目的 天然气运输管道中固体杂质会对管线造成严重的冲蚀破坏,为对天然气运输过程中管线钢的冲蚀事故进行预测与防护。方法 本研究使用满足ASTM-G76标准的空气射流冲蚀试验设备对常用输气管线钢材X80、X65进行气固冲蚀实验,研究对比常用管线钢X80、X65在不同冲击角度与冲击速度下的冲蚀规律,并通过扫描电镜与三维轮廓观察进一步分析对比各管线钢的冲蚀机理。结果 X80、X65管线钢冲蚀率变化规律一致,冲蚀率随着冲击角度（30°~90°）的增加而降低,随着冲击速度（45~72 m/s）的增加而增加。X80,X65管线钢的宏观冲蚀形貌与材料去除机制的变化规律一致,宏观冲蚀形貌由30°冲击角度的椭圆形逐渐变为90°冲击角度的圆形,材料去除机制逐渐由犁削向压实与开裂转变,冲击速度不会影响宏观冲蚀形貌。材料的不同会影响材料冲蚀深度以及去除机制的效果,在同一实验条件下,冲蚀深度与磨损体积X80均小于X65。结论 X80、X65管线钢的冲蚀行为符合典型塑性材料的普遍规律,管线钢中X80的耐冲蚀性能最好。建立了X80,X65管线钢的冲蚀速率方程,并建立喷嘴-冲蚀腔CFD冲蚀模型对冲蚀速率方程进行验证,相对误差在允许范围内。所建立的冲蚀速率方程能够为复杂流场下管线钢的CFD气固冲蚀仿真模拟提供支撑。
Abstract
Solid impurities in natural gas transmission pipelines cause severe erosive wear damage to the pipeline walls. Ensuring pipeline stability and safety is crucial for natural gas energy security and industrial development, necessitating the prediction and prevention of erosion incidents in pipeline steels during gas transportation.
In this study, an air jet experimental apparatus compliant with the ASTM-G76 standard is employed to conduct gas-solid erosion experiments on X80 and X65 pipeline steels, which are commonly used in gas transmission pipelines. The erosion behavior of these steels is comparatively investigated under varying impact angles (30°, 45°, 60°, 92°) and impact velocities (45 m/s, 56 m/s, 64 m/s, 72 m/s). Erosion scar volume and depth are quantitatively measured with a Contour GT InMotion 3D optical profilometer. The microscopic morphology of eroded regions is characterized via scanning electron microscopy (SEM), enabling comparative analysis of the erosion mechanisms for each pipeline steel. Based on the Alhert erosion prediction model, erosion rate equations for X80 and X65 pipeline steels are established. A nozzle-erosion chamber CFD erosion model is constructed for different materials to validate these erosion rate equations, thereby providing data support for CFD gas-solid erosion simulation of pipeline steels under complex flow fields.
The variation trend of erosion rate for X80 and X65 pipeline steels is consistent: the erosion rate decreases with increasing impact angles (from 30° to 90°) and increased with increasing impact velocities (from 45 m/s to 72 m/s). The evolution of their macroscopic erosion morphology follows a similar pattern: the scar shape transitions from elliptical at 30° towards circular at 90°. The impact velocity does not significantly alter the macroscopic erosion morphology. Under identical experimental conditions, the macroscopic erosion morphology and scar area exhibit minimal differences between X80 and X65 steels. However, due to its higher hardness (X80: 280.6HV, X65: 214.3HV), X80 demonstrates the shallowest erosion depth, the smallest wear volume, and consequently, the lowest erosion rate. The material removal mechanisms for both steels evolve similarly with increasing impact angles: a transition from predominantly plowing to mechanisms dominated by compaction and cracking. At 30°, material removal is primarily governed by the highly efficient plowing mechanism. At 45°, plowing, compaction, and cracking coexist. By 60°, compaction and cracking become dominant, with plowing significantly reduced. At 90°, compaction and cracking are the principal removal mechanisms, with plowing virtually absent. The material type influences the effectiveness of these mechanisms rather than their fundamental nature. Specifically, at 30°, the grooves generated by plowing are the shortest and narrowest for X80. At 90°, the depth of indentations and the number of cracks caused by compaction and cracking are higher for X65 compared with X80.
