4.5 Article

Studies on the impact of fluid flow on the microbial corrosion behavior of product oil pipelines

期刊

JOURNAL OF PETROLEUM SCIENCE AND ENGINEERING
卷 146, 期 -, 页码 803-812

出版社

ELSEVIER SCIENCE BV
DOI: 10.1016/j.petrol.2016.07.035

关键词

Microbial corrosion behavior; Product oil pipelines; Flow velocity; Scouring experiment; SEM; XRD

资金

  1. National Natural Science Foundation of China [51474183]
  2. State Key Laboratory of Oil and Gas Reservoir Geology and Exploitation

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The effect of fluid flow on the microbial corrosion behavior of API 5L X60 pipeline steel is investigated in product oil pipelines. It is confirmed that there is a small amount of trapped water accumulated at low elevation sections along the pipelines. The trapped water and dissolved oxygen (DO) in pipelines promote the growth of both aerobic and anaerobic bacteria, causing microbiologically influenced corrosion (MIC). MIC has been detected not only in static fluid systems, but also in flow systems. In product oil pipelines, MIC is conventionally attributed to three species of bacteria namely sulfate-reducing bacteria (SRB), iron oxidizing bacteria (IOB) and total general bacteria (TGB) which were influenced by the fluid flow condition. By applying a large flow loop, we conducted the experiment that the above three species of bacteria attached to the coupons were scoured by diesel oil at three different flow velocity (1.3 m/s, 1.5 m/s and 3 m/s). The macroscopic and microcosmic analysis results indicate that after the scouring experiment all the bacterial corrosion behaviors almost remain the same as those before the experiment even at high flow velocity (3 m/s), which far exceeds the economic field flow velocity (1-2 m/s) of product oil pipelines. Consequently, once there are sessile bacteria on the inner wall of pipelines, serious corrosion will occur. Those bacteria play a key role in the corrosion of product oil pipelines. (C) 2016 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.5
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据