Subsea Pipelines

Prepared for Directed Studies CIVL 7006

Nikzad Nourpanah Under supervision of: Dr. Farid Taheri

Winter 2008/2009

Scope
The scope of this document is to give a general introduction on the subject of subsea pipelines, with reference to design codes as used by the industry. The document covers most important aspects of analysis and design of subsea pipelines, but it should be noted that some less important topics are left out. Where applicable, the theory and/or experimental data behind code provisions is discussed with reference to available technical literature. The main topics are Mechanical design, on-bottom stability, free spanning and installation of subsea pipelines.

Subsea Pipelines

Page 1

Contents
1. 2. 3. 4. Introduction Material Grade Selection Diameter Selection Wall Thickness Selection 4.1. 4.2. 4.3. 4.4. 5. 5.1. 5.2. 5.3. 5.4. 6. 6.1. 6.2. 7. 7.1. 7.2. 7.3. 7.4. 7.5. 7.6. References Internal Pressure Containment (Burst) Collapse Due to External Pressure Local Buckling Due to Bending and External Pressure Buckle Propagation Soil Friction Factor Hydrodynamic Force Calculation Hydrodynamic Coefficient Selection Stability Criteria Static condition VIV J-lay S-lay Reel lay Towed Pipelines Shore Approach Wet vs Dry Pipeline Installation 9 11 12 13 13 19 22 27 35 37 37 39 44 45 47 50 63 68 72 73 74 75 77 80

On-Bottom Stability

Free Span (Bottom Roughness) Analysis

Installation of Subsea Pipelines

Subsea Pipelines

Page 2

List of Figures
Figure 1 - US crude oil production trends (S. Chakrabarti, 2005) ................................................................9 Figure 2 - Number of ultra deepwater (>5000 ft) wells drilled in Gulf of Mexico (S. Chakrabarti, 2005) ...... 10 Figure 3 - Roles of pipelines in an offshore hydrocarbon field (Bai, 2000) ................................................. 10 Figure 4 - Free body diagram of a pipe section under internal and external pressure ................................ 13 Figure 5 – Burst pressure (Pb) according to API-RP-1111 (1999) using Equations 4 and 5 for X65 grade steel, SY = 65 ksi, U = 77 ksi and E = 29’000 ksi ....................................................................................15 Figure 6 – Pressure level relations (API-RP-1111, 1999) .......................................................................... 16 Figure 7 – Ductile burst sample (API-RP-1111, 1999) .............................................................................. 17 Figure 8 – Brittle burst sample (API-RP-1111, 1999) ............................................................................... 17 Figure 9 – Concept of effective axial force (Fyrileiv et al, 2005) ............................................................... 19 Figure 10 – Collapse pressures of 2900 specimen normalized with collapse pressures calculated by Equation (15) (Murphey and Langner, 1985) ........................................................................................................ 21 Figure 11 - Collapse pressure vs. D/t per API 1111 (1999) and DNV OS-F101 (2000), (Nogueira & Mckeehan, 2005) .................................................................................................................................. 21 Figure 12 – Mechanical behavior of pipe subjected to pure bending, (Murphey and Langner, 1985) ........... 23 Figure 13 – Moment vs. strain curves for constant diameter and yield stress but variable wall thickness (Murphey and Langner, 1985) ............................................................................................................... 23 Figure 14 – Pipe bending tests in air – curvatures at buckling (Murphey and Langner, 1985)..................... 24 Figure 15 – Pipe collapse due to combined bending and external pressure; comparison of experimental results with (18) for a perfectly circular pipe (Murphey and Langner, 1985) ............................................. 25 Figure 16 - Rational model prediction of collapse pressure vs. initial ovality, compared to experimental results for pipe with D/t = 35 (Nogueira & Mckeehan, 2005) ................................................................... 26 Figure 17 - Pressure vs. bending strain predicted by rational model and experiments (Nogueira & Mckeehan, 2005) ................................................................................................................................................... 26 Figure 18 - Pressures vs. bending strain; comparison between empirical formulations of API, DNV and the rational model (Nogueira & Mckeehan, 2005) ......................................................................................... 27 Figure 19 – Elastic, plastic, collapse and buckle propagation pressures for an X65 grade pipeline based on API RP 1111 (1999) and Timoshenko (1961) formulations, E = 29’000 ksi ............................................... 28 Figure 20 – Hoop stress associated with elastic, plastic and collapse pressure for an X65 grade pipeline based on API-RP-1111 (1999) and Timoshenko (1961) formulations, E = 29’000 ksi ................................. 28 Figure 21 – Grouted Sleeve arrestor (Langner, 1999) .............................................................................. 29 Figure 22 – Integral Ring arrestor, which also serves as J-Lay Collar, (Langner, 1999) .............................. 30 Figure 23 - Tested sample of a pipeline with Sleeve type buckle arrestors and the numerical model .......... 30 Subsea Pipelines Page 3

............. 1992) ..................................................... 2006) ..................................................................Motions due to a prescribed second mode inline deflection...................5............... 62 Subsea Pipelines Page 4 ......................... 50 Figure 43 – Classification of free spans (DNV-RP-F105.. 49 Figure 42 – Vortex shedding due to steady flow at different Reynolds numbers and fluctuating pressures on pipe resulting in oscillating lift and drag forces (Blevins............................................................................ 1981) ..... 2003) .............. 1977) ............... 44 Figure 36 – Free spanning pipeline on seabed ..................................... 38 Figure 28 – Current profile due to tides and wind (DNV-CN-30..................................... 39 Figure 29 – CD as a function of Reynolds number and roughness for a cylinder in steady current (DNV-CN30.... 2000) ................... 2004) ........... 36 Figure 27 – Relative importance of inertia....................................................................... Ormen Lange field............................Figure 24 – U mode buckling of a pipeline............... Norway (Source: Internet) ....................................... 1991) ........................5................................................................................................................. 46 Figure 39 ...5.... 40 Figure 31 – CD as a function of KC and roughness (DNV-CN-30.......Regions of applicability of different wave theories (API RP 2A................ the collapse wave passes through a sleeve type arrestor (Kyriakides................5............ 53 Figure 45 – Effective length vs.. 1981) .............. 34 Figure 26 .................................................................................................................................... drag and diffraction wave forces (DNV-OS-J101........... 48 Figure 41 – Static stress and span for pipeline passing obstruction (Mousselli........... CM and CL for regular waves............. 1992) 43 Figure 35 – Free body diagram of pipeline for on-bottom stability analysis (Bai............................ 2003) .......................... 2000) ................. 2001) ................... (C) Time series of ry/D close to an antinode....................... 1999) ................ 46 Figure 40 – Static stresses and deformations in a free spanning pipeline (Mousselli........................................... 2005).... 41 Figure 33 – Hydrodynamic force coefficients CD.................. 45 Figure 38 – Subsea pipelines................... 54 Figure 46 – Illustration of the in-line VIV Response Amplitude versus VR and KS (DNV-RP-F105................................................................................................................ (D) Time series of rz/D close to an antinode......Typical free span distributions and pipeline profile (Soreide................ 2006)........ 59 Figure 49 – Schematic diagram of free span pipelines with additional local stiffness and damping (Fernes and Bertsen... (Fernes and Berntsen..................................... (Bottom panels) Countours of time evolution of ry/D and rz/D.. 45 Figure 37 – Continental shelf and continental slope............................. 58 Figure 48 – Typical two-slope S-N curve (DNV-RP-F105.42 Figure 34 – Hydrodynamic coefficients versus current ratio for wave plus steady current (Bryndum......... 61 Figure 50 ..................................... 41 Figure 32 – Influence of seabed proximity on CD for current+wave situation (DNV-CN-30............................. 33 Figure 25 – Comparison of integral ring buckle arrestor design formula with available test data (Langner......................................... 1991) ...... 1991) . 40 Figure 30 – Added mass coefficient Ca as a function of gap ratio H/D (DNV-CN-30................................. soil stiffness (DNV-RP-F105) ..................... 1991) .. 51 Figure 44 – CFD simulation of piggyback pipeline .................. 57 Figure 47 – Illustration of the cross-flow VIV Response Amplitude versus VR (DNV-RP-F105) ................................. effect of pipe roughness (a) and seabed roughness (b) (Bryndum....................... 2006) ................................. 1991) ..5..........

....... 2003) ....Combined in-line and cross flow motion of a pipeline section (Fernes and Berntsen....Bottom pull method......................... 65 Figure 55 – Catenary mooring system ... 65 Figure 56 – Combined station-keeping method for intermediate water depths (Langner................ Bottom: S-lay (Dixon et al....................... 2005) ..... 73 Figure 62 – Schematic of towed pipeline (Bai. 1973) .........Figure 51 ..........................................................4 mm (26 inch) pipeline: submerged weight in laying condition as a function of depth (Palmer...................................................................................................... Top: J-lay........................................................................ 72 Figure 61 – A reel vessel (Guo et al................................................................. 75 Figure 64 – Bottom pull method used for pipeline shore approach ........................... 78 Figure 68 – Comparison of design strategies for 660.. 2005) ....................................... 1991) ................................................. 75 Figure 65 .................... launching roller track ................ 74 Figure 63 – Float and sink method used for shore approach installation ............................... 63 Figure 53 – Schematic of J-lay method for pipelaying (Nogueira & Mckeehan......... 2005) .................. 1998)...................... 70 Figure 60 – A typical S-lay Vessel (Nogueira & Mckeehan............. 75 Figure 66 – Directional drilling method for pipeline shore approach ....................................................... 2003) ........... 2000) . dynamic stresses and tension for different wave periods (Clauss et al.......................................... 2005) ..................................... 76 Figure 67 – Comparison of design strategies for 660.......... 69 Figure 59 – Dynamics of pipelines during laying: motion. 78 Subsea Pipelines Page 5 ................. 2005) ................................................................................................................ 64 Figure 54 – Taut mooring system ................................................................................................ 1998) ..................................................................................................................................................... 66 Figure 57 – Location of stress concentration in sleeve connection....... 62 Figure 52 – Schematic of S-lay method for pipelaying (Nogueira & Mckeehan..........................................................................................4 mm (26 inch) pipeline: wall thickness as a function of depth (Palmer............ 67 Figure 58 – Heerema's balder in J-lay mode (Nogueira & Mckeehan.............................

