Elbows are widely used in high-pressure pipe manifolds but are prone to severe erosion by solid particles, threatening safety and reducing pipeline service life. The blind tee can enhance the erosion resistance. Based on liquid-solid erosion experimental results, numerical simulations were conducted to compare the erosion behavior of elbows and blind tees with different length-to-diameter ratios (1–2.5) under different outlet pressures (25–125 MPa), flow velocities (7.5–17.5 m/s), and particle mass flow rates (0.05–0.25 kg/s). The liquid-solid two-phase flow was modeled using the Euler-Lagrange approach with a modified E/CRC erosion model validated by experiments. Results show that increasing outlet pressure, velocity, and particle flow rate significantly enhances erosion, with velocity exhibiting an exponential effect and particle flow rate a linear effect. Compared to elbows, blind tees generate a buffer vortex that reduces the maximum erosion rate. The primary erosion area occurs at the tee intersection and the outlet pipe bottom. The maximum erosion rate decreases with increasing L/D, considering overall cost and space efficiency, L/D = 2 is the optimal choice. These findings provide valuable insights for the design and safe operation of high-pressure pipe manifolds.
XuSGuoJFengQ, et al.Optimization of hydraulic fracturing treatment parameters to maximize economic benefit in tight oil. Fuel2022; 329: 125329.
2.
ShaibuRGuoB. The dilemma of soaking a hydraulically fractured horizontal shale well prior to flowback–A decade literature review. J Nat Gas Sci Eng2021; 94: 104084.
3.
BuczyńskiPIwańskiMMazurekG, et al.Effects of Portland cement and polymer powder on the properties of cement-bound road base mixtures. Materials (Basel)2020; 13: 4253.
4.
JosifovicARobertsJJCorneyJ, et al.Reducing the environmental impact of hydraulic fracturing through design optimisation of positive displacement pumps. Energy2016; 115: 1216–1233.
5.
FarokhipourAMansooriZRastehA, et al.Study of erosion prediction of turbulent gas-solid flow in plugged tees via CFD-DEM. Powder Technol2019; 352: 136–150.
6.
FarokhipourAMansooriZRasoulianMA, et al.Study of particle mass loading effects on sand erosion in a series of fittings. Powder Technol2020; 373: 118–141.
7.
DaiSFanJYangS. Experimental study of erosion behavior under fluctuating tensile loads. Proc Inst Mech Eng Part J J Eng Tribol2023; 237: 2230–2237.
8.
DesaleGRGandhiBKJainSC. Effect of erodent properties on erosion wear of ductile type materials. Wear2006; 261: 914–921.
9.
MalikJToorIHAhmedWH, et al.Evaluating the effect of hardness on erosion characteristics of aluminum and steels. J Mater Eng Perform2014; 23: 2274–2282.
10.
YabukiAMatsuwakiKMatsumuraM. Critical impact velocity in the solid particles impact erosion of metallic materials. Wear1999; 233: 468–475.
11.
ToorIUAlashwanZBadrHM, et al.Effect of jet impingement velocity and angle on CO2 erosion–corrosion with and without sand for API 5L-X65 carbon steel. Materials (Basel)2020; 13: 2198.
12.
OkaYIOhnogiHHosokawaT, et al.The impact angle dependence of erosion damage caused by solid particle impact. Wear1997; 203: 573–579.
13.
ToorIUHIrshadHMBadrHM, et al.The effect of impingement velocity and angle variation on the erosion corrosion performance of API 5L-X65 carbon steel in a flow loop. Metals (Basel)2018; 8: 402.
14.
ElemurenRTamsakiAEvittsR, et al.Erosion-corrosion of 90 AISI 1018 steel elbows in potash slurry: effect of particle concentration on surface roughness. Wear2019; 430: 37–49.
15.
SuKXiaDWuJ, et al.Particle size distribution effects on cavitation erosion in sediment suspensions. Wear2023; 518: 204629.
16.
Ben-MansourRBadrHMAraoyeAA, et al.Computational analysis of water-submerged jet erosion. Energies2021; 14: 3074.
17.
KouBLiuELiD, et al.Research on erosion characteristics of the sleeve-type blowdown valve in the shale gas gathering and transportation station. SPE J2024; 29: 328–345.
