response of a free span pipeline subjected to ocean currents

63
1 CHAPTER 1 INTRODUCTION Offshore pipelines are used to transport oil and gas between offshore platforms or to transport oil and gas directly from offshore to land. Marine pipelines are used for disposal of industrial and municipal wastewater into the sea, for cooling water in nuclear power plants, and for the transportation of gas and crude oil from offshore platforms. Marine cables, on the other hand, are increasingly used for communication. Many offshore engineering activities involve the use of pipelines in ocean along with offshore oil development, deep ocean mining, beach replenishment harbour and entrance channel maintenance dredging etc. A pipeline is a fixed asset with large capital costs. Once the pipeline is in place, though, the operation, maintenance costs are relatively small, and the pipeline has an operating life of 40 years or more. The use of offshore pipelines is a more recent development of the latter part of the twentieth century. The design of an offshore pipeline is multidisciplinary and typically involves three fields of engineering such as Structural mechanics, hydrodynamics, and soil mechanics. Planning of the route demands a great deal of considerations of the life cycle of a pipeline must be considered. During the life cycle from fabrication to abandoning the installed pipeline after years of operation, the pipeline must provide safe transportation. The pipelines are placed either to rest directly on the seabed or in trench or on saddles depending on the bottom topography of the seabed along their routes. In the water depth considered, beyond 300m, waves will not impose forces of any significance to the pipeline. However, the ocean current causes a separated flow around the free spanning pipeline. Hence pipelines cannot be designed and constructed in a rational basis similar to pipelines on land due to the fact that sea weather conditions may changes rapidly from smooth to rough seas. Therefore, the submarine pipeline is in many ways more complex than land based structures.

Upload: vimala-vinod

Post on 21-Apr-2015

232 views

Category:

Documents


5 download

TRANSCRIPT

Page 1: Response of a Free Span Pipeline Subjected to Ocean Currents

1

CHAPTER 1

INTRODUCTION

Offshore pipelines are used to transport oil and gas between offshore platforms or

to transport oil and gas directly from offshore to land. Marine pipelines are used

for disposal of industrial and municipal wastewater into the sea, for cooling water

in nuclear power plants, and for the transportation of gas and crude oil from

offshore platforms. Marine cables, on the other hand, are increasingly used for

communication. Many offshore engineering activities involve the use of pipelines

in ocean along with offshore oil development, deep ocean mining, beach

replenishment harbour and entrance channel maintenance dredging etc. A pipeline

is a fixed asset with large capital costs. Once the pipeline is in place, though, the

operation, maintenance costs are relatively small, and the pipeline has an

operating life of 40 years or more.

The use of offshore pipelines is a more recent development of the latter

part of the twentieth century. The design of an offshore pipeline is

multidisciplinary and typically involves three fields of engineering such as

Structural mechanics, hydrodynamics, and soil mechanics. Planning of the route

demands a great deal of considerations of the life cycle of a pipeline must be

considered. During the life cycle from fabrication to abandoning the installed

pipeline after years of operation, the pipeline must provide safe transportation.

The pipelines are placed either to rest directly on the seabed or in trench or on

saddles depending on the bottom topography of the seabed along their routes. In

the water depth considered, beyond 300m, waves will not impose forces of any

significance to the pipeline. However, the ocean current causes a separated flow

around the free spanning pipeline. Hence pipelines cannot be designed and

constructed in a rational basis similar to pipelines on land due to the fact that sea

weather conditions may changes rapidly from smooth to rough seas. Therefore,

the submarine pipeline is in many ways more complex than land based structures.

Page 2: Response of a Free Span Pipeline Subjected to Ocean Currents

2

The numerical simulation of unilaterally constrained structural systems is

receiving increased attention, mainly because direct solutions to the problem are

unattainable. During the operation and installation of offshore pipelines, high axial

forces and pressures are experienced, and their effects cannot be neglected. The

development of the technology of submarine pipelines has provided the possibility

of conducting projects under extreme conditions with respect to water depth and

environmental conditions. In these conditions, free spanning pipelines are often

unavoidable. Free spans may occur due to natural seabed irregularities present at

pipe installation or they may develop during operation due to erosion, scour, or

migrating sand waves.

Free spanning pipe section may subject to significant dynamic stresses due

to the presence of submarine currents and wave induced flows. Amplified

responses due to resonance between the vortex shedding frequency and natural

frequency of the free span may cause fatigue damage of the material and reduction

of the pipeline life. The sections of free spans may thus represent weak points of

the transport system, as they have a low reliability.

When a part of a subsea pipeline is suspended between two points on an

uneven seabed, it is always referred to as a free span pipeline. For a safe operation

of offshore gas or oil pipeline during and after installation, the free span lengths

should be maintained within the allowable lengths, which are determined during

the design stage. The determination of the critical length of spans under the

various environmental conditions along the pipeline thus becomes an important

element in pipeline design with a significant economical impact, especially in

deep water where the traditional maintenance and repair technology is inadequate.

In analysis and design of marine pipelines, free spanning analysis is one of

the scopes, besides determination of pipe size and wall thickness, on-bottom

stability and corrosion requirement. Free spanning analysis is performed to ensure

stability and fatigue life of the pipeline when exposed to wave and current forces.

The analysis and design of subsea pipeline is complex due to the facts that

a) Loading on the pipeline may be static, dynamic, transient, harmonic or

random.

Page 3: Response of a Free Span Pipeline Subjected to Ocean Currents

3

b) Loading on the pipeline is location and time dependent.

c) The characteristics of sea floor vary along the pipeline corridor and sea

bottom is irregular.

d) The bottom contact points of the pipeline are not known a priori.

e) Material behaviour of the pipeline may be elastic or viscoelastic.

1.1 OCCURRENCE OF FREE SPANS

Free spans can be caused by:

Seabed unevenness.

Change of seabed topology (e.g. scouring, sand waves).

Artificial supports/rock beams etc.

Fig 1.1 Seabed unevenness 1.2 AIM AND SCOPE OF THIS THESIS

The aim of this thesis is to determine the fatigue damage of a free span pipeline

considering in-line and cross-flow force. This involves the following major steps.

Numerical modelling of the 3D frame work’s mass and stiffness properties

and obtaining the frequencies and corresponding mode shapes.

Deterministic regular wave fatigue analysis.

Deterministic irregular wave fatigue analysis using the rainflow cycle

counting method.

Parametric study is performed to determine the parameters, which

influence the dynamic response and fatigue of the free spanning pipeline.

Page 4: Response of a Free Span Pipeline Subjected to Ocean Currents

4

A MATLAB code is developed for calculating the fatigue damage of

pipeline for both regular and irregular wave conditions. This study provides the

understanding of the mechanisms that is involved in the free spanning analysis of

an offshore pipeline especially on the fatigue damage.

1.3 METHODOLOGY

1.3.1 Static analysis

To determine shape of the span after installation.

To ensure a stable equilibrium between the pipeline and the seabed.

To determine natural frequency of the free spanning pipeline.

1.3.2 Fatigue analysis

Calculate the stress ranges and verify that the magnitude of the maximum

stress is below yield stress of the steel pipe.

Calculate the number of stress cycles.

Determine the allowable number of stress cycles to from S-N curves.

Calculate the Damage by Palmgren-Miners rule.

1.3.3 Parametric study

Functional state

Damping ratio

Page 5: Response of a Free Span Pipeline Subjected to Ocean Currents

5

CHAPTER 2

LITERATURE REVIEW

2.1 GENERAL

During the life cycle from fabrication to abandoning the installed pipeline after

years of operation, the pipeline must provide safe transportation. In case of failure,

severe environmental pollution and great economic loss may occur. It is important

to consider the seabed conditions and the wave and current action on the pipeline

during route planning. The pipeline sections must comply the transportation

demand and at the same time have a bearing capacity and a proper protection to

resist the rather rough environment of the sea during installation and operation.

Structural configurations of the pipeline during construction will depend upon

the method and equipment used for installation. The pipes either short units or in long

floating strings are supplied by a ship to the laying vessel. The most important

characteristics of the laying vessel are the loading capacity, the motion characteristics,

pipe laying, and welding of the pipe segments. The different methods of laying a

pipeline are:

1. Stinger lay barge method

2. Reel barge method

3. Bottom pull method

4. Floating string method

During the operational state, the pipeline may subject to fatigue damage

due to cyclic loads. The maintenance is another important aspect of a pipeline life

cycle. Annual inspections are made by video whereas the repair work of the

seabed can be done by local rock dumping at the free span to prevent erosion in

the future.

