OTI 93 613

~~ STRUCTURAL ANALYSIS
HSE
Health & Safety
Executlve OF PIPELINE SPANS

Prepared by J P Kenny & Partners Ltd

for the Health and Safety Executive

Offshore Technology lnformation

Health and Safety Executive

 OTI 93 613

STRUCTURAL ANALÍSIS
OF PIPLEINE SPANS

Development of Guidelines for Assessment

of Submarine Pipeline Spans

Background Document Two

Report prepared by

J P Kenny & Partners Ltd

Thames Plaza, 5 Pinetrees
Chertsey Lane, Staines
Middlesex TW18 3DT

HSE BOOKS

Health and Safety Executive - Offshore Technology lnformation

 © Crown copyright 1993
Applicationsfor reproduction should be made to HMSO
First puhlished 1993
1SBNO 7176 0639 2

This report is published by the Health and Safety Executive as

part of a series of reports of work which has been supported by
funds fonnerly provided by the Department of Energy and lately
by the Executive. Neither the Executive, the Department nor the
contractors concemed assume any liability for the reports nor do
they necessarily reflect the views or policy of the Executive or the
Department.

Publications in the Offshore Technology lnformation (OTI) series

are intended to provide background information and data arising
from offshore research projects funded by the Department, or the
Executive, and major companies.

Results, including detailed evaluation and, where relevant,

recominendations stemming from their research projects are
published in the OTH series of reports.
 FOREWORD

A repon in the Offshore Technology series (OTH 86 231) "The Development of Guidelines
for the Assessment of Submarine Pipeline Spans - Overall Summary Repon", was
published in 1986 by the Depanment of Energy, who at that time were responsible for
authorising the construction and operation of pipelines io UK waters.
It descrihed the maio fiodiogs of a major study on the problems associated with pipeline
spans. The work was carried out by J P Kenny and Panners Ltd and comprised a wide-
rangiog programme of theoretical and experimental work, designed to provide a basis for the
development of guidelines for the assessment of pipeline spans.
There have heen a numher of requests for access to the detailed information on which that
repon was based and the theoretical development and experimental data are obviously
valuable reference sources. Acconlingly the Offshore Safety Division of HSE have agreed to
publish the back ground repons prepared at the time the project was completed. These
comprise:
l. "Evaluation ofVonex Sheddiog Frequency aod Dynarnic Span Response" OTI 93 614
2. "Structural Analysis ofPipeline Spans" OTI 93 613
3. "Vibration of Pipeline Spans" OTI 92 555 •
The first two of these deal with the principal aspects of the spans project aod the third
describes io detail the experimental work carried out on the full scale pipeline span test rig
built in the Severo Estuary.

• The last repon describes work done by HR Wallingford Ltd, which at the time of the study
was called Hydraulics Research Ltd ·

lll
 CONTENTS

Page

SUMMARY ix

1 . INTRODUCTION 1

2. SPAN FORMATION, BOUNDARY CONDITIONS ANO 3

LOADINGS
2.1 lntroduction 3
2.2 Pipeline installation methods 3
2.3 Development of spans 5
2.4 Types of span 7
2.5 Span end conditions 14
2.6 Loading conditions 14
2.7 Types of loading 14
2.7.1 Submerged weight 17
2.7.2 Effective mass 17
2.7.3 Interna! and externa! pressure loading 18
2.7.4 Thermalloading 21
2.7.5 Residuallay tension 21
2.7.6 Non-linear sag tension 23
2.7.7 Soil/pipeline interaction 23
2.7.8 Seawater/pipeline interaction 27
2.7.9 Seismic loading 31
2.7.10 Trawl board pullover or hooking 31
2.8 Span analysis load summary 32

3. STA TIC ANALYSIS 35

3.1 1ntroduction 35
3.2 Equilibrium of supported and free pipes 35
3.2.1 Equilibrium equations 35
3.2.2 Boundary conditions 37
3.3 Non-dimensional parameters 39
3.3.1 Vertical equilibrium equation 39
3.3.2 Effective axial force, J3 0 40
3.3.3 Horizontal equilibrium equation 41
3.3.4 Boundary conditions 41
3.3.5 Summary of non-dimensionalised parameters 41
3.4 Method of solution of equilibrium equations 42
3.5 Static response and strength 42
3.5.1 Static response 43
3.5.2 Yielding 43
3.5.3 Buckling 43
3.5.4 Serviceability 50
4. DYNAMIC ANALYSIS 55
4.1 lntroduction 55
4.2 Methods of dynamic analysis 55
4.2.1 Dynamic equilibrium equations 55
4.2.2 Energy method 57

V
 Page

4.2.3 Rayleigh method 57

4.2.4 Limitations of the Rayleigh method 58
4.3 Methods of estimation of natural frequency 58
4.4 Dynamic span response to vortex shedding 59
4.5 Effects of pipe, span and seabed characteristics on natural 60
frequency
4.5.1 Effects of axial force, T 60
4.5.2 Effects of soil conditions 60
4.5.3 Effects of seabed geometry 66
4.5.4 Static and dynamic non-linear effects 70
4.5.5 Multiple spans 76

5. PARAMETRIC ANALYSIS OF SPANS 79

5.1 lntroduction 79
5.2 Ranges of parameters 79
5.2.1 Linear axial force parameter, ~' 79
5.2.2 Seabed slope parameter, 1.. 80
5.2.3 Soil stiffness parameter, y 83
5.2.4 Characteristic displacement parameter, 1; 84
5.2.5 Pipe/soil friction parameter,l) 84
5. 3 Sensitivity studies 84
5.4 Non-dimensional design curves 89
5.5 Span analysis methods 94

6. CONCLUSIONS 97

APPENDIX A • Notatlon and deflnltlons 99

APPENDIX B · References 107

LIST OF TABLES
Page

Table 2.1 Typical ranges of E,, v, and k. for various types of soil 24
2.2 Typical ranges of axial pipe/soil friction coefficients for 25
various types of soil
3.1 Summary of non-dimensional parameters 42
4.1 Frequency-static displacement relationship for difieren! 58
end conditions
4.2 Comparisons between exact and approximate values of 59
natural frequency
4.3 Dependence on bi-linear soil stiffness ratio on the pipe 63
end support conditions
5.1 Critica! span lengths 81
5.2 Variation of slope parameter 81
5.3 Limits of soil stiffness parameters 83
5.4 Recommended analysis factors 89

vi

Contents
 LIST OF FIGURES
Page

Figure 2.1 Pipe installation techniques 4

2.2 J-lay pipe laying method 6
2.3 Typical formation of spans due to scouring action 8
2.4 Typical mechanisms of pipe burial due to sand movement 9
2.5 Typical examples of single span geometry 10
2.6 ldealised span geometries 11
2.7 Typical examples of multiple spans 12
2.8 Pipe span al plalform base 13
2.9 Typical span end conditions 15
2.10 ldealised end condition models 16
2.11 Pressure effects on a pipe 19
2.12 Lateral out-of-balance loads on curved pipe due lo 20
interna! pressure
2.13 Development of axial force in pipe spans 22
2.14 Pipe/soil friction behaviour 26
2.15 Soil pressure distribution around a buried pipe 29
2.16 Typical ranges of suitability for various wave theories 30
2.17 Functional plus environmentalload summary 33
3.1 Equilibrium of pipe element 36
3.2 Notation and convention for span geometry and supports 38
3.3 Typical static behaviour of pipe spans 44
3.4 Local buckling of axially compressed pipes 45
3.5 Collapse of pipes subject to bending 46
3.6 Collapse of pipes subject to externa! hydrostatic pressure 47
3.7 Collapse of pipes subject to combined bending and externa! 48
pressure
3.8 Theoretical and experimental information for pipes subject 48
to combined bending and externa! pressure
3.9 Relationship between propagation pressure and D/1 49
3.1 o Local and propagation buckling test results for pipes subject 50
lo combined bending and externa! pressure
3.11 Buckling strains of steel pipes subject to bending 52
3.12 Strain-flattened relationship for tubes subject lo bending 53
3.13 Externa! pressure- curvatura relationship 54
4.1 Behaviour of pipe span under dynamic loading 56
4.2 Basic span configurations for unburied and buried pipes 61
4.3 Variation of natural frequency of pipeline spans with axial 62
force, assuming rigid soil supports
4.4 Variation of natural frequency with soil stiffness and axial force 64
4.5 Pipe span with bi-linear soil stiffness 65
4.6 Graph showing effect of bi-linear soil stiffness on natural 67
frequency of span
4.7 Typical distribution of frictional force 68
4.8 Effect of soil friction on natural frequency 69
4.9 Static non-linear effects 71
4.10 Variation of non-linear tension with characteristic 72
displacement for different friction coefficients
4.11 Dynamic non-linear effects 73
4.12 Variation of natural frequency with amplitude of vibration 74
4.13 Effect of vibration amplitude on side-span length 76
4.14 Multiple spans 78
5.1 Approximate dependence of critica! span length on 82
pipe diameter
5.2 Variation of frequency and moments with friction parameter 85
5.3 Variation of non-linear tension with friction parameter 86
5.4 Variation of natural frequency and bending moments 87
with slopes

vii
1

Contents
 Paga

5.5 Variation of non-linear tension with slopes 88

5.6 Non-linear axial force design curves for y= 107 90
5.7 Non-linear axial force design curves for y= 1O' 91
5.8 Non-linear axial force design curves for y= 1O" 92
5.9 Non-linear axial force design curves for y= 1CJ' 93
5.10 Bending moment ratio (M/Mc) design curves 95
5.11 Natural frequency ratio (file) design ctlrves 95

NOTATION AND DEFINITIONS 110

REFERENCES 115

viii

Contents
 SUMMARY

The formation of spans either during installation or by subsequent scouring or movement,

may have a critical influence on the safety and integrity of a submarine pipeline. The early
detection, assessment, and where necessary, correction of spans is importan! to the safety
and life expectancy of pipeline systems. There is therefore a need for guidance which will
enable reliable assessments to he made of the structural response of a pipeline to particular
span conditions which may be random in nature. This report presents a method of analysis
which allows the safe evaluation of the static and dynamic characteristics of pipeline spans.
The various methods of pipelaying are considered such as laybarge, reeling, J-I ay and tow-
out. The development of spans during laying or within the service life of a pipeline is
discussed. The almost infinite number of span geometries resulting from these conditions
are classified into a relatively small number of idealised formations in arder to carry out the
analytical procedures.
The span end conditions are discussed with regard to axial soil stiffness, lateral soil stiffness
and rotational soil stiffness. The end conditions may change during the lifetime of a span
according to the various loading and environmental conditions occurring in its installation
and operational phases.
The main loading conditions during the lifetime of a pipeline are identified as instaiiation,
water-filled, hydrotest and operational. The types of loading are classified as functional,
which are the loads due to the existence of the pipe (eg weight of pipe, coating, contents,
etc), and environmentalloads (eg waves, currents, trawl-board hooking, etc). The various
combinations of fnnctional and environmentalloadings are addressed and it is concluded that
the most importan! forces applied to the pipe are !hose in the vertical plane.
The pipeline's response to these loads is seen to vary considerably depending on the
interactions with the environment, configuration and geometry of the particular span. This
complexity means that pipeline behaviour may be itself much more complex than is
predicted by sorne of the simple analytical methods in use, particular! y those based on
engineering bearn theory. It was therefore necessary to develop a more rigorous static
analysis procedure. This set out the exact differential equilibrium equations and boundary
conditions describing the behaviour of supported and free-spanning pipes and their various
interactions. The static response and strength of pipes is discussed with special reference to
yielding and buck:ling hehaviour. ·
A similarly rigorous approach was adopted for the development of a dynamic analysis of
pipeline spans resting on elastic supports including the effects of friction and non-linearities
such as sag tension are difficult. In this case it was desirable to introduce simplifications
which would enable acceptable approximations to be made. In this way the effects of pipe,
span and seabed on the natural frequency are considered in detail and then assessed to identify
those areas where further more accurate information may be needed for reliable estimations
of natural frequency.
The results of the work previously described were then applied to the development of a
parametric span analysis method. The variables which influence the hehaviour of a pipeline
span are expressed in non-dimensional format in order to reduce the total number of
independent variables and provide generalised solutions to pipe spanning problems. The
structural quantities of interest are axial force, bending moments and natural frequency.
Because of the complexity of the pararnetric method of span analysis described, a two stage
approach is suggested. A conservative analysis assuming that the span is simply supported
is carried out. Spans which are unacceptable by these criteria are considered lo be critica! and
require the full pararnetric analysis methc:id to he applied.

IX

Contents
 1. INTRODUCTION

Pipeline spans on the seabed required assessment to determine whether or not remedia!
action is required to avoid damage to the pipeline. lt is in the interests of both the operators
and the regulatory body concemed, to ha ve the ability to · predict the state of a span as
accurately as possible;. The Department of Energy commissioned J P Kenny to carry out a
research project in order to provide the technical background for the development of
guideline. This comprised theoretical studies, laboratory model testing of spans, and full
scale testing of a 20 inch diameter pipeline span.
This report addresses the detailed structural analysis of submarine pipeline spans, and
presents the technical background toa parametric method of structural analysis. A separate
background report deals with the hydrodynamic and span response aspects of pipeline span
behaviour.
The parametric method of structural analysis provides a means of evaluating the state of
stress and natural frequency, for the purpose of span assessment. The analysis is a complex
procedure but it is only necessary to apply it to critical spans. A simple and conservative
method of span assessment has been developed which assumes that the span is simply
supported and checks the following failure modes:
• yield
• bar buckling
• flow induced vibrations
Spans which are found unacceptable by this simple analysis are considered to be critical and
are therefore subject to the detailed non-dimensional, parametric method of span analysis
which has been developed and is described in this report.
This report is arranged as follows:
• Summary of the work.
• Section l is the Introduction.
• Section 2 describes the mechanics of span formation and the loading conditions to
which a span is subjected during its design lifetime.
• Section 3 establishes the static response of a span, and its strength against yielding and
buckling.
• Section 4 pro vides methods for determination of the natural frequency of a span which
govems its dynamic response.
• Section 5 presents a method for structural analysis of pipeline spans by means of five
controlling parameters.
• Section 6 sets out the conclusions from this part of the study.

Contents
 2. SPAN FORMATION, BOUNDARV
CONDITIONS ANO LOADINGS

2.1 INTRODUCTION
The formation of spans in submarine pipelines, either due to seabed irregularities during
installation or due to subsequent scouring and movement, may have a critica! influence on
the safety and integrity of the pipeline. Usually potential spans can be identified prior to
installation by proper gathering of data and marine surveys along the proposed pipeline
route [19, 20]. Available methods of analysis [!] may then be used to investigate the static
and dynamic characteristics of these pipe spans, to ensure that the pipe can be maintained at
an acceptable safe state. If cases where the required safety cannot be ensured then remedia!
actions in the forro of rerouting, span correction, use of gravity mattresses, etc., are used to
make certain that design criteria regarding stress levels and potential for vortex shedding
induced response are not exceeded
However, spans may be created subsequent to installation due to scour action or pipe
movement. In such cases their configuration is usually random, depending on the seabed
topography and composition, wave and curren! action and pipe properties [19,26], The early
detection, assessment and correction of a span is important to assure the continued safe use
of the pipeline. In view of the random nature and the unpredictability of the extent of spans,
they can constitute a potential hazard to the pipeline, in that increasing span lengths are
accompanied by increasing pipe displacements, possibility of vortex shedding induced
oscillations and eventual damage. In addition to the importance of detecting such span early,
there is a need for guidance in assessing their effect on the structural response of the
pipeline, to enable engineers to make decisions regarding the need for intervention [23].
Such guidance should preferably be based on simple, yet sufficiently accurate, methods to
allow the safe evaluation of the static and dyn~c characteristics of these spans.
It is the intention of this Chapter to provide such information in an easily accessible and
explicit form. The following sections provide background information on the mechanics of
span formation and response, with special emphasis on the assessment of the various types
of loading to which pipe spans may be subjected.

2.2 PIPELINE INSTALLATION METHODS

There are various methods of submarine pipeline installation that have been or are being
developed, including lay-barge, reel vessel, J-lay and tow method. The appropriateness of
each method depends on the circumstances of the pipeline, particular! y the water depth and
pipe size. The most common installation method used at the present time, especially in the
Nortb Sea, is laying by a specialised lay-barge.
In the lay-barge method [19], the pipe is jointed on the vessel using conventional welding
techniques, tested and field-joint coated. Once welded, the pipe is fed into the sea over a
curved supporting stinger, by moving the vessel forwards on its anchors. The pipe takes up
an S-bend configuration, as shown in Figure 2.1 (i), which can be controlled to preven!
overstressing and buckling. The stinger radius controls the overbend curvature and the
sagbend curvature is controlled by the tension applied to the pipe by tensioners on the
barge. The required tension depends on the water depth, the weight of the pipe and the
allowable radius of curvature of the sagbend. The pipeline is general! y in a state of residual
!ay tension as it reaches the sagbend. The maximum depth to which pipelines can be layed
by lay barges is govemed by their tension capacity, ranging, for example, from 50m to
300m [2I].

Contents
 LAY BARGE

STINGER

PIPE

' ...... .

il PIPE LAYED BY LAY BARGE

HOLD-BACK VESSEL TOW VESSEL

ii} OFF -BOTTOM TOW

Figure 2.1
Pipe installatlon techniques

Contents
One of the oldest methods of pipelay is by reeling [ 19]. The pipeline is manufactured on
shore and reeled round a large drum on a purpose built vessel. The pipe rnay undergo plastic
deformation during this process, but is straightened using a special ramp prior to
installation. From then on the method of installation is similar to the lay barge, but the
stinger is generally steeper effectively eliminating the overbend. Therefore, residual lay
tension levels are relatively lower than those arising from lay barge methods. Because of
restrictions in curren! Codes [1] regarding plastic deforrnation ofpipelines, the maximum
diarneter pipe that can be reeled is 0.4m, with D/t < 25.
For short pipelines or bundles, towing methods, described in References [19,22]. rnay be
preferable to the conventionallay barge methods. Surface, below-surface, off-bottom and
on-bottom tow methods have been developed and used successfully in the recent past. These
methods enable the pipe to be fabricated onshore and then pulled out by vessels, as for
example shown in Figure 2.1 (ii) for off-bottom tow. Residual lay tension levels arising
from such methods are usually small or even zero.
With the discovery of new oil and gas fields in very deep water new methods of pipe lay are
necessary. One of the methods presently being developed is the J-lay method. A detailed
description of the method is presented in Reference [30]. As the narne suggested, during
installation the pipelines will take up a J-configuration as opposed to the usual S-shape, as
shown in Figure 2.2. This is achieved by lowering the pipe almost vertically into the
water, thus totally eliminating the overbend. This reduces the total stress in the pipe,
allowing greater depths to be reached [32]. It also has the additional effect of reducing
residual lay tension levels in comparison to lay barge methods. Dynamic positioning may
be used to keep the J-lay barge on course, thus alleviating the problems of requiring
anchoring in deep water.
In general, as can be seen from the descriptions above there can be considerable variations
in the levels of residual lay tension depending on the method employed for pipe laying.
In addition, in places of uneven seabed, pipelaying rnay be followed by the development of
spans, that may have a critica! effect on the pipeline response and integrity during its
lifetime. ·

2.3 DEVELOPMENT OF SPANS

Spans can develop during laying, because of seabed irregularities, or during the service life
of the pipeline, due to scouring and, in sorne cases, due to horizontal movements. The
mechanics of development and behaviour of spans are discussed below. During pipelaying,
discussed in the previous section, the pipeline takes up a configuration on the seabed which
is dependen! on the seabed profile, the type of soil, the residual tension, the pipe flexura!
stiffuess and its submerged weight. ·
U neven areas in the seabed constitute serious problems for the structural safety of pipelines
as they enhance the forrnation of free spans. Route selection, therefore, plays an importan!
part in design, as discussed in Reference [23]. However, it is usually impossible to selecta
totally obstruction free route. In most situations intervention work may be needed in order
to reduce the likelihood of spans occurring during installation. This. for exarnple, can take
the forro of clearing the routing corridor prior to installation.
The effect or residual tension on span creation is closely linked to the pipe weight. A large
residual lay tension tends to generate more spans, and to increase span length, whereas a
heavy pipe will norrnally rest on the seabed, thus minimising the number and length of
spans. However, if the pipe is. beavy. greater tension is required during installation in order
to prevent overstress.

