Two-phase flow regime identification using multi-method feature extraction and explainable kernel Fisher discriminant analysis

Purpose Identifying the flow regime is a prerequisite for accurately modeling two-phase flow. This paper aims to introduce a comprehensive data-driven workflow for flow regime identification. Design/methodology/approach A numerical two-phase flow model was validated against experimental data and was used to generate dynamic pressure signals for three different flow regimes. First, four distinct methods were used for feature extraction: discrete wavelet transform (DWT), empirical mode decomposition, power spectral density and the time series analysis method. Kernel Fisher discriminant analysis (KFDA) was used to simultaneously perform dimensionality reduction and machine learning (ML) classification for each set of features. Finally, the Shapley additive explanations (SHAP) method was applied to make the workflow explainable. Findings The results highlighted that the DWT + KFDA method exhibited the highest testing and training accuracy at 95.2% and 88.8%, respectively. Results also include a virtual flow regime map to facilitate the visualization of features in two dimension. Finally, SHAP analysis showed that minimum and maximum values extracted at the fourth and second signal decomposition levels of DWT are the best flow-distinguishing features. Practical implications This workflow can be applied to opaque pipes fitted with pressure sensors to achieve flow assurance and automatic monitoring of two-phase flow occurring in many process industries. Originality/value This paper presents a novel flow regime identification method by fusing dynamic pressure measurements with ML techniques. The authors’ novel DWT + KFDA method demonstrates superior performance for flow regime identification with explainability.

[1]  Umair Khan,et al.  Numerical Gas–Liquid Two-Phase Flow Regime Identification in a Horizontal Pipe Using Dynamic Pressure Data , 2023, Applied Sciences.

[2]  S. Rushd,et al.  Comparative Performance of Machine-Learning and Deep-Learning Algorithms in Predicting Gas–Liquid Flow Regimes , 2023, Processes.

[3]  Chao He,et al.  Numerical investigation of gas-liquid two-phase flow in horizontal pipe with orifice plate , 2021 .

[4]  Gioia Falcone,et al.  Development of a Real-Time Objective Gas–Liquid Flow Regime Identifier Using Kernel Methods , 2021, IEEE Transactions on Cybernetics.

[5]  Christopher J. Anders,et al.  Explaining Deep Neural Networks and Beyond: A Review of Methods and Applications , 2021, Proceedings of the IEEE.

[6]  Sotiris Kotsiantis,et al.  Explainable AI: A Review of Machine Learning Interpretability Methods , 2020, Entropy.

[7]  Ke-wei Xu,et al.  Two-phase flow regime identification based on the liquid-phase velocity information and machine learning , 2020, Experiments in Fluids.

[8]  Mamdud Hossain,et al.  Investigation of slug-churn flow induced transient excitation forces at pipe bend , 2019, Journal of Fluids and Structures.

[9]  Haesang Yang,et al.  Monitoring Severe Slugging in Pipeline-Riser System Using Accelerometers for Application in Early Recognition , 2019, Sensors.

[10]  Li Liu,et al.  Flow regime identification of swirling gas-liquid flow with image processing technique and neural networks , 2019, Chemical Engineering Science.

[11]  Xingru Wu,et al.  An improved model for gas-liquid flow pattern prediction based on machine learning , 2019, Journal of Petroleum Science and Engineering.

[12]  M. Nasif,et al.  Numerical simulation of two-phase flow regime in horizontal pipeline and its validation , 2018, International Journal of Numerical Methods for Heat & Fluid Flow.

[13]  Maciej Kusy,et al.  Identification of liquid-gas flow regime in a pipeline using gamma-ray absorption technique and computational intelligence methods , 2018 .

[14]  Scott Lundberg,et al.  A Unified Approach to Interpreting Model Predictions , 2017, NIPS.

[15]  Avanti Shrikumar,et al.  Learning Important Features Through Propagating Activation Differences , 2017, ICML.

[16]  Abdalellah O. Mohmmed,et al.  Statistical assessment of experimental observation on the slug body length and slug translational velocity in a horizontal pipe , 2017 .