Page 6: Response of a Free Span Pipeline Subjected to Ocean Currents

6

2.2 PREVIOUS WORKS ON SUBSEA PIPELINES

Three methods have been adopted in the past for handling the pipeline-seabed

random contact problem i.e. optimization, negative support reaction monitoring

and successive over-relaxation (SOR). Due to the statistical nature of the problem,

optimization methods have been extensively employed coupled with direct

solutions of the differential equation of flexure. Maier et al (1978) adopted

quadratic programming for the determination of the fundamental control variable

defining the relative position of the pipe to the rigid seabed geometry. Both elastic

and elasto-plastic material stress-strain relationships were incorporated into their

numerical model. Using a similar technique, Stavroulakis et al (1986) expanded

the optimal control theory to include the seabed-pipeline frictional effects during

the random contact process.

Chuang (1992) investigated the efficiency of the quadratic programming

method according to the flexibility and the stiffness formulation approach. In a

series of publications, Baniotopoulos et al (1985) investigated the static and

dynamic response of submarine cable configurations using the optimal control

theory. Mathematical programming has also been applied by Mahmoud et al

(1986) and Salamon et al (1989) to the study of other structural systems besides

submarine pipelines.

By considering full soil-pipe contact, Bianchi et al (1988) used a node-by-

node negative seabed reaction elimination method for identifying the free pipeline

span development along the complete subsea route. With the aid of a successive

over relaxation algorithm, Kalliontzis et al (1996) examined the static installation

bending stresses developed in a pair of highly pressurized submarine pipelines

along a strait crossing. Direct pipe bending stress solutions can be obtained if the

structure-soil contact points are assumed to be known beforehand. Following this

method, Pranesh et al (1995) developed an analytic stress theory, aimed at

determining the optimal subsea pipeline routing.

Park et al. (1997) analyzed static and dynamic free spans of pipelines, and

proposed an allowable length of free span. The variation of allowable lengths is

examined for specialized boundary conditions, where free spanning is modeled as

a beam with transversal and rotational springs at each end. Kapuria et al. (1998)

Page 7: Response of a Free Span Pipeline Subjected to Ocean Currents

7

used the beam equation to determine the allowable free span or a pipe loaded both

tensile as well as compressive axial forces. An allowable spanning length is

prescribed to ensure enough strength and to prevent resonance happening. In

pipeline assessment, fatigue life shall be evaluated if VIV occurs.

Choi et al. (2001) derived a closed form solutions of the beam-column

equation for the various possible boundary conditions by considering tension and

compressive force. The natural frequency is calculated by energy balance method.

Some calculations are to present the sensitivity of the axial forces on the allowable

free spanning lengths. For free spanning pipeline, thermal expansion leads to

compression and reduces the natural frequencies and make the pipeline vibrate at

frequencies much lower than that without axial force.

Kim J. Mork et al (2001) proposed a rational design criteria and guidance

on fatigue design methods for free spans subjected combined wave and current

loading. Soreide et al (2002) investigated the dynamic properties of in the vertical

and horizontal direction of the free span due to the sag effect of a long free span.

Model tests on long free spans have revealed the importance of the interaction

between in-line and cross-flow VIV responses.

Furnes et al (2002) formulated a time domain model to examine

dynamical features of free spanning pipelines subjected to current forces.

Coupling between the cross-flow and the in-line motions was carried out by

considering the time varying part of the axial tension caused by current induced

deflections.

Abbas et al (2007) investigated the effects of sea bed formation along with

axial force on Natural Frequency of offshore pipelines. Based on this assessment a

new simple formula is proposed and compared the results with the allowable free

span length of Qeshem Island pipeline calculated based on DNV (1998) and ABS

(2001) guidelines.

J. Zhou et al (2008) has been derived a discrete equation of free spanning

submarine pipeline. The spatially varying earthquake ground motion, the internal

pressure, and the thermal load were imposed on the FE model. The nonlinear

material constitutional relationships of the pipe and the soil as well as the large

Page 8: Response of a Free Span Pipeline Subjected to Ocean Currents

8

displacement effect were considered. The effect of internal pressure, thermal

loading, and the interaction between pressure and temperature on the multi-

support input response of the submarine pipelines was studied.

XU Jishang et al (2010) carried out both static and dynamic analysis

methods to study the maximum allowable free span length (MAFSL) in the deep

water regime of the pipeline off the west coast of Hainan Island. The static

analysis was carried out by considering the maximum bending moment to

calculate the MAFSL. MAFSL Estimated by Cross-Flow Induced VIV is based on

partial safety factor design criteria.

2.3 CYCLE COUNTING

According to ASTM E 1049 – 85 (2011), Standard Practices for Cycle Counting

in Fatigue Analysis, cycle counting is used to summarize often-lengthy irregular

load versus time histories by determining the number of times cycles of various

sizes occur around varying mean stress levels. Cycle counts can be made for time

histories of force, stress, strain, torque, acceleration, deflection, or other loading

parameters of interest..

Schütz (1993), considers the rainflow counting procedure to be the

optimum counting procedure, because it counts the stress ranges and the

associated mean stresses correctly. The author cautions however that one aspect of

the rainflow counting procedure requires consideration i.e., it will always give the

load variation between the lowest trough and the highest peak as the largest range

counted cycle. However, consider the lowest trough occurs very early in the load

sequence and the highest peak at the end.

ASTM E 1049 – 85 (Reapproved 2011), defines basic fatigue loading

parameters, the range as the absolute value between successive valley and peak

loads, peak as the point at which the load – time history changes from a positive to

a negative sign with a valley being the opposite, reference load the steady state

condition on which loads are superimposed, reversal the point at which the load –

time history changes sign and mean crossings as the number of times the load –

time history crosses the mean load level during a given time history, as shown in

Fig. 2.1.

Page 9: Response of a Free Span Pipeline Subjected to Ocean Currents

9

Fig 2.1:Basic Fatigue Loading Parameters

2.4 CUMULATIVE DAMAGE

According to Heuler & Klätschke (2005), cumulative damage has been studied

for decades and it is well known that data and models that characterise the fatigue

behaviour of materials and structures under baseline constant amplitude loading

may not be appropriate or sufficient to adequately assess their fatigue performance

under irregular variable amplitude loading.

Further it is generally agreed that the structural load variations should be

characterised in the time domain since in most cases the range of a load, stress or

strain cycle plus its respective max or mean value can be considered as fatigue

relevant. The sequence or mixture of load cycles of different ranges and means

must not be neglected.

Issler (2009), indicates that a variable amplitude load – time history must

be broken down into a constant amplitude load - time history using an accepted

cycle counting method such as rainflow cycle counting. This results in a load

history consisting of various stress amplitudes across different mean levels.

Page 10: Response of a Free Span Pipeline Subjected to Ocean Currents

10

CHAPTER 3

NUMERICAL MODELLING OF SUBSEA PIPELINE

3.1 GENERAL

The modelling of a subsea pipeline is multidisciplinary and typically involves

three fields of engineering

a) Structural mechanics

b) Hydrodynamics

c) Soil mechanics

In this analysis, it is assumed that the pipeline is located at intermediate

water depth. Fig 3.1 and 3.2 explains the design condition of free spanning

pipeline.

Fig 3.1: Design condition of free spanning pipeline

Page 11: Response of a Free Span Pipeline Subjected to Ocean Currents

11

Fig 3.2: Cross section of pipeline

3.2 STRUCTURAL MODELLING

The numerical data taken here is that of a dual submarine pipeline crossing along

the Revithoussa -Aghia Triada strait in Greece carrying liquefied natural gas. The

horizontal distance between upstream and downstream points of the submarine

pipeline is subdivided into a number of segments known as finite elements. For

modeling, the following engineering assumptions were made.

1. The pipeline is a two-nodal 3-D Bernoulli-Euler linear elastic beam.

2. The pipeline cross section remains circular even after bending

3. The seabed is idealized by the Winkler foundation model

4. The sea floor characteristics are considered to be same along the length

of the pipeline under consideration

5. The flexural rigidity of the pipe, EI, is constant

6. The other external forces on the pipelines, such as pull due to anchors,

are neglected.

Page 12: Response of a Free Span Pipeline Subjected to Ocean Currents

12

The equation governing deformations of the linearly elastic slender pipe is

given by

EId ydx − T

d ydx + k y − w = 0 (3.1)

Subject to the contact or suspension condition of

(y − z)q = 0 (3.2)

Where, y is deflection of the pipe, y1 is pipe elevation relative to an

arbitrary reference datum, z is seabed elevation, q is seabed reaction per unit

length, T is tension in pipeline, E is young's modulus of pipe material I is moment

of inertia pipe section. Fig 3.3 shows a beam segment of a space frame having six

degrees of freedom per node, translation along all-axis (ux, uy, uz) and rotation

about all axis (Өx, Өy, Өz,) are considered .The element has a constant moment of

inertia I, modulus of elasticity E, density ρ and length L.

