适用于超临界CO2管道瞬态过程模拟的软件评价

1.中国石油大学(华东)储运与建筑工程学院·山东省油气储运安全重点实验室;2.国家管网集团科学技术研究总院分公司;3.中国石油工程建设有限公司西南分公司

CO2管道;瞬态过程;OLGA;LedaFlow;泄漏;投产;适应性评价

Adaptability evaluation of the software for transient process simulation of supercritical CO2 pipelines
MA Xinyuan1,OUYANG Xin2,ZHU Jianlu1,CHEN Junwen3,LIU Luoqian2,YANG Teng1,SONG Guangchun1

1.College of Pipeline and Civil Engineering, China University of Petroleum (East China)//Shandong Key Laboratory of Oil & Gas Storage and Transportation Safety; 2.PipeChina Institute of Science and Technology; 3.Southwest Branch of China Petroleum Engineering & Construction Corporation

CO2 pipeline, transient process, OLGA, LedaFlow, leakage, commissioning, adaptability evaluation

DOI: 10.6047/j.issn.1000-8241.2024.05.012

备注

【目的】CO2管道运行过程中涉及泄漏、投产等瞬态过程,由于CO2具有特殊的物性和相特性,使得CO2管道瞬态过程模拟难度较大,目前尚缺乏CO2管道瞬态过程数值模拟软件的适应性评价。【方法】选取OLGA与LedaFlow两款主流瞬态模拟软件建立CO2瞬态泄漏数值仿真模型,并利用自行搭建的DN200高压CO2管道泄漏实验装置,开展不同相态CO2瞬态泄漏实验,从压力变化、温度变化、相特性等多个角度评价软件的适应性;以中国某长输CO2管道为例,将该CO2管道瞬态投产现场数据与软件模拟结果进行对比,从工程角度验证两款软件的适应性。【结果】通过对比泄漏实验结果与软件模拟结果发现,对于两个设定的泄漏工况,OLGA软件泄漏压力计算的平均误差分别为15.3%、14.7%,而LedaFlow软件则为16.7%、18.0%,故OLGA软件与LedaFlow软件压力求解准确度相近。OLGA、LedaFlow软件分别存在低估、高估泄漏过程管内最低温度的情况,OLGA软件预测两个测点处最低温度的平均相对误差分别为21.2%、24.5%,而LedaFlow软件平均相对误差分别为13.1%、11.1%。对于某CO2管道投产过程中的压力、温度,OLGA软件模拟的结果平均相对误差分别为1.2%、6.1%,而LedaFlow软件则分别为1.3%、5.2%,可见两款软件模拟结果与现场数据均较为接近。【结论】在CO2管道泄漏过程中,OLGA软件低估泄漏过程最低温度可保证管道低温安全性,且OLGA软件更适用于CO2泄漏过程中管内压力、温度及相特性的预测;在CO2管道投产过程中,OLGA、LedaFlow两款软件均适用于管内的压力、温度模拟研究。(图9表4,参[31]
[Objective] Transient processes like leakage and commissioning in CO2 pipeline operation pose simulation challenges due to the unique physical properties and phase behavior of CO2. Currently, there is a deficiency in adaptability evaluation of numerical simulation software for CO2 pipeline transient processes. [Methods] This study utilized two mainstream transient simulation software, OLGA and LedaFlow, to establish a numerical simulation model for transient CO2 leakage. Testing was conducted on a self-built experimental setup for DN200 high-pressure CO2 pipeline leakage across different phases, with software adaptability evaluated in terms of pressure, temperature and phase behavior. Furthermore, the adaptability of these software types was verified through a comparison of the simulation results with field data from transient commissioning of a long-distance CO2 pipeline in China. [Results] The comparison of the results from leakage test and software simulations revealed that under two specified leakage conditions, OLGA exhibited average pressure calculation errors of 15.3% and 14.7%, whereas LedaFlow exhibited errors of 16.7% and 18.0%. Consequently, the pressure calculation accuracy of OLGA closely aligns with that of LedaFlow. OLGA underestimated the lowest temperature in the pipe during leakage, with average relative errors of 21.2% and 24.5% at the two measuring points. In contrast, LedaFlow overestimated the lowest temperature with average relative errors of 13.1% and 11.1% at the two measuring points. During the commissioning of a CO2 pipeline, OLGA exhibited average relative errors of 1.2% for pressure and 6.1% for temperature, whereas LedaFlow exhibited errors of 1.3% and 5.2% for the same parameters. The simulation results from both software packages closely align with the field data. [Conclusion] In conclusion, in the process of CO2 pipeline leakage, OLGA underestimates the lowest temperature during the leakage process, which can enhance the low-temperature safety of the pipeline. OLGA is better suited for predicting pressure, temperature and phase behavior during CO2 leakage. Both OLGA and LedaFlow are suitable for simulation studies on pressure and temperature in CO2 pipelines during commissioning. (9 Figures, 4 Tables, 31 References)
·