Contents
 J-LAY VESSEL

PIPE

J- SHAPED
SAG BEND

Figure 2.2
J·lay pipelaylng method

6 ;,.·
.:·.,·,.

Contents
The amount of residual tension in the pipe in contact with the seabed al so depends on the
soil friction. The ends of the installed pipeline and the pipe at the sides of spans are free to
move. If this movement is nüt resisted by soil friction, it will have the effect of reducing
the value of the tensile force. In general, at sorne point along the pipeline sufficient soil
friction develops to preven! further movement, usual! y in the first kilometre from the pipe
ends. This is normally termed as the 'anchor point'. The full residual lay tension remains
effective in the rest of the pipe. A relatively stiff pipe will tend to develop more and longer
spans than a less stiff pipe on the same irregular seabed. The value of the residual !ensile
force also depends on the method of installation. With sorne lay methods residual tension in
the installed pipe may be small or even zero, as for example with mid-depth tow.
Subsea surveys immediately after installation sometimes show the presence of these span
features [24]. However, subsequent surveys carried out at regular intervals, may show
changes in the configuration of these primary spans. Sorne of them may alter both in
length and depth, while other fill-in complete! y, and in cases, new ones appear for the first
time. This occurence is usually dueto scour effects.
Scour is caused by the flow of steady and wave-induced currents around the pipelines. In
this event turbulence is set up due to the obstruction to the flow path by the pipe. As a
result, the seabed may be eroded away from both the upstream and downstream sirle of the
pipe, as discussed in Reference [28]. This is especially evident with granular materials such
as sand.
The scour can be caused by long term or short term effects, with the span configurations
constantly changing. As scour boles develop around the pipe, gaps form under it, creating
small spans. At such gaps fluid jets from the upstream si de may be forced under the pipe,
thus leading to "tunnel" erosion. Further erosion under the span is initially very rapid. As a
result, substantially long free spans can be formed by scouring, as shown in the illustration
in Figure 2.3 obtained from experimental results reported in Reference [26]. These effects
have also been shown in tests perforrned on small scale models [25]. In addition, these tests
have also shown that continuous current and wave action may also result in eventual burial
of the pipe, as illustrated in Figure 2.4, [26].
Full scale tests, reported in Reference [26]. show that most scouring takes place shortly
after installation. This is because of the immediate imposition and interference of the pipe
on the flow re gime near. the seabed. It is therefore importan! to assess the extent of span
creation from scour effects and to examine the seabed Configuration as soon after
installation as possible. Timely detection of spans, and remédial action, where necessary,
are important to ensure pipeline integrity and continuous safe operation.

2.4 TYPES OF SPAN

It follows from the discussion on span development that the irregular nature of the seabed
topography and the randomness of scouring, can give rise toa theoretically infinite number
of possible span geometries. Severa! typical examples of single spans are shown in Figure
2.5. indicating the influence of seabed slopes. Single spans can be idealised in analysis as
shown in Figure 2.6.
Pipeline spans are not limited to the single types addressed abo ve. Figure 2. 7 shows sorne
possible multiple span configurations, in which adjacent spans are located in sufficiently
close proximity for interaction between them to be possible. In such situations each span
cannot, therefore, be considered individual! y, but rather the entire system must be analysed
as a unit. In addition to these simple cases; more complex forros may occur in practice,
including, for example, spans created at the base of platform risers, as shown in Figure 2.8.
However, the range of span types is usually much more limited in practica! situations. A
survey carried out on the Frigg pipelines l and 2 (D = 0.8m) and reported in Reference [7].,
assessed the frequency of type occurrence and dimensions of the spans present along the
pipelines. The most cornmon type observed was the single pipe span lying on the top of
the seabed, and which on average makes up 75% of the total number of spans. In addition,
the slope of the seabed at the sides of the spans were found to be relatively small. However,
spans in different regions may have different characteristics and the boundary conditions at
either side of the span may show wider variation:

Contents
 .• .. -" ' ~ ,- .... -.

····'
•'
_;~:,;.;·_
....... - _,.,..

··t'•F_. i ' · -
r 'Y.;...:
il

li)

Figure C2.3
Typlcal formation of spans due to scouring actlon

Contents
 1)

..
"

. _. --
;;o -: .·:

..· .. -./ ·<_.":- ~_:... .

~-.¡e'~-~-~-_, ~-~~.¿,·
- ......-- ~-- ..-.-,_ ·, j
~-·; -.
~.1·
:·. .
... ··
ji)
·<

Figure 2.4
Typlcal mechanisms of pipe burlal due to sand movement

Contents
 L

i) PIPELINE CROSSES SEABED DEPRESSION

ii) PIPELINE CROSSES SEABED WITH CHANGE IN SLOPE

iii) PIPELINE CROSSES SEABED DEPRESSION WITH SLOPING ENDS

Figure ·2.5
Typical examples of single span geoinetry

10

Contents
 i)

i i)

i);~' ,,
:t
._,,_
~·-'-

ix)

iv)

vi)

Figure 2.6
ldealised span geometries

11

Contents
 i) PIPELINE CROSSES SEABED ROCK OUTCROP

ii) PIPELINE TOUCHES DOWN AT CENTRE OF SEABED DEPRESSION

¡¡¡) PIPELINE CROSSES HIGHLY UNEVEN SEABEO REGION

Figure 2.7
Typlcal examples of multiple spans

12

Contents
RISER

\4----STRUCTURE

SEALS TUBE
PIPE

l&~~S.~'~:t~1-f~('ii]:¡¿~~~2;.}~~~~\.~H?i!~ih·:~:"i;á~~<~~~~:~~:1~1t~11li~~}~iál~~~~~~~~~r*~t~~;;_ ~ 1;~-.(·:'?-,\-·_;¡.\~-:i:%{~~;¿_02:~~-:
SOIL

Figure 2.8
Pipe span at platform base

13

Contents
2.5 SPAN END CONDITIONS
Two of the simplest types of span end condition likely to be encountered in practice are
shown in Figure 2.9. Figure 2.9 (i) shows the simple case of an unburied pipeline in
contact with and lying on top of the seabed. Figure 2.9(ii) shows the altemative case of a
pipeline which is completely buried in the seabed soil. This situation could arise as a result
of scouring if the pipe has originally been purposefully buried during installation, or could
altematively be due to natural deposition of material on top of an initially unburied
pipeline, for example, as a result of sediment transportation due to wave and current action.
In analysis these end conditions can be idealised by employing end springs representing the
stiffness and frictional resistance ofthe soil, as shown in Figure 2.10.
The conditions at the sides of spans may change duting its lifetime, according to the
various loading and environmental conditions, to which the pipeline may be subjected in
the installation and operational phases.

2.6 LOADlNG CONDITIONS

During the lifetime of a submarine pipeline it is subject to four loading conditions,
narnely:
• Installation:
This represents the period during which the pipeline is installed, but prior to any
flooding taking place. The main loads experienced by the pipe during this period will.
be wave and steady current loading and self weight. The combination of pressure and
bending loads, as a result of the laying method and the formation of spans, may have a
signification effect on pipeline behaviour at this stage.
• Water filled condition:

This condition occurs before and after hydrotesting of a pipeline. It may also occur if
the line is to be te111porarily abandoned at any stage, in which case it may be filled
with (inhibited) seawater to provide increased on-bottom stability. The increase in
submerged weight may critically affect pipeline configuration and stress condition.
• Hydrotest:
Hydrotesting involves subjecting the pipeline to an interna! pressure, which exceeds
the design operating pressure by a factor chosen according to design Codes [1, 2]. The
pipe is usua11y water filled for this operation. As a result of the increased submerged
weight and very high interna] pressures the pipe may, at this stage, experience its most
severe loading.
• Operation:
Following installation and testing the pipeline enters its operational phase. During
operation, the pipe may be subjected to high interna! pressure and temperature. Normal
operating conditions are expected to apply for most of the design life ·of the pipeline.

2.7 TYPES OF LOADING

The loadings to which a pipeline is subjected are divided into two groups:
• Function loado;:
These are loads that arise a< a result of the existence of the pipeline and the conditions
of its use, without considering the influence of the various environmental effects.
Functionalloads are, therefore, those dueto weight, including weight of pipe, coating
and contents, due to pressure and thermal effects, as a result of its use, and any
prestressing due to laying.

14

Contents
 SECTION A-A

ii) BURIED PIPE

......

