地下供水管线渗漏的探地雷达模拟探测试验分析

doi:10.11720/wtyht.2023.1199

Abstract
Figure/Table
References
Related Citation (15)

Download: PDF (7153 KB) HTML (1 KB)
Export: BibTeX | EndNote (RIS)

Abstract

As an important part of urban infrastructure, underground water supply pipelines frequently leak or break due to disrepair,corrosion,and poor construction quality.It is of great significance to identify the leakage locations and affected areas of underground water supply pipelines using a non-destructive testing method for the purpose of early warning and follow-up treatment.This study conducted simulated detection experiments and analysis of underground water supply pipeline leakage using the ground penetrating radar (GPR) method.Firstly,this study established the leakage model of water supply pipelines in sandy soil using the SEEP/W module in the GeoStudio software and calculated the volumetric water content of different leakage locations and leakage times.Then,it established the relative dielectric constant and conductivity model for water supply pipeline leakage using the Topp equation and the empirical equations of electrical conductivity and water content.On this basis,this study conducted the GPR simulated detection of the water supply pipeline leakage model with different leakage locations and different leakage times using the finite difference time domain (FDTD) method and analyzed the simulation results.Finally,this study conducted the GPR-based physical simulated detection tests of water supply pipeline leakage and compared the test results with the numerical simulation results.The study results are as follows.Compared with the hyperbolic diffracted wave of the water supply pipelines without leakage,that of the water supply pipelines with leakage at different locations are stated as follows.For the leakage on the upper side,a longer leakage area and a larger leakage area were associated with an earlier present hyperbolic diffracted wave with weaker energy,while the horizontal position of the hyperbolic diffracted wave's vertex remained unchanged.For the leakage on the lower side,two hyperbolic diffracted waves appeared,which moved up and down individually.Moreover,a longer leakage time corresponded to two weaker and more separated hyperbolic diffracted waves.The horizontal positions of the hyperbolic diffracted waves' vertexes remained unchanged.For the leakage on the left (right) side,a longer leakage time was associated with a weaker hyperbolic diffracted wave,whose vertex deviated farther toward the upper left (right).The simulated detection results of this study can provide a reliable basis for early warning and follow-up treatment of water supply pipeline leakage.

Key words： water supply pipeline leakage GeoStudio software ground penetrating radar numerical simulation physical simulation

Received: 17 May 2022 Published: 05 July 2023

ZTFLH:

P631.4

	Service

	E-mail this article
	Add to my bookshelf
	Add to citation manager
	E-mail Alert
	RSS
	Articles by authors
	Yu-Cheng WANG
	Hong-Hua WANG
	Peng-Jin SU
	Jun-Bo GONG
	Yu-He XI

Cite this article:

Yu-Cheng WANG,Hong-Hua WANG,Peng-Jin SU, et al. Simulated detection experiments of underground water supply pipeline leakage based on ground penetrating radar[J]. Geophysical and Geochemical Exploration, 2023, 47(3): 794-803.

URL:

https://www.wutanyuhuatan.com/EN/10.11720/wtyht.2023.1199 OR https://www.wutanyuhuatan.com/EN/Y2023/V47/I3/794

Volumetric water content distribution of water supply pipeline after 2.0 h leakage at different locations
a—upper leakage;b—lower leakage;c—left leakage;d—right leakage

Relative permittivity distribution of water supply pipeline at different leakage position for 2.0 h leakage
a—upper leakage;b—lower leakage;c—left leakage;d—right leakage

Distribution diagram of conductivity of water supply pipeline after leakage of 2.0 h at different locations
a—upper leakage;b—lower leakage;c—left leakage;d—right leakage

No leakage of water supply line relative permittivity model(a) and its simulated GPR profile(b)

The permittivity model of water supply line after upper side leakage 0.5 h(a),1.0 h(b),2.0 h(c) and 3.0 h(d)

GPR simulated profile of water supply line after upper side leakage 0.5 h(a),1.0 h(b),2.0 h(c) and 3.0 h(d)

Fig.6
">

Comparison of Single waveform at horizontal center position in Fig.6

The permittivity model of water supply pipeline after below leakage 0.5 h(a),1.0 h(b),2.0 h(c) and 3.0 h(d)

GPR simulated profile water supply pipeline after below leakage 0.5 h(a),1.0 h(b),2.0 h(c) and 3.0 h(d)

Fig.9
">

Comparison of Single waveform at horizontal center position in Fig.9

The permittivity model of water supply pipeline after left leakage 0.5 h(a),1.0 h(b),2.0 h(c) and 3.0 h(d)

The permittivity model of water supply pipeline after right leakage 0.5 h(a),1.0 h(b),2.0 h(c) and 3.0 h(d)