..............................................Tensile strength properties (API 5L........................... 2006) ...... 12 Table 4 ...... 55 Table 10 – Advantages and disadvantages of J-lay (Nogueira & Mckeehan....... 2005) ...................................................... 52 Table 9 – Boundary conditions coefficients (DNV-RP-F105......................... 2000) .. for steel pipe according to ASME B31............................ T.........Crude oil sizing guidance (Nogueira & Mckeehan............ 2006) ........................................................................... 2005) ............Diameters for selected offshore projects (Nogueira & Mckeehan........... 2005) ............... 68 Table 11 – Advantages and disadvantages of S-lay (Nogueira & Mckeehan.......................................................................................................... 2006) .....35 Table 6 – Allowable pipeline stresses (Nogueira & Mckeehan.............. 14 Table 5 – Return period for environmental phenomena ............... 2005) ...............List of Tables Table 1 ....... 2005) ...... 47 Table 7 – Response Behavior of free span (DNV-RP-F105....... 11 Table 2 .............................. 2005) ............... 52 Table 8 – Different flow regimes (DNV-RP-F105............... 2005) & (Guo et al...............Temperature de-rating factor................. 2005) .......... 73 Subsea Pipelines Page 6 ..................................... 12 Table 3 .............8 (Nogueira & Mckeehan......................... 72 Table 12 – Advantages and disadvantages of Reel-lay (Nogueira & Mckeehan........................................................

coating mass and added mass C1 ~ C 6 = Boundary condition coefficients C a = Added mass coefficient C D = Drag coefficient C m = C a + 1= Inertia coefficient C L = Lift Coefficient M = Moment n i = Number of cycles at stress range Si N i = Number of cycles to failure at stress range Si P(i) = Probability of occurrence for the “i”th stress cycle (“i”th sea state) CSF =Coating Stiffness Factor d = Water depth D = Pipeline nominal outside diameter D fat = Accumulated fatigue damage E = Modulus of elasticity E = Longitudinal joint factor f 0 = Collapse factor f 1 = 1st eigen-frequency of free span in still water f d = Design factor f e = Weld joint factor f n = nth eigen-frequency of free span in still water f p = Buckle propagation safety factor P0 = External pressure P1 = psia at start point of pipeline P2 = psia at end point of pipeline Pa = Incidental overpressure Pactual = Actual measured burst pressure Pb = Burst pressure Pc = Collapse pressure Pcr = Free span critical buckling load Pe = Elastic collapse pressure Pi = Internal pressure Pid = Internal design pressure Pm = Minimum cross-over pressure Pmax − Hyd = Maximum hyrotest pressure Pp = Buckle propagation pressure Pt = Hydrostatic test pressure f t = Temperature de-rating factor for steel f v .Nomenclature A = Pipeline steel cross section A0 = Pipeline outer cross section ACF = Stress amplitude due to a unit diameter cross-flow mode shape deflection Ai = Pipeline inner cross section AIL = Stress amplitude due to a unit diameter in-line mode shape deflection AY = In-line VIV amplitude I = Moment of inertia ID = Pipeline inner diameter k = Burst coefficient 4πm eξ T Ks = = Stability parameter ρD 2 KC = Uc = Keulegan-Carpenter number fwD Az = Cross-flow VIV amplitude L = Wave length L = buckle arrestor length Lm = Length of pipeline in Miles me = Effective (modal) mass m( s) = mass per unit length of pipeline including structural mass.i = vibration frequency of pipeline due to “i”th sea state f w = Wave frequency F = Construction design factor FD = Drag force FI = Inertia force FL = Lift force h = Buckle arrestor thickness H = Wave height Subsea Pipelines Px = Buckle arrestor cross-over pressure Py = Plastic collapse pressure Q = Cubic ft of gas per 24 hr Page 7 .

including structural.Re = UcD υ = Reynolds number th δ = ( Dmax − Dmin ) /( Dmax + Dmin ) = ovality δ = Pipeline sagging at mid span η = Efficiency parameter for buckle arrestor η fat = Fatigue safety factor S i = Stress range due to i seastate S u = Soil undrained shear strength S Y = Specified minimum yield stress S Y . a = Specified minimum yield stress of buckle arrestor S Y . 1*10-6 for seawater ε = critical strain ξT = Damping. soil and hydrodynamic damping ρ = Mass density γ = Weight density Uc = Current flow velocity ratio Uc +Uw Subsea Pipelines Page 8 . actual = Average measured yield strength of pipe κ = Curvature µ = Soil friction factor θ = Seabed slope ϕ = Internal friction angle of soil φ = mode shape SF = Safety factor t = Pipeline nominal wall thickness t min = Minimum measured wall thickness T T = Wave period = Temperature de-rating factor for steel Ta = True wall axial force T d = Design life Teff =Effective axial force (true wall force including pressure corrections) Tlife = Fatigue life capacity U = Steel ultimate tensile strength U actual = average measured ultimate tensile strength U c = Current velocity Um = Uc +Uw U w = Particle maximum horizontal velocity due to wave & = Particle maximum horizontal acceleration due to U w wave U wind = Current velocity due to wind U tide = Current velocity due to tide VR = Uc +Uw = Reduced velocity fn D Ws = Pipeline submerged weight α= υ = Poisson’s ratio. 0.3 for steel υ = Kinematic viscosity.

the importance of offshore oil and gas is first mentioned. Introduction In order to understand the importance of subsea pipelines. Figure 1 shows the US crude oil production trends from onshore and offshore resources. therefore exploration is active in deep and ultra deep (>5000 ft) waters. This is due to the fact that most onshore hydrocarbon fields are discovered and under production and some of them are no longer economic. Chakrabarti. Also it is seen that production from shallow waters is nearly constant while production in deepwater (>1000 ft) is increasing. Figure 2 shows this fact: the number of wells in ultra deep waters is increasing very fast. 2005) It is seen in Figure 1 that offshore production is increasing and onshore portion is decreasing. Figure 1 . Subsea Pipelines Page 9 .1. This is due to the fact that almost all resources in shallow waters are found and being utilized.US crude oil production trends (S.

Roles of pipelines in an offshore hydrocarbon field (Bai. Chakrabarti.Number of ultra deepwater (>5000 ft) wells drilled in Gulf of Mexico (S. 2000) Subsea Pipelines Page 10 .Figure 2 . Figure 3 shows a typical offshore hydro carbon field and the role of pipelines. 2005) In an offshore hydrocarbon production system. Figure 3 . pipelines have a connecting role between the facilities.

Table 1 shows tensile strength properties according to API-5L. the cost of pipeline per meter is slightly reduced.Tensile strength properties (API 5L. On the other hand by using higher grade steels the required wall thickness is reduced.2. where required tension can be a limiting factor. therefore the required tension is lower. Welding higher grades is harder. API-5L covers Grade B to Grade X80 steels with Outside Diameters (OD) ranging from 4. higher grades of steel (e. This factor is very important in deep waters. X70. Higher grade steels result in a lighter pipeline. Generally the most common steel grade used for deepwater subsea pipelines is X65.g. Subsea Pipelines Page 11 .5 to 80 inch. regarding its cost-effectiveness and adequate welding technology. Material Grade Selection Generally carbon steels are used for subsea pipelines. For buried offshore pipeline in the Arctic. the more ductile X52 has been proven the best choice for limit state design and the need for a high toughness material that could sustain the high strain based design. Therefore although higher grades cost more per unit volume. Duplex) cost more per unit volume. X80. 2000) Generally. API-5L "Specification for Line Pipe" (2000) is used for standard specifications. Table 1 . therefore each joint requires more time so the overall operation time of the lay barge is higher.

2005).Diameters for selected offshore projects (Nogueira & Mckeehan.Crude oil sizing guidance (Nogueira & Mckeehan. 2005) Subsea Pipelines Page 12 . Also. especially for multi phase flows. there exist some empirical formulas that produce reasonable accuracy. However. For example Equation 1 can be used for sizing single phase gas lines and Table 2 for crude oil pipelines (Nogueira & Mckeehan. 2005) Table 3 . diameters of some selected offshore projects are presented in Table 3. Diameter Selection The process for selecting a pipeline diameter involves a detailed hydraulic analysis.3. Q= 2 2 500 ID3 P 1 −P 2 Lm (1) Table 2 .

Buckle propagation and its arrest.1 inner pipe radius. Thin wall equation can be used for D/t < 20 but it gives slightly higher estimates of stress than thick wall theory. 2.4. Internal pressure containment (burst) during operation and hydro-test. Internal Pressure Containment (Burst) The burst pressure of the pipeline is basically calculated by the hoop stress formula for thin walled pressure vessels. four different failure modes must be assessed: 1. The burst pressure is calculated by setting the hoop stress equal to pipeline yield stress and incorporating safety factors. 4. Collapse due to external pressure. 3. Figure 4 . 4. ASME. Here the formulation according to US regulations (CFR. ABS and CSA) use the same philosophy. 2002): Pid = 2 SY t FET D (2) Subsea Pipelines Page 13 . Local buckling due to bending and external pressure.Free body diagram of a pipe section under internal and external pressure All the major codes (i. DNV.1. Code of Federal Regulation). Wall Thickness Selection To calculate the required wall thickness for an offshore pipeline.e. Thin wall theory is valid for D/t > 20 and t < 0. the variation in stress between inner and outer surfaces becomes significant. which uses allowable stress design is given. Pid is internal design pressure (CFR. The principal difference between the thin and thick wall formulations is that for thick wall conditions. API. It assumes uniform wall stress and gives mean circumferential stress.

95 for hydro test: Pmax − hyd = 2 SY t FET D (3) API-RP-1111 (1999) which is a limit state code and uses LRFD method uses the following logic for internal pressure check: A burst pressure. T = temperature de-rating factor (See Table 4). and 0. T. construction design factor is 0.0 for seamless. 2005) According to 30 CFR 250 (CFR.25 times the maximum allowable operating pressure (MAOP) for at least 8 h. Subsea Pipelines Page 14 .F = construction design factor of 0. E = longitudinal joint factor (for API-5L steels E is 1.8 (Nogueira & Mckeehan.6 for furnace but welded). A plot of the two equations is given in Figure 5 and it is seen that the two equations give the same results. Regarding geometrical properties. submerged arc welded. electric flash welded. Equations (4) and (5) are only functions of D/t. for steel pipe according to ASME B31. is defined for the pipeline: Pb = 0.60 for the riser component. electric resistance welded. 2002). Table 4 . all pipelines should be hydrostatically tested with water at a stabilized pressure of at least 1.90(S Y + U ) t D−t (5) Any of the Equations (4) and (5) can be used.Temperature de-rating factor. Pb.72 for submerged component and 0. but API recommends use of Equation (4) for D/t<15.45(S Y + U )Ln D D − 2t (4) Pb = 0. Equation (3) can be used where F.

The Maximum Operating Pressure (MOP) should not exceed 0. API-RP-1111 only accepts pipelines with fe equal to one. U = 77 ksi and E = 29’000 ksi The hydrostatic test pressure should satisfy the following: Pt ≤ f d f e f t Pb (6) Where: fd is design factor equal to 0.90 for pipelines and 0.80 Pt (7) Subsea Pipelines Page 15 .35 30 25 Burst Pressure.8.80 of the hydro-test pressure: Pd ≤ 0. Pb (ksi) 20 15 10 5 0 0 10 20 30 40 D/t 50 60 70 80 Figure 5 – Burst pressure (Pb) according to API-RP-1111 (1999) using Equations 4 and 5 for X65 grade steel.75 for risers fe is weld joint factor and the same as E in Equation (2).4 and ASME B31. ft is temperature de-rating factor and is the same as T in Equation (2) which is given in Table 4. originally defined by ASME B31. SY = 65 ksi.

or any temporary incidental condition. maximum incidental over pressure. Figure 6 – Pressure level relations (API-RP-1111. unintended shut-in pressure.90 Pt (8) The relation between maximum operating pressure. A longitudinal fracture extends over the length of the bulge and terminates near the end of the bulge. Subsea Pipelines Page 16 . This code only allows use of ductile material. but the normal shut-in pressure condition should not be allowed to exceed MOP. The end of fracture turns at roughly 45 degrees from the pipe axis at each end. Figure 7 and Figure 8 show typical failure pattern of ductile and brittle material respectively. hydro-test pressure and burst pressure are shown graphically in Figure 6. with fe and ft equal to 1. Pa ≤ 0.Incidental overpressure (Pa) includes the situation where the pipeline is subject to surge pressure. 1999) API-RP-1111 (1999) provides Appendix-A as a procedure for testing and qualification of material other than carbon steel. The incidental overpressure should not exceed 90% of the hydro-test pressure. The incidental pressure may exceed MOP temporarily. A ductile burst failure has a distinct bulge at the burst location.

1999) Figure 8 – Brittle burst sample (API-RP-1111. 1999) Subsea Pipelines Page 17 .Figure 7 – Ductile burst sample (API-RP-1111.

