International Journal of Hydrogen Energy 55 (2024) 828–838

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

International Journal of Hydrogen Energy

journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/he

Numerical simulation of the transport and thermodynamic properties of

imported natural gas injected with hydrogen in the manifold
Shuangjie Yan a, Guanwei Jia a, *, Weiqing Xu b, c, Rui Li d, Maolin Cai b, c
a
School of Physics and Electronics, Henan University, Kaifeng, 475004, PR China
b
School of Automation Science and Electrical Engineering, Beihang University, Beijing, 100191, PR China
c
Pneumatic and Thermodynamic Energy Storage and Supply Beijing Key Laboratory, Beijing, 100191, PR China
d
General Institute of Science and Technology of National Petroleum and Natural Gas Pipeline Network Group Co.,Ltd, Langfang, 065000, Hebei, PR China

A R T I C L E I N F O A B S T R A C T

Keywords: Blending hydrogen with natural gas (NG) is an efficient method for transporting hydrogen on a large scale at a
Hydrogen-blended natural gas low cost. The manifold at the NG initial station is an important piece of equipment that enables the blending of
Hydrogen hydrogen with NG. However, there are differences in the components and component contents of imported NG
Components
from different countries. The components of hydrogen-blended NG can affect the safety and efficiency of
Manifold
Gas mixing
transportation through pipeline systems. Therefore, numerical simulations were performed to investigate the
Thermodynamic properties blending process and changes in the thermodynamic properties of four imported NGs and hydrogen in the
manifold. The higher the heavy hydrocarbon content in the imported NG, the longer the distance required for the
gas to mix uniformly with hydrogen in the pipeline. Hydrogen blending reduces the temperature and density of
NG. The gas composition is the main factor affecting the molar calorific value of a gas mixture, and hydrogen
blending reduces the molar calorific value of NG. The larger the content of high-molar calorific components in
the imported NG, the higher the molar calorific value of the gas after hydrogen blending. Increasing both the
temperature and hydrogen mixing ratio reduces the Joule-Thomson coefficient of the hydrogen-blended NG. The
results of this study provide technical references for the transport of hydrogen-blended NG.

1. Introduction enable cross-regional, low-cost, and large-scale transportation of

Expanding the use of hydrogen energy is an important strategy for
the reduction of fossil greenhouse gas emissions [1,2]. Hydrogen is a
potential alternative fuel that can help reduce CO2 emissions from the
NG industry in a short period [3,4]. New energy sources (hydro, solar,
wind, and so on) provide continuous sources of energy for hydrogen
production [5–7]. Hydrogen has gained recognition as a clean, safe, and
dependable energy source for the future [8,9]. Owing to its high energy
density and sustainability, hydrogen is a valuable energy option for
achieving deep decarbonisation goals [10–12]. However, the share of
hydrogen in the global end-use energy is extremely low (less than 3 %)
[13,14]. The main reasons are as follows: (1) mismatch between
hydrogen production and hydrogen demand locations; (2) high cost and
small transportation volume for long-distance hydrogen delivery; (3)
lack of infrastructure for transmission, storage, and use of hydrogen; and
(4) high cost of building pure hydrogen pipelines [15–18]. Injecting
hydrogen into natural gas (NG) pipeline networks for delivery can
hydrogen. Relevant studies and experiments have shown that blending
hydrogen and NG for transportation is a viable solution [19,20]. Ex­
amples include the NaturalHy project in the EU [21], Hydeploy and H21
Leeds CityGate projects in the UK [22], DVG projects in Germany [23],
and China in 2019 Hydrogen blending and transportation in Liaoning
Chaoyang demonstration project [24]. Currently, research and projects
on hydrogen-blended NG use blending ratios less than 20 %. For
example, the HyP Gladstone and HyP Murry Valley projects in Australia
injected hydrogen into the NG network at a blend of 10 % [25]. USA’s
HyBlend project plans to blend hydrogen at a rate of 1–30 % and grad­
ually increase the hydrogen blend [26,27]. The USA’s SoCalGas project
plans to ultimately achieve 20 % hydrogen blending [28]. The Liaoning
Chaoyang Gas Hydrogen Mixing Demonstration Project has a 10 %
hydrogen blend and has been operating safely for more than one year.
Gondal [29] studied the effect of hydrogen blending on NG infrastruc­
ture and gas quality. The permissible limit of the hydrogen mixing ratio
was obtained as 10 %. Choudhury et al. [30] showed that hydrogen

* Corresponding author.
E-mail address: jiaguanwei@henu.edu.cn (G. Jia).

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijhydene.2023.11.178
Received 8 September 2023; Received in revised form 3 November 2023; Accepted 15 November 2023
Available online 22 November 2023
0360-3199/© 2023 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Ltd on behalf of Hydrogen Energy Publications LLC. This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND
license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/).
S. Yan et al.
mixing ratios lower than 10 % do not reduce the combustion efficiency
of NG. Quintino et al. [31] showed that in the present NG infrastructure,
hydrogen content between 20 % and 30 % does not need to be modified
significantly. These projects have provided experience on the wide-scale
application of hydrogen-blended NG. China is a major importer of NG
and has a well-developed NG transmission pipeline network. Its
hydrogen production ranks first globally, with certain hydrogen pro­
duction facilities located near operational NG pipelines. This provides
convenient geographical and infrastructural conditions for realising
wide-scale, cross-regional, and low-cost transportation of hydrogen.
According to 2022 data, the total length of China’s in-service trunk gas
pipelines is approximately 118,000 km [32]. China’s NG imports
amounted to 150.3 billion m3 [32], accounting for 41.22 % of China’s
total NG consumption. Its hydrogen production reached 37.81 million
tons in 2022, accounting for approximately 40.2 % of the global
hydrogen production. The distribution of major NG pipeline networks,
hydrogen production locations, NG imports, and hydrogen production
in China are shown in Fig. 1. China’s annual demand for imported NG is
greater than 40 %, and NG imports are high. NG is a mixture of hy­
drocarbons extracted from underground sediments. The quality of NG
differs depending on its origin. The components and component con­
tents of imported NG from different countries vary. Therefore, it is
necessary to investigate the influence of hydrogen and different com­
ponents of NG on its transport properties.
The initial NG station is an important part of the NG transmission and
distribution system. The manifold at the initial station is used to connect
the individual inlet and outlet pipelines and can be used directly for
blending hydrogen with NG [35]. However, hydrogen injection changes
the transportation state of NG and affects the transportation perfor­
mance of the pipe network. Galyas et al. [36] showed that hydrogen
Fig. 1. − Major NG import pipeline routes and hydrogen production in China [33,34].
829
International Journal of Hydrogen Energy 55 (2024) 828–838
blending increases pipeline capacity at the same operating pressure.
Hydrogen blending decreases the transferable energy capacity of the NG
network. Ozturk et al. [37] showed that hydrogen blending reduces the
consumption of NG and the emission of harmful gases such as CO2.
Ozturk et al. [38] studied the effect of 20 % hydrogen addition on the
consumption of hydrogen-blended NG. The results show that the con­
sumption of mixed gases increases, but the consumption of NG de­
creases. Deymi-Dashtebayaz et al. [39] demonstrated that the
components of NG affect the physical properties of the
hydrogen-blended NG. Zhou D et al. [40] showed that the location of
hydrogen injection affects the pressure and energy drop in NG trans­
portation systems. Eames et al. [41] found that the inhomogeneous
mixing of hydrogen increases the risk during transportation. Abd et al.
[42] studied the effect of the hydrogen mixing ratio on the physical
properties of gas mixtures in 7.5 MPa pipelines. Their study provided a
reference for the blending of hydrogen and NG. Liu et al. [43] studied
the stratification phenomenon of hydrogen–NG mixtures in horizontal
and undulated pipelines. Increasing the pressure and hydrogen con­
centration enhances the layering effect of the gas mixture. Tong et al.
[44] reported that the effect of the gas source and composition should be
considered when studying the calorific value of hydrogen–NG mixtures.
Zhou Z et al. [45,46] analysed the flow state of high-pressure NG in a
pipeline using the Peng–Robinson (PR) real gas equation of state (EOS).
The simulation results were consistent with the experimental results. Liu
et al. [47] simulated the decompression process of hydrogen-blended
NG using the computational fluid dynamics (CFD) method combined
with the PR-EOS. Most studies at home and abroad have used a single
source of NG or pure methane to analyse the effect of hydrogen blending
on the NG transportation characteristics. However, there are differences
in the components of NG from different countries. Changes in the
S. Yan et al. International Journal of Hydrogen Energy 55 (2024) 828–838

