ArticleSensors (Basel, Switzerland)2025
Leakage Detection Using Distributed Acoustic Sensing in Gas Pipelines.
Article in Sensors (Basel, Switzerland), 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Review of Research Advances in Full-Spectrum Fiber Optic Sensing Technologies for COACS omega · 2026Review
- Intelligent monitoring system for pipeline status based on MEMS acoustic emission sensors.Microsystems & nanoengineering · 2026Article
- A Mixture of Experts Model for Third-Party Pipeline Intrusion Detection Using DAS.Sensors (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
Abstract
This study investigates the performance of Distributed Acoustic Sensing (DAS) for detecting gas pipeline leaks under controlled experimental conditions, using multiple fiber cable types deployed both internally and externally. A 21 m steel pipeline with a 1 m test section was configured to simulate leakage scenarios with varying leak sizes (¼", ½", ¾", and 1"), orientations (top, side, bottom), and flow velocities (2-18 m/s). Experiments were conducted under two installation conditions: a supported pipeline mounted on tripods, and a buried pipeline laid on the ground and covered with sand. Four fiber deployment methods were tested: three internal cables of varying geometries and one externally mounted straight cable. DAS data were analyzed using both time-domain vibration intensity and frequency-domain spectral methods. The results demonstrate that leak detectability is influenced by multiple interacting factors, including flow rate, leak size and orientation, pipeline installation method, and fiber cable type and deployment approach. Internally deployed black and flat cables exhibited higher sensitivity to leak-induced vibrations, particularly at higher flow velocities, larger leak sizes, and for bottom-positioned leaks. The thick internal cable showed limited response due to its wireline-like construction. In contrast, the external straight cable responded selectively, with performance dependent on mechanical coupling. Overall, leakage detectability was reduced in the buried configuration due to damping effects. The novelty of this work lies in the successful detection of gas leaks using internally deployed fiber optic cables, which has not been demonstrated in previous studies. This deployment approach is practical for field applications, particularly for pipelines that cannot be inspected using conventional methods, such as unpiggable pipelines.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.