In order to justify the end cap assumption. which is much more complex than the effective axial force method. can be written as Equation (10). is defined as: k= ( SY . in which k was set to 0. The effective tension due to static primary longitudinal loads should not exceed the allowable value: Teff ≤ 0.875kaverage ⎪ k = min⎨0.45.The burst coefficient. 2005). (Fyrileiv et al. By arbitrarily considering a segment of pipeline as end-capped. The effective axial force concept is illustrated in Figure 9. the external and internal pressures have to be integrated over the outer and inner volume surface respectively.45.9kmin ⎪0. Pb. Note that Equation (10) is the general form of Equation (4). the summation of external and internal pressures result in buoyancy and weight of internal liquid respectively. (as seen in Equation 10).60T y (11) Where Teff = Ta − Pi Ai + P0 A0 Ta = σ A A Ty = S y A Effective axial force is a concept introduced to simplify the treatment of internal and external pressures.45 ⎩ It is expected that the computed k values will all significantly exceed 0. Ta. k. Subsea Pipelines Page 18 . the burst pressure. opposite forces are applied and summed with true axial force. actual Pactual ⎛ D ⎞⎛ t min ⎞ + U actual ) ln ⎜ ⎟⎜ ⎟ ⎝ D − 2t ⎠⎝ t ⎠ (9) Having obtained the burst factor. If this simplifying method is not used. Pb = k (SY + U )Ln D D − 2t (10) The value of k is determined from the burst test data as: ⎧0.

the collapse pressure is between the elastic and plastic collapse pressures. 2005) Also for the combination of axial force and pressures. The plastic collapse pressure. Generally. Pe . The elastic collapse pressure.96 for hydrotest loads ⎥ ⎦ (12) 4.Figure 9 – Concept of effective axial force (Fyrileiv et al. is found by equating the hoop stress to the yield stress.90 for operational loads ⎤ ⎞ ⎥ ⎟ ≤ ⎢0. The differential pressure may cause collapse of pipe. Pe = 2E ⎛ t ⎞ ⎜ ⎟ 1−υ 2 ⎝ D ⎠ t D 3 (13) Py = 2 S y (14) Subsea Pipelines Page 19 .96 for extreme loads ⎢ ⎥ ⎟ ⎠ ⎢ ⎣0. is found by examining the stability of a pipe section under hydrostatic load. Py . API-RP-1111 (1999) suggests the following interaction equation to be satisfied: ⎛ Pi − Po ⎜ ⎜ P b ⎝ ⎛ Teff ⎞ ⎜ ⎟ ⎟ +⎜ T ⎠ ⎝ y 2 2 ⎡0. subsea pipelines are typically subjected to conditions where external pressure exceeds the internal pressure. Collapse Due to External Pressure During installation.2.

(15) and (16) is given in Figure 19 and the associated hoop stresses (calculated by assuming thin-wall theory) is given in Figure 20. propose the following design equation collapse pressure: Pc = 2S y S y (1 − υ 2 ) ⎛ D ⎞ 3 1+ ⎜ ⎟ E ⎝ t ⎠ (16) Both Equations (15) and (16) are interpolation formulas between Pe and Py. Comparison of results of Equation (15) with 2900 pipe collapse tests is shown in Figure 10. Equation (15) gives nearly the same results as DNV as seen in Figure 11.Each of the major codes gives a transition formula between Pe and Py for calculating the collapse pressure Pc . 0. API-RP-1111 (1999) gives a very simple formula for Pc. 0. Timoshenko and Gere (1961) propose a bi-linear transition. (14). The design equation according to API-RP-1111 (1999) for external pressure is: P0 − Pi < f 0 Pc (17) Where: f 0 = Collapse factor. 1985). and shows that 97% of the collapse data lie above the predictions of Equation (15).7 for seamless ERW pipe. It is seen in Figure 20 that the collapse hoop stress of the pipeline has the same typical pattern for column critical stress. such as DSAW pipe Subsea Pipelines Page 20 . A graphical presentation of Equations (13). Equation was originally introduced by Shell in 1975 (Murphey and Langner. DNV (2000) and ABS (2000) give a complicated third order equation. which is the lowerbound prediction for collapse pressure: Pc = Pe Py Pe2 + Py2 (15) Timoshenko and Gere (1961).6 for cold expanded pipe.

1985) Figure 11 . 2005) Subsea Pipelines Page 21 .Collapse pressure vs. (Nogueira & Mckeehan.Figure 10 – Collapse pressures of 2900 specimen normalized with collapse pressures calculated by Equation (15) (Murphey and Langner. D/t per API 1111 (1999) and DNV OS-F101 (2000).

less than the proportional limit strain. Figure 12 (d).3 ⇒ ε b = 1. pure bending of a pipeline is discussed here. to point B.8. produces a further departure from the initial linear behavior. As bending moment is applied to the pipe. which is defined as reciprocal of radius of curvature. This strain is determined by eigenvalue analysis based on the small strain elastic theory.4. without any account of imperfections and residual stresses (Fatemi. including residual curvature of the pipe centerline. as indicated in Figure 12 (c). These formulations are based entirely on empirical data fitting. the stress at any point and the bending moment vary linearly with bending strain. Local Buckling Due to Bending and External Pressure During installation with a lay barge. and the pipe itself is not weakened or in any danger of imminent failure. curvature is developed.2 t D In order to understand the physical meaning of critical strain. At this point both the stress-strain curve and the moment-curvature curve move off the initial straight lines. 2007). The plastic deformation at this degree of bending is stable. 1961): εb = t 3(1 − υ 2 ) D 2 υ = 0. however in other situations this might happen. namely in free spans and during depressurization. causing little ovaling or change in cross sectional shape. and the stress distribution. A further increase in strain.2 t/D. Subsea Pipelines Page 22 . the pipeline is subject to severe bending and external pressure. plastic deformation of the pipe material begins. becomes nonlinear. The general equation is (Timoshenko and Gere. The buckling strain for a cylindrical shell under the action of uniform axial compression is 1.3. DNV and ABS also suggest the same formula except that the strain term is to the power of 0. API-RP-1111(1999) proposes Equation (18) which can be used for D/t < 50.0. A convenient measure of curvature is strain of the material farthest from neutral bending plane: ε= κD 2 For small bending strains. With further increase in the bending strain to just beyond the proportional limit (Point A on the stress-strain curve in Figure 12 (a)). ε ( P0 − Pi ) + ≤ g (δ ) εb Pc (18) Where: εb = t =buckling strain under pure bending 2D g (δ ) = (1 + 20δ ) −1 = collapse reduction factor which is maximum 1 for a perfectly circular pipe The safety factor for bending strain is 2. Most of the codes have addressed this failure mode and proposed relevant formulations.

1985) Subsea Pipelines Page 23 .(a) Stress-strain curve (b) Moment vs strain (c) (c) Ovaling due to bending (d) Stress distributions Figure 12 – Mechanical behavior of pipe subjected to pure bending. strain curves for constant diameter and yield stress but variable wall thickness (Murphey and Langner. 1985) Figure 13 – Moment vs. (Murphey and Langner.

DNV. The bending moment Mb is maximum at this bending strain. This slope of of the moment-strain curve between points B and C is determined by two competing effects.As bending strain increase toward point C. and the critical bending strain is εb = t/2D. which tends to decrease the bending moment. 1985). Figure 14 shows how this value fits the experimental data. ovaling of the cross section reduces the section modulus and the hoop stresses interact with the axial stresses through the plasticity relationships. Figure 14 also provides some indication of the detrimental effects of “flat” stress-strain curves and/or inhomogeneous pipe. ABS). “Flat” stress-strain is one that the slope of the curve goes to zero or becomes negative at any point during the initial yielding process. At point C the bending strain reaches a critical value εb where the ovaling effect just overcomes the strain hardening characteristics of the pipe material. 1985) Subsea Pipelines Page 24 . which is the value used in Equation (18) and is used by most major design codes (API. Moment is increased as a result of strain hardening and because an increasing fraction of the cross section reaches yield. For undamaged pipeline it has been observed that the bending strength Mb is approximately equal to fully plastic moment. where the diameter is kept constant and wall thickness varies. ovaling increases rapidly and the slope of the bending moment vs strain curve tends toward zero. Note that all the lowest buckling points on this graph fall into one or both of these categories. Figure 13 shows moment-strain curves for three D/t ratios. Figure 14 – Pipe bending tests in air – curvatures at buckling (Murphey and Langner. At the same time. and after this point the pipe would buckle (Murphey and Langner. Premature buckling is expected for pipes with “flat” stress-strain curve.

If in addition to bending. This. until it collapses. or ring. external pressure is applied. Nogueira and Lanan (2001) have developed a rational model from first principles. In this model it is recognized that as a pipe bends.g. which ovalises the pipe cross section. its effects are taken into account by noticing that it contributes to reduce the ring capacity to resist bending. the ovalisation (initially uniform along the pipe length) will concentrate at the weakest point along the pipe (e. Therefore. and the predictions have been shown to correlate very well with test results. Figure 15 – Pipe collapse due to combined bending and external pressure. in turn. which is too long and complicated to be presented here. Subsea Pipelines Page 25 . The resulting is an interaction equation (between pressure and bending strain). a thinner ring) and a local buckle will form. comparison of experimental results with (18) for a perfectly circular pipe (Murphey and Langner. This is due to the effects of the compressive hoop stress. components of the longitudinal bending stresses act into the cross-section. Figure 15 shows experimental results and predictions of Equation (18) and a good fit is observed. Figure 16 shows comparison of collapse pressure predicted by model with those by the experiments which are in good agreement. 1985) In lieu of the mentioned empirical formulation. A pipe under bending will collapse when its cross section (or ring) loses stiffness due to plastic hinges mechanism formation at the onset of local buckling. For this case. generates a transverse moment.Equation (18) for a perfectly circular pipe (where the collapse reduction factor is 1) is a straight line which intersects both axes at 1. when rings of the pipe lose their stiffness.

Figure 16 .Pressure vs. 2005) Subsea Pipelines Page 26 . Figure 17 . 2005) Figure 17 shows the collapse pressure vs. compared to experimental results for pipe with D/t = 35 (Nogueira & Mckeehan. A good match is observed. bending strain predicted by the rational model and experiments. initial ovality. bending strain predicted by rational model and experiments (Nogueira & Mckeehan.Rational model prediction of collapse pressure vs.

bending strain. Subsea Pipelines Page 27 . The equation given by API-RP-1111 (1999) is presented. Pp for an X65 pipeline. the external pressure may cause the buckle to propagate (travel) along the pipeline. Figure 20 shows the hoop stress associated with the mentioned levels. Py.4. for example resulting from excessive bending.Pressures vs. 2005) 4. the buckle cannot propagate. comparison between empirical formulations of API. Codes present different empirical formulations for buckle propagation pressure which mainly depend on diameter.4 (19) It is noted that propagation pressure Pp is smaller than collapse pressure Pc (collapse pressure is the pressure required to buckle a pipeline section). Figure 19 is a plot of Pe. As long as the external pressure is less than the propagation pressure threshold. wall thickness and steel grade. ⎛ t ⎞ Pp = 24 S y ⎜ ⎟ ⎝D⎠ 2. DNV and the rational model (Nogueira & Mckeehan. Buckle Propagation If a local buckle is present in a section of a pipeline. Pc.Finally the results from empirical formulations of codes (API and DNV) are compared with results of the rational model in Figure 18. Figure 18 .

collapse and buckle propagation pressures for an X65 grade pipeline based on API RP 1111 (1999) and Timoshenko (1961) formulations. Pe API Collapse Pressure. plastic and collapse pressure for an X65 grade pipeline based on APIRP-1111 (1999) and Timoshenko (1961) formulations. plastic. Pc Plastic Collapse Pressure. E = 29’000 ksi Subsea Pipelines Page 28 .10 9 8 7 Pressure (ksi) 6 5 4 3 2 1 0 Buckle Propagation Pressure. Pp Elastic Collapse Pressure. Py 0 10 20 30 40 D/t 50 60 70 80 Figure 19 – Elastic. Pc Timoshenko Collapse Pressure. E = 29’000 ksi 80 Plastic Collapse Hoop Stress 70 60 Elastic Collapse Hoop Stress 50 Stress (ksi) 40 API Collapse Hoop Stress 30 20 Timoshenko Collapse Hoop Stress 10 0 0 10 20 30 40 D/t 50 60 70 80 Figure 20 – Hoop stress associated with elastic.