Figure 2.9
Typical span end conditions

15

Contents
 ROTATIONALLy
FREE SUPPORT
SOIL FRICTION
SPRING1

-%~·~~~~~~~~­
Illl
rrr1 __ SOIL STIFFNESS
SPRING

il UNBURIED PIPE

PIPE BURIED
AT SUPPORT

-~~~~ ROTATIONAL
RESTRAINED
SUPPORT

~~~~;_, ..>----SOIL "STIFFNESS

SPRING

ii l BURIED PIPE

Figure 2.1 O
ldeallsed end condltlon models ·

16

Contents
• Environmentalloads:
These are loads that arise as a result of environmental phenomena, such as wind,
waves. current, etc. They are usually random in nature, and are often evaluated on this
basis of probabilistic methods. Environmental design data values are general!y specified
in terms of a 'return period', which is the average time interval between successive
events of the design value being equalled or exceeded. The retum period specifi.ed for a
given loading condition is normally related to the expected duration of the loading
condition itself. For normal operating conditions, the retum period would generally be
a multiple of the design life of the pipeline, whereas for temporary pha.;;es, a multiple
of the expected duration of the phase would be more appropriate.
For any given loading condition, it is therefore necessary to consider the combination of the
environmental design loads appropriate to that condition, together with the functionalloads.
Since it is generally difficult to predict which combinations of functional and
environmentalloads ·wm produce the worst overallloading situation, it is usually necessary
to analyse all the various possible combinations and select the worst. In arder to facilitate
this analysis it is appropriate to first consider and assess the various types of environmental
and functionalloads separately.
There are ten types of loading which need to be taken into account during the assessment of
a submarine pipeline span. Functionalloadings result from:
• submerged weight of pipe
• effective mass ofpipe
• extemal and intemal pressure
• thermal strains
• residuallay tension
• sag tension
• soil/pipe interaction for unburied and buried pipeline.
Environmentalloadings result from the following:
• seawater/pipe interaction, hydrodynamic forces due to current and wave action
• loadings dueto seismic activity
• trawl board pull over or hooking.
The pipeline span loadings are based on evaluations of the environment, construction
methods, operational parameters and test requirements. The evaluation of these loadings is
discussed in detail in the following text.

2. 7.1 Submerged weight

The submerged weight of the pipe can be calculated in a straightfoiVIard manner based on
known or specified pipe data. For example, for a concrete coated pipe the submerged
weight, q, may be obtained from:

q = ¡1t 2 2 2 2
g [p,(D - D, )+p,(Do- D )+p,D,- p.D"]
2 2
Eqn 2.1

The submerged weight is a uniformly distributed static load which, especially for a heavy
pipe; can have a critical influence in detennining on bottom stability and the behaviour of
pipe spans.

2. 7. 2 Effective mass
In dynamic analysis, the effective mass of the pipe is the importan! parameter, as opposed
to the weight which is needed for static analysis. This, in addition to the mass of pipe, m..
coating, lllc, and contents, ID¡, includes an added mass, lila, and it is given by:
m., = m. :t m., + . rn +rn. Eqn 2.2
The first three components can be calculated simply by knowing the pipe dimensions,
thickness and density of coating, and density of contents. The added mass, rn., corresponds
to the mass of water which vibrates with the pipeline, and is a function of the following:

17

Contents
• vibration frequency and amplitude
• Keulegan-Carpenter number
• Reynolds number
• proximity of boundaries.
However, when the clearance between the pipe and the seabed is larger than three diameters
the added mass is usual! y taken as being equal to the mass of water of the same volume as
the pipe and coating [l]. The validity of this assumption is discussed in reference [27]. An
increase in effective mass has a detrimental effect on dynamic behaviour as it reduces the
natural frequency of the span.

2. 7. 3 Interna! and externa! pressure loading

A subsea pipeline is normally subjected to internal and externa! pressures during its
operating life as shown in Figure 2.11(i). The internal pressures, P¡, is a result of
pressurised contents passing through the pipe during operation and hydrotest. The external
pressure, Po. is dueto hydrostatic pressure as a result of the depth, H, of the pipe below the
water surface, and is given by:
Po = p.gH Eqn 2.3
As a result of pressure loading, hoop and axial stresses are induced in the pipe.
The average hoop stress, ae, is induced by the pressure acting radially on the pipe wall, as
shown in Figure 2.11(ii), and is defined by:

Eqn 2.4

The hoop stress is tensile when P¡ > Po·

If the associated axial strain in the pipe, due to the Poisson effect, illustrated in Figure
2.11 (iii), is completely restrained, for example as a result of pipe/soil friction, an axial
stress will be induced, given by:
_ VP;D;
O'xv - 2t Eqn 2.5

The externa! pressure does not induce a Poisson stress because the extemal pressure Poisson
strains are present before the line is restrained by the pipe/soil friction. A conservative
value of the Poisson induced axial force, T, is given by:
Eqn 2.6
In cases where the pipe has an overall curvature, K, the effect of pressure loading will be to
induce lateral pressure loads, qp. per unit length, in the direction of the radius of curvature,
as shown in Figure 2.12. This may be calculated as follows.
lt is assumed that an interna! pressure P; is acting on a strip element along the pipe, of area
(R + r;sin9)8tf>r;OB where R is the radius of curvature of the bent pipe and r; is its interna!
radius.
Its componen! in the vertical y direction is P;sin9(R +r;sin9)8$r;cSe so that the total vertical
out-of-balance force, Q,, due to pressure acting on a curved pipe is:

Q, = f027t P;sin9(R + r;sin9)8q,r;d9

= 1tr;P;84>

1tD: P;O$
= 4
The lateral pressure load, q,, may then be obtained from:
2
n_ - _Q,_. rtD¡P;
~ - R8<!> 4R

18

Contents
 i)

O¡

iil SECTION AA.

''

L-----LONGITUOINAL CONTRACTION
DUETO POISSON'S EFFECT

¡¡ i)

Figure 2.11
Pressure effects on a pipe

19

Contents
 1
K=-
R

R R+ r¡ Sine

R s,¡. SECTION AA

R.Sr¡,

Figure 2.12
Lateral out-of-balance loads on curvad pipe due to Interna! pressure
As (!IR) is the curvature of the pipe, K, then

20

Contents
 1tD~P¡K
q, = 4
An externa! pressure has a similar effect but acting in the opposite direction, so that:

Eqn 2.7

2. 7. 4 Thermal loading
Inlet temperature of hydrocarbon products may be significantly elevated above ambient
seawater temperature, so that when these are fed into a pipeline, significan! thermal
expansion of the pipe material may take place. If the pipeline is restrained axial! y and
laterally, due for exarnple to soil friction or mechanical restraint, then thermal expansion
effects are suppressed, thus inducing compressive forces, Te, in the pipe. These may be
calculated from:
Te=-aAEt.e Eqn 2.8
In parts of the pipeline in continuous contact with the seabed, thermal effects may induce
buckling, a phenomenon which is well known in railway tracks [34]. On the other hand,
the temperature increases in pipeline spans will usually result in a combination of
compressive forces and increased displacements. However, as the distance away from the
wellhead or platform increases, the temperature of the pipe contents decreases, due to heat
loss, until it becomes equal to the ambient seawater temperature. In these regions, of course
pipe spans will not be affected by temperature effects.
It is, therefore, evident that when considering thermal effects on pipe behaviour, it is
necessary to consider the distance of the span from the wellhead or platfOrm relative to the
heat affected region.

2. 7. 5 Residual lay tension

The residual terision present in the pipeline is dependen! on the method used for the
installation of the pipe as discussed in Section 2.2. This is a parameter that is difficult to
quantify in view of the many effects that can influence its value. The magnitude of the
nominallay tension applied by the !ay barge during installation is generally under tight
control and known accurately. The residual value at the sea bed is a factor of this tension
and the weight of the pipe at the bottom of the S oc J curves.
An estimate of the residual tension, T,.,, can be obtained approximately by subtracting the
weight of the pipe from the laybarge tension, T""' [32] that is:

Eqn 2.9

where q and H. are the weight per unit length of the pipe in air and the height of the
tensioners above the water surface respectively.
This tension will remain effective provided that the pipe remains axially restrained.
However, many effects will influence its value during the lifetime of the pipe. For this
reason, it may be unrealistic to assume that the residuallay tension indefinitely retains the
value immediately after laying. For example, random barge motions at the time of
installation will provide initial deviations from the nominal tension, and further deviations
will occur as the pipe adapts itself to the seabed configuration and interacts with the
environmental conditions. During hydrotesting, movement and permanent deformations of
the pipe may occur, resulting in stress relieving. In addition, creep and current [72],
thennally or pressure produced movements throughout the life of the pipeline can also
effect the value of residual lay teosion. These effects are alllargely unquantifiable and make
reliable estimates of residual tension very difficult. For this reason, it is advisable to ensure
that appropriate conservative assumptions are made during the assessment of a span
condition.

21

Contents
 EQUILIBRIUM POSITION

AXIAL fORCE• \AY

i) SPAN CAUSED BY IRREGULARITIES IN SEABED TDPOGRAPHY

INITIAL
EQUILIBRIUM POSITION

-
_L_ FORCE = T LAY

AXIAL FORCE = T LAY + T NL

ii l SPAN CAUSED BY SCOURING

1· l ·1

iii l DEFLECTED SHAPE OF A TYPICAL SPAN

Figure 2.13
Development of axial force in pipe spans

22
,,
Contents
2. 7. 6 Non-linear sag tension
Non-linear sag tension, Tnh is induced in the span as the result of additional deflections of
the span being axially restrained at the end supports. Non-linear sag tension is induced
when seabed scour causes either existing spans to increase in size or new spans to develop.
The axial force in a span is initially equal to the residual lay tension, Tlay, as shown in
Figure 2.13(i). If scouring under the pipeline occurs the span sag is increased. The
additional deflection of the span is axially restrained by the friction at the side of the span.
The effect of this is the development of non-linear sag tension in the pipe span. Tbe non-
linear sag tension, Tnh is additional to the residual lay tension, T1ay. as shown in Figure
2.13(ii). Sag tension is truly non-linear, as it is related to x and y displacements by second
arder differentials.
Tbe sag tension can be calculated by considering the additional deflection of the pipe from
its initiallay position, as shown in Figures 2.13(ii) and (iii).
The non-linear strain, En~o in the pipe is given by:
1 <!Y 2
e,1=;:(dx)

The associated change in 1ength, OL, of a pipe with span L, which is restrained axial! y,
may be obtained from:

oL = d~ (;¡;)' dx
The non-linear sag tension, Tnh can, therefore, be calculated from:

T,1 = EAL
oL

EA
2L
JLO [9Y]'
dx
dx Eqn 2.10

For a pipe with clamped ends, for which the deflected profi1e may be approximated by:
1 ( 1- cos2L
y =;:y, ltX) Eqn 2.11

Equation 2. 9 gives

Eqn 2.12

When the pipe ends are not fully restrained and sorne axial movement against soil friction
is al1owed to take place, the magnitude of T,1 will be reduced in comparison to that given
by Equation 2.12. Sorne usefu1 information on this is given in References [6,15].

2. 7. 7 Soillpipeline interaction
The evaluation of the interactive effects between the pipeline and the seabed, when complete
contact exists, is important in establishing the potential destabilising effect of
hydrodynamic forces and also the expansion due to the pressure and temperature of the pipe
contents. In cases of pipeline spans, as discussed in Section 3.5, soil stiffness and pipe/soil
friction are important in determining the response of the pipe to various imposed loads.
The currently availab1e data on the behaviour of soils is empirically based and highly
dependent on test conditions. In addition the composition of the soil is a prime factor in
determining the magnitude of friction coefficients and soil stiffnesses, as is the embedment
of the pipe. In general, results from the tests show a considerable scatter band even for
nominally the same soil. Indeed the present stilte of information is such that the mechanism
of soil behaviour cannot be defined with sufficient precision to permit accurate analysis.
For this reason conservative approaches are used in design, by employing soil pararneters
such that the associated displacements and forces are calcu1ated as upper bounds. In general,
if the choice of soil parameters is crucial for design it is advisable to obtain soil data from
in-situ tests.
Relevant information regarding soil stiffnesses and friction coefficients, relevant to offshore
pipelines, is given below.

23

Contents
Soil Stiffness:
The stiffness of soil, k., in resisting the normal forces applied by a pipe in contact with the
seabed, may be obtained on the basis of simple settlement theory. Thus, according to
Reference [ 10], and by defining stiffnesses as the ratio of the normal force per unit length to
the corresponding soil settlement, k. can be expressed as:

k.=~
2(1-v,)
Eqn 2.13

where E, is the modu1us of elasticity and v, is the Poisson's ratio of the soil.
Typical ranges of va1ties of E, and v, for various types of soi1 are given in References [9,
12]. These together with the corresponding values ofk. are Iisted in Table 2.1.
The soil stiffnesses in Table 2.1 are more applicable to pipes resting on the seabed or.
partially embedded in soil. For buried pipes soil stiffness increases with depth of burial.
However. as no definitive methods exist for estimating this depth dependence of les. it may
be conservative to assume that the values in Table 2.1 are applicable irrespective of depth.
In addition, for buried pipes k, becomes effective for both downward and upward
movements, as suggested by the springs model in Figure 2.1 O (ii).

Tabla 2.1
Typlcal ranges of E., v 8 and ks for various types of soil

Soil Type E, (MPa) v, k.. (MPa)

V. Soft Clay 2- 15 0.4 - 0.5 l- lO

(saturated)

Soft Clay 5- 50 3- 33

Medium Clay 15- 50 9- 33

Hard Clay 50- lOO 30- 67

Sandy Clay 25 - 250 0.2 - 0.3 l3 - 140

Sand (Loose) lO- 24 = 0.3 5- l3

Sand (Dense) 48- 81 0.2 - 0.4 25- 48

Silt 2- 20 0.3 - 0.35 l - ll

Roe k 103 - lo' 0.2 - 0.3 550 - 52000

24

Contents
Pipe/Soil Friction
Soil friction has the effect of restraining the pipe against horizontal movement. In pipes it
may have· both axial and lateral components, with the coefficient of friction varying
accordingly. From the point of view of pipe spans it is the axial component that is of
particular interest.
N; with soil stiffnesses available information on pipe/soil friction coefficients is mainly
empirical and highly dependent on the test conditions, the soil composition, pipe size, the
degree of pipe embedment and pipe roughness. Test results show a considerable scatter band
of friction coefficients even for nominally the same soil and pipe. In practice it is advisable
to employ conservative approaches such that the adopted friction coefficients result in upper
bound estimates of displacements.
A typical range of axial pipe/soil friction coefficient for various types of soil, obtained
from a number of reported experimental studies [35, 36, 37, 38], is given in Table 2.2.

Table 2.2
Typical ranges of axial pipe/soil frlction
coefficients for varlous types of soil

Soil Type Longitudinal Coefficient

Friction (~)

SAND 0.3 - 1.2

SILT 0.3 0.9

CLAY 0.2 0.6

ROCK 0.6

When a pipe resting on soil is pulled horizontally, as shown in Figure 2.14 (ii), movement
will be resisted by the development of friction. Thus, at very small displacements friction
will develop very rapidly until a limited value, F 1, is reached. Further horizontal
movement, in general, will not affect F,, significantly. A typical experimentally observed
response for loose sand, reported in Reference [10], is shown in Figure 2.14 (i). This
behaviour can be modelled as shown in Figures 2.14 (ii) and (iii). The initial response of an
idealised pipe can be considered to be elastic and described by:
F = G,.u
where G, = E,/[2(l+v,)] is the soil shear modulus. The limiting response is given by:
F = F,
For a pipe resting on the seabed:
Fl = ~q Eqn 2.14

25

Contents
 0·8
0·7
o6 I/
;
0·5
~ 1
"'- 0·4
0·3
r 1

o2
! '' i 1

i 1
e o 1
1

i : T T
1

s u 1 1 í

d ':'~~n~----rv~t=f----¡;;:;::¡;;:1=<>"'1-~[3: ¡: -:~:,----,:1
zg; O 2·5 50 7·5 10·0 125
O SHEAR DISPLACEMENT (rr,m)

i) TYPICAL RESULTS FROM A DIRECT FRICTION TEST ON A LOOSE SANO

~
u HHHH+
SOIL t?it\'$¡;,}'\; ; Nié i' \;!c¡ ¡~'f ~/~r~F~tgtgt~·~t~.~ T'';'/¡¡;P,Jo/.'~Zg:"jifi!gt(~i,~
1 1

1 1
L------~...l/
ii) PIPE/SOIL FRICTION RESPONSE

LIMITING FRICTION
--::::;;;;;;------

REAL PIPE

LONGITUDU'JAL
ul u DISPLACEMENT
iii) THEORETICAL REPRESENTATION OF PIPE/SO/l FRICTION BEHAVIOUR

Figure 2.14
Plpe/soll frlctlon behavlour

26

Contents
However, development of friction in a real pipe/soil interaction will follow the solid curve
shown in Figure 2.14 (iii). This can be modelled by the relationship:
u
F = F,.-
u+c
where e is a constant to be defined as u ~O

:: 1 u'= O = F,
e
-- Gs

and therefore:
e = F,
G,
or using Equation 2.13:

e=:-~--,­
F,
k,(!- v,)
Assuming that for soils v,= 0.5, then

e = 2F,
k.
So that the pipelsoil friction can be expressed as:
u
F = Fl. 2F, Eqn 2.15
u+-
k.
This relationship can be used in pipeline analysis. It is, of course, an approximate friction
modelling but it has the advantage of allowing friction to develop gradually, as observed in
experiments, rather than assuming that limiting friction develops immediately after the
application of load.
The developed equations may be applied to both pipes resting on the seabed or partially
embedded, or to completely buried pipes. However, in ·the later situation the limiting
friction, F 1, will be affected by soil pressure.This has been accounted for in a theoretical
derivation based on ideal soil conditions, developed in Reference [40]. The assumed soil
pressure distribution is shown in Figure 2.15, and the resulting limiting friction is given
by:

1t
Fl = Jl [- Eqn 2.16
2
where Ps is the submerged soil density and Hs is the depth of the pipe below the soil
surface; K., is the coefficient of lateral soil stress at rest, give by:
K, = l - sin<I>F Eqn 2.17
where <I>F is the angle of interna! friction [ l 0].

2. 7. 8 Seawater/pipeline interaction
Subsea pipelines exposed to wave and curren! action experience hydrodynamic forces, that is
lift, drag and inertia forces. These influences may also give rise to vortex shedding, which
is discussed in more detail in Reference [5].
The process of evaluating hydrodynamic forces is by its nature extraordinarily complex and
one which relies heavily on empiricism. The conventional steps followed are:
• Definition of the nature of the environment with regard to wave and currents, by
referring to sorne statistical extreme state.
• Definition of the resultan! steady and oscillatory components of curren! at the seabed,
using appropriate boundary !ayer and wave theories.
• Evaluations of imposed loadings using hydrodynamic force coefficients of drag, lift and
inertia, or, in the event of vortex shedding, fluctuating force coefficients.

27

Contents
Each step has inherent uncertainties and, consequendy, conservative estimates are usually
made to ensure that upper bound, and therefore safe, values are used in design analyses.
With regards to the prediction of extreme wave conditions, the practice is to extrapolate
from measured or observed data using an appropriate statistical model. The accuracy of this
approach depends heavily on the quantity and quality of base data. An important factor in
such an analysis is lhe selection of lhe retum period; this is usually taken lo be 50 or 100
years, or al least three times the design life of the system, thus ensuring an inherent degree
of safety. For the analysis of a pipeline system in its "as installed" condition, prior to
commissioning, 1 or 5 year extremes are normal! y used.
A wave may then by represented by the maximum or the significan! force, obtained using
statistical methods. However, in pipeline stability analysis it may be unreasonable to
expect that the maximum wave should be taken as the basis for hydrodynantic loading
calculations. This is because, in general, the wave traverses only a short section of a
pipeline, possible at sorne angle, and with a finite Iength of crest. Consequently, a factored