components lead to changes in the NG properties, such as viscosity, A1 and A2 are 1 m, whereas the length of the straight pipe downstream of
density, and calorific value [48]. During the blending process, the the manifold is 20 m.
composition of the NG influences both the blending procedure and the
thermodynamic properties of the hydrogen-NG mixture. The manifold is
2.2. Mathematical model
an important part of gas blending in the NG initial station. It serves to
balance, buffer, and distribute the gas flow during transportation. The
Ansys Fluent was used to predict the local state of the fluid by solving
manifolds can satisfy the needs of blending fluids while reducing the
the continuity, momentum, and component equations.
number of pipelines in the system and lowering costs. At the NG initial
Continuity equation:
station, the manifold plays a crucial role in mixing the imported NG and
( )
hydrogen. This mixing is a major element of the process. The manifold ∂ρ ∂(ρux ) ∂ ρuy ∂(ρuz )
structure enables the uniform blending of hydrogen and NG, without + + + =0 (1)
∂t ∂x ∂y ∂z
altering the existing pipeline network. Reduce the size of the equipment
structure. The manifold will interfere with the gas flow rate and greatly where ux, uy, and uz are the velocity components in the x, y, and z di­
change the distribution of hydrogen and NG in the pipeline. Neverthe­ rections, respectively, m/s; and ρ is the density, kg/m3.
less, there is a lack of domestic and international research on the Momentum equation:
blending behaviour of hydrogen with the different components of NG in
the manifold. Investigating the effects of the gas composition and its
∂(ρux ) ∂p ∂τxx ∂τyx ∂τzx
+ div(ρux →
u )= − + + + + ρfx (2)
properties on the flow state can help optimise the design of the pipeline ∂t ∂x ∂x ∂y ∂z
structure. ( )
∂ ρuy ( ) ∂p ∂τxy ∂τyy ∂τzy
The blending behaviour of four imported NGs with hydrogen in the + div ρuy →
u =− + + + + ρfy
manifold was investigated in this study. Investigating the gas mixing ∂t ∂y ∂x ∂y ∂z
process and thermodynamic parameter changes in the manifold is very
∂(ρuz ) ∂p ∂τxz ∂τyz ∂τzz
useful for the implementation of hydrogen-blended NG systems. The + div(ρuz →
u )= − + + + + ρfz
∂t ∂z ∂x ∂y ∂z
main research of this paper:
where p is the pressure, Pa; τxx, τyy, τzz, etc. are the components of the
(1) Numerical simulations were used to investigate the mixing pro­ viscous stress τ on the surface of the elemental body; and fx, fy, and fz are
cess, uniformity, transportation, and thermodynamic properties the components of the force per unit mass in the x, y, and z directions,
of hydrogen-blended NG in the manifold. respectively, m/s2.
(2) The mixing process of hydrogen and different components of NG Component transportation equations:
in the manifold were compared. NG components and component
content impact the blending distance and velocity COV of ∂(ρmi )
+ div(ρ→
u mi ) = div(Di gradmi ) (3)
hydrogen and NG. ∂t
(3) J-T coefficients were calculated for gas mixtures with hydrogen
where mi and Di are the mass fraction and diffusion coefficient of
mixing ratios of 5 %, 10 %, 20 %, and 30 % using a multicom­
component i, respectively.
ponent NG. The J-T coefficients were also compared with the J-T
Because NG is transported under high pressure, the size of the mol­
coefficients of methane-hydrogen gas mixtures in the paper by Li
ecules and interaction forces between them cannot be ignored during
et al. [49].
the calculation process. The PR-EOS was used to consider the size of the
molecules and intermolecular interactions.
2. Model construction and setting of boundary conditions
PR-EOS:
2.1. Model construction RT a
p= − (4)
V − b V(V + b) + b(V − b)
The manifold is an important piece of equipment in the NG gathering
and transportation processes. Manifolds are used in many projects such where V is the molar volume of the gas mixture, m3/kg; R = 8.314 J/
as gas gathering, long-distance pipelines, and treatment plants. The mol⋅K; T is the temperature, K; and a and b are the energy and size pa­
manifold collects NG from different sources and distributes it. The rameters, respectively.
working pressure and flow rate of the manifold in the NG gate station are Referring to the calculation method for the high molar calorific value
high. Fig. 2 illustrates the structure of the manifold in a NG gate station stipulated in GB/T 11062-2020 [51], the formula for calculating the
[50]. Inlet 1 and Inlet 2 are the NG and hydrogen inlets, respectively. high molar calorific value of the gas mixture is as follows:
The NG and hydrogen are blended in the manifold (B) and flow into the ∑
n
[ ]
straight pipeline (C) downstream of the manifold. The inner diameter of (Hc )G (t1 ) = xi ⋅ (Hc )0G i (t1 ) (5)
the pipe for Inlet 2 is 150 mm. The internal diameters of pipelines A1, B, i=1

