Advertisement

Nonlinear finite element analysis of upheaval buckling of buried offshore pipelines in medium dense sand with fines

  • Sahar IsmailEmail author
  • Salah Sadek
  • Shadi Najjar
  • Mounir Mabsout
Original Paper
  • 243 Downloads
Part of the following topical collections:
  1. Topical Collection from GeoMEast 2017 – Sustainable Civil Infrastructures: Innovative Infrastructure Geotechnology

Abstract

Offshore pipelines that transport oil and gas in different areas of the world are often buried in trenches to provide stability and protection against upheaval buckling. Hydrocarbons in the pipeline are transported at high temperatures and pressures to facilitate flow and prevent potential solidification. Such conditions of transport, however, generate increases in axial compressive forces in the pipeline, which may lead to upward buckling (in the direction of the least soil resistance). Upheaval buckling can result in pipeline failure causing severe environmental and economic losses. The potential for upheaval buckling is mitigated by the resistance of the soil overlying the pipeline. This resistance is a function of several parameters. In this study, a series of 3D displacement-controlled finite element analyses were conducted using AbaqusTM to investigate the effects of pipeline diameter, pipeline embedment depth, and fines content on the soil resistance against uplift buckling. In the analyses, the offshore pipeline was assumed to be buried in medium dense sand with fines and was pulled upward along its entire length to simulate plane-strain conditions. The response of the pipeline was: (1) studied through the variation of the normalized uplift soil resistance with respect to normalized pipeline displacement, and (2) compared to the predicted response from available analytical resistance models. The results show that the uplift resistance, along with the normalized mobilization distance, depends on the pipeline diameter, embedment soil depth and fines content. Moreover, analytical design methods which assume mobilized soil blocks with inclined slip surfaces better capture the behavior observed in the numerical models, when compared to methods in which vertical slip surfaces are considered.

Keywords

Upheaval buckling AbaqusTM Displacement control Uplift resistance Offshore pipelines Medium dense sand with fines 

