Abstract
The ability to precisely predict the volume fraction percentage of the different phases flowing in a pipe plays an important role in the oil, petroleum and other industries. In this research, the volume fraction percentage was measured precisely in water-gasoil-air three-phase flows by using a single pencil beam gamma ray attenuation technique and multilayer perceptron (MLP) neural network. The volume fraction percentage determination in three-phase flows requires least two gamma radioactive sources with different energies while in this study, we used just a 137Cs source (with the single energy of 662 keV) and a NaI detector. Also, in this work, the MLP neural network in MATLAB software was implemented to predict the volume fraction percentage. The experimental setup provides the required data for training and testing the network. Using this proposed method, the volume fraction was predicted in water-gasoil-air three-phase flows with mean relative error percentage less than 6.95 %. Also, the root mean square error was calculated 2.60. The set-up used is simpler than other proposed methods and cost, radiation safety and shielding requirements are minimized.
References
1. Tjugum, S. A., Frieling, J., Johansen, G. A.: A compact low energy multibeam gamma-ray densitometer for pipe-flow measurements. Nucl. Inst. Meth. B. 197, 301 (2002).10.1016/S0168-583X(02)01481-7Search in Google Scholar
2. Johansen, G. A., Jackson, P.: Salinity independent measurement of gas volume fraction in oil/gas/water pipe flows. Appl. Radiat. Isot. 53, 595 (2000).10.1016/S0969-8043(00)00232-3Search in Google Scholar PubMed
3. Abro, E., Johansen, G.A., Improved void fraction determination by means of multibeam gamma-ray attenuation measurements. Flow. Meas. Instrum. 10, 99 (1999).10.1016/S0955-5986(98)00043-0Search in Google Scholar
4. Chu, I. C., Song, C. H.: Development and Performance Evaluation of 32-Channel Gamma Densitometer for the Measurement of Flow Pattern and Void Fraction in the Downcomer of MIDAS Test Facility. KAERI/TR-2045/2002. KAERI (2002).Search in Google Scholar
5. Chang, S. K., Park, H. S., Chung, C. H.: Analysis of the Test Results for the Two-Phase Critical Flow with Non-Condensable Gas. KAERI/TR-2242/2002. KAERI (2002).Search in Google Scholar
6. Salgado, C. M., Brandao, L. E. B., Pereira, C. M. N. A., Salgado, W. L.: Salinity independent volume fraction prediction in annular and stratified (water-gas-oil) multiphase flows using artificial neural networks. Prog. Nucl. Energy 76, 17 (2014).10.1016/j.pnucene.2014.05.004Search in Google Scholar
7. Salgado, C. M., Brandao, L. E. B., Pereira, C. M. N. A., Xavier da Silva, A., Ramos, R.: Prediction of volume fractions in three-phase flows using nuclear technique and artificial neural network. Appl. Radiat. Isot. 67, 1812 (2009).10.1016/j.apradiso.2009.02.093Search in Google Scholar PubMed
8. Abro, E., Khoryakov, V. A., Johansen, G. A.: Determination of void fraction and flow regimeusing a neural network trained on simulated data based on gamma-ray densitometry. Meast. Sci. Tech. 10, 619 (1999).10.1088/0957-0233/10/7/308Search in Google Scholar
9. Roshani, G. H., Feghhi, S. A. H., Mahmoudi-Aznaveh, A., Nazemi, E., Adineh vand, A.: Precise volume fraction prediction in oil-water-gas multiphase flows by means of gamma-ray attenuation and artificial neural networks using one detector. Measurement 51, 34 (2014).10.1016/j.measurement.2014.01.030Search in Google Scholar
10. El Abd, A.: Intercomparison of gamma ray scattering and transmission techniques for gas volume fraction measurements in two phase pipe flow. Nucl. Inst. Meth. A. 735, 260 (2014).10.1016/j.nima.2013.09.047Search in Google Scholar
11. Jing, C. G., Bai, Q.: Flow regime identification of gas/liquid two-phase flow in vertical pipe using RBF neural networks. In: Proceedings of the Chinese Control and Decision Conference (CCDC) (2009).Search in Google Scholar
12. IAEA-TECDOC 1459: Technical Data on Nucleonic Gauges, IAEA, Vienna (2005).Search in Google Scholar
13. Taylor, J. G.: Neural Networks and their Applications, John Wiley & Sons Ltd., Brighton (1996).Search in Google Scholar
14. Zahoor Raja, M. A., Umar, M., Sabir, Z., Ali Khan, J., Baleanu, D.: A new stochastic computing paradigm for the dynamics of nonlinear singular heat conduction model of the human head. Eur. Phys. J. Plus 133, 364 (2018).10.1140/epjp/i2018-12153-4Search in Google Scholar
15. Hagan, M. T., Menhaj, M.: Training feedforward networks with the Marquardt algorithm. IEEE Trans. Neural Netw. 5, 989 (1994).10.1109/72.329697Search in Google Scholar PubMed
16. Demuth, H., Beale, M., Hagan, M.: Neural Network Toolbox TM 6, User’s Guide, The Math Works, Massachusetts (2008).Search in Google Scholar
17. Zaknich, A.: Neural Networks for Intelligent Signal Processing, World Scientific Pub Co. Inc., Toh Tuck Link (2003).10.1142/5220Search in Google Scholar
18. Dorofki, M., Elshafie, A. H., Jaafar, O., Karim, O. A., Mastura, S.: Comparison of artificial neural network transfer functions abilities to simulate extreme runoff data. International Conference on Environment, Energy and Biotechnology, Singapore (2012).Search in Google Scholar
19. Islami rad, S. Z., Gholipour Peyvandi, R.: A novel and fast technique for evaluation of plastic rod scintillators as position sensitive gamma-ray detectors using artificial neural networks. Rad. Phys. Chem. 157, 1 (2019).10.1016/j.radphyschem.2018.12.005Search in Google Scholar
© 2020 Walter de Gruyter GmbH, Berlin/Boston
