The present disclosure is directed at methods, systems, and techniques for detecting whether an acoustic event has occurred along a fluid conduit such as a pipeline, well casing, or production tubing.
Pipelines and oil and gas wells are examples of conduits that are used to transport liquids or gases (collectively, “fluids”) which, if leaked, could cause environmental damage. In the example of pipelines, the fluid may comprise oil. In the example of an oil well, the fluid may comprise liquid production fluid or be gaseous, such as when casing vent flow or gas migration occurs. Accordingly, in certain circumstances it may be desirable to monitor fluid conduits to determine whether a leak or other event potentially relevant to the integrity of the conduit has occurred.
According to a first aspect, there is provided a method for determining whether an acoustic event has occurred along a fluid conduit having acoustic sensors positioned therealong. The method comprises determining, using a processor and for each of the sensors, a linear relationship between a measured acoustic signal measured using the sensor and a white noise acoustic source located along a longitudinal segment of the fluid conduit overlapping the sensor; and from the linear relationship, an acoustic path response and an acoustic source transfer function that transforms the white noise acoustic source. The method further comprises monitoring over time variations in one or both of the acoustic path responses and acoustic source transfer functions; determining whether at least one of the variations exceeds an event threshold; and when at least one of the variations exceeds the event threshold, attributing the acoustic event to one of the sensors corresponding to the acoustic path response or acoustic source transfer function that varied in excess of the event threshold.
The processor may attribute the acoustic event to the one of the sensors for which the variation most exceeds the event threshold.
The acoustic event may comprise one of multiple acoustic events, and wherein the processor attributes one of the acoustic events to each of the sensors for which the variation exceeds the event threshold.
The acoustic path response may comprise an acoustic response of the longitudinal segment and the acoustic event may be identified as having occurred along the longitudinal segment corresponding to the sensor to which the acoustic event is attributed.
For each of the channels, the processor may determine the linear relationship between the measured acoustic signal, the white noise acoustic source located along the longitudinal segment, and white noise acoustic sources located along any immediately adjacent longitudinal segments.
Each element of the linear relationship may be a parameterized transfer function that is parameterized using a finite impulse response structure.
The processor may determine the acoustic path responses and acoustic source transfer functions by factoring the linear relationship using a linear regression, wherein the linear regression may be factored into a first array of parameterized transfer functions for determining the acoustic path responses and a second array of parameterized transfer functions for determining the acoustic source transfer functions.
Each of the first and second arrays may be parameterized using a finite impulse response structure.
The method may further comprise, prior to monitoring variations in one or both of the acoustic path responses and acoustic source transfer functions, refining the one or both of the acoustic path responses and acoustic source transfer functions using weighted nullspace least squares.
The method may comprise determining a confidence bound for each of two of the acoustic path responses or two of the acoustic source transfer functions; from the confidence bounds, determining a statistical distance between the two of the acoustic source responses or the two of the acoustic source transfer functions; comparing the statistical distance to the event threshold; and identifying the acoustic event as having occurred when the statistical distance exceeds the event threshold.
The method may further comprising dividing the measured acoustic signal into blocks of a certain duration prior to determining the linear relationship.
Each of the longitudinal segments may be delineated by a pair of fiber Bragg gratings located along an optical fiber and tuned to substantially identical center wavelengths, and the method may further comprise optically interrogating the optical fiber in order to obtain the measured acoustic signal.
The optical fiber may extend parallel to the fluid conduit.
The optical fiber may be wrapped around the fluid conduit.
The optical fiber may be within a fiber conduit laid adjacent the fluid conduit.
The fluid conduit may comprise a pipeline.
According to another aspect, there is provided a system for detecting whether an acoustic event has occurred along a fluid conduit longitudinally divided into measurements channels. The system comprises an optical fiber extending along the conduit and comprising fiber Bragg gratings (FBGs), wherein each of the measurement channels is delineated by a pair of the FBGs tuned to substantially identical center wavelengths; an optical interrogator optically coupled to the optical fiber and configured to optically interrogate the FBGs and to output an electrical measured acoustic signal; and a signal processing unit. The signal processing unit comprises a processor communicatively coupled to the optical interrogator; and a non-transitory computer readable medium communicatively coupled to the processor, wherein the medium has computer program code stored thereon that is executable by the processor and that, when executed by the processor, causes the processor to perform the method of any of the foregoing aspects or suitable combinations thereof.
The optical fiber may extends parallel to the fluid conduit.
The optical fiber may be wrapped around the fluid conduit.
The system may further comprise a fiber conduit adjacent the fluid conduit, wherein the optical fiber extends within the fiber conduit.
The fluid conduit may comprise a pipeline.
According to another aspect, there is provided a non-transitory computer readable medium having stored thereon computer program code that is executable by a processor and that, when executed by the processor, causes the processor to perform the method of any of the foregoing aspects or suitable combinations thereof.
This summary does not necessarily describe the entire scope of all aspects. Other aspects, features and advantages will be apparent to those of ordinary skill in the art upon review of the following description of specific embodiments.
In the accompanying drawings, which illustrate one or more example embodiments:
As used herein, “acoustics” refer generally to any type of “dynamic strain” (strain that changes over time). Acoustics having a frequency between about 20 Hz and about 20 kHz are generally perceptible by humans. Acoustics having a frequency of between about 5 Hz and about 20 Hz are referred to by persons skilled in the art as “vibration”, and acoustics that change at a rate of <1 Hz, such as at 500 μHz, are referred to as “sub-Hz strain”; as used herein, a reference to “about” or “approximately” a number or to being “substantially” equal to a number means being within +/−10% of that number.
