See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/254519335

Update on Subsea LNG Pipeline Technology

Article · April 2007

DOI: 10.4043/18542-MS

CITATION READS
1 6,458

4 authors, including:

Clifford Neal Prescott Jeff Zhang

Fluor Enterprises, Inc. 5 PUBLICATIONS   10 CITATIONS   
14 PUBLICATIONS   23 CITATIONS   
SEE PROFILE
SEE PROFILE

All content following this page was uploaded by Clifford Neal Prescott on 08 May 2016.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

OTC 18542
Update on Subsea LNG Pipeline Technology
Tom Phalen, C. Neal Prescott, Jeff Zhang, and Tony Findlay, Fluor Corp.
Copyright 2007, Offshore Technology Conference
This paper was prepared for presentation at the 2007 Offshore Technology Conference held in
Houston, Texas, U.S.A., 30 April–3 May 2007.
This paper was selected for presentation by an OTC Program Committee following review of
information contained in an abstract submitted by the author(s). Contents of the paper, as
presented, have not been reviewed by the Offshore Technology Conference and are subject to
correction by the author(s). The material, as presented, does not necessarily reflect any
position of the Offshore Technology Conference, its officers, or members. Papers presented at
OTC are subject to publication review by Sponsor Society Committees of the Offshore
Technology Conference. Electronic reproduction, distribution, or storage of any part of this
paper for commercial purposes without the written consent of the Offshore Technology
Conference is prohibited. Permission to reproduce in print is restricted to an abstract of not
more than 300 words; illustrations may not be copied. The abstract must contain conspicuous
acknowledgment of where and by whom the paper was presented. Write Librarian, OTC, P.O.
Box 833836, Richardson, TX 75083-3836, U.S.A., fax 01-972-952-9435.
Abstract
The increased interest and rapid development in the
transportation of LNG world-wide has prompted a fresh look
at how LNG is transferred to/from an LNG carrier that may be
moored offshore in various locations. The traditional shore-
side loading/unloading of LNG to/from marine carriers may
be prohibited due to proximity to populated areas, safety
and/or environmental concerns. Also, the extension of an
offshore jetty structure to support the transfer pipelines with
related seabed dredging to facilitate vessel access, may be
prohibitively costly. This presentation discusses how new
developments in high-strength Nickel alloy cryogenic
pipelines and high-efficiency insulation systems have
significantly improved the prospects for the installation of the
first subsea cryogenic pipeline for LNG service.
Subsea cryogenic pipelines designs to date focus on the
use of vacuum systems for insulation and Invar™ pipe
materials to control growth and differential stress in the
pipeline systems. This approach, while successful, has also
resulted in high cost systems and welding issues. A new
design approach using ambient pressure, high efficiency
insulation and high strength Nickel alloys reduces the cost of
the system and improves constructability. The design and
installation techniques are based on proven systems used in
operating high temperature pipelines.
This paper addresses the design, fabrication and
installation of subsea cryogenic pipelines as well as
possibilities for inspection, maintenance and real time
monitoring of the installed system. The designs to be reviewed
focus on the use of new developments in high-strength Nickel
alloy cryogenic pipelines and high-efficiency insulation
systems. The presentation also discusses the test program
employed to certify a Fluor developed ambient pressure
subsea LNG pipeline for commercial use.
Introduction
Terminals are required for both the loading and offloading of
LNG into tankers. For locations with sufficient deep water
access terminals may consist of jetty structures and
breakwaters where tankers can be moored and offloading can
take place via standard loading arms.
Several LNG facilities have the jetty terminal connected
to an onshore facility by a short trestle structure, which
supports the LNG and utility piping, and may in some cases
support vehicular access to the loading terminal.
Location of the jetty terminal is dependant upon not only
the requirements for the LNG tanker maneuvering and
positioning with respect to water depths, currents and ship
traffic, but also with prevailing winds which may influence the
location from a safety view point.
In the design of the jetty terminal and trestle structure, a
major consideration is the final location and layout to satisfy
safety considerations from vapor plumes that may result from
leaks or damage to the LNG piping on the jetty and along the
trestle structure. [1] Special precautions must also be taken in
the design of jetty piping for protection against damage that
may result in leaks. This may include additional structural
protection and block valves that isolate segments of the
piping. In the U.S. handling requirements for LNG on jetty
structures require full containment to be designed into the
structure to contain a leak or spillage.
Fixed-Berth Offshore
LNG Off-Loading
Onshore Terminal
Re-Gas Facility
Cryogenic
Pipelines
on trestle
Figure 1- Typical LNG Unloading Jetty
Each of these provisions adds to the cost of the facilities.
In addition, the length of the trestle to the end jetty terminal
may need to be increased to move the end farther from a
potential safety conflict. This too would increase the cost of
the trestle structure.
When a trestle structure is used for LNG piping, the
design must include provision for expansion or contraction
2 OTC 18542
loops that accommodate thermal movements in the piping
during operation. This often increases the total length of the
LNG piping as much as 20% and adds additional friction in
the transfer of the LNG due to the extra length and bends in
the piping. A provision for these thermal loops must be
made in the trestle structure, which additionally increases the
cost of the facility.
Factors influencing trestle costs
Costs of a typical trestle structure are dependant upon a
number of factors:
• Length
• Water Depth
• Soils Conditions
• Number and Sizes of Trestle Piping
• Requirements for Vehicular or Pedestrian Access
• Site Access Conditions
• Environmental Conditions (Waves and Currents
which influence height of structure above the water
and the strength of the structure to resist the
environmental loading)
• Materials used in Facility
• Methods of Construction or Installation
• Safety Requirements.
These factors can greatly influence the final cost of the
structure. A number of trestle structures have been built
around the world for LNG and LPG handling and the lengths
