Reliability assessment model of natural gas pipeline line system under multiple failure modes

doi:10.16265/j.cnki.issn1003-3033.2025.09.0510

Abstract

Abstract:

In order to ensure the safe operation of gas pipeline networks and to enable the overall reliability assessment of pipeline systems, a three-level reliability evaluation model "component-segment-pipeline network" was proposed for natural gas pipeline networks. First, the state equations of steel pipe and weld units under different failure modes were established by analyzing the composition of the pipe network line system. Combined with the Monte Carlo algorithm, the failure probability under different failure modes was calculated. Based on fault tree analysis and the minimal cut set theory, a "component-segment" level reliability model was developed, enabling the hierarchical reliability evaluation from components to pipeline segments. Next, the GO method was applied to analyze the topological structure of the pipeline network, and a structural reliability model at "segment-pipeline networ" level was established. The structural reliability of the entire pipeline network was calculated and weak segments in terms of reliability were identified rapidly. Finally, a case study was conducted to verify the accuracy and applicability of the proposed model. The results show that the reliability of pipeline network systems is positively correlated with pipe material strength and wall thickness, and negatively correlated with the diameter-to-thickness ratio and internal pressure. Compared to high-grade pipelines represented by X80, networks composed of lower-grade pipelines exhibit higher sensitivity to external factors, with their reliability being more significantly affected by external disturbances.

Key words: failure mode, pipe network line system, reliability assessment, pipeline segment reliability, graphical and operational (GO) method

CLC Number:

X937

XU Houjia, SHUAI Jian, LI Yuntao, YAN Xu, LI Xingtao, SUN Bingcai. Reliability assessment model of natural gas pipeline line system under multiple failure modes[J]. China Safety Science Journal, 2025, 35(9): 176-184.

Figures/Tables 13

Fig.1

Fig.2

Table 1

Reliability operations for each type of operation

类型	对象	可靠度	失效概率	失效率	维修率
类型1	操作符参数Q	$R Q (1) = 1$	$P Q (2) = 0$	$λ Q = 0$	$μ Q = ∞$
	输入信号参数W	$R W 1$	$P W 2$	$λ W$	$μ W$
	输出信号参数T	$R T (1) = R W 1$	$P T (2) = P W 2$	$λ T = λ W$	$μ T = λ T R T (1) / P T 2$
类型2	操作符参数Q	$R Q (1) = 1$	$P Q (2) = 0$	$λ Q = 0$	$μ Q = ∞$
	输入信号参数W	$R W 1 1 、 R W 2 1 、$ …	$P W 1 2 、 P W 2 2 、$ …	$λ W 1 、 λ W 2 、$ …	$μ W 1 、 μ W 2 、$ …
	输出信号参数T	R_T(1)=1-P_T(2)	$P T (2) = ∏ i = 1 n P W i 2$	$λ T = ∑ i = 1 n μ W i$	$μ T = λ T R T (1) / P T 2$
类型5	操作符参数Q	$R Q (1) = 1$	$P Q (2) = 0$	$λ Q = 0$	$μ Q = ∞$
类型5	输出信号参数T	$R T (1) = R Q 1$	$P T (2) = 0$	$λ T = 0$	$μ T = ∞$

