journal article·2023-03-29Open access

Predicting Natural Gas Pipeline Failures Caused by Natural Forces: An Artificial Intelligence Classification Approach

Bright Awuku, Ying Huang, Nita Yodo

Applied Sciences· Volume 13· Issue 7

Abstract

Pipeline networks are a crucial component of energy infrastructure, and natural force damage is an inevitable and unpredictable cause of pipeline failures. Such incidents can result in catastrophic losses, including harm to operators, communities, and the environment. Understanding the causes and impact of these failures is critical to preventing future incidents. This study investigates artificial intelligence (AI) algorithms to predict natural gas pipeline failures caused by natural forces, using climate change data that are incorporated into pipeline incident data. The AI algorithms were applied to the publicly available Pipeline and Hazardous Material Safety Administration (PHMSA) dataset from 2010 to 2022 for predicting future patterns. After data pre-processing and feature selection, the proposed model achieved a high prediction accuracy of 92.3% for natural gas pipeline damage caused by natural forces. The AI models can help identify high-risk pipelines and prioritize inspection and maintenance activities, leading to cost savings and improved safety. The predictive capabilities of the models can be leveraged by transportation agencies responsible for pipeline management to prevent pipeline damage, reduce environmental damage, and effectively allocate resources. This study highlights the potential of machine learning techniques in predicting pipeline damage caused by natural forces and underscores the need for further research to enhance our understanding of the complex interactions between climate change and pipeline infrastructure monitoring and maintenance.
Source: crossref · Quality: baseline

Research context

OpenAlex topics: Structural Integrity and Reliability Analysis · Offshore Engineering and Technologies · Non-Destructive Testing Techniques

SciVX discovery tags are terminology-based. OpenAlex topics are source-provided classifications.

Affiliations

Department of Civil, Construction, and Environmental Engineering, North Dakota State University, Fargo, ND 58102, USA

Funding

National Science Foundation

References (46)

