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

net/publication/318893184

Direct Pipe Construction: An Engineering Perspective on Quality Assurance

Conference Paper · August 2017

DOI: 10.1061/9780784480878.022

CITATION READS
1 495

2 authors:

Jonathan L. Robison Nicholas A. Arens

GeoEngineers, Inc. 2 PUBLICATIONS 4 CITATIONS
20 PUBLICATIONS 23 CITATIONS
SEE PROFILE
SEE PROFILE

All content following this page was uploaded by Jonathan L. Robison on 05 June 2020.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

 Direct Pipe® Construction - An Engineering Perspective on Quality Assurance

J.L. Robison, PE, MASCE1 and N.A. Arens, EIT2

1
GeoEngineers, Inc., 3050 South Delaware Avenue, Springfield, Missouri 65804; PH (417)
831-9700; FAX (417) 831-9777; email: jrobison@geoengineers.com
2
GeoEngineers, Inc., 3050 South Delaware Avenue, Springfield, Missouri 65804; PH (417)
831-9700; FAX (417) 831-9777; email: narens@geoengineers.com

ABSTRACT

Direct Pipe® (DP) is a recently developed trenchless technique used for steel
pipeline installations. DP combines the benefit of a continuous pipe fabrication and
stringing area (similar to the horizontal directional drilling [HDD] method) with the
continuously supported and earth pressure balancing capabilities of a curved
microtunnel. Additionally, as opposed to traditional microtunneling, launch and
retrieval shafts can often be of minimal depth or even at the ground surface. Since the
first DP installation in Germany in 2007, the method has gained relatively rapid
acceptance among engineers and owners. As of this writing, there have been 67 DPs
successfully completed worldwide, of which 25 were completed in North America.
Good documentation and timely analysis are critical to the successful and safe
completion of DP crossings. In particular, during construction the alignment and profile
of the microtunnel boring machine (MTBM) should be closely monitored along with
the thrust forces required to complete the drive. If annular pressure is a design
parameter (as with a levee crossing), it should be closely monitored and recorded to
confirm the annular pressures related to the minimum factor of safety against soil
hydraulic fracture are not exceeded. Engineers with a comprehensive understanding of
axial, bending, hoop, and combined stresses; buckling; and hydraulic fracture risk
should review the construction data and provide timely input into the construction
process to reduce the likelihood of steel pipe yielding issues, hydraulic fracture of soil,
or other undesirable outcomes.

1.0 DIRECT PIPE METHOD

DP is a trenchless construction method comprised of a steerable MTBM jacked

through a sometimes curved path by a pipe thruster assembly. A schematic of the
process is shown in Figure 1 on the next page.

1
 Microtunnel Boring Machine

Pipe Thruster

Figure 1. Schematic of DP crossing.

The pipe thruster clamps onto the outside of the steel pipe allowing for pre-
installation make-up and testing of the jacking pipe and simultaneous excavation of
material and the continuous installation of a steel pipeline. The steel pipe is typically
welded but mechanical joints may be used, depending on the pipe application. This
method of construction allows for a convenient, continuously supported, one-pass
installation in a variety of geological conditions at shallow depths (relative to HDD)
and with the reduced potential for hydraulic fracture and inadvertent returns.
The pipe thruster assembly transfers the jacking force through the steel pipeline
to the MTBM, which is steered by hydraulic cylinders and a laser gyroscope that allows
for precise alignment corrections with very precise and accurate installations possible,
relative to HDD. The interior of the pipeline houses the slurry and return lines, power
and communication cables, and slurry pumps. The slurry lines provide an aqueous
bentonite slurry for lubrication within the tunnel overcut and for high pressure jetting
at the cutting head. Excavated material and bentonite slurry passes through the cutter
head and are pumped through the slurry return line which is processed through a slurry
fluid recycling system. The photograph on the following page (Figure 2) shows a DP
entry workspace.

2
 Figure 2. DP entry workspace.

Similar to the HDD process, a pipe stringing and fabrication area is staged
behind the pipe thruster assembly and launch pit. The pipe thruster clamp and part of
the jacking pipe stringing area are shown in the photograph below (Figure 3).

Figure 3. Pipe thruster clamp and stringing area.

3
1.1 ENGINEERING CONSIDERATIONS

It is important for engineers to understand and evaluate the installation stresses

developed during DP construction during the design phase to appropriately specify the
jacking pipe. Critical to these evaluations is an understanding of the DP geometry, axial
or thrust forces developed at the pipe thruster, buckling risk, and associated stresses
and combinations of stresses. To provide for safe operation over the design life of the
pipeline, in the authors opinion, the following items must be addressed (as presented in
Robison, et. al [2013] and Robison and Chen [2017]):

• The thrust force required to install the pipe should be estimated.

• Axial, bending, hoop, and combined stresses should be calculated for the
estimated thrust force and for an upper-bound thrust force condition.
• The axial stress should be limited such that if and when buckling occurs, it
occurs within the elastic range of the pipe steel, reducing the risk of permanent
strength loss and yielding. (This is especially important for pipe that will be
subjected to high product pressures post-installation).
• The pipe specification (wall thickness and steel yield strength, typically) should
be adjusted so that the pipe satisfies all the stress evaluations at the upper-bound
loading scenario.

As related to the above considerations, two factors particularly critical to track

from design through construction are the as-built jacking pipe geometry and the thrust
forces required to install the pipe. A thorough understanding and the documentation of
these items will allow the engineer to evaluate whether stress violations have occurred.
DP is occasionally used instead of HDD where the annular pressures generated by the
MTBM are a controlling design factor. This condition may occur under a levee, for
instance, where the risk of hydraulic fracture of the soil surrounding the pipe must be
shown to be low. The calculation of both the soil formation limit pressure and the
estimated annular pressures generated by the two fluid systems used in DP construction
are detailed in Robison and Sparks (2015). During construction, an exterior annular
pressure measurement device is attached to the MTBM, the annular pressures are
recorded and compared with the calculated maximum allowable pressures (typically
the formation limit pressure divided by two).

2.0 CONSTRUCTION OBSERVATION, DOCUMENTATION AND THE

DAILY FIELD REPORT- GENERAL GUIDANCE

The field engineer’s role is to document and observe that work is being
completed according to the plans and specifications, and foresee complications that
may arise from deviations to the work plan and/or design. Involvement throughout the
project from exploration, design, permitting, and through construction further provides
an information channel for the client and contractor that may ultimately prevent delays.
The field engineer should document construction work and maintain daily records that
sufficiently describe the progress of work activities throughout the day. These field
reports should be made available to the client as soon as possible following the end of

4
the work shift for review and submittal. Detailed reporting and project records, can, if
necessary be critical in early dispute resolution to avoid potential claims or litigation.
As a minimum, the following should be recorded within the daily field report.

• Daily weather conditions

• Total footage and percentage of work completed to date
• Horizontal and vertical deviation, if any, from the design plan and profile
• Thrust force, face pressure, and penetration rates
• Annular pressure (if required)
• Slurry fluid testing reports
• Schedule analysis
• Material/Supplies delivered to the site
• Type of equipment in use
• Size of workforce, supervisors, client representatives and inspectors
• Hours worked and downtime per day
• Areas of concern or corrective actions taken
• Sufficient number of photographs
• Job Hazard Analysis

3.0 DP CONSTRUCTION MONITORING AND DATA ACQUISITION

In the DP method, the MTBM utilizes and records in real time data from
multiple sensors during the mining process, gathering a tremendous amount of data that
can be recorded on a time or tunnel distance basis. Thrust and contact force; various
cutting wheel and other pressures; vertical and horizontal location and orientation; rate
of penetration; and other data are acquired and recorded within the MTBM control
system. From the control cab (Figure 4), the operator will monitor these sensors to
balance the thrust, friction, and face contact forces, and penetration rates. With this data
acquisition, the field engineer and project team can better assess the potential for
installation geometry tolerances; thrust force and related stress considerations; over
mining and settlement risk; premature cutter head wear; hydraulic fracture and
inadvertent returns; as built versus plan construction schedule; and other
considerations.

5
 Figure 4. DP control cab.

3.1 INSTALLATION FORCE MEASUREMENT

The proper documentation of installation thrust force is key to understanding

the axial and combined stresses developed during installation. A maximum thrust force
should be specified during the design phase and compliance with this specification
should be documented by the field engineer during construction. An example, as-built
graph documenting thrust force, skin friction, and face contact force is shown below in
Figure 5. Note that thrust force measured at the pipe thruster machine as the pipe is
jacked through the drive. If the face contact force (load at the face) and thrust force
(load at the pipe thruster) are known, then load distribution between the face and
thruster may be estimated through interpolation and the axial force (and stress)
estimated in conjunction with bending stresses at points along the pipe to calculate
critical combined stresses.

6
 Figure 5. Thrust Force Analysis, Robison and Wilson (2016).

3.2 POSITION CONTROL

Position control and specifically understanding the relation of the MTBM to the
design plan and profile is necessary to document a safe installation. Design radii are
critical to achieve, in particular, for both installation and operating safe stress
conditions. The field engineer should document that design geometry is adhered to
within acceptable, specified tolerances. The DP system typically incorporates a
hydrostatic water level system for vertical orientation, a gyroscopic compass to
measure horizontal orientation, and a wheel survey at the launch seal to measure
MTBM penetration. Figure 6 below shows the wheel survey being installed on the
launch seal. Depending on the length of the DP and desired installation tolerances,
optical survey check shots are often required to confirm the output of the MTBM
positional survey system.

7
 Figure 6. Installing survey wheel on launch seal prior to MTBM launch.

3.3 FLUID SYSTEMS

The DP method incorporates two, independent fluid systems: a bentonite

lubrication system and a slurry cuttings removal feed, clean, and return system.
The bentonite lubrication system injects a mixture of bentonite and water into
the annular space between the excavated soil and jacking pipe through a lubrication
ring with nozzles behind the MBTM and through a nozzle at the launch seal. This fluid
is necessary to reduce installation friction forces to keep overall thrust forces low. The
photograph below (Figure 7) shows the lubrication ring.

Figure 7. DP lubrication ring.

8
 The cuttings removal system circulates a bentonite-water mixture through the
jacking pipe to the MTBM cutting face, where it mixes with soil and/or rock cuttings
and is then returned through the jacking to a fluid recycling system. Depending on the
geotechnical conditions the recycling system may consist of a series of shaker sieves
with a centrifuge to remove ultra-fine cuttings. Below, Figure 8 shows the slurry feed
and return lines extending out of the back of the jacking pipe. Figure 9 shows a typical
fluid recycling system, note the shaker system in the foreground and the centrifuge in
the background. The cuttings removal and fluid recycling system must function well to
allow tunneling to proceed. The field engineer should periodically observe the cleaning
system and shaker sieves to evaluate that the material being excavated is consistent
with the anticipated geology. Additionally, the owner may desire for the field engineer
to document the removal of cuttings for disposal purposes.

Figure 8. Slurry feed and return lines.

9
 Figure 9. Cuttings recycling system.

3.4 ANNULAR PRESSURE

As discussed in section 1.1, the DP method may have been selected due to
concerns of hydraulic fracture or inadvertent returns. In this case an annular pressure
gauge can be used to measure the exterior pressure generated by the MTBM and
document compliance with annular pressure permit conditions. Figure 8 below shows
an example of annular pressure documentation. Note that in addition to ground surface,
pressure monitoring zone limits, and DP geometry information, the following design
and as-built data are provided on Figure 8:

(1) The formation limit pressure (FLP) calculated using the Delft equation and
cavity expansion theory in accordance with USACE Report CPAR-GL-98
(Staheli, et al., 1998),

(2) The USACE allowable pressure (the FLP divided by 2),

(3) The anticipated hydrostatic fluid pressure, calculated during the design of
the project, and

(4) The as-built, measured annular pressure generated during construction.

10
 Figure 10. Estimated, allowable, and observed annular pressure.

4.0 CONCLUSION

Acting on behalf of the owner, the field engineer plays a critical part in the
construction process. Proper documentation of construction processes can reduce
disputes and confirms the adherence of the constructed work to project specifications,
design geometry, and permit conditions allowing the owner, contractor, and regulating
agency (as applicable) to have confidence in the safety of the installed pipeline.

5.0 REFERENCES

Robison, J., Chen, C. (2017) – Considering Buckling – Direct Pipe® Engineering

Design, NASTT No-Dig Conference Proceedings paper TM2-T5-02 (Publication
Pending).

Robison, J., Hotz, R., Chen, C. (2013) – Emerging Technologies – A Suggested Design
Method for Jacked, Curved Steel Pipe, ASCE Pipelines Conference Proceedings pp.
864.

Robison, J., Hotz, R., (2014) – Direct Pipe – Estimated and Actual Load Installation
Analyses for 20 Crossings, NASTT No-Dig Conference Proceedings paper TM2-T5-
04.

11
 Robison, J., Sparks, A., (2015) – Direct Pipe® Levee Crossing Design – Mitigating
Hydraulic Fracture Risk, NASTT No-Dig Conference Proceedings paper WM-T4-04.

Robison, J., Wilson, J. (2016) – Sabine Neches Levee Crossing Direct Pipe®
Engineering and Permitting, NASTT No-Dig Conference Proceedings paper TA-T5-
04.

Staheli, et al., 1998, “Installation of Pipelines Beneath Levees Using Horizontal

Directional Drilling,” U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Waterways Experiment Station,
CPAR-98-1.

12

View publication stats