Thick Wall Pipe Joint arrestors Subsea Pipelines Page 29 . but are more expensive than sleeve arrestors because of the additional welding required. the buckle arrestors also serve as pipe support collars. Integral Ring arrestors are used for pipelines in which the strength of sleeve type arrestors is not adequate. 1999) Integral Ring arrestors are thick-wall rings that are welded into selected pipe joints. for sufficiently deep water. In this case the distance between arrestors is simply the length of each J-Lay joint. and Thick Wall Pipe Joints (Langner. even an infinitely rigid Grouted Sleeve arrestor is ineffective. Hence. Integral Ring arrestors. namely Grouted Sleeve arrestors. as illustrated in Figure 22. at “reasonable” cost. 1999). very large thickness is required which is not economical. Figure 21 – Grouted Sleeve arrestor (Langner. as external pressure increases. before being installed offshore. These arrestors are very efficient in terms of strength for a given amount of steel.8 should be satisfied: P0 − Pi ≤ f p ⋅ Pp (20) In order to satisfy Equation (20) in deep waters. In general. because of their low cost.In order to avoid buckle propagation. this type of arrestor has limited usefulness in deep water because. However. Grouted Sleeve arrestors are steel sleeves that are slid over the ends of selected pipe joints and are grouted in place. Buckle arrestors can be used to mitigate the risk of buckle propagation. Three types of buckle arrestors are in common use. the distance between buckle arrestors should be selected to enable repair of the flattened section of pipeline between two adjacent arrestors. and for J-Lay applications that require a support collar on each pipe joint. as shown in Figure 21. Grouted Sleeve arrestors are preferred. where feasible. before being installed offshore. For pipelines installed by J-Lay. the following equation with safety factor fp = 0. a collapsed pipe will transform from its normal flat “dogbone” cross section into a C-shaped cross section which then passes through the arrestor.

the minimum crossover pressure for a “weak” arrestor is the propagation pressure Pp (Equation (19)) and the maximum crossover pressure for a “strong” pipe is the collapse pressure Pc (Equation (15)).are special pipe sections (each designed to prevent collapse propagation). Figure 22 – Integral Ring arrestor. (Langner. which also serves as J-Lay Collar. The strength of a buckle arrestor is expressed by its crossover pressure. which is the minimum pressure that can force a buckled section of pipe to “cross over” the arrestor and start buckling the undamaged pipe on the other side. design relationships are empirical. An efficiency parameter that varies between 0 and 1 is defined which depends on the arrestor strength: Subsea Pipelines Page 30 . Obviously. 1999) Figure 23 . A Thick Wall Pipe Joint is essentially a very long integral ring arrestor. that are welded into a pipeline at intervals.Tested sample of a pipeline with Sleeve type buckle arrestors and the numerical model Due to the complexities of the buckle propagation phenomenon. but is much less efficient in the amount of steel used. Px.

where L/h > 2. are used primarily for pipelines installed by J-Lay.η= Px − Pp Pc − Pp (21) Providing a safety factor of 1. For this technique stress concentration issues must be accounted for. A less expensive version slides over the pipe and is fillet welded both sides onto the outside of the pipe joint. based on their geometry. Integral Ring arrestors are forged and/or machined weld-neck rings that are butt-welded into a pipe joint.5 – 2. Thick Wall Pipe Joints have been used as buckle arrestors in situations where suitable thick-wall joints are readily available and where the weight of the suspended pipeline during laying is not a critical issue. The efficiency parameter of the arrestor is given by: Subsea Pipelines Page 31 . here the arrestor doubles as a collar for supporting the suspended pipe span. Narrow arrestors. in which the length-to thickness ratio varies between L/h = 0. The design of a thick wall pipe joint arrestor is obtained by equating the minimum crossover pressure Pm with the design crossover pressure Px which is the same as the propagation pressure Pp. because of the easier passage of this type of arrestor through the tensioners and over the stinger rollers.35 for any buckle arrestor the minimum crossover pressure Pm is defined as: Pm = 1. Integral arrestors are categorized into two types. and solving for the thickness of the Thick Wall Pipe Joint: 0. Thick Wall Pipe Joint. Wide integral arrestors. are used primarily for pipelines installed by S-Lay.35γd max (22) Design formulas for each of the three mentioned types of buckle arrestors are given here from Langner (1999) which is the reference as stated by API-RP-1111 (1999).0.4167 t ⎛ Pm =⎜ D ⎜ ⎝ 24S Y ⎞ ⎟ ⎟ ⎠ (23) Integral Ring Arrestors.

9 mm Y = 448 MPa ( X 65) H = 500 m 3 γ = 10104 N / m Using the given formulas we have: Pe = 18.97 MPa L = 75 mm L/h < 2 Pa = 31.17 MPa ⇒ Pc = 15. k = 5 λ = 1.5 < L / h < 2 L/h>2 (narrow) ( wide) λ= LPa DPp 2.30 ⇒ Px > Pm ⇒ Subsea Pipelines Page 32 .40 MPa P0 ≤ 0. the following case is examined: D = 457 mm E = 199938 MPa t = 15.93 MPa P0 = γH = 5.53 Mpa Pp = 3.09 MPa h = 40 mm Ya = 448 MPa ⇒ narrow buckle arrestor .4 (arrestor strength factor) ⎛h⎞ Pa = 24SY .5 Px = 7.80 Pp ⇒ Py = 31.a ⎜ ⎟ ⎝D⎠ The buckle arrestor should be dimensioned such that the crossover pressure Px which is calculated from Equation (21) is greater than minimum crossover pressure Pm (Equation (22)).16 MPa Buckle arrestor is adequate η = 0. As an example.05 MPa Buckle arrestors are required The integral ring buckle arrestor design is as follows: Pm = 6.η≥ λ k and η ≤1 (24) Where: ⎧5 k =⎨ ⎩8 for for 0.

Typical grout materials that have been used are portland cement. Grouted Sleeve arrestors are forged or fabricated steel cylinders. 2005) Design formulas for rigid sleeve type arrestors are as follows: λ ≥3 Where and L / D ≥ 0 . that are slid over the end of a pipe joint. Subsea Pipelines Page 33 . Figure 25 shows the fitting of design formulas for integral ring buckle arrestors with test data. sand-filled epoxy. and grouted in place near the middle of the joint.4 Pp . the cross section of a buckled pipeline can change from the “dogbone” shape typical of free buckle propagation. P2 = Pp + Choosing the spacing between buckle arrestors is an optimization problem. At the crossover limit. the collapse wave passes through a sleeve type arrestor (Kyriakides. typically with dimensions of L/D = 0. An approach is given in Bai (2001). P 2) Pc − Pp 3 P1 = 2.5 – 2. as seen in Figure 24 Figure 24 – U mode buckling of a pipeline. to a U mode that enables the collapse wave to pass through a sleeve-type arrestor.0.Grouted Sleeve Arrestor. Sleeve arrestors generally are the lowest cost type of buckle arrestor.5 Px ≥ min( P 1. but may not be suitable in deep water due to their limited arrestor strength. and two-part polyurethane.

1999) Subsea Pipelines Page 34 .Figure 25 – Comparison of integral ring buckle arrestor design formula with available test data (Langner.

It should be noted that in a complete 3D analysis. Pipeline stability is checked for both operation and installation (pipeline empty) cases. lift (CL). The pipeline is usually filled during operation lifetime. a minimum pipeline specific gravity of 1. ratio of wave to steady current and embedment depth of pipeline. Additionally. including: • • • • • • Water depth (d) Significant wave height (H). The on-bottom stability analysis is performed by the following steps: 1. less severe design environmental phenomenon are selected (shorter return periods). Return period of environmental phenomena for on-bottom stability analysis is given in Table 5. Regarding the rather short period. During installation the pipeline might be empty. 3.5. Keulegan-Carpenter Number. which is relative to submerged weight of pipeline. The goal of this analysis is to determine required submerged weight of pipe. These coefficients should be adjusted for Reynolds number. **Operation lifetime of pipeline might be several decades. The pipeline withstands these forces by friction. the strain energy of the pipeline is also taken into account. Definition of environmental condition for different return periods. soil friction factor or undrained shear strength (Su) Seabed slope ( θ ) measured positive in downward loading 2. Therefore more severe design environmental phenomenon are selected (longer return periods). Calculation of hydrodynamic forces drag (FD). If pipeline self-weight is insufficient. inertia (FI) Subsea Pipelines Page 35 . Table 5 – Return period for environmental phenomena Condition Installation* (Less than 3 days) Based on weather forecast Installation* (Longer than 3 days) 1 year (no threat to human lives) 100 year (threat to human lives) Operation** 100 year wave + 10 year current 10 year wave + 100 year current Return Period *The installation time is usually short in comparison with operational lifetime of the pipeline. lift (FL) . wave period (T) and angle of attack Steady current velocity (Uc) and angle of attack Wave only particle velocity (Uw).20 during installation is desired. Inertia (Cm). On-Bottom Stability A pipeline laid on seabed is subject to current and/or wave forces. Determination of hydrodynamic coefficients: drag (CD). additional concrete coating would be required. maximum water particle velocity due to wave and current (Um) and steady current ratio (UR = Uc/Um) Soil submerged weight ( γ ).

Uw is dependent upon wave height. By knowing these parameters a suitable wave theory can be used to calculate Uw. Figure 26 shows the validity of different wave theories for different wave and depth characteristics. Current velocity (Uc) is steady while particle velocity due to a passing wave (Uw) is oscillatory. For shallow water or very high wave heights. a large diameter might affect the flow regime and other methods may be appropriate. Stoke's fifth order theory becomes more appropriate. For most situations linear theory is adequate. because the particle velocities and accelerations do not vary significantly between theories. solitary theory is best suited.Regions of applicability of different wave theories (API RP 2A. The last step is to perform a static force balance. For breaking waves. the hydrodynamic loads are opposed by friction of pipe over seabed. Hydrodynamic forces on the pipeline (wave and current) are related to velocity and acceleration of flow at the pipeline level. but in general pipelines should be trenched within the breaking wave (surf) zone. 2000) Subsea Pipelines Page 36 .4. As wave height to water depth ratio increases. period and water depth. Figure 26 .

lift and inertia force can be calculated by the Morrison equation.1. In the absence of site specific data. The first integration is over a control volume and the second one is over a control surface. The Morrison equation states that wave loading is summation of drag and inertia forces. Compact sand: µ = tan ϕ .4 Rock and gravel: µ = 0. Soft clay: µ = 0. dV is volume element.5. The friction factor is dependent upon soil type.s r rr r (25) C1 and C2 are constants for inertia and drag. For typical ocean waves and subsea pipelines the slender body assumption is true. dA is area element and v is velocity. The condition in which Morrison's equation is valid is when the ratio of wave length to pipeline diameter is greater than 5. The general assumption for Morrison's equation is that the body (pipeline) is small enough not to disturb the flow pattern caused by the wave. the following can be used: • • • • • Loose sand: µ = tan ϕ . Hydrodynamic Force Calculation The drag. If the ratio is less than 5. 5. which occurs after a very small displacement of the pipe builds a wedge of soil.v ρv dV + ∫ ρv v ⋅ dA = C1 ρ ⋅ (Volume ) ⋅ Accelerati on + C2 ρ ⋅ ( Area ) ⋅ Velocity 2 c. seabed slope and burial depth. the body diffracts the waves and a diffraction theory should be used. Morrison's formula is usually written as: Subsea Pipelines Page 37 . and therefore the pipeline is considered as slender.7 ϕ = 30 o ϕ = 35 o The starting friction factor in sand is about 30% less than the maximum value.2.7 Stiff clay: µ = 0. pipe roughness. Soil Friction Factor Friction factor is defined as the ratio between the force required to move a section of pipe and the vertical contact force applied by the pipe on the seabed. The backbone of the equation can be derived using the momentum conservation for a control volume containing the pipeline: r r d ( mv ) ∂ ∑ F = dt = ∂t ∫ c .

