Proceedings of the ASME 2022 14th International Pipeline Conference
IPC2022
DESIGN AND FINITE ELEMENT ANALYSIS (FEA) OF BULKHEADS FOR A PIPE-IN-
PIPE FLOWLINE: APPLICATION OF ASME BOILER AND PRESSURE VESSEL CODE
Mehdi Shekarforoush Hamid Hoorzad
AP Dynamics AP Dynamics
Calgary, AB, Canada Calgary, AB, Canada
ABSTRACT
Evaluating a pipe-in-pipe (PIP) system with bulkheads is
not explicitly covered by the Canadian Standards Association
(CSA) Z662 for oil & gas pipeline systems and refers to the rules
in the ASME Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code (BPVC Section
VIII, Division 2) as alternative reference code. However, the
BPVC does not specifically address the pipeline design. Due to
the nonlinear nature of the PIP and bulkhead geometry and
loading condition, careful modeling and an appropriate
interpretation and application of design criteria by BPVC code
are required. The current paper addresses the challenges and
recommendations for geometric design of the bulkheads, the
appropriate modeling of the problem using FEA method, as well
as analysis and accurate interpretation of the results based on
the BPVC rules. The bulkhead design was checked per ASME
B&PV VIII.2, design-by-analysis, and showed that the assembly
has met the criteria for protection against 1) plastic collapse, 2)
local failure and 3) failure from ratcheting.
Keywords: Pipe-in-pipe, bulkhead, ASME BVPC, Stress,
Finite element method, hot pipelines
NOMENCLATURE
𝜀𝑝𝑒𝑞 Equivalent plastic strain
ε𝑙 Triaxial strain
∆𝑆𝑛,𝐾 Primary plus secondary equivalent stress range
𝑆𝑃𝑆 The allowable stress limit
𝑃𝐿 Linearized local primary membrane stresses
𝑃𝑏 Primary bending stresses
Q Secondary stresses
1. INTRODUCTION
The PIP system consists of an inner carrier pipe, high-
performance insulation, and an outer pipe (jacket pipe) [1-2]. PIP
September 26-30, 2022, Calgary, Alberta, Canada
IPC2022-87070
Jaspreet Hothi Mario Forcinito
AP Dynamics AP Dynamics
Calgary, AB, Canada Calgary, AB, Canada
systems have some advantages that make them an appropriate
alternative for common pipelines, especially for high-
temperature lines. They have a good insulation capability, which
can diminish heat loss to the outside area and protect the
environment. Moreover, the outer pipe increases the stiffness and
strength of the pipeline and can act as a protective layer during
upset conditions, failure of the inner pipes.
The carrier pipe was designed following the CSA Z662,
National Standard of Canada for oil and gas pipeline system [3].
According to CSA Z662, analyzing a pipe-in-pipe system with
bulkheads should be performed based on the rules in the ASME
Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code (BPVC Section VIII, Division
2) [4] as an alternative reference code. In the PIP system, the
ends of the inner and outer pipes are connected by bulkheads to
align the two pipes and fix them together to prevent the relative
axial movement between the pipes. The attachment of the pipes
with the bulkheads creates a complex stress distribution that
should be analyzed with the finite element (FE) method.
The well heads of a Steam Assisted Gravity Drainage
(SAGD) facility are connected to the processing facility with
buried pipelines carrying hot Produced Emulsion (PE) and hot
Boiler Feed Water (BFW). The Project included designing these
pipelines with a pipe-in-pipe (PIP) system. The pipelines are
designed to be thermally pre-stressed to reduce the temperature
differential between installation and operating temperatures. The
current paper discusses the design and analysis of the bulkheads
of the PIP system based on the “design by analysis” rules of the
ASME BPVC Section VIII, Division 2. The procedures provided
in the paper have been developed through discussion with
several engineering specialists with extensive experience with
the ASME BPVC codes and pipeline design.