GPR simulated profile of water supply pipeline after left leakage 0.5 h(a), 1.0 h(b), 2.0 h(c) and 3.0 h(d)

GPR simulated profile of water supply pipeline after right leakage 0.5 h(a), 1.0 h(b), 2.0 h(c) and 3.0 h(d)

Fig.13 or Fig.14
">

Single channel waveform comparison at horizontal center in Fig.13 or Fig.14

Physical model of underground water supply pipeline leakage(a) and layout of survey lines(b)

GPR physical simulation profile of water supply line after upper leakage 0 min(a), 20.0 min(b), 40.0 min(c) and 60.0 min(d)

GPR physical simulation profile of water supply pipeline after bellow leakage 0 min(a), 20.0 min(b), 40.0 min(c) and 60.0 min(d)

GPR physical simulation profile of water supply line after left leakage 0 min(a), 20.0 min(b), 40.0 min(c) and 60.0 min(d)

GPR physical simulation profile of water supply line after right leakage 0 min(a), 20.0 min(b), 40.0 min(c) and 60.0 min(d)

[1]	金鑫. 管线渗漏异常探地雷达数据的电场分量成像分析[J]. 煤田地质与勘探, 2018, 46(2):159-163.
[1]	Jin X. Study on electric field component imaging of leakage in pipeline using GPR[J]. Coal Geology & Exploration, 2018, 46(2):159-163.
[2]	姬建, 夏嘉诚, 张哲铭, 等. 污水管线渗漏诱发地面下陷数值分析[J]. 河海大学学报:自然科学版, 2021, 49(5):406-412.
[2]	Ji J, Xia J C, Zhang Z M, et al. Numerical analysis of ground subsidence induced by leakage of sewage pipeline[J]. Journal of Hohai University:Natural Sciences, 2021, 49(5):406-412.
[3]	张军伟, 刘秉峰, 李雪, 等. 基于GPRMax2D的地下管线精细化探测方法[J]. 物探与化探, 2019, 43(2):435-440.
[3]	Zhang J W, Liu B F, Li X, et al. Refined detection method of underground pipeline based on GPRMax2D[J]. Geophysical and Geochemical Exploration, 2019, 43(2):435-440.
[4]	杨向东. 地下管线综合探测技术在道路改造中的应用[J]. 物探与化探, 2001, 25(6):477-479.
[4]	Yang X D. The application of comprehensive detection technology for underground pipes and cables to road rebuilding[J]. Geophysical and Geochemical Exploration, 2001, 25(6):477-479.
[5]	Prego F J, Solla M, Puente I, et al. Efficient GPR data acquisition to detect underground pipes[J]. NDT&E International, 2017, 91:22-31.
[6]	袁明德. 探地雷达探测地下管线的能力[J]. 物探与化探, 2002, 26(2):152-155,162.
[6]	Yuan M D. The capacity of the ground-penetrating radar for detecting underground pipelines[J]. Geophysical and Geochemical Exploration, 2002, 26(2):152-155,162.
[7]	Laanearu J, Hou Q, Annus I, et al. Water-column mass losses during the emptying of a large-scale pipeline by pressurized air[J]. Proceedings of the Estonian Academy of Sciences, 2015, 64(1):8-16.
[8]	杨理践, 张禄, 高松巍. 供水管道泄漏声信号特性[J]. 沈阳工业大学学报, 2011, 33(2):183-187.
[8]	Yang L J, Zhang L, Gao S W. Acoustic signal characteristic for water supply pipeline leakage[J]. Journal of Shenyang University of Technology, 2011, 33(2):183-187.
[9]	陈建宇. 供水管道在线泄露检测方法[J]. 辽宁工程技术大学学报:自然科学版, 2015, 34(4):496-499.
[9]	Chen J Y. On-line water-pipeline leak detection method[J]. Journal of Liaoning Technical University:Natural Science, 2015, 34(4):496-499.
[10]	Lai W W L, Chang R K W, Sham J F C, et al. Perturbation mapping of water leak in buried water pipes via laboratory validation experiments with high-frequency ground penetrating radar (GPR)[J]. Tunnelling and Underground Space Technology Incorporating Trenchless Technology Research, 2016, 52:157-167.
[11]	Lau K W, Cheung W Y, Lai W L, et al. Characterizing pipe leakage with a combination of GPR wave velocity algorithms[J]. Tunnelling and Underground Space Technology, 2021, 109:103740.