maximum or significan! wave is normally appiied. Such approaches have been used
extensively in practica! design situations and ha ve been found to be generally safe ..
However, hydrodynamic loadings arise not only from the action of waves, but more
general! y from the combined effects of waves and currents.
The definition of the steady and oscillatory components of current involves additional
complications because of the disturbances of the flow due to ·wave action and bottom
roughness. In practice sea bed roughness cannot be readily quantified and simple boundary
!ayer models are often used, based on the appropriate wave and boundary !ayer theories. The
choice of wave theory depends on the relationships of the wavelength, water depth and,
sometimes, wave height.
Existing literature sometimes concentrates on the definition of ranges of applicability of
particular wave theories for prediction of w~ve induced particle motions. A summary of
suitable ranges, suggested in Reference [42], is shown in Figure 2.16. Recognised theories
include:
e Airy's small arnplitude wave theory
e Stoke's finite arnplitude wave theory (various orders)
• non-linear shallow wave theories, such as conoidal and solitary wave theories
• . strearn function theory.
These are described in detail in Reference [42]. However, such wave theories may be of
limited use for conditions at the seabed, which merit careful consideration before the
appropriate theory is seiected. This panicular area is inadequately addressed in curren!
literature and in available Codes. ·
Other parameters which influence conditions at the seabed are boundary effects, directional
spreading of wave induced motions and the effects of wave-current interactions. All of these
are highly complex phenomena, the influences of which have not yet been deterrnined to a
degree useful for general pipeline design purposes. For this reason the evaluation of
hydrodynarnic forces introduces additional uncertainty into the analysis, which is usually
compensated by making upper bound estimates to ensure safety. In this context
hydrodynantic effects are evaluated as quasi-static forces in the form of lift, drag and inertia
forces, dueto the combined effects of waves and currents. The analysis is normally carried
out using Morison's equations, which take the following form for forces per unit length of
member.
• Drag force, which acts in Iine with the direction of current flow, and is a
function of the flow velocity U, so that:
• 1
FD = 2 p.D.CoUIUI Eqn 2.18
• Inertia force, which aiso acts in the direction of current flow and is a
-function of the flow acceleration, aw, and therefore only dependent on wave action,
given by:
1 2
F1 = 1t ¡ p w D 0 C 1a w Eqn 2.19

28

Contents
NOTES:

P5 = SOIL OENSITY

H5 = OEPTH OF PPE BELDW SOIL SURFACE

k
0
= COEFFICJENT OF LATERAL SOIL
STRESS AT REST [ 40]

Figure 2.15
Soil pressure dlstrlbutlon around a buried pipe

29

Contents
 0·05-r------.-------------.----,

0·02

0·01

0·005
STOKES' 2nd ORDER
1

0·002

0001

0·0005 1

1
00002 LINEAR THEDRY
1
o 0001 INTERMEDIATE DEPTH
IDEEP
WATER
WAVES IWAVES
o·ooo05_¡:=:::=;~1f::;===:;==::;:::::=;:==::=;;=j::;==:j
ooo1 ooo2 o·oo5 oo1 oo2 o·os o1
H
gT.;
Hw= WAVE HEIGHT (m) H = WATER DEPTH (m)
T,. = WAVE PERIOD ( s) g = GRAVITY ( mfs2)
Lw = WAVE LENGTH (m)
H 0 = HEIGHT OF BREAK!NG WAVE (m)
REFERENCE ( 42]

Figure 2.16
Typical ranges of suitability for varlous wave theorles

30

Contents
• Lift force, which acts normally to the direction of curren! flow and is a function of the
flow velocity U and the proximity to the seabed, obtained from:
Eqn 2.20

U is the design velocity derived by combining the effects of waves, U., and steady state
currents, Us, in the form
U = Uw + U, Eqn 2.21
However, theory shows that the wave induced velocity, Uw, and acceleration, aw. are ninety
degrees out of phase, so that in a wave cycle with velocity amplitude, U., and period, T,

Eqn 2.22

Eqn 2.23

where Sw is the wave phase angle. lt is normally necessary to use an iterative procedure to
determine the phase angle 9w which will produce the worst combination of drag and inertia
forces.
A typical method for the selection of force coefficients Co, e[ andeL is given in the DnV
Rules [1]. These are dependen! on the Reynolds's and Keulegan-Carpenter numbers and the
proximity of the pipe to the seabed. The approach given by Dn V [ 1] should, however, be
treated with sorne caution since the values given are not fully consistent with a 'steady
state' type loading condition. In general terms:
• Drag coefficient C 0 , is dependent on the marine growth and surface roughness of the
pipe as well as Reynolds number. Thc seabed proximity effect becomes negligible
when the clearance between the pipe and the seabed is larger than one diameter.
• Inertia coefficient, CI is dependent piimarily on seabed proximity. When the clearance
is larger than three diameters the value can be taken as approximately two.
• Lift coefficient, CL, is extremely dependent on bed proximity and becomes very small
when the pipe clearance is more than one diameter. · ·
Additional relevan! information is presented in References [42, 43]. The lift force is induced
by asymmetries in flow caused by the pipe proximity to the seabed and acts away from the
seabed, thus opposing self-weight. As the clearance. between the pipe and the seabed
increases the tlow becomes more symmetrical and the lift force, therefore, decreases
significantly. For these reasons it is generally conservative to ignore lift force in span
analysis.

2. 7. 9 Seismic loading
In general seismic effects do not need to be considered during span assessment, since they
are normally small. However, there is available information on the effects of seismic
activity on pipelines, reported in Reference [33], which should be consulted for designs in
areas prone to significant earthquakes.

2. 7.1 O Trawl board pullover or hooking

Trawl board pullover or hooking needs to be considered in areas of fishing activity. Trawl
board loads can be calculated using the information described in Reference [73]. The
probability of a trawl board impact may be shown to be sufficiently low for trawl board
loadings to be disregarded during span assessment.

31

Contents
2.8 SPAN ANALYSIS LOAD SUMMARY
In assessment of pipeline spans it is necessary to consider combinations of the functional
and environmentalloads described in Section 2.7. These loadings act on the pipeline span
as summarised in Figure 2.17, and are listed below:

• combined axial force, Ta

• externa! pressure, P,
• intemal pressure, P¡
• submerged weight, q
• lateral pressure load, q¡,
• hydrodynantic force, FH
• soil friction force, F
• soil reaction force, ksY
The combined axial force, T, is made up of three linear components and one non-linear
component, namely:
• residuallay tension, Ttay
• axial force due to thermal effects, T9
• axial force dueto Poisson effect associated with pressure loading, Tv
• non-linear sag tension, Tnt

so that:
T, = T1,, +Te+ T, + T,, Eqn 2.24
The pressure loads, P, and P, induce the hoop stress, cre, the Poisson axial force, T,, and
the lateral pressure load, qp. The non-linear sag tension is normally only present in spans
that develop as the result of scour.
The vertical loading of the span. q, consists of the submerged weight, q and the lateral
pressure load, qp. as discussed in Section 2.7.3, so that :
q,=q+q¡, Eqn 2.25
An additional force acting in the vertical plane is the lift force, FL, discussed in Section
2.7.8. However, it has been argued in the sarne Section that FL acts upwards, opposing self-
weight and that it becomes very small when the clearance between the pipe and the seabed
is greater than one diameter. For these reasons, it is conservative to ignore lift forces in the
analysis.
The horizontalloading of the span, qh, consists of the maximum combined drag and inertia
forces, FH, and the lateral pressure load, q,, so that:
Eqn 2.26
In the assessment of pipeline spans, it is important to estímate the maximum value of FH.
As the maximum values of F0 and F1 do not occur at the same value of wave phase angle,
9., as discussed in Section 2.7.8, it is necessary to use iterative procedures to determine the
maximum value of FH.
In addition to the loads acting on a pipe span element, the pipe/soil frictional and reaction
forces at positions of contact between the pipeline and the seabed, as shown in Figure
2.17(i). are considered by the structural analysis.
1t is apparent that a free span is subjected to bi-axial loading. A rigourous solution to the
static problem should be based on analysis that takes into account the bi-axial nature of
loading. This is achieved by making use of the symmetry of the pipe cross-section.
Solutions cOrresponding to the loads in the vertical and horizontal planes are obtained
independently, and then combined according to the principie of superposition.
In the following sections oniY forces in the vertical plane are considered. This is the plane
containing the inertia forces that determine the natural frequency response of the pipe span
in its worst response mode. These methods may. then be u sed to evaluate the static response
in the horizontal plane. The appropriately superposed results yields the complete static
solution.

32

Contents
 i) TYPICAL PIPE SPAN

cp q.P

iil LOADS ON PIPE SPAN ELEMENT

q. + q.p
iiil LOADS ON SECTION AA

Figure 2.17
Functlonal plus envlronmental load summary

33

Contents
 3. STATIC ANAL YSIS

3.1 INTRODUCTION
During installation and operation and the different intermediate stages, a pipeline may be
subjected to various loads which are discussed in detail in Section 2. The pi peJines response
to these loads will vary considerably depending on the degree of interaction with its
environment, its conditions of use and its configuration and geometry. For these reasons,
pipeline behaviour may be considerably more complex than that predicted by the various
simplified analytical methods [6, 13, 14, 15, 44, 45]. Many of these methods are based on
different versions of simple engineering beam theory. While, as a first approximation, this
may provide useful results, the validity becomes highly questionable when effects such as
soil flexibility, pipe/soil friction and sag tension are considered.
For this reason, it is necessary to investigate the influence of such parameters by using
more accurate results, these methods can provide reliable information, against which the
simplified approaches can be gauged.
The exact differential equilibrium equations and boundary conditions which describe the
behaviour of supported and free spanning pipes, and their interaction with flexible
foundations, including non-linear sagging and hogging effects, are given in detail in this
Section. These equations are subsequently non-dimensionalised, in order to reduce the
number of independent variables and facilitate parametric investigations, and hence
determine the importan! pararneters governing the pipeline hehaviour.
Following a brief description of the method of solution the static response and strength of
pipes is discussed with special reference to yielding and buckling behaviour, serviceability
conditions are also considered.

3.2 EQUILIBRIUM OF SUPPORTED ANO FREE PIPES

3. 2.1 Equilibrium equations

The equi1ibrium of supported pipe elements [ 17] can be discussed with reference to Figure
3.1. In deriving the equations it is assumed that the pipe rotations and the initial inclination
of the pipe element to the horizontal,"'" are small.
In addition to the forces discussed in Section 2.7, there is a shearing force V anda bending
moment M acting on the sides of the element. The pipe/soi1 interaction is represented by
the frictional force, F, and the normal reaction force, N. The positive directions and
notation for forces and displacements are shown in Figure 3.1.
Thus, summing up forces in the x direction gives:

Eqn 3.1

Consideration of equilibrium in the y direction results in:

::-N +q +q,- [F- d!'] [~ + 'l'•] +T,~ =O Eqn 3.2

Taking moments about point b gives:

dM-V=O Eqn 3.3

dx

35

Contents
 ---7J--
'its
------~
1

dM
_\M+ dXSx

~+dTA..,
A dx oX

Sx

i) FORCES

. .¡,
__ _
_}
5
., x{u)

-------,-
, - - - - - - __ \

~
y y y
dx
, a

2
dy d y "
-+=oX
dx dx
ii) DISPLACEMENTS ANO ROTATIONS

Figure 3,1
Equllibrlum of pipe element

36

Contents
Combining Equation 3.2 with Equations 3.1 and 3.3 to eliminate V and by neglecting
second order terms the following equilibrium equations are provided:
d2M
dx' - N+ q + q, + T, dx' = O
ciT Eqn 3.4

and

Eqn 3.5

Tbe bending moment, M, and the combined axial force, T., can be expressed in terms of the
vertical deflection, y, and the axial displacement, u, as follows:

M=-EI~ Eqn 3.6

Eqn 3.7

where Ae is the temperature increment from ambient temperature and a is the linear
coefficient of thermal expansion.
Tbe normal reaction force, N, appearing in Equation 3.4 can be expressed, for a pipe resting
on soil, in the form:

N = k,y Eqn 3.8

where y is the pipe displacement be1ow the seabed surface. For a pipe buried in a bilinear
soil

wheny<O
Eqn 3.9
when y> O

However, as the behaviour of unburied pipes is more important from the point of view of
safety, the definition of N in Equation 3.8 will be assumed in the rest of this document.
Combining Equations 3.4, 3.6, 3.8 and 2.7 gives a vertical equilibrium equation in the
form:

Eqn 3.10

Thus the equi1ibrium equations for a supported pipe e1ement are 3.5 and 3. 10. Tbe same
equations can be used for a free e1ement by neg1ecting the pipe/soi1 interaction terms F and
k,y.

3. 2. 2 Boundary Conditions
At positions of discontinuity in the seabed and span slopes it is necessary to ensure that the
continuity conditions for the pipe are satisfied [17]. Thus, with reference to support A in
Figure 3.2(ii) and taking downwards disp1acements positive, pipe continuity is satisfied
when:

~ 1 L + IJI A + d_y
dx dx 1 R + '1'·

or

Eqn 3.11

where AIJI is the re1ative ang1e between the seabed and the span, given by:
AIJIA = IJIA- '1'· Eqn 3.12

37

Contents
 A
--L
- B

i) SE ABE O j SPAN GEOMETRY

ii) SUPPORT A

lii) SUPPOR T B

Figure 3.2
Notatlon and conventlon for span geometry and supports

38

Contents
Similar equations are obtained when considering support B in Figure 3.2(iii). Suffices L
and R indicate slopes evaluated at the left and right of the supports respective! y.

3o3 NON-DIMENSIONAL PARAMETERS

The equilibrium equations and boundary conditions for a pipe element on flexible
foundations have been derived in Section 3.2. It can be seen from these equations that there
are several variables that effect the behaviour of a span such as pipe properties and
dimensions, soil properties, seabed configuration and imposed loads. In order to simplify
the analysis, by limiting the number of independent variables, it is advantageous to non-
dimensionalise these equations. This procedure has the effect of reducing the number of pipe
parameters that need to be considered in analysis and has the additional advantage of
providing a general solution applicable to severa! pipeline and seabed configurations.

3 o3 o1 Vertical equilibrium equation

The vertical equilibrium equation 3.1 O can be written in a conveniently modified form as:

El <!'
dx'- ~ + k,y-
Y T, dx -- q Eqn3.13
2

The effective tension, or axial force, combines the combined axial force, Ta, and the
pressure axial force, Tp as given below:
Eqn 3.14
where:

Tp = ¡ (PoD 2
- P,D, 2) Eqn 3.15

The pressure axial force, T,, represents the effect of pressure acting on a curved pipe.
Non-dimensionalisation of Equation 3.13 may then proceed by assuming a set of non-
dimensional coordinates (x*,y*), given by:

x* = -"- and y* = ':L. Eqn 3.16

Lo Lo
where Le is sorne characteristic pipe length. Thus, Substituting these parameters into
Equation 3.13 and after sorne rearrangement the equation becomes:
~ K
2
T,L d'y* + k,L' -. Eqn _17
dx* 4 - EI dx* 2 El y = EL 3

Assuming that the characteristic length, Le. is defined by:

Eqn 3.18

and letting ~ and y be the non-dimensional axial force and soil stiffness parameters, given
respective! y by:
TL'
Eqn3.19
El

ksL 4
"( = - Eqn 3.20
El
then Equation 3.17 can be expressed in a complete!y non-dimensional formas:
<i'r. d'y*
dx*' - ¡3, dx*' + 'YY
-*
=1 Eqn 3.21
Note that the axial force parametefs, ~a. ~e. ~P• ~ 1 and ~ 81 associated with each of the
different axial forces T., T" T,, T¡ and T,¡ may be obtained from Equation 3.19.
Thus, the number of parameters has been reduced from five in Equation 3.13 to two in
Equation 3.21.

39

Contents
3. 3. 2 Effective axial force, 13.
The effective axial force, T" defined by Equation 3.14, is given below:
Te = Ta + Tp
Substituting for T., Equation 2.24, gives:
Te = T1ay + Te + Tv + Tn1 + Tp
The effective axial force, Te. contains two types ofterm, namely:
• Those that are linear in terms of displacement given by TI, where:
du
T 1 = T,,, + EA [dx. - at.8] + z (P,D, )+ T,
V1t 2
Eqn 3.22

• Those that are non-linear in tenns of displacements, given by T ni. where:

Tnl = EA ¡<!Y¡' Eqn 3.23
2 dx.
Non-dimensionalisation of Equation 3.22 is of no special significance, and it is sufficient
to define a linear axial force parameter, ~ .. using Equation 3.19. The non-linear axial force
parameter, J3,¡, can be defined in a similar way. Thus when Equation 3.23 is non-
dimensionalised it takes the form:

But for pipes with D/t > 10 a good approximation to (A/1) is

A 8
¡=O'
so that:

J3,, = 4 [:;]' [~]'

Replacing L., by the physically more convenient displacement of a clarnped pipe, y,, given
by:
~-.h.. Eqn 3.24
yc = 384EI - 384
yields:

J3,, = 768 2 [YE]'

D [<!Y"]'
dx*

The term (yJO) can he considered a displacement parameter, characteristic for a particular
pipe. Hence, by defining a characteristic displacement pararneter, ¡;,as
y,.
Eqn 3.25
D
the non-linear tension can be expressed as:

J3,¡ = 768
2 2
/; [~.]'UA Eqn 3.26

The useful outcome of thiS non-dimensionalising process is the derivation of the

characteristic displacement pararneter, 1;.

40

Contents
3.3.3 Horizontal equilibrium equation
For the convenience of non-dimensional analysis and without loss of significance, the
horizontal equilibrium Equation 3.5 ~an be simplified into the form:

Eqn 3.27

by assuming that the pipe slope is small, so that the weight term can be ignored, and, that
the friction is at its limiting condition, F 1, given by:
F 1 = llk,y Eqn 3.28
where 11 is the coefficient of pipe/soil friction.
Using Equations 3.16 and 3.28 and multiplying by (L 3/EI), Equation 3.27 can be non-
dimensionalised in the form:
_<!__
dx*
[T,L']
El
= L, .y*
L
or, using Equation 3.25,

.!ID,_ = 38411
dx* · .
º-L y~ y*
1
Defining a friction parameter, 11. such that•

Eqn 3.29

then

Eqn3.30

Thus non-demineralisation of the horizontal equilibrium equation has led to the derivation
of friction parameter, 11·

3.3.4 Boundary conditions

The non-<limensionalised pararneter pertaining to seabed and span slopes can be derived by
considering the boundary condition Equation 3.11, which by using Equation 3.16 may be
·expressed as:

º-Y'
dx*:.I R - dx* L - dljiA ~,.
º-Y':.I - -
L. - dljiA qL' -ª-
Defining a non-dimensional seabed slope parameter, A, as:
El
).. =. dljl qL' Eqn 3.31

then

º-Y':.I R .- º-Y'
dx* dx*:.I L = )..A Eqn 3.32

A siiJlilar expression can be obtained for the support B in Figure 3.2(iii).

3. 3·. 5 Summary of non-dimensionalised parameters

The non-dimensional parameters derived in Section 3.3 should provide a complete
description of the static response of a subsea pipe. Tbey have the effect of generalising the
·analysis andas such they will be used extensively in subsequent Sections of this document.
A summary of these parameters is given in Table 3.1.

41

Contents
 Table 3.1
Summary of non-dimensional parameters

Non-Dimensional
Parameter Symbol Relationship Description

TL'
Axial force parameter
El

y Soil stiffness parameter

.)\;
Characteristic displacement
D
parameter

D
Tf ~­ Soil friction parameter
L

Seabed slope parameter

3.4 METHOD OF SOLUTION OF EQUILIBRIUM EQUATIONS

The differential equilibrium equations. that have been derived in Section 3.2 and non-
dimentionalised in Section 3.3, were solved numerically using a computer programme [17].
Because of the non-linear nature of the equations an iterative method was employed, in
which the displacements obtained from one step were used to provide new estimates of the
effective tension and the pipe/seabed interaction forces, which in tum were used as input
into the next step. This procedure was repeated until acceptable convergence was obtained.
The derived results were then used to compute bending moments and axial forces, including
sag tension, that described the static behaviour, and estimates of the natural frequency,
discussed in Section 5.

3.5 STATIC RESPONSE ANO STRENGTH

An important consideration in the assessment of pipe spans, is the evaluation of their
structural static response when subjected to the various loading conditions. which the