The element stiffness and mass matrices of the elements in the Matlab

Model are described in the appendix A. The elements are based upon the theory of

3-D, straight Bernoulli-Euler beams.

Fig 3.3: Three-dimensional beam element

Fig 3.2 shows the definition sketch of a unilaterally supported submarine

pipeline with its finite element discretisation. The pipeline is divided into

segments of length L, known as finite elements by S nodes. Along the one-

dimensional grid, the length L of each segment is assumed constant. Two benefits

result from such an assumption. Firstly, arithmetic performance tends to be

Page 13: Response of a Free Span Pipeline Subjected to Ocean Currents

13

particularly efficient when using regular grids and secondly, compact program

coding is facilitated.

Fig 3.4: Sketch of a unilaterally supported submarine pipeline and its

finite element discretisation grid

If rigid sea floor geometry is assumed, then the seabed reaction q is

calculated after the pipeline deformation has been determined. A more general

approach accounting for variable sub-soil characteristics, is to model the seabed

reaction as a series of springs using the standard force-displacement relationship

q = k ∗ y (3.3)

Where, ks and y respectively denotes spring stiffness or sub grade modulus

and soil displacement or settlement.The sub grade modulus k of the linear spring,

the magnitude of which represents the resistance offered to vertical pipeline

movements, is usually linearly related to the shear modulus G of the sub-soil.

Hence

k = α ∗ G (3.4)

Where, α is a coefficient ranging from 1.0 to 3.0. It is customary to assume

a value of 3.0 for vertical springs and 2.0 for horizontal springs.

The seabed is idealized by Winkler foundation medium given by linear

vertical springs as shown in Fig 3.3.

Page 14: Response of a Free Span Pipeline Subjected to Ocean Currents

14

Fig 3.5: Pipeline model on elastic foundation

3.3 HYDRODYNAMIC MODELLING

In this session, the flow condition for a cylinder near a wall is discussed. This is

an important aspect of determining the hydrodynamic forces because the seabed

proximity has a large effect on the hydrodynamic forces that affect the pipeline

free span. The conventional model for determining hydrodynamic forces on

cylindrical structures in the offshore industry is the Morison Model. The

hydrodynamic forces affecting the pipeline have components in two directions the

in-line force and the cross-flow force. Fig 3.6 shows the forces affecting the

pipeline. The hydrodynamic force coefficients are determined according to DNV-

RP-F105.

Fig 3.6: Hydrodynamic forces acting on the pipeline

Page 15: Response of a Free Span Pipeline Subjected to Ocean Currents

15

Although the real sea is random, the wave environment can be described by two

methods. In the deterministic method, the sea is described as composed of regular,

individual waves. In the spectral method, the sea is described as a function of sea

surface elevation due to regular waves combining to form an irregular sea.

3.3.1 Simulation of Regular Wave

In this analysis, regular waves are simulated by discretization of a continuous

wave spectrum as explained in the section 3.3.2. Fig 3.7 explains the wave

characteristics,

Fig 3.7: Wave Characteristics

)sin(. tkxa (3.5)

Fluid velocity component in the z-direction,

cosh( ( )). sin( )

cosh( )zagk k d zV t kx

kd

(3.6)

Fluid velocity component in the y-direction,

sinh( ( )). cos( )

cosh( )yagk k d zV t kx

kd

(3.7)

Page 16: Response of a Free Span Pipeline Subjected to Ocean Currents

16

Fluid acceleration component in the z-direction,

sinh( ( )). cos( )

cosh( )zk d za agk t kx

kd

(3.8)

Fluid acceleration component in the y-direction,

sinh( ( )). sin( )

cosh( )yk d za agk t kx

kd

(3.9)

Where, a is the wave amplitude, T is the time period of wave, k = L/2 ,

is the wave number, L is the wave length, d is the water depth, z is the point at

which water particle kinematics is to be determined with SWL as origin, is the

amplitude of the wave, is the frequency of wave.

3.3.2 Simulation of Random Sea State

A uni-directional random wave train may be simulated as a sum of component

regular wave trains, all propagating in the same specified direction but with

different amplitudes, frequencies, and phases. In the present study, simulation was

done by deterministic spectral model or the random wave phase spectrum method.

In this, waves are assumed stationary, homogenous and erdodic in the statistical

sense.

Fig 3.8: Discretization of a continuous wave spectrum

Page 17: Response of a Free Span Pipeline Subjected to Ocean Currents

17

The short-term, stationary, irregular sea states may be described by a wave

spectrum. The JONSWAP spectrum was developed by Hasselman, et al. (1973)

was to relate wave amplitude as a function of wave frequency and with further

analysis the spectral energy density S (f) as a function of the wave frequency as

given by Equation 3.10, for the Joint North Sea Wave Project. The formula is to

be derived from the modified Pierson-Moskowitz spectrum formula.

S(f) =αg

(2π) f exp −1.25(ff ) (3.10)

Where, α=.0081,g=9.81,,f = frequency and fo =peak frequency (Hz).

Wave profile or surface elevation is represented by

ˆ( , ) .cos( 2 )1

Mx t a k x f ti i i ii

(3.11)

dkgktf iii tanh).ˆ.2( 2 (3.12)

Here, M being a sufficiently large number, ai denotes the amplitude of the

component wave in the ith frequency,

if is the ith representative frequency, which

is evenly distributed in the range of ),( 1

ii ff , i is phase angle. In this equation,

wave number of the ith component, ki, can be determined from the dispersion

relationship after knowing the corresponding representative frequency and water

depth d.

The wave amplitude ai is determined from a given function of the

frequency spectrum

)( ifS by,

Page 18: Response of a Free Span Pipeline Subjected to Ocean Currents

18

iii ffSa )ˆ(2

(3.13)

2/)ˆˆ(ˆ1 iii fff (3.14)

)ˆˆ( 1 iii fff (3.15)

Fluid acceleration component in the z-direction is given by,

u(t) =

H2 (2π푓) sin(k x− 2π푓t + i )

cosh (k y)sinh(k h)

(3.16)

Fluid acceleration component in the y-direction is given by,

v(t) = −H2 (2π푓) cos(k x− 2π푓t + i )

sinh (k y)sinh(k h) (3.17)

Fluid velocity component in the z-direction,

u(t) = H (π푓) cos(k x− 2π푓t + i )cosh (k y)sinh(k h) (3.18)

Fluid velocity component in the y-direction,

v(t) = H (π푓) sin(k x− 2π푓t + i )sinh (k y)sinh(k h) (3.19)

Where, ai is the wave amplitude, ki = L/2 , is the wave number, L is the

wave length, h is the water depth, y is the point at which water particle kinematics

is to be determined with SWL as origin, is the amplitude of the wave and

if is

the ith representative frequency.

Page 19: Response of a Free Span Pipeline Subjected to Ocean Currents

19

3.3.3 Random Wave Validation

After generating the random waves, validation of the simulated random wave

profile is needed to assure the precision and efficiency of the numerical

simulation. This is conducted by comparing the simulated or predicted frequency

spectrum with the target frequency spectrum presented in equation (3.10) after

considering that all the typical random wave characteristics, such as significant

wave height and period can be determined by the frequency spectrum.

After knowing the water surface elevation ( , )x t , there are two methods,

which can be applied to determine the simulated (predicted) spectrum: auto-

correlation method and FFT method. In this study, FFT is used.

3.3.4 Hydrodynamic Coefficients

This section describes the determination of force coefficients independent of time,

which are the estimated values that are typically implemented in the Morison

Model. The drag coefficient CD and inertia coefficient CM to be used in

Morison’s equation are functions of Keulegan Carpenter number, the current flow

ratio, α, the gap ratio, (e/D).In order to get all contributions from the

hydrodynamic load, three different force coefficients need to be determined

a) Drag force coefficient

b) Inertia force coefficient

c) Lift force coefficient

In reality, the hydrodynamic force coefficients vary with time and depend

on multiple parameters, including the Reynolds number, the Keulegan-Carpenter

number, the current-flow velocity ratio, seabed proximity, and the pipe roughness.

Table 3.1 shows typical values for the surface roughness

Page 20: Response of a Free Span Pipeline Subjected to Ocean Currents

20

3.3.4.1 Drag Force Coefficient

The drag force coefficient CD is determined according to DNV-RP-F105.The drag

force coefficient is determined as

CDA

CDproxi

CDk

oD DCC ... (3.20)

Where, DoC is the basic drag coefficient.

