isothermal.

3.1 Gas equations
3.1.1 Equation of state
It is assumed that the gas is ideal and the ideal gas law can
be selected as the equation of state.
RT p =

(1)

3.1.2 Equation of mass
For a fixed cross-sectional area, the mass conservation
equation can be written as:
0 =
c
c
+
c
c
x
V
t

(2)

3.1.3 Equation of momentum
The momentum conservation equation can be expressed
as:
2
sin
2
V V p V
V g
t x x D

u
c c c | |
+ + =
|
c c c
\ .

(3)

3.1.4 Method of solution
Flow dynamics equations are solved by method of
characteristics (MOC). It is an explicit method and a powerful
tool to analyze hydraulic transients in pipeline flow. With the
method of characteristics (MOC), the partial differential
equations can be converted into ordinary differential equations.
The method of characteristics is a technique that takes
advantage of the known physical information at each point of
the regular rectangular grid. Therefore, the results of physical
characteristics can be quickly calculated in every time step.
According to thermodynamics, acoustic speed of fluid for
adiabatic is found from the equation
[10]
:
2
s
s
p
a
|
|
.
|

\
|
c
c
=

(4)
s
p

| | c
|
c
\ .
can be represented as:
T
v
p
s
p c
c
p
|
|
.
|

\
|
c
c
=
|
|
.
|

\
|
c
c

1
(5)
For convenient calculation, energy conservation equations
are neglected and the equations above are solved together. We
therefore write:
2
1
0
v
s
p
c p p V
L V a
t x c x

c c c
= + + =
c c c
(6)
2
2
1
sin 0
2
V V p V
L V g
t x x D

c c c | |
= + + + + =
|
c c c
\ .
(7)
Where
1
L and
2
L are just labels for the equations,
p is pressure of fluid, t is time,

is density of fluid,
p
c is
specific heat at constant pressure,
v
c
is specific heat at constant
volume, x is axial coordinate, V is speed of fluid, is
friction factor, g is gravitational acceleration,
D
is inner
diameter of pipeline, u is angle between axis and horizontal
direction.
By method of characteristics (MOC), we can get the
following equations as illustrated in Figure 2:
C
+
1 | |
sin 0
2
s
s
dx
a
dt
V V
dV dp g dt dt
a D
o

u
o

= +

+ + + =

(8)

C

1 | |
sin 0
2
s
s
dx
a
dt
V V
dV dp g dt dt
a D
o

u
o

+ + =

(9)
Where
p
v
c
c
= o

(10)

3 Copyright 2012 by ASME

Figure 2 x-t two dimensions

3.2 Liquid equations
3.2.1 Equation of mass
For a fixed cross-sectional area,, the mass conservation
equation can be written as:
0
2
=
c
c
|
|
.
|

\
|
+
c
c
+
c
c
x
Q
gA
a
x
H
V
t
H

(11)

3.2.2 Equation of momentum
The momentum conservation equation can be expressed
as:
0
1 1
= +
c
c
+ |
.
|

\
|
c
c
+
c
c m
Q fQ
x
H
x
Q
V
t
Q
gA

(12)

3.2.3 Friction force
Friction force between the fluid and the tube wall can be
calculated from friction factors given by the Leybinzong
formula for turbulent flow.
5
0.0246
m
m
f
D
v

=

(13)
Where
A
is cross-section area of pipeline, m is the index
number and is equal to 0.25,
H
is water head of fluid, a is
acoustic speed of fluid, Q is volume rate of fluid, f is friction
factor, v is kinematic viscosity of water.

3.2.4 Method of solution
Flow dynamics equations are solved by the method of
characteristics (MOC)
[11]
. Thus, we have the equations for
hydraulic transient of batch transport of pipeline flow with
unknown variables Qand H as flows:
C
+

= + +
+ =

0
1
adt Q fQ dH dQ
gA
a
a V
dt
dx
m

(14)

C

= +
=

0
1
adt Q fQ dH dQ
gA
a
a V
dt
dx
m

(15)

3.2.5 Boundary conditions
Boundaries include the inlet of pipeline, the outlet of
pipeline, the tail of the pig and nose of the pig. In order to solve
the flow dynamic equations, boundaries conditions must be
given. Boundaries at the pipeline inlet and outlet are constant
flow rate and constant pressure, respectively. In addition, it is
assumed that pressure and flow rate at the tail of the pig are the
same as they are in the upstream fluid, close to the pig. This
assumption is also applied between the nose of the pig and the
downstream fluid. Dynamic behavior of the pig is taken into
account to solve the flow dynamics equations.