and C are 476 mm. The manifold length is 4 m. The lengths of pipelines
where (Hc)G(t1) is the high molar calorific value of the gas mixture, kJ/
mol; xi is the molar fraction of component i; and [(Hc)0G]i (t1) is the total
ideal molar calorific value of component i, kJ/mol.
One monitoring cross-section was set up at 1D intervals on the
straight pipeline. Thirty-three monitoring points uniformly distributed
on the monitoring cross-sections were set up to determine the hydrogen
molar fraction and velocity values. The velocity COV equation is as
follows:
√̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅
s 1 1 ∑n
COV = = (vi − v)2 (6)
v v n− 1 i=1

where n is the number of monitoring points in the cross-section; vi is the

Fig. 2. − Structure of the model manifold. velocity at the monitoring point, m/s; and ‾v is the average velocity in

830
S. Yan et al. International Journal of Hydrogen Energy 55 (2024) 828–838

the monitoring cross-section, m/s. 2.4. Boundary conditions

Referring to industry standards, gases with a mixing uniformity U ≥
95 % are considered well mixed [52,53]. The mixing uniformity calcu­ The gas flow in the manifold is turbulent, and the standard k-ω tur­
lation formula is as follows: bulence model was used in this study. The external pressure was stan­
√̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅ dard atmospheric pressure, the temperature was 298.5 K, and the
n (
1∑ xi − x)2 gravity was 9.8 m/s2. The wall material was steel and standard no-slip
U= 1− (7)
n i=1 x wall conditions were adopted. The NG inlet (Inlet 1) and hydrogen
inlet (Inlet 2) boundary conditions were set as the velocity inlet
where xi is the hydrogen mole fraction at the monitoring point and ‾x is boundaries. The velocity at the NG inlet was set to 6.247 m/s (flow rate:
the average hydrogen mole fraction over the monitoring cross-section. 4002 m3/h) and the velocity at the hydrogen inlet was set to 6.99 m/s
The formula for calculating the dynamic viscosity μm is (flow rate: 444.67 m3/h). The hydrogen mixing ratio was 10 %. The
∑
n pressure outlet condition was then selected and the pressure was set to
7.5 MPa. After selecting steady-state calculations, the component
1/2
xi ⋅μi ⋅Mi
μm = i=1∑
n (8) transport was turned on, and the coupled algorithm was used to solve
1/2
xi ⋅Mi the calculation. The pressure in the pipeline was initialised to 7.5 MPa
and the pipeline was set to be filled with NG.
i=1

where μm is the dynamic viscosity, Pa⋅s; μi is the dynamic viscosity of

component i, Pa⋅s; and Mi is the molar mass of component i, kg/kmol. 3. Analysis and discussion of results
The formula for the J-T coefficient is as follows:
⎡ ⎤ NGs imported from different countries have different components,
densities, and calorific values. The components, component contents,
1 ⎢V− b − V(V+b)+b(V− b) T dT ⎥
RT 1 da
μJ− T = ⎢ ⎢ RT
⎥
− V⎥ (9) and calorific value are the main indicators for evaluating the quality of
NG. For hydrogen-blended NG, the component content of NG has a
Cp ⎣ 2a(2+b) ⎦
2 − 2
(V− b) [V(V+b)+b(V− b)]
direct impact on the transportation process. For example, the methane
content of NG affects the crack-stopping performance requirements of
where Cp is the specific heat capacity of the gas mixture, J/(kg⋅K). pipelines. Therefore, the influences of the NG components on the gas
Bernoulli’s principle relates the pressure and velocity of a fluid: properties and blending behaviour were considered during the study.
1 Four different components and component contents were selected for
p + ρv2 + ρgh = C (10) the imported NGs, which were obtained from Russia, Myanmar, Iran,
2
and the USA. The quality of the NGs complied with the requirements of
where g is the gravitational acceleration, m/s2; h is the height, m; and C GB 17820-2018 [54]. Investigating the blending behaviour and ther­
is a constant. modynamic properties of hydrogen and different components of NG is
helpful in optimising the design of pipeline network structures and
2.3. Mesh division and mesh independence verification transportation safety. The methane contents of the four imported NGs
differ, and Myanmar NG has the highest hydrogen sulfide content. Ira­
The size and quality of meshing are crucial for the CFD calculation nian NG has high carbon dioxide and nitrogen contents, whereas USA
process. The mesh quality has a significant impact on the efficiency and NG has a high content of heavy hydrocarbons. The compositions and
convergence of the calculation results. Usually, the finer the mesh, the actual component contents of the four imported NGs are listed in
more accurate the results of the calculation. However, the higher the Table 2.
number of meshes, the more computation is required, and the more
computing resources are used in the calculation process. An extremely
3.1. Hydrogen distribution and mixing uniformity
large number of meshes reduces the efficiency of the computer, but the
improvement in the computational accuracy is only small. A tetrahedral
The components and component contents affect the blending
mesh was selected for meshing the fluid regions. This study verified the
behaviour of NG and hydrogen in the pipeline during mixing. The dis­
relevance of the mesh using three different specifications: sparse, me­
tribution of hydrogen in the manifold is depicted in Fig. 3. Hydrogen and
dium, and dense. The meshing results are presented in Table 1. The error
NG initially blend in the manifold and then flow into the straight
between the simulated and theoretical values of the gas flow velocity at
pipeline to continue blending. There is an obvious stratification of the
the outlet (6.941 m/s) was within 0.03 %. The quality of the mesh
gas within 0D–10D of the straight pipeline. This portion is the main
delineation was evaluated using the mesh skewness and mesh quality
mixing region for hydrogen and NG. As the blending distance increases,
coefficients. The average skewness and average quality coefficients of
the region of uniform blending gradually expands. The gas stratification
the three mesh specifications satisfied the requirements. Therefore, a
gradually disappears at 19D–26D in the straight pipeline, and the
mesh size of 20 mm was adopted. The number of nodes in the divided
hydrogen and NG have blended uniformly. Myanmar NG blends with
mesh was 404464 and the number of cells was 2078217.