Although Figure 27 is for a vertical pile. Figure 27 – Relative importance of inertia. Figure 27 shows relative importance of inertia. drag forces are dominant. 2004) The magnitude of particle horizontal velocity and acceleration due to waves according to linear (Airy) theory are as follows (L is wave length and z origin is at water surface and negative downward): Uw = H gT cosh[ 2π ( z + d ) / L ] 2 L cosh[ 2πd / L ] (Horizontal particle velocity at elevation z) (Horizontal particle acceleration at elevation z) & = gπH cosh[ 2π ( z + d ) / L ] U w L cosh[ 2πd / L ] L= gT 2 2πd tanh( ) 2π L (27) Subsea Pipelines Page 38 . It is seen that as slenderness (L/D) increases. it can be used for a subsea pipeline if the water depth is not more than half the wave length. drag and diffraction wave forces (DNV-OS-J101.FD = FL = 1 C D ρDU m U m 2 1 2 C L ρDU m 2 ⎛ πD 2 1 FI = C M ρ ⎜ ⎜ 4 2 ⎝ ⎞& ⎟ ⎟U m ⎠ (26) Only velocity and acceleration perpendicular to pipeline axis is considered in Morrison's equation. drag and diffraction wave forces.

Figure 28 – Current profile due to tides and wind (DNV-CN-30.5.3.7 and CL ~ 0. The combined current profile is shown in Figure 28. Wind driven currents have a linear profile and affect a limited depth (50 m). Hydrodynamic Coefficient Selection CD. Figure 29 can be used to evaluate these effects on CD for steady current. CD ~ 0. 1991) 5. CD is generally dependent upon Reynolds number (Re) and roughness. In the absence of site specific data the profile given below can be used (z is distance from free surface and positive downwards): ⎛d −z⎞ U c = UTide ⎜ ⎟ ⎝ d ⎠ 1/ 7 ⎛ 50 − z ⎞ + UWind ⎜ ⎟ ⎝ 50 ⎠ (28) UWind is wind-driven current velocity at surface and can be approximated as 0.Currents have different sources but the most important ones are due to tides and wind.9. but for post critical state it is constant. Subsea Pipelines Page 39 . Tidal currents have a 1/7 power law profile in depth.015 x wind velocity at 10 m elevation. CL and CI are dependent on one of the following situations: Steady current only Steady current and waves For steady current conditions acting on a pipeline resting on seabed. Velocities of tidal currents depend strongly on the location and no approximate formulas are established.

The added mass coefficient (Ca = Cm-1) is given in Figure 30 as a function of gap ratio. the coefficients are dependent on Keulegan-Carpenter KC number.CD Figure 29 – CD as a function of Reynolds number and roughness for a cylinder in steady current (DNV-CN-30.5. roughness and steady current ratio. Ca D Figure 30 – Added mass coefficient Ca as a function of gap ratio H/D (DNV-CN-30.5. Physically KC is the amplitude of fluid particle displacement in each period normalized by pipeline diameter. 1991) In the case of steady current and waves. and is interpreted as measure of drag to inertia ratio. 1991) Subsea Pipelines Page 40 .

Also effect of superposition of a steady current on the waves is investigated for current ratios of 0<Uc/Uw<2.These experiments cover a wide range of flow conditions. Figure 32 can be used for CD. Figure 31 – CD as a function of KC and roughness (DNV-CN-30. the situation is similar to steady current alone (If Uc/Uw is greater than 0. Tests for wave only have been done for 0<KC<160. These studies are used in the comprehensive on-bottom stability program by American Gas Association (AGA 1993).4 this is true). For situation where the ratio is << 0. 1991) Figure 32 – Influence of seabed proximity on CD for current+wave situation (DNV-CN-30.5. as seen in Figure 34.4.If Uc is large with respect to Uw. as seen in Figure 33 and Figure 34. The influence of seabed proximity can be seen by using correction factors obtained from Figure 35. 1991) Extensive experimental studies by Bryndum et al. Subsea Pipelines Page 41 . They have also concluded that increasing the current ratio decreases all hydrodynamic coefficients.5. (1983 and 1992) have led to hydrodynamic coefficients graphs.

CM and CL for re egular waves. 1992) elines Subsea Pipe Page 42 . effect of pipe e roughness (a) ( and seabe ed roughne ess (b) (Brynd dum.Figure 33 – Hydrodynami ic force coefficients CD.

1992) elines Subsea Pipe Page 43 . CM and d CL versus cu urrent ratio fo or wave plus steady curren nt (Bryndum.Figure 34 – Hydrodynamic coefficien nts CD.

µ (Ws cos θ − F ) ≥ SF ( FD + FM + WS sin θ ) (29) Subsea Pipelines Page 44 . Ws is pipeline submerged weight. Recommended SF is 1. particle velocity and acceleration and hydrodynamic coefficients. 2000) The following formula assumes a coulomb friction model and is over-conservative if the pipe is embedded. Figure 35 – Free body diagram of pipeline for on-bottom stability analysis (Bai.5. Figure 35 shows a free body diagram of the problem.1 for installation and operation conditions respectively.05 and 1. Stability Criteria The last step of the simplified on-bottom stability analysis consists in assessing stability using a simple lateral force equilibrium equation.4. The rather low safety factors are due to the very conservative nature of this simplified 2D method. A safety factor (SF) is included to account for actual values of soil friction. environmental data.

Figure 37 – Continental shelf and continental slope Subsea Pipelines Page 45 . Figure 38 shows visualizations of a rough seabed topography and subsea pipelines of the Ormen Lange field (Norway) passing a rough seabed. Free Span (Bottom Roughness) Analysis The goal of this analysis is to identify possible free spans that exceed the maximum allowable span length. Figure 36 shows a schematic of a pipeline laid on a rough seabed in which free spans are possible. Figure 36 – Free spanning pipeline on seabed The irregular seabed profile is seen on the continental slope. a steep slope where the mild slope continental shelf reaches ultra deep waters as seen in Figure 37.6.

Figure 38 – Subsea pipelines.Typical free span distributions and pipeline profile (Soreide. Norway (Source: Internet) The length and height of the span have a random distribution and lengths as long as 300-400 m is possible. A typical distribution of free span length vs height and also the resulting profile of the pipeline is shown in Figure 39. Figure 39 . Ormen Lange field. 2001) Subsea Pipelines Page 46 .

1. along with dimensionless diagrams for calculation of stress at mid-span and span shoulders. Both Von-Mises and longitudinal stresses should be checked and limited to the values given in Table 6.6. 2005) A typical pipeline span free body diagram is shown in Figure 40. Subsea Pipelines Page 47 . and also mid-span deflection and induced pipe span. The stresses depend on span length and pipeline tension. Static condition The pipe span is checked for stresses under static conditions. Table 6 – Allowable pipeline stresses (Nogueira & Mckeehan.

1981) w is submerged weight of pipeline per unit length Subsea Pipelines Page 48 .Figure 40 – Static stresses and deformations in a free spanning pipeline (Mousselli.

For this situation the span is a function of obstruction height and pipeline tension. Figure 41 – Static stress and span for pipeline passing obstruction (Mousselli.Another scenario is that the pipeline passes over an obstruction. while mid-span stresses do not depend on tension. A schematic of the pipeline is given in Figure 41. 1981) Subsea Pipelines Page 49 . along with dimensionless diagrams for pipeline span and maximum stress at mid-span.

Drag forces s cause in-line V and lift VIV t forces cause cross-flo ow VIV. W When free spans s occur due to seab bed irregula arities the pr resence of bottom b curre ent (and wav ves in shallo ow w water) may y cause dyn namic effects s. Regarding VIV.2. s Tw wo forms of f oscillation are a observed d namely in-line and cro oss-flow whi ich are caused by symmetr ric and asym mmetric vortex shedding g. o Recen ntly codes ha ave added an a option which w VIV is allowed to occur but t the f fatigue damage has to be b assessed and shown to be allowa able. tw wo cycles of f pressure oscillation o p parallel to th he flow occ cur. The fluid d interaction n with the pipeline p can n cause the free span to oscillate due e to vortex shedding. as seen in n Figure 42.6. V the free e spans mus st be such th hat in-line and cross-low VI IV do not occur. Figure 42 – Vortex she edding due to steady flow at a different Reynolds R numb bers and fluct tuating pressu ures on pipe g in oscillating g lift and drag g forces (Blev vins. 1977) resulting Subsea Pipe elines Page 50 . for eve ery one cycl le of pressu ure oscillation normal n to th he flow. Therefo ore f frequency of f inline VIV is approxima ately twice cross-flow c VI IV. VIV T free spa The an should also be assess sed for VIV. As can be seen n in Figure 42.

the two spans interact. 2006) A pipe over a short span behave like a beam (bending mode is dominant). Subsea Pipelines Page 51 .Generally the following tasks have to be performed in the assessment of free spans for VIV: • • • • • Structural modeling Load modeling A static analysis to obtain the static configuration of the pipeline An eigen-value analysis which provides natural frequencies and corresponding modal shapes for inline and cross-flow vibrations A response analysis using a response model or force model in order to obtain the stress ranges from environmental actions It is necessary to predict if a free span is isolated or affected from adjacent spans. and also length of two adjacent spans are comparable. as seen in Figure 43. Generally if the shoulder length between two spans are relatively short. Figure 43 – Classification of free spans (DNV-RP-F105. while a pipe over a long span behaves like a cable (axial mode is dominant). where L is free span length and D is pipeline diameter. Table 7 shows this classification.

2006) Another important parameter is the current flow velocity ratio which distinguishes between current and wave dominated flow regimes and is defined by Equation (30).Table 7 – Response behavior of free span (DNV-RP-F105. α= Uc Uc + Uw (30) Table 8 – Different flow regimes (DNV-RP-F105. Table 8 shows different regimes. 2006) Subsea Pipelines Page 52 .

These response models are empirical relations between “reduced velocity” response amplitudes. Figure 44 – CFD simulation of piggyback pipeline Subsea Pipelines Page 53 . The application of CFD for VIV assessment is at present severely limited by the computational effort required. or generally “Force Model” (Larsen. In addition. “Reduced velocity” is a function of still-water natural frequency and flow velocity. Computational Fluid Dynamics (CFD) simulation of the turbulent fluid flow around one or several pipes can in principle be applied for VIV assessment to overcome the inherent limitations of the state-of-practice engineering approach. Figure 44 shows results of a CFD simulation for the case of a pipeline with a piggyback pipe.The state of the art code for free spanning pipelines is DNV-RP-F105. “Response Models” approach to predict the vibration amplitudes due to vortex shedding. and the first one is the most commonly used: 1. documented work is lacking which shows that the estimated fatigue damage based on CFD for realistic free span scenarios gives better and satisfactory response than the methods described above. The main disadvantage is that appropriate formulations for loading –especially for cross-flow VIV. Semi-empirical lift coefficients. As a third option. Hence the stress response is derived from an assumed vibration mode with an empirical amplitude response. If the loading is defined. This code recognizes three methods for VIV assessment. 3. the response can be achieved from solution of governing equations. 2002).do not exist. 2.