The erosion behavior of both X80 and X65 pipeline steels conforms to the general patterns observed in typical ductile materials. Among the pipeline steels studied, X80 exhibits the optimal erosion resistance. Erosion rate equations for X80 and X65 pipeline steels are successfully established. Validation using the nozzle-erosion chamber CFD erosion model yields the maximum relative errors of -9.3% for X80 and -9.7% for X65, confirming the accuracy and scientific validity of the fitted erosion rate equations. This work provides essential support for conducting CFD gas-solid erosion simulations of pipeline steels within complex flow fields.
关键词
管线钢 /
冲蚀磨损 /
气固冲蚀 /
冲蚀速率方程 /
CFD冲蚀模型
Key words
pipeline steel /
erosive wear /
gas-solid erosion /
erosion rate equation /
CFD erosion model
{{custom_sec.title}}
{{custom_sec.title}}
{{custom_sec.content}}
参考文献
[1] 赵雅如. 新时期天然气发展机遇与挑战[J]. 现代工业经济和信息化, 2024, 14(10): 47-49.
ZHAO Y R.Opportunities and Challenges of Natural Gas Development in Nen Times[J]. Modern Industrial Economy and Informationization, 2024, 14(10): 47-49.
[2] 高振宇, 赫曼求, 杨飞, 等. “双碳” 目标下中国天然气发展的分析与建议[J]. 油气与新能源, 2023, 35(4): 7-11.
GAO Z Y, HE M Q, YANG F, et al.Analysis and Recommendations for China's Natural Gas Development in Light of the "Double Carbon" Target[J]. Petroleum and New Energy, 2023, 35(4): 7-11.
[3] VENKATESH E S. Erosion Damage in Oil and Gas Wells[C]//SPE Rocky Mountain Regional Meeting. Billings, Montana. Richardson: Society of Petroleum Engineers, 1986: SPE 15183-MS.
[4] PARSI M, NAJMI K, NAJAFIFARD F, et al.A Comprehensive Review of Solid Particle Erosion Modeling for Oil and Gas Wells and Pipelines Applications[J]. Journal of Natural Gas Science and Engineering, 2014, 21: 850-873.
[5] 施宇恒. 基于有限元法的天然气长输管道球阀冲蚀磨损研究[D]. 大庆: 东北石油大学, 2020: 1-2.
SHI Y H.Study on Erosion Wear of Ball Valve in Long- Distance Natural Gas Pipeline Based on Finite Element Method[D]. Daqing: Northeast Petroleum University, 2020: 1-2.
[6] 刘玉发. X80管线钢冲刷腐蚀内多因素影响研究[D]. 北京: 中国石油大学(北京), 2020: 13-17.
LIU Y F.Study on Multi-Factors Influencing Erosion Corrosion of X80 Pipeline Steel[D]. Beijing: China University of Petroleum (Beijing), 2020: 13-17.
[7] 叶福相, 姚军, 刘玉发, 等. 多因素影响下的X80管道钢两相流冲蚀腐蚀特性[J]. 化工进展, 2021, 40(12): 6450-6459.
YE F X, YAO J, LIU Y F, et al.Erosion Corrosion Characteristics of X80 Pipeline Steel in Two-Phase Flow under the Influence of Multiple Factors[J]. Chemical Industry and Engineering Progress, 2021, 40(12): 6450-6459.
[8] 樊学华, 柳伟, 祝亚茹, 等. 高温高压条件下流速对X70钢CO2冲刷腐蚀行为的影响[J]. 表面技术, 2020, 49(12): 296-304.
FAN X H, LIU W, ZHU Y R, et al.Influence of Impingement Velocity on CO2 Erosion-Corrosion Behaviour of X70 Steel at High-Temperature and High-Pressure Conditions[J]. Surface Technology, 2020, 49(12): 296-304.
[9] 白莉, 赵婷婷, 宋存德, 等. 砂粒对多相流弯管冲蚀的影响因素分析[J]. 实验力学, 2018, 33(6): 862-868.
BAI L, ZHAO T T, SONG C D, et al.Influence Factor Analysis of Sand Particles on Erosion of Multiphase Flow Bends[J]. Journal of Experimental Mechanics, 2018, 33(6): 862-868.
[10] 薛世奇. 页岩气集输管道弯头冲蚀特性及缓蚀工艺研究[D]. 成都: 西南石油大学, 2023.