1 © 2022 by ASME
2. BASIC PIP AND BULKHEAD DESIGN
The cases analyzed, in order, were 1) pre-stressing by
preheating and locking in pre-stress, 2) post-construction shut
down that represents the scenario before the pipeline is
commissioned into operation, 3) hydrostatic pressure test, 4)
design operation and 5) the upset case that presents a scenario
where the fluid leaks in the annular space between the inner and
outer pipes. An example of design parameter is summarized in
Table 1 for the straight PE line. A similar table was created for
the BFW straight line and bend and compound bend of the PE
and BFW lines. A true stress-strain curve that includes
temperature-dependent hardening behavior was used for the FE
model.
TABLE 1: SUMMARY OF LOAD CASES FOR PE
STRAIGHT LINE
Inner Pipe
Case Temperature Pressure
(C) (kPa)
Preheating 100 0 air during the installation and the expanded pipelines will be
Post-Construction
10 0 to ground temperature prior to operation. This pre-stressing
Shutdown
Hydrotest 10 13,000
Design Operation 180 15,000
Operational Shutdown 10 2,000
Upset 200 6000
2.1 Geometric optimization of bulkheads
Since bulkhead design is not directly covered in pipeline
codes, the design process for the bulkhead is an iterative process.
Initially, a basic design based on the geometrical constraints and
operational conditions (such as pressure and temperature) should
be developed. Due to the geometric shape of the bulkheads, there
is stress concentration on the nibs of the bulkheads (the location
of attachment of pipes to the bulkheads). The bulkheads should
be geometrically optimized to reduce the stress concentrations.
The most effective way to reduce stress concentrations is to
reduce the slopes of the bulkhead wings (1:4 slope is
recommended in Z662). Note that eventually, any bulkhead
design should pass the acceptance criteria by ASME BPVC code.
The quality and effectiveness of the design at this step depend on
experience and engineering intuition. As a rough estimate, the
geometry should be designed in a way that the un-factored stress
remains below 80% of SMYS.
Figure 1 shows the schematic geometry of the PIP
components used in this study. The inner bulkhead is attached to
the inner pipe and through a connecting pipe, it is attached to the
outer bulkhead and the outer pipe. The annuli between the inner
and outer pipes and between the outer pipe and shroud are filled
with insulation similar to the PIP assemblies.
FIGURE 1: SCHEMATIC VIEW OF PIP ASSEMBLY
2.2 Pre-tensioning
For the PIP system, a key failure mode is buckling due to
excessive bending moments. This issue causes significant
challenges for the design and analysis of PIP systems. A common
approach to resolve this issue is to pre-tension the pipelines by
preheating process. To do so, the pipeline is preheated using hot
“locked-in”, to prevent them from contracting as they cool down
concept reduces the thermally-induced compressive stress at
high operating temperatures but it reduces pipe strengths for
tensile stress. All the finite element models should maintain the
stress history due to pre-tensioning.
2.3 Heat transfer analysis and environmental
constraints
A constraint for the bulkhead design is to limit the
temperature at its outside surface to a value that would not cause
environmental concerns. Such concerns include heat transfer to
the roots of plants resulting in a change to their growth patterns,
visibly affecting the surface temperature (i.e. melting snow), and
heating of groundwater surrounding the bulkhead which could
lead to the formation of visible water vapor atypical to the area.
The main paths of heat transfer are through the connecting pipe
between the inner and outer pipe, the conduction through the soil
layer, and the convection on the ground. This results in complex
heat transfer regimes around the bulkhead. The nonlinear
temperature distribution in the bulkheads affects stress
distributions in the bulkheads as well.
Heat transfer analysis may be required to estimate the heat loss
between ends of the pipelines, the temperature in the soil
between pipeline and surface, and the temperature distribution in
the bulkheads as input to the bulkhead stress analysis. The task
of calculating the soil temperature above the pipeline will define
the limitation for bulkhead and outer pipe temperature. The
limiting value of 50°C is usually selected for this purpose.
