4.6 Article

On steady state modelling for optimization of natural gas pipeline networks

Journal

CHEMICAL ENGINEERING SCIENCE
Volume 255, Issue -, Pages -

Publisher

PERGAMON-ELSEVIER SCIENCE LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.ces.2022.117636

Keywords

Fuel cost minimization problem; FCMP; Natural gas transportation; Steady-state modelling; Natural gas pipeline networks

Funding

  1. Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada (NSERC) through Discovery Grant [RGPIN-2019-05217]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

This paper evaluates the validity of commonly used simplifications and assumptions in the research on fuel cost minimization problem (FCMP) quantitatively. The study finds significant prediction error in simpler models compared to a rigorous pipeline model. The consideration of temperature variation and rigorous calculation of critical physical quantities are found to be crucial for a more accurate model that better represents reality. The research provides important insights for improving the accuracy of FCMP models.
Current approaches to the fuel cost minimization problem (FCMP) emphasize the tractability of the pipeline model but compromise its validity. In this paper, the model simplifications and assumptions commonly used in the FCMP research are assessed quantitatively. Firstly, a rigorous pipeline model is developed. Secondly, outputs from the rigorous model are compared to outputs from simpler models used in the literature. It is found that there is a significant prediction error in these simpler models. The pipeline model is also extended to address a pipeline network, for which the mixing effect at the pipeline junctions is addressed. Lastly, a FCMP problem is solved for a pipeline network, and the obtained mass flow rates are used to assess the performance of different models. It is found that consideration of temperature variation and rigorous calculation of critical physical quantities are crucial for a more accurate model that better represents reality.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.6
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available