Table 1

Table 2

Fig.3

Table 3

Table 4

Fig.4

Table 5

Table 6

Fig.5

Fig.6

Fig.7

References 23

[1]	宫运华, 张喆, 范志炜. 油气管道事故原因分类模型及其社会网络分析[J]. 中国安全科学学报, 2024, 34(9):34-40.
	GONG Yunhua, ZHANG Zhe, FAN Zhiwei. Classification model of oil and gas pipeline accidents causes and its social network analysis[J]. China Safety Science Journal, 2024, 34(9):34-40. doi: 10.16265/j.cnki.issn1003-3033.2024.09.1353
[2]	王海燕, 任帅, 孙东旭. 含腐蚀缺陷油气管道剩余强度的评价方法对比[J]. 腐蚀与防护, 2025, 46(2):80-88,94.
	WANG Haiyan, REN Shuai, SUN Dongxu. Comparison of evaluation methods for residual strength of oil and gas pipeline with corrosion defects[J]. Corrosion and Protection, 2025, 46(2):80-88,94.
[3]	骆正山, 毕傲睿. 腐蚀管道寿命可靠性的步降应力加速试验研究[J]. 中国安全科学学报, 2017, 27(1):59-64. doi: 10.16265/j.cnki.issn1003-3033.2017.01.011
	LUO Zhengshan, BI Aorui. Research on reliability of corroded pipelines based on step-down-stress accelerated life testing[J]. China Safety Science Journal, 2017, 27(1):59-64. doi: 10.16265/j.cnki.issn1003-3033.2017.01.011
[4]	任伟, 帅健. 管道环焊缝可靠性的参数统计分布研究[J]. 石油科学通报, 2016, 1(3):484-492.
	REN Wei, SHUAI Jian. Research into the statistical distribution of reliability parameters for girth welds on pipelines[J]. Petroleum Science Bulletin, 2016, 1(3):484-492.
[5]	王旭, 帅健, 张圣柱, 等. 基于应变的高钢级管道环焊接头失效评定方法[J]. 天然气工业, 2023, 43(2):121-130.
	WANG Xu, SHUAI Jian, ZHANG Shengzhu, et al. A strain based failure assessment method for girth welded joints in high grade steel line pipes[J]. Natural Gas Industry, 2023, 43(2):121-130.
[6]	ABYANI M, BAHAARI M. A new approach for finite element based reliability evaluation of offshore corroded pipelines[J]. International Journal of Pressure Vessels and Piping, 2021,193: DOI: 10.1016/J.IJPVP.2021.104449.
[7]	ABDELMOETY K, KAINAT M, YOOSEF-GHODSI N, et al. Strain-based reliability analysis of dented pipelines using a response surface method[J]. Journal of Pipeline Science and Engineering, 2022, 2(1):29-38.
[8]	王东营, 陈小平, 刘权, 等. 基于改进的云模型-FMEA的油气管道风险排序[J]. 中国安全科学学报, 2024, 34(5):61-68. doi: 10.16265/j.cnki.issn1003-3033.2024.05.1069
	WANG Dongying, CHEN Xiaoping, LlU Quan, et al. Risk ranking of oil and gas pipeline based on improved cloud model-FMEA[J]. China Safety Science Journal, 2024, 34(5):61-68. doi: 10.16265/j.cnki.issn1003-3033.2024.05.1069
[9]	CALEYO F, VALOR A, ALFONSO L, et al. Bayesian analysis of external corrosion data of non-piggable underground pipelines[J]. Corrosion Science, 2015, 90: 33-45.
[10]	LEIRA B, NAESS A, NAESS O. Reliability analysis of corroding pipelines by enhanced Monte Carlo simulation[J]. International Journal of Pressure Vessels and Piping, 2016,144:11-17.
[11]	LIU Aihua, CHEN Ke, HUANG Xiaofei, et al. Dynamic risk assessment model of buried gas pipelines based on system dynamics[J]. Reliability Engineering & System Safety, 2021, 208: DOI: 10.1016/J.RESS.2020.107326.
[12]	AULIA T, SRIRAMULA S. Dynamic reliability model for subsea pipeline risk assessment due to third-party interference[J]. Journal of Pipeline Science and Engineering, 2021, 1(3): 277-289.
[13]	ZHENG Qian, ABDELMOETY K, LI Yong, et al. Reliability analysis of intact and defected pipes for internal pressure related limit states specified in CSA Z622:19[J]. International Journal of Pressure Vessels and Piping, 2021,192: DOI:10.1016/J.IJPVP.2021.104411.
[14]	韩冰, 季蓓蕾, 付强, 等. 含体积型缺陷集输管道剩余强度评价方法适用性[J]. 腐蚀与防护, 2025, 46(3):91-98.
	HAN Bing, JI Beilei, FU Qiang, et al. Applicability of residual strength evaluation method for gathering and transportation pipelines with volume defects[J]. Corrosion and Protection, 2025, 46(3):91-98.
[15]	ASME B31G-2009, Manual for determining the remaining strength of corroded pipelines[S].
[16]	BS 7910-2019, Guide to methods for assessing the acceptability of flaws in metallic structures[S].
[17]	张强, 杨玉锋, 郑洪龙, 等. 第三方挖掘作用下管道可靠性评估研究[J]. 中国安全生产科学技术, 2017, 13(2):143-147.
	ZHANG Qiang, YANG Yufeng, ZHENG Honglong, et al. Study on reliability evaluation of pipeline under the effect of third-party excavation[J]. China Safety Science Journal, 2017, 13(2):143-147.
[18]	WALODDI W. A statistical distribution function of wide applicability[J]. Journal of Applied Mechanics. 1951,18: 293-297.
[19]	EZMAREH Z, YARI G. Statistical inference of stress-strength reliability of gompertz distribution under type II censoring. advances in mathematical physics[J]. Advances in Mathematical Physics, 2022: DOI:10.1155/2022/2129677.
[20]	温轶群, 段富海. 一种基于GO法的多态反馈系统选择性维修模型[J]. 大连理工大学学报, 2023, 63(5):501-508.
	WEN Yiqun, DUAN Fuhai. A selective maintenance model for polymorphic feedback system based on GO methodology[J]. Journal of Dalian University of Technology, 2023, 63(5):501-508.
[21]	NAZEMI N, DAS S. Behavior of X60 line pipe subjected to axial and lateral deformations[J]. Journal of Pressure Vessel Technology, 2010, 132(3): DOI:10.1115/1.4001426.
[22]	杨玉锋, 葛新东, 郑洪龙, 等. 第三方损坏对管道可靠性的影响规律[J]. 油气储运, 2017, 36(8):903-909.
	YANG Yufeng, GE Xindong, ZHENG Honglong, et al. Influence laws of third party damage on pipeline reliability[J]. Oil and Gas Storage and Transportation, 2017, 36(8):903-909.
[23]	郭庆, 翟红波, 刘永寿. 考虑动态腐蚀的输流管道时变共振可靠性及灵敏度分析[J]. 兵器装备工程学报, 2024, 45(1):166-172, 216.
	GUO Qing, ZHAI Hongbo, LIU Yongshou. Time-variant resonance reliability and sensitivity analysis of pipes conveying fluid considering dynamic corrosion[J]. Journal of Ordnance Equipment Engineering, 2024, 45(1):166-172, 216.