3. MATERIALS AND METHODS
3.1 ASME Code Check
As the name suggests, the ASME BPVC code is developed
for designing boiler and pressure vessels. So, designing the
2 © 2022 by ASME
bulkheads based on this code requires an accurate interpretation
of the code and an engineering decision. Poor interpretation of
this code might result in an inaccurate analysis of the
components. The proposed methodology herein was derived
through consultation with engineers with extensive experience
with the ASME BPVC codes.
3.2 Protection against plastic collapse
Load combination 2 of Table 5.5 of ASME VIII, i.e.
0.88𝛽 (𝑃 + 𝑃𝑆 + 𝐷 + 𝑇) + 1.13𝛽𝐿 + 0.36𝛽𝑆𝑆 , was selected for
the analysis as the governing load case. This load case is the only
one that has a temperature load and consequently causes the
highest stress in the model. Also, 𝛽 is 2.4, and P, D, and T are the
pressure, deadweight thermal loads. PS (static pressure), L (live
load due to effect of fluid momentum), and SS (snow loads) were
not applicable for this pipeline analysis. According to the BPVC
code, temperature loads are the self-equilibrating loads that arise
due to the constraint of the structure itself and are classified as
secondary. This is why the load factor is reduced to 88% when
thermal loads are considered in load combination 2. However, in
the PIP system, the axial forces arise from the constraint of the
adjacent pipeline that is mainly thermal in origin and does not
arise from the self-constraint of the bulkhead itself. If the
bulkhead deforms plastically, the axial forces do not reduce. In
this sense, the thermal loads should be considered primary loads
for the PIP system. Thus, for the analysis, the multiplying factor
of 2.4 was used for all cases.
According to the ASME BPVC, the acceptance criteria using the
elastic-plastic stress analysis method is to run the model for the
governing load case, the assembly is passing the plastic collapse
criteria if the convergence is achieved.
3.3 Protection against local failure
Local failure is another failure mode that is required to
check. The elastic-plastic procedure was used to evaluate
protection against local failure as it gives a more accurate
estimate of the protection against local failure mode. An elastic-
plastic stress analysis was performed based on the load case
combinations in Table 5.5 of the BPVC code, similar to the
previous section. Then, the equivalent plastic strain (𝜀𝑝𝑒𝑞 ), and
the limiting triaxial strain (ε𝑙 ) were determined for each point in
the component as explained in the code. For each point, the strain
limit was evaluated using the following equation according to
ASME BPVC VIII.2
ε𝑝𝑒𝑞
ε𝑝𝑒𝑞 ≤ ε𝑙 𝑜𝑟 ≤1 (1)
ε𝑙
3.4 Protection against failure from ratcheting
Another failure mode that should be considered per ASME
BPVC is protection against ratcheting. Protection against
ratcheting could be checked by the elastic-plastic criteria. After
applying the cyclic load (between operation and shutdown). The
ratcheting criteria is satisfied if any of these three conditions are
met: 1) there are no plastic strains in the components, 2) there is
an elastic core in the primary load-bearing, 3) there is no
permanent change in the overall dimensions of the component.
Alternatively, the elastic ratcheting analysis method can be used
to evaluate protection against ratcheting. Using elastic ratcheting
analysis method, the following limit shall be satisfied:
∆𝑆𝑛,𝐾 ≤ 𝑆𝑃𝑆 (2)
where ∆𝑆𝑛,𝐾 is the primary plus secondary equivalent stress
range and 𝑆𝑃𝑆 is the allowable limit. The only condition that
could result in ratcheting in between the operation and shutdown
cases. The value of ∆𝑆𝑛,𝐾 is derived from the combination of
linearized local primary membrane stresses (𝑃𝐿 ) plus primary
bending stresses (𝑃𝑏 ) plus secondary stresses (Q), i.e. (𝑃𝐿 + 𝑃𝑏 +
𝑄). The load case used for the analysis was (𝑃 + 𝑃𝑠 + 𝐷 + 𝐿 +
𝑇), without considering 𝑃𝑠 and L.