The formulas are valid for single span on relatively flat seabed (almost horizontal spans). Teff is effective axial force (true axial force with consideration of in external and internal pressure effects) and Pcr is the critical buckling load. and CSF is a factor accounting for stiffness of coating. soil stiffness (DNV-RP-F105) Subsea Pipelines Page 54 . Also compressive axial force should be less than half the buckling load. Boundary conditions are a function of shoulder soil stiffness. geometric non-linearities and static equilibrium conditions. The formulations are based on fixed-fixed boundary conditions and Leff account for this. As this stiffness increases the conditions are more like fixed.5. The static deflection can be estimated as: δ = C6 qL4 eff EI ⋅ (1 + CSF ) 1+ 1 Teff Pcr (31) C6 is boundary condition coefficient and is given in Table 9.Natural Frequency Natural frequencies of the span can be found using FEM including pipe-soil interaction effects. Figure 45 – Effective length vs. as seen in Figure 45 (β represents soil stiffness). L/D is less than 140 and sagging deflection/D is less than 2. Also approximate formulations are available (DNV-RPF105).

E is Young’s modulus. In this Equation. Equation (32) predicts the eigen-frequency with ±30% accuracy (DNV-G14. natural frequencies are a function of stiffness and mass only. half wave cosine for first mode). For a geometrically nonlinear structure natural frequencies are dependent also upon deflection (sagging of pipe span). I is moment of inertia and me is effective (modal) mass. content mass and added mass. Effective modal mass is defined as: me = ∫ m(s)φ L 2 ( s )ds ∫φ L 2 ( s )ds (33) Where m(s) is mass per unit length of pipeline including steel and concrete coating mass. as can be seen in Equation (32).e. For a (geometrically) linear structure. the three terms in the parentheses represent bending. axial and sagging effects respectively (Bruschi & Vitali.The first eigen-frequency can be approximated by (32). 1991). and Φ is assumed mode shape (i. Table 9 – Boundary conditions coefficients (DNV-RP-F105. 1998). EI f 1 ≈ C1 ⋅ 1 + CSF me L4 eff 2 ⎛ Teff ⎛δ ⎞ ⎞ ⎜1 + + C3 ⎜ ⎟ ⎟ ⎜ P ⎝D⎠ ⎟ cr ⎝ ⎠ (32) Where C1 – C3 are boundary condition coefficients given in Table 9. 2006) Subsea Pipelines Page 55 .

A non-dimensional parameter named reduced damping or stability parameter is used instead: Ks = 4πm e ξ T ρD 2 (37) Subsea Pipelines Page 56 . 1977): • Reduced velocity: as a structure vibrates in a flow. • Keulegan-Carpenter Number: KC = Uw fwD (36) • Damping factor: dependant on ratio of energy dissipated by the structure per cycle over total energy of structure. For steady vibrations the path length normalized by diameter is termed reduced velocity: VR = Uc + U w fn D (34) • Reynolds number: Re = UcD υ (35) Kinematic viscosity (ν) is defined as ratio of viscosity to density. it traces out a path.Important Parameters for VIV VIV response depends on these parameters (Blevins.

0 ⎩ ⎧0.5) / 0. In-line VIV stress range is calculated as: ⎛A ⎞ S IL = 2 AIL ⎜ Y ⎟ψ α . The response models are based on experimental laboratory test data and full-scale tests. 2006) The effect of flow regime (Table 8) is included with a correction factor applied to stress range.3 ⎪1. increasing the damping (which increases stability parameter Ks (Equation 22)) reduces the vibration amplitude. As with an SDOF system.Response Models Amplitude response models are empirical models providing the maximum steady state VIV amplitude response as a function of basic hydrodynamic and structural parameters mentioned above. Figure 46 shows a curve relating reduced velocity (Equation 19) to maximum in-line VIV amplitude.8 ψ α . IL ⎝ D ⎠ (38) Where the correction factor for current flow ratio is defined as: α < 0.5 < α < 0.5 0. Figure 46 – Illustration of the in-line VIV Response Amplitude versus VR and KS (DNV-RP-F105.8 (39) Subsea Pipelines Page 57 .0 ⎪ for for for α > 0. IL = ⎨(α − 0.

Equation (39) shows that for wave dominant flow regimes (according to Table 8). Dedicated laboratory test data 2. For cross-flow VIV. Accepted fracture mechanics theory 3.15 K s Rk = ⎨ −1. Use of codes Subsea Pipelines Page 58 . An S-N curve gives the number of cycles required for failure of a structure (N) for a given stress range (S). Figure 47 can be used to relate reduced velocity VR to maximum vibration amplitude. 2 K s Ks ≤ 4 Ks > 4 (41) Fatigue Criteria Having calculated the stress for each sea state (for example by using the above mentioned Response model). Figure 47 – Illustration of the cross-flow VIV Response Amplitude versus VR (DNV-RP-F105) Cross-flow VIV stress range can be calculated as: ⎛A ⎞ S CF = 2 ACF ⎜ Z ⎟ R k ⎝ D ⎠ (40) The effect of damping is included via the amplitude reduction factor Rk: ⎧1 − 0 . in-line VIV is negligible or does not occur. the fatigue damage can be calculated by using S-N curves.5 ⎩3 . Three methods are available for generating an S-N curve: 1.

Figure 48 shows a typical two-slope S-N curve. 2006) For a given sea state number i. which states that fatigue damage due to each individual stress range can be summed up to give the total damage D. from S-N curve) are known. a bi-linear curve is obtained in which m1 and m2 are the slopes of each segment. the stress range. Log NSW is typically 6-7. Figure 48 – Typical two-slope S-N curve (DNV-RP-F105. The accumulated fatigue damage of different sea states during the pipelines life can be evaluated using the Palmgren-Miner law (DNV-RP-F105.DNV-RP-F105 (2006) gives the following formulation for S-N curves: −m ⎧ ⎪ a1 ⋅ S 1 N =⎨ − m2 ⎪ ⎩a 2 ⋅ S S > S SW S ≤ S SW (42) a1 and a2 are characteristic fatigue strength constant defined as the mean minus two standard deviation curve. 2006) with Equation (43). By plotting Equation (42) in a logarithmic plane. defined by: ⎛ log a1 − log N SW ⎜ ⎜ m1 ⎝ ⎞ ⎟ ⎟ ⎠ S SW = 10 Where NSW is the number of cycles for which change in slope appear. number of cycles (ni) and number of cycles to failure (Ni. the value D = 1 is equivalent to fatigue failure: Subsea Pipelines Page 59 . Log NSW is typically 6-7. SSW is stress at intersection of the two S-N curves.

The general equation is as follows: Td ≤ η fat ⋅ Tlife (45) DNV-RP-F105 (2006) defines the safety factor η fat as 1. the fatigue life capacity. Subsea Pipelines Page 60 .0. Td. i N i = aS i− m By equating Equation (43) equal to unity. “Normal” and “High” safety classes respectively. The difference between the numbers is because DNV uses partial safety factors for VIV.25 for “Low”. Tlife.D fat = ∑ ni Ni (43) Where: ni = Pi × Tlife × f v . On the other hand API-RP-1111 (1999) defines the safety factor as 0. is formally expressed as (DNV-RPF105): Tlife = ∑ f v . Various codes give safety factors.5 and 0. should be less than Fatigue life.1. The design life.i 1 ⋅ S im ⋅ P (i ) a (44) The fatigue life is the minimum of the in-line and cross-flow fatigue lives. 0.

(Kreyszig. F is hydrodynamic forces calculated by Morrison’s equation. r is deflection vector (y and z components. The above partial differential equation has two sources of non-linearity: time dependency of tension and hydrodynamic forces. as seen in Figure 49. r = ry + irz). 2003). Coupling of cross-flow and in-line mode shapes can be investigated using this model. 2003) ∂ ⎛ ∂r ⎞ ∂r ∂ 4 r ∂ ⎛ ∂r ⎞ ∂r + EI 4 − ⎜ T δ ( x − a ) − krδ ( x − a ) ⎜M ⎟ + R1 ⎟ = F + Gi − R 2 ∂t ⎝ ∂t ⎠ ∂t ∂x ⎝ ∂x ⎠ ∂t ∂x (46) Where: M is mass. T is tension. As an example. it has been shown that in-line and cross-flow vibrations are not independent (Fernes and Berntsen. tension can be calculated as: T = T0 + EA Where: S−L L T0 is the residual lay tension. At any instant.On-going Research Recently. The governing equation of motion is given in Equation (46) Figure 49 – Schematic diagram of free span pipelines with additional local stiffness and damping (Fernes and Berntsen. Fernes and Berntsen (2003) have approached by a “Force Model” technique. k is local stiffness and δ is Kronecker delta function. Subsea Pipelines Page 61 . A general geometricallynonlinear beam-cable with additional local damping and stiffness (which can be used to model shoulder soil) is formulated. i is imaginary unit. 2003). Excitation in a cross flow mode shape might lead to in line excitations and vice versa. calculated from: ds ⎛ dr ⎞ = 1+ ⎜ ⎟ dx ⎝ dx ⎠ 2 Equation (46) is solved using the Fourier Sine Transform technique (Fernes and Berntsen. L is initial length and S is elongated length. 1993). G is submerged weight per unit length. R1 and R2 are global and local damping respectively.

Figure 50 . (Bottom panels) Countours of time evolution of ry/D and rz/D.Motions due to a prescribed second mode inline deflection. The coupling of cross-flow mode shape (rz) is observed. (D) Time series of rz/D close to an antinode. (Fernes and Berntsen. as seen in Figure 50. 2003) An example trajectory of a point on a pipeline free span is generally 8 shaped. 2003) Subsea Pipelines Page 62 . Figure 51 .Combined in-line and cross flow motion of a pipeline section (Fernes and Berntsen. (C) Time series of ry/D close to an antinode.a unit diameter in-line second mode shape is imposed as initial condition (ry). as seen in Figure 51.

The unspoiled pipeline departs the vessel in an S-lay or J-lay shape depending on the vessel method employed. the pipeline is spooled around one or more spools and un-spooled during offshore works. namely S-lay. or S-shape. In the J-lay method the pipeline departure angle is large.7. J-lay. In the reel-lay method. On the other hand. 2005) Subsea Pipelines Page 63 . Figure 52 – Schematic of S-lay method for pipelaying (Nogueira & Mckeehan. Installation of Subsea Pipelines There are four methods for installing pipelines on the seabed. The shape of the suspended pipeline from lay barge to seabed justifies the corresponding name. Reel-lay and Tow. This geometrical condition results in a single curvature for the pipeline. the departure angle in the S-lay method is smaller and therefore the pipeline has a double curvature. or J-shape. J-lay and S-lay methods are schematically shown in Figure 52 and Figure 53 respectively.

and also additional supply barges as required. Catenary moorings can be made of chains.Figure 53 – Schematic of J-lay method for pipelaying (Nogueira & Mckeehan. and are mainly used in deep waters but by using intermediate buoys they can be used in shallow waters too. The lay-barge needs to be positioned in a specific position for some time during the laying operation. namely taut and catenary which are shown in Figure 54 and Figure 55 respectively. namely roll. The taut system withstands the environmental forces acting on lay-barge with its axial stiffness. the three other ones require a lay-barge that can store line-pipe onboard. Moorings are not effective regarding angular motions of the vessel. Taut mooring can be made of steel cables or nylon ropes. Generally two methods exist for station-keeping: • • Mooring and anchoring Dynamic Positioning System (DPS) There are two mooring types. The catenary mooring withstands forces by its weight. Subsea Pipelines Page 64 . Taut mooring is suitable for shallow waters. pitch and heave. 2005) Apart from the tow method.

and thus the vessel achieves relative positioning.Figure 54 – Taut mooring system Figure 55 – Catenary mooring system A DPS vessel has thrusters in every direction. It has sensors which sense the environmental forces acting on the vessel. It should be noted that accuracy of DPS is generally less than mooring. DPS is the only option. but for ultra deep waters. the thrusters are activated and exert a force opposite that of environmental ones. Subsea Pipelines Page 65 . Based upon the magnitude of environmental forces sensed.