pipeline encounters during its design life. The pipeline and especially the pipe spans are
expected to withstand these condition without damage. and within the permissible
limitations, specified in Design Codes, typically [ 1]. From the point of view of static
strength, these limitation are in the forro of permissible stresses to avoid excessive yielding
and buckling, and limitations on deformations for serviceability reasons. These are
discussed in the following sub-sections, together with a description of static behaviour.
It is usual in design to employ usage factors when carrying out stress calculations, to
account for variabilities in the pipe parameters and the conditions of use. Such factors ha ve
not been considered in this document. but typical values are given in References [1.2].

42

Contents
 3. 5. 1 Static response
A pipe spanning between supports can be idealised as shown in Figure 3.3(i). with the
support frictional, F, and normal reaction, N, forces replaced by l~near springs.
· A submarine pipeline span subject to an effective axial force, T,, behaves in an ordinary
Euler coturno. Thus when the pipe is assumed to be straight and the effect of self-weight, q.
is neglected, the pipe will suffer ""bar buckling'' at the Euler critica! load, TE· When q is
included in the analysis it will have an effect similar to that of an initially deflected
coturno. with the pipe following path II in Figure 3.3(ii).
The presence of frictional force, F, has an axial restraining effect, which resists axial
displacements, and as a consequence, limits lateral displacement, Yo. As a result of this
there is a build-up of sag tension in the span, which depends on the degree of axial restraint,
and thus an apparent stiffening of the pipe. Under such circumstances the pipe will follow
equilibrium path 1 in Figure 3.3(ii), with the combined axial force, T,. increasing rapidly
with Y,. in contras! with an axial! y unrestrained pipe.
This type of behaviour, including the effect of friction, is taken into account explicitly by
the method of analysis developed in Section 3.2.

3.5.2 Yielding
In addition to the behaviour described in Section 3.5.1, a subsea pipe subjected to the loads
discussed in Section 2.7 will develop axial, bending, hoop and shear stresses. If these
stresses are large, failure may occur dueto excessive yielding, provided that local buckling
does not occur first. For this reason Codes [1.2] specify permissible limits to stress levels
to ensure that this form of failure is avoided. Usually these limitations are expressed in
tenns of an "equivalent stress", <J'E, calculated according to the von Mises criterion as:
1
aE = [ a;y + a~ - OxCJy + 3-t:!y 12 Eqn 3.33

where crll, O"y, and 't~y are the maximum longitudinal stress (incorporating axial and bending .
effects). the hoop stress and the shear stress respective! y, acting at the sarne position in the
pipe. The limitations placed on crE are usually in the form:
Eqn 3.34
where ur is a usage or design factor to account for variabilities in the pipe parameters and
the yield stress of the pipe material. Por typical values of uf see, for example, Reference
Oy,
[ l].
The pipe stress appearing in Equation 3.33 may be calculated as foltows:

• Maximum longitudinal stress

T, MD
a, = Eqn 3.35
A + 21
• Hoop stress

Eqn 3.36

• Shear stress. This is usually small and is neglected in analysis. However, if shear
forces and torsional moments are significant, then it may be necessary to include 'txy·

3.5.3 Buckling
Considerable research has been devoted in recent years to obtaining theoretical and
experimental information on the buckling behaviour of circular cylindrical members such as
pipes. Sorne of the results of this research have been incorporated in Codes [1,2]. while
other results are too recent for such modification. Most of the relative information is
summarised in Reference [46]. The buckling behaviour under different loading conditions is
discussed in the following:

43

Contents
 i) AXIALLY COMPRESSED PIPE WITH END RESTRAINTS

z
o
¡;;
..."'
!i"'
o
<.>

o 1-+---------- Yo
~
¡;;
...
z
1-

ii) TYPICAL AXIAL FORCE- OISPLACEMENT RELATIONSHIP

1- AXIALLY RESTRAINED PIPE

R- AXIALLY FREE PIPE

FOR SIMPLE SUPPORTS

Figure 3.3
Typlcal statlc behavlour of pipe spans

44

Contents
Axial Compression
When pipes are subjected to large axial compressive loads, they are likely to develop large
lateral deformations in a mode known as "bar buckling", discussed in Section 3.5.1, or
localised bulging deformations of the pipe wall. E ven though this latter mode is not very
likely to occur in pipe spans. it may occur in certain instances during installation. or in
situations where an axially compressed pipe is restrained from developing lateral
deformations. Available experimental information is summarised in Figure 3.4. lt can be
seen that for pipes with D/t < 50 buckling in a local mode is unlikely to be a problem.
However, the theoretical curve, recommended in Reference [53], provides a safe lower bound
to the test results. In the range D/t < 100 this curve can be described accurately by the
following linear equation:

cr~ = 1 - 0.0024 (~) Eqn 3.37

Cly t
where O'xc is the local buckling stress for axially compressed pipes.

~
1·2

1·0
..........:---
•.~
.'... ...· .... ..
' y
u
tl'
(/) . _____----......-'
.............. ...........~----·-
...... ..... . •
.~----
(/) 0·8
w
...
tr:
(/)
06 lli:
·-·-·-·-·-·---.
"'
z
::; e TEST RESULTS [s 3l
API [54]
"
'-' 04
"
a> REFERENCE [53]
..J - - - Dnv [o]
"g ,02

00
o 50 100 150 200 250
DIAMETER TO THICKNESS RATIO, 011

Figure 3.4
Local buckllng of axlally compressed pip,es

Pure Bending
When a pipe is subjected to bending, as in a span, collapse can occur either due to
maximum moment reached because of the combined effects of ovalisation and plasticity, or
due to local buckling, depending on the geometrical and material properties of the pipeline.
Considerable information is available regarding the strength of tubular elements subject to
bending and Figure 3.5 shows a collation of test results. lt can be seen that the curve
recommended for design in Reference [53] provides a clase lower bound to experimental
results. This curve, which includes the practica] range forpipelines, may be approximated
to:
M.,
- = 1 - 0.0024 -
D
Eqn 3.38
Mo t

where M., is the recommended collapse moment and Mo is the full plastic moment capacity
of the section, given by:
M 0 = (D - t) 2t crv Eqn 3.39
The right hand side ofEquation 3.38 is identical to that of Equation 3.37, which reflects the
clase sintilarity in buckling behaviour between pipes subjected to bending and axial
compression. It can also be seen from Figure 3.5 that pipes with D/t < 25 can develop over
95% of their full plastic moment capacity.

45

Contents
Extemal Pressure

o
••• •
....:Eu
•• •
:E
1·2
.....
• •
.... •,.. •• 1 ••• ••
Z
~~
....

o
z
1
OB
o ¡-·.-'-....;:"'.~t:,·;;·~:·~=-·!=-~..,;~~~~:-~----..__j
¡-.... ......
_::r-4-- .,. • 1
'•
• ........
•
"
• • •

~-........
• •
•
•

~ .... -~
-•

~ O ·6 KEY : ..,.--~ .... ..,.

"' -.-TEST RESULTS [53,59] ............
.., - REFERENCE (53)
!; o 4
~
·--DnV [1]
5:::> 0·2

00+-----~-------r------~----~-------r------~
o 50 100 150
OIAMETER TO THICKNESS RATIO, 0/t

Figure 3.5
Collapse of pipes subject lo bending
The effect of extemal pressure loading on perfect pipes is first to cause a uniform radial
contraction, and then al a critical pressure, dependent on the material and geometric
characteristics, to instigare a bifurcation type buckling. Pipes with initial out-of-roundness
imperfections will start ovalising immediately with the application of pressure and will
eventually collapse in a snap-through manner. Considerable research effort, both
experimental and theoretical, has been expended on the effects of pressure loading. As a
result, the relationship between pipe characleristics and pressure is adequately understood
and documented [53]. Available results are summarised in Figure 3.6.
The theoretical externa! pressure, P"' required to buckle a perfectly round elastic tube is:

2E [ t ] ' Eqn 3.40

Poc = (l-v2) D-t
However, in the presence of small initial flatlening imperfections analysis by Timoshenko
[3] has shown that the collapse pressure, Pe, may be obtained from:
2 3 D
Pe- [P, + (1 + l e, t) P"] P, + PcrP, = O Eqn 3.41

where Py is the pressure required for development of full plasticity in the hoop direction,
given by:
t
P, = 2crv(D-t) Eqn 3.42

ande, is the out of roundness of the pipe, defmed as:

l>D
eo==2-- Eqn 3.43
D
The value of e, recommended in DnV [1] is 0.02 for pipes with D < 500mm. Using this
value, Equation 3.41 appears to provide clase predictions of experimental behaviour in
Figure 3.6.

46

Contents
Note that IP6 [2) defines out-of-roundness as equal to eJ2, and recommends a value of 0.0 l
for out-of-roundness. Thus care must be taken over the definition of out-of-roundness being
used.

1·0-r----r----r----.---r::-----..

oet---+---+--~~~~JL---1
.·· f/
.·. ·.:.:.:\......
.·ti·(·.·:
,. v···.)..
..·:.:.~.
.. .
06+-------+-------+-~~·~~·~----~~----~
.
=.·lV
r
04+-------+-~~·~~·~------+-----~~----~

:Y
02+---~--~---r--~--~

OLo 02 04 06
THEORETICAL COLLAPSE PRESSURE
OB 1·0
Pe /Py

KEY:
• TEST RESULTS

EQUATION 3• >1)

Figure 3.6
Collapse of pipes subject to externa! hydrostatic pressure

Combined Externa/ Pressure, Bending and Axial Compression

For pipes subjected to combined bending and pressure loads comparisons between reported
theoretical numerical results and recommendations made by Dn V [ 1] are shown in Figure
3.7 for pipes with D/t < 30. A close correlation appears to exist.
The relation~hip recommended by Dn V accounts for combinations of axial compression,
bending and pressure loads and may be written as

Eqn 3.44

where cr, is the maximum longitudinal stress, defined by Equation 3.35, and P is the
appl~ed extemal pressure. Index n is defined by Dn V as

n = l + 300 [i] (:J Eqn 3.45

Equation 3.44 is valid only when both <Jx and P produce compressive effects.

47

Contents
 1·0

o."
'~
1
w 1
"'
:::> 1
1
..."'"'
.
"'
1
1
.
..J
z
05 1
1
1
..."'
1-
~;
1
1
X - NUMERICAL ANALYSIS [ 60,61) 1
"' 1
1
- - - DnV [1]
1
D/t' SO 1
1
\
O· O
0·0 05 1·0
BENOING MOMENT, MIMe

Figure 3.7
Collapse of pipes subject to combined bending and externa! pressure

Propagation Buckling
lt is strictly true, that provided that the pipe dimensions are such that it will not suffer local
buck:ling due to imposed loads and that it is free of defects, there is no need to consider the
incidence of propagation b~ckling. This is because the pressure to cause a buckle to "ruÍl"
is always lower than that to cause local buckling. However, in combined loading
situations, for example involving externa! pressure and bending, a local buck:le caused by
bending may be converted to a propagating buckle because of the action of externa!
pressure. Thus, with reference to Figure 3.8 at very low externa! pressures local buckling
caused by bending will remain localised. As the externa! pressure is increased there will be a
transition zone above which a local buckle will be converted to a propagating buckle. Its
most critical feature is that once initiated it will propagate under a considerably lower
pressure than that required to initiate it, P, referred toas the propagation pressure, Pp·

KEY: e LOCAL BENDING 8tJCKLING

- O PROI'AGATION BUCKLING
J TEST RESULTS [so]
- NUMERICAL ANAL.YSIS (e.o] '
- - - EQUATION (3 36)
..Q. • 50
1
...
§
"' e
"'"'g: L,
==~iji'x::l=
~
TRANSITION ZONE
1
ffi le
I-
X
1
1
"' 1
1
0·0+---------r--------T--------,-----_¿~~----'
0·0 0·5 1·0
BENOING t.IOMENT, M 1 M0

Figure .3.8
Theoretical and experimental lnformation for pipes subject to cOmblned bendlng
and externa! pressure ·

48

Contents
The propagation pressure is a characteristic pressure for a pipe and because deformations
during buckle propagation are largely plastic, in addition to being dependen! on Dlt, it is
al so a function of the material properties. Empirical relationships have been suggested in
references [1, 60, 62]. These are compared with available experimental results in Figure
3.9. It can be seen that the expression developed by Kyriakides and Babcock [62], which for
steels with low strain hardening takes the form
t 2.25
P, = 10.7 crv (
0) Eqn 3.46

provides a safe lower bound to available experimental results.

The initiation pressure, P1, is the lowest externa! pressure at which a buckle will initiate
and propagate when the pipe is subjected to combined externa! pressure and bending
loading. As a consequence of experimental investigations, the results of which are
summarised in Figure 3.10, an empirical relationship was suggested in reference [51],
which can be expressed as
t 2.064
P, = 0.02E (
0) Eqn 3.47

This is shown in Figure 3.10 to provide a lower bound fit to the available test results for
which propagation buckling was the mode of failure.

0020
\\\';.
\\ \
\
\
t>
'o."
0·010
0008
~'
'-V
\ t
~
o 006
·. ~
"'w"'g: 0·004
\~
z
Q ' ~\.
\
~ 0002

\.
C>
~
o
g:
0·001
10 20 30 40 60 BO 100
OIAMETER TO THICKNESS RATIO, 0/ t

KEY· • EXPERIMENTAL RESULTS (60,62.]

REFERENCE (60)

- EOUATION 3 46)- REFERENCE (62)

Do V [o)

Figure 3.9
Relatlonshlp between propagation pressure and D/t

49

Contents
 ·~ o o o
o o

.'.
~
oe co
o <o o

"'
Ir

"
U>

.
U>

"'"'
...J

"'z
Ir
02
"'....X
"' • •
00
20 40 60 80
OIAMETER TO THICKNESS RATIO, 0/t

KEY.
•
o
LOCAL BUCKLING

PROPAGATION BUCKLING

EQUATION (3-47) -REFERENCE

} TEST RESULTS

[so]
[so]

Figure 3.10
Local and propagation buckling test resulta for pipes subject to combined bendlng
and externa! pressure
The complete understanding of propagation buckling is very important in pipeline design.
Because its consequences are so significant from a financial viewpoint, care must be taken
to ensure its elimination. This is influenced greatly by the level of externa! pressure to
which the pipeline is subjected, P, in relation to the initiation, PI, and propagation, P,
pressures. Buckling may be initiated in pipeline spans due to large bending deformations
and their interaction with extemal pressure.
Thus if P < Pp. even, though the pipe may still develop a local buckle due to bending
loading, it is certain that it will not propagate and buckle arrestors are not needed in this
range.
However, when Pp < P < P 1 propagation buckling is possible, depending on the magnitude
of initial flattening imperfections and possible damage. Extensive experimental information
on the effects of local pipeline damage on the initiation of propagating buckles is given in
reference [63]. Provision ofbuckle arrestors may be necessary in this range.
Propagation buckling is very likely when P, < P, < P, even in the absence of significan!
fabrication imperfections and damage. Protection of the pipeline from extensive damage by
the provision of buckle arrestors is imperative. Information on the design and performance
of buckle arrestors is given in references [64,65].
Of course the altemative is always available to the engineer in designing his system so that
P < Pp. otherwise provision of buckle arrestors may be necessary.

3.5.4 Serviceability
In certain situations where significant deformations of the pipe cross-section may occur as a
result of loading or excessive plastic action during installation or operation, it is usual to
specify limits of acceptable deformation to ensure continued and satisfactory serviceability
of the pipeline. For example, limitation of ovalisation and flattening of pipes is important
to the unhindered operation of pigging. The important deformation states corresponding to
various loading conditions are discussed in the following.

50

Contents
Pipes Subject to Pure Bending
In certain situations, mainly associated with pipelaying, where significan! cold-bending
may be necessary, and pipeline spans where large bending deformations may occur, the pipe
is required to be able to sustain a specified curvature, or bending strain, without suffering
collapse. This problem has been examined extensively, both theoretically and
experimentally [59, 70, 71]. Experimental results reported in reference [49] are shown in
Figure 3.11, illustrating the dependence of the bending buckling strain, e,, on the pipe
diarneter to thickness ratio, D/t. A lower bound fit to the experimental results appears to be
provided by an equation of the form:
t 2
e, = 15 (D) Eqn 3.48

The corresponding curvature may then be obtained from the well known relationship
between curvature, K, and strain, E, in the form
2
K= -e Eqn 3.49
n·
In pure bending situations the severity of the ovalisation or flattening of the cross-section
is of particular importance, especial! y with regards to pigging operations. For this reason
considerable research work [55, 56, 57, 58] has been concemed with establishing a
relationship between applied curvature, or bending strain, e, and the associated ovalisation
of the cross-section, e". Particular! y simple relationships can be developed using the method
pioneered in Reference [55]. Based on this the following expression was developed in
reference [58],

eo = l8 [!2. e] '
t
Eqn 3.50

which is claimed to be valid, as a first approximation, for the bending of pipes in the
plastic range. Comparisons with available experimental results in Figure 3.12, for pipes
with D/t < 35, sbow that this is indeed the case initially, but considerable disparities occur
in the advanced plastic range. In any case Equation 3.50 appears to forro an upper bound to
the considerable scatter of experimental results, and as such may be useful in design.
However, considerably more research may be needed in this area.

51

Contents
 0·05
()-04
• •
0·03 •
002 ••
••...
.&>
• ••
.."'....
~
a: 0·01
Ul ••
"
ji!;
_,¡
O·OOB

0·006
'•• •
"::>
u

"'z
"i5 0·004
z
"'"'
0002
•
' 2
Eb•15l¡¡l

o 001 +-----,r--...---.,.--,~r--...,.--.-...1
20 40 60 BO 100 120 160200
OIAMETER TO THICKNESS RATIO, D/1

KEY • TEST RESULTS (59, 70 J

- EQUATION ( 3 · 48)

Figure 3.11
Buckllng stralns of steel pipes subject to bendlng

52

Contents
 0·06~--------.r--------------------~

o
004
•
..,
"' •• •
"'zz 002
•• ••
•
"'1-
1-
<!
••
...-' 000
0·0 01 0·2 03 04 ( .Q E )2
1

KEY
• TEST RESULTS [59,72] - 0/t < 35

EQUATION (3 50)

Figure 3.12
Straln-llattened relationship lor tubes subject to bendlng

Effect of Combined External Pressure and Bending

Tbe presence of externa! pressure has a considerable effect on the capacity of a pipe to
sustain a specified curvature without collapse. A vailable experimental and theoretical
information indicates that this effect is very strong, with collapse curvature decreasing
significantly even at low extemal pressures, in comparison to its value under pure bending,
K•. This is corroborated by the results from Reference [61], which have been plotted in
Figure 3.13. These and other results reported in Reference [61] suggest a linear interaction
between curvature and extemal pressure, of the form

Eqn 3.51

where K., using Equations 3.48 and 3.49, can be expressed as

K = 30 (_!_) 2 Eqn 3.52
• D D
A similar influence of extemal pressure on ovalisation is expected to exist but there is
insufficient information to quantify this in any way.

53

Contents
 1·0
e TEST RESULTS}
- THEORY RE~RENCE(61)
- - - EOUATION 13 SI)

.
e: u
C>8 O lt • 34 · 7 • ALUMINIUM ALLOY

...J

"'ffiz 0·4
....
)(

"'
o2

06 0·8 1·0 1·2

CURVATURE, K/K 0

Figure 3.13
Externa! pressure - curvature relationship

54

Contents
 4. DYNAMIC ANAL YSIS

4.1 INTRODUCTION
The exact dynamic analysis of pipeline spans resting on elastic supports, including the
effects of friction and non-linearities, such as sag tension, is extremely difficult. For this
reason it is desirable to introduce simplifications to the problem that will enable
approximate solutions to be obtained. At the same time it is necessary to ensure that these
approximations are small and within acceptable bounds. For these reasons this Section
initially describes the exact dynamic equilibrium equations and then considers available
approximate methods, assessing at each step the levels of approximation introduced.
The pararneter that is of greatest importance in dynamic analysis is the natural frequency, as
this determines the response of the system to time-dependent excitation forces. For
example, the response of free pipeline spans to vortex shedding is dictated by the closeness
of the vortex shedding frequency to the natural frequency.
In order to understand the physical nature of the problem, the effects of pipe, span and
seabed characteristics on the natural frequency are considered in detail, using available
published information, both for single and multiple spans. Assessment of these results can
then help to identify those areas where further, more accurate, information may be needed
for reliable estimations of natural frequency.

4. 2 METHODS OF DYNAMlC ANAL YSlS

4, 2.1 Dynamic equilibrium equations

The dynamic equilibrium of a free vibrating pipe can be obtained by considering the
response of a pipe element, in a way similar to that used for the static analysis in Section