When using acoustics to determine whether an event, such as a pipeline leak, has occurred, it may be desirable to distinguish between different types of events that generate different sounds, where “different” refers to a difference in one or both of acoustic intensity and frequency. For example, when the equipment being monitored is a buried oil pipeline, it may be any one or more of a leak in that pipeline, a truck driving on the land over that pipeline, and a pump operating near the pipeline that are generating a sound. However, of the three events, it may only be the leak that requires immediate attention. Similarly, when monitoring a well, it may be one or both of pumping equipment and an instance of casing vent flow that generate a sound. Again, while the casing vent flow may require remediation, the standard operation of pumping equipment does not.
The embodiments described herein are directed at methods, systems, and techniques for detecting whether an acoustic event has occurred along a fluid conduit such as a pipeline. Optical interferometry using fiber Bragg gratings (“FBGs”), as described in further detail with respect to
Referring now to
The optical fiber 112 comprises one or more fiber optic strands, each of which is made from quartz glass (amorphous SiO2). The fiber optic strands are doped with a rare earth compound (such as germanium, praseodymium, or erbium oxides) to alter their refractive indices, although in different embodiments the fiber optic strands may not be doped. Single mode and multimode optical strands of fiber are commercially available from, for example, Corning® Optical Fiber. Example optical fibers include ClearCurve™ fibers (bend insensitive), SMF28 series single mode fibers such as SMF-28 ULL fibers or SMF-28e fibers, and InfiniCor® series multimode fibers.
The interrogator 106 generates sensing and reference pulses and outputs the reference pulse after the sensing pulse. The pulses are transmitted along optical fiber 112 that comprises a first pair of FBGs. The first pair of FBGs comprises first and second FBGs 114a,b (generally, “FBGs 114”). The first and second FBGs 114a,b are separated by a fiber optic sensor 116 that comprises a segment of fiber extending between the first and second FBGs 114a,b. The length of the sensor 116 varies in response to an event (such as an acoustic event) that the optical fiber 112 experiences. Each fiber segment between any pair of adjacent FBGs 114 with substantially identical center wavelengths is referred to as a “sensor” 116 of the system 200. The system 200 accordingly comprises multiple sensors 116, each of which is a distributed sensor 116 that spans the length of the segment between the adjacent FBGs 114. An example sensor length is 25 m. In the depicted embodiment, the FBGs 114 are consistently separated by, and the sensors 116 accordingly each have a length of, 25 m; however, in different embodiments (not depicted) any one or more of the sensors 116 may be of different lengths.
The light pulses have a wavelength identical or very close to the center wavelength of the FBGs 114, which is the wavelength of light the FBGs 114 are designed to partially reflect; for example, typical FBGs 114 are tuned to reflect light in the 1,000 to 2,000 nm wavelength range. The sensing and reference pulses are accordingly each partially reflected by the FBGs 114a,b and return to the interrogator 106. The delay between transmission of the sensing and reference pulses is such that the reference pulse that reflects off the first FBG 114a (hereinafter the “reflected reference pulse”) arrives at the optical receiver 103 simultaneously with the sensing pulse that reflects off the second FBG 114b (hereinafter the “reflected sensing pulse”), which permits optical interference to occur.
While
The interrogator 106 emits laser light with a wavelength selected to be identical or sufficiently near the center wavelength of the FBGs 114 that each of the FBGs 114 partially reflects the light back towards the interrogator 106. The timing of the successively transmitted light pulses is such that the light pulses reflected by the first and second FBGs 114a,b interfere with each other at the interrogator 106, and the optical receiver 103 records the resulting interference signal. The event that the sensor 116 experiences alters the optical path length between the two FBGs 114 and thus causes a phase difference to arise between the two interfering pulses. The resultant optical power at the optical receiver 103 can be used to determine this phase difference. Consequently, the interference signal that the interrogator 106 receives varies with the event the sensor 116 is experiencing, which allows the interrogator 106 to estimate the magnitude of the event the sensor 116 experiences from the received optical power. The interrogator 106 digitizes the phase difference and outputs an electrical signal (“output signal”) whose magnitude and frequency vary directly with the magnitude and frequency of the event the sensor 116 experiences.
The signal processing device (controller) 118 is communicatively coupled to the interrogator 106 to receive the output signal. The signal processing device 118 includes a processor 102 and a non-transitory computer readable medium 104 that are communicatively coupled to each other. An input device 110 and a display 108 interact with the processor 102. The computer readable medium 104 has encoded on it computer program code to cause the processor 102 to perform any suitable signal processing methods to the output signal. For example, if the sensor 116 is laid adjacent a region of interest that is simultaneously experiencing acoustics from two different sources, one at a rate under 20 Hz and one at a rate over 20 Hz, the sensor 116 will experience similar strain and the output signal will comprise a superposition of signals representative of those two sources. The processor 102 may apply a low pass filter with a cutoff frequency of 20 Hz to the output signal to isolate the lower frequency portion of the output signal from the higher frequency portion of the output signal. Analogously, to isolate the higher frequency portion of the output signal from the lower frequency portion, the processor 102 may apply a high pass filter with a cutoff frequency of 20 Hz. The processor 102 may also apply more complex signal processing methods to the output signal; example methods include those described in PCT application PCT/CA2012/000018 (publication number WO 2013/102252), the entirety of which is hereby incorporated by reference.