3.2.6 Pig motion in pipeline
The behavior of the pig in the pipeline is determined by a
balance of forces acting on the pig as shown in Figure 3. The
pig will move forward if the drag force is less than the driving
force, but will stop when the drag force is dominant
1, 2,0
1
sin
i s
m dV
P P P m g
A A dt
| = + A + +

(16)

WhereV ,
m
,
1,i
P
,
2,0
P
and | are the pig velocity, pig
mass, the pressure on the upstream, downstream faces of the pig
and angle between axis and horizontal direction. Term
s
P A

represents the axial contact force between the pig and the pipe
wall, acting in opposition to the pig motion, in the direction of
the pig axis. It is obtained from the contact force equation.

Figure 3 Forces Acting on the Pig

3.2.7 Initial conditions
Static state can be used for the initial conditions. In other
words, the flow rate is 0m
3
/s and pressure is equal to the
hydrostatic head at each point of pipeline.

3.2.8 Algorithm
Based on the analysis, the following algorithm
[12]
may be
drawn for the pigging process:
(1)Since the pig moves in the pipe and the fluids in the two
sections are different, it is useful to employ a dual-grid system
in which the equations of each fluid are solved at each grid
system depending on the pig position as shown in Figure 4:
(2) Using the outlet boundary condition, the liquid
dynamic equations are solved from the pipe outlet to the pig
nose, to obtain the downstream pressure and flow rate close to
pig noise.

4 Copyright 2012 by ASME
(3)Pig motion equations and gas dynamic equations are
used to obtain the pig velocity.
(4) Assuming constant flow at the pipeline inlet, the gas
dynamic equations are solved from the pig tail to the inlet, to
obtain the upstream pressure and flow rate close to the pig tail.

Figure 4 Computational Grid System

4. NUMERICAL RESULTS
A mathematical model has been formulated to simulate the
pigging process, based on the analysis above. Meanwhile, these
results were obtained from simulating the process by our own
program.
According to the local data, constant flow rate at the inlet
is 1.0 m
3
/s (under the standard state) and constant pressure at
outlet is equal to atmospheric pressure. Temperature was
assumed to be 20 to obtain various fluid properties. Since
pig velocity should be calculated from the system of equations,
pigging flow rate was not set to control the pig velocity. The
results are discussed in the paragraphs below. Figure5 shows the
pig velocity versus time during pigging. Figures6 shows
pressure versus time at the high elevation point. Figures7 shows
pressure versus time at the burst point.
Based on these results, five stages of the pigging process
are defined as follows, according to the position of the pig
during the process:
(1) The pig initial operation stage
Open the valve near the pipeline outlet and start the air
compressors; from initiation until the flow stabilizes is defined
as the first stage. Figure5 shows that the pig, which is initially at
rest, starts moving as air is injected into the in pipeline.
(2) The pig flat-segment operation stage
From 0 to 7 hours, the pig moves between point 1 and
point 2. For this stage, the injection gas flow rate is
approximately stable because flat terrain has little effect on the
motion of pig, as shown in Figure 6. At constant gas flow, the
motion of pig is quick and stable until the pig reaches the gully.
Meanwhile, however, cavitation may appear at the high
elevation point because the pressure is below the saturated
vapor pressure, as shown in Figure 6.
(3)The pig gully-segment operation stage
During stage 3, the pig moves from profile point 2 to point
4 (from 7.0 to 18.5 hours) and the pig motion is very slow.
When the pig passes the high elevation point, the pressure is as
much as 1.01MPa as shown in Figure 6. Then, as the gas
undergoes expansion, the pressure at point 4 is decreasing. The
pig movement includes two steps during this stage. Static
pressure resulting from the height deviation downstream is main
drag force that would make the pig stop. Firstly, the pig stops
and pressure upstream starts to increase until the differential
pressure across the pig is sufficient to overcome the drag force.
Secondly, as the pig starts to move with abrupt acceleration,
there is a drop in the pressure upstream because of the
expansion of gas and eventually the pig velocity decrease.
When the drag force is dominant again, the pig will stop. As
explained above, the movement would occur periodically.
(4) The pig downhill-segment operation stage
From 18.5 to 19.5 hours, the fourth stage describes the
motion of the pig from point 4 to point 5. Since there is a
negative pressure downstream resulting from cavitation at the
high elevation point, the pig is at high speed and the peak
velocity is as high as 35m/s. Because of a great upstream and
downstream differential pressure, the pig will accelerate over a
period of time. Then, the pig compresses the gas downstream at
high speed as shown in Figure 5.
(5) The pig near outlet-segment operation and
overpressure stage
The gravity of water results in the holdup of some water
from low elevation point to the pipeline outlet at the bottom of
pipe. When the pig reaches at the end of the pipe, some amount
of the gas downstream will undergo extrusion process and
eventually is dispersed into water. Consequently, a serious
collision occurs and it leads to instantaneous overpressure
reaching 30.5MPa and the velocity increasing to 27.9m/s as
shown in Figure 5 and Figure 7.