XUE S Q.Study on Erosion Characteristics and Corrosion Inhibition Technology of Shale Gas Gathering and Transportation Pipeline Elbow[D]. Chengdu: Southwest Petroleum University, 2023.
[11] 邓宽海, 程金亮, 林元华, 等. 基于气-固两相流喷嘴实验的20G钢冲蚀机理研究[J]. 表面技术, 2024, 53(17): 50-61.
DENG K H, CHENG J L, LIN Y H, et al.Erosion Mechanism of 20G Steel Based on Gas-Solid Two-Phase Flow Nozzle Experiment[J]. Surface Technology, 2024, 53(17): 50-61.
[12] 李明星, 刘广胜, 王娜, 等. 储气库生产管柱的气固冲蚀性能[J]. 腐蚀与防护, 2025, 46(2): 66-72.
LI M X, LIU G S, WANG N, et al.Gas Solid Erosion Performance of Production Pipe String in Gas Storage[J]. Corrosion & Protection, 2025, 46(2): 66-72.
[13] ALAM T, ISLAM M A, FARHAT Z N.Slurry Erosion of Pipeline Steel: Effect of Velocity and Microstructure[J]. Journal of Tribology, 2016, 138(2): 021604.
[14] ALAM T, FARHAT Z N.Slurry Erosion Surface Damage under Normal Impact for Pipeline Steels[J]. Engineering Failure Analysis, 2018, 90: 116-128.
[15] OKONKWO P C, SHAKOOR R A, AHMED E, et al.Erosive Wear Performance of API X42 Pipeline Steel[J]. Engineering Failure Analysis, 2016, 60: 86-95.
[16] OKONKWO P C, SHAKOOR R A, ZAGHO M M, et al.Erosion Behaviour of API X100 Pipeline Steel at Various Impact Angles and Particle Speeds[J]. Metals, 2016, 6(10): 232.
[17] OKONKWO P C, SLIEM M H, SK M H, et al.Erosion Behavior of API X120 Steel: Effect of Particle Speed and Impact Angle[J]. Coatings, 2018, 8(10): 343.
[18] OKONKWO PAUL C, SHAKOOR R A, MOHAMED A M A. Synergistic Erosion-Corrosion Behavior of API X120 Steel[J]. Materials Today: Proceedings, 2020, 32: 37-43.
[19] 李玉星, 张睿, 刘翠伟, 等. 掺氢天然气管道典型管线钢氢脆行为[J]. 油气储运, 2022, 41(6): 732-742.
LI Y X, ZHANG R, LIU C W, et al.Hydrogen Embrittlement Behavior of Typical Hydrogen-Blended Natural Gas Pipeline Steel[J]. Oil & Gas Storage and Transportation, 2022, 41(6): 732-742.
[20] 郭克星, 房世超, 高杰. 油气输送用管线钢组织及性能研究进展[J]. 大型铸锻件, 2024(1): 41-46.
GUO K X, FANG S C, GAO J.Research Progress on Microstructure and Properties of Pipeline Steel for Oil and Gas Transmission[J]. Heavy Casting and Forging, 2024(1): 41-46.
[21] 任鹏. 预应变对凹陷X80管道疲劳性能的影响研究[D]. 绵阳: 西南科技大学, 2024.
REN P.Study on the Effect of Pre-Strain on Fatigue Performance of Dented X80 Pipeline[D]. Mianyang: Southwest University of Science and Technology, 2024.
[22] 王复越, 任毅, 张帅, 等. 我国管线钢生产技术的进步[J]. 轧钢, 2024, 41(5): 79-86.
WANG F Y, REN Y, ZHANG S, et al.Progress of Pipeline Steel Production Technology in China[J]. Steel Rolling, 2024, 41(5): 79-86.
[23] 刘冰, 刘旭, 邓宽海, 等. 高速固体颗粒冲击下30CrMo钢的冲蚀机理测试研究[J]. 表面技术, 2023, 52(9): 135-145.
LIU B, LIU X, DENG K H, et al.Erosion Mechanism of 30CrMo Steel Impacted by High Speed Solid Particles[J]. Surface Technology, 2023, 52(9): 135-145.
[24] LAGUNA-CAMACHO J R, CRUZ-MENDOZA L A, ANZELMETTI-ZARAGOZA J C, et al. Solid Particle Erosion on Coatings Employed to Protect Die Casting Molds[J]. Progress in Organic Coatings, 2012, 74(4): 750-757.
