A Discussion on How Internal Pressure is Treated in Offshore Pipeline Design

Abstract

The design of rigid submarine pipelines has been the object of extensive research work over the last few years, where the most relevant issues include upheaval and lateral buckling problems. Both of these problems systematically associate temperature and pressure loads, where the treatment of the first is obvious, while the latter have always been a matter of discussion. In 1974 Palmer and Baldry [1] presented a theoretical-experimental contribution, in which they have set a pattern that has been followed ever since. Another similar and well known paper was published by Sparks in 1983 [7], who only present a physical interpretation of this same theory. Most of the present day industry codes define an effective axial force, according to which, fixed end pipelines will be under compression due to internal pressure. The starting point of the discussion presented in [1] was that internal pressure produces a lateral force, which is numerically equal to the pressure times internal cross-sectional area times the pipeline curvature: q=p.Ai.d2y/dx2(1) This equation is demonstrated further ahead in this paper. Palmer and Baldry then based their arguments on the traditional equation of the pinned column buckling problem, studied by Euler [2]: EId4y/dx4+Pd2y/dx2=0(2) for which the well known solution is: P=π2EI/L2(3) and on the associated problem studied by Timoshenko [3], which adds a distributed lateral load q to the same problem: EId4y/dx4+Pd2y/dx2=q(4) Replacing q with the lateral pressure given above, they were able to have their own problem fall back onto the Euler solution: EId4y/dx4+Pd2y/dx2=p.Ai.d2y/dx2P-pAi=π2EI/L2(5) After correcting for the Poisson effect they were able to determine the new critical axial force caused by the pressure. Unfortunately, however, the arguments set forth in [1] have been misunderstood. The fact that both axial force and lateral force multiply curvature does not make them forces of the same nature. Being able to add them has solved a mathematical equation, but still hasn’t converted the lateral force to axial. The authors wish to prove that [1] presents no more than a tool, which can be used in the analysis of global buckling problems of pipelines subject to both temperature and pressure. It will be shown, however, that this pressure will not produce an axial force, as now-a-days prescribed conservatively in many pipeline codes, which is even used for stress checking.

An Investigation on the Effect of Random Pitting Corrosion on the Strength of the Subsea Pipeline Using Monte Carlo Method

“…As a result, the Euler buckling approach is a suitable method to analyze their buckling behavior [23,30]. The criteria for pipeline failure pressure in the commonly used evaluation criteria at home and abroad can be summarized into two categories: two failure criteria based on stress and strain [2]. The evaluation criteria commonly utilized domestically and internationally for pipeline failure pressure can be categorized into two principal branches: stress-based and strain-based failure criteria [31].…”

“…To mitigate such corrosion-related concerns, it's imperative to ensure a robust coating system and effective cathodic protection measures are in place. It's therefore imperative to remain vigilant and implement effective maintenance strategies to detect and preserve against such damages to ensure the durability and longevity of structures [1][2][3].…”

Residual ultimate strength of offshore metallic pipelines with structural damage – a literature review

“…In DNV standards (DNV 2007(DNV , 2013a, it has been defined as the effective axial force S eff and expressed as Equation ( 1), where N is the true wall axial force, A i and A e are pipe crosssectional areas under internal pressure and external pressure, respectively, p i is the internal pressure and p e is the external pressure. Many researchers such as Carr et al (2003), Galgoul et al (2004), Fyrileiv and Collberg (2005) and Vedeld et al (2014) have argued against this concept because it is somewhat counter-intuitive. For instance, based on this definition, a closed pipe segment subjected to internal pressure could buckle when the pressure builds up.…”