Any changes to the optical path length of the sensor 116 result in a corresponding phase difference between the reflected reference and sensing pulses at the interrogator 106. Since the two reflected pulses are received as one combined interference pulse, the phase difference between them is embedded in the combined signal. This phase information can be extracted using proper signal processing techniques, such as phase demodulation. The relationship between the optical path of the sensor 116 and that phase difference (θ) is
where n is the index of refraction of the optical fiber; L is the optical path length of the sensor 116; and λ is the wavelength of the optical pulses. A change in nL is caused by the fiber experiencing longitudinal strain induced by energy being transferred into the fiber. The source of this energy may be, for example, an object outside of the fiber experiencing the acoustics.
One conventional way of determining ΔnL is by using what is broadly referred to as distributed acoustic sensing (“DAS”). DAS involves laying the fiber 112 through or near a region of interest and then sending a coherent laser pulse along the fiber 112. As shown in
DAS accordingly uses Rayleigh scattering to estimate the magnitude, with respect to time, of the event experienced by the fiber during an interrogation time window, which is a proxy for the magnitude of the event, such as vibration or acoustics emanating from the region of interest. In contrast, the embodiments described herein measure events experienced by the fiber 112 using interferometry resulting from laser light reflected by FBGs 114 that are added to the fiber 112 and that are designed to reflect significantly more of the light than is reflected as a result of Rayleigh scattering. This contrasts with an alternative use of FBGs 114 in which the center wavelengths of the FBGs 114 are monitored to detect any changes that may result to it in response to strain. In the depicted embodiments, groups of the FBGs 114 are located along the fiber 112. A typical FBG can have a reflectivity rating of 2% or 5%. The use of FBG-based interferometry to measure interference causing events offers several advantages over DAS, in terms of optical performance.
Technical challenges when developing a leak detection system comprise:
Certain embodiments described herein are able to continuously monitor pipelines using acoustic sensing equipment.
Each of the sensors 116a-c in the depicted embodiment overlaps with a longitudinal segment of the pipeline 204, with none of the longitudinal segments overlapping each other and all of the longitudinal segments collectively forming a continuous portion of the pipeline 204. In different embodiments (not depicted), the longitudinal segments of the pipeline 204 that are monitored may not be continuous. For example, any two or more neighbouring longitudinal segments may be spaced apart so long as the neighbouring segments remain acoustically coupled to each other. Additionally or alternatively, in different embodiments (not depicted) the fiber 112 may not extend parallel with the pipeline 204. For example, in one example the fiber 112 is wound around segments of the pipeline 204 to increase sensitivity.
The system 200 of
Many conventional event detection systems are able to detect events 208, such as leaks or flow rate changes, when they have a priori knowledge about when the event is expected to occur. A more technically challenging problem is performing event detection without that a priori information. Similarly, many conventional event detection systems are able to detect events 208 during periods of relatively constant environmental or ambient conditions. A more technically challenging problem is performing event detection when one or both of operating and environmental conditions are changing.
At least some of the embodiments described herein address these technical challenges. The processor 102 extracts leak relevant features from the measured acoustic signal. Fluid escaping from the pipeline 204 may do any one or more of:
Whenever a leak is present, a hole or crack in the pipeline 204 is also present. The leak itself may have different causes including any one or more of:
The processor 102 distinguishes the aforementioned causes of the leak from normal or non-critical events affecting the pipeline 204, such as:
Described herein is an approach to estimate both the acoustic path response, which in certain embodiments comprises the pipeline's 204 frequency response, and the frequency content of acoustic sources affecting the pipeline 204. By obtaining estimates of (and monitoring) both the pipeline's 204 frequency response and the acoustic sources' frequency content the processor 102 determines at least some of the features and causes of leaks listed above. For example:
The processor 102, by being sensitive to several features of a leak, increases sensitivity to leaks and reduces the likelihood of a false positive occurring. The more features that are detected that are consistent with a leak, the more confidence associated with the processor's 102 determination that a leak is present.
The following assumptions apply to the pipeline 204 and system 200 of
A measured acoustic signal is a measurement of an acoustic signal resulting from a superposition of signals from multiple acoustic sources (each a “source signal”) that reach the sensor 116 via multiple paths; those acoustic sources may represent acoustic events 208, other sources, or both. Thus when an acoustic event 208 occurs along the pipeline 204, the processor 104 detects the event 208 using several of the nearest sensors 116 as the source signal generated by the event 208 propagates through the ground, pipeline 204 wall, and fluid inside the pipeline 204. Consequently, even though an event 208 is only attributed to one of the sensors 116, many of the sensors 116 are able to measure the event 208. Two features that distinguish a measured acoustic signal from the source signals that cause it are:
An acoustic measurement at sensor 116 i at time t is modeled as:
wi(t)=Fi(q)(wir(t)+(t))+si(t) (1)
where Fi is the acoustic sensor frequency response, and si is sensor noise (i.e. measurement error). The sensor 116 measures acoustic waves traveling in both directions. Unless otherwise stated herein, si is assumed to be very small compared to ei and accordingly can for practical purposes be dropped from the equations. A component of the sensor frequency response is an integration over the sensor's 116 length.