3.5 Bending Analysis
Protection against plastic collapse analysis (Section 3.2.)
was performed in the absence of the bending moment. Unlike the
pressure vessels, plastic collapses in the pipeline mainly result
from the local wrinkling due to the external bending moment
applied to the pipelines. Another important aim of the PIP system
analysis is to determine the bending capacity of the pipelines.
Because of the connection of the pipes with the bulkheads, there
is stiffness discontinuity, resulting in strain localization [5]. This
can reduce the moment capacity of the PIP system.
To estimate the bending capacity of the pipelines, first, the
factored load combination in plastic collapse analysis, 2.4(𝑃 +
𝐷 + 𝑇), was applied to the assembly. Then, a bending moment
was applied to the model and increased incrementally until
divergence. The bending capacity limit is defined as the
maximum calculated bending moment divided by the safety
factor of 2.4.
𝑀𝑚𝑎𝑥
𝑩𝒆𝒏𝒅𝒊𝒏𝒈 𝑪𝒂𝒑𝒂𝒄𝒊𝒕𝒚 = (3)
𝟐.𝟒
The bending capacity from Eq. (3) was defined based on the
elastic-plastic stress analysis approach. This approach might
result in a low bending capacity, especially for the upset
condition. For the upset condition, it might be more realistic to
use elastic stress analysis. To perform bending analysis using this
approach, the magnitude of the maximum bending moment
should be known in advance, from the global analysis of the
pipeline. The bending moment is added to the pressure (P),
deadweight (D), and thermal load (T) and by using the elastic
material property for the model. The acceptance criteria are
evaluated through the stress linearization approach. First stress
linearization is used to define general primary membrane
equivalent stress (𝑃𝑚 ), local primary membrane equivalent stress
(𝑃𝐿 ), and primary bending equivalent stress (𝑃𝑏 ). Then, the
computed stress components are compared with the available
values as explained in section 5.2.2.4 of the BPVC code.
3 © 2022 by ASME
 3.6 Heat transfer analysis
A multi-region simulation was performed considering
several different domains as shown in Figure 2. The domains are
the inner and outer pipes (solid region), two insulation layers
(solid regions), and the two gaps filled with air (fluid regions).
The heat conduction equation was solved for the solid
components and the full Navier-Stokes equations are applied for
the two fluid domains. The air was modeled as “pseudo-
compressible" assuming its density is a function of the
temperature only, which is given by Eq. (4).
𝒑𝒓𝒆𝒇
𝝆= (4)
𝑹𝑻
For the inner wall, the temperature is set equal to the process
fluid temperature flowing inside the inner pipe. For the outer
wall, the boundary heat flux was computed by specifying an
"ambient" temperature and a heat transfer coefficient. These
variables are very sensitive to the conditions to which the wall
surface is exposed. Different scenarios should be considered:
during preheating and installation, the pipeline is exposed to the
atmospheric air and forced convection should be used in the heat
transfer model. Once the pipe is buried, the soil domain should
be added to the model. For this case, there is a heat conduction
transfer between pipe and soil and forced convection heat
transfer between the surface ground and the ambient
temperature.
FIGURE 2: PIP REGIONS FOR HEAT TRANSFER ANALYSIS
4. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
4.1 ASME Code Check
4.1.1 Protection against plastic collapse
According to the code, the assembly is passing the plastic
collapse failure, if the model could achieve an equilibrium
solution for a small increase in load (i.e., Convergence) by
incorporating an elastic-plastic material model and factored
loads. The convergence was achieved for all the cases for the
model. Figure 3 shows the equivalent Von mises stress and
plastic strain contours on the model, for one of the lines for one
load case.
(a) VON-MISES STRESS
(b) THE EQUIVALENT PLASTIC STRAIN
FIGURE 3: VON-MISES STRESS AND THE EQUIVALENT
PLASTIC STRAIN (PEEQ) FOR ONE LINE AND ONE LOAD CASE
4.1.2 Protection against local failure
Among all criteria that should be checked according to the
ASME code check, the highest strain capacity was considered
for protection against local failure. The plastic strain (ε𝑝𝑒𝑞 ) is
very small for all cases as the pipes are designed to operate in the
elastic domain. For the pipelines the maximum value of the strain
ε
ratio in bulkheads is smaller than 1 ( 𝑝𝑒𝑞 ≤ 1); so, the lines met
ε𝑙
the criteria set by the code for protection against local failure
(Figure 4).
FIGURE 4: STRAIN RATIO FOR ONE LINE AND ONE LOAD
CASE
4.1.3 Protection against failure from ratcheting
Initially, the protection against ratcheting was performed
based on elastic-plastic and elastic ratcheting analysis. Using
elastic-plastic approach, there was a plastic deformation for the
upset cases; thus, an elastic ratcheting approach was used as an
alternative approach.
Ratcheting analysis was conducted on pairs of steps between
which the system may cycle multiple times. Considering the
order of steps and the cycles the assembly will be subjected to
during its lifecycle, the only cycles that should be considered for
∆𝑆𝑛,𝐾 are between operation and shutdown case. Hydro-test will
only happen 1 time or a few times and after the upset case, the
pipeline would be replaced or repaired so there will be no
ratcheting.
4 © 2022 by ASME
For the material grade used in this study, SPS is constant for the
temperature range of installation and operation of the pipe-in-
pipe system and its value is (ASME BPVC VIII.2)
𝑆𝑃𝑆 = 3𝑆 = 663 𝑀𝑃𝑎
𝑆 @ 25𝐶
where 𝑆 = 𝑇
2.4
The result of the ∆𝑆𝑛,𝐾 for equivalent von Mises stress is shown
in Figure 5. Since ∆𝑆𝑛,𝐾 ≤ 𝑆𝑃𝑆 , we could conclude that for all
the cases analyzed, the elastic criteria for protection against
ratcheting was satisfied.
FIGURE 5: EQUIVALENT STRESS RANGE (∆𝑺𝒏,𝑲 ), IN A
CYCLE BETWEEN DESIGN AND SHUTDOWN CASES
4.2 Bending
Figure 6 shows moment-rotation curve for the design case
of the PIP system before divergence. The maximum un-factored
bending capacity was defined from this figure and divided by 2.4
to calculate the bending capacity for this case.
FIGURE 6: MOMENT-ROTATION CURVE – DESIGN
An elastic stress analysis was also performed to evaluate the
models against the stress criteria for plastic collapse provided in
ASME-BPVC-VIII-2. The location with the maximum
compressive loads and bending moments were defined from the
global 1-D model and those loads were applied to the 3D FE
model in the proximity of the bulkheads. Through wall stress
linearization was conducted at critical areas on the outer
bulkhead. The result of the equivalent Von mises stresses is
shown in Figure 7.
The allowable limit on the local primary membrane (𝑃𝐿 ) and
local primary membrane plus bending (𝑃𝐿 + 𝑃𝑏 ) is 𝑆𝑃𝐿 as
explained by the code. For this project, the value of 𝑆𝑃𝐿 is equal
to the yield strength (𝑆𝑦 ) for the material. The results of stress
linearization is shown in Table 2. Since 𝑃𝐿 + 𝑃𝑏 ≤ 𝑆𝑃𝐿 , the
assembly passed the criteria
FIGURE 7: LOCATION OF STRESS LINEARIZATION
CHECK
TABLE 2: STRESS LINEARIZATION RESULTS
Stress Stress Allowable
Category Value (MPa) Stress (MPa)
Tresca Stress Mises Stress
𝑃𝐿 282 245 448
𝑃𝐿 + 𝑃𝑏 412 360 448
4.3 Heat transfer
The value of temperature in the proximity of the outer
bulkhead is shown in the Figure 7. The temperature of the carrier
pipe remains constant through operation, which was modeled as
a fixed temperature boundary condition on the inner pipe. There
is a temperature gradient in the connecting pipe between the
inner and outer bulkheads, resulting in nonlinear stress
distribution in the bulkheads. Moreover, as can be seen, the PIP
assembly was designed in a way that the temperature on the
outside surfaces of the lines reached a maximum of ~ 50 C. This
temperature satisfies the Canadian guidelines for environmental
concerns in the current project. It is noteworthy that the
allowable temperature should be per environmental guidelines
which depends upon the location of installation and its specific
environmental and biological conditions such as permafrost,
muskeg, agricultural land, etc.
Interestingly, the top surfaces of the PIP system have higher
temperatures as compared to the bottom surfaces. This is due to
a cyclic airflow motion inside the gaps of the PIP system, Figure
7. Once the air is heating up due to the contact with the hot
surface of the inner pipe, its local density increases and it moves
upward. The air temperature is gradually decreased and moved
downward to create a cyclic airflow. This non-symmetric
temperature distribution is important for stress analysis as it
causes thermal stress concentration on the bottom side of the
pipes and increased the nonlinearity of the system.
5 © 2022 by ASME

FIGURE 8: TEMPERATURE VALUES AND AIR FLOW
PATTERN
5. CONCLUSION
This paper presents procedures for the analysis and design
of bulkheads in PIP systems using the “design by analysis
rules” in the ASME Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code
(BPVC Section VIII, Division 2). Moreover, a
methodology explained for bending analysis of the PIP
system using both the elastic-plastic and elastic stress
analysis approach by BPVC code. Finally, the paper
presents a heat transfer analysis of the bulkhead that is a
crucial factor in defining thermal stress distribution and
concentrations.
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
The authors would like to thank the client for permission to
publish this paper. The authors would also like to thank to
previous colleagues, Adrien Chatel, Eugenio Turco Neto,
and Srinivas Krishna.
REFERENCES
[1] Manouchehri, Soheil. and Potter, Jason.” Comparison of
Applicable Codes and Standards for Design of End Bulkheads of
Pipe-in-Pipe Systems.” ASME 2013 32nd International
Conference on Ocean, Offshore and Arctic Engineering,
OMAE2013-10170, V04AT04A019. Nantes, France, June 9–14,
2013. https://doi.org/10.1115/OMAE2013-10170.
[2] Manouchehri, Soheil. and Kaye, David.” Design of Reelable
Bulkheads: Application of Pressure Vessel and Subsea Pipeline
Codes.” ASME 2015 34th International Conference on Ocean,
Offshore and Arctic Engineering, OMAE2015-41417,
V05AT04A011. St. John’s, Newfoundland, Canada, May 31–
June 5, 2015. https://doi.org/10.1115/OMAE2015-41417.
[3] CSA Z662:19 (2019). “CSA Z662:19 Oil and gas pipeline
systems.” Tthe Canadian Standards Association.
[4] ASME BPVC-VIII-2 (2021). “ASME BPVC-VIII-2, 2021
Edition, July 2021 - SECTION VIII - RULES FOR
CONSTRUCTION OF PRESSURE VESSELS DIVISION 2 -
ALTERNATIVE RULES.” ASME International (ASME)
[5] Carr, Malcolm, Matheson. Ian. Peek, Ralf. Saunders, Paul.
and George, Nigel.”Load and Resistance Modelling of the
Penguins Pipe-In-Pipe Flowline Under Lateral Buckling.” ASME
2004 23rd International Conference on Offshore Mechanics and
Arctic Engineering, OMAE2004-51192: pp. 39-47. Vancouver,
British Columbia, Canada, June 20–25, 2004.
https://doi.org/10.1115/OMAE2004-51192.
6 © 2022 by ASME