Advertisement

Protection of Buried Pipelines Using Geosynthetics Under Different Loading Conditions—A Review

  • Margi M. DaveEmail author
  • C. H. Solanki
Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Civil Engineering book series (LNCE, volume 55)

Abstract

The role of buried pipelines is becoming significant day by day in recent urban and industrial development. They act as lifelines of modern infrastructure as they carry essential materials. Damage of buried pipes due to loads acting on them, may result in severe hazards in terms of loss of materials, environmental pollution and sometimes loss of lives too. Hence protection of buried pipelines is extremely important. The paper reviews the effects of geosynthetic reinforcement for buried pipes subjected to different loading conditions. The literature is categorized into six types of loads which may act on pipe namely; static load, repeated load, permanent ground deformation, accidental damage, uplift pressure, and explosion. The paper describes the mechanism of mitigation provided by different geosynthetics. The researches show that the introduction of geosynthetic reinforcement effectively reduces stress, strain, deflection, and vibration in pipes. This paper also reflects the performance of different reinforcement configurations around the pipe. The available experimental and numerical investigations indicate the potentials for the use of geosynthetics to minimize the effects of static as well as dynamic loads on buried pipes.

Keywords

Geosynthetics Reinforcements Buried pipe Stress Strain 

References

  1. 1.
    Abbas BJ (2017) Parametric studies of reducing applied stress on buried PVC pipes using finite element. Muthanna J Eng Technol (MJET) 5(2):21–29Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Ahmed MR, Tran VDH, Meguid MA (2015) On the role of geogrid reinforcement in reducing earth pressure on buried pipes: experimental and numerical investigations. Soils Found 55(3):588–599CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Corey R, Han J, Khatri DK, Parsons RL (2014) Laboratory study on geosynthetic protection of buried steel-reinforced HDPE pipes from static loading. J Geotech Geoenvironmental Eng 140(6):04014019CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Fattah MY, Al-Kalali HHM, Zbar BS (2016) Three-dimensional finite element simulation of the buried pipe problem in geogrid reinforced soil. J Eng 22(5):60–73Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Fattah MY, Hassan WH, Rasheed SE (2018) Behavior of flexible buried pipes under geocell reinforced subbase subjected to repeated loading. Int J Geotech Earthq Eng (IJGEE) 9(1):22–41CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Fattah MY, Redha WBM (2016) Effect of geocell reinforcement in the mitigation of traffic loads transmitted to the flexible buried pipes. Glob J Eng Sci Res Manag 3(7):118–128Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Gas Authority of India Ltd. (GAIL). https://gailebank.gail.co.in
  8. 8.
    Hegde AM, Sitharam TG (2015) Experimental and numerical studies on protection of buried pipelines and underground utilities using geocells. Geotext Geomembr 43(5):372–381CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Indian Oil Corporation of India (IOCL). https://www.iocl.com
  10. 10.
    Jiang F, Wang X, Gu A (2008) Damage mitigation for buried pipeline using EPS geofoam under permanent ground deformation. In: International conference on Information management, innovation management and industrial engineering. ICIII’08, vol 3, pp 23–26. IEEEGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Khalaj O, Azizian M, Tafreshi SM, Mašek B (2017) Laboratory investigation of buried pipes using geogrid and EPS geofoam block. In: IOP conference series: earth and environmental science (vol 95, no. 2, p 022002). IOP PublishingGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Kim H, Choi B, Kim J (2010) Reduction of earth pressure on buried pipes by EPS geofoam inclusions. Geotech Test J 33(4):304–313Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Kou Y, Shukla SK, Mohyeddin A (2018) Experimental investigation for pressure distribution on flexible conduit covered with sandy soil reinforced with geotextile reinforcement of varying widths. Tunn Undergr Space Technol 80:151–163CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Lingwall B, Bartlett S (2014) Full-scale testing of an EPS geofoam cover system to protect pipelines at locations of lateral soil displacement. Pipelines 2014:605–615Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Lingwall BN (2011) Development of an expanded polystyrene geofoam cover system for pipelines at fault crossings. The University of UtahGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Lingwall B, Bartlett SF (2007) Conceptual design and modeling: EPS geofoam cover system for buried pipelines. Prepared for Questar Gas Corporation, Salt Lake City, UtahGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
  18. 18.
    Metropolitan Engineering, Consulting & Environmental servicesGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Moser AP (2001) Buried pipe design. McGraw-Hill, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    NYSDOT Geotechnical Design Manual, Chapter 21: Geotechnical Design Aspects of Pipe Design and Installation. 2018Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Open Government Data (OGD) Platform of India. https://community.data.gov.in
  22. 22.
    Palmeira EM, Andrade HKPA (2010) Protection of buried pipes against accidental damage using geosynthetics. Geosynth Int 17(4):228–241CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Palmeira EM, Bernal DF (2015) Uplift resistance of buried pipes anchored with geosynthetics. Geosynth Int 22(2):149–160CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Pires ACG, Palmeira EM (2017) Geosynthetic protection for buried pipes subjected to surface surcharge loads. Int J Geosynth Ground Eng 3(4):30CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Rajkumar R, Ilamparuthi K (2008) Experimental study on the behaviour of buried flexible plastic pipe. Electron J Geotech Eng 13:1–10Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    Raveendran G, Thomas N (2017) Geonet as a soil reinforcement system for the protection of buried pipelines. Int Res J Eng Technol (IRJET) 4(4):1894–1897Google Scholar
  27. 27.
    Shukla S (2002) Geosynthetics and their applications. Thomas Telford Publishing, Thomas Telford LtdGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Singh S (2016) Pressure reduction on wide culverts with EPS geofoam backfillGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Tafreshi SM, Khalaj O (2008) Laboratory tests of small-diameter HDPE pipes buried in reinforced sand under repeated-load. Geotext Geomembr 26(2):145–163CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Tavakoli Mehrjardi G, MoghaddasTafreshi SN, Dawson A (2015) Numerical analysis on Buried pipes protected by combination of geocell reinforcement and rubber-soil mixture. Int J Civ Eng 13(2):90–104Google Scholar
  31. 31.
    Tupa N, Palmeira EM (2007) Geosynthetic reinforcement for the reduction of the effects of explosions of internally pressurised buried pipes. Geotext Geomembr 25(2):109–127CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd. 2020

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Sardar Vallabhbhai National Institute of Technology (SVNIT)SuratIndia

Personalised recommendations