3.2. Thus, with reference to Figure 3.1, the difference between dynamic and static response
is that in the former the submerged weight is replaced by an inertia force. This is given by
the product of the effective mass, m.,, incorporating added mass effects as described in
Section 2.7.2, and the transverse acceleration of the beam element, Yt(t), as indicated in
Figure 4.1 (i).
For a pipe element, vibrating freely, and subjected to an effective axial force, T" the
dynamic equilibrium equation becomes:

El <!'y.,, - T <f.lí Eqn 4.1

dx e dx.Z = ITle)'t

which is similar to Equation 3.13, but with the weight replaced by the inertia term. A dot
(.) above y indicates derivatives with respect to t.
When a pipe vibrates transversely in one of its natural modes, its deflection, Yt. varies
harmonically with time [47], such that:
y, = y [A cos (mt) + B sin (Olt)] Eqn 4.2
where ro is the angular velocity of the vibration. Substitution of Equation 4.2 into
Equation 4.1 results in:

El ~ - T' ~ = mew'y Eqn 4.3

Solution of this equation should yield the exact dynamic displacemeni function, y, and the
angular velocity, Ol, and thus the natural frequency, f, from

f = .fQ_ Eqn 4.4

21t

·55

Contents
 '·iiiE . L
me

.p . X
PIPE SPAN

1¿'
DYNAMIC DEFLECTED
SHAPE

' X

1((
ACCELERATION

' Yt

INERTIA FORCE

il OYNAMIC RESPONSE PARAMETERS

z 14 RESONANCE
Q
1-
...u 1
......
..J UNDAMPED RESPONSE
(IDEAL PIPE)
Q 1

~
¡¡: w DAMPED RESPONSE
(REAL PIPE)
lE 1
::>

.
lE
x
:E
1
FREQUENCIES
fu= VORTEX
SHEDDING
fn =NATURAL
FREQUENCY RATIO
fulfn
¡¡ l DEFLECTION FREQUENCY RELATIONSHIP FOR FORCED PIPE
VIBRATIONS

Figure ·4.1
Behaviour of pipe span under dynamic 'loadlng

56

Contents
Methods of solution of Equation 4.3 when T, ; O and with simple boundary conditions are
described in Reference [47]. However, wheil boundary conditions are more general and
T, T- O, exact solution may become tedious and cumbersome. Simpler, approximate
methods, that produce sufficiently accurate results, may be better suited for use in such
situations. Such methods are discussed in the following Sections.

4.2.2 Energy method

The dynamic analysis of vibrating pipes can be carried out using conservation of energy
principies. In this, assuming that the total energy of the system remains constan!, the
maximum potential energy, (PE), must be equal to the maximum kinetic energy, (KE), so
that:
Eqn 4.5
For vibrating pipe with no axial forces, and assuming that the maximum potential energy
is due mainly to bending action:

(PE)~, ; ~ f El [~] 2
dxlmax Eqn 4.6

The corresponding maximum kinetic energy is given by:

(KE)m,. ; ~ f m. (y,)'dxlmax Eqn 4.7

Substituting y,, using Equation 4.2, in Equations 4.6 and 4.7, evaluating maximum values
of (PE) and (KE) with respect to time, and finally substituting the resulting expressions in
Equation 4.5, yields: ·

Eqn4.8

Thus, the angular velocity, ro, and therefore natural frequency of the pipe may be obtained
using Equation 4.8, provided that the dynamic displacement function, y, is known. A
convenient approximation introduced by Rayleigh [11] simplifies solution of Equation 4.8
further.

4. 2. 3 Rayleigh method
The basis of the Rayleigh approximation when applied to vibrating pipes, is that the
dynamic deflection shape, y, can be assumed to be identical to the deflection shape, y, due
to the static application of loads.
This assumption makes it possible to express the maximum potential energy of the system
in terms of the externa} work of the statically applied submerged weight, q, (which is now
equal to the bending strain energy) so that:

~Ed [!*]' ctx; ~qLctx

Thus Equation 4.8 can now be re-written in the simpler forro:

q Jydx ; J
m.ro' y2dx
so that ro can be obtained from
ro' - _<¡_ fydx Eqn4.9
- m. !y'dx
Thus by knowing the static deflection shape of the pipe it then becomes possible to
calculate ro using using Equation 4.9. A further simplification can be introduced by
expressing the deflected shape in the forro:
y ; y,Y(x) Eqn4.10

57

Contents
where Yo is the maximum static deflection and Y(x) is the deflection function of the pipe.
Use of this expression reduces Equation 4.9 to the form:

2 _g_ JY(x)dx
ro = m.,y. JY'(x)dx Eqn 4.11
which indicates that the angular velocity and, therefore, the frequency of vibrations is
inversely proportional to the square roo! of the maximum static deflection of the pipe.

4. 2. 4 Limitations of the Rayleigh method

The choice of a definite shape for the dynamic deflected curve of the pipe, as a result of the
Rayleigh approximation, [ 11], is equivalent to constraining its degrees of freedom. This in
tum has the effect of increasing the stiffness and therefore the frequency of vibration of the
pipe.
Therefore use of Equation 4.11 should always result in overestimation of the frequency in
comparison to exact methods. However, severa] examples examined in Reference [47]
indicate that this error is very small; for practical pipeline span geometries it is less than
1.5%.
It may, therefore, be concluded that use of Rayleigh's method should result in sufficiently
accurately predictions of the frequency of vibrations of pipes, certainly within the error
bounds described above.

4.3 METHODS OF ESTIMATION OF NATURAL FREQUENCY

Further simplifications can be made in the method of estimating natural frequency, by
extending the Rayleigh approximation, described in Section 4.2.3. That is, in general, it
can be assumed that any reasonable approximation of the deflected shape of the pipe should
lead toa close estimate of the true frequency of the vibrations [47]. This implies that the
ratio of the integrals in Equation 4.11 should be approximately the same irrespective of,
say, the flexible boundary conditions of the pipe. Thus from Equation 4.11 and with
reference to Equation 4.4:
f'v.m
~
q
= constant Eqn4.12

The validity of the assumptions can be investigated by examining the ratio (f2yorn.Jq) for a
pipe with different degrees of flexural restraint at its ends, as shown in Table 4.1, assuming
that q = m.,g.

Table 4.1
Frequency · static displacement relationship
for different end conditions

Support Condition f'y,mJq % Difference

From CC

Simple- Simple (SS) 1.268 2.7%

Simple - Clamped (SC) 1.285 1.4%

Clamped - Clamped (CC) 1.303

As in most practica! situations of pipeline spans the end support conditions will be within
the range of those considered in Table 4.1, it can be concluded that the simplification of
Equation 4.12 is valid, within the accuracy ofthe present analysis.

58

Contents
The implication of relationship 4.12 is that if the frequency, f,, and maximum static
deflection, y" of a clamped-clamped axial! y free pipe are adopted as the standard values, with
respect to which results from pipes with other support conditions (f, Yo) are compared, then:

Eqn4.13

Estimates of the error involved in calculating f using Equation 4.13, are listed in Table 4.2
for (SS) and (SC) end supports.

Table 4.2
Comparisons between exact and approximate values of natural frequency

f/fc

Support Condition Exact Ref Equation % Difference

[47 4.13

SS 0.441 0.447 1.4

se 0.689 0.694 0.7

Sirnilarly, small errors are found to occur even when support flexibility is considered, as
shown in Figure 4.5(iii), using solutions described in Reference [47].
Thus the approximations introduced in the dynamic analysis may in general result in small
overestimations of natural frequency. However, in the context of vortex shedding
calculations lower bound estimates are required. For this reason, it is recommended that a
design factor is applied to the natural frequency, calculated according to Equation 4.13, to
account for the following errors:
• Rayleigh approximation; 1.5% error.
• Approximation involved in Equation 4.13, 1.5% error.
• Small errors due to support flexibility.

The frequency design factor that would appear to be appropriate is 0.95.

Thus, with its validity established, Equation 4.13 can be used very conveniently to obtain
the natural frequency of a pipe span with any end support conditions, provided that its
maximum static displacement is known. Such a simplification is of a great value in
structural response analysis, because it means that both the static and dynamic response of
pipe spans can be evaluated, simply by carrying out a static analysis.

4.4 DYNAMIC SPAN RESPONSE TO VORTEX SHEDDING

The analysis of free vibrating pipeline spans was considered in previous Sections, as were
methods for evaluating their natural frequencies. However, if the pipe is subjected to time-
dependent, periodic, disturbing forces, its response is referred to as forced vibrations. In
subsea pipelines, depending on the pipe and span characteristics, and the current and wave
conditions, fluid tlow around the circular pipe may result in vortices occurring in the wake,
at regular intervals. This is referred toas vortex shedding and it induces cyclic forces on the
pipe. Methods for calculating the vortex shedding frequency are described in detail in the
companion background document, Reference [5].
The effect ofthe vortex shedding frequency, f, on the pipe response can be examined with
reference to Figure 4.l(ii). When f, is very small in comparison to the natural frequency, f,,
then the effect of vortex shedding is small and pipe deflections are not very different from
those due to static action. However, as the frequency ratio, fvlfn, approaches unity the
amplitude of the resulting forced vibrations increases very rapidly, reaching a maximum
when fv =fu. referred toas resonance. These very large detlections may cause pipe failure

59

Contents
due to yielding, buckling, concrete spalling, or combinations of these. In addition fatigue
damage may occur due to fluctuations in the stress levels in the pipe [48, 49]. For tbese
reasons it is necessary to allow a safety margin between the vortex shedding and natural
frequencies to avoid such effects. Recommendations to achieve this are presented in
Background Document One, Reference [5].
The assessment of vortex shedding and methods of evaluating the associated forced dynamic
response of pipeline spans and their consequences are also discussed in detail in Background
Document One, Reference [5].

4.5 EFFECTS OF PIPE, SPAN ANO SEABED

CHARACTERISTICS ON NATURAL FREQUENCY
The natural frequency of pipe spans, so crucial in detennining their response to forced
periodic loading, may be influenced by the pipe and span characteristics and the seabed
conditions. The effects of these parameters on the natural frequency of single and multiple
spans are reviewed in the following sub-sections, using available published information.
Most of the available literature related to single spans [6, 13, 14, 15, 18, 45], with very
little published on multiple spans [16]. lt is shown in these References that the most
importan! parameters that affect the natural frequencies are:
• axial force
• soil conditions and degree of pipe embedment in soil
• seabed geometry
• static and dynamic non-linear effects
• multiple spans - separation length.

4. 5. 1 Effect of axial force, T

Most of the available information on the effects of axial force on natural frequency,
corresponds to single pipe spans with either surface resting supports, as shown in Figure
4.2(i), or buried supports, as shown in Figure 4.2(ii), in rigid soil. These effects are
illustrated in Figure 4.3 for various end conditions, using results reported in References [6,
13, 14, 18, 44, 45]. In all cases the pipes were assumed to be umestrained axially whilst
subject to an axial force.
As expected, a reasonable lower bound to the different curves is provided by the response of
a pipe with pinned ends. Increasing the bending restraint at the end supports has the effect
of increasing natural frequency. The large variation in values shows that simplification of
boundary conditions may not be justifiable, either producing results that may be very
conservative when simple supports are adopted, or producing results that may be
unconservative if stiffer end conditions are assumed.
The effect of axial tension, as shown in Figure 4.3, is to increase natural frequency.
Therefore, in cases where the axial tension cannot be estimated accurately, it may be
conservative to calculate the natural frequency assuming f3::; O. However, the same cannot
be said for axial compression which is shown to have a detrimental effect on natural
frequency. Conservative estimates of natural frequency can, therefore, be obtained only if
the maximum axial compression is adopted in calculations.
This dependenc~ of natural frequency on axial forces will be modified if the effects of axial
restraint are incorporated. These effects are examined in Section 4.5.4.

4. 5. 2 Effects of soil conditions

In most practica! situations for a subsea pipeline, support is provided by flexible soils.
There are very few available studies which consider the effects of flexible soil on pipe span
response and in many design procedures it appears to be completely neglected. The two
main parameters of interest are soil stiffness and soil/pipe friction. Their effect on natural
frequency was examined in References [13, 14, 15] and the results are examined in the
following. ·

60

Contents
 .~I~;&;·!.o-.:;,¡;~~~~J.:.i):.W~~::;~
{':,;- ', :;

,.;,:~=""'=~,...,-......J,'-~
~~l'.:~:~:~::~~~->~·-:·..., . ,._;_:~~:-~?~ /

i) TYPICAL PIPE, SPANNING BETWEEN HORIZONTAL RIGIO SUPPORTS

ii) BURIED PIPE WITH LINEAR SOIL SPRINGS

Figure 4.2
Baslc span configurations for unburied and buried pipes

61

Contents
 i
fe
......... ..........
CLAMPED ..............-
--·
~

-·-
---------1·0 -~-----.-...---
·······
..... -· -·-· -· -· . ··•·····••
~--

-·-·-·
...~
~.":!:::·

0·5
_______ _!INNED_
------
---.._.--..,===--=~=1
OA

03

o 5 10
COMPRESSON TENSION

KEY:
REFERENCE SUPPORT CONDITION

6 SURFACE RESTING SPAN ON.RIGIO SOIL

---- 13 SURFACE RESTING SPAN ON R IGID SOIL

----- 14 BURlE O SPAN IN RIGID SOIL

---- 18 SPAN WITH PINNED ENDS

............. 44 SURFACE RESTING SPAN ON RIGID SOIL

• 45 SPAN WITH CLAMPED ENDS

AXIALL V UNRESTRAINED PIPES

Figure 4.3
Variation of natural frequency of pipeline spans wlth axial force, assumlng rigid
soil supports

62

Contents
Buried Linear Soil Stiffness
The span configuration employed in the analysis of the effects of soil stiffness on natural
frequency is shown in Figure 4.2(ii). This is based on a pipe with buried ends, linear soil
springs and no axial restraint. The dependence of natuial frequency on soil stiffness is
shown in Figure 4.4. It can be seen that as the soil becomes more flexible, and the soil
stiffness parameter, y decreases, the natural frequency decreases. If, in addition to this, the
effect of axial forces is considered, there can be large variations in the value of the natural
frequency. Thus, a combination of soft soil and large axial compression may result in very
low frequencies.
It is evident from Figure 4.4 that soil stiffness has an important effect on the natural
frequency and should be considered qrrefully in analysis. There can be as much as 250%
difference between the values off corresponding lo soft and hard soils.

Partially B~ried or Unburied Bi~inear Soil StiffneSs.

In earlier Sections the span was considered as either resting on the surface of the seabed, or
with its ends completely buried. The behaviour ·af a span with end conditions somewhere
between unburied and total! y buried, is considered in this Section.
An approximate solution to this situation has been developed in Reference [15]. In this, the
pipe span was modellOO, as shown in Figure 4.5 resting on bilinear soil springs, with the
spring stiffness in the upwiird directión denoted by ~ and that in the downwards direction by
~; their ratio is denoted by r = kJk;. Values of r corresponding to different end support
conditions are listed in Tablé 4.3.

Table 4.3
Dependence on bi·linear soll stiffness ratio on the pipe end support conditions

Pipe End Support Conditions k~

k,•

Resting on flexible soil o k, o

Resting on rigid soil o ~ o
Buried in linear soil k, k,

Buried in bilinear soil k; k,•

Buried in rigid soil

The case of pipe ends buried in two different types of soil, for example sand resting on clay,
is modelled by assunting a pipe is buried in bilinear sóil.
In the analysis reported in Reference [15] the bilinear soil stiffness effects were modelled
approxiÍnately. lt was assumed that the springs in Figure 4.5(i) can be replaced by
equivalen! translational, k,,, , and rotational, k22, springs, as shown in Figure 4.5(iii). The
stiffnesses of these springs, k,, and k22 , were expressed as functions of k; or k:, depending
on whether the average deflection of the pipe over the support was downwards or upwards.
In addition, the pipe was assumed to be completely unrestrained axially.

63

Contents
 1·5

1·4

1·3

1·2

,.,

}~'"'
(3 = 40
-.... - - - -
u
1·0
CLAMPED BEAM
¡3 = 20
11: 09
w ¡3 =o
...,
1-
O·B
:lE
<( /3 = -4
11:
<(
Q. 0·7
,_ /3=""8
u 0·6
z
w
::;)
/J = -,2 COMPRES StO N
...,o 0·5
11: 11 = -,6
"-
04
/3 =-20
0·3

0·2

0·1

10° 101 102 10 3 Kf 10 5 10 6 107 108 10 9 10 10 10 11

SOIL STIFFNESS PARAMETER, 1f

NOTES

AXIALLY UNRESTRAINED BURIED PIPE SPAN .

WITH LINEAR SOIL STIFFNESS

,REFERENCE (14)

Figure ·4.4
Varlatlon of natural frequency wlth soll sllffness and axial force

64

Contents
il SPAN RESTING ON BILINEAR SOIL SPRINGS

l~o---DOWNWARD STIFFNESS, k:

BILINEAR SOIL STIFFNESS

UPWARD STIFFNESS, k~
RATIO,

iil BILINEAR SOIL STIFFNESS RELATIONSHIP

iiil MODELLED END CONDITIONS

I
Figure 4.5
Pipe span with bl·llnear soll stlffness

65

Contents
Even though these are severe limitations on the method, the results obtained from the
analysis should still be useful in providing an approximate assessment of the effects of
bilinear soil stiffness on natural frequency. The results are shown in Figure 4.6, and they
correspond to a soil with "( = 106 These results were obtained by considering a number of
typical pipe geometries and span lengths, assuming in all cases that [3 =O. A small scatter
was exhibited about the curve shown in Figure 4.6, but always less than ±1 %. lt can be
seen that as the soil stiffness ratio, r, increases, the effect of bilinearity on the natural
frequency rapidly becomes very small; for r > 0.5 it practically disappears, with the
frequency becoming equal to that of a pipe totally buried in linear soil.
What is also interesting, is that the natural frequency of a pipe resting on the surface of the
supports, provides a reasonable lower bound to the frequency of a totally buried pipe; for
the example in Figure 4.6 the difference is only 14%. This result suggests that in cases
where the degree of pipe embedment and the resistance to pipe deflections due to the soil
head cannot be quantified accurately, it may be conservative, but not unreasonably so, to
base natural frequency calculations on a surface resting pipe support model.

Effect of Soil Friction

In general, the axial movement of a pipe resting on or buried in soil is restrained by
frictional forces. These forces are dependen! on the normal reaction force, N, between the
pipe and the soil, and the coefficient ofpipe/soil friction, ¡.t, as discussed in Section 2.7.8.
For pipes resting on the surface or buried in the soil at the supports, the development of
friction is as illustrated in Figure 4.7. Immediately adjacent to the span, where the support
reactions are large, frictional forces of large magnitude develop, decreasing rapidly away
from the span, until they reach a limiting value dependent on the submerged weight of the
pipe. Further away, as axial movement decreases and becomes zero, no frictional forces
develop. The position where this occurs is referred to as the anchor point.
The effect of pipe/soil friction on the natural frequency has been examined in reference [15}.
In arder to simplify the analysis, an approximate linear modelling of the development of
frictional forces .was adopted in Reference [15]. This modelling may be a reasonable
approximation for' pipes completely buried at the supports, but may be unrepresentative of
surface resting pipes, as can be seen in Figure 4.7(i). In Reference [15] the frictional
resistance was modelled as a linear friction spring with stiffness, kr = ..J 2~qEA. The results
of this approximate analysis have been plotted in Figure 4.8. In this the values of ¡..t > 1
were included to model the effect of soil pressure on the development of frictional forces in
búried pipes, discussed in Section 2. 7 .8.
Thus, in Reference [15] instead ofusing Equation 2.22 to define limiting friction for buried
pipes, Equation 2.20 was used but with ¡.t modified to account for the difference. The
comparisons of Figure 4.8 show that, depending on the pipe and span geometry, there can
be a strong influence of J..l on frequency. One important reason why this may be so, is the
development of very large sag tension forces due to the increasing axial restraint provided
by increased friction. However, these results may, to a certain extent, be misleading, by