Table 2
Composition and actual component contents of the four imported NGs.
Component(mole%) Russia Myanmar Iran USA
Table 1 CH4 96.51 89.45 80.01 75.8
Tests for mesh relevance. C2H6 1.66 1.334 3.8 14.15
C3H8 0.62 – 0.49 6.03
Mesh Number Number Average Average Velocity
C4H10 – – 0.99 1.71
characteristics of nodes of units skew quality at the
C5H12 – – 0.19 0.19
factor of factor of outlet
C6H14 – – 0.09 0.09
the mesh the mesh (m/s)
H2S – 7.859 3.03 –
Sparse 155451 775213 0.22759 0.83758 6.9401 CO2 0.42 0.385 8.41 –
Medium 404464 2078217 0.22463 0.83828 6.94276 N2 0.79 0.972 5.41 2.03
Dense 686522 3574853 0.2227 0.84102 6.94104 Total 100 100 100 100

831
S. Yan et al.
Fig. 3. Hydrogen distribution in the pipeline.
hydrogen at the shortest stratification distance in the straight pipeline,
and the stratification is not significant after 11D. In contrast, USA NG
mixed with hydrogen has the longest stratification distance. This is
because of the components of NG: the larger the molecular mass of the
gas components, the slower the movement of molecules. USA NG con­
tains more components with larger molecular masses, such as C2H6 and
H2S. The gas molecules in the straight pipeline are relatively weakly
disorganised. Therefore, USA NG requires the longest distance to blend
uniformly with hydrogen.
The curves of the blending uniformity of the four gas mixtures in the
straight pipeline versus the blending distance are displayed in Fig. 4. Lmix
indicates the mixing distance. The blending degree of hydrogen and NG
was determined by calculating the mixing uniformity. As the length of
the pipeline increases, the gas mixture gradually blends uniformly. The
Fig. 4. Gas mixing uniformity versus mixing distance in a straight pipeline.
832
International Journal of Hydrogen Energy 55 (2024) 828–838
stratification of the gas mixture at 1D is significant, with a very low
blending uniformity (<20 %) of hydrogen and NG. The blending uni­
formity gradually increases with increasing blending distance. Owing to
the differences in the components of NG, the distances required for the
different gas mixtures to achieve uniform blending differ. The gas
mixing uniformity of the Russian, Myanmar, Iranian, and USA NGs
reaches 95 % at 21.2D, 18.8D, 21.1D, and 25.4D, respectively. The N2
and CO2 components in NG have little effect on the blending uniformity.
USA NG has a high content of heavy hydrocarbons with large molecular
masses, such as C2H6; thus, the distance required to attain uniform
blending is the longest.
3.2. Velocity COV
A larger value of the velocity COV indicates a more uneven velocity
distribution in the monitored cross-section. Fig. 5 shows the correlation
between the velocity COV and blending distance in the straight pipeline.
As the blending distance increases, the value of the velocity COV de­
creases, and the gas velocity inside the pipeline gradually stabilises.
Hydrogen and NG are combined in the manifold and flow into the
straight pipeline to continue mixing because of the pressure gradient. A
sudden increase in the velocity of the hydrogen-blended gas flowing into
the straight pipeline is observed. The velocity distribution is disturbed;
thus, the value of the velocity COV at the inlet of the straight pipeline is
large. The velocity COV decreases rapidly from approximately 65 % at
0D–10D, after which it stabilises and fluctuates within a certain range.
After the velocity COV is stabilised, Iranian NG mixed with hydrogen in
the straight pipeline exhibits the largest velocity COV of approximately
46 %. USA NG contains more heavy hydrocarbons, such as C2H6, which
are relatively stable during the flow process. Therefore, the velocity COV
of USA NG is the first to stabilise after hydrogen blending, and it has the
smallest value of approximately 40 %.
3.3. Pressure distribution in the manifold
The components and component contents affect the pressure distri­
bution and pressure drop in the manifold. The pressure distribution
S. Yan et al. International Journal of Hydrogen Energy 55 (2024) 828–838

pressure gradually increases. The pressure becomes stable after 4D, and
then it decreases slowly with an increase in pipe length.
Fig. 7 illustrates the variation in the pressure drop with the straight
pipeline length. With an increase in the length of the straight pipeline,
the pressure drop of the gas mixture first decreases rapidly and then
increases gradually. In the 1D–2D region, the pressure drop is high and
decreases rapidly from 1D to 4D. Affected by the roughness of the pipe
wall, velocity change, etc., the pressure of the mixed gas subsequently
decreases with an increase in the pipeline length. When mixed uniformly
with hydrogen, Myanmar and USA NGs have high-pressure drops,
whereas Iranian NG exhibits the lowest.

Fig. 5. Variation of velocity COV with mixing distance in the straight pipeline.
(COV, ratio of the standard deviation to the mean value).

inside the manifold is depicted in Fig. 6. According to Bernoulli’s prin­

ciple, the velocity and pressure of a gas mixture in a pipeline are
inversely proportional. The gas mixture in the manifold flows into the
straight pipeline because of the pressure gradient; the potential energy is
converted into kinetic energy, and the velocity increases considerably.
At the inlet of the straight pipeline, the pressure decreases, but the ve­
locity increases. The friction and impingement of the gas mixture cause a
significant pressure decrease. Therefore, an area with low pressure and
high velocity exists at 0D–2D in the straight pipeline. With an increase in
the blending distance, the kinetic energy of the gas is converted into
pressure energy, and the velocity continues to decrease as the pressure
increases, which homogenises the pressure and velocity of the gas to Fig. 7. Relationship between pressure drop in the straight pipeline and pipe­
reach an intermediate value. In 2D–4D, the velocity decreases, and the line length.

Fig. 6. Pressure distribution in the manifold.

833
S. Yan et al. International Journal of Hydrogen Energy 55 (2024) 828–838

3.4. Effect of hydrogen mixing of NG with different components on

temperature

The temperature distribution in the manifold is displayed in Fig. 8.

The NG and hydrogen undergo turbulent diffusion mixing in the mani­
fold, and the temperature changes significantly. Owing to the differ­
ences in the components and component contents of NG, the
temperature ranges (minimum–maximum) in the manifold after
hydrogen injection into Russian, Myanmar, Iranian, and USA NGs are
277–312, 282–309, 276–305, and 277–301 K, respectively. The most
drastic temperature change in the manifold occurs during blending of
hydrogen and Russian NG. In contrast, the change in temperature in the
manifold for USA NG is relatively small. The temperature change in the
gas mixture is no longer considerable after entering the straight pipeline.
The region from 1D to 10D of the straight pipeline is the main blending
area. Energy conversion occurs during the blending process, which
causes the change in temperature of the gas mixture. The temperature
stops changing after the gases are uniformly blended. The temperature
of the gas mixture stabilises after approximately 30D. Iranian NG ex­
hibits the longest distance of gas temperature fluctuation, while Russian
NG has the shortest distance. After uniform blending, the temperature is Fig. 9. Variation of molar calorific value of gases in the straight pipeline.
reduced compared to that at the inlet. The temperature of the mixture
decreases by 3–5 K after hydrogen blending. The temperatures of length of the straight pipeline, the molar calorific value of the gas sta­
Russian, Myanmar, Iranian, and USA NGs after uniform mixing with bilises when the mixing distance exceeds 25.4D. After uniform blending,
hydrogen are 296.2, 296.0, 295.3, and 295.5 K, respectively, at 30D in USA NG exhibits the largest molar calorific value of 1029 kJ/mol,
the straight pipeline. whereas that of Iranian NG is the smallest (760 kJ/mol). The molar
calorific values of Russian and Myanmar NGs blended with hydrogen are
849 and 814 kJ/mol, respectively.
3.5. Molar calorific value