Show source-provided references
1. (2023, January 10). The International Energy Agency (IEA) Gas Market Report, Q1 2022. Gas Market Report 2022. Available online: https://www.iea.org/reports/gas-market-report-q1-2022.
2. (2023, January 10). Natural Gas Explained. About U.S. Natural Gas Pipelines 2022, Available online: https://www.eia.gov/energyexplained/natural-gas/natural-gas-pipelines.php.
3. Cobanoglu, M.M., Kermanshachi, S., and Damnjanovic, I. (2016). Statistical modeling of corrosion failures in natural gas transmission pipelines. Pipelines, 195–204.10.1061/9780784479957.018 ↗
4. A resilience assessment of an interdependent multi-energy system with microgrids10.1080/23789689.2019.1710074 ↗
5. Sustainable Development for Oil and Gas Infrastructure from Risk, Reliability, and Resilience Perspectives10.3390/su15064953 ↗
6. US DOT Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration (2023, January 10). All Reported Incident Cause Breakdown 2022, Available online: https://portal.phmsa.dot.gov/analytics/saw.dll?Go.
7. Failure classification in natural gas pipe-lines using artificial intelligence: A case study10.1016/j.egyr.2021.10.093 ↗
8. Detection, visualization, quantification, and warning of pipe corrosion using distributed fiber optic sensors10.1016/j.autcon.2021.103953 ↗
9. Lecuyer, H.A., and Rice, C. (2017, January 9–12). Computing Natural Gas Losses from Damaged Pipelines Using Analytical Discharge Equations and Network Modeling Software. Proceedings of the PSIG Annual Meeting, Atlanta, GA, USA.
10. Ozdemir, Z., Lak, M.A., François, S., Coulier, P., Lombaert, G., and Degrande, G. (2011, January 4–6). A numerical model for the prediction of the response of pipelines due to vibrations induced by the operation of a pavement breaker. Proceedings of the 8th International Conference on Structural Dynamics, Eurodyn, Leuven, Belgium.
11. A comprehensive review of corrosion protection and control techniques for metallic pipelines
12. Wang, X., Qi, X., Lin, Z., Battocchi, D., and Chen, X. (2019). Enhanced Protective Coatings Based on Nanoparticle fullerene C60 for Oil & Gas Pipeline Corrosion Mitigation. Nanomaterials, 9.10.3390/nano9101476 ↗
13. Extracting spatial patterns of urban gas pipeline risk considering social and structural parameters of urban blocks10.1016/j.jngse.2018.04.011 ↗
14. Bayesian reliability of gas network under varying incident registration criteria10.1002/qre.1921 ↗
15. Novel hybridized adaptive neuro-fuzzy inference system models based particle swarm optimization and genetic algorithms for accurate prediction of stress intensity factor10.1111/ffe.13325 ↗
16. Advanced intelligence frameworks for predicting maximum pitting corrosion depth in oil and gas pipelines10.1016/j.psep.2021.01.008 ↗
17. Severity of emergency natural gas distribution pipeline incidents: Application of an integrated spatio-temporal approach fused with text mining10.1016/j.jlp.2020.104383 ↗
18. Popescu, C., and Gabor, M.R. (2021). Quantitative Analysis Regarding the Incidents to the Pipelines of Petroleum Products for an Efficient Use of the Specific Transportation Infrastructure. Processes, 9.10.3390/pr9091535 ↗
19. Data mining and equi-accident zones for US pipeline accidents10.1061/(ASCE)PS.1949-1204.0000340 ↗
20. Afrin, T., and Yodo, N. (2019, January 28–31). Resilience assessment of repair strategies against localized attacks for infrastructure protection. Proceedings of the 2019 Annual Reliability and Maintainability Symposium (RAMS), Orlando, FL, USA.10.1109/RAMS.2019.8769282 ↗
21. Ekic, A., Wu, D., and Huang, Y. (2022, January 9–12). A Review on Cascading Failure Analysis for Integrated Power and Gas Systems. Proceedings of the 2022 IEEE 7th International Energy Conference (ENERGYCON), Riga, Latvia.10.1109/ENERGYCON53164.2022.9830223 ↗
22. Aljameel, S.S., Alomari, D.M., Alismail, S., Khawaher, F., Alkhudhair, A.A., Aljubran, F., and Alzannan, R.M. (2022). An Anomaly Detection Model for Oil and Gas Pipelines Using Machine Learning. Computation, 10.10.3390/computation10080138 ↗
23. Condition-based monitoring as a robust strategy towards sustainable and resilient multi-energy infrastructure systems10.1080/23789689.2022.2134648 ↗
24. Scikit-learn: Machine learning in Python
25. Bridge infrastructure asset management system: Comparative computational machine learning approach for evaluating and predicting deck deterioration conditions10.1061/(ASCE)IS.1943-555X.0000572 ↗
26. Analysis of microarray data using Z score transformation10.1016/S1525-1578(10)60455-2 ↗
27. Feature selection: A data perspective
28. Feature selection: A literature review10.6029/smartcr.2014.03.007 ↗
29. A novel hybrid feature selection strategy in quantitative analysis of laser-induced breakdown spectroscopy10.1016/j.aca.2019.07.012 ↗
30. Bhalla, D. (TechTarget, 2017). Select Important Variables Using Boruta Algorithm, TechTarget.
31. Prasatha, V.S., Alfeilate, H.A.A., Hassanate, A.B., Lasassmehe, O., Tarawnehf, A.S., Alhasanatg, M.B., and Salmane, H.S.E. (2017). Effects of distance measure choice on knn classifier performance-A review. arXiv.
32. Miner, G.D., Miner, L.A., Goldstein, M., Nisbet, R., Walton, N., Bolding, P., Hilbe, J., and Hill, T. (2014). Practical Predictive Analytics and Decisioning Systems for Medicine: Informatics Accuracy and Cost-Effectiveness for Healthcare Administration and Delivery Including Medical Research, Academic Press.
33. A generalized mean distance-based k-nearest neighbor classifier10.1016/j.eswa.2018.08.021 ↗
34. The distance function effect on k-nearest neighbor classification for medical datasets10.1186/s40064-016-2941-7 ↗
35. Random forests10.1023/A:1010933404324 ↗
36. Improvised number identification using SVM and random forest classifiers
37. Dey, A., and Yodo, N. (2021, January 22–25). A Dropout-based Neural Network Framework for Tool Wear Prediction under Uncertainty. Proceedings of the 2021 IISE Annual Conference, Online.
38. Dhieb, N., Ghazzai, H., Besbes, H., and Massoud, Y. (2019, January 4–6). Extreme gradient boosting machine learning algorithm for safe auto insurance operations. Proceedings of the 2019 IEEE International Conference on Vehicular Electronics and Safety (ICVES), Cairo, Egypt.10.1109/ICVES.2019.8906396 ↗
39. Nafees, A., Javed, M.F., Khan, S., Nazir, K., Farooq, F., Aslam, F., Musarat, M.A., and Vatin, N.I. (2021). Predictive modeling of mechanical properties of silica fume-based green concrete using artificial intelligence approaches: MLPNN, ANFIS, and GEP. Materials, 14.10.3390/ma14247531 ↗
40. Conservative Confidence Interval Prediction in Fused Deposition Modeling Process With Linear Optimization Approach10.1115/1.4051750 ↗
41. A deep neural network and Bayesian method based framework for all-terminal network reliability estimation considering degradation10.1016/j.ress.2022.108881 ↗
42. Gas pipeline failures: Australian experience10.1179/000705985798272786 ↗
43. Kiefner, J.F., and Rosenfeld, M.J. (2012). The Role of Pipeline Age in Pipeline Safety, INGAA.
44. Oruji, S., Ketabdar, M., Gregorian, K., and Motamed, R. (2019, January 6–9). Climate Change Resiliency of Natural Gas Pipelines: Overview of Land Subsidence and Associated Issues in Central California. Proceedings of the International Conference on Sustainable Infrastructure 2019: Leading Resilient Communities through the 21st Century, Los Angeles, CA, USA.10.1061/9780784482650.001 ↗
45. Vulnerability of the oil and gas sector to climate change and extreme weather events10.1007/s10584-013-0891-4 ↗
46. Ihsan, A.F., and Astuti, W. (2022, January 15–16). Deep Learning Based Anomaly Detection on Natural Gas Pipeline Operational Data. Proceedings of the 2022 2nd International Conference on Intelligent Cybernetics Technology & Applications (ICICyTA), Bandung, Indonesia.10.1109/ICICyTA57421.2022.10037988 ↗