exaggerating the effects of friction, for the following reasons:
• The geometries for which large variations occur in f with increasing m, correspond to
long slender pipes, which may be unrealistic.
e The deflected shape was fixed in all cases to correspond to a pipe with rotationally
restrained ends.
• With small ¡.t, implying a surface resting pipe, the assumption of full rotational
restraint may b~ too conservative.
Thus, the influence of friction on buried pipes can be exarnined consistently only if
considered together with the effects of bilinearity in the soil stiffness, for more practica!
pipe and span geometries.

4. 5. 3 Effects of seabed geometry

The seabed is often uneven with several changes in slope. The effects of the seabed slope
adjacent to spans on natural frequency ha ve been investigated in Reference (6], together with
the effects of axial force. The pipe was considered to be restingon rigid sloping supports as
shown in Figure 3.2(i).

66

Contents
 1·00

--
....)

....)
ID

o
~
Ir
>- 0·90
u
z
UJ
:::>
fil
Ir
"-

o 80 l---r--.--,.--.--,---,----¡--..,----,,-.,..---
0 o 1 o 2 0·3 04 0·5 0·6 0-7 0·8 0·9 1·0
BILINEAR S~L STIFFNESS RATIO, r (=k; 1 k: )

_ FREOUENCY ~ SPAN WITH

f BL - BILINEAR SOIL STIFFNESS

_ FREQUENCY CF SPAN WITH

-LINEAR SOIL STIFFNESS (BURIED)

=UPWARD STIFFNESS

DOWNWARD STIFFNESS

l! = ;o•
(J =O

AXIALLY UNRESTRAINED PIPE

REFERENCE (15]

Figure 4.6
Graph showlng effect of bl-linear soil stlffness on natural frequency of span

67

Contents
 ----
FcxJ
.... ·'

FtxJ
VARIATION OF FRICTIONAL FORCE

i) FRICTIONAL FORCE FOR SPAN RESTING ON SOIL

BURIED SPAN

••
+ ,rf11 Fcxl VARIATION OF FRICTIONAL FORCE

ii) FR!CTIONAL FORCE- FOR BURIED SPAN

Figure 4.7
Typlcal dlstrlbutlon of frlctlonal force

68

Contents
 L/0 RATIO

I·O + - - - + - - - + - - - + - . . . . , . - - - - - + - 5 0
100
100

200
400

.."
-...
"-
o
¡:::
... 0·8
0:
>-
u
z
""o::>
'""-
0:

0·7+1---r---1---t-.--~--~-------,
NOTES
fF = FREQUENCY WITH SOIL FRICTION
fe•= FREQUENCY OF AXIALLY
RESTRAINEO BURIEO PIPE
SUPPORTS
{$ = 3
PIPE SUPPORTS BURIED IN RIGIO
SOIL ANO RESTRAINEO
ROTATIONALLY
osl----+----+----+-===~===í==~----~
2 4 6 8 10
COEFFICIENT OF FRICTION fL

Figure 4.8
Effect of soil friction on natural frequency

69

Contents
The reported results from Reference [6] show that seabed slopes of less than have an zo
appreciable effect on natural frequencies, sometimes up to 15% in comparison to
horizontally supported pipes, for zero axial forces.
However, these large variations may be dueto the approximations made when obtaining the
solution to the problem, particular! y with regards to the estimation of sag tension and
friction effects. In the calculations it was assumed that the displacement shape and
amplitude of the freespan remained constant irrespective of the variations in axial forces and
the seabed slopes. In addition, the effect of friction at the edges of the sirle spans, illustrated
in Figure 4.7(i), was completely ignored; this may in cases be very important depending on
the reaction forces at these positions, which are usually large. For these reasons, in general
small variations in seabed slope are expected to have a smaller effect that that suggested in
Reference [6]. The effects of seabed slope on pipeline span are exarnined further in Section
Six.

4.5.4 Static and dynamic non-linear effects

When the ends of a pipe span are restrained against axial movement, for example due to the.
development of pipe/soil friction, then application of loads will induce sag tension, the
magnitude of which increases parabolically with the amplitude of the deflected shape. The
effect of an increase in tension is to stiffen the pipe and increase the natural frequency as
discussed in Section 4.5.1.
This dependence of sag tension and natural frequency on the pipe span deflection is of a
non-linear nature, and it depends on the degree of axial restraint. Sag tension can develop as
a result of static effects, due, for exarnple, to the response of a pipe span to submerged
weight, or as a result of dynarnic effects, for example caused by vortex shedding
oscillations. In the latter case both stiffening and destiffening effects may occur, depending
on whether the movement is downwards or upwards during a vibration cycle. Aspects of
this behaviour have been examined in Reference [15], and are discussed in the following.

Effect of Static Sag Tension

The effect of static sag tension on static deflections and thus on natural frequency, has been
examined in Reference [15], by considering completely clamped pipe spans, as shown in
Figure 4.9(i). lt was found that when the non-linear effects were included, the static
deflection, y,, could be obtained from:

Eqn 4.14

where l3 is the axial force parameter, defined by equation (3.19), and ~ is the characteristic
displacement parameter, defined by Equation 3.25. It was found that, for this particular
example, variations of 13 in Equation 4.14 did not have a strong effect on Yo•· This is
illustrated for different pipe geometries and span lengths in Figure 4.9(ii). Because of the
assumed boundary conditions very large sag tensions are induced in the pipe spans, thus
overshadowing the effect of the applied axial force. This is a very unrealistic example. In
practica} situations the axial and rotational restraints will have finite values depending on
the development of axial friction and the soil stiffness of the supports. In such situations
the effects on non-linear and linear tensions will be expected to be comparable.
This is illustrated in Figure 4.10, which shows the effect of characteristic displacement
parameter, 1;. on non-linear axial force parameter, 13ru, for different values of the coefficient
of friction, ~- The results in Figure 4.10 were obtained in Reference [15], assuming pipes
with ends buried in rigid soil supports and subjected to axial tension corresponding to
13 ; 3. lt can be seen that the degree of friction development has a very strong effect on 13.,.
For soils with ~ ; 0.5 and pipes with ~ < 2; it appears that 13., is of the same order as 13.
However, the practica! significance of this graph is limited because of the assumptions
made regarding rotational restraint and soil stiffness.

70

Contents
 :~;;r~~~i.t:ii.tr-!~~;~;.:(j'ffj
;'t, RIGID SUPPORTS
~~+------

il AXIALLY RESTRAINED PIPE

L=50m

05

-5 -4 -3 -z -, o 2 3 4
COMPRES SION TENSION

iil VARIATION OF STATIC NON-LINEAR DEFLECTION WITH

AXIAL FORCE PARAMETER ,¡:¡.

Figure 4.9
Static non·linear effects

71

Contents
 ...J
z ~ •<>o
~
a:
"'.... 20
"'<1::E
a:
Cf
z
o ~ = 5·0
¡¡;
z
"'....a:
<1

"':::;z
10
z'
o ~ =0·5
z

CHARACTERISTIC DISPLACEMENT PARAMETER, ~ (= Yc/Dl

NOTES'

PIPE BURlE O IN RIGID SOIL

fl = 3

Figure 4.10.
Varlatlon of non-linear tenslon wlth characterlstlc dlsPiacement for dlfferent
friction coefficlents

72

Contents
 FIXED ENDS

il VIBRATION OF PIPE WITH yd < Y05

FIXED END

CASE l i
·....

·.· ...

iil VIBRATION OF PIPE yd > Y05

RESTORING
FORCE

1 DYNAMIC DE LECTION
RATIO yd 1 y05

iiil VARIATION OF RESTORING FORCE WITH AMPLITUDE OF VIBRATION

. Figure 4.11
Dynamlc non-linear effects

73

Contents
 1·5

-..
•
' "" 1·0

-
·o
¡::
,_"'"'
u
z
w D = 1·0 m
::>
o
w
"'
"-
0·5
:'-----O= 05m L= lOOm

'--,,----O= O· 25m

o+-------~------+-------r-------,-------
0 0·5 10 1·5 20
OYNAMIC TO STATIC OISPLACEMENT AMPLITUDE RATIO,
Yos

NOTES'

® YELO OCCURREO AT (J y = 350 M Po

,;e = 3
AXIALLY RESTRAINED PIPE BURIEO IN RIGIO SUPPORTS

Figure 4.12
Varlatlon of natural frequency wlth amplitude- of vibratlon

74

Contents
Dynamic Non-Linear Effects
Pipe spans subjected to static loads will deflect to a static equilibrium position, for example
shown by the salid curve in Figure 4.ll(i). However, when subjected to a periodic
disturbing force, for example to vortex shedding loading, they will vibrate about this
equilibrium position, as shown in Figure 4.ll(i). Thus the dynamic response will be
superimposed on the static deflected shape of the pipe, as indicated by the broken lines in
Figure 4.11 (i). Downwards dynamic displacements will result in increases in sag tension
and thus increases in stiffness, indicated by curve I in Figure 4.ll(iii). Upwards dynamic
displacements will result in reductions in sag tension and stiffness, indicated by curve 11.
However, when these upward displacements are large, with yiyos>l, so that shape reversa!
occurs, as shown in Figure 4.11 (ii), sag tension and pipe stiffness will start increasing
again, as shown by curve II1 in Figure 4.11 (iii). Increases and decreases in sag tension will
be accompanied by restoring forces being generated in the pipe, the effect of which is
always to restare the pipe to its original static equilibrium position. Their variation with
the amplitude of vibration, y,, is shown in Figure 4.11 (iii).
The variations in sag tension and pipe stiffness, which are functions of the vibration
amplitude, y,, will have an effect on the natural frequency study of the system. This is
shown in Figure 4.12, obtained from results reported in Reference [15). In general, the
frequency, fsd, decreases in comparison to the value, which occurs at yd =O, fs. It reaches a
minimum value at yd =Yos. and increases again for Yd > Yos· This behaviour is closely
associated with the variation in pipe stiffness, indicated by Figure 4.ll(iii). Reductions in
frequency as muchas 20% can occur because of this non-linear destiffening associated with
dynamic displacements. When the amplitude of the vibrations is significant, compared to
the static deflection, y,., yielding of the pipe, and possibly collapse, may occur during its
dynamic response. Positions where yielding of the pipe occurs, assuming that allowable
stress is 350 MPa, are shown in Figure 4.12. For this reason, it is advisable that large
amplitude vibrations are prevented, by ensuring that a safe separation margin exists between
the vortex shedding frequency, and the pipe natural frequency as discussed in Reference [5].
For ydiYos < 0._2 the effect of dynamic displacements on the natural frequency is
insignificant.
An additional effect of vibrations on span behaviour is that illustrated in Figure 4.13,
associated with situations where surface resting pipes form small side-spans. During
vibrations the deflection, y,, and length, L, of the side-spans change, increasing with
downward movement and decreasing with upward movement of the central span. Because of
the interaction between the si de and central span response, when the amplitude of motion is
significan! the time-varying support length may have an effect on the natural frequency.
This behaviour was examined in Reference [15), assuming a surface resting pipe, on rigid
supports, and zero axial force. It was also assumed that the amplitude of vibrations in the
central span was limited to a value, such that the amplitude of vibrations in the side span,
y,, was equal to the static deflection, y,, to relevan! problems associated with contact with
the seabed. Within these limitations and for the exarnple considered in Reference [15], the
effect of time varying support length on natural frequency was reported to give a 6.5%
underestimation of the value. However, the practica! value of these results is very limited,
due to the very idealised support conditions considered in the analysis.
In general, it has been shown that non-linear actiOn associated with vibration of pipe spans
can have a significan! effect on natural frequency. However, it is usual practice to preven!
vibrations of pipe spans, because of the potential of catastrophic collapse associated with
fatigue or buckling, when significantly large vibration amplitudes occur. This is achieved
by ensuring a safe separation margin between the vortex shedding frequency and the natural
frequency, recommendations about which are made in Reference [5]. In such cases,
therefore, it may be concluded that non-linear dynamic effects have insignificant influence
on natural frequency.

75

Contents
 y,
~r)i'fiCf.•CC>Mj' ,,

.Ó.Lo

;;&if.S;t,i,;i'lw~fi!\j;\?X1'if:~·;::::i;1't"'W~6·
Lo L Lo

Figure 4.13
Effect of vibration amplltude on slde·span length

4. 5. 5 Multiple · spans
There may be occasions where spans form adjacent to each other along the pipeline route,
especially when the seabed is very uneven, or dueto scouring, as discussed in Section 2.3.
If such spans are sufficiently clase together, with relatively short intermediare support
lengths, they may interact, responding as a system. When this occurs, the whole multiple
span system must be considered as a unit in calculating the natural frequency. Tbis
interaction of adjacent spans occurs through the coupling influence of the intermediate
support length. It is therefore important to know whether the spans are uncoupled, thus
behaving independently, or if they are coupled in which case they must be analysed together
using more accurate methods of analysis, for example [17].

Buried Supports
A study was carried out in Reference [ 16], concerning the above phenomenon. In order to
simplify the analysis, the following assumptions were made.
a. the sea bed was horizontal
b. the soil supports behaved as linear elastic springs
c. the pipeline remained in contact with the supports
d non-linear effects were ignored
e. both spans existed simul taneously
[, the frrst fundamental frequency mude was considered only
g, frictional effects were ignored.
Assumption (e) was made because the order in which the spans are formed can have an
effect on the results. For instance, if a single span occurs and is followed by a second
adjacent span, the sag of the first span would be reduced during the development of the
second span.
The multiple span geometry which was considered in the analysis is shown in Figure
4.14(i) with Lo and L, being the adjacent span lengths, and L; the intermediate support
length. The pipe spans were assumed to have soil spring supports of stiffuess k,.
The natural frequencies of a number of multiple span cases were calculated in the study,
including the effects from variations of span lengths, L1 and L2, soil stiffuess, k,, and axial
force, T,

76

Contents
The spans were considered to be uncoupled when the frequency of the fundamental mode did
not change with the support length L;. It was found that a good approximation to the
critica! uncoupling support length, L¡, is given by:
21t
L;o = [::-2::---c(c:-k-,-_EI-n--',f'é!2"-)-:-~-----=-]­ Eqn4.15
+ _! ~
El'
The spans were considered as uncoupled when:
L;o < L¡ Eqn 4.16
The above equations can be non-dimensionalised using the parameters derived in Sections
Four and Five, by expressing L;o in terms of L¡. The resulting equations can be simplified
by noticing that in most cases k.. >> f'. Thus, combination of Equations 4.15 and 4.16
gives the condition for which span decoupling is ensured as:
2y, i + J3, > 41t 2 Eqn 4.17
where y; and ¡3; are respectively the soil stiffness and axial force parameters corresponding to
the intermediate support. Provided expression 4.17 is satisfied interaction between adjacent
spans will be avoided.
It was also found. in Reference [ 16], that the effect of interaction between adjacent spans is
to reduce the natural frequency, relative to that of the individual spans. As this is more
critica!, being unconservative from the point of view of vortex shedding, it is importan! to
analyse spans which are coupled, using accurate methods such as those described in
Reference [17].
When spans are uncoupled they can be treated as independent single spans, and can be
analysed using the methods described in Sections 3 and 4.

Surface Resting $upports

The approximatioo to the critical decoupling support length, L;c, given by Equation 4.15,
was obtained on the basis of the assumption that vibrations of the central support length
did not extend into the adjacent spans. In the case of pipe resting on the surface of the
supports, it was shown in Reference [ 13] that side-spans form of length approximately
equal to L/2, as illustrated in Figure 4.14(ii). Thus assuming in this case that span
uncoupling occurs when vibrations of the intermediate support lenglh do not extend into
these side-spans, equation 4.16 takes the form:
1
Lto + :;: (L, + L,) < L, Eqn4.18
which after non-dimensionalisation and rearrangement becomes:
1 41t 2
2Y:;:+ ¡3, > [ _ (L 1 + L 2 ) ] ' Eqn 4.19
l 2Li
Thus, provided that expression (4.19) is satisfied, uncoupling between adjacent spans can be
ensured. As in most practica! situations it is difficult to establish whetber intermediate
supports are completely buried, partially buried, or surface resting, it is recoinmended that
Equation 4.19 should be used in all cases to provide conservative estimates of span
uncoupling.
If span coupling is a problem, due to its adverse effects on frequency more accurate methods
of analysis should be used, as for exarnple those in Reference [17]. However, the results
from pararnetric studies presente<! in Reference [16] indicate that conservative estimates of
natural frequency may be obtained by assuming simple supports and analysing the spans
individually.

77

Contents
 L, L¡

i) BURIED SUPPORTS

L, L¡

ii) PIPE RESTING ON SURFACE OF SUPPORTS

Figure 4.1~
Multlple sp~ns

78

Contents
 5. PARAMETRIC ANALYSIS OF SPANS

5.1 INTRODUCTION
The variables which influence the behaviour of a pipeline span are identified in Sections 3
and 4. They have been expressed into a non-dimensional forma! in an effort to reduce the
total number of independent variables and provide generalised solutions to pipe spanning
problems. These non-dimensional parameters include the axial force parameter, ~. soil
stiffness pararneter, y, seabed slope parameter, /., characteristic displacement parameter, ~.
and soil friction parameter, 11· It is necessary to limit the values of these non-dimensional
parameters to a practica! range, in arder to ensure realistic results. This is achieved by
examining values of the variables as used in practice, under normal conditions.
The methods of analysis established in Sections 3 and 4 have been employed to carry out
parametric investigations of span behaviour, by varying the above mentioned parameters
within chosen limits.
The structural quantities of interest, obtained from such an analysis, are axial force, bending
moments and natural frequency. The dependence of these quantities on the non-dimensional
parameters is examined in the context of parametric sensitivity studies. In cases where this
dependence is found to be small, the effects of the corresponding non-dimensional
parameters are accounted for by the use of analysis factors, the magnitudes of which are
obtained from the sensitivity studies carried out. In assessing the magnitudes of these
factors a conservative approach is followed, so that frequency is minimised, and the bending
moments and axial forces are maximised in magnitude. The use of these analysis factors has
the effect of reducing the number of non-dimensional pararneters that need to be considered
in analysis even further, thus simplifying the overall approach. The dependence of the
structural characteristics of pipe spans on the remaining important non-dimensional
pararneters is then examined in full.

5.2 RANGES OF, PARAMETERS

In order to assess the behaviour of a span in a consistent and rational manner, 1t ts
necessary to establish the practical ranges of the static and dynamic non-dimensional
parameters, in relation t6 subsea pipelines. Each of the parameters developed in Sections 3
and 4 is considered to establish these practica! ranges.

5. 2.1 Linear axial force parameter, ~~

The linear axial force pararneter, ~ •• has been derived in Section 3.3. It takes the form:
2
" _ T 1L
f'l - El
In order to establish the practica} range of this parameter, it is appropriate to consider the
possible limit states of pipeline spans under various loading conditions. This approach
should yield the linút values of the critica! span pararneters. When a span is subjected to
comprcssion, for example as a result of pressure effects, it behaves similar toa compressed
bar, for which the limit state corresponds to Euler type buckling. This can be used to
examine practica! ranges of ~ .. as Euler buckling depends on sinúlar variables, such as axial
force, span length and pipe flexura! rigidity.

79

Contents
 When the compressive force is increased and it nears the value of the Euler buclding load,
T,, the displacements and the bending moments become large. In axiallly restrained pipes,
non-linear tension may develop which has the effect of reducing the deflections. This effect
is illustrated by curves 1 and 11 in Figure 3.3. The non-linear tension will have a stronger
effect on a stiff pipe than a flexible one. A limit state criterion can be established by
comparing the linear axial force parameter,f3 1 , to the Euler buckling load, T,.
Since, assuming simple supports:
2
1t EI
T,=u
and:
R - T,L'
pi - El
It is possible to express the axial force, T, in the form:
T - [3,T,
1 - 1t2

A suitable criterion is to limit the linear axial force, T¡, to a value less !han the Euler