The transfer functions G12i, G21i, G11i, and G22i describe the acoustic path response; that is, the acoustic response of the path the acoustic wave travels, which in the depicted embodiment comprises the pipeline 204. Thus these transfer functions are affected by physical changes in the pipeline 204 due to dents, corrosion, fluid density, fluid flow rate, fluid pressure within the pipeline 204, material surrounding the pipeline 204, and the like. On the other hand, the transfer functions Hri and Hλi describe the filter that shapes the source signals affecting the pipeline 204 as generated by the external sources ei. As discussed above, those acoustic waves are by definition white noise, and so the filter Hri changes according to the frequency content of the external sources ei affecting the pipeline 204 such as wind, machinery, traffic noise, river noise, etc.
Given the measurements wi, i=1,2,K the transfer functions G12i, G21i, G11i, G22i, Hri, and H80 i i=1,2,K in the model 300 shown in
The mathematical relationship between the measured variables wi, i=1,2,K is determined below. A mathematical representation of the equations illustrated in
Equation (2) can be expressed as:
wm(t)=Gm(q)wm(t)+Hm(q)em(t) (3)
An equation in terms of wi's as defined in Equation (1) is desirable. The expression for wm in terms of only em is
wm=(I−Gm)−1Hmem (4)
where the inverse is guaranteed to exist because I−Gm is monic. In order to obtain an expression with a vector of Fi(q)(wir+wiλ), i=1,2,K, on the left hand side, premultiply Equation (4) by
resulting in
w(t)=M(q)(I−Gm(q))−1Hm(q)e(t)=W(q)e(t) (5)
where the elements of w are wi as defined in Equation (1) and w(q)=M(q)(I−Gm(q))−1Hm(q). Two points about Equation (5) are:
Determining the acoustic path responses the pipeline 204 segments being monitored by the sensors 116 is desired. Because each element in W is a function of G11i, G12i, G21i, G22i, Hri's and H80 i, i=1,2,K it is not sufficient to monitor the transfer functions of W. In order to independently monitor the acoustic path responses from the acoustic sources e, affecting the pipeline, W is factored. W can be factored as:
W(q)=F(q) (I−G(q))−1H(q) (6)
where F=diag(F1,K,F6), and
where
where
Using the factorization of Equation (6), a network equation relating the measured variables is:
w(t)=W(q)e(t)
F−1(q)w(t)=G(q)F−1(q)w(t)+H(q)e(t)
w(t)=F(q)G(q)F−1(q)w(t)+F(q)H(q)e(t), (7)
where G, H, and F are defined in Equation (6).
Two points about Equation (7) are:
The first point means that the dynamics of the acoustic path (represented by the acoustic path responses G11i, G12i, G21i, and G22i, i=1,2,K) can be identified independently from the external signals' ei frequency content (represented by Hλi and Hri, i=1,2,K).
The second point is an issue in that rectangular noise models may not be identifiable. In the following text a noise model that is statistically equivalent to H in Equation (7) is derived, but it is square. Two statistically equivalent noise models H1 and H2 are such that the statistics of ν1 and ν2 are the same for both noise models (where νi=Hie, i=1,2, where ei is a white noise process). In particular ν1 and ν2 are statistically equivalent if they have the same power spectral density Φv
Noise models are closely related to spectral factors. By the spectral factorization theorem, any power spectral density matrix Φ(z) can be uniquely factored as Φ(z)=H(z)H(z−1)T where H(z) is a (square) monic stable, minimum phase transfer matrix. For Equation (7) the power spectral density matrix of the noise is equal to:
where
Aii(z)=Hi,i−1(z)Hi,i−1(z−1)+Hii(z)Hii(z−1)+Hi,i+1(z)Hi,i+1(z−1)
Bij(z)=Hij(z)Hjj(z−1)+Hii(z)Hji(z−1)
Cij(z)=Hi,i−1(z)Hj,j−1(z−1).
Note that the power spectral density in Equation (8) is 5-diagonal para-Hermitian matrix. Para-Hermitian means that the (i, j) th entry, Φij(z)=Φji(z−1). Moreover, no entries in the diagonal bands are zero, as long as there is no situation where Cij or Bij are equal to zero. From Equations (7) and (8):
It follows that elements Cij only equal zero if either G12i−1 or G21i−1 are zero, which means there is no acoustic energy transfer between the sensors 116. This, in practice, is unlikely. The same argument can be made for the elements Bij. A 5-diagonal matrix where none of the elements in the diagonal bands are zero is hereinafter referred to as a full 5-diagonal matrix. The following lemma shows that the spectral factor of a full 5-diagnal matrix is nearly a full 3-diagonal matrix.
Lemma 1: Let Φν be an n×n Hermitian matrix. Let H be the unique, monic, stable and minimum phase spectral factor of Φν. If Φ is a full 5-diagonal matrix then H is a full 3-diagonal matrix with possibly non-zero entries in the (3,1) and (n−2,n) positions and possibly zero entries in the (2,1) and (n−1,n) positions.