Referring to GB/T 13609-2017 [55], a sampling line was established
at 1/3 of the pipe diameter and the mole fraction of each component on
the sampling line was derived for calorific value determination. The
molar calorific value of hydrogen-blended NG was calculated based on
GB/T 11062-2020 [51]. The relationship between the calorific value of
the gas and location of the sampling point is shown in Fig. 9. The range
of 1D–10D in the straight pipeline is the main area for gas blending. The
molar calorific value of the gas mixture fluctuates in this region, and a
small fluctuation still exists within 10D–15D. With an increase in the
3.6. Dynamic viscosity of gas mixtures
The dynamic viscosity affects parameters such as gas flow velocity,
pressure drop, and energy loss in pipelines. This property is critical for
assessing the state of motion (laminar or turbulent) as well as the
pressure drop. The variation in the dynamic viscosity from the inlet to
the outlet of the pipeline is depicted in Fig. 10. The starting position (0D)
is the inlet position of the hydrogen and NG. The routes overlap at 4.7D.
The value of dynamic viscosity continues to be taken along the straight

Fig. 8. Temperature distribution in the pipeline.

834
S. Yan et al. International Journal of Hydrogen Energy 55 (2024) 828–838

Fig. 10. Change in dynamic viscosity of gas between inlet and outlet.

pipeline, and the length of the path in the straight pipeline is 10.3D. The
total length of the fetch path is 15 D. On the left side of Fig. 10 is the gas
dynamic viscosity change curve with the NG inlet as the starting point.
On the left side is the gas dynamic viscosity change curve with the
hydrogen inlet as the starting point. The dynamic viscosity of gases at
the same temperature and pressure is primarily dependent on the
component content. Iranian NG has the highest dynamic viscosity of
1.17 × 10-5 Pa s, whereas USA NG has the smallest (1.01 × 10-5 Pa s).
The dynamic viscosity of hydrogen and Iranian NG after uniform
blending is the highest (1.16 × 10-5 Pa s). The temperature and com­
ponents, including changes in the component content and gas temper­
ature after hydrogen injection, are important factors affecting the
dynamic viscosity. The temperature changes in the manifold during
blending of hydrogen with Russian and Iranian NGs are drastic, causing
significant changes in the dynamic viscosity during the mixing process.
With an increase in the length of the pipeline, the gases are gradually
blended uniformly and the dynamic viscosity is gradually stabilised.

3.7. Density

Density is critical for the measurement and transportation of NG. The

density of NG decreases when it is blended with hydrogen. The
component contents, pressure, and temperature affect the density of the
gas mixture. Fig. 11 displays the relationship between the density of the
gas mixture and length of the straight pipeline. The temperature and
pressure vary considerably in the 1D–3D region; therefore, the gas
density fluctuates drastically. A small fluctuation in the density also
occurs between 4D and 15D. When the blending distance exceeds 25.4D,
the hydrogen and NG are uniformly blended and the density is stabi­
lised. The components and component contents are the main factors
affecting the density of the hydrogen-blended NG. After mixing with
hydrogen, USA NG has the highest density of 74.94 kg/m3, while
Russian NG exhibits the lowest value (54.34 kg/m3). The densities of
Iranian and Myanmar NGs after mixing with hydrogen are 68.7 and
59.43 kg/m3, respectively.
3.8. J-T coefficient
The J-T coefficient is the partial derivative of temperature with
respect to pressure at constant enthalpy. A temperature reduction in the
Fig. 11. Relationship between gas density and mixing distance.
gas during expansion indicates a positive J-T effect, whereas a temper­
ature increase denotes a negative J-T effect. The J-T coefficient of a gas
can be substantially affected by alterations in its components and
component contents. Therefore, it is important to accurately calculate
the J-T coefficients of gases during gas mixing and transportation. Ac­
cording to the J-T effect, the temperature of NG decreases when it ex­
pands. The effect of the throttling process of hydrogen is the inverse of
the J-T effect, and the temperature of hydrogen increases when it ex­
pands. Table 3 presents the J-T coefficients of the four hydrogen-blended
NGs at different temperatures, including the data (10 % H2–90 % CH4)
from Li et al. [49]. The corresponding curves are illustrated in Fig. 12. It
can be seen that the J-T coefficient of the hydrogen-blended NG de­
creases with increasing temperature. The J-T coefficients of the hydro­
gen–NG mixtures are greater than those of the H2–CH4 mixture. Among
the four types of NGs, Russian NG has the smallest J-T coefficient after
mixing with hydrogen, while USA NG has the largest. Temperature af­
fects the interaction forces between the gas molecules and the properties

835
S. Yan et al. International Journal of Hydrogen Energy 55 (2024) 828–838

Table 3
− J-T coefficients at different temperatures.
Type 275 K 300 K 350 K

Li et al. [49] 3.56 2.98 2.11

Russia 3.8963 3.3568 2.3275
Myanmar 4.2010 3.6274 2.5234
Iran 4.3386 3.7601 2.5968
USA 5.171 4.6428 3.1664

(Data source: Table 11,12,13 in Li et al. [49])

Fig. 13. − Variation of J-T coefficient with hydrogen mixing ratio. (HMR,
hydrogen mixing ratio).

transported. However, an increase in the hydrogen mixing ratio will

change the characteristics of the gas being transported in the pipeline.
The composition of the gas mixture affects the efficiency and safety of
the NG transport system. Studying the variation of J-T coefficients for
hydrogen mixing ratios up to 30 % can provide a reference for future
theoretical studies and application projects of large-scale hydrogen-
blended NG delivery.

Fig. 12. Variation of J-T coefficient with temperature. 4. Conclusions

of the gas itself. The J-T coefficient of USA NG varies the most with The blending process of hydrogen and four types of NGs in a mani­
temperature after blending with hydrogen. Its J-T coefficient at 275 K is fold was determined using the PR-EOS. The mixing uniformity and
5.171 K/MPa while that at 350 K is 3.166 K/MPa, decreasing by 2.005 thermodynamic properties (pressure, temperature, density, dynamic
K/MPa. viscosity, and J-T coefficient) of the hydrogen–NG mixtures were
Table 4 lists the J-T coefficients at 7.5 MPa and 300 K for different investigated. The following conclusions can be drawn:
hydrogen mixing ratios. The change in the J-T coefficient with the
hydrogen mixing ratio is shown in Fig. 13. The J-T effect is opposite for (1) The components and component contents of NG affect the dis­
hydrogen and NG. The trends of the J-T coefficients for the different tance at which it is uniformly mixed with hydrogen. When NG
NG–hydrogen blends are similar. The J-T coefficient of the hydrogen- contains more components with higher molecular masses (e.g.,
blended NG decreases approximately linearly with an increase in the heavy hydrocarbons and H2S), the gas mixture requires longer
hydrogen mixing ratio. Moreover, the J-T coefficients of the hydrogen- distances to blend uniformly. The distance required by USA NG to
blended NGs are larger than the corresponding J-T coefficients of the blend uniformly with hydrogen in a straight pipeline is 25.4D.
H2–CH4 mixture. The mixture of hydrogen and USA NG has the highest The uniformly mixed USA NG and hydrogen have the shortest
J-T coefficient. The smaller the J-T coefficient of the gas, the weaker is distance to reach a stable velocity and the smallest velocity COV.
its cooling effect, which favours the transportation of hydrogen-blended (2) The hydrogen-blended NG in the manifold flows into the straight
NG. However, an excessively high hydrogen mixing ratio increases the pipeline at a high velocity owing to the pressure gradient. A re­
probability of hydrogen embrittlement and other phenomena, thereby gion of low pressure and high velocity is formed between 0D and
affecting transportation safety. The demand for hydrogen transportation 2D in the pipeline. The main region for hydrogen and NG mixing
will gradually increase as the amount of hydrogen produced and used in the straight pipeline is in 1D–10D. The density, molar calorific
increases. The increase in the ratio of hydrogen mixing is helpful to value, and dynamic viscosity of the gas undergo fluctuations in
increase the transportation efficiency and the amount of hydrogen the straight pipeline between 1D and 10D. With increasing
pipeline length, the gas mixing becomes uniform, and the density,
molar calorific value, and dynamic viscosity of the gas stabilise
when the blending distance exceeds 25.4D. The gas components
Table 4
J-T coefficients for different hydrogen mixing ratios.
and component contents are the main factors affecting the molar
calorific value and dynamic viscosity of the gas mixture. The
Type 5% 10 % 20 % 30 %
higher the content of gas components with high calorific values,
Li et al. [49] 3.31 2.98 2.37 1.82 the higher the molar calorific value after hydrogen blending.
Russia 3.5842 3.3568 2.9064 2.4237 (3) Hydrogen blending significantly affects the J-T coefficient of NG,
Myanmar 3.9075 3.6274 3.1608 2.6090
Iran 3.9805 3.7601 3.2753 2.6690
which is important in gas transportation engineering. At 7.5 MPa,
USA 4.9118 4.6428 4.2227 3.5420 the J-T coefficient of the hydrogen-blended NG decreases with
increasing temperature. Hydrogen and NG have opposing J-T
(Data source: Table 12 in Li et al. [49])

836
S. Yan et al.
effects, and hydrogen mixing decreases the J-T coefficient of NG.
By increasing the hydrogen mixing ratio, the J-T coefficient of the
gas mixture is decreased gradually.
5. Outlook
Blending hydrogen into existing NG networks can help reduce CO2
emissions from the NG industry. Studying the blending process of
hydrogen and NG in manifolds can provide an important basis for the
wider application of hybrid and full hydrogen systems in the future.
(1) The structure of the manifold is simple and the pressure loss to the
gas is small. The uniform mixing of hydrogen and NG can be
accomplished within a short distance. The manifold structure can
be utilized in the hydrogen mixing stage for the connection of the
hydrogen and NG pipeline network;
(2) Hydrogen blending into NG will change the nature of the original
gas in the pipeline. At the same time the distribution state,
pressure, and temperature of the gas in the pipeline will be
affected. Higher requirements are placed on the pipeline mate­
rials and performance of the manifold. It is necessary to carry out
regular maintenance of the pipeline or choose materials with
higher strength;
(3) Hydrogen has the opposite J-T effect to NG. Blending hydrogen
into NG pipelines during the transportation of hydrogen-blended
NG inhibits the formation of hydrates and reduces the risk of
pipeline blockages. However, the NG-hydrogen mixture requires
a greater pressure drop to achieve the cooling effect during
liquefaction processing;
(4) Simulation and concentration adjustment of the hydrogen con­
centration field can effectively mitigate the risk of hydrogen
accumulation. Real-time monitoring and control of hydrogen
concentration helps to enhance the safety of hydrogen-blended
NG pipeline transport systems.
Founding
This work was supported by the Science and Technology Research
Project of Pipechina (No. WZXGL202104) and Beijing Outstanding
Young Scientists Program (BJJWZYJH01201910006021).
Declaration of competing interest
The authors declare that they have no known competing financial
interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence
the work reported in this paper.
Nomenclature
ux velocity component in the x direction (m/s)
uy velocity component in the y direction (m/s)
uz velocity component in the z direction (m/s)
ρ density (kg/m3)
p pressure (Pa)
fx component of the force per unit mass in the x direction (m/s2)
fy component of the force per unit mass in the y direction (m/s2)
fz component of the force per unit mass in the z direction (m/s2)
mi mass fraction of component i
Di diffusion coefficient of component i
V molar volume of the gas mixture (m3/kg)
R molar gas constant (8.314 J/mol⋅K)
T temperature (K)
a energy parameter
b size parameter
(Hc)G(t1) the high molar calorific value of the gas mixture (kJ/mol)
xi the molar fraction of component i
837
International Journal of Hydrogen Energy 55 (2024) 828–838
[(Hc)0G]i(t1) the total ideal molar calorific value of component i (kJ/
mol)
COV ratio of the standard deviation to the mean value
n number of monitoring points in the cross-section
vi velocity at the monitoring point (m/s)
U mixing uniformity
μm dynamic viscosity (Pa⋅s)
μi dynamic viscosity of component i (Pa⋅s)
Mi the molar mass of component i (kg/kmol)
Cp specific heat capacity of the gas mixture (J/(kg⋅K))
g gravitational acceleration (m/s2)
h height (m)
Abbreviations
NG natural gas
CFD computational fluid dynamics
USA United States of America
LNG liquefied natural gas
HMR hydrogen mixing ratio
J-T Joule-Thomson
References
[1] Qin P, Xu H, Liu M, Xiao C, Forrest KE, Samuelsen S, Tarroja B. Assessing
concurrent effects of climate change on hydropower supply, electricity demand,
and greenhouse gas emissions in the Upper Yangtze River Basin of China. Appl
Energy 2020;279:115694. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apenergy.2020.115694.
[2] Pathak PK, Yadav AK, Padmanaban S. Transition toward emission-free energy
systems by 2050: potential role of hydrogen. Int J Hydrogen Energy 2023;48(26):
9921–7. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijhydene.2022.12.058.
[3] Ozturk M, Dincer I. Development of renewable energy system integrated with
hydrogen and natural gas subsystems for cleaner combustion. J Nat Gas Sci Eng
2020;83:103583. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jngse.2020.103583.
[4] Sorgulu F, Ozturk M, Javani N, Dincer I. Experimental investigation for combustion
performance of hydrogen and natural gas fuel blends. Int J Hydrogen Energy 2023;
48(88):34476–85. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijhydene.2023.05.239.
[5] Saedi I, Mhanna S, Mancarella P. Integrated electricity and gas system modelling
with hydrogen injections and gas Tracking. Appl Energy 2021;303:117598.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apenergy.2021.117598.
[6] Ogbe E, Mukherjee U, Fowler M, Almansoori A, Elkamel A. Integrated design and
operation optimization of hydrogen commingled with natural gas in pipeline
networks. Ind Eng Chem Res 2019;59(4):1584–95. https://pubs.acs.org/doi/10.10
21/acs.iecr.9b04550.
[7] Guandalini G, Robinius M, Grube T, Campanari S, Stolten D. Long-term power-to-
gas potential from wind and solar power: a country analysis for Italy. Int J
Hydrogen Energy 2017;42(19):13389–406. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
ijhydene.2017.03.081.
[8] Ozturk M, Dincer I. A comprehensive review on power-to-gas with hydrogen
options for cleaner applications. Int J Hydrogen Energy 2021;46(62):31511–22.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijhydene.2021.07.066.
[9] Sorgulu F, Dincer I. Analysis and techno-economic assessment of renewable
hydrogen production and blending into natural gas for better sustainability. Int J
Hydrogen Energy 2022;47(46):19977–88. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
ijhydene.2022.04.133.
[10] Bellocchi S, Colbertaldo P, Manno M, Nastasi B. Assessing the effectiveness of
hydrogen pathways: a techno-economic optimization within an integrated energy
system. Energy 2023;263:126017. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
energy.2022.126017.
[11] Abad AV, Dodds PE. Green hydrogen characterisation initiatives: definitions,
standards, guarantees of origin, and challenges. Energy Pol 2020;138:111300.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enpol.2020.111300.
[12] Ishaq H, Dincer I, Crawford C. A review on hydrogen production and utilization:
challenges and opportunities. Int J Hydrogen Energy 2022;47(62):26238–64.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijhydene.2021.11.149.
[13] Al-Bassam AM, Conner JA, Manousiouthakis VI. Natural-gas-Derived hydrogen in
the presence of carbon fuel taxes and concentrated solar power. ACS Sustainable
Chem Eng 2018;6(3):3029–38. https://pubs.acs.org/doi/abs/10.1021/acssusch
emeng.7b02745.
[14] Cavana M, Leone P. Solar hydrogen from North Africa to Europe through
greenstream: a simulation-based analysis of blending scenarios and production
plant sizing. Int J Hydrogen Energy 2021;46(43):22618–37. https://doi.org/
10.1016/j.ijhydene.2021.04.065.
[15] Sorgulu F, Dincer I. Analysis and techno-economic assessment of renewable
hydrogen production and blending into natural gas for better sustainability. Int J
Hydrogen Energy 2022;47(46):19977–88. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
ijhydene.2022.04.133.
[16] Ekhtiari A, Flynn D, Syron E. Investigation of the multi-point injection of green
hydrogen from curtailed renewable power into a gas network. Energies 2020;13
(22):6047. https://doi.org/10.3390/en13226047.
S. Yan et al.
[17] Wang C, Zhou D, Xiao W, Shui C, Ma T, Chen P, Hao J, Yan J. Research on the
dynamic characteristics of natural gas pipeline network with hydrogen injection
considering line-pack influence. Int J Hydrogen Energy 2023;48(65):25469–86.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijhydene.2023.03.298.
[18] Borsboom-Hanson T, Patlolla SR, Herrera OE, Mérida W. Point-to-point