[25] 陈海龙, 杨学锋, 鹿重阳, 等. 固体粒子冲蚀磨损理论及影响因素的研究概述[J]. 材料导报, 2017(S2): 403-406.
CHEN H L, YANG X F, LU C Y, et al.Review on the Theory and Influencing Factors of Solid Particle Erosion Wear[J]. Materials Reports, 2017(S2): 403-406.
[26] 黄德全, 王维东, 鲜林云, 等. CT110连续管用板材在固液两相流下的抗冲蚀性能分析[J]. 焊管, 2024, 47(12): 52-57.
HUANG D Q, WANG W D, XIAN L Y, et al.Analysis of Erosion Resistance Performance of CT110 Coiled Tubing under Solid-Liquid Two-Phase Flow[J]. Welded Pipe and Tube, 2024, 47(12): 52-57.
[27] 潘牧, 罗志平. 材料的冲蚀问题[J]. 材料科学与工程, 1999(3): 92-96.
PAN M, LUO Z P.Erosion of Materials[J]. Materials Science and Engineering, 1999(3): 92-96.
[28] FENG Z, BALL A.The Erosion of Four Materials Using Seven Erodents—Towards an Understanding[J]. Wear, 1999, 233: 674-684.
[29] LAGUNA-CAMACHO J R, MARQUINA-CHÁVEZ A, MÉNDEZ-MÉNDEZ J V, et al. Solid Particle Erosion of AISI 304, 316 and 420 Stainless Steels[J]. Wear, 2013, 301(1/2): 398-405.
[30] ABD-ELRHMAN Y M, ABOUEL-KASEM A, EMARA K M, et al. Effect of Impact Angle on Slurry Erosion Behavior and Mechanisms of Carburized AISI 5117 Steel[J]. Journal of Tribology, 2014, 136: 011106.
[31] ISLAM M A, FARHAT Z N.Effect of Impact Angle and Velocity on Erosion of API X42 Pipeline Steel under High Abrasive Feed Rate[J]. Wear, 2014, 311(1/2): 180-190.
[32] ISLAM M A, ALAM T, FARHAT Z.Construction of Erosion Mechanism Maps for Pipeline Steels[J]. Tribology International, 2016, 102: 161-173.
[33] DESALE G R, GANDHI B K, JAIN S C.Effect of Erodent Properties on Erosion Wear of Ductile Type Materials[J]. Wear, 2006, 261(7/8): 914-921.
[34] LÓPEZ D, CONGOTE J P, CANO J R, et al. Effect of Particle Velocity and Impact Angle on the Corrosion- Erosion of AISI 304 and AISI 420 Stainless Steels[J]. Wear, 2005, 259(1/2/3/4/5/6): 118-124.
[35] VERITAS D N.Recommended Practice RP O501 Erosive Wear in Piping Systems[J]. DNV Recommended Practice, 2007, 4(2): 1-43.
[36] ZHANG P, ZHENG S J, JING J Q, et al.Surface Erosion Behavior of an Intrusive Probe in Pipe Flow[J]. Journal of Natural Gas Science and Engineering, 2015, 26: 480-493.
[37] OKA Y I, OKAMURA K, YOSHIDA T.Practical Estimation of Erosion Damage Caused by Solid Particle Impact Part 1: Effects of Impact Parameters on a Predictive Equation[J]. Wear, 2005, 259(1/2/3/4/5/6): 95-101.
[38] OKA Y I, YOSHIDA T.Practical Estimation of Erosion Damage Caused by Solid Particle Impact Part 2: Mechanical Properties of Materials Directly Associated with Erosion Damage[J]. Wear, 2005, 259(1/2/3/4/5/6): 102-109.
[39] AHLERT K R.Effects of Particle Impingement Angle and Surface Wetting on Solid Particle Erosion of AISI 1018 Steel[D]. Tulsa: BUniversity of Tulsa, 1994: 1-33.
[40] FORDER A, THEW M, HARRISON D.A Numerical Investigation of Solid Particle Erosion Experienced within Oilfield Control Valves[J]. Wear, 1998, 216(2): 184-193.
基金
国家自然科学基金项目（52474011）; 四川省科教联合基金（2025NSFSC2052）
PDF(4913 KB)
渝公网安备 50010702501715号 渝ICP备15012534号-3