From Equation (8) and Lemma 1 it follows that ν=He can be equivalently modelled as ν= where is a square, monic, stable, minimum phase full 3-diagonal matrix. Thus, H can be replaced by in Equation (7) without any changes to w. Consequently, the final model for the acoustic sensor setup is:
w(t)=F(q)G(q)F−1(q)w(t)+F(q)H̆(q)ĕ(t). (9)
A graphical representation of Equation (9) is shown as a model 400 in
Certain points about Equation (9) are summarized in the following list:
Using the first two points it is possible to distinguish between changes in the acoustic path response and changes in the frequency content of the external signals ei affecting the pipeline 204.
Implementation
The methods and techniques described above may be implemented using, for example, Matlab™ software. The method to obtain estimates of F(q)G(q)F−1(q) and F(q)(q) in Equation (9) is split into three actions. In the first action the processor 102 estimates the matrix in Equation (10) from the data. In the second action the processor 102 factors the estimated into F(q)G(q)F−1(q) and F(q)(q) as defined in Equation (9). In the last action the processor 102 further refines the estimates of F(q)G(q)F−1(q) and F(q)(q) to reduce prediction error.
The method for the first action, i.e. estimating in Equation (9) from data, is a by-product of estimating the source powers using, for example, a technique such as that presented in chapter 6 of Huang, Y., Benesty, J., and Chen, J. (2006), Acoustic MIMO Signal Processing, Signals and Communication Technology, Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg and in chapter 7 of Liung, L. (1999), System Identification, Theory for the User, 2nd Edition, Prentice Hall, the entireties of both of which are hereby incorporated by reference. In this action, the processor 102 determines an estimate of , where each element of (q, θ) is a parameterized transfer function that is parameterized using a Finite Impulse Response (FIR) structure, i.e. the elements are parameterized as:
Wij(q,θ)=θij(1)q−d
Wii(q,θ)=1+θii(1)q−1+Λ+θii(m)q−m,i=1,2,K,
where dij is the delay is the delay of the (i,j)th off-diagonal transfer function representing the time it takes for an acoustic wave to travel between the sensors 116 and θij is a parameter to be estimated.
When performing the second action, the processor 102 factors the estimate (q,{circumflex over (θ)}) into G and H, where {circumflex over (θ)} is an estimated version of θ. The processor 102 in one example embodiment does this factorization using a linear regression. It is desirable to factor as:
W̆(q,θ)=B−1(q,β)A(q,α), (12)
where α and β are parameter vectors that define A and B. From Equation (9), A(q, α) is an estimate of F(q)(q), and B(q, β) is an estimate of F(q)(I−G(q))−1F−1(q). In addition, from Equation (9) the matrices F(q)(q) and F(q)(I−G(q))−1F−1(q) have a particular structure. Therefore, A and B are parameterized with the same matrix structure:
where each Aij(q, α), and Bij(q, β) are parameterized transfer functions. Each Aij(q, α), and Bij(q, β) are parameterized using a FIR structure, although in different embodiments (not depicted) a different parameterization may be used. This choice ensures uniqueness of the estimates and also makes the estimation of α and β easier. In particular the processor 102 parameterizes Aij(q, α), and Bij(q, β) as
Aij(q,α)=αij(1)q−d
Bij(q,β)=βij(1)q−d
Bii(q,β)=1+βii(1)q−1+Λ+βii(m)q−m,i=1,2,K.
The parameterization is entirely defined by α, β, dij, i, j=1,2,K, and m.
From Equation (12) it follows that
B(q,β)W(q,{circumflex over (θ)})=A(q,α). (13)
Because W, A, and B are parameterized using an FIR structure, α and β appear linearly in Equation (13). This means that the equations can be re-organized to gather all elements of α and β into a vector:
where ζ({circumflex over (θ)}) is a vector. Due to the structure of A and B because W and B are parameterized with monic transfer functions on the diagonal, it follows that [P M ({circumflex over (θ)})] is square and always full rank. Therefore, estimates of α and β can be obtained as:
In certain embodiments the processor 102 uses any one or more of several methods to further refine {circumflex over (α)} and {circumflex over (β)} such that they better represent the data. For example, the processor 102 may use a Weighted Null Space Least Squares (WNLS) method. The processor 102 may use WNLS to iteratively minimize the prediction error by iteratively adjusting the value of {circumflex over (θ)}.
For example, in certain example embodiments the processor 102 iteratively selects values of {circumflex over (θ)} until the prediction error converges such that a stopping criterion is satisfied. In embodiments in which the processor 102 selects {circumflex over (θ)} using Equation (21), for example, the processor 102 may iteratively select {circumflex over (θ)} until the difference between successive iterations is small enough to satisfy the stopping criterion. In one specific example, the processor 102 ceases iterating when successive iterations of the slope of the objective function being minimized is small enough (e.g., a difference of less than 1×10−4) to satisfy the stopping criterion.
The processor 102 also determines when an estimated acoustic path response and/or an acoustic source transfer function has changed. In order to continuously monitor the pipeline 204, the processor 102 segments the data coming collected using the fiber 112 into blocks of a certain duration, each of which in the depicted embodiment is one minute long. For each block of data, the processor 102 determines estimates of F(q)G(q)F−1(q) and F(q)(q).
The result is that the processor 102 determines a sequence of estimated transfer functions in the form of the acoustic path responses and the acoustic source transfer functions. The processor 102 then monitors the estimated transfer functions for changes. Depending on which transfer function changes, the change may represent a change in the acoustic path (e.g., a hole in the pipeline 204) or a change in the frequency content of the external sources e, (e.g., a truck driving in the vicinity of the pipeline 204). Because the processor 102 compares two estimated transfer functions, in certain embodiments the processor 102 determines the confidence bounds for each transfer function. The processor 102 then uses the confidence bounds to determine the statistical distance between the two estimated frequency response functions at a particular frequency. The processor 102 does this as follows.