of these facilities range from a few hundred meters up to 10-
km. The adjusted current costs of these facilities range from
US$15 million / km to US$54 million / km (US$23 million /
mile to US$87 million / mile).[2] (Indeed this cost range may
be low as recent data has suggested that significantly higher
costs may be more representative. However, this range is
maintained so as to not unreasonably skew the comparisons).
The installed costs shown are for the structure only and do
not include the cost of the piping, which would be in addition.
This represents a significant capital cost for a project,
especially in the event there is a need to extend the jetty
offshore for some distance.
Dredged 9-km Ships Channel
Dredged
Turning Basin
1.2-km Rock
Onshore Gas
Breakwatera
Liquefaction
Facility
6 km Jetty
Offshore Loading
Terminal
Figure 2- Typical LNG Loading Jetty with Breakwater
Typical piping for a cryogenic terminal may include LNG
piping, LPG piping, vapor return piping and cryogenic cool
down piping. In the case of the illustration above, the piping
would be supported by the trestle / jetty structure that would
connect the offshore terminal with the onshore gas plant
facility. There may also be a need to have utility lines added
to the piping that may transfer potable water and bunkering
fuel as well as fire-water.
Subsea pipelines – an alternate to trestle piping
As an alternate to the trestle supported piping, subsea
pipelines may be considered. A subsea pipeline can be used to
transport the LNG from / to an offshore terminal thereby
eliminating the need and cost for a connecting trestle. With
current subsea cryogenic pipeline designs, LNG can be
efficiently transferred over distances of up to 20 miles.
Dredged
Turning Basin Dredged 9-km Ships
Channel
Onshore
Offshore
Loading
Gas Terminal
Liquefaction
6-km
Cryogenic
1.2-km Rock Breakwater
Pipelines
Figure 3- Typical Subsea LNG Pipeline with Loading Jetty
Buried subsea pipelines that have properly designed
engineering backfill are inherently safer from leaks and
damage. In addition, having buried cryogenic piping may
improve the thermal performance of the pipeline in hot
climates. By adding features such as real time monitoring of
the performance of the pipeline for structural integrity, thermal
performance and leaks using fiber optic technology, the safety
of the subsea pipeline can be further enhanced to provide a
final design that has a loss prevention profile equal or better
than that of a conventional system.
Factors influencing cryogenic piping costs
Costs of cryogenic piping are dependant upon a number of
factors:
• Length
• Wall thickness and diameter
• Whether subsea or above ground on a trestle
• Corrosion protection requirements
• Insulation requirements
• Materials used in configuration
• Methods of Fabrication, Construction and Installation
• Site Access
• Safety Requirements or Enhancements
Costs of cryogenic piping vary significantly by the type of
insulation and configuration employed in a particular installed
application. For example, the current practice for above
ground piping is to have either external insulation in the form
of polyurethane foam or use vacuum insulated piping. These
represent two extreme examples of cryogenic piping. The
polyurethane piping would require a significantly thicker
insulation to achieve similar thermal performance levels to the
vacuum insulated piping. The amount of insulation, of course,
OTC 18542
is dependant upon the level of thermal protection that is
needed to limit thermal boil off from the cryogenic product to
economic levels, given cycling times between tanker loadings.
Costs for trestle supported cryogenic piping in today’s
market range from US$13 - US$15 million / km (US$20 -
US$23 million / mile). This is exclusive of the cost of the
trestle structure. Costs of subsea cryogenic pipelines range
from US$11 - US$16 million / km (US$18 - US$26 million /
mile). In both cases these are installed costs and vary
depending upon the factors noted above. These are general
costs that are dependant upon the type of final configuration
selected. [2]
It can be seen that effectively, the cost of the trestle
supporting structure can be saved if subsea pipelines were
employed, since the relative costs of the trestle supported
piping is comparable to the cost of a subsea pipeline
alternative. On this basis subsea pipelines offer an
economically attractive solution for LNG terminal
applications.
Offshore LNG Terminals – an alternate
In case the conditions are less favorable due to shallow
waters, congested shipping and / or mooring situations, but
also because of lack of community acceptance and permitting
difficulties, offshore terminals are a very attractive alternative.
Although such terminals exist - they have been widely used
for loading of crude oil and oil products for many years - no
offshore terminals for LNG are in use.
SPM
Gas Plant
Subsea LNG Pipeline
Figure 4- Typical Subsea LNG Pipeline and Single Point Mooring
The most dominant advantages of LNG offshore
terminals are the lower costs for construction and operation,
and the possibility to locate the terminal in deeper water
thereby eliminating the need for dredging. In addition, the
increased availability, safety and reduced voyage time as LNG
carriers need not enter and maneuver in congested waters.
LNG carrier berths can be located away from confined
waterways, thereby increasing safety and security while at the
same time preventing costly civil works. Furthermore,
impairment of new and existing shipping traffic will be
minimized. [3]
A number of LNG import facilities are currently planned
in various parts of the U.S. employing offshore Floating
Regasification Units. The solution outlined above may
represent a technically viable and cost effective alternate in
3
cases where it is convenient to situate the LNG Regasification
facilities onshore.
Subsea Cryogenic Pipelines
Subsea cryogenic pipelines are emerging technologies that are
essential for the new generation of offshore LNG loading and
receiving terminals. The major challenges for these systems
include, the managing of pipeline contraction due to the low
temperature of the LNG, the thermal efficiency of the
insulation system chosen, the reliability of the system, the ease
of construction and the ability to monitor, inspect and, if
necessary, repair in a timely manner.
Many types of subsea pipeline configurations are now
being considered for use in offshore applications. To illustrate
the differences between available subsea cryogenic pipeline
systems, eight configurations have been compared on the basis
of cost and thermal performance. These configurations are:
1. Vacuum Insulated pipe-in-pipe with 9% Ni product
