Introduction of the axial force terms to governing equation for buried pipeline subjected to strike-slip fault movements

Talebi, Farzad; Kiyono, Junji

doi:10.1016/j.soildyn.2020.106125

Cited by 34 publications

(19 citation statements)

References 24 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…On the basis of the previous study, 49 the axial force of the pipeline is made of (1) frictional axial soil–pipe interaction and (2) geometrical nonlinearity effects (membrane force) owing to large deflections at the pipeline high‐curvature zone. The horizontal projection of the buried pipeline axial force onto the x ‐axis (

H

) is then derived according to:

H = H_{s} + H_{m}

where

H_{s}

is projection of frictional axial force onto x ‐axis, and

H_{m}

is the projection of the pipeline membrane force onto x ‐axis.…”

Section: Evaluation Of Axial Force Of Pipelinementioning

confidence: 99%

“…Recent computing and finite element method (FEM) developments can enable numerical treatment approaches that are applicable to the above‐mentioned problem 15 . In existing finite element (FE) models, pipelines are represented using beam, shell, or continuum solid elements, and the soil–pipe interaction is modeled by soil springs, that is, uniaxial nonlinear spring elements, or three‐dimensional inelastic continuum elements 4,16–28 . More recently, Vazouras et al 25 proposed a new hybrid spring‐shell model to decrease the computational cost by substituting the model effect of far distances from the fault plane using equivalent springs with pipe and soil–pipe interaction spring stiffness at both sides of the three‐dimensional FE models.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…However, their study had the same shortcomings as those of Trifonov and Cherniy 46 with regard to the governing differential equation of the buried pipeline. In 2020, Talebi and Kiyono 49 removed most of the previous simplification assumptions and introduced a new governing equation that includes the linear axial pipe force, linear axial soil–pipe interaction, and effects of the geometrical nonlinearity in the governing equation. This substantially increased the accuracy of the analytical method for elastic analysis.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

A refined nonlinear analytical method for buried pipelines crossing strike‐slip faults

Talebi

Kiyono

2021

Earthq Engng Struct Dyn

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This paper presents a novel nonlinear governing equation and solution procedure for analyzing a buried pipeline at an active strike‐slip fault crossing. The proposed method includes exact nonlinear axial and nonlinear transverse soil–pipe interaction terms, in addition to geometrical nonlinearity terms in the governing equation. The assumption of partitioning the pipeline into four segments with four governing equations based on the soil yield threshold is removed, and a unified governing equation is introduced. Compared with existing methods, the proposed method has a significantly extended application range with improved accuracy and provides the advantage of including the sliding of buried pipelines within soil, transverse soil spring plasticity, and improved large‐deformation effects including the sliding effect. The solution procedure is improved by removing the optimization steps and external calculations. The proposed method is verified by comparison to a verified finite element‐based model with various fault displacements and angles, and the results are in excellent quantitative and qualitative agreement with the numerical results, even for cases of large fault movement. Finally, criteria for assessing the ovalization damage of buried pipelines are proposed. The proposed method fulfills the missed part of literature, and it is valuable for (1) verification of the nonlinear FEM analysis; (2) fast, economic, and reliable stability analysis and design of buried pipelines; and (3) a strong tool for future developments of buried pipelines seismic design guidelines.

show abstract

H

) is then derived according to:

H = H_{s} + H_{m}

where

H_{s}

is projection of frictional axial force onto x ‐axis, and

H_{m}

is the projection of the pipeline membrane force onto x ‐axis.…”

Section: Evaluation Of Axial Force Of Pipelinementioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

A refined nonlinear analytical method for buried pipelines crossing strike‐slip faults

Talebi

Kiyono

2021

Earthq Engng Struct Dyn

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…In 2012, an analytical model based on the stability model of Trifonov and Cherniy [33], including the operational loads (internal pressure and temperature gradient), was developed for the stress-strain analysis of buried pipelines at a fault crossing by Trifonov and Cherniy [35]; however, their study had the same shortcomings as their previous governing differential equation [33]. In 2020 and 2021, Talebi and Kiyono [36,37] introduced a novel nonlinear governing equation that includes the longitudinal sliding behavior of a pipe within soil during large PGDs, lateral elastoplastic soil-pipe interaction springs, and longitudinal forces made by geometrical nonlinearity effects. They removed the unrealistic assumptions and remarkably increased the accuracy and application area of the analytical methods for the problem of buried pipelines at active strike-slip fault crossings.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The efficacy of FEM-based analysis to assess the behavior of a buried pipeline crossing an active fault has been proved in the literature. FEM has been used to evaluate the buried pipeline performance with the assessment of criteria such as local buckling, ovalization, and tensile damages [18,[38][39][40][41]. Vazouras et al [39] modeled a hybrid (shell and solid elements beside the equivalent springs) pipeline buried in solid soil.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Comparison of 3D Solid and Beam–Spring FE Modeling Approaches in the Evaluation of Buried Pipeline Behavior at a Strike-Slip Fault Crossing

Talebi

Kiyono

2021

Energies

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Validated 3D solid finite element (FE) models offer an accurate performance of buried pipelines at earthquake faults. However, it is common to use a beam–spring model for the design of buried pipelines, and all the design guidelines are fitted to this modeling approach. Therefore, this study has focused on (1) the improvement of modeling techniques in the beam–spring FE modeling approach for the reproduction of the realistic performance of buried pipelines, and (2) the determination of an appropriate damage criterion for buried pipelines in beam–spring FE models. For this paper, after the verification of FE models by pull-out and lateral sliding tests, buried pipeline performance was evaluated at a strike-slip fault crossing using nonlinear beam–spring FE models and nonlinear 3D solid FE models. Material nonlinearity, contact nonlinearity, and geometrical nonlinearity effects were considered in all analyses. Based on the results, pressure and shear forces caused by fault movement and pipeline deformation around the high curvature zone cause local confinement of the soil, and soil stiffness around the high curvature zone locally increases. This increases the soil–pipe interaction forces on pipelines in high curvature zones. The beam–spring models and design guidelines, because of the uniform assumption of the soil spring stiffness along the pipe, do not consider this phenomenon. Therefore, to prevent the underestimation of forces on the pipeline, it is recommended to consider local increases in soil spring stiffness around the high curvature zone in beam–spring models. Moreover, drastic increases in the strain responses of the pipeline in the beam–spring model is a good criterion for a damage evaluation of the pipeline.

show abstract

Analytical Derivations and Numerical Verifications on the Asymmetric Dynamic Responses of the Buried Steel Pipelines Under Seismic Active Faults

Yang,

Luo,

2024

Earthq Engng Struct Dyn

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The seismic ground movements may lead to significant bending, tensile, and compressive strains to the buried steel pipelines. This study concerns the dynamic behavior of the buried pipeline at its yielding state to offer preliminary design criteria in the geohazard region. An analytical scheme is proposed to assess the responses of the pipelines under a normal fault or a strike‐slip fault. A piecewise function is assumed to describe the deformed S‐shaped pipeline under the seismic fault. Then, the explicit strain and displacement are obtained by considering the asymmetry of curvature and pipeline‐soil interaction. Moreover, the deformed length and yield displacement are predicted explicitly based on the first yielding theory of the classical beam for both asymmetric and symmetric cases. In addition, the proposed analytical results, characterized by the deformed shape and the yield displacement, are verified efficiently by developing a three‐dimensional (3D) finite element model (FEM) in the present study, as well as other predictions elsewhere. It is found that the present study offers a good reference for strength evaluation and failure analysis of pipelines subjected to a normal fault or a strike‐slip fault.

show abstract

Introduction of the axial force terms to governing equation for buried pipeline subjected to strike-slip fault movements

Cited by 34 publications

References 24 publications

A refined nonlinear analytical method for buried pipelines crossing strike‐slip faults

A refined nonlinear analytical method for buried pipelines crossing strike‐slip faults

Comparison of 3D Solid and Beam–Spring FE Modeling Approaches in the Evaluation of Buried Pipeline Behavior at a Strike-Slip Fault Crossing

Analytical Derivations and Numerical Verifications on the Asymmetric Dynamic Responses of the Buried Steel Pipelines Under Seismic Active Faults

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About