Let G(ejω, {circumflex over (θ)}) and (ejω, {circumflex over (θ)}) denote the frequency response functions of the estimates of G and . The covariance of the frequency response functions of the estimated transfer functions is
where
and Pθ is the covariance matrix of the estimated parameter vector:
P74 =(Ē[ψ(t,θ0)Λ0−1ψT(t,θ0)])−1,
where
where ε is the prediction error.
Let the variance of G(ejω, {circumflex over (θ)}) and H(ejω, {circumflex over (θ)}) be denoted σG2(ejω) and σH2(ejω) respectively. Then the statistical difference between two estimates G(ejω, {circumflex over (θ)}1) and G(ejω, {circumflex over (θ)}2) is:
The processor 102 determines the statistical distance at each frequency of the frequency response functions. From Equation (15) it follows that if the estimates G(ejω, {circumflex over (θ)}1) and G(ejω, {circumflex over (θ)}2) are very different at frequencies where the variance of the estimates are small, then the statistical distance between them is large. In contrast, if the estimates G(ejω, {circumflex over (θ)}1) and G(ejω, {circumflex over (θ)}2) are very different at frequencies where the variance of the estimates is large, then the statistical distance between the estimates is not as big as before. Thus, by using statistical difference to monitor for changes in transfer functions, the processor 102 incorporates uncertainty associated with the estimates into the monitoring method.
Accordingly, in one embodiment consistent with the above description, the method for detecting whether the acoustic event has occurred comprises, given periodically refreshed data sets of length N obtained from L channels of the sensor as shown in
One example embodiment of this method is depicted in
The processor 102 then proceeds to block 1008 where it monitors over time variations in one or both of the acoustic path responses and acoustic source transfer functions. An example of this is determining statistical differences of one or both of the acoustic path responses and acoustic source transfer functions as described above.
The processor 102 subsequently proceeds to block 1010 where it determines whether at least one of the variations exceeds an event threshold. An example of this is determining whether the determined statistical differences exceed the event threshold.
If not, the processor 102 proceeds to block 1014 and the method of
If at least one of the power estimates exceeds the event threshold, the processor 102 proceeds from block 1010 to 1012. At block 1012, the processor 102 attributes the acoustic event 208 to one of the sensors 116 for which the acoustic path response or acoustic source transfer function varied in excess of the event threshold. For example, the processor 102 may attribute the acoustic event 208 to the one of the sensors 116 for which the acoustic path response or acoustic source transfer function most exceeds the event threshold. Alternatively, in embodiments in which there are multiple acoustic events, the processor 102 may attribute one of the acoustic events 208 to each of the sensors 116 for which the acoustic path response or acoustic source transfer function exceeds the event threshold. In one example embodiment in which there is only one acoustic event 208, the event threshold is selected such that the acoustic path response or acoustic source transfer function exceeds the event threshold for only one of the sensors 116, and the acoustic event 208 is attributed to that sensor 116.
In embodiments in which there are multiple acoustic events 208, the power estimates of the acoustic sources attributed to multiple of the sensors 116 may exceed the event threshold; in the current embodiment, the processor 102 attributes a different acoustic event 208 to each of the sensors 116 i to which is attributed an acoustic source that exceeds the event threshold. The event threshold for the sensors 116 may be identical in certain embodiments; in other embodiments, the event thresholds may differ for any two or more of the sensors 116.
In embodiments in which the acoustic event 208 is the leak, the processor 102 determines the acoustic event as affecting the longitudinal segment of the pipeline 204 corresponding to the sensor 116 to which the acoustic event is attributed.
In at least some example embodiments, a test signal may be generated and used to do one or both of generate and test the acoustic path responses and the acoustic source transfer functions. The test signal may, for example, be an impulse signal, or white noise comprising a wide acoustic band, a frequency sweep signal, or pings of various frequencies. Using a known acoustic input allows better estimation of the acoustic path response and the acoustic source transfer functions because it reduces the uncertainty regarding the input signals and improves the transfer function calculations based on the relationship between the measured output and the known input signals. In embodiments in which the input signal is or approximates an ideal impulse signal, the frequency domain conversion of the measured output signal is or approximates the acoustic path response.
Two uncorrelated sequences of Gaussian noise were generated. Each signal was split into 4 parts. Parts 1-4 were filtered by a Chebyshev Type 1 Bandpass filter of order 2, 3, 4, and 5, respectively. The signals were played over the speakers 504a,b. The ordering of the first signal was r1, r2, r3, r4, and r1, where ri denotes the signal filtered with bandpass filter i. The transition times of the signals are t=6, 30, 54, 78 mins. The ordering of the second signal is r3, r4, r1, r2, and r3. In addition, the second signal is shifted such that the transition between filters occur at t=18, 42, 66, 90 mins. Therefore, at all times, both speakers 504 are playing sequences with different spectral content, and at no time are both speakers 504 changing their spectral content simultaneously. The speakers 504 are the external signals ei, and the frequency content of the external signals ei is the frequency content of the signals played over the speakers 504. A spectrogram of the frequency content of both speakers 504 in shown in the upper two plots of
The acoustic path in
In
In
In
In
The embodiments have been described above with reference to flowcharts and block diagrams of methods, apparatuses, systems, and computer program products. In this regard, the flowchart and block diagram in
Each block of the flowcharts and block diagrams and combinations thereof can be implemented by computer program instructions. These computer program instructions may be provided to a processor of a general purpose computer, special purpose computer, or other programmable data processing apparatus to produce a machine, such that the instructions, which execute via the processor of the computer or other programmable data processing apparatus, create means for implementing the functions or acts specified in the blocks of the flowcharts and block diagrams.