A DPS lay-barge has substantial advantages in deepwater (e. 100 ft and deeper). 1973) which utilizes both DPS and anchoring: lateral positioning is done via moorings and longitudinal positioning is achieved via thrusters.g. Consequently. At shallower depths. a DPS lay-barge has disadvantages which are uncompensated. A combined station-keeping method was patented in 1973 (Langner. if unrestrained. therefore station-keeping is very important during pipelaying. In shallow water any motion of the vessel other than the prescribed forward motion. Figure 56 – Combined station-keeping method for intermediate water depths (Langner. 1973) Subsea Pipelines Page 66 . the lay-barge has greater freedom of movement before the pipe is endangered. At greater depths the pipe assumes a nearly vertical attitude as it sags to bottom.Any unexpected movement away from the planned laying route may severely bend the pipeline either in a sag-bend or in an over-bend and the pipe may buckle or kink. as seen in Figure 56. It is apparent that engines of substantial size are required to limit the control vessel motions with this high accuracy. can damage the pipe.

Regarding the new strain based design method of pipelines. Dixon et al. strain and stress concentrations during offshore installations have to be carefully considered. as seen in Figure 57. A sleeve is slided over the connection area. 2003) Subsea Pipelines Page 67 . They have found different locations of stress concentration for J-lay and S-lay. Bottom: S-lay (Dixon et al. Figure 57 – Location of stress concentration in sleeve connection. and only one offshore weld is required for welding two inner pipes together. These types of innovative techniques have to be carefully examined regarding stress and strain concentrations.e. For example a new (and faster) installation method for pipe-inpipe welding is as follows: Typically two offshore welds are required for connecting two pipe-in-pipe joints together (i. Top: J-lay. one for inner and one for outer pipe). In the new technique the outer pipe is swaged and fillet welded to inner pipe onshore. (2003) performed a FEM analysis of the mentioned connections.

Touchdown point is relatively closer to vessel. J-lay The J-lay installation method is a relatively new type of installation method specifically aimed at deepwater and ultra-deepwater projects. Buckle Propagation. and allows more flexibility for route layout. Figure 58 shows a J-lay vessel laying pipe with the aid of a side tower. these collars may be used as buckle arrestors too). Disadv. with respect to landing on the seabed.7. If shallower water pipeline installation is required in the same route. This may be important in congested areas. Smallest bottom tension of all methods. Adv. Suited for all diameters. Adv. it may be not feasible to J-lay the shallow end with a particular vessel and a dual (J-lay/S-lay) installation may be required. Even then. which leads to the smallest route radius. Can typically handle in-line appurtenances with relative ease. 2005) Adv. the stresses and strains close to the top and the horizontal tension component and also the horizontal tension at the seabed are minimized. fewer welding stations are available. Adv. Adv. therefore the pipeline has a suspended J-shape. but within the constraints of the J-lay tower. During J-lay. The advantages and disadvantages of the J-lay method are described in Table 10. Best suited for ultra deepwater pipeline installation. Therefore the laying rate is generally less than S-lay. Disadv. the J-lay must be lowered to a less steep angle. typically one or two. typically 65 deg or higher departure angle. This method is characterized by a steep ramp.1. Some vessels require the use of J-lay collars to hold the pipe (as mentioned in section 4. Regarding the near vertical ramp.4. Disadv. thus easier to monitor and position. Subsea Pipelines Page 68 . depending on the water depth. Table 10 – Advantages and disadvantages of J-lay (Nogueira & Mckeehan.

(1992). It should be noted that these researches are basically two uncoupled analyses: Subsea Pipelines Page 69 . Some researchers in the early 90’s have addressed this topic namely Vlahpoulos et al. a structural analysis by FEM method has to be performed. Also the seabed resists horizontal and longitudinal pipeline movement with friction. the yield stress and modulus of elasticity may be different in hoop and longitudinal directions • Seabed soil: the seabed soil serves as an elastic foundation for the pipeline.g.Figure 58 – Heerema's balder in J-lay mode (Nogueira & Mckeehan. (1991) and Clauss et al. 2005) In order to assess the pipeline structural integrity during any installation method where the pipeline is suspended from the vessel to the seabed. The seabed also damps the vibrations of the suspended span • • Effect of wave and current forces on the suspended pipeline Effect of wave. X80 and above and Duplex) are anisotropic. Depending on the degree of accuracy required. (1990). Clauss et al. several aspects have to be modeled namely: • • • Geometrical nonlinearity Material nonlinearity: the pipeline in the sagbend and overbend usually undergoes plastic deformations Material anisotropy: the new higher grade carbon steels which are being developed (e. A FEM package has to be used. current and wind forces on lay-barge which induce movement of top of suspended pipeline. All these researches neglect the Material nonlinearity and material anisotropy.

analysis of a geometrically non-linear beam-column moving in fluid (which is subjected to boundary condition derived from first analysis The results of an analysis of this kind. Figure 59 – Dynamics of pipelines during laying: motion. etc).g. including motions of the suspended pipeline. WAMIT. MOSES. dynamic stresses and tension for different wave periods (Clauss et al. analysis of the vessel motions from a seaway neglecting effect of pipeline on vessel motions which can be done using standard packages (e. dynamic stresses and dynamic tension range are shown in Figure 59. ANSYS AQUA. Second.First. which is used as input boundary condition for the second analysis. 1991) Subsea Pipelines Page 70 . Result is the time history of stinger motions.

General FEM packages such as ABAQUS and ANSYS can be used for this means. Other packages are also available which are specifically aimed at subsea pipelines, the oldest and most common one being OFFPIPE (www.offpipe.com). The goal of the installation analysis is to check the wall thickness of the pipeline, the top tension required during installation and seabed tension. The top tension has to be checked with capacity of lay-barge tensioners. The tensioner force is equal to the submerged weight of the suspended span minus seabed tension. Some modeling features of OFFPIPE are as follows: Dynamic analysis capability, lay-barge RAO’s (Response Amplitude Operators) and regular wave or wave spectrum can be specified, the resulting vessel motions are incorporated in the analysis. • • • • The finite element method considers both geometric (large displacement) and material (nonlinear stress-strain curve) non-linearities. Provides a detailed model of the lay-barge and a simplified structural model of the stinger which includes the effects of the ballast schedule and hinges between stinger sections. Includes detailed pipe support models, which can include angled horizontal and vertical rollers, overhead restraints and finite length roller beds. The seabed is modeled as a continuous elastic-plastic foundation (not a series of point supports). The lateral soil resistance is bilinear, elastic for small horizontal displacements and frictional for large displacements. OFFPIPE uses the Ramberg-Osgood material model, expressed as:

⎛ M ⎞ M ⎟ = + A⎜ ⎜M ⎟ Ky My y ⎠ ⎝

κ

B

Where:

Ky = My =

2S y ED 2 IS y D

A = Ramberg-Osgood equation coefficient B = Ramberg-Osgood equation exponent
In lieu of the detailed analysis mentioned above –which is required for the detail design stage of a projectpreliminary analysis using the stiffened catenary equations can be used. The original catenary equations consider only tension in the line. By modifying the original catenary equations to include the effect of bending stiffness, the stiffened catenary equations result. These equations yield very accurate for the J-lay configuration (Langner, 1984) and the output is top and bottom tension and pipeline stresses and strains, therefore a preliminary check of wall thickness and vessel tensioner can be done.

Subsea Pipelines

Page 71

7.2. S-lay
The majority of offshore pipelines are installed using S-lay. For shallow waters the stinger and departure angle are near horizontal. Recently S-lay vessels configuration is modified such that the stinger can reach very steep angles of departure, which enables it to operate in deeper waters. This method is termed steep S-lay. An S-lay vessel is seen in Figure 60.

Figure 60 – A typical S-lay Vessel (Nogueira & Mckeehan, 2005)

All offshore welding is done with the pipe in a horizontal position; therefore S-lay is very efficient compared to J-lay. The main advantages and disadvantages of S-lay are given in Table 11.
Table 11 – Advantages and disadvantages of S-lay (Nogueira & Mckeehan, 2005)

Adv. Adv. Adv/Disadv. Disadv. Disadv. Disadv.

All welds are done in horizontal position, making for efficient productivity of multiple welding stations (typically 5-6). Suited for all diameters. Can typically handle smaller, more compact in-line appurtenances with ease, but larger inline structures may be too large to go through the stinger. Buckle arrestors will induce concentrated higher strains in their vicinity within the stinger Typically, pipeline will twist (rotate axially) during installation. Bai (2000) describe this phenomenon as a result of plastic strains. Requires a very high component of horizontal tension.

Subsea Pipelines

Page 72

7.3. Reel lay
Reel-lay is a method of installing pipelines from a giant reel mounted on the lay-barge. Pipelines are assembled at an offshore spool-base facility and spooled onto a reel which is mounted on the deck of a laybarge, as seen in Figure 61. Reel-lay was first patented in USA in 1968.

Figure 61 – A reel vessel (Guo et al. 2005)

Reeled pipelines can be installed up to 10 times faster than conventional pipelay. The greater speed allows pipelines to be laid during shorter weather windows. Reel-lay can be used for pipelines up to 18 inches in diameter. The reel can be either horizontal or vertical. Horizontal reel vessels lay pipelines in shallow to intermediate water depths using a stinger and S-lay. The vertical reel-lay vessel is used for intermediate to deep waters. The main advantages and disadvantages of real-lay are given in Table 12.
Table 12 – Advantages and disadvantages of Reel-lay (Nogueira & Mckeehan, 2005) & (Guo et al. 2005)

Adv. Adv/Disadv. Adv. Disadv.

Almost all welds are done onshore, minimizing offshore welding. Well suited for smaller diameter lines and smaller D/t ratios. Maximum diameter is 18 inches. If all pipeline can be stored on-board, a very fast installation campaign is achieved, making this method very cost effective. If the route is too long or the diameter is too large, all the pipes may not be able to be stored on-board and a number of recharging trips to the spooling base may be necessary to reload, thus offsetting the high lay rate.

Disadv.

Very high pipeline strains (3-5%) are applied to the pipeline. also the pipeline is plastically deformed and then straightened. Some thinning of the wall and loss of yield strength of the material in localized areas can occur (Bauschinger effect)

Disadv. Disadv. Disadv. Disadv. Disadv.

Due to high strains, welding methods and acceptance criteria are more stringent. Pipeline will rotate during installation and may coil on the seafloor Inline structures are typically more difficult to handle and install. Concrete coated pipelines cannot be reeled. Only specifically designed pipe-in-pipe pipelines can be reealed. Page 73

Subsea Pipelines

7.4. Towed Pipelines
In this installation method, the pipeline is constructed onshore and towed into place, as illustrated in Figure 62. There are different ways to tow the pipeline string to site: surface tow, mid-depth tow or bottom tow. In the surface tow the pipe is positively buoyant, towed to location on the surface, and sunk in position by flooding. Wave action is a factor; therefore this method is used typically where rough seas are not likely. In the mid-depth tow typically the pipe or pipe bundle is negatively buoyant, suspended above the seabed and towed by a lead tug with a tail tug at the end of the pipe string. If the pipe is positively buoyant, mid-depth tow may be achieved by incorporating the use of drag chains at specified intervals along the pipe string, so that the pipe string assumes an equilibrium position above the seabed. For the bottom tow method, the pipeline rests on the seabed, and a tug pulls it.

Figure 62 – Schematic of towed pipeline (Bai, 2000)

The length of the towed string is limited to about ten miles in the most favorable conditions. The tow methods are challenging due to the effects of the environment such as waves action, oscillations during pull or abrasive effects of the seabed during bottom tow. However, the onshore construction may significantly reduce cost when compared to the installation methods described in the previous sections. Several failures of pipe bundles during tow attest to the precautions that the offshore pipeline engineer must take when using the tow method of installation.

Subsea Pipelines

Page 74

Three methods exist: • Float and sink.5. launching roller track Subsea Pipelines Page 75 . Shore Approach The methods mentioned above may not be able to install the subsea pipeline as it approaches very shallow waters and the shore. illustrated in Figure 64.Bottom pull method. The required roller tracks installed onshore are seen in Figure 65: Figure 64 – Bottom pull method used for pipeline shore approach Figure 65 . illustrated in Figure 63: Figure 63 – Float and sink method used for shore approach installation • Bottom pull method: the pipeline is pulled from shore to sea.7.

as illustrated in Figure 66: Figure 66 – Directional drilling method for pipeline shore approach Subsea Pipelines Page 76 .• Directional drilling method: the pipeline is drilled from shore under the seabed to a point where water depth is sufficient.

the internal pressure during operation is almost invariably higher than the external pressure.6. Alternative liquids might have advantages for wet installation. If the pipeline is filled with lighter liquids the external and internal pressures don’t counter act completely. These wall thicknesses burden the economic feasibility of projects attractive on other grounds. for example. It is seen that liquid filling reduces the required wall thickness substantially. On the other hand in the liquid filled technique. two methods are available for installing the pipeline: • • Air filled (dry) Liquid filled (wet) The advantage of air-filled installation is reduced submerged weight which results in lower force required by vessel tensioner. and the pipeline has to be designed for the pressure difference. The advantage of wet installation in ultra deep waters is illustrated in the following example: An X65 steel pipeline with D = 660. and the calculated wall thickness is very large. In a real sense. A lighter liquid fill reduces the submerged weight. experimental and analytical studies indicate that the required minimum wall thickness is well over 30 mm even for modest diameters of 20 and 26 inches (Palmer. Once the pipeline is in service.4 (26 inch) is designed for the worst of the following two cases: The pipeline must withstand an operating gauge pressure of 20 MPa The pipeline must withstand the difference between external and internal pressure The required wall thickness for different depths is shown in Figure 67. because the pipeline is normally installed air-filled (dry). and as mentioned above the biggest disadvantage is large wall thickness required to withstand external pressure. Methanol (791 kg/cu. Wet vs Dry Pipeline Installation Conventional design in deep water requires the pipeline to withstand hydrostatic pressure of the sea.m). but internal and external pressure counter act and wall required thickness is not governed by external pressure. Subsea Pipelines Page 77 .m). if we take advantage of the reduced wall thickness that wet installation grants. 2000 m of seawater corresponds to 20 MPa: most flowlines operate at higher pressure than this. the additional steel required to resist external pressure during laying is wasted. Also wet laying enhances on-bottom stability immediately after installation. In ultra deep water it is no longer true. In shallow water this is true. Pentane (626.2 kg/cu. The conclusion is that: Most of the wall thickness of a conventionally designed pipeline is only required while the pipe is being laid. the submerged weight is higher. In the design studies of Oman-to-India pipeline in maximum depths of 3000 m.7. Gasoline and water have been used for installation. Collapse under external pressure usually governs the establishment of wall thickness. 1998). because if the internal pressure were less than the external hydrostatic pressure the produced fluid would normally go back down the hole. Generally.

a liquid filled installation allows large reductions in wall thickness without any penalty in submerged weight.Figure 67 – Comparison of design strategies for 660. as would be expected. whereas pentane filled requires 367 kg/m and water filled requires 216 kg/m. the pentane filled procedure gives a submerged weight during construction smaller than air filled. the pipeline designed and constructed air filled is lighter during construction than the liquid filled one. which at a round figure of $1000/tonne corresponds to a saving of 200 M$. air filled installation has a steel weight of 566 kg/m. 1998) The pipeline submerged weight (which has to be in the range of vessels tensioner capacity) is shown in Figure 68. Subsea Pipelines Page 78 . Figure 68 – Comparison of design strategies for 660. In water depths up to about 1000 m. At these ultra deep waters. In the above example and a maximum depth of 3000 m.4 mm (26 inch) pipeline: submerged weight in laying condition as a function of depth (Palmer. However if the depth exceeds 2700 m. 1998) The liquid filled strategy clearly allows huge reductions in the cost of steel.4 mm (26 inch) pipeline: wall thickness as a function of depth (Palmer. for a 1000 km pipeline the reduction in tonnage of steel with Pentane fill is therefore 200’000 tonnes.

Printing Office. API-RP-2A (2000). M. American Petroleum Institute 5. “Pipelines and Risers”.Working Stress Design”. et al. (1977). AGA (1993). Bai. Subpart J (2002). American Gas Asociation 3. OTC 6760 13.pipelines and pipeline rights-of-way”. S. U. API-5L (2000). Bruschi and Vitali (1991). Gov. Dixon et al.C. D. “Offshore Pipe Laying – Significance of Dynamic Stresses and Motions During Laying Operations”. Washington. DNV-OS-J101 (2004). API-RP-1111 (1999).B. “Hydrodynamic Forces on Pipelines: Model Tests”. “Offshore Standard. “Offshore Pipe Laying Operations – Interaction of Vessel Motions & Pipeline Dynamic Stresses”. Van Nostrand Reinhold Company 8. American Petroleum Institute 4.5 (1991). Det Norske Veritas 17. Applied Ocean Research.B. Journal of Offshore Mechanics and Arctic Engineering. Code of Federal Regulations. et al. “Environmental Conditions and Environmental Loads”. Chapter 1 in Handbook of Offshore Engineering. (1991). (1983). 21st Edition. Offshore Technology Conference. 15. Chakrabarti (Ed. 1st Edition. “Large-Amplitude Oscillations of Geometrically Nonlinear Elastic Beams Subjected to Hydrodynamic Excitation”. Clauss et al. (2003). Part 250. Bryndum. 113 9. Elsevier Ltd 12. Journal of Offshore Mechanics and Arctic Engineering. Free Spanning Pipelines”. “Recommended Practice for Planning. Vol. Design of Offshore Wind Turbine Structures”. (1992). R. Det Norske Veritas 19. Operation. et al. Chakrabarti. “Hydrodynamic Forces from Wave and Current Loads on Marine Pipelines”. “Design. Offshore Technology Conference. DNV-OS-F101 (2000). American Petroleum Institute 6. “Guide for Building and Classing Subsea Pipeline Systems”. “Submarine Pipeline On-bottom Stability”. “Part 250 . DNV-CN-30. “Offshore Standard. “Flow-Induced Vibration”. Vol 14. Construction. Elsevier Ltd 7. OTC 15373 16. 42nd Edition.D. 7-01-02 Ed.References 1. Submarine Pipeline Systems”. and Maintenance of Offshore Hydrocarbon Pipelines (Limit State Design)”. Vol. 3rd Edition. “Deepwater Installation Techniques for Pipe-in-Pipe Systems Incorporating Plastic Strains”.)”. S. No 3 14. Det Norske Veritas 18.oil and gas and sulphur operations in the outer continental shelf. Designing and Constructing Fixed Offshore Platforms .. (2001). Title 30. American Bureau of Shipping 2. “Specification for Line Pipe”. Blevins. Det Norske Veritas Subsea Pipelines Page 79 . M. Clauss et al.14. DNV-G14 (1998). 114 11. Y. “Historical Developments of Offshore Structures. (1992). OTC 4454 10. Offshore Technology Conference. (2005). ABS (2006). 1st Edition.S. subpart J . “Guideline No. Bryndum.

C. Nielsen et al. DNV-RP-F105 (2006). S. Applied Ocean Research. Int. Chapter 11 in Handbook of Offshore Engineering. Langner. 27. et al. and Fatigue”. McGraw-Hill International Book Company 39. International Journal of Mechanical Sciences 47 (2005) 603–620 28. “On the Response of a Free Span Pipeline Subjected to Ocean Currents”. G. Int. Palmer. Dalhousie University 22. Ocean Engineering. Vol 12. (2007). on Offshore Mechanics and Arctic Engineering 34. Stag 35. A. (1990). and Gere. Conf. S.1553-1577 23.H. Elsevier Ltd 36. “Recommended Practice. Langner. OTC 8670 37. “Subsea Pipeline Engineering”. Guo et al. (1999). S. and Lee. Mousselli. 30. Larsen et al. Inc. C. “Frequency and Time Domain Analysis of Vortex Induced Vibrations for Free Span Pipelines”. “Theory of Elastic Stability”. C. G. on Offshore Mechanics and Arctic Engineering. Free Spanning Pipelines”. E. OMAE2002-28064 32. (2005). 7th edition. “Buckle Arrestors for Deepwater Pipelines”. “Advanced Engineering Mathematics”. Chakrabarti (Ed. Editors Zienkiewicz. Fernes and Berntsen (2003). United State Patent 3715890 29. (1973). Master’s Thesis. and Mckeehan. “A Radical Alternative Approach to Design and Construction of Pipelines in Deep Water”. pp. “Three –Dimensional Nonlinear Dynamics of Pipe Laying”. (1993). A. (1981). No 3 Subsea Pipelines Page 80 . Offshore Technology Conference. “influence of Pressure in Pipeline Design – Effective Axial Force”. S. “Offshore Pipeline Design. Murphey and Langner (1985). (1998). (1984). “Ultimate Pipe Strength Under Bending.20.)”. Conf. (1961). 1st Edition. Kenny. (2007). Vol. D. M. John Wiley & Sons. ISBN 0-87814-156-1 33. Conf. on Offshore Mechanics and Arctic Engineering. Timoshenko. L. Fatemi. (2005). Kreyszig. A. (1978). Conf. “Offshore Pipelines”. (2002). “Buckle Propagation in Confined Steel Tubes”. “Some Aspects of Marine Pipeline Analysis”. Int. “Computational Parametric study of Energy Pipes Subject to Combined State of Loading”. OTC 10711 31. Lecture Notes 26. Det Norske Veritas 21. “Design and Construction of Offshore Pipelines. (2005). G. Analysis and Methods”. Lewis. on Offshore Mechanics and Arctic Engineering 30. “Mooring System for Pipelaying Barges”. Ch. A. Elsevier Ltd 25. Langner. Soreide et al. 3rd Edition. Kyriakides. Collapse. “Relationships for Deepwater Suspended Pipe Spans” Int. Fyrileiv. Offshore Technology Conference. P.C. Vlahpoulos et al. (2001). S. Nogueira. OMAE2005-67502 24. (2005). J. “Parameter Study of Long Free Spans”. O. Proceedings of ISOPE 2001 38.17 of book Numerical Methods in Offshore Engineering.

Sign up to vote on this title
UsefulNot useful