References

  1. 1.
    Palmer AC, Baldry JAS (1974) Lateral buckling of axially constrained pipelines. J Pet Tech 26(11):1283–1284CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Schaminee PEL, Zorn NF, Schotman GJM (1990) Soil response for pipeline upheaval buckling analyses: full-scale laboratory tests and modeling. In: Proceedings of the 22nd Offshore Technology Conference, OTC6486, pp 563–572.  https://doi.org/10.4043/6486-MS
  3. 3.
    Palmer AC, Ellinas CP, Richards DM, Guijt J (1990) Design of submarine pipelines against upheaval buckling. In: Offshore Technology Conference, OTC6335, pp 551–561.  https://doi.org/10.4043/6335-MS
  4. 4.
    Bransby MF, Newson TA, Brunning P, Davies MCR (2001) Numerical and centrifuge modeling of the upheaval resistance of buried pipelines. In: Proceedings of OMAE pipeline symposium, Rio De Janeiro, Brazil, OMAE2001/Pipe-4118Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    White DJ, Barefoot AJ, Bolton MD (2001) Centrifuge modelling of upheaval buckling in sand. Int J Phys Model Geotech 314:19–28CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Ng CWW, Springman SM (1994) Uplift resistance of buried pipelines in granular materials. In: Leung, Lee, Tan (eds) Centrifuge 94. Singapore, pp 753–758Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Vermeer PA, Sutjiadi W (1985) The uplift resistance of shallow embedded anchors. In: Proceedings of the 11th International Conference on Soil Mechanics and Foundation Engineering.San Francisco, pp 1635–1638Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Det Norske Veritas (DNV) (2007) Global buckling of submarine pipelines-structural design due to high temperature high pressure. RP-F110, Oslo, NorwayGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    ASCE (1984) Guidelines for the seismic design of oil and gas pipeline systems. Committee on gas and liquid fuel lifelines of the ASCE technical council on lifeline earthquake engineering, Reston, VAGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    ASCE (2001) Guidelines for the design of buried steel pipe. American lifelines alliance, ASCE, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Gao X, Liu R, Yan S (2011) Model test based soil spring model and application in pipeline thermal buckling analysis. China Ocean Eng 25(3):507–518CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Chin EL, Craig WH, Cruickshank M (2006) Uplift resistance of pipelines buried in cohesionless soil. In: Ng, Zhang, Wang, (eds) Proceedings of the 6th International Conference on Physical Modelling in Geotechnics, vol 1. Taylor and Francis Group, London, pp 723–728Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Schupp J, Byrne BW, Martin CM., Oliphant J, Maconochie A, Cathie D (2006) Pipeline unburial behaviour in loose sand. Proceedings of the 25th International Conference on Offshore Mechanics and Arctic Engineering, vol 4. pp 297–308Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Byrne BW, Schupp J., Martin CM, Oliphant J, Maconochie A, Cathie DN (2008) Experimental modelling of the unburial behaviour of pipelines. In: Proceedings of Offshore Technolnology Conference OTC 19537.  https://doi.org/10.2118/19573-MS
  15. 15.
    Byrne BW, Schupp J, Martin CM, Maconochie A, Oliphant J, Cathie D (2013) Uplift of shallowly buried pipe sections in saturated very loose sand. Geotechnique 63(5):382–390CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Bransby MF, Ireland J (2009) Rate effects during pipeline upheaval buckling in sand. Geotech Eng 162(5):247–256CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Newson TA, Deljoui P (2006) Finite element modeling of upheaval buckling of buried offshore pipelines in clayey soils. In: Proceedings of the GeoShanghai 2006 Conference on Soil and Rock Behavior and Modeling. SCE, pp 351–358Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Robert DJ, Thusyanthan NI (2015) Numerical and experimental study of uplift mobilization of buried pipelines in sands. J Pipeline Syst Eng Pract 6(1):04014009CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Liu JX, Zhang HM, Meng QR, Zhang H (2008) Study examines causes of upheaval buckling in shallow subsea pipelines in ahallow subsea PIP Lines. J Oil Gas 106:53–57Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Liu R, Xiong H, Wu X, Yan S (2014) Numerical studies on global buckling of subsea pipelines. Ocean Eng 78:62–72CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Liu R, Basu P, Xiong H (2015) Laboratory tests and thermal buckling analysis for pipes buried in Bohai soft clay. Marine Struct 43:44-60CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Liu R, Wang WG, Yan SW (2013) Finite element analysis on thermal upheaval buckling of submarine burial pipelines with initial imperfection. J Cent South Univ 20(1):236–245CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Stone KJL, Newson TA (2006) Uplift resistance of buried pipelines: an investigation of scale effects in model tests. In: Proceedings of the 6th International Conference on Physical Modelling in Geotechnics, vol 1, pp 741–746. Yaylor & Francis Group, LondonGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Bransby MF, Newson TA, Brunning P (2002) The upheaval capacity of pipelines in jetted clay backfill. Int J Offshore Polar Eng 12:280–287Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    Berghe J, Cathie D, Ballard J (2005) Pipeline uplift mechanisms using finite element analysis. In: Proceedings of the 16th International Conference of Soil Mechanics and Foundation Engineering. Millpress Science Publishers, Brussels, Belgium, pp 1801–1804Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    Wang J, Haigh SK, Forrest G, Thusyanthan NI (2012) Mobilization distance for upheaval buckling of shallowly buried pipelines. J Pipeline Syst Engand Pract 3(4):106–114CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Najjar SS, Gilbert RB, Liedtke E, McCarron B, Young AG (2007) Residual shear strength for interfaces between pipelines and clays at low effective normal stresses. J Geotech Geoenviron Eng 133(6):695–706CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Abaqus (2016) Abaqus Analysis User's Manual (version 6.13-4). Abaqus, Inc.Google Scholar
  29. 29.
    Yimsiri S, Soga K, Yoshizaki K, Dasari GR, O’Rourke TD (2004) Lateral and upward soil-pipeline interactions in sand for deep embedment conditions. J Geotech Geoenviron Eng 130(8):830–842CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Robert DJ, Soga K (2010) Soil pipeline interaction in unsaturated soils. In: New trends in the mechanics of geomaterials, chap 13. Wiley, Lausanne, SwitzerlandGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Ismail S (2016) Upheaval buckling of buried offshore pipelines. Dissertation, American University of BeirutGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing AG, part of Springer Nature 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  • Sahar Ismail
    • 1
    Email author
  • Salah Sadek
    • 1
  • Shadi Najjar
    • 1
  • Mounir Mabsout
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Civil and Environmental EngineeringAmerican University of BeirutBeirutLebanon

Personalised recommendations