Table 3.1: Surface roughness

Pipe surface Steel, painted Steel, un-coated

(not rusted)

Marine growth

k [metres] 10-6 10-5 1/200 → 1/20

For small gap ratios, the seabed will have influence on the flow around the

pipe. The drag force generally increases with decreasing gap ratios. The correction

factor for the seabed proximity is taken as

CDproxi =

0.9 +. 5

1 + 5 eD

, eD < 0.8

1, else (3.21)

Where, e is the gap between the pipe and the seabed in m, De

is gap

ratio.The current-flow velocity ratio is determined as

α = mc

c

UUU

(3.22)

Where, Uc is the Velocity of the current in m/s, Um is the Maximum

velocity of the wave in m/s.

Page 21: Response of a Free Span Pipeline Subjected to Ocean Currents

21

3.3.4.2 Inertia Force Coefficient

The inertia force coefficient is determined according to DNV-RP-F105.The

inertia force coefficient is determined as

CMproxi

CMkM

oM CC .. (3.23)

Where, MoC is basic inertia force coefficient, CM

k is correction factor for

the pipe roughness, CMproxi is correction factor for the seabed proximity.

The basic inertia force coefficient is determined as function of the current-

flow velocity ratio α and KC.

MoC = f(α) +

5 2 − f(α)KC + 5 (3.24)

f(α) = 1.6− 2α, α ≤ 0.5 0.6 α > 0.5 (3.25)

For increasing pipe roughness, the inertia force will decrease. For increasing

pipe roughness, the inertia force will decrease. The correction factor for the pipe

roughness is taken as

CMk = 2-

CDk (3.26)

For decreasing gap ratios, inertia force will increase. The correction factor for

the seabed proximity is taken as

CMproxi =

⎩⎪⎨

⎪⎧0.84 +

0.8

1 + 5 eD

, eD < 0.8

1 eD > 0.8

(3.27)

Page 22: Response of a Free Span Pipeline Subjected to Ocean Currents

22

3.3.4.3 Lift Force Coefficient

DNV-RP-F105 does not specify values for the lift force coefficient. In this project,

the maximum absolute value of CL when the gap is small (e / D < 1) and the

cross-flow force arises from wall proximity.

Fig 3.9: Lift force coefficient for a near-wall cylinder

3.3.4.4 Keulegan-Carpenter

The Keulegan-Carpenter number is defined as

KC =U + U

D T (3.28)

Where, T is the wave period, Um is the in-line flow velocity for the wave in m/s,

Uc is the maximum in-line flow velocity for current in m/s.

3.3.5 Estimation of In-Line Force

For a cylindrical structure with infinite stiffness, the Morison Model for

determining the in-line force reads,

f = g . U|U| + g . U (3.29)

Page 23: Response of a Free Span Pipeline Subjected to Ocean Currents

23

Where, 푓 is the in-line force per unit length of the pipe as function

of time in mN , g is the drag force term, 2m

kg , g is the inertia force term,mkg , U is

the in-line flow velocity for wave and currentsm .

The force terms for drag, inertia and added hydrodynamic mass are

defined as

g = C14 ρ D (3.30)

g = C14 ρ D (3.31)

Where, CD and CI respectively denote the drag force, inertia force

coefficients.

3.3.6 Estimation of Cross-Flow Force

When the cylinder approaches the wall, the change in pressure along the pipe

perimeter causes a resulting cross-flow force that is directed upwards. The

Morison Model for the cross flow force reads

f = g . (U) (3.32)

Where, 푓 is the cross-flow force per unit length of the pipemN

, g is the lift force term, mkg .

The lift force term is determined as

g = C14 ρ D (3.33)

Where, C is the lift force coefficient.

Page 24: Response of a Free Span Pipeline Subjected to Ocean Currents

24

3.3.7 Current

The current that affects the pipeline is determined by assuming that the velocity

profile is polynomial and can be formulated as

u(z) =87 u .

zh (3.34)

Where, u is current velocity affecting the pipe,(m/s), z is vertical

coordinate with origin at the water surface, h is water depth, uc is Basic current

parameter.

The velocity profile, which uses a 1/7th-power profile, is generally in good

agreement with a logarithmic formulation of the velocity profile. However, it is

however that the logarithmic velocity profile tends to be more accurate because

the seabed roughness is included as an additional parameter in this formulation.

The basic current parameter varies according to the return period of the design

wave. The current that affects the pipe is taken at an elevation 1 m above the

seabed, i.e. z = −h +1m. Table 3.2 shows the steady current that affects the pipe.

Table 3.2: Basic current parameter

Current

Extreme current

associated

with 1-year design

wave

Extreme current

associated

with 10-year

design wave

Extreme current

associated

with 100-year

design wave

Basic current

parameter

uc (m/s)

0.25 0.45 0.60

Page 25: Response of a Free Span Pipeline Subjected to Ocean Currents

25

CHAPTER 4

ANALYSIS OF FREE SPAN PIPELINE 4.1 GENERAL

Considering the overall free span analysis procedural aspects, the first step is to

undertake a static analysis to determine the sag deflections and tension

distribution in the pipeline. After identifying the unknown contact points and

pipeline deformation, a fatigue analysis is performed to determine the damage

ratio due to wave and current forces.

4.2 STATIC ANALYSIS

In general, four methods have been used for the static analysis of the suspended

pipelines. They are listed as follows, the stiffened catenary method, the finite

beam segment method, the finite difference method, and the finite element

method. In the present analysis, finite element method is adopted for

determination of stresses in laid pipelines for static loads.

A 3D beam finite element model of the pipe is applied. The analysis will

start from a stress free (horizontal straight lined) configuration without any

seafloor contact. A sequence of loads will be applied in such a way that the final

condition will represent the real pipeline as accurately as possible. Linear bottom

springs take care of the pipe/seafloor interaction. A large number of load

increments may be needed in order to maintain a stable solution during all

intermediate conditions. Iterative analysis is continued till a stable condition is

attained. Fig 4.1 shows the line diagram of stable condition attained after static

analysis.

Page 26: Response of a Free Span Pipeline Subjected to Ocean Currents

26

Fig 4.1: Line diagram of stable condition attained after static analysis

WVKsKgK (4.1)

Where, W is the load vector and, K , gK , sK are, respectively, the

stiffness matrix, the geometric matrix and soil stiffness matrix with typical

coefficients.

In this Project, static analysis is done by modifying the MATLAB code

developed by Subin et al (2011), in which the pipe element is considered as 2

node linearly elastic beam subject to vertical loads within a vertical plane having

three degrees of freedom per node. But for the fatigue analysis 3 degrees of

freedom per node is not sufficient. Hence the same program is modified to a 2

noded linearly elastic beam having six 6 degrees of freedom and is validated with

the unknown contact points and pipeline deformation in literature. Thereby the

formulation of stiffness matrix, geometric matrix, and soil stiffness is validated.

Under free vibration, the natural frequencies and the mode shapes of a

multiple degree of freedom system are the solutions of the eigenvalue problem

0][][ 2 MK (4.2)

Where, is the angular natural frequency is the mass matrix and is the

mode shape of the structure for the corresponding natural frequency. The element

stiffness, the geometric and mass matrices of the pipe elements is described in the

appendix A.

Page 27: Response of a Free Span Pipeline Subjected to Ocean Currents

27

4.3 FATIGUE ANALYSIS

Offshore structures, which are subjected to cyclic hydrodynamic loading, suffer a

reduction in strength, which may eventually cause failure, through a process

called fatigue. Fatigue is the systematic degeneration over time, which can

eventually lead to fracture and failure of components exposed to varying or cyclic

loads, which never reaches a level sufficient to cause failure in a single

application. The reliability of systems relies heavily on accurate fatigue life

prediction of related components. Fatigue damage in free spanning pipeline is

predominantly a result of wave loads. Fatigue life prediction is a complicated

process requiring the correct methodology to determine accurate and reliable

predictions. The Palmgren Miner damage accumulation hypothesis is widely used

in determining the fatigue life of components exposed to variable loading

conditions.

This section describes how to determine the fatigue damage of the pipeline

free span according to the design criteria given in [DNV-RP-C203 2005]. The

procedure of a fatigue damage check for the pipeline free span is:

1. Calculate the stress ranges and verify that the magnitude of the

maximum stress is below the yield stress of the steel pipe.

2. Calculate the number of stress cycles.

3. Determine the allowable number of stress cycles to failure from S-N

curves.