[12]	李方震, 沈宇鹏, 黄乐艺, 等. 探地雷达识别管线渗漏病害的试验研究[J]. 城市地质, 2017, 12(1):20-29.
[12]	Li F Z, Shen Y P, Huang L Y, et al. Study on application of test method for GPR pipeline seepage defects[J]. Urban Geology, 2017, 12(1):20-29.
[13]	胡群芳, 郑泽昊, 刘海, 等. 三维探地雷达在城市市政管线渗漏探测中的应用[J]. 同济大学学报:自然科学版, 2020, 48(7):972-981.
[13]	Hu Q F, Zheng Z H, Liu H, et al. Application of 3D ground penetrating radar to leakage detection of urban underground pipes[J]. Journal of Tongji University:Natural Science, 2020, 48(7):972-981.
[14]	宋涵韬, 高磊, 韩川, 等. 地下管线及油污泄漏地质雷达正演模拟研究[J]. 能源与环保, 2019, 41(1):52-57.
[14]	Song H T, Gao L, Han C, et al. Study on forward modeling of underground pipelines and oil leakage by ground penetrating radar[J]. China Energy and Environmental Protection, 2019, 41(1):52-57.
[15]	沈宇鹏, 董淑海, 王卿, 等. 城市供水管道渗漏程度的渗流模型分析与探地雷达信号正演[J]. 工程地质学报, 2016, 24(s1):422-429.
[15]	Shen Y P, Dong S H, Wang Q, et al. Different degrees of water pipelines leakage model analysis and GPR signal forward simulation[J]. Journal of Engineering Geology, 2016, 24(s1):422-429.
[16]	何保, 宋帅. 基于GeoStudio的边坡稳定性分析及支护方案选择的理论探讨[J]. 地质与勘探, 2019, 55(5):1329-1335.
[16]	He B, Song S. Theoretical analysis of slope stability and support scheme selection based on software GeoStudio[J]. Geology and Exploration, 2019, 55(5):1329-1335.
[17]	鞠程炜, 郝嘉凌, 杨晓松, 等. 台州东部新区围区海水入侵抗渗计算[J]. 武汉大学学报:工学版, 2018, 51(5):394-400,417.
[17]	Ju C W, Hao J L, Yang X S, et al. Calculation of anti-seepage of seawater intrusion in Taizhou eastern new reclamation area[J]. Engineering Journal of Wuhan University, 2018, 51(5):394-400,417.
[18]	郝喆, 陈红丹, 张颖, 等. 降雨—蒸发—蒸腾耦合作用下的中小型尾矿库重金属Cu²⁺迁移规律研究[J]. 安全与环境学报, 2022, 22(1):467-475.
[18]	Hao Z, Chen H D, Zhang Y, et al. Research on migration rule of heavy metal Cu²⁺ in small and medium-sized tailings ponds under rainfall-evaporation-transpiration coupling[J]. Journal of Safety and Environment, 2022, 22(1):467-475.
[19]	曹泽. 下穿管道对堤防工作性状的影响分析[D]. 扬州: 扬州大学, 2016.
[19]	Cao Z. The Analysis of mechanical behavior of pipeline undercrossing embankment[D]. Yangzhou: Yangzhou University, 2016.
[20]	Topp G C, Davis J L, Annan A P. Electromagnetic determination of soil water content:Measurements in coaxial transmission lines[J]. Water Resources Research, 1980, 16(3):574-582.
[21]	Mccutcheon M C, Farahani H J, Stednick J D, et al. Effect of soil water on apparent soil electrical conductivity and texture relationships in a dryland field[J]. Biosystems Engineering, 2006, 94(1):19-32.
[22]	胡明顺, 潘冬明, 董守华, 等. 煤火区浅部松散煤体及采空区的探地雷达响应特征[J]. 物探与化探, 2012, 36(4):598-601,606.
[22]	Hu M S, Pan D M, Dong S H, et al. GPR response characteristics of shallow loose coal seam and goaf in the coalfield combustion area[J]. Geophysical and Geochemical Exploration, 2012, 36(4):598-601,606.
[23]	黄玲, 曾昭发, 王者江, 等. 钢筋混凝土缺陷的探地雷达检测模拟与成像效果[J]. 物探与化探, 2007, 31(2):181-185.
[23]	Huang L, Zeng Z F, Wang Z J, et al. Modeling and imaging effects of GPR detection of reinforced concrete defects[J]. Geophysical and Geochemical Exploration, 2007, 31(2):181-185.
[24]	王敏玲, 王洪华. 探地雷达波动方程数值模拟方法研究进展综述[J]. 地球物理学进展, 2018, 33(5):1974-1984.
[24]	Wang M L, Wang H H. Review of wave equation numerical simulation methods for ground penetrating radar[J]. Progress in Geophysics, 2018, 33(5):1974-1984.