pipe and 9% Ni casing.
2. Vacuum Insulated pipe-in-pipe with bellows and
stainless steel product pipe and steel casing.
3. Aerogel filled annular space pipe-in-pipe with 9% Ni
product pipe and steel casing pipe.
4. Aerogel blanket pipe-in-pipe with 9% Ni product
pipe and steel casing pipe.
5. Fumed silica insulated pipe-in-pipe with vacuum and
Invar™ product pipe and steel casing pipe.
6. Aerogel blanket pipe-in-pipe with Invar™ product
pipe and steel casing pipe.
7. Polyurethane insulated pipeline with Invar™ and
HDPE casing.
8. Polyurethane insulated pipe-in-pipe with 9% Ni
product pipe and steel casing.
Handling contraction
For subsea applications it is not practical to consider the
inclusion of expansion loops in the subsea pipeline
configuration as there would be too many for practical
installation. Although it is common to include expansion
loops at the tie-ins of subsea hot oil lines, a preferred approach
for cryogenic pipelines is to eliminate the subsea expansion
loops and configure a system that incorporates a straight run
of pipe. At present, there are mainly two methods to
accommodate this contraction:
• Use of InvarTM or other alloy with ultra-low thermal
expansion coefficient, or
• Use of bellows, one in each segment (about 15-m
long) of the pipeline, which is a self-contained pipe-
in-pipe segment with vacuum insulation, and one
larger bellows on the external casing pipe in larger
intervals (about 150-m long).
While technically feasible, both methods suffer major
disadvantages in cost, reliability, durability, or maintenance
requirement. InvarTM is an alloy steel containing
approximately 36% Nickel (Ni) and with Ni prices tripling
over the last year (2006), the cost of Invar™ type materials
has soared. In addition, production schedules for the
4 OTC 18542
manufacture of the sizes and amount of tonnage required for a
typical LNG export or import terminal would require the full
production of existing mills for a period of 3-years. Therefore
a project schedule would be driven by the long production
output of existing mills. Although extensive testing of
production and field welds of InvarTM has been conducted
over the last few years, there still remains a question as to the
high-cost of quality repetitive field welds using this system.
Bellows are known to have a high cost and there has been
a continuing question on the reliability and maintenance of
large-diameter thin-walled bellows if used in a subsea
application, where installation stresses may damage the units.
A more robust configuration would be preferred in a subsea
application.
Therefore, the following may be summarized.
• InvarTM
– High Cost / Production Difficulty / Weld
Issues
• Bellows
– High Cost / Low Reliability / High
Maintenance
Addressing thermal performance
At present, there are several methods for addressing
thermal performance for low temperature cryogenic pipelines:
• Use of conventional polyurethane or similar
insulation systems such as fumed silica.
• Use of high efficiency Aerogel insulation systems
• Use of vacuum insulated pipe-in-pipe.
Although vacuums have inherently a higher thermal
performance level than ambient pressure systems with
insulation, there is a penalty to pay for higher maintenance
costs and reliability through the life of the system to ensure
that the vacuum is maintained. If there is a leak, this
effectively eliminates any thermal performance.
Conventional insulation systems suffer from the fact that
they are not as thermally efficient as a vacuum system or an
Aerogel insulation system. Its use therefore requires a larger
amount of insulation for equivalent thermal performance and a
resultant larger outer casing pipe. This places this
configuration into question when attempting to build pipe-in-
pipe systems offshore when the internal product pipe is in the
order of 30” to 36” in diameter (762 – 914 mm). Therefore in
summary:
• Vacuum
– High Efficiency BUT High Maintenance
• Conventional Insulation
– Low Efficiency therefore more Insulation
Ambient pressure systems are preferred due to their
higher reliability; and when coupled with high-efficiency
Aerogel insulation and a configuration that includes 9% Ni
steel as the product carrying pipe, these are found to be the
most cost effective. These are the subsea pipeline
configurations that are preferred. [2]
Preferred Technical Configuration
A new pipeline configuration has been developed to address
the disadvantages noted above. The configuration (patent
pending)[4] is the culmination of Fluor Corporation (Fluor)
conceptual designs, which began in the 70’s with the design of
a subsea LPG pipeline and which continued into the 80’s with
their first subsea LNG pipeline for an arctic LNG ship system.
This new design, however, takes advantage of recent
developments in insulation technology and uses a highly
efficient thermal nano-porous insulation in the annular space
between the inner and outer pipes. This material is kept in an
ambient pressure environment, which is produced through
sealing by metallic bulkheads. The bulkheads also act to
transfer the contraction induced axial tension load on the inner
cryogenic carrier pipe to the external jacket pipe. The resulting
pipeline bundle is a structural element, which accommodates
the thermal contraction and expansion loads without resorting
to expansion bellows or expensive ultra-low thermal
expansion alloys. As an example, the LNG carrier pipe would
be of 9% Nickel steel, while the jacket pipe can be carbon
steel, unless the owner prefers double cryogenic containment
in which case 9% Nickel steel can also be employed as the
outer pipeline. The thermal insulation would be a high
performance nano-porous Aerogel product, approximately 50-
mm to 75-mm thick, in blanket or granular form installed
within the annular space without vacuum and under ambient
pressure.[5]
Aerogel Insulation
(Cabot NanogelTM
Expansion PackTM)
Concrete Weight
ASTM 553 Type 1
(9% Ni Steel)
Coating (if required)
Product Pipe
External Carbon Steel
Casing Pipe (or 9% Ni
Steel if required)
Figure 5 – Fluor Subsea LNG Pipeline
The features of the subsea pipeline configuration are as
follows:
• Metallic Bulkheads at each End
• 9% Ni Steel for Product Line
• Ambient Pressure in Annular Space
• Aerogel Insulation
• Simple Fabrication and Assembly
• Proven Installation Techniques
• Patent Pending Design
The configuration is very simple in that it incorporates
proven fabrication and installation techniques developed in the
offshore industry over the last 20-years. Using the high-
efficiency thermal insulation systems that have been recently
made commercial and the high-strength cryogenic piping
systems that also have been developed recently using 9% Ni
OTC 18542 5