4. Calculate the damage by Palmgren-Miners rule.

5. Verify that the damage criterion is satisfied.

4.3.1 Nominal Stress

The nominal stress component of pipes is a linear combination of the axial and

bending stresses given by

σ(t) = σ (t) + σ (θ, t) (4.3)

Page 28: Response of a Free Span Pipeline Subjected to Ocean Currents

28

Axial stress is given by,

σ (t) =T(t)

(A − A ) (4.4)

To ensure that the maximum stress range does not exceed the yield stress

of the steel pipe, the Mises criterion for yielding is applied. The Von Mises

equivalent stress safety criterion is adopted for examining pipe material non-

yielding conditions. Based on the proposals of Det Norske Veritas and BS 8010,

the von Mises equivalent stress formula is applied for testing the overall pipeline

stability. Hence,

σ ≤ ησ (4.5)

σ = ( (σ ± |σ |) + σ − (σ ± |σ |)σ (4.6)

Where, σ is the equivalent stress, σ is the yield stress of steel, σ is the

hoop stress of steel and η the usage factor, a coefficient less than or equal to unity

and σ the bending stress given by

σ (θ, t) =f R (M (t))

I (4.7)

Where, f is a stress reduction factor, which accounts for residual strains

and according to Ref.7, may be taken as 0.85. M is the bending moment about the

local y and z axes.

An increase of the internal fluid pressure relative to the ambient salt-water

hydrostatic pressure yields a hoop or circumferential stress, which for thin walls is

defined as,

훔퐡 =ퟐ∆퐏퐀퐢

(퐀퐨 − 퐀퐢) (4.8)

Where, A0 and Ai, are the outer and inner pipe steel section areas, ∆P the

mean pressure difference assumed to be constant. For zero longitudinal strains the

tensile stress is given by,

Page 29: Response of a Free Span Pipeline Subjected to Ocean Currents

29

σ = μσ (4.9)

Where, μ is the Poisson ratio for steel. Consequently, the tensile force is

obtained from

T = σ (A − A ) = 2∆PA (4.10)

Second moment of area the composite section shown in Fig 4.2 may be

determined from

I =βπ4 (R − R ) (4.11)

Where,Ro and Ri are the outer and inner radius of steel part of the pipe

respectively.

Fig 4.2:Composite pipeline cross section parameters

The parameter β is given by,

β = 1 + [sin(φ)R

R ] +R tπR t

[(π2 − φ)(1 + 2sin φ)) −

32 sin (2φ)] (4.12)

Page 30: Response of a Free Span Pipeline Subjected to Ocean Currents

30

Where,

φ = 2R t /π(2R t + R t ) (4.13)

R =12 (R + R ) (4.14)

t =tf (4.15)

Here, te is effective concrete thickness, tc thickness of concrete portion of

the pipe, fe is the young’s modulus ratio of steel to concrete, Rc radius of the pipe

up to neutral axis and ts is the thickness of steel portion of the pipe.

Table 4.1: Allowable range of bending stress

Functional state η Lim|휎 |

N/mm2

Empty .72 321.64

Water filled 0.72 322.56

Pressurized .96 330.87

4.3.2 Deterministic Regular Wave Fatigue Analysis

This method may be considered as a simplified version of the spectral method.

The main simplification involves how wave-induced load effects are

characterized. In wave-by-wave method, a discrete set of regular waves are

selected to represent the typical sea spectrum. In this analysis, regular waves are

selected at equal frequency increments by discretization of a continuous wave

spectrum. Each wave will be the same frequency difference away from its

neighbours, but each wave will have a different height corresponding to the

energy within its frequency increment.

Page 31: Response of a Free Span Pipeline Subjected to Ocean Currents

31

In order for a structure to suffer from fatigue damage, it must undergo a

displacement process. Anytime a structure is displaced in a cyclic manner, the

possibility of the displacement of the structure being dynamically amplified exists.

This analysis involved an evaluation of the range of frequencies over which the

hydrodynamic loading might dynamically amplify the response of the free-

spanning submarine pipeline structure. Hence, in order to account the dynamic

behavior of pipeline under the effect of the environmental wave forces Dynamic

Amplification Factors (DAFs) has been determined, which will be applied to the

static analysis.

Airy wave theory was employed to describe surface-wave induced water

particle kinematics. This theory allowed water particle velocity and acceleration to

be determined at the elevation of the free-spanning pipeline. The structure is then

analyzed to determine the stress S for each of the load cases and, hence, the

fatigue life using Miner’s Rule.

4.3.2.1 Number of wave cycles in each bin

In this analysis, the waves are divided into five characteristic sea states. Let the

list of sea state spectra and associated durations be denoted Si and Di respectively,

for i= 1, 2 … k where k is the number of sea states. The probability of occurrence

of sea state q is given by

p(Sq) = Dq / ∑Di. (4.16)

A general definition of the nth order moment of an energy density

spectrum is given as

m = f S(f)df (4.17)

Where n = 0,1,2…… This further used to derive the significant wave

height (Hrms) and average zero cross periods (To) as below. A mean period is

defined as To,1 ,

Page 32: Response of a Free Span Pipeline Subjected to Ocean Currents

32

Where,

T , =mm (4.18)

The root mean square value is calculated from spectrum and is given by

the formula,

H = 2 2m (4.19)

On the assumption of a narrow-band spectrum, the probability density of

wave height, H, having a period, T is

p(ξ, τ) =ξ√2π

exp [−12ξ (1 + τ )] (4.20)

Where, 휉 is normalized wave height, τ is a non dimensional variable

defined by Longuent-Higgins (1962).

ξ =H

H (4.21)

τ =T − T ,

ν T , (4.22)

Where, ν is defined in terms of the moments of the spectrum by

ν =m m − m

m (4.23)

The total number of occurrences Oij for each bin is given by

O = p(ξ, τ) D

T (4.24)

Where, Dtotal is the total duration.

Page 33: Response of a Free Span Pipeline Subjected to Ocean Currents

33

4.3.3 Deterministic Irregular Wave Fatigue Analysis Using

The Rainflow Cycle Counting Method

Dynamic analysis is used when inertia forces are comparatively important and can

be done either in the frequency domain or in the time domain. In the frequency

domain, transient effects are neglected and steady-state solutions are obtained.

The method assumes linear system. In the time domain, on the other hand, the

nonlinear drag is taken into consideration by the time integration of the design

wave. Thus, the transient effects as well as nonlinearities are considered.

Using finite element, subsea pipeline analysis may typically be formulated

within the framework of structural dynamics as follows:

[M]{x} + [C]{x} + [K]{x} = {F(t)} (4.25)

Where, {f(t)} is force vector,[M] is mass,[C] is damping,[K] is stiffness

matrices,{x} is acceleration,{x}, {x} is displacement vectors for the whole

structure.

The solution of the dynamic equations of a linear system may be found by

the numerical integration of the dynamic equations.

4.3.3.1 Stress cycles

Counting methods have initially been developed for the study of fatigue damage

generated in aeronautical structures. Since different results have been obtained

from different methods, errors could be taken in the calculations for some of them.

Level crossing counting, peak counting, simple range counting and rainflow

counting are the methods which are using stress or deformation ranges. One of the

preferred methods is the rainflow counting method.

Since each stress cycle causes a certain amount of damage to the structure,

it is necessary to determine the number of stress cycles. For harmonic loading, this

is relatively simple, but for irregular stress cycles, the counting of stress cycles is

usually ambiguous. Cycle counting is used to summarize irregular load-versus-

time histories by providing the number of times cycles of various sizes occur. The

definition of a cycle varies with the method of cycle counting. Various methods to

obtain cycle counts are level-crossing counting, peak counting, simple-range

Page 34: Response of a Free Span Pipeline Subjected to Ocean Currents

34

counting, range-pair counting and rainflow counting. Cycle counts can be made

for time histories of forces, stress, strain, torque, acceleration, deflection, or other

loading parameters of interest.

In this project, the stress cycle counts are determined by using rainflow-

counting method as described in Ref 9. The Rainflow cycle counting method

extracts the composition of a variable amplitude stress history. Rules for the

rainflow counting method described in ASTM E–1049 Standard Practices for

Cycle Counting in Fatigue Analysis are given as follows:

Let X denotes range under consideration; Y denotes previous range

adjacent to X; and S, starting point in the history.

1. Read next peak or valley. If out of data, go to Step 6.

2. If there are less than three points, go to Step 1. Form ranges X and Y using

the three most recent peaks and valleys that have not been discarded.

3. Compare the absolute values of ranges X and Y.

a. If X<Y, go to Step 1.

b. If X_Y, go to Step 4.