[17]  Hoi Yeung,et al.  Non-invasive classification of gas–liquid two-phase horizontal flow regimes using an ultrasonic Doppler sensor and a neural network , 2016 .

[18]  Marco Tulio Ribeiro,et al.  “Why Should I Trust You?”: Explaining the Predictions of Any Classifier , 2016, NAACL.

[19]  J. Banerjee,et al.  Characterization of two-phase slug flow sub-regimes using flow visualization , 2015 .

[20]  H. Shaban,et al.  Measurement of gas and liquid flow rates in two-phase pipe flows by the application of machine learning techniques to differential pressure signals , 2014 .

[21]  Zhong-Ke Gao,et al.  Uncovering dynamic behaviors underlying experimental oil–water two-phase flow based on dynamic segmentation algorithm , 2013 .

[22]  Yaguo Lei,et al.  A review on empirical mode decomposition in fault diagnosis of rotating machinery , 2013 .

[23]  I. Indarto,et al.  The Identification of Gas-liquid Co-current Two Phase Flow Pattern in a Horizontal Pipe Using the Power Spectral Density and the Artificial Neural Network (ANN) , 2012 .

[24]  W. Qian,et al.  Analysis of the PSD and PDF characteristics on typical flow regime of gas-liquid two-phase flow in horizontal pipes , 2011, 2011 Second International Conference on Mechanic Automation and Control Engineering.

[25]  Chul-Hwa Song,et al.  An application of the wavelet analysis technique for the objective discrimination of two-phase flow patterns , 2010 .

[26]  Yongmei Huang,et al.  Study of AR model based on EMD in flow regime identification of gas-liquid two-phase flow , 2010, World Congress on Intelligent Control and Automation.

[27]  I. Selesnick,et al.  Full length article: Emerging applications of wavelets: A review , 2010 .

[28]  Imre Pázsit,et al.  General regression artificial neural networks for two-phase flow regime identification , 2009, 2009 International Joint Conference on Neural Networks.

[29]  Feng Dong,et al.  Identification of gas/liquid two-phase flow regime through ERT-based measurement and feature extraction , 2007 .

[30]  Elif Derya Übeyli,et al.  Improving medical diagnostic accuracy of ultrasound Doppler signals by combining neural network models , 2005, Comput. Biol. Medicine.

[31]  Jian Yang,et al.  Essence of kernel Fisher discriminant: KPCA plus LDA , 2004, Pattern Recognit..

[32]  S. M. Ghiaasiaan,et al.  Artificial neural network approach for flow regime classification in gas–liquid–fiber flows based on frequency domain analysis of pressure signals , 2004 .

[33]  N. Huang,et al.  The empirical mode decomposition and the Hilbert spectrum for nonlinear and non-stationary time series analysis , 1998, Proceedings of the Royal Society of London. Series A: Mathematical, Physical and Engineering Sciences.

[34]  J. S. Archer,et al.  Neural network based objective flow regime identification in air-water two phase flow , 1994 .

[35]  Jan Čermák,et al.  Diagnostics of gas—liquid flow patterns in chemical engineering systems , 1989 .

[36]  Goichi Matsui,et al.  Identification of flow regimes in vertical gas-liquid two-phase flow using differential pressure fluctuations , 1984 .

[37]  A. E. Dukler,et al.  Modelling flow pattern transitions for steady upward gas‐liquid flow in vertical tubes , 1980 .

[38]  P. Welch The use of fast Fourier transform for the estimation of power spectra: A method based on time averaging over short, modified periodograms , 1967 .

[39]  I. Moon,et al.  Explainable Artificial Intelligence for Fault Diagnosis of Industrial Processes , 2023, IEEE Transactions on Industrial Informatics.

[40]  Caleb S. Brooks,et al.  Identification of flow regimes in boiling flows in a vertical annulus channel with machine learning techniques , 2022, International Journal of Heat and Mass Transfer.

[41]  Ovid Baker,et al.  Design of Pipelines for the Simultaneous Flow of Oil and Gas , 1953 .