steels, the cryogenic pipeline configuration is an attractive In the Table above, it can be seen that by using various
low-cost option for offshore LNG terminals. insulation systems, the outer casing pipe diameter varies
depending upon the thermal performance of the insulation. In
Yield this comparison equivalent thermal performance was the goal,
Relative Cost Stress but in the vacuum cases where the thermal performance is
Material
(in January 2007) (MPa) @ very efficient, the configuration is limited by the constraints of
0 oC assembly and fabrication. In Cases 3 and 4, Nanogel®
Invar
TM
– 36% Ni 24 270 Aerogel as developed and manufactured by Cabot
Corporation, was used as a reference material.
316L Stainless Steel 10 250
The Table above compares similar vapor boil-off rates for
9% Ni Steel 4 585 a standard 24-inch (610 mm) diameter pipeline. The
differences are substantial and influence the overall cost of the
API X52 Carbon Steel 1 359 configuration.
When the costs of the comparative configurations are
Table 1 - Relative Cost and Yield Stress Comparisons of Materials evaluated, it can be seen that there are three systems that stand
As can be seen in the Table above high Nickel content out as lower cost options. These are high-lighted through
materials such as InvarTM and 316L stainless steel have a much shading in the Table below.
higher relative cost as well as a lower yield stress. 9% Ni
Steel has inherent advantages when used as a cryogenic
material. It has a higher strength and it has a relatively low Insulation Product Casing Cost
Case
cost compared to the other options. Description Pipe Pipe Ranking
As indicated, the cost of an InvarTM pipeline is currently 6
times that of a 9% Nickel Steel pipeline. Additionally, the 9% Vacuum PIP with
1 9% Ni 30” 9Ni 3
Bulkheads
Nickel Steel has a greater strength than the relatively low
strength 36% Nickel Steel which would further compound the Vacuum PIP with
2 304 SS 36” CS 5
Bellows
cost differential due to the increased wall thickness
requirement in a pressure containing pipeline. In the past year 3 Nanogel® Annular Fill 9% Ni 32” CS 1
(2006) there has been a significant increase in the cost of
Nickel with prices that tripled thus broadening the difference 4 Nanogel® Blankets 9% Ni 34” CS 2
in cost between the 36% Nickel Steels such as InvarTM as
compared to 9% Ni Steels proposed by Fluor. Fumed Silica Panels
5 36% Ni 30” CS 8
with Vacuum
The advantages of 9% Ni Steels are further
emphasized by a comparison with other available LNG subsea 6 Aerogel Blankets 36% Ni 34” CS 7
systems.
Polyurethane Foam
7 36% Ni 48” HDPE 6
(10pcf)