4. If range Y contains the starting point S, go to step 5; otherwise, count

range Y as one cycle; discard the peak and valley of Y; and go to Step 2.

5. Count range Y as one-half cycle; discard the first point (peak or valley) in

range Y; move the starting point to the second point in range Y; go to Step

2.

6. Count each range that has not been previously counted as one-half cycle.

Page 35: Response of a Free Span Pipeline Subjected to Ocean Currents

35

(a) (b)

(c) (d)

(e) (f)

Fig 4.3: Practical definition of rainflow cycle counting

Page 36: Response of a Free Span Pipeline Subjected to Ocean Currents

36

4.3.4 S-N Curves

S-N curves determine the fatigue resistance of a local part of the structure as a

function of the amount of cyclic loading. The S-N curves are based upon the

following relationship

(4.26)

Where, N is the maximum allowable number of cycles at the ith stress

range , is the ith stress range in Mpa, is the intersect parameter of the S-N

curve with the log N axis, is the Negative slope parameter of the S-N curve

The S-N curves depend upon the detail category. This considers the type

of constructional detail, welding type, the site conditions during the welding as

and the loading type of the structure. The S-N curves for a steel structure in

seawater with cathodic protection and in different detail categories are shown in

Fig 4.4. The parameters for the S-N curve in category D are given in Table 4.2.

Fig 4.4: S-N curves in seawater with cathodic protection

Page 37: Response of a Free Span Pipeline Subjected to Ocean Currents

37

Table 4.2: Parameters for S-N curve for category D, DNV-RP-C203 2005

Number of cycles Stress range m Log10 a

N ≤ 106 cycles ∆σ ≥ 83.4MPa 3.0 11.764

N ≥ 106 cycles ∆σ ≤ 83.4MPa 5.0 15.606

4.3.5 Fatigue Damage

The damage caused by cyclic loading is determined by Palmgren-Miners

accumulation rule. This way of determining damage assumes that the order of

stress cycles does not have influence on the damage of the material. The stress

range distribution is replaced by a histogram with a chosen number of blocks with

constant stress ranges. The fatigue damage is then determined by

D = nN ≤ α (4.27)

Here, Ni denotes the fatigue life under constant amplitude loading with

amplitude, ni is the number of load cycles at this amplitude and is the allowable

damage ratio. Failure due to fatigue damage is assumed to occur when fat D =1.

The allowable damage ratio according to DNV is shown in Table 4.3.

Table 4.3: Allowable damage ratio for fatigue [DNV-OS-F101 2007, p50]

Safety class Low Medium High

α 1/3 1/5 1/10

The damage ratio can be calculated according to DNV-RP-C203 2005, p10, by

combining the S-N curves and Palmgren-Miners rule which provides,

D =1a n (∆σ ) ≤ α (4.28)

Page 38: Response of a Free Span Pipeline Subjected to Ocean Currents

38

CHAPTER 5

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

5.1 GENERAL

For identifying unknown contact points and pipeline deformation, a Matlab

program developed by Subin et al (2011) for two dimensional pipeline element

was taken and modified to three dimensional pipeline element. A Matlab program

is developed for analysis of subsea pipeline considering wave-by-wave method

and rainflow counting method. A parametric study is performed to understand the

parameters governing the fatigue for the free span pipeline.

5.2 STRUCTURAL AND FUNCTIONAL DATA

The formulated finite element model was subsequently applied to free span

analysis of a dual submarine pipeline crossing along the Revithoussa-Aghia

Triada strait in Greece.

Table 5.1 Pipeline data

E σy μ Ri Ro Rc Length

of pipe

Depth

(D)

2x108kN/m2 448N/mm2 0.3 29.23cm 30.50cm 36.50cm 102.5m 80m

The functional data for the pipeline is determined for three functional

states: empty, water-filled, and operational state. Table 5.2 shows the details of

functional states.

Page 39: Response of a Free Span Pipeline Subjected to Ocean Currents

39

Table 5.2 Functional Data

Functional state η )/( 2mmNP We ( kN/m)

Empty .72 -0.20 0.476

Operational .72 5.00 1.130

Water filled .96 0.00 3.109

It is assumed that the pipeline is located at intermediate condition there for

the depth/wavelength ratio (d/L) is taken as .40. The wave data considered for the

fatigue analysis is shown in Table 5.3.

Table 5.3 Wave data for fatigue analysis

Hs

(m)

Tz

(sec)

Duration

[hours/year]

Sea state 4 7.0 11.6 47

Sea state 3 5.0 9.8 362

Sea state 2 3.0 7.6 2668

Sea state 1 1.0 4.4 5707

5.3 PARAMETRIC STUDY FOR WAVE BY WAVE METHOD

This parametric study is performed to identify the governing parameters of the

dynamic response and fatigue for the pipeline. The parametric study is divided

into the following parts

a) Functional state

b) Damping

Page 40: Response of a Free Span Pipeline Subjected to Ocean Currents

40

5.3.1 Functional State

This analysis is made to find the most critical functional state for the pipeline free

span considering fatigue damage. The functional states that are considered are: (1)

Empty condition, (2) Water-filled condition, (3) Operational condition.

Static analysis is validated by comparing the results obtained from

literature with a MATLAB program incorporating three dimensional analysis of

pipeline. The comparison of results is given in Table 5.4. and Table 5.5.

Table 5.4 Gap between Seabed and pipeline under operational condition

Operational condition

Free span length= 60m

Spanning length Le/3 Le/2 Le3/2

Gap ( Ref:) 0.28593m 0.68669m 0.30634m

Gap ( 3D frame) 0.28593m 0.68669m 0.30634m

Table 5.5 Gap between Seabed and pipeline under empty and water filled

Empty condition Water filled condition

Free span length=75m Free span length=50m

Spanning length Le/3 Le/2 Le3/2 Le/3 Le/2 Le3/2

Gap 0.67472m 0.53452m 0.39941m 0.53683 0.63559 0.45045

Fig 5.1 shows the final profile obtained after static analysis for each

functional state.

Page 41: Response of a Free Span Pipeline Subjected to Ocean Currents

41

Fig 5.1: Final pipe profile obtained after pipe analysis

Page 42: Response of a Free Span Pipeline Subjected to Ocean Currents

42

Once the static equilibrium position obtained by static analysis, eigenvalue

analysis can be perform to determine the natural frequency of pipeline. This

further used to determine Dynamic amplification factor due to hydrodynamic

forces. First six natural frequency of pipeline after empty pipe analysis is listed in

the Table 5.6.

Table 5.6: The four lowest eigen frequencies for each functional state.

Functional

state f1 (Hz) f 2 (Hz) f 3 (Hz) f 4 (Hz) f 5 (Hz) f 6 (Hz)

empty 0.021138 0.058497 0.11486 0.19 0.28391 0.39659

Operational 0.019556 0.053899 0.07556 0.17461 0.26081 0.36423

Waterfilled 0.01296 0.03587 0.07044 0.11653 0.17413 0.24324

Fig 5.2 shows the first two mode shapes of pipeline.

Fig. 5.2 :First two mode shapes of pipeline under operational condition

For validation of mass matrix, a fixed beam is modeled as shown in Fig

5.3 in the same program. Problem is taken from Structural dynamics theory and

computation by Mario Paz.

Page 43: Response of a Free Span Pipeline Subjected to Ocean Currents

43

Fig 5.3:Fixed beam modelled for validating Mass matrix formulation

Table 5.7 Validation of Natural frequency

Literature Natural Frequency(Hz) 7.23 20.09 39.86 75.4 124.71 200.93

Program Natural Frequency(Hz) 7.2307 20.089 39.856 75.403 124.71 200.93

In wave-by-wave method, regular waves used for static deterministic wave

load calculations. In order to determine the wave static load, the spectrum is

discretized into number of bins and the particle velocities from each bin are

determined for different sea states. Number of wave cycles in each bin is

determined as explained in section 4.3.2.1. Fig 5.4 to 5.7 shows the number of

waves in each bin for different sea states.

Fig 5.4 :Number of waves in sea state 1

Page 44: Response of a Free Span Pipeline Subjected to Ocean Currents

44

Fig 5.5 :Number of waves in sea state 2

Fig 5.6 :Number of waves in sea state 3

Fig 5.7 :Number of waves in sea state 4

Page 45: Response of a Free Span Pipeline Subjected to Ocean Currents

45

Fatigue analysis was carried out by discretizing the spectrum into a number of

waves. For showing the results, from each sea state, only those waves having

maximum number of cycles are summarized in Table 5.8 to 5.10.

