What is the leakage rate of my underground piping system?

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around calculating the leakage rate of an underground piping system that is failing a pressure test. Participants explore various methods and considerations related to the pressure drop, the properties of water, and the potential effects of gas entrapment on the calculations. The scope includes technical reasoning, mathematical calculations, and practical testing methods.

Discussion Character

  • Technical explanation
  • Mathematical reasoning
  • Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • One participant describes a pressure loss of 1 psi/min from an initial 80 psi in a 10" diameter, schedule 40 steel pipe and seeks to calculate the leakage rate.
  • Another participant suggests that off-gassing of dissolved gases could affect the calculations, particularly as pressure decreases.
  • A different participant provides a calculation of compressibility using water densities at various pressures, arriving at a different volume change than the original poster.
  • Concerns are raised about the accuracy of the compressibility value used, with one participant noting a potential error in the pressure value referenced.
  • Participants discuss the possibility of significant air traps affecting the leakage rate and suggest methods to measure the leakage more accurately.
  • There is a suggestion to inject measured water to regain original pressure after a leak, with discussions on how this could provide a better estimate of the leak rate.
  • Some participants debate whether the refill rate should match the leak rate, considering the dynamics of the filling process and the nature of the leak.
  • Technical suggestions are made regarding the setup of the fill line and the potential need for a calibrated external water feed to measure compressibility accurately.
  • Questions are raised about the elongation of the pipe under stress and how that might affect calculations.
  • One participant proposes a method to measure total leakage using a tee fitting and valve on the fill line.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express differing views on the effects of gas entrapment, the accuracy of compressibility values, and the methods for measuring leakage. No consensus is reached on the best approach to calculate the leakage rate or the implications of the various factors discussed.

Contextual Notes

Participants note limitations in their calculations, including assumptions about gas presence, potential errors in pressure values, and the complexity of measuring leakage accurately under varying conditions.

Messages
23,869
Reaction score
11,317
TL;DR
Trying to find the leakage rate of a pipe that loses 1psi per minute.
This is a situation I don't often deal with; I have an underground piping system that is failing a pressure test and losing pressure at a rate of about 1psi/min from 80psi. I'd like to calculate the leakage rate.

The pipe is a simple 10" diameter, schedule 40 steel pipe, 500' long (0.365" th). That's roughly 2,038.8 gal.

First, I calculate the compressibility of water. Googling, I'm seeing 2.8% compression for 1,000 psi (taken from a graph). Or 0.06 gal/psi. This feels reasonable.

Next, I use the hoop stress equation and 29 MPsi Young's Modulus to calculate the expansion of the pipe. I get a volume difference of 0.0019 gal. This feels surprisingly low.

Could someone double-check me please.
 
Engineering news on Phys.org
Just a small quantity of off gassing of that liquid might skew the calculations. Especially if pressure is decreasing, some quantity of dissolved gasses might form bubbles. Can you re-check the calculation if 1% of the volume was gaseous?
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: berkeman
Double check coming up:

Compressibility (densities from NBS/NRC Steam Tables):
Water at 20 deg C and 1 bar absolute = 998.23 kg/m^3
Water at 20 deg C and 6.5 bar absolute = 998.48 kg/m^3
Water at 20 deg C and 70 bar absolute = 1001.37 kg/m^3

Change in volume = ##2038.8 gal * (1 - 998.23/998.48) = 0.51 gal / 80 PSI##
##0.51 / 80 = 0.0064 gal / PSI##
We differ by a factor of 10.

I used the hoop stress equation, 0.37 inch wall, and 30E6 modulus, and got 0.00185 gal/PSI. This agrees nicely with your calculation.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: berkeman and russ_watters
russ_watters said:
Summary:: Trying to find the leakage rate of a pipe that loses 1psi per minute.

I'm seeing 2.8% compression for 1,000 psi (taken from a graph). Or 0.06 gal/psi.
That's far too high. Even at the bottom of the Mariana trench the compression is just several percent, at ~1000 times atmospheric pressure or ~13000 psi. A factor 10 as error looks plausible.

I share the concern about gas being present somewhere.
 
Thanks guys; yep, I slipped a decimal place in reading off this graph:
main-qimg-4d2f81cc732aa4c0c94633b8143a3e94.jpg


That's 10,000 psi, not 1,000 psi for 2.8%.

Yes, it is possible there is a significant trap of air somewhere and that could cause a much higher volumetric leakage for the same pressure drop. I didn't measure, but the air vent was maybe a foot below the cap on the pipe, so presumably at least that half a cubic foot was full of air. 1 psi of expansion should be about 0.04 gallons. And there's no real telling if there is a significant air trap somewhere along the 500' length.
 
russ_watters said:
And there's no real telling if there is a significant air trap somewhere along the 500' length.
Can you instead inject measured water sufficient to regain the original pressure after, say, 10 minutes of leak? If the entrapped air doesn't change that would give a pretty good number.
 
Why did I post this in aerospace engineering instead of mechanical engineering? Fixed...
 
hutchphd said:
Can you instead inject measured water sufficient to regain the original pressure after, say, 10 minutes of leak? If the entrapped air doesn't change that would give a pretty good number.
I could put a flow meter on the inlet to measure the fill, but that isn't really the critical issue; on its own it doesn't inform much to what the leak rate is.
 
If water leaks and you refill with water, shouldn't the refill rate match the leak rate? That would eliminate the volume considerations as you end up with the same pressure and volume as before.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: hutchphd
  • #10
mfb said:
If water leaks and you refill with water, shouldn't the refill rate match the leak rate?
No...we're filling from a garden hose at city water pressure, and the leak is likely a few mm in diameter, mostly at close to zero pressure. It leaks for hours or days and then we refill to retest in minutes.

I've only witnessed one of the tests and we haven't tried an exact timed interval between tests. Nobody has tried to estimate the leak rate before I just did; it was just a pass/fail test.
 
  • #11
russ_watters said:
No...we're filling from a garden hose at city water pressure, and the leak is likely a few mm in diameter, mostly at close to zero pressure. It leaks for hours or days and then we refill to retest in minutes.
The timing is not an issue (measured refill=total leak over previous interval). The injection under pressure is a different matter: you would need an external water feed tank capable of feeding water under under pressure.
Actually if you wanted to keep the injection water pressure lower, you could inject, at lower pressure and "calibrate" the compressibility: Put known amounts of water into the sealed system and monitor the resultant pressure increase. Extrapolate this (presumed linear?) line to the pressure region of interest and that slope gives you the result you need.
 
  • #12
russ_watters said:
Next, I use the hoop stress equation and 29 MPsi Young's Modulus to calculate the expansion of the pipe.
The extension stress will be about half the hoop stress. How much does the pipe elongate?
 
  • #13
You can measure the total amount of leakage by adding a tee fitting and valve to the fill line. Fill, close the fill valve, and open the tee into a bucket.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: russ_watters and hutchphd
  • #14
That is not complicated enough! (It does assume the fill line is submerged...)
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: jrmichler and russ_watters

Similar threads

Replies
5
Views
4K
  • · Replies 13 ·
Replies
13
Views
4K
Replies
6
Views
4K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
5K
  • · Replies 29 ·
Replies
29
Views
10K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
17K
Replies
2
Views
3K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
6K
Replies
1
Views
5K