Insulation Thickness Casing U Polyurethane Foam

8 9% Ni 48” CS 4
Case (10pcf)
Description (inches) Pipe (W/m2/K)
Table 3 - Cost Ranking – Same Boil-off/Km for 24” OD Pipeline
Vacuum PIP with
1 2.5 30” 9Ni 0.070
Bulkheads
Cases 1, 3 and 4 are the Fluor 9%Ni cryogenic pipeline
Vacuum PIP with solutions that use either a vacuum insulation system or a high-
2 5.5 36” CS 0.035
Bellows
efficiency Nanogel® Aerogel insulation system. In Case 1,
Nanogel® Annular both the product and casing pipe are considered to be 9%Ni
3 3.5 32” CS 0.134
Fill steel in the vacuum pipe-in-pipe application. This was
4 Nanogel® Blankets 4.0 34” CS 0.131
implemented to ensure that if in the event that the vacuum was
lost and cryogenic temperatures reached the outer pipe, a
Fumed Silica Panels cryogenic resistant material would prevent a secondary failure.
5 2.0 30” CS 0.120
with Vacuum It can be seen that the 36%Ni steels (InvarTM) were the
highest cost options, whether the option used a partial vacuum
6 Aerogel Blankets 4.0 34” CS 0.131
with fumed silica insulation or with Aerogel blankets in an
Polyurethane Foam ambient pressure system. In this comparison, even
7 11.5 48” HDPE 0.132 Polyurethane insulation systems were less expensive than the
(10pcf)
Polyurethane Foam InvarTM configurations.
8 11.5 48” CS 0.132 Once insulation thicknesses of all the options are
(10pcf)
compared, it can be seen there is a disadvantage of using
Table 2 - Insulation and Casing Sizes for 24” OD Pipeline Polyurethane insulation for long subsea pipeline distances.
For example, the Table below compares the relative insulation
thickness that is required for each configuration when
6 OTC 18542

compared to several typical lengths that may be expected for Max Max
an offshore LNG terminal. Using these larger insulation Same
Insulation Boil-Off Boil-Off
thicknesses creates a situation wherein it becomes physically Case Boil-Off
Description for for
more difficult, if not impossible, to install a Polyurethane per km
2 km 8 km
foam insulation system pipe-in-pipe configuration in a subsea Vacuum PIP with
1 3 4 1
application using current installation practices. The weight of Bulkheads (9%Ni)
the pipe-in-pipe combined with the physical size becomes a Vacuum PIP with
fabrication and installation issue. For this reason, the 2 Bellows 5 5 4
(Stainless Steel)
Polyurethane applications are not considered practical for
Nanogel® Annular Fill
longer lengths of subsea pipeline. 3
w/ 9% Ni
1 1 3
®
Nanogel Blankets w/
4 2 2 2
9% Ni
Same Max Max
Insulation Fumed Silica Panels
Case Boil-Off Boil-Off Boil-Off
Description 5 with Vacuum 8 8 6
per km for 2 km for 8 km w/ 36% Ni
Aerogel Blankets w/
Vacuum PIP with 6 7 7 8
1 2.5 2.5 2.5 36% Ni
Bulkheads
Polyurethane Foam
Vacuum PIP with 7 6 6 7
2 5.5 5.5 5.5 (10pcf)
Bellows
Polyurethane Foam
8 4 3 5
3 Nanogel® Annular Fill 3.5 1.5 6.5 (10pcf)