Table 5.8 shows the values of force coefficient considered in the operational state

Table 5.8 KC number and force coefficients for operational condition

Sea state KC CD Cm CL

Sea state 1 20 1.3 1.81 0.9

Sea state 2 9 1.3 1.74 1.9

Sea state 3 2.22 1 2.19 2

Sea state 4 1.5 1 2.24 2

Damage caused by the stress ranges is determined at the mid span. Table 5.9

shows the dynamic amplification factor obtained for most probable wave height

under operational condition. Table 5.10 shows the contribution of most probable

wave height from each sea state.

Table 5.9 Dynamic amplification factors for most probable wave height

under operational condition

Sea

state

Hm

(m) DAF

T

(sec) f1 (Hz) f 2 (Hz) f 3 (Hz) f 4 (Hz) f 5 (Hz) f 6 (Hz)

1 7.185

1 1 1 1.5032 1.1769 1.0835 9.861

2 4.944

1 1 1 1.8374 1.2577 1.1175 8.4394

3 3.23861

1 1 1 3.6276 1.4888 1.2028 6.8573

4 .77

1 1 1 2.5231 2.5631 1.4588 4.8632

The number of cycles of the most probable wave in sea states 1 to 4 are 1300,

16724, 348902, and 471094 respectively.

Page 46: Response of a Free Span Pipeline Subjected to Ocean Currents

46

Table 5.10 Summary of fatigue analysis for most probable wave height under

operational condition

Fz is the horizontal wave force. Fy wave force in Z direction. Table 5.10 shows

the damage for each functional state respectively.

Table 5.11 Damage at the mid span of pipeline under functional state

ζ = 0.05

Functional

state

Sea states Cumulative

Damage

ratio 1 2 3 4

Empty 0.15 0.013 0.0093 0.0023 0.1746

Operational 0.0024 0.094 0.2 0.27 0.5664

Water

filled 0.0019 0.054 0.084 0.18 0.3116

Sea

state

Hm

(m) Fz

(N/m)

Fy

(N/m)

Nominal stress

( Mpa) Damage

ratio T

(sec)

Maximum

in vertical

Minimum

invertical

Maximum

in lateral

Minimum

in lateral

1 7.185

112.066 85.291 60.4711 3.1849 74.6652 34.0092 0.00039 9.861

2 4.944

55.2118 72.3661 49.3575 13.2687 44.2205 16.4058 0.0013 8.4394

3 3.23861

31.1801 91.7763 55.0888 16.5354 37.6673 22.9570 0.045 6.8573

4 .77

30.4318 91.2942 59.7822 -24.1656 43.2734 -2.6569 0.083 4.8632

Page 47: Response of a Free Span Pipeline Subjected to Ocean Currents

47

Table 5.9 Table 5.10 shows the damage caused by 3- 4 sea state is

significantly lower than the damage caused by the other two sea states in empty

condition. The number of cycles is higher in 3-4 sea state and stress ranges are

lower than stress ranges caused by the other two sea states, which shows that the

magnitude of stress ranges in this case significant on damage on pipeline. In the

case of water-filled condition, number of cycles is significant on damage on

pipeline.

Validation of nominal stress calculation is done by considering a frame as

shown in Fig 5.9. Members 2 and 3 are subjected to external distributed load of 6

kN/m.

Fig 5.8 :Frame considered for validation of nominal stress

Results obtained from the MATLAB program and literature is given in the

Table 5.10.

Table 5.12 Validation of nominal stress calculation

Element

no:

Length

(m)

Area

(m2)

EI

(kNm2)

Nominal

stress

Nominal stress

(Ref )

1 3 10000 1 27.8904 27.89

2 3.1623 10000 1 -39.7608 -39.76

3 3.1623 10000 1 17.6888 17.69

4 3 10000 1 -39.7608 -39.76

Page 48: Response of a Free Span Pipeline Subjected to Ocean Currents

48

5.3.2 Effect of Damping

The dynamic response is compared for three different damping ratios:

ζ = 0.05

ζ = 0.10

ζ = 0.15

Table 5.13 Damage at the mid span of pipeline for different damping ratio

Functional

state

Sea states Cumulative

Damage

ratio 1 2 3 4

ζ = 0.10 Operational 0.0024 0.094 0.2 0.27 0.5664

ζ = 0.15 Operational 0.0024 0.094 0.2 0.27 0.5664

Table 5.12 shows the change in material damping ratios does not affect the

calculated stress of the model.

5.4 IRREGULAR WAVE FATIGUE ANALYSIS USING

RAINFLOW CYCLE COUNTING METHOD

In practice, a spanning analysis of a pipeline free-span is conducted by assuming

that the hydrodynamic forces are induced by regular waves. Waves are irregular in

nature and hence this study is carried out in order to investigate the implications of

this simplification of random waves to regular waves. Only operational condition

is considered for the analysis. The critical fatigue stresses are determined by the

normal stresses in the mid-section of the pipeline, where the magnitude of the

normal stresses is largest. Since the response history is irregular, the Rain Flow

Counting Method is used for determining stress ranges and cycles.

The irregular sea states 1-5 are modelled for 3.0 hours duration and the number of

cycles has been scaled by the ratio between the actual and modeled duration of the

irregular sea states.

Page 49: Response of a Free Span Pipeline Subjected to Ocean Currents

49

Fig 5.9 :Simulation of wave profile for sea state 1

Fig 5.10 :Simulation of velocity profile for sea state 1

Fig 5.11 :Simulation of acceleration profile for sea state 1

Page 50: Response of a Free Span Pipeline Subjected to Ocean Currents

50

Fig 5.12 : Inline force history for sea state 1

Fig 5.13 : cross flow history for sea state 1

Fig 5.14 : Inline response for sea state 1

Page 51: Response of a Free Span Pipeline Subjected to Ocean Currents

51

Fig 5.15 : Cross flow response for sea state 1

For validation of response calculation, a fixed beam as shown in Fig 5.3 is

modeled and analysed in SAP software.

A sin wave of amplitude 500 and time period 20 is applied in the Y direction of

the beam.Time history analysis done in SAP2000 and MATLAB.Results are

showed in the Table:9.4

Table 5.14 Validation of response

Fig 5.16:Comparison of response obtained from SAP and MATLAB

Max response at mid span (SAP) Max response at mid span(MATLAB)

0.003386m 0.0032m

Page 52: Response of a Free Span Pipeline Subjected to Ocean Currents

52

Fig 5.17 : Nominal stress history in lateral direction for sea state 1

Fig 5.18 : Nominal stress history in vertical direction for sea state 1

Table 5.15 Damage at the mid span of pipeline under functional state using

rainflow counting

ζ = 0.05

Functional

state

Sea states Cumulative

Damage

ratio 1 2 3 4

Empty 0.0897 0.0003 0.0027 0.0011 0.0938

Operational 0.0012 0.094 0.1386 0.1767 0.4105

Water

filled 0.0001 0.0336 0.0579 0.18 0.1258

Page 53: Response of a Free Span Pipeline Subjected to Ocean Currents

53

For validation of stress cycle counting, a problem is shown in Fig 5.16, taken from

John Wægter etal. Stress cycles obtained from literature is given in Table

5.14.Table 5.15 shows the stress cycles obtained from MATLAB program.

Table 5.16 Cycle count in literature

Literature Full cycle Half cycles

2-3-3a, 4-5-5a, 6-

7-7a, 9-10-12b

and11-12-12a

1-8, 8-13 and 13-

14

Fig 5.19:Rain flow counting problem in literature and matlab

Page 54: Response of a Free Span Pipeline Subjected to Ocean Currents

54

Table 5.17 Cycle count obtained from program

Amplitude Mean Cycle count

0.5000 2.5000 1.0000

1.5000 2.5000 1.0000

1.0000 4.0000 1.0000

3.5000 2.5000 0.5000

0.5000 -2.5000 1.0000

1.5000 -2.5000 1.0000

5.5000 0.5000 0.5000

6.0000 1.0000 0.5000

Page 55: Response of a Free Span Pipeline Subjected to Ocean Currents

55

CONCLUSIONS

The major findings of the study on response of a free span pipeline subjected to

ocean currents are summarized as follows:

The functional state of an offshore pipeline has been studies under three

conditions, viz. empty condition, operational condition and water-filled

condition.

Among these functional states, the operational condition of the pipeline

has been found to be the most critical state when considering fatigue

damage ratio.

The cumulative damage ratio for operational, empty and water-filled

conditions were determined and were found to lie in Low, Normal and

high Safety classes respectively, according to DNV-OS-F101 2000. Hence

the free span has to be reduced for fatigue damage reduction.

