Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
This study develops an analytical inverse framework for estimating the effective area of a single leak at a known location in a horizontal gas pipeline. A one-dimensional isothermal diffusion model with constant resistance and separately parameterised boundary pressures is coupled with compressible discharge. Modal and Volterra representations describe pressure and leakage under choked conditions. Independent finite-difference verification gives a pressure root-mean-square discrepancy of 0.011 Pa in the finest benchmark comparison. Extended Monte Carlo tests cover four pressure-noise levels and three opening diameters; at 10 Pa noise, relative area root-mean-square errors are 11.61%, 2.90%, and 0.73% for 10, 20, and 40 mm openings, respectively. Location and resistance errors produce additional estimation bias. Across three leak positions, a 10-fold leakage increase requires area increases of 10.076–10.211 times because of local pressure feedback. However, a nonlinear-friction benchmark yields approximately 1.00 kPa pressure discrepancy and drives absolute-pressure inversion to the zero-area bound. The results establish numerical consistency and conditional sensitivity while revealing substantial model discrepancy. Geometric-area recovery requires discharge-coefficient calibration, and operational application requires further model assessment and experimental validation.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Hasanov et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: