Pressure-pulse inversion for pipeline integrity assessment

Non-intrusive pipeline inspection

Zhetalonians turns a pressure transient into an engineering estimate of where the problem is, what is changing, and how certain the answer is — from the pressure response your line already produces.

Patent-backed methods · Physics-based inversion · Quantified uncertainty

deposit · restriction pressure sensor upstream measured pressure at sensor echo → distance = a·Δt/2 observed → physics → inverse problem → location · size · uncertainty
The problem

Intervention is expensive. Diagnosis shouldn't have to be.

When a pipeline starts behaving differently, the options are usually to send people to the field, interrupt production, mobilise inspection equipment, open the line, or keep operating on incomplete information. The first question is simpler: what does the pressure response already tell us? Zhetalonians is built around that question.

You already have the data. We extract the physics.

How it works

Turn a pressure pulse into an engineering diagnosis

1 · Measure

Record the transient at an accessible pressure sensor — typically at a valve — during a controlled closure.

2 · Invert

A method-of-characteristics transient model reconstructs the pipeline behaviour that produced the response.

3 · Diagnose

Estimate the position and character of deposits, restrictions, cross-sectional change or leaks.

4 · Quantify

Every estimate carries an uncertainty, a residual and a list of every reflector found — including the weak ones.

5 · Decide

Use the result to decide whether, and where, inspection or intervention is warranted.

No shutdown for the analysis. No new permanent instrumentation where suitable pressure data already exist.

Live · method of characteristics · blockage at 60 % of length
1,180wave speed m/s
0.00echo time s
reflector at m
area remaining

The trace on the left is being simulated and inverted in your browser right now. If an echo arrives Δt after the closure step, the reflector sits at x = a·Δt/2 from the sensor; its reflection coefficient gives the remaining area, A′/A = (1 − r)/(1 + r). A leak appears as a negative reflection.

What it can reveal

Deposits · restrictions · geometry · hydraulic changes

Deposits and restrictions

Wax, hydrate, scale and asphaltene build-up: position from the sensor, remaining flow area, and extent along the line.

Cross-sectional and geometry changes

Diameter or wall changes, partial collapse, and other features that alter the acoustic impedance of the line.

Leaks and hydraulic changes

Leak position and estimated leak flow, reported as a qualified capability: verified against an independent solver, not yet against published field data.

Why Zhetalonians

Most monitoring answers “did something change?” We answer “what physical change could have produced what we measured?”

Physics first

The inversion starts from a transient-flow model of the line, not from treating the pressure signal as an arbitrary statistical series.

Non-intrusive

Pressure-response information replaces physical access to the suspected location.

Quantitative

The output is an engineering estimate — a distance, an area, a flow — not an anomaly score.

Uncertainty-aware

Positions carry a 1σ uncertainty; Bayesian analyses report convergence diagnostics; every reflector found is listed so false alarms are visible.

Explicit about scope

Each tool states its assumptions and what it has not been validated against. We advertise the limitations.

Built for decisions

Not another dashboard: actionable information about whether and where to investigate.

Validation

Engineering software should show its work.

Independent transient-solver comparison, synthetic recovery tests with false-alarm counts, convergence diagnostics on every Bayesian run, and a documented validity envelope for each tool.

View validation methodology
307 ± 9 mleak at 300 m, independent solver
< 1 %synthetic position error
5 / 5detections at 10 ms closure, 0 false alarms
R̂ · ESSreported on every Bayesian run
The tools

Three analysis tools, one engineering license each

The people

Built by oil & gas engineers who know the cost of being wrong.

The methods come from more than a dozen granted US patents on pressure-pulse pipeline inspection, coiled-tubing automation and production optimisation, and from peer-reviewed research on physics-based machine learning. We built the tools from the operating problem outward, not from a model inward.

About the founders and the methods
12+granted US patents
10+peer-reviewed publications
3engineering tools in production
1independent-solver validation published
Engineering license

Annual license, per tool

For engineers who need to evaluate pipeline pressure-response, well-log or intervention data without building the inversion workflow themselves.

  • Full access to the licensed tool, running in your browser
  • Engineering documentation, model assumptions and validity envelope
  • Analysis outputs with uncertainty and diagnostics; saved, reproducible runs; engineering reports
  • Validation examples and sample datasets
  • Technical support from the engineering team
Enterprise and multi-seat

Several engineers, custom models, your history

Multiple seats, custom forward models, integration with your data systems, or evaluation against your own historical pressure data.

Your data

Have pressure data you've been trying to understand?

Send a representative dataset and we'll show you what the inversion recovers — location, magnitude, uncertainty, and what the data do not support. You are not buying software; you are finding out whether we can extract engineering information from your line.

Request a technical evaluation
Common questions

Questions pipeline and well engineers ask us

Can a pressure test locate a blockage or deposit in a pipeline?

Yes. A valve-closure pressure pulse reflects from any change in cross-section; the echo time gives the distance and the reflection strength gives the severity. The inversion reports position, remaining area and extent with an uncertainty.

Do I need to shut the line down?

No. The analysis uses a short pressure transient from existing instrumentation; the line keeps operating. What is required is a valve that can be closed quickly and a pressure sensor near it sampling at 500 Hz or faster.

Is leak location supported?

Leaks appear as negative reflections and the tool reports position and estimated leak flow. This has been verified against an independent transient solver on a synthetic case; field validation of leak sizing is not yet published, and the Validation page says so.

Is my data uploaded anywhere?

No. The analysis and storage run in your browser; data leaves your machine only if you email it to us for an evaluation.

More on each tool: pressure pulse inversion · Bayesian parameter inversion · tubular lockup prediction · validation · about.