Temporary measures such as providing sandbags as intermediate supports

and permanent measures such as piled supports for the pipelines could be

suggested as suitable remedial measures.

The dynamic behavior of the free span pipeline was found to be only

slightly affected by the effect of fluid and material damping.

Page 56: Response of a Free Span Pipeline Subjected to Ocean Currents

56

REFERENCES

1 Abbas Yeganeh Bakhtiary, “Analysis of Offshore Pipeline Allowable Free

Span Length”, International Journal of Civil Engineerng. Vol. 5, No. 1, pp 84-

91, March 2007.

2 Aristodemo et al, “Modelling of periodic and random wave forces on

submarine pipelines”, 2006.

3 F.G. Nielsen, “Dynamic response of pipeline in long free spans or multi-

spans”, EURODYN, pp 187-193,2005

4 Fatemi A., & Yang L., “Cumulative fatigue damage and life prediction

theories: a survey of the state of the art for homogeneous materials”,

International Journal of Fatigue 20, pp 9 – 34, 1998 .

5 H.S. Choi, “Free spanning analysis of offshore pipelines”, Ocean Engineering

28, pp 1325–1338, 2001.

6 Issler L, “Safety and Lifetime Analysis for Engineering Structures”. Course

notes, pp 5.1 – 5.56, 2009.

7 John Wægter. “Stress range histories and rain flow counting”, 2009

8 Kalliontzis C et al: “Finite element stress analysis of unilaterally supported

submarine pipelines”, Computers and Structures, Vol. 61, No 6, May 1996, pp

1207-1226

9 Maier G and Andreuzzi F: “Elastic and elasto-plastic analysis of submarine

pipelines as unilateral contact problems”, Computers and Structures, Vol. 8,

January 1978, pp 421-431

10 Mario Paz. “Structural Dynamics: Theory and Computation”,2003.

Page 57: Response of a Free Span Pipeline Subjected to Ocean Currents

57

11 Pook L.“Metal Fatigue, What it is, why it matters (1st Edition)”, The

Netherlands, Springer. pp 1 – 62 ,2007

12 Recommended Practice Det Norske Veritas DNV-OS-F101: “Submarine

Pipeline Systems”, 2000.

13 Recommended Practice Det Norske Veritas DNV-RP-C203: “Fatigue Design

of Offshore Steel Structures”, 2005.

14 Recommended Practice Det Norske Veritas DNV-RP-F105: “Free Spanning

Pipelines”, 2006.

15 Recommended Practice Det Norske Veritas: “Rules for Submarine Pipeline

Systems”, Reapproved 2011.

16 Recommended Practice ASTM E1049-85: “Standard Practices for Cycle

Counting in Fatigue Analysis”, Reapproved 2011

17 S.K Chakrabarti. “Hydrodynamics of Offshore Structures”,2003

18 Schütz W, “The significance of service load data for fatigue life analysis”,

Fatigue Design ESIS 16, Mechanical Engineering Publications Limited, pp 1-

17, 1993.

19 Sonsino C M, “Principles of Variable Amplitude Fatigue Design and Testing”.

Journal of ASTM International, Vol. 1, No. 10, Paper ID JAI19018, pp 7–8,

2004.

20 Tao Xu, “Wave-induced fatigue of multi-span pipelines”, Marine Structures

12, pp 83-106, 1999.

21 XU Jishang, “Calculation of Maximum Allowable Free Span Length and

Safety Assessment of the DF1-1 Submarine Pipeline”, Ocean University of

China, Science Press and Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg, pp 1-10, 2010.

Page 58: Response of a Free Span Pipeline Subjected to Ocean Currents

58

APPENDICES

A ELEMENT MATRICES IN MATLAB MODEL

B RAYLEIGH DAMPING

Page 59: Response of a Free Span Pipeline Subjected to Ocean Currents

59

A ELEMENT MATRICES IN MATLAB MODEL

Element Stiffness Matrix

The stiffness matrix for a three-dimensional uniform beam segment is readily

written by the superposition of the axial stiffness matrix, the torsional stiffness

matrix, and the flexural stiffness matrix

in which Iy, Iz are respectively cross-sectional moments of inertia with respect to

the principal axis labeled as y and z in Fig 3.2 and L,A and J are respectively the

length, cross-sectional area, and torsional constant of the beam element.

Page 60: Response of a Free Span Pipeline Subjected to Ocean Currents

60

Element Mass Matrix

22

22

22

22

4L 0 0 0 22L- 0 3L- 0 0 0 13L- 0 0 4L 0 22L 0 0 0 3L- 0 13L 0 0

0 0 140Ia 0 0 0 0 0 70Ia 0 0 0 0 22L 0 156 0 0 0 13L- 0 54 0 0

22L- 0 0 0 156 0 13L 0 0 0 54 0 0 0 0 0 0 140 0 0 0 0 0 70 3L- 0 0 0 13L 0 4L 0 0 0 22L 0

0 3L- 0 13L- 0 0 0 4L 0 22L- 0 0 0 0 70Ia 0 0 0 0 0 140Ia 0 0 0 0 13L 0 54 0 0 0 22L- 0 156 0 0

13L- 0 0 0 54 0 22L 0 0 0 156 0 0 0 0 0 0 70 0 0 0 0 0 140

420mL

e

where, m = distributed mass/unit length in kg/m

Aps mmmm

sm = mass including steel and concrete/unit length

pm = mass of oil or gas/unit length.

Am = hydrodynamic added mass.

2

4* DCm AA

ρw

AC =added mass coefficient.

ρw =density of sea water.

Ia=Io/A,

Io=polar mass moment of inertia,

Page 61: Response of a Free Span Pipeline Subjected to Ocean Currents

61

Soil Stiffness Matrix

LL4k 0 0 0 L 22k- 0 L3k- 0 0 0 L 13k- 0

0 LL4k 0 L22k 0 0 0 L3k- 0 L13k 0 0 0 0 140ka 0 0 0 0 0 70ka 0 0 0 0 L22k 0 156k 0 0 0 L13k- 0 54k 0 0

L22k- 0 0 0 156k 0 L13k 0 0 0 54k 0 0 0 0 0 0 140ka 0 0 0 0 0 70ka

LL3k- 0 0 0 L13k 0 L 4k 0 0 0 L22k 0

0 L3k- 0 L13k- 0 0 0 L 4k 0 L 22k- 0 0 0 0 70ka 0 0 0 0 0 140ka 0 0 0

0 L13k 0 54k 0 0 0 L 22k- 0 156k 0 0 L13k- 0 0 0 54k 0 L22k 0 0 0 156k 0

0 0 0 0 0 ka*70 0 0 0 0 0 140ka

420

tt2

tt

tt2

tt

tttt

tttt

tt2

tt

2tt

2tt

tttt

tttt

LK s

ka is the linear spring stiffness in axial direction 2MN

kt is the linear spring stiffness in transversal direction 2MN

Page 62: Response of a Free Span Pipeline Subjected to Ocean Currents

62

4.4 Element Geometric Matrix

LKg 30

22

22

22

22

4L 0 0 0 3L- 0 L- 0 0 0 3L 00 4L 0 3L 0 0 0 L- 0 3L- 0 00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 00 3L 0 36 0 0 0 3L 0 36- 0 03L- 0 0 0 36 0 3L- 0 0 0 36- 0

0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0L- 0 0 0 3L- 0 4L 0 0 0 3L 0

0 L- 0 3L 0 0 0 4L 0 3L- 0 00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 00 3L- 0 36- 0 0 0 3L- 0 36 0 0

3L 0 0 0 36- 0 3L 0 0 0 36 00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

T=Tensile force in N

4.5 Load Matrix

L6q61-

L6q61

q q q q

L6q61

L6q61

q q q q

2LW

y

z

w

z

y

x

y

z

w

z

y

x

qx, qy, qz are respectively uniform distributed load corresponding to x,y and z axis

as labeled in Fig 4.3

Page 63: Response of a Free Span Pipeline Subjected to Ocean Currents

63

B RAYLEIGH DAMPING

The Effect of Viscous Damping

The global damping is implemented in the numerical models by Rayleigh’s

damping model which assumes that the damping matrix can be written as a linear

combination of the mass and stiffness matrix as

C = a0M+ a1K

where,

C is the damping matrix

M is the mass matrix

K is the stiffness matrix

a0 , a1 are the Rayleigh coefficients

Rayleigh coefficients can be calibrated perfectly for two eigenmodes by

Two different damping ratios, 1 = 0.05 and 2 = 0.05 are used to show the effect

of the damping ratio on the dynamic magnification factor.