These computer program instructions may also be stored in a computer readable medium that can direct a computer, other programmable data processing apparatus, or other devices to function in a particular manner, such that the instructions stored in the computer readable medium produce an article of manufacture including instructions that implement the function or act specified in the blocks of the flowcharts and block diagrams. The computer program instructions may also be loaded onto a computer, other programmable data processing apparatus, or other devices to cause a series of operational steps to be performed on the computer, other programmable apparatus or other devices to produce a computer implemented process such that the instructions that execute on the computer or other programmable apparatus provide processes for implementing the functions or acts specified in the blocks of the flowcharts and block diagrams.
As will be appreciated by one skilled in the art, embodiments of the technology described herein may be embodied as a system, method, or computer program product. Accordingly, these embodiments may take the form of an entirely hardware embodiment, an entirely software embodiment (including firmware, resident software, micro-code, etc.) or an embodiment combining software and hardware that may all generally be referred to herein as a “circuit,” “module,” or “system.” Furthermore, embodiments of the presently described technology may take the form of a computer program product embodied in one or more non-transitory computer readable media having stored or encoded thereon computer readable program code.
Where aspects of the technology described herein are implemented as a computer program product, any combination of one or more computer readable media may be utilized. A computer readable medium may comprise a computer readable signal medium or a non-transitory computer readable medium used for storage. A non-transitory computer readable medium may comprise, for example, an electronic, magnetic, optical, electromagnetic, infrared, or semiconductor system, apparatus, or device, or any suitable combination thereof. Additional examples of non-transitory computer readable media comprise a portable computer diskette, a hard disk, RAM, ROM, an erasable programmable read-only memory (EPROM or flash memory), a portable compact disc read-only memory (CD-ROM), an optical storage device, a magnetic storage device, or any suitable combination thereof. As used herein, a non-transitory computer readable medium may comprise any tangible medium that can contain, store, or have encoded thereon a program for use by or in connection with an instruction execution system, apparatus, or device. Thus, computer readable program code for implementing aspects of the embodiments described herein may be contained, stored, or encoded on the computer readable medium 104 of the signal processing device 118.
Program code embodied on a computer readable medium may be transmitted using any appropriate medium, including but not limited to wireless, wireline, optical fiber cable, radiofrequency, and the like, or any suitable combination thereof. Computer program code for carrying out operations comprising part of the embodiments described herein may be written in any combination of one or more programming languages, including an object oriented programming language and procedural programming languages. The program code may execute entirely on the user's computer, partly on the user's computer, as a stand-alone software package, partly on the user's computer and partly on a remote computer or entirely on the remote computer or server. In the latter scenario, the remote computer may be connected to the user's computer through any type of network, including a local area network (LAN) or a wide area network (WAN), or the connection may be made to an external computer (e.g., through the Internet using an Internet Service Provider).
The terminology used herein is for the purpose of describing particular embodiments only and is not intended to be limiting. Accordingly, as used herein, the singular forms “a”, “an” and “the” are intended to include the plural forms as well, unless the context clearly indicates otherwise. It will be further understood that the terms “comprises” and “comprising,” when used in this specification, specify the presence of one or more stated features, integers, steps, operations, elements, and components, but do not preclude the presence or addition of one or more other features, integers, steps, operations, elements, components, and groups. Directional terms such as “top”, “bottom”, “upwards”, “downwards”, “vertically”, and “laterally” are used in the following description for the purpose of providing relative reference only, and are not intended to suggest any limitations on how any article is to be positioned during use, or to be mounted in an assembly or relative to an environment. Additionally, the term “couple” and variants of it such as “coupled”, “couples”, and “coupling” as used in this description are intended to include indirect and direct connections unless otherwise indicated. For example, if a first device is coupled to a second device, that coupling may be through a direct connection or through an indirect connection via other devices and connections. Similarly, if the first device is communicatively coupled to the second device, communication may be through a direct connection or through an indirect connection via other devices and connections.
One or more example embodiments have been described by way of illustration only. This description is been presented for purposes of illustration and description, but is not intended to be exhaustive or limited to the form disclosed. Many modifications and variations will be apparent to those of ordinary skill in the art without departing from the scope of the claims. It will be apparent to persons skilled in the art that a number of variations and modifications can be made without departing from the scope of the claims. In construing the claims, it is to be understood that the use of a computer to implement the embodiments described herein is essential at least where the presence or use of computer equipment is positively recited in the claims.