4 Nanogel® Blankets 4.0 2.0 7.0 Table 5 - Cost Ranking for Different Length – 24”OD Pipeline

Fumed Silica Panels Fluor Subsea LNG Pipeline Design Description

5 2.0 1.0 4.0
with Vacuum
6 Aerogel Blankets 4.0 2.0 7.0
Polyurethane Foam
7 11.5 3.5 23.5
(10pcf)
Polyurethane Foam
8 11.5 3.5 23.5
(10pcf)
Table 4 -Comparison of Insulation Thicknesses (inches)
After comparison of the costs of these various
configurations for different lengths, it is clear which
applications are preferred. Two interesting aspects become
more apparent.
The 9%Ni steel solutions are seen to be the lower cost
options, and, as the length increases, the vacuum system with
9%Ni steel becomes more attractive. In the case of the
vacuum system, the Fluor configuration uses 9%Ni steel for
the product and casing pipe and incorporates metallic
bulkheads at the ends of the pipeline and at regular intervals
throughout the pipeline, acting as containment and isolation
bulkheads. This configuration is essentially the same as that
of the Fluor ambient pressure pipeline configuration with the
Nanogel® insulation, but without the Nanogel® insulation.
However, it does incorporate a cryogenic vent line if in the
event the system needs to be bled. This same vent line can be
used to maintain the vacuum on the system.
As can be seen in the cost comparison for the various
lengths, the configuration using the Aerogel blankets with
36%Ni steel product pipeline in an ambient pressure actually
becomes comparatively more expensive as the length
increases.
Fluor’s technology utilizes an inner carrier pipe manufactured
in high strength 9% Nickel Steel with the annulus filled with a
highly efficient Nanogel® aerogel insulation at ambient
pressure (i.e. without the requirement for critical maintenance
of the vacuum throughout the service life of the facility).
Contraction stresses in the carrier pipe are accommodated at
each end of the pipeline by bulkheads shaped to provide
optimum strength while minimizing heat transfer. The
external pipeline is manufactured in normal strength Carbon
Steel, unless double containment is required by the owner, in
which case 9% Nickel Steel can be employed for both inner
and outer pipes.
Testing
Fluor has conducted two test programs:
• At AGL Resources Cherokee LNG Plant in Georgia in
March/April 2004 - Pipe in Pipe (6-inch in 12-inch) both
316L Stainless Steel - flowing LNG was employed as the
cryogenic test medium. Aerogel blankets were used as
the insulation. Instrumentation of the Pipe in Pipe was
fiber-optic sensors and cabling. A total of 22 Fiber-Bragg
and heat-flux sensors were used.
• At Delta Engineering, Houston, Texas in January 2006 -
Pipe in Pipe (6-inch in 12-inch) both 316L Stainless Steel
- Liquid Nitrogen was employed as the test medium.
Nanogel® aerogel expansion packs were used as the
insulation.
OTC 18542
Figure 6 - Fluor LNG Pipeline under Test at AGL Georgia
Figure 7- Fluor LNG Pipeline under Test at Delta - Houston
Both the above test programs successfully proved the concept
and validated analytical predictions of the pipeline’s
contraction behavior and stress loading.
• A further full scale component test is planned again at
Delta Engineering employing Pipe in Pipe (24-inch in 32-
inch) internal pipe 9% Nickel Steel and external pipe
Carbon Steel – conservatively Liquid Nitrogen will be
employed as the test medium.
Qualification of New Technology
Two Certification Agencies, the American Bureau of Shipping
(ABS) and Det Norske Veritas (DnV) reviewed the concept
and witnessed the latter series of tests performed in January
2006. “Approval in Principle” for the concept was received
from both agencies in April 2006.
7
Figure 8- Certificate of “Approval in Principal” from DNV
Insulation
The insulation material proposed for the Fluor Subsea LNG
pipeline configuration is a high-efficiency aerogel
manufactured by Cabot Corporation under the trade name
Nanogel® and deployed in their proprietary Expansion Pack™
system. As ultra-low conductivity insulation, Nanogel®
provides the very high thermal performance required for
cryogenic LNG pipeline flow-assurance.
Conductivity of Nanogel® insulation for cryogenic
applications is in the range of 11 mW/m-K. Moreover, since
the Nanogel® Expansion Pack insulation completely fills the
annular space (unlike a blanket or panel), the effective
insulation value is greater than a material of equivalent
conductivity that requires an air gap.
The nano-porous insulation is also mechanically strong,
eliminating the need for heat-bridging centralizers and is
hydro-phobic which means it does not absorb water and
therefore does not degrade in the presence of moisture the way
materials such as microporous silica, Polyurethane foam and
other insulations do.
Recent tests of the insulation system in a Pipe in Pipe
configuration confirmed the thermal performance of the
insulation. Water intrusion tests were performed where a
simulated leak was introduced and the thermal performance of
the insulation in this application was validated, exceeding
expectations.
Bulkhead
Fluor’s subsea LNG pipeline design utilizes 9% Nickel Steel
forging and fabrication technology including a dedicated
welding procedure designed to reduce residual stresses in the
bulkhead due to the welding process. The technology is
developed by Brück Pipe-connections B.V. of the
Netherlands.
The bulkheads are used at the ends of the pipeline to
effectively seal the annular space and to allow transfer of the
contraction induced axial compression loads on the inner
cryogenic carrier pipe to the external jacket pipe. The Pipe-in-
Pipe system functions as a structual column, with thermal
insulation maintained in the annular space in an ambient
pressure environment.
8 OTC 18542
Figure 9 - Typical Cross Section of Pipeline Bulkhead
The bulkhead is configured on a case by case basis to
satify the dimensional and loading conditions while
minimizing heat lose. Fininte Elelement Analysis (FEA) is
employed to derive the bulkhead configuration and verify that
the selected bulkhead and Pipe-in-Pipe system satisfy all
stress, strain, buckling, fatigue and brittle fracture criteria.
FEA analysis has shown that only one conical element is
needed for design for the loadings anticipated, however, this
design allows for an additional margin of safety with the
inclusion of a second element. Thermal analysis has
determined that the external casing pipe at the bulkhead will
be at external ambient temperature eliminating the need for
external insulation; however, 9%Ni steel will be used in this
area near the bulkhead not only for its cryogenic properties,
but also for its strength.
It is planned that the bulkhead sections would be
manufactured in a controlled condition in a specialty forging
and fabrication facility and delivered to the construction site
where they would be inserted in to the line using conventional
welding practices developed for the material.
Figure 10 -Cross Section of Bulkhead Showing Insulation
9% Ni Steel Pipe
The use of 9% Nickel Steel in cryogenic application is well