buckling load, T,, because if T,, is greater !han T, the stresses may increase toa leve!
which will precipitate collapse.
Therefore, if it is assumed that at the limit:
T1 = T,
then:
[3, = 10
As the boundary conditions may not necessarily correspond to simple supports, a somewhat
larger range may be defined for [3,,
-15 < [3¡ < 15
From the above assessment it can be seen that this may be a reasonable range for t3,.

5. 2. 2 Seabed slope parameter, A.

The parameter which describes the slopes of the span at the supports is given by

A. - @J!lli!
- qL'

Therefore A. depends on the following factors, which need to be considered in order to define
its parametric limits:
• the relative angle between the slope of the support and the span, dljl
• the length of span, L
• pipe properties, q and El.
From surveys of various pipelines, for example the Frigg Line survey reported in Reference
[7], it is apparent that seabed slopes are rarely greater than 2°. An exception is the
Norwegian Trench where slope angles may reach 6°. However, it is not practicable to allow
for all exceptional cases in the basic analysis. For this reason a 2° relative slope angle is
initially taken as the maximum in the range of geometries considered. When slopes are
outside this range then it may be necessary to carry out more accurate methods of analysis,
as for exarnple described in Reference [17].

Typical, feasible, span lengths will depend on the pipe properties, and can be estimated on
. the basis of vortex shedding considerations. Por instance a span of 15m can be critical for
small diameter pipe (6-inch), while it may be insignificant for a large diameter pipe (40-
inch). Similarly a span of lOOm can be critica! for a large diameter pipe but it is not
feasible with a small diameter pipe, which will usual! y follow the seabed profile forming
only smaller spans. The critica! span length for a particular pipe size, can, therefore, be
obtained on the basis of vortex shedding calculations, as described in Codes of Practice, for
example Reference [1]. Values of the typical critica! span lengths, Lcr. are. given in

80

Contents
Reference [8] anda graph showing the dependence of La on pipe diameter, D, is shown in
Figure 5.1. V alues of critica! span length for a number of diameters are summarised in
Table 5.1 and can be used in determining parametric ranges for A..

Table 5.1
Critica! span lengths

[.,y
D [.,y
D
(m) (m)

0.1 15 150

0.5 34 68

l. O 96 96

1.2 140 116

The variation of !• with span length and pipe sizes has been calculated for empty and
water filled pipes with 50mm and lOOmm concrete coating. A representative maximum
value for A. can then be chosen from the variation in the computed values shown in Table
5.2.

Table 5.2
Varlation of slope parameter

Pipe El
Case Dia (m) D/t [.,y
qL'
1..
dllf=1 o dllf=20

1.,=2" 0.1 lO 15 0.3 0.0052 0.0105

0.5 30 34 2.4 0.0419 0.0838
empty 1.2 30 140 0.55 0.0096 0.0192

~=2" 0.1 10 15 0.29 0.0051 0.0101

water 0.5 30 34 1.2 0.0269 0.0419
filled 1.2 30 140 0.13 0.0023 0.0045

1.,=4" 0.1 10 15 0.14 0.0024 0.0049

0.5 30 34 1.2 0.0209 0.0419
empty 1.2 30 140 0.25 0.0044 0.0087

!<,=4" 0.1 10 15 0.13 0.0023 0.0045

water 0.5 30 34 0.72 0.0126 0.0251
filled 1.2 30 140 0.105 0.0018 0.0037

A maximum of A.= 0.04 covers the rnajority of cases for ang1es of 1o and 2°. The exception
in Tab1e 5.2 appears lo be with a slope angle of 2°, an empty pipe with diameter 0.5m and
concrete coating of 50mm.

A similar range for A. rnay be obtained by considering the slopes al the end of a simply
supported span, 'lfu, given by,
_ 51tgL 3
'l'u - 384EI

81

Contents
 1
1

102

E
~
'-'
-'
r
1-
"'wz
...J
z
íi'.
(J)

-'
<[
u
;::
¡¡:
u
10 1

NOTES
PIN- ENDED STROUHAL NUMBER
MODIFIER = 1·0
ADDED MASS COEFFICIENT, Cm= 1
LOGARITHMIC DECREMENT OF
STRUCTURAL DAMPING= 0·126
20< .!f < 40
Q-5 < Us < 1 ms-1

10°1-----i----4----t---+--+----
0 0·5 1·0
PIPE DI AME TER D( m)

Figure 5.1
Approxlmate dependence of crltlcal span length qn pipe diameter

82

Contents
The corresponding non-dimensional slope parameter A. , is given by
"
' - l!f,.EJ - ~ - O 04
"-n - A.L 3 - 384 = ·

This value for A., of 0.04, is considered reasonable within working bounds. However,
values of A. greater than 0.04 and within the range -0.12 < A. < 0.12 will be investigated in
the sensitivity study.

5. 2. 3 Soil stiffness parameter, y

The soil stiffness parameter is defi.ned as

It therefore depends on the following:

• soil stiffness, k,
• length of span, L
• pipe properties, EJ.
All of these factors will need to be considered when determining the practica] range of the
soil stiffness parameter and examined in the following.
As most available methods of soil survey of the seabed produce mostly qualitative results,
it is unrealistic to expect high accuracy when defining values of soil parameters. These are
usually given within relative wide ranges, which give an indication of the behaviour of
certain types of soil.

Soil Stiffness
Tbe stiffness, k,, of certain typical types of soil is discussed in Section 2.7.7. Values of k.
appear to vary bétween IMPa for soft soils and 106 MPa for hard rocks.

Length of Span
Typical critica! span lengths, based on vortex shedding criteria, corresponding to various
pipe sizes are given in Section 5.2, and are summarised in Table 5.1.

Range of Soil Stiffness Parameters

Based on the range of span lengths given in Tab1e 5.1 the 1imits of (~;)can be deterrnined
for various pipe sizes. Thus by incorporating the limits of soil stiffness the corresponding
ranges of y can be found as shown in Table 5.3.

Table 5.3
Limits of soil stiffness parameters

D k kL'
(m)
D/t (m)
(;;;:¡•
El r=a
Min Max
ks-10 6 ks-1012

0.1 10 15 0.082 8.2x10 4 8.2x10 8

0.5 30 34 0.0084 8.4x10 3 8.4x10 9

1.2 30 140 0.079 7.9x104 7.9x10 10

83

Contents
Discrete values covering the complete range of y can be obtained by examining Figure 4.4,
which was derived from Reference [J4]. These values are JO', JO', JO' and JO'. In cases
where soiJ parameters fall within these discrete values, the immediately lower value should
be used for conservativeness. Otherwise interpolation may be employed.

5. 2. 4 Characteristic displacement parameter, ~

The characteristic displacement pararneter, ~. is given by:

é, = >'E
D
A reasonably practica) range for the displacement of a clamped bearn, y,, is y,~ 0.6 D, thus
~ ~ 0.6. .

5.2.5 Pipe/soil friction parameter, 11

The friction pararneter, 1], is defined by:
D
11 = ~ L
This depends on the coefficient of pipelsoil friction, and pipe diarneter to span length ratio.
Typical values of the coefficient of longitudinal friction, ¡l, are given in Section 2.7.7,
TabJe 2.2. These values appear to vary between 0.2 and J.2.
The typical range of pipe diameter to span length ratios is estimated to be between JnO and
IIJ50, using the results shown in Table 5.1. Based on these, the practica! range of the
friction parameter, 1], can be defined as O.OOJ < 11 < 0.02.

5.3 SENSITIVITY STUDIES

It has been shown in Sections Four and Five that the frequency, bending moments and sag
tension are functions ofthe effective axial force, soil stiffness,.characteristic displacement,
seabed slopes, and soil friction parameters, so that:
f = f (~"y,é,,A.,l])
Initial studies ha ve shown that the effect of slopes and friction on frequency, f, moments,
M, and sag tension, ~,,, is relatively small. This suggests that it may be possible to
account for the effects of slope, A., and friction, 11.. parameters by the use of "analysis
factors", so that, for example:

Where .PJ.. and .p'l are the analysis factors for slope and friction respectively. Thus by using
this method it becomes possible to reduce the number of independent parameters that
determine structural response, to 13,. y and ~-
Values for the analysis factQrs can be detennined from a sensitiv.ity analysis. This may be
based on parametric studies of the variations in f, M and ~'" with A. and 1]. The results of
such sensitivity studies are shown in Figures 5.2 to 5.5. The ranges of variation are shown
shaded, with the percentage changes from the standard cases shown on each plot.
The variations are relatively small for frequency and bending moments. Even though the
corresponding variations in sag tension appear to be very large, they usually have a
reasonabJy smaJI effect on the total axial stresses. This is due to the fact that the sag
tension is in most cases a small part of the effective axial force. The analysis factors
obtained from the graphs in Figures 5.2 to 5.5 are given in Table 5.4. These have been
chosen on the basis that a lower bound is conservative for frequency, while an upper bound
is conservative for bending moments and axial forces. Also shown in Table 5.4 are analysis
factors to account for approximations in dynamic analysis, discussed in Section 4.3.

84

Contents
(lc)'l
I·O+-----.----r-----,---
09

o 8 1---t-------t----t--~
0·7

o 6 -t---------J-----t----,¡
0·5

0·3

02-t--~~---,----r---r---t--~

01

E--r~--~-+--r-~-,--+--r--t--r~(-
1 c)~=0006
1
01 02 03 OA 05 0·6 07 08 0·9 10 H
i) FREQUENCY

1·5
(:ch=0006
SAGGING

-~L__ _J__ _ -t- -1·5"'---~---"---...._-

ii) MOMENT

Figure 5.2
Varlation of frequency and moments with frlctlon parameter

85

Contents
 ..

6
'f
45%./

/ V i
'
/.

5 ~·
/ k( •
v·~~~.l
4

·'
V ~·
v/
v··
~-~
~·
/

3 1/lL ....
1 .

/
.•

1 V.
/.
~/
2 L

~
/.'
/ •/
¿~V
[;.
o
o 2 3 4 5 6 7

Figure 5.3
Varlatlon of non-linear tenslon wlth friction paramet8r

86

Contents
 1·1
{tc) slope 1·0
4o/. /i 1/. ¡,/

0·9
l •·····.
.·..
ll: ."'

lh V
era 1
,,. 5"t.

0·7
/
~
/ h.
/ .,.
0·6

0-5 / 1,¿'

0·4
/ -¿.
0·3
/t:#
02 ~
0·1
lv
l/i (fe) flat
o o1 0·2 03 04 05 06 0·7 era 0·9 I·O 1·1 1·2
i) FREQUENCY

HOGGING

1----1-----l-----,fL---+---+---+ (~e \al

- ~5 -¡.o 0·5 I·O 1·5 1'
SAGGINGJ

,•
ii) MOMENT

Figure 5.4
Variatlon of natural frequency and bending moments wlth slopes

87

Contents
 o 2 4 5 6

Figure 5..5
Variatfon of non-linear tenslon wtth slopes

88

Contents
 Table 5.4
Recommended analysis factors

Analysis Factors
Minimum Maximum Non-Linear
Frequency Bending Moments Axial Tensions
Hogging Sagging Maximum Minimum
Ar Am. A.. 1\,¡~ Anlmin

S1oping Sides 0.95 1.15 1.08 2.4 0.68

A.< 0.12

Friction 0.94 1.05 1.06 1.45 0.73

Effects
0.2 < 11 < 1.0

Dynamic 0.95
Analysis
Approximated

Recommended 0.85 1.20 1.15 3.5 0.5

Analysis
Factor

5.4 NON-DIMENSIONAL DESIGN CURVES

The methods of span analysis developed in Sections 3 and 4 are used to develop the non-
dimensional, parametric design curves, presented in Figures 5.6 to 5.11. These curves
permit the evaluation of the equivalen! tensile stress, cr,, for the purpose of a combined
stress yield check, and the evaluation of the span natural frequency of vibration for the
purpose of a vortex shedding check.
The design curves in Figures 5.6 to 5.9 show graphically the relationship between the non-
linear axial force parameter, 13nt. and the controlling linear axial force parameter, ¡3~, the
characteristic displacement pararneter, ~. and the soil friction pararneter, y.
The design curves shown in Figure 5.10 show graphically the relationship between the
maximum hogging and sagging bending moment ratios, Mh/Mc and Ms/Mc. and the
controlling effective axial force pararneter, p., and the soil stiffness pararneter, y.
The design curves shown in Figure 5.11 show graphically the relationship between the
span natural frequency ratio, f/fc. and the controlling effective axial force parameter, 13e. and
the soil stiffness pararneter, y.
It can be seen from Figures 5.6 to 5.9 that the non-linear axial force parameter, p,¡ is
always tensile, and increases with:
.• increasing characteristic displacement, ~
• decreasing linear axial force, l3n1
• ,increasing soil stiffness, y.
The effective axial force pararneter, p., is related to the linear and non-linear axial force
pariuneters; ¡3, and 13ru. by the relation be1ow:

~' = lh ~-
The eft(:ctive axial force parameter, 13e. is related to the linear and non-linear axial force
pararneters; ¡3, and ~.1. by the relation below:
l3o = ~¡ + ~,¡
It can be seen from Figure 5.10 that the hogging and sagging bending moment ratios,
Mi/M., and MJM.,, increase in absolute value with:
• decreasing effuctive axial force, ¡3,
• decreasing soil stiffness, y.

89

Contents
 SOIL STIFFNESS PARA METER • y •lO 7

8 ~l= -15

..
~
z
7
111:
_,
"'
~ =
.
"'e
:E
6 111:
111:
e
.... ~.: -7·5 "'
~

"'e
:E

"'u
111:
5 111:
e0..
...
o
.J 4
"'u
111:
e ~l= o ...o
...
)(

...
111:
3
...
.J

~ = 7·5
"'z
l ...
)(

~l= 15
.J
z
1
2
...
111:

o
z
"'z
.J

o
o 0·1 0·2 0·3 0·4 0·5 0·6 0·7

CHARACTERISTIC OISPLACEMENT PARAMETER, ~=~e

Figure -5.6
Non-linear axial force deslgn curves for· r = 107

90

Contents
 SOIL STIFFNESS PARAMETER ,Y•t05

8
Pl= -15

.. -'
z
7
"'"'
1-
"'
:10
.. -'

6
cr
"'"'
"'
cr
CL
Pl=-7·5 1-
"'
:E
cr
..,"' 5
"'
cr
"'....
o 0..

.J
cr 4 "'..,a:
Pl" O o
)( ....
cr .J
a: cr
cr 3 Pl= 7·5 )(

"'z
.J Pl= 15
cr
a:
1 cr
z 2
o
z "'
z
:::;

o
o 0·1 0·2 0·3 0·4 0·5 0·6 0·7

CHARACTERISTIC OISPLACEMENT PARAMETER, ~=~e

Figure 5.7
Non-linear axial force design curves for 1 = 105

91

Contents
 SOIL STIFFNESS PARAMETER ,Y•I0 4

8
Ji.=-15
..J
z
.,_ /¿J
V
7

V
lt:

"'1-
...
"'
2i
6 ~ lt:
-
,_"'
V
lt:
....
"'a:u 5 1/
P.: -7·5
..
"'
~

lt:

,/
....
o
IL

..
.J 4
/' PL= o
"'lt:
u
lf" ¡r
)(

/ / V .
."'
lt:
3
~
~"' PL= 7·5
.J

.
/ / V ~V
)(

z
.J
/_ . ~"
PL• 15
.."'
a:

v·
1
z 2

V / (/:,..,~
o V z
z :;

¿~ ~ ~
o •
o 0·.1 0·2 0·3 0·4 0·5 0·6 0·7

CHARACTERISTIC DISPLACEMENT PARAMETER, ~=~e

Figure 5.8
Non-linear axial force deslgn curves for y =104

92

Contents
 SOIL STIFFNESS PARA METER , Y •10'5

...
..J
z
7
11::

"'
1- .....J

"'cr
:E
6
11::
...
cr ....... 1!¡_=-7·5

"'u 5 1
1
11::
o
....
..J
cr 4
~L: Q
"'ua::
)(
cr
11::
3
1 ~· / ~
..J
cr
cr

1 1/
)(
cr
"'z
..J ~L: 7· 5 a::
z
1
2 / cr
"'..J
/ ~ ,~·
o z
z ,......... PL= 15

o
_,~~ ~
o '
0·1 0·2 0·3 0·4 0·5 0·6 0·7

CHARACTERISTIC OISPLACEMENT PARAMETER, ~=~e

Figure 5.9
Non-linear axial force deslgn curves for y = 10 3

93

Contents
lt can be seen from Figure 5.11 that the span natural frequency ratio, f/fc increases with:
• decreasing effective axial force, ~
• decreasing soil stiffness, y.
It can be concluded that conservative upper bound values of bending moment, M, and
natural frequency, f, are associated with:
• minimum non-linear axial force parameter, ~nl
• minimum effecti ve axial force parameter, ~'
• minimum soil stiffness.

It is importan! to note that the non-linear axial force pararoeter, ~"'' develops only in spans.
Th~ non-linear axial force parameter, ~nl. should be included only in such situations.
The analysis factors given in Table 5.4 should be applied to all values of non-linear axial
force pararneter, ~'" bending moment ratio, M/M, and natural frequency ratio, f/f, obtained
from Figures 5.6 to 5.11.

5.5 SPAN ANALYSIS METHODS

Phase 1 Span Analysis
The parametric method of span analysis is a complex procedure in tended for the analysis of
critica! spans. In order to identify which spans are critica!, a simple, quick and conservative
method of span analysis is needed.
Such an analysis, called the Phase 1 Span Analysis, has been developed and is presented,
together with worksheets, in draft form in a document for discussion with the industry
Reference [74]. The Phase 1 span analysis conservatively assumes the span is simply
supported and checks the following failure modes:
• yield
• bar buckling
• flow induced vibration.
Spans found unacceptable by the criteria applied in the Phase 1 span analysis are considered
critica] and should be subject to further more detailed analysis. The Phase 2 span analysis is
Considered a suitable more detailed method of analysis for spans identified as critica!.

Phase 2 Span Analysis

The non-dimensional, parametric method of span analysis developed within this report is
also presented in Reference [74], which contains a tlow-chart that sub-divides the Phase 2
span assessment into 26 activities. A worksheet is provided for each activity together with
guidance notes for the completion of each activity worksheet.

94

Contents
 1·5
"'
;!';
O>
O> Y >lo•
o
:<
Y =10 4
,.....
u
Y= 10'
~

rL
,. "'1-
.
2
1- ..,.
"'
0:
0:
...
1- (/)

,."'oz -15
(/)

"'...z
,. ...;::
"'¡¡z (/)

-'
z
.,"' Y >lo 5
o
(/)

..
z
y =10
4

.
¡;;
O>
(/)
Y= 10 5

EFFECTIVE AXIAL FORCE PARAMETER, Pe

Figure 5.10
Bending moment ratio (M/Mc) design curves

1·1
v >1 0 7
-
-
u
1·0 1
::::
....,.
0:
o ~ "'
.
l-
a:
0·9
~~
"\..._ ¡--Y=I0 5
1-

0:
,.. O·"
:
o
z
./~
"""' ;,...o.
7 " .--
"'~ '\ Y=l 0
4 (/)

"'"'...z
.
"'"o
... lL: L
0:
~ .<s ...
.
1-
..... 0·5 "\. "'-'
"'lr" ¿_ ~
~ Y=I0 3
o
"'
z ~ 0·3
-15 -10 -5 o 10 15
COMPRESSION TENSION

EFFECTIVE, AXIAL FORCE PARAMETER, Pe

Figure 5.11
Natural frequency ratio (flfc) design curves

95

Contents
 6. CONCLUSIONS

The Phase 1 span analysis method presented in Reference [74] provides a simple and
conservative method of identifying critica! spans.
The Phase 2 span analysis method presented in Reference [74] provides a non-dimensional
parameter based method for the analysis of critica! spans.
The static analysis concludes that the static behaviour of a span is govemed by five non-
dimensional parameters, namely:
• axial force parameter, J3
• soil stiffness parameter, y
• characteristic displacement, ~
• soil friction factor, 11
• seabed slope pararneter, A
The dynamic analysis concludes that the natural frequency, f, of a span is a function of the
same ti. ve parameters, and may be calculated from the static solution using the equation
below:

where:
(, = natural frequency of the clamped span
Ye = lateral displacement of a clamped span
Yo =lateral displacement of real span.
The use of the non-dimensional design curves is dependent on the value of the non-
dimensional parameters falling within the recommended ranges of applicability.

The sensitivity analysis concludes that the soil friction and seabed slope parameters may
reasonably be considered constant. These constants are included in the Analysis Factors, A,
that are applied to the results determined from the non-dimensional design curves.

The parametric analysis concludes that conservative values of bending moment, M, and
natural frequency, f, are associated with:
minimum non-linear axial force parameter, Bnt
minimum effecti ve axial force parameter, Be
minimum soil stiffness parameter, y.
The non-linear axial force parameter, Bnt. is present when the span develops through the
action of scour. Thus the non-linear axial force, Bnl. should only be included when scour can
be shown to be the cause of spanning.

In the event of multiple span interaction, the spans should be treated as simply supported
for the purposes of span assessment.

97

Contents
 NOTATION

A cross sectional area of steel pipe

minimum natural frequency analysis factor

maximum hogging bending moment analysis factor
maximum sagging bending moment analysis factor
maximum non-linear axial force analysis factor
minimum non-linear axial force analysis factor

water particle acceleration

in-line amplitude of oscillation

drag coefficient
inertia coefficient
lift coefficient
added mass coefficient

e friction constant

nominal pipe diameter

interna! pipe diameter
externa! pipe diameter, including coatings

E modulus of elasticity of steel

E. modulus of elasticity of soil

flattening of pipe cross section, or ovality

soil friction force

limiting friction factor
critica! buckling load
drag force
inertia force
lift force
maximum combined drag and inertia force

f natural frequency of pipeline span

fe characteristic natural frequency of clamped pipe

G maximum gap below span

G, shear modulus of soil

g gravity

H depth of pipe below water surface

f¡ height of pipe on barge above water leve!
Hs height of breaking wave
H. depth of burial of pipe from soil surface to pipe centreline

second moment of area of steel pipe

K curvature
K. critica! buckling curvature
K. coefficient of lateral soil stress at rest
K.E. kinetic energy

100

Contents
 soil spring stiffness
soil stiffness
soil reaction force

pipe span length

characteristic length
wave length
intermediate support length between multiple spans
multiple span lengths

side span length

M bending moment
M.o characteristic moment for clamped pipe
M, hogging bending moment
M, full plastic moment of pipe section
M, sagging bending moment

added mass from surrounding water

mass of concrete coating
mass of contents
effective mass
mass of steel pipe

N nonnal reaction force

collapse pressure for local buckling

initiation pressure
interna! pressure
externa! pressure
propagation pressure
pressure required for full plasticity in the hoop direction

P.E. potential energy

lateral force due to pressure effects

q submerged weight of pipe

q unit of weight of pipe in air
q. horizontalloading of spari
q, lateral pressure load per unit length
q, verticalloading of span

R radius of curvature of pipe

r, interna} radius of pipe

T, combined axial force

T,.. minimum tension applied to pipe by laybarge
T, effective axial force
T, linear axial force
Ttay residuