Pipeline Walking-Understanding the Field Layout Challenges, and Analytical Solutions Developed for the SAFEBUCK JIP

Carr, Malcolm; Sinclair, Forbes; Bruton, David A.S.

doi:10.4043/17945-ms

Cited by 45 publications

(44 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The first comprehensive study of pipe walking was reported by Tornes et al (2000) and analytical solutions linking pipe-soil friction and pipe walking rate for simple scenarios were presented by Carr et al (2006). A significant quantity of experimental data on axial pipe-soil resistance was collated by , showing the influence of drainage and excess pore pressure.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Cyclic consolidation and axial friction for seabed pipelines

Yan

White

Randolph

2014

Géotechnique Letters

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Finite-element analyses of the axial sliding resistance of a seabed pipeline embedded in soft normally consolidated modified Cam clay are presented. The study demonstrates the rise in axial resistance associated with episodes of movement with intervening periods of consolidation. It is shown that the excess pore pressures generated during undrained axial movements lead to significant consolidation and strength gain in the surrounding soil. For modified Cam clay, using properties representative of kaolin, the resistance rises exponentially with cycles and reaches the drained limit within approximately 10-20 episodes of movement and consolidation. The rate of gain in resistance is shown to be controlled by the volumetric stiffness ratio, k/l, for soil that is initially normally consolidated. Simple relationships are proposed that will assist in utilising this beneficial phenomenon in design practice. The increase in axial sliding resistance due to consolidation may mean that mitigation requirements against cyclic axial pipe walking, caused by thermal expansion, may be reduced or eliminated.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Cyclic consolidation and axial friction for seabed pipelines

Yan

White

Randolph

2014

Géotechnique Letters

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…This can lead to on-bottom buckling and progressive axial displacement (termed 'walking', see Carr et al (2006)). To model this behaviour in design, the axial load transfer response of the pipeline is assessed in a similar manner to the shaft resistance of a foundation pile.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Consolidation around partially embedded seabed pipelines

Krost¹,

Gourvenec

White

2011

Géotechnique

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

When a pipeline is laid on a soft clay seabed, excess pore pressure is generated. During the subsequent dissipation process, the effective stress at the pipe-soil interface and the available axial pipe-soil resistance rise. This 'set-up' of axial resistance is an important consideration in various aspects of pipeline design, including the mitigation of thermal and pressure-induced expansion, the stability of the pipeline on sloping ground and the assessment of pipe-soil forces during installation. A set of finite-element analyses has been conducted to assess the pore pressure dissipation and consolidation beneath partially embedded seabed pipelines, extending existing solutions for strip footings. It is shown that the curved shape of a pipeline increases the normalised rate of consolidation compared with a strip footing. Dissipation curves for various levels of embedment are presented and the calculated response is shown to compare well with data from a field test conducted on a soft clay. The dissipation curves have been used to derive the development of effective contact force between the pipe and the seabed as consolidation progresses. These results highlight the significant enhancement of this force -and therefore the available axial resistance -that arises from a 'wedging effect' related to the curvature of the pipe-soil contact surface. This wedging effect leads to a beneficial enhancement of the axial resistance.

show abstract

“…Another effect applicable to HP/HT pipelines is the so called pipeline walking, see Carr 2006. This is an effect of transients at start-up and shut-down that will move the pipe towards the cold end.…”

Section: Pipeline Walkingmentioning

confidence: 98%

Safebuck Design Guideline and DNV-RP-F110

2011

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Global buckling of submarine pipelines may happen when the expansion due to temperature and pressure in the pipeline is restrained by the pipe/soil resistance. Global buckling may occur for both trenched pipelines (upheaval buckling) and for exposed pipelines (lateral buckling). Global buckling has been a major offshore pipeline design topic for High Pressure/ High Temperature (HPHT) since the mid 1980s, when the first buckles observed. In 1996 the Hotpipe project was initiated by Statoil with the purpose of developing design criteria for global buckling. In 2001 the first revision of the Hotpipe Guideline was issued and in 2007 this was published as a recommended practice DNV-RP-F110. In 2002 another initiative was launched with the Safebuck Joint Industry Project to carry out research and develop global buckling criteria for exposed pipelines. This work was intended to complement the work performed by Hotpipe by addressing some of the issues more relevant to deepwater flowlines. The latest revision of the Safebuck Guideline was issued in Dec 2008. Several papers have in parts been discussing global buckling in the past but only two documents provide consistent design guidance; the public DNV-RP-F110 (outcome of the Hotpipe project) and the Safebuck JIP Design Guideline (confidential to JIP participants). In 2009 Safebuck and DNV initiated a process with the purpose of merging these two documents. The advantages of this merger will be several; taking the best parts from the two documents, will remove the confusion in the industry with two alternative design guidelines. The combined document will be published in the public domain as a new revision of DNV-RP-F110. This paper will discuss the individual advantages of the design concepts in the two different codes and the benefit of combining these. Finally, some elaboration will be given on the structure of the future Safebuck Guideline that may unify how HPHT pipelines will be designed in the future. Introduction Global buckling of pipelines is sometimes referred to as Euler buckling as the pipeline may be considered as a straight, slender, stress free bar in compression. As long ago as 1757, Leonhard Euler formulated the capacity of a slender bar and one may therefore believe that this phenomenon is fully understood (Bradly 2007). Uncertainties do, however, contribute to make global buckling a challenge to pipeline engineers. First, as often experienced in history, engineers were skeptical about " academic problems?? and for a long time did not believe this to be an actual problem; even when there were several indications that this was a real behavior of pipelines. In the mid 1980s the first major upheaval buckles (vertical buckles of buried pipelines) were experienced. Over the next decade, pipeline design approached upheaval buckling with much success. However, the overburden employed to stabilise the pipelines was often excessive. In the mid 1990s computers became fast enough to model the actual pipeline configurations and more detailed design methodologies were applied. This lead to a general decrease in the overburden design but with patchy success in mitigating upheaval buckles and upheaval buckles started to appear again. Global (lateral) buckling of exposed pipelines was identified as a potential problem for pipelines resting on the seabed by Palmer (1974). For a long time this was also considered to be an academic problem only; or possibly relevant for " hot pipelines??. It was a common understanding that hot was at least 50ºC above ambient temperature and buckling was not an issue for big trunk lines. Today we know that many existing trunk lines have buckled. True enough, these buckles are long, smooth and have not impaired the integrity of the pipelines. Generally, most pipelines with concrete coating due to on bottom stability requirements will for a certain environmental condition be very light. This means that they are likely to be susceptible to global buckling, but will be exposed to relatively low lateral restraint in the buckled condition. Hence, " hot?? and " high pressure?? must also be linked to the lateral resistance, i.e. the submerged weight of the pipeline.

show abstract

Pipeline Walking-Understanding the Field Layout Challenges, and Analytical Solutions Developed for the SAFEBUCK JIP

Cited by 45 publications

References 0 publications

Cyclic consolidation and axial friction for seabed pipelines

Cyclic consolidation and axial friction for seabed pipelines

Consolidation around partially embedded seabed pipelines

Safebuck Design Guideline and DNV-RP-F110

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About