18.
FinnieI. Erosion of surfaces by solid particles. Wear1960; 3: 87–103.
19.
FinnieI. Some observations on the erosion of ductile metals. Wear1972; 19: 81–90.
20.
BitterJ. A study of erosion phenomena part I. Wear1963; 6: 5–21.
21.
BitterJ. A study of erosion phenomena: part II. Wear1963; 6: 169–190.
22.
OkaYIYoshidaT. Practical estimation of erosion damage caused by solid particle impact Part 2: mechanical properties of materials directly associated. Wear2005; 259: 102–109.
23.
OkaYIOkamuraKYoshidaT. Practical estimation of erosion damage caused by solid particle impact Part 1: effects of impact parameters on a predictive equation. Wear2005; 259: 95–101.
24.
ZhangYReuterforsEPMclauryBS, et al.Comparison of computed and measured particle velocities and erosion in water and air flows. Wear2007; 263: 330–338.
25.
AhlertKR. Effects of particle impingement angle and surface wetting on solid particle erosion of AISI 1018 steel. Tulsa: University of Tulsa, 1994.
26.
ParkashOKumarASikarwarBS. Computational erosion wear model validation of particulate flow through mitre pipe bend. Arab J Sci Eng2021; 46: 12373–12390.
27.
LiuEBHuangSTianDC, et al.Experimental and numerical simulation study on the erosion behavior of the elbow of gathering pipeline in shale gas field. Petroleum Science2024; 21: 1257–1274.
28.
YangQMckellarR. Nanolayered CrAlTiN and multilayered CrAlTiN-AlTiN coatings for solid particle erosion protection. Tribol Int2015; 83: 12–20.
29.
Van der JagtRHKolsterBHGillhamM. Anti-wear/corrosion treatment of finished austenitic stainless steel components: the hardcor process. Mater Des1991; 12: 41–46.
30.
Dos SantosVFde SouzaFJDuarteCAR. Reducing bend erosion with a twisted tape insert. Powder Technol2016; 301: 889–910.
31.
DuarteCARde SouzaFJDos SantosVF. Mitigating elbow erosion with a vortex chamber. Powder Technol2016; 288: 6–25.
32.
LiRSunZLiA, et al.Design optimization of hemispherical protrusion for mitigating elbow erosion via CFD-DPM. Powder Technol2022; 398: 117128.
33.
ChanCWBremsAMahmoudiS, et al.PEPT Study of particle motion for different riser exit geometries. Particuology2010; 8: 623–630.
34.
ZhaoXCaoXZhangJ, et al.Numerical investigation and dimensionless erosion laws of solid particle erosion in plugged tees. Powder Technol2022; 402: 117342.
35.
ZhaoXCaoXZhangJ, et al.Experimental and numerical investigation of erosion in plugged tees for liquid-solid flow. Int J Multiphase Flow2023; 160: 104348.
36.
Shabestari ShiraziAPakravanHA. Numerical Eulerian modeling of erosion in blinded T-Bends: a parametric study. Wear2025; 564–565: 205717.
37.
AhmadHMZhangJShiraziS, et al.Experimental and CFD analysis of erosion in plugged tees in series. Wear2025; 570: 205956.
38.
HuangYZhuLLiaoH, et al.Erosion of plugged tees in exhaust pipes through variously-sized cuttings. Appl Math Model2016; 40: 8708–8721.
39.
YangSFanJZhangL, et al.Performance prediction of erosion in elbows for slurry flow under high internal pressure. Tribol Int2021; 157: 106879.
40.
GuoZFanJYangY, et al.Experimental and numerical study on erosion of elbows under high-pressure fluctuating loads. Wear2025; 572–573: 206068.
41.
GuoZFanJZhangJ, et al.The effect of vibration on the erosion of elbows in gas-solid two-phase flow. Powder Technol2025; 452: 120593.
42.
GrantGTabakoffW. Erosion prediction in turbomachinery resulting from environmental solid particles. J Aircr1975; 12: 471–478.
43.
ZihanGJianchunFYunpengY, et al.Erosion characteristics of high-pressure tee manifold under dynamic load. J Chin Soc Corros Prot2024; 45: 698–708.