Filing Document | Filing Date | Country | Kind |
---|---|---|---|
PCT/CA2018/050812 | 6/29/2018 | WO |
Publishing Document | Publishing Date | Country | Kind |
---|---|---|---|
WO2019/000107 | 1/3/2019 | WO | A |
Number | Name | Date | Kind |
---|---|---|---|
5526689 | Coulter | Jun 1996 | A |
20060225507 | Paulson | Oct 2006 | A1 |
20150034306 | Hull | Feb 2015 | A1 |
Number | Date | Country |
---|---|---|
2013102252 | Jul 2013 | WO |
Entry |
---|
Aichner, Robert, et al., “A real-time blind source separation scheme and its application to reverberant and noisy acoustic environments,” Signal Processing 86 (2006), pp. 1260-1277. |
Huang, Yiteng, et al., “Blind Identification of MIMO Signal Processing,” Acoustic MIMO Signal Processing: Springer Series on Signals and Communication Technology, Chapter 6, Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2006, pp. 109-161. |
Buchner, Herbert, et al., “A Generalization of Blind Source Separation Algorithms for Convolutive Mixtures Based on Second-Order Statistics,” IEEE Transactions on Speech and Audio Processing, vol. 13, No. 1, Jan. 2005, pp. 120-134. |
Aichner, Robert, et al., “Convolutive Blind Source Separation for Noisy Mixtures,” in Speech and Audio Processing in Adverse Environments, ser. Signals and Communication Technology, E. Hansler and G. Schmidt, Eds. Springer Berlin Heidelberg, 2008, Ch. 13, pp. 469-525. |
Chaudhry, S.M., et al., “System Identitification of Acoustic Characteristics of Enclosures with Resonant Second Order Dynamics,” Progress in Electromagnetics Research, PIER 61, 2006, pp. 89-110. |
Fang, B., et al., “Modelling, system identification, and collrol of acoustic-structure dynamics in 3-D enclosures,” Control Engineering Practice 12 (2004), pp. 989-1004. |
Gu, Yuantao, et al., “10 Norm Constraint LMS Algorithm for Sparse System Identification,” IEEE Signal Processing Letters, 16(9): 774-777, 2009. |
Hua, Yingbo, et al., “Blind Identification of FIR MIMO Channels by Decorrelating Subchannels,” IEEE Transactions on Signal Processing, vol. 51, No. 5, May 2003, pp. 1143-1155. |
Huang, Yiteng, et al., “Identification of acoustic MIMO systems: Challenges and opportunities,” Signal Processing 86 (2006) 1278-1295. |
Hwang, Woo Seok, et al., “System identification of structural acoustic system using the scale correction,” Mechanical Systems and Signal Processing 20 (2006) 389-402. |
Weinstein, Ehud, et al., “Multi-Channel Signal Separation by Decorrelation,” IEEE Transactions on Speech and Audio Processing, vol. 1, No. 4, Oct. 1993, pp. 405-413. |
Yang, Jin, et al., “Leak location using blind system identification in water distribution pipelines,” Journal of Sound and Vibration 310 (2008) 134-148. |
Liung, L., “System Identification, Theory for the User,” 2nd ed., Chapter 7, Prentice Hall, 1999. |
L. Wei, Z. Laibin, X. Qingqing, and Y. Chunying, “Gas pipeline leakage detection based on acoustic technology,” Engineering Fail-ure Analysis, vol. 31, pp. 1-7, Nov. 16, 2012. |
X. Qingqing, Z. Laibin, and L. Wei, “Acoustic detection technology for gas pipeline leakage,” Process Safety and Environmental Pro-tection, vol. 91, pp. 253-261, 2013. |
Y. Huang, J. Benesty, and J. Chen, “Simulation, Prediction, & Control,” Acoustic MIMO Signal Processing, ser. Signals and Communication Technology, Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg, ch. 3, pp. 51-68, 2006. |
R. Pintelon and J. Schoukens, “Design of Excitation Signals,” System Identification, A Frequency Domain Approach, 2nd ed., ch. 5, pp. 151-175, Hoboken, New Jersey, USA: IEEE Press, John Wiley and Sons, Inc., 2012. |
M. Brennan, Y. Gao, and P. Joseph, “On the relationship between time and frequency domain methods in time delay estimation for leak detection in water distribution pipes,” Journal of Sound and Vibration, vol. 304, No. 12, pp. 213-223, 2007. |
L. Meng, L. Yuxing, W. Wuchang, and F. Juntao, “Experimental study on leak detection and location for gas pipeline based on acoustic method,” Journal of Loss Prevention in the Process Indus-tries, vol. 25, pp. 90-102, 2012. |
H. Buchner, R. Aichner and W. Kellermann, “Trinicon-based Blind System Identification with Application to Multiple-Source Localization and Separation,” Blind Speech Separation, pp. 101-147, 2007. |
H. Fuchs and R. Riehle, “Ten years of experience with leak detection by acoustic signal analysis,” Applied Acoustics, vol. 33, pp. 1-19, 1991. |
Y. Gao, M. Brennan, and P. Joseph, “On the effects of reflections on time delay estimation for leak detection in buried plastic water pipes,” Journal of Sound and Vibration, vol. 325, No. 3, pp. 649-663, May 8, 2009. |
L. Ljung, “Blind Identification of Acoustic MIMO Systems,” System Identification. Theory for the User, ch. 6, 2nd ed. Prentice Hall, pp. 109-167, 1999. |
Number | Date | Country | |
---|---|---|---|
20200158594 A1 | May 2020 | US |
Number | Date | Country | |
---|---|---|---|
62527847 | Jun 2017 | US |