管线名称	输气量/ (10⁸ m³·a^-1)	设计压力/ MPa	管径/ mm	钢级
1	36	6.4	660	X60
2	170	10.0	1 016	X70
3	150	10.0	1 016	X70

名称	分布类型	均值/mm	标准差/mm
腐蚀长度	对数正态分布	24	16.8
腐蚀深度	对数正态分布	1.534 4	0.308 8
裂纹长度	正态分布	39	8.3
裂纹深度	正态分布	1.4	0.28

单元	失效模式	可靠度
钢管单元	穿孔泄漏	1
	含缺陷钢管破裂	0.999 999
	第三方挖掘破坏	0.999 970
焊缝单元	环焊缝拉伸断裂	0.999 999

输气气流	R_T(1)	P_T(2)
1	1	0
2	0.998 113 000	0.001 887 00
3	0.994 779 000	0.005 221 00
4	0.999 826 000	0.000 174 00
5	0.999 999 091	0.000 000 91
6	0.999 925 091	0.000 074 91
7	0.999 925 091	0.000 074 91
8	0.999 999 994	0.000 000 01
9	0.994 749 994	0.005 250 01
10	0.999 893 994	0.000 106 01
11	0.999 999 443	0.000 000 56
12	0.999 911 443	0.000 088 56
13	0.999 965 443	0.000 034 56
14	0.999 999 996	0.000 000 00
15	0.999 565 996	0.000 434 00
16	0.999 999 181	0.000 000 82

系统失效最小割集	割集	失效概率	份额/%
B₂O₂	管段S1—S10、S27—S29失效	8.189 6×10^-7	82.907 2
B₂C₂V₂	管段S1—S10、S12—S13、S17—S18失效	1.714 3×10^-9	0.173 5
B₂E₂F₂	管段S1—S10、S14、S19失效	2.750 9×10^-11	0.002 8
B₂I₂J₂	管段S1—S10、S15、S20失效	1.050 1×10^-9	0.106 3
B₂L₂H₂	管段S1—S10、S16、S21失效	1.660 5×10^-7	16.810 2