Subsea rigid jumper design and

VIV fatigue evaluation
Wang Jun

(DMAR Engineering Inc.,Houston,Texas 77094,USA)

Abstract:The purpose of this paper is to present a design procedure for subsea rigid jumper system including
strength and fatigue analysis. Special attention gives to a methodology based on DNV-RP-F105 to evaluate jumper
fatigue damage caused by vortex induced vibration (VIV). Jumper strength analysis is to determine the jumper configuration which can accommodate various load conditions and all possible span lengths driven by installation tolerances of connected subsea structures. Fatigue analysis includes two parts:thermal fatigue and VIV fatigue. This
paper presents the procedure of VIV fatigue damage calculation. An example is given to illustrate above
methodologies.
Key words:subsea rigid jumper;vortex induced vibration

1 Introduction
Subsea rigid jumpers are usually made from
steel pipes connecting subsea structures,such as manifolds,pipeline end termination (PLET),trees,and
riser bases,via subsea connectors. Each jumper shall
be designed to meet the specific functional application,including pressure rating,end thermal expansion,external environmental load and installation requirements,etc.
Due to the complicate and numerous load conditions,the analysis of subsea rigid jumper must go
through several iterations to reach an optimal design.
First of all,rigid jumpers have to possess enough
flexibility to accommodate end thermal expansion
and installation misalignments,which are governing
loads for jumper strength analysis in most of cases.
Jumper connector capacity envelope can also be the
driving factor for increasing flexibility. To achieve
these requirements,the typical span length of a rigid
jumper is from 20 m to 50 m,and it is usually fabricated to M- shape,L- shape and inverted U- shape by
adding vertical legs and using steel bends,tees and elbows. However,adding vertical legs to jumper configurations may result in longer unsupported length,
which causes jumpers to have low natural frequencies. Due to the existence of bottom currents,rigid

jumpers are also subjected to vortex induced vibration
(VIV) fatigue damage at welds along jumper pipes.
The scope of this study is to present a design procedure of subsea rigid jumpers,including strength
and fatigue analysis. For fatigue analysis,special attention is given to VIV in rigid jumper system. The
detailed description is as follows.

2 Strength analysis
Each jumper should be checked for acceptable
yield strength,collapse buckling,and connector capacity criteria against various functional,environmental and installation loads. Load case matrix are
shown in Table 1,which provides general guidance
for jumper strength analysis.
Depending on as-installed positions of end structures,jumpers may end up at various span lengths
and heading angles to the pipeline growth direction.
As shown in Fig.1,PLET and manifold can fall at
any point within their target installation ranges. Four
dash lines represent possible jumper positions with
the maximum and minimum span lengths and heading
angles. The jumper configuration should be determined after a parametric study of these 2 variables to
show the response of the jumpers over a feasible
range of possibilities.

Received 20 May 2013

Vol. 11 No.4,
Aug. 2013 67

1) Step 1. 68 ENGINEERING SCIENCES There are several methods to predict VIV fatigue. A modal analysis is then performed to determine the natural frequencies and mode shapes,in which added mass effects and internal fluid are considered when calculating the mate- . Fluctuation of pressure and temperature during these cycles cause stress changes resulting in fatigue damage at certain welds.1 Pipeline growth application and end structure installation tolerances In general,jumpers are more inflexible along their length. When it becomes close to vortex shedding frequency,related to current speed and pipe diameter, the jumper will vibrate and should be checked for fatigue damage. Perform modal analysis. Increasing flexibility can reduce thermal fatigue damage in rigid jumpers. Unfortunately,both of them are not particularly designed for subsea jumpers. The step. 4 VIV analysis methodology Fig. Strakes may be used as mitigation for VIV fatigue damage. For each jumper,a finite element model is constructed and strength analysis is performed to include the effect of pre-stress due to operating loading. Fatigue damages of rigid jumpers are mainly contributed by two parts:thermal fatigue and VIV fatigue. Subsea rigid jumpers may also be subjected to VIV excited by bottom currents. DNV-RP-F105 [3] presents free spanning analysis for subsea pipelines, in which VIV fatigue is predicted using the response models. It is specially designed for riser systems,which are usually subjected to sheared flow along pipe length. As the angle to the pipeline growth approaches 0° or 180° ,the loading on the jumper and connectors increases as well as the pipe stresses. The most optimal pipeline growth angle is close to 90° . The results should be able to cover any possible jumper length and heading angle. In general,the amplitude of thermal fatigue damage is related to jumper flexibility as strength check.by. In this study,the ANSYS [1] finite element analysis computer program was used to calculate the jumper pipe stress resulting from various load combinations. Iterative sets of runs for jumpers in various configurations were performed for the parametric study until reaching acceptable strength requirements. An ANSYS batch input file was created employing parameters for the permutated variables used in this study.step procedure for VIV analysis is described below. Unsupported net span of a typical jumper can be over 30 m,which causes the jumper to possess very low natural frequency. Thermal fatigue damage is originated by operating cycles of the field such as compliance,shut-down,emergency shut-down,etc. This principle should be considered during field layout development. For subsea rigid jumpers,in-line VIV responses are significant,and in some cases,it can even be a governing factor. The methodology described in this paper follows the principle in DNVRP-F105 because it includes the prediction of in-line VIV responses.Table 1 Load matrix for rigid jumper strength analysis Load case Operating Self-weight ? Design pressure (internal) ? Buoyancy ? Hydrostatic pressure (external) ? Temperature load ? Test pressure Pipeline end movement End structure settlement Metrology & fabrication tolerance ? Onshore hydrotest ? Subsea leak test ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? 3 Fatigue analysis After a basic jumper configuration is determined by jumper strength check,jumper fatigue analysis is then performed based on this configuration. SHEAR7 [2] is one of the well-known commercial softwares to predict VIV fatigue.

Calculate fatigue damage and fatigue life. S-N curve is selected to calculate the fatigue damage caused by each mode. It clearly indicates that longer jumper has more flexibility than shorter jumper,hence resulting in lower stresses. 2) Step 2.4 m. Fig.plane current,the first mode response is called cross.1 Strength analysis The M-shape jumper has been designed to minimize the static stress for all possible jumper profiles (combination of span length and heading angle). When subjected to a steady current,the jumper can respond in accordance with either mode. If the current is perpendicular to the jumper plane, the first mode becomes in. Modal analysis was performed to obtain the jumper’s natural frequencies.3 show the response shapes of the first 2 modes for the analyzed jumper.of. 5 Example A 16" rigid jumper was designed to connect a PLET to a manifold.2 115 107 132 120 120 120 0. For an in. In this study, the jumpers with 28 m and 42.plane response.0 28. Table 2 Strength analysis results Jumper 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Span length/m Heading angle/(°) Utilization factor 42.0.6 in DNVRP-F105.4 35.rial density of the pipe. Because the out.3 and Section 4.92 Comparing the results of Jumper #3 through #5 with a similar span length of 35 m,the stress increases significantly with the increase of heading angles.2 m,while the heading angle from 107° to 132° . Miner’s rule is applied to calculate the total fatigue damage by each current bin under operating condition.2 VIV analysis Once the jumper configuration is determined, the most important variable for VIV fatigue evaluation is the span length.line VIV and the second mode is cross-flow VIV. Vol. 5. Generally,the jumper design is satisfied as long as these 4 cases can meet the design requirements.83 28.96 0. 4) Step 4.85 0. The jumper has to accommodate a pipeline expansion of 0.4, Aug.e. The unit stress amplitude can be obtained as well for each mode.line VIV.of.plane stiffness is lower than the inplane stiffness,the basic (first) mode of the jumper always has the out.2 124 0. 2013 69 . Calculate reduced velocity. having the minimum and maximum span lengths and heading angles. Generally , a jumper with longer span length has lower natural frequency, which is more likely to be subjected to VIV. Table 2 lists the utilization factors for several jumpers with different span lengths and heading angles.70 0.6 35. Taking into account the installation tolerances of the PLET (3 m × 5 m box) and manifold (2 m radius circle),the jumper span length may vary from 28 m to 42. Determine VIV response per DNV-RPF105.84 0. The output will be stress range to be used for fatigue damage calculations.79 0. The effect of span length can be conceived by Jumper #5 through #7.0 35. 5.0 42. First,calculate stability parameter Ks and select suitable safety factors from Section 2. The last 2 cases are added for parametric study purpose only. The purpose of the strength analysis is to find a configuration with the least flexibility but still can meet the strength requirements. The first 4 jumpers are critical cases,whose profiles fall on the edge of the installation range,i. The span length is 35 m and the heading angle is 120º in nominal. Taking into account the probability of current bins,the fatigue life is then determined. Based upon current direction and the corresponding response direction,these responses can be divided into two types:in-line VIV and cross-flow VIV. 3) Step 3. Reduced velocity,VR,should be calculated as VR = Uc / (f × D),where Uc is current speed;f is jumper natural frequency;D is pipe hydro-diameter. Large heading angle causes higher displacements within the jumper plane by the pipeline expansion;therefore,higher stress occurs. The fifth case in Table 2 represents the nominal profile of the jumper. 11 No.2 and Fig.flow VIV and the second mode is in. The design life is 20 years.4 in DNV-RP-F105,respectively. Then in-line and cross-flow VIV responses are calculated based on two charts in Section 4.2 m span lengths were first analyzed. For extreme events (such as 100-year return current),factored fatigue damage during each event should not be over 1. By increasing the rigidity,the risk for the jumper subjected to VIV fatigue failure can be reduced.

697 2 ~ 16 0 Infinity 1 0.909 ~ 4.232 Cross-flow 0 ~ 0.3 Frequency and mode shape of jumper?s 2nd mode Table 3 VIV evaluation subjected to in-plane current Span length/m Reduced velocity Lock-in velocity Fatigue damage per year Factored fatigue life/year 0 ~ 0. As shown in Table 3,only the longest jumper is excited to VIV because the maximum reduced velocity is greater than the lower 70 ENGINEERING SCIENCES bond value for either in-line or cross-flow VIV. Therefore,the lock-in range should be different for different modes.406 0 Infinity 0 ~ 0. Table 3 shows the detailed VIV fatigue calculation of the jumpers with various span lengths when currents are applied in the jumper plane. Table 4 presents the results when currents are perpendicular to the jumper plane.909~4.406 4.ofplane.125 1 1.406 2.76 Cross-flow 28 2 33 2 42.109 Cross-flow 0 ~ 1.4 2 1.514 2~16 0 Infinity 1 1.909~4.404 0.125 0.2 Mode No.in current range for in.60E-03 63 Table 4 VIV evaluation subjected to out-of-plane current Span length/m 28 33 42. Therefore,VIV mitigation is not required.line VIV is mainly determined by two parameters:pipe diameter and effective mass.76 In-line 0 ~ 2.2 Frequency and mode shape of jumper?s 1st mode Assuming the current is omni-directional,therefore,the jumper VIV responses by the current from two directions were studied:in.Fig.344 Cross-flow 0 ~ 1.344 In-line In-line In-line 0 ~ 2.383 In-line 0 ~ 1.03 Cross-flow 0 ~ 0.52E-03 22 2 2. For this case study, the jumper is made from uniformed pipe along the entire length,so the lock.406 3.514 0.109 In-line 0 ~ 1.232 1.03 2.406 0 ~ 1.87E-04 258 2 3. When the jumper is subjected to out-of- .78E-06 17 305 1.909 ~ 4.697 0.159 2~16 0 Infinity The lower bound value of the lock-in range determines if VIV may occur. Frequency/Hz VIV type Reduced velocity Lock-in velocity Fatigue damage per year Factored fatigue life/year 1 1.in ranges shown in Table 3 and Table 4 are the same.047 0.404 1 0.909~4. Frequency/Hz VIV type 1 1.plane and out. The effective mass is related to the mode shapes.406 Mode No.159 0.909 ~ 4.047 2 ~ 16 2 ~ 16 2 ~ 16 0 0 0 Infinity Infinity Infinity 5. The lock.90E-02 3. Fig.383 Cross-flow 0 ~ 1. However,the factored fatigue life is still greater than the design life of 20 years.2 2 3.

11 No.plane current for this jumper system.5 [S]. 2011. DNV. It is actually a general conclusion for all M-shape rigid jumpers. 2013 71 . The design is illustrated using a specific example. If the jumper span length exceeds 33 m,strakes are required to mitigate VIV. References [1] ANSYS Inc. A methodology based on DNV. In this case,in-line VIV is governing the design. [3] Det Norske Veritas.4, Aug. User Guide for SHEAR7 Version 4. 14. The analysis results also show that out-of-plane current is more critical than in.plane current,in-line VIV is excited for all jumpers, but not cross-flow VIV (Table 4). 6 Conclusions A design procedure of subsea rigid jumpers is Author Wang Jun,male,was born in 1976. degree majored in structural engineering from the University of Houston in 2006.6 [S]. presented in this paper. ANSYS Help System.F105 has been developed to evaluate fatigue damage caused by VIV in jumper systems. He can be reached by E-mail:jwang@dmar-engr.com Vol. He is currently the subsea structure group manager in DMAR Engineering Inc.RP. When the jumper span length is less than 33 m,it still can survive VIV fatigue without mitigation. 2006. [2] Massachusetts Institute of Technology.,Houston,USA.RP. Free spanning pipelines [S]. He acquired his Ph. Version.F105.D. 2012. In this study case,33 m was found as a critical span length.