proven having been employed for several decades in
extremely low temperature tankage. Also processes used in
the manufacture of the 9% Nickel Steel pipe from plate
supplied from current producers are not new technology.
Currently certain manufacturers, including the German
specialty mill Eisenbau Kraemer (EBK) are expanding their
capacity to accommodate the anticipated demand for pipe
manufactured in 9% Nickel Steel.
The 9% Nickel Steels are available in two heat-treated
conditions. They can be used in quenched and tempered (QT)
condition and the double normalized and tempered (NNT)
tempered. The metallographic structure of QT is a mixture of
matensite / bainite with hardness of 400Hv. This procedure
results in steel with higher yield to tensile ratio.
The minimum acceptable operating temperature of the
ASTM 333 Grade 8 (double normalized and tempered, or
quenched and tempered) is that of liquid nitrogen (-195 ºC or -
320 ºF). Additionally, the Charpy impact test temperature is
specified in ASTM A333 as that of liquid nitrogen (-195 ºC or
-320 ºF). This is within the operating temperatures of LNG
service.
EBK has qualified manufacturing processes for 9% Ni
Steel Pipe, and is capable of producing pipe to an API 5L
Grade X-80 Standard required for a typical LNG project.
9% Nickel Steel Pipe Welding
Specialty welding consumables required will be supplied by
the manufacturer of the 9% Nickel Steel pipe. Fluor has
focused on welding technology from EBK who has developed
and optimized several welding techniques to achieve
overmatched welds for 9% Nickel Steel pipe.
Construction
The Pipe-in-Pipe configuration chosen is similar to the
bundled pipeline configurations that have been installed
throughout the world over the last 20-years, thus the
construction techniques used are familiar to the marine
construction industry. Installation of pre-fabricated and
assembled pipelines can be implemented by numerous well
known methods, especially including the bottom pull or towed
methods of installation. Alternatively, the pipeline may also be
installed by a laybarge.
The method of installation would depend upon the final
location of the pipeline and the resultant weight for the
specific site application. Similar pipeline bundle
configurations have been built for bottom tow and controlled
depth towed methods of installation in maximum lengths
between 11 and 16 km and towed to an installation site over a
distance of between 700 and 900 km.
The configuration of the Pipe-in-Pipe system chosen
allows it to be fabricated in sections in an onshore make-up
and assembly site for projects where the bottom pull method
of installation is used. In this type of activity, the pipe is often
make up in “strings” or “sections”, which may be several
hundred meters in length. Each “string” is then assembled
into one long continuous “section” on a rail system that will
allow the full length of pipeline to be launched into the sea.
A typical make-up site and rail launch system is shown in
the following photograph of a past Fluor project where this
method has been used to install a 44-inch OD oil pipeline with
5-inches thick concrete coating that was 5.6-km in length,
which is similar to a LNG subsea pipeline application for
loading and off-loading terminals. The length of each of the
strings for this particular project was 700-feet (213-m).
OTC 18542
Figure 11 – Typical Pipeline Stringing Site
For the case where there is an onshore make-up site, the
offshore subsea pipelines is launched directly into the sea. A
typical rail launch system using an offshore pull-barge for the
installation is shown in the following photograph.
Figure 12 – Typical Pipeline Bottom Pull
It is anticipated that the subsea LNG pipeline will be
buried to provide additional protection from wave action and
dropped objects as well as assisting in restraining some of the
contraction loads. Again conventional techniques will be
employed.
Additonal Enhancements - Online Inspection and
integrity Monitoring
Conventional inspection survey techniques would be
employed to monitor the pipeline service life condition. In
addition a comprehensive non-intrusive monitoring system is
recommended to monitor the integrity of the operating
pipeline. Fluor has been working with Astro Technology, Inc.
for the development of such a system. This would encompass
a series of fiber-optic sensors and data gathering equipment to
not only monitor for leaks, but also to monitor the thermal
efficiency of the insulation system and to provide a system for
detecting any intrusions to the system that may compromise
the structural integrity.
9
A cross-sectional view of a typical buried PIP system
showing general locations of fiber-optic sensors is shown
below. The system employed would allow, not only leak
detection, but also external intrusion monitoring.
Back-Filled Trench Fiber-Optic Sensors
Leak Path
Figure 13 – Cross Section – Buried PIP
A previous and similar installation of a monitoring system
was used for an oil and gas bundle system in the Gulf of
Mexico. It employed a system that would shut-in the
producing wells if a situation developed that would indicate
leaks or intrusions into the system. The monitoring system
was tied to the Control Room on the offshore facilities as a
safety feature for Operations.
As a result of advances in fiber-optic sensing
capabilities, these types of sensing devices would be proposed
to provide real-time strain, temperature, vibration, and flow
monitoring for the subsea and Trestle supported cryogenic
pipelines. Fiber-optic sensors are attractive in these
applications because of their multiplexing capability,
immunity to electro-magnetic interference, ruggedness and
long distance signal transmission ability.
Feasibility of using fiber-optic sensors offshore has been
demonstrated through full scale riser deployment in the Gulf
of Mexico on steel centenary risers and drilling risers. [6]
Conclusions
Currently Liquid Natural Gas (LNG) is transported to or from
LNG tankers to shore based facilities by means of trestle
supported pipelines which require large contraction loops to
accommodate the temperature variation (typically +50oC air
temperature to -162oC LNG storage temperature). The cost of
the structures to support the pipelines alone (which due to
bathymetry constraints can be several kilometers long), is a
significant cost element of any LNG import or export facility.
Reduction and / or elimination of contraction loops is
possible with the newer LNG pipeline designs, and these have
cost advantages when considered for either trestle supported
or subsea applications. With the need to address ever
increasing costs of trestle construction in remote areas, the
application of subsea pipelines is being considered for
lowering cost and improving delivery schedules.
With the dramatic rise in Nickel prices over the last year
(2006) and Nickel prices remaining at all time peaks, alternate
alloy steels for cryogenic service are becoming more of an
10 OTC 18542