transportation: the economics of hydrogen export. Int J Hydrogen Energy 2022;47
(74):31541–50. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijhydene.2022.07.093.
[19] Cerniauskas S, Junco AJC, Grube T, Robinius M, Stolten D. Options of natural gas
pipeline reassignment for hydrogen: cost assessment for a Germany case study. Int
J Hydrogen Energy 2020;45(21):12095–107. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
ijhydene.2020.02.121.
[20] Wang B, Liang Y, Zheng J, Qiu R, Yuan M, Zhang H. An MILP model for the
reformation of natural gas pipeline networks with hydrogen injection. Int J
Hydrogen Energy 2018;43(33):16141–53. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
ijhydene.2018.06.161.
[21] Di Lullo G, Oni AO, Kumar A. Blending blue hydrogen with natural gas for direct
consumption: examining the effect of hydrogen concentration on transportation
and well-to-combustion greenhouse gas emissions. Int J Hydrogen Energy 2021;46
(36):19202–16. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijhydene.2021.03.062.
[22] Isaac T. HyDeploy: the UK’s first hydrogen blending deployment project. Clean
Energy 2019;3(2):114–25. https://doi.org/10.1093/ce/zkz006.
[23] Witkowski A, Rusin A, Majkut M, Stolecka K. Analysis of compression and
transport of the methane/hydrogen mixture in existing natural gas pipelines. Int J
Pres Ves Pip 2018;166:24–34. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijpvp.2018.08.002.
[24] Jia G, Lei M, Li M, Xu W, Li R, Lu Y, Cai M. Hydrogen embrittlement in hydrogen-
blended natural gas transportation systems: a review. Int J Hydrogen Energy 2023.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijhydene.2023.04.266.
[25] Australian Gas Networks. https://www.australiangasnetworks.com.au/hydrogen
-park-murray-valley. [Accessed 31 October 2023].
[26] National Renewable Energy Laboratory. https://www.nrel.gov/news/program/
2020/hyblend-project-to-accelerate-potential-for-blending-hydrogen-in-natural-g
as-pipelines.html. [Accessed 31 October 2023].
[27] Cision PR Newswire. https://www.prnewswire.com/news-releases/socalgas-and-s
dge-announce-groundbreaking-hydrogen-blending-demonstration-program-to-he
lp-reduce-carbon-emissions-301178982.html. [Accessed 31 October 2023].
[28] California Air Resources Board. https://ww2.arb.ca.gov/our-work/programs/cap-
and-trade-program/about. [Accessed 31October 2023].
[29] Gondal IA. Hydrogen integration in power-to-gas networks. Int J Hydrogen Energy
2019;44(3):1803–15. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijhydene.2018.11.164.
[30] Choudhury S, McDonell VG, Samuelsen S. Combustion performance of low-NOx
and conventional storage water heaters operated on hydrogen enriched natural
gas. Int J Hydrogen Energy 2020;45(3):2405–17. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
ijhydene.2019.11.043.
[31] Quintino FM, Nascimento N, Fernandes EC. Aspects of hydrogen and biomethane
introduction in natural gas infrastructure and equipment. Hydro 2021;2(3):
301–18. https://doi.org/10.3390/hydrogen2030016.
[32] National Energy Administration. China natural gas development report. 2023. htt
p://www.nea.gov.cn/. [Accessed 1 August 2023].
[33] Standard map service. Maps of China. http://bzdt.ch.mnr.gov.cn/. [Accessed 1
August 2023].
[34] International Energy Agency-IEA. Natural gas information: database
documentation (2023 edition). https://www.iea.org/. [Accessed 1 August 2023].
[35] Liu E, Yan S, Peng S, Huang L, Jiang Y. Noise silencing technology for manifold
flow noise based on ANSYS fluent. J Nat Gas Sci Eng 2016;29:322–8. https://doi.
org/10.1016/j.jngse.2016.01.021.
[36] Galyas AB, Kis L, Tihanyi L, Szunyog I, Vadaszi M, Koncz A. Effect of hydrogen
blending on the energy capacity of natural gas transmission networks. Int J
Hydrogen Energy 2023;48(39):14795–807. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
ijhydene.2022.12.198.
838
International Journal of Hydrogen Energy 55 (2024) 828–838
[37] Ozturk M, Dincer I. Utilization of waste heat from cement plant to generate
hydrogen and blend it with natural gas. Int J Hydrogen Energy 2022;47(48):
20695–704. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijhydene.2022.04.214.
[38] Ozturk M, Dincer I. System development and assessment for green hydrogen
generation and blending with natural gas. Energy 2022;261:125233. https://doi.
org/10.1016/j.energy.2022.125233.
[39] Deymi-Dashtebayaz M, Ebrahimi-Moghadam A, Pishbin SI, Pourramezan M.
Investigating the effect of hydrogen injection on natural gas thermo-physical
properties with various compositions. Energy 2019;167:235–45. https://doi.org/
10.1016/j.energy.2018.10.186.
[40] Zhou D, Yan S, Huang D, Shao T, Xiao W, Hao J, Wang C, Yu T. Modeling and
simulation of the hydrogen blended gas-electricity integrated energy system and
influence analysis of hydrogen blending modes. Energy 2022;239:121629. https://
doi.org/10.1016/j.energy.2021.121629.
[41] Eames I, Austin M, Wojcik A. Injection of gaseous hydrogen into a natural gas
pipeline. Int J Hydrogen Energy 2022;47(61):25745–54. https://doi.org/10.1016/
j.ijhydene.2022.05.300.
[42] Abd AA, Naji SZ, Tye CT, Othman MR. Evaluation of hydrogen concentration effect
on the natural gas properties and flow performance. Int J Hydrogen Energy 2020;
46(1):974–83. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijhydene.2020.09.141.
[43] Liu C, Pei Y, Cui Z, Li X, Yang H, Xing X, Duan P, Li L, Li Y. Study on the
stratification of the blended gas in the pipeline with hydrogen into natural gas. Int
J Hydrogen Energy 2023;48(13):5186–96. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
ijhydene.2022.11.074.
[44] Tong S, Li X, Sun S, Tu C, Xia X. Interchangeability of hydrogen injection in
zhejiang natural gas pipelines as a means to achieve carbon neutrality. Energies
2022;15(17):6394. https://doi.org/10.3390/en15176394.
[45] Zhou Z, Zhang J, Huang X, Guo X. Experimental study on distributed optical-fiber
cable for high-pressure buried natural gas pipeline leakage monitoring. Opt Fiber
Technol 2019;53:102028. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.yofte.2019.102028.
[46] Zhou Z, Zhang J, Huang X, Zhang J, Guo X. Trend of soil temperature during
pipeline leakage of high-pressure natural gas: experimental and numerical study.
Measurement 2020;153:107440. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
measurement.2019.107440.
[47] Liu X, Michal G, Godbole A, Lu C. Decompression modelling of natural gas-
hydrogen mixtures using the Peng-Robinson equation of state. Int J Hydrogen
Energy 2021;46(29):15793–806. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
ijhydene.2021.02.129.
[48] Kayadelen HK. Effect of natural gas components on its flame temperature,
equilibrium combustion products and thermodynamic properties. J Nat Gas Sci Eng
2017;45:456–73. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jngse.2017.05.023.
[49] Li J, Su Y, Yu B, Wang P, Sun D. Influences of hydrogen blending on the
Joule–Thomson coefficient of natural gas. ACS Omega 2021;6(26):16722–35.
https://pubs.acs.org/doi/10.1021/acsomega.1c00248.
[50] Kong L, Su L, Zhou X, Chen L, Liu Q. Accuracy guarantee for determining the
calorific value for dual gas sources. Flow Meas Instrum 2019;65:233–9. https://
doi.org/10.1016/j.flowmeasinst.2019.01.003.
[51] GB/T 11062-2020. Natural gas− Calculation of calorific values, density, relative
density and Wobbe index. Beijing: China Standards Press; 2021.
[52] Montante G, Coroneo M, Paglianti A. Blending of miscible liquids with different
densities and viscosities in static mixers. Chem Eng Sci 2016;141:250–60. https://
doi.org/10.1016/j.ces.2015.11.009.
[53] Zhuang Z, Yan J, Sun C, Wang H, Wang Y, Wu Z. The numerical simulation of a
new double swirl static mixer for gas reactants mixing. Chin J Chem Eng 2020;28
(9):2438–46. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cjche.2020.05.008.
[54] GB 17820-2018. Natural gas. Beijing: China Standards Press; 2019.
[55] GB/T 13609-2017. Natural gas sampling guidelines. Beijing: China Standards
Press; 2018.