Figure 5. Pig Velocity Versus Time During Pigging



5 Copyright 2012 by ASME

Figure 6. Pressure Versus Time at Point 4

Figure 7. Pressure Versus Time at the Burst Point

5. CONCLUSIONS
Based on the analytical investigations and simulation
results presented in this paper, the following conclusions may
be drawn.
(1)This aggressive terrain favors the emergence of
instantaneous overpressure accidents. In the process, there
would be in negative pressure or under saturated vapor
pressure. When the air is dissolved in the water, and then is
released, cavitation may occur at the high elevation point of the
pipeline, and there would be a large amount of air or water
vapor present. The small cross-section area of the drainage pipe
and the landform at the end of pipeline are favorable for gas
aggregation.
(2)The essential element present in the instantaneous
overpressure accident was gas-liquid coexistent. According to
related articles, an eruption of the mixture of water and gas
appeared and loud noises were made at the end.
(3)As discussed, the root cause of the damage may be
instantaneous overpressure caused by vapor cavity collapse,
rather than insufficient quality of the drainage tube. The results
show maximum instantaneous pressures of up to 30.5 MPa,
which far exceeds the critical value which could cause fracture
of the tube.

6. ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
The authors thank the financial support from the Key
National Science and Technology Specific Project
(2011ZX05026-004-03), the National Natural Science
Foundation of China (51104167) and the China National and
the China National Petroleum Corporation (CNPC) Innovation
Foundation (2010D-5006-0604).
REFERENCES
[1] E.Benjamin Wylie, Victor L. Streeter, and Lisheng SuoJones,
1993, Fluid Transients in Systems, PRFNTICE HALL.
Enalewood Cliffs. NJ 07632, Chap. 3.
[2] Ovdia Shoham,2006, Mechanistic Modeling of Gas-Liquid
Two-Phase Flow in Pipes, Society of Petroleum Engineers.
[3] Christopher Earls Brennen, Cavitation and Bubble
Dynamics,1995, Oxford University Press, Chap. 2,3.
[4] ZhiQian Huang, ZhiQian Huang Anthology(1)[M], Shaani
scientific and Technological Press,2006:123-125.
[5] XiZhang Liang, An Analysis of Pressure Test on the Gas
Transmission Pipeline[J], Natural Gas and Oil, 2003,21(4):1-
6.
[6] Gong Jing, Yan Dafan,Dec.1996, The Analysis of Transient
for Slack Line Flow in a Long Slope Pipeline, Journal of
FuShun Petroleum Institute Vol.16,No.4.
[7] Gong Jing, Yan Dafan, Dec.1995, Analysis of Flow
Characteristics for Slack Line Flow in a Long Slope Pipeline,
Journal of the University of Petroleum, China, Vol.19,No.6
[8] JinHeng Luo,2011, An analysis of the Problems of
Fracture at New Great Drop Line Pipe, Oil & Gas Storage and
Transportation, 1000-8241(2011)06-0411-04
[9] F. Esmaeilzadeh, D. Mowla,2006, Modeling of Pig
Operations in Natural Gas and Liquid pipeline, SPE 102049
[10] Shuli Wang, Huijun Zhao,2005, The Design and
Management of Gas Pipelines, Chemical Industry
Press,2005.8,Chap.9.
[11] JiaNing Pu, Analysis and Controlling of water hammer of
pipeline, China Machine Press,Chap.4.
[12] S.M. Hosseinalipour, A. Zarif Khalili, and A.Salimi,
Dec.2007, Numerical Simulation of Pig Motion through Gas
Pipelines, 16th Australasian Fluid Mechanics Conference.