interest. The current cost of InvarTM pipe material is currently References

6 times that of an equivalent pipe using 9% Nickel Steel.
Additionally, the 9% Nickel Steel has a greater strength than
the relatively low strength 36% Nickel Steel which would
further compound the cost differential due to the increased
wall thickness requirement in a pressure containing pipeline.
Various subsea pipeline configurations are being
considered for use in LNG applications, each of which have
been compared on the basis of cost and thermal performance.
Of the subsea pipeline configurations that have been
contemplated, there is a significant cost advantage using the
Fluor configuration, which utilizes 9%Ni steels and the high-
efficiency Aerogel insulation systems in an ambient condition.
For long distance applications 9%Ni vacuum systems may be
considered.
Although vacuums have inherently a higher thermal
performance than ambient pressure systems with insulation,
there is a cost penalty for higher maintenance and questions on
reliability through the life of the system in ensuring that the
vacuum is maintained. If there is a leak, and the vacuum is
lost then all thermal performance is lost. Ambient pressure
systems are preferred due to their reliability since tests have
demonstrated that, in the unlikely event of puncture damage to
the casing pipe, the Nanogel® insulated pipeline system will
retain some functionality, unlike a vacuum. This reduced
functionality can eliminate the need for an immediate
operational shutdown making it possible for pipeline repairs to
be deferred to a later time.
The evolving technology and the application of proven
design techniques has allowed the development of cost
effective subsea LNG pipeline designs for marine operations
associated with both offshore and onshore LNG terminals.
New techniques have been developed to address the double
containment issues and the management of high temperature
differences in a cost effective pipe in a pipe approach.
[1]
SANDIA Report SAND2004-6258 “Guidance on Risk Analysis
and Safety Implications of a Large LNG Spill over Water”,
December, 2004
[2]
Cryogenic Piping for LNG Workshop, Houston, Texas, Zeus
Development Corporation, “An Update on Subsea LNG
Technology, Neal Prescott, Fluor Corporation, August 2006.
[3]
21st International Conference on LNG, LPG, and Natural Gas,
GASTECH 2005, Bilbao Spain, “Ship to Shore Transfer of LNG
– A New Approach”, Neal Prescott, Fluor Corporation; Max
Krekel, Bluewater Offshore Production Systems (USA) Ltd,
March 14 ~ 17, 2005.
[4]
US Patent Office Provisional Application No. 60/556535,
Cryogenic Pipeline Configurations and Methods, Fluor –
Clifford Prescott, et al
[5]
OTC 17338 “An Ambient Pressure Insulated LNG Pipeline for
Subsea Environments, C. Neal Prescott, Fluor Corporation; Jeff
Zhang, Fluor Corporation; David V. Brower, Astro Technology,
Inc., May 2005
[6]
Subsea Rio 2004 “Real Time Subsea Monitoring and Control for
Pipelines”, by Neal Prescott, Fluor Corporation and David V.
Brower, Astro Technology, Inc., June 2004

Acknowledgements
The authors would like to thank Fluor Corporation
management for the permission to publish this paper. Grateful
acknowledgement is given to Eisenbau Kramer for the
development of their pipeline and welding manufacturing
processes for the 9%Ni used for the cryogenic pipeline
solution and for their permission to publish information
pertaining to this technology. Grateful acknowledgement is
also given to Brück Pipeconnector for manufacturing and
assembly technology used in the 9%Ni bulkheads and to
Cabot Corporation for the development of their high
efficiency Nanogel® Aerogel insulation system used in the
qualification testing program, and their permission to publish
information pertaining to their technology. Grateful
acknowledgement is also given to Astro Technology, Inc. for
their continued research and development of sensor
monitoring technology during the sensor benchmark tests in
cryogenic temperatures and their permission to publish this
information. Last but not least, our gratitude goes to our
colleagues at Fluor Corporation for their contributions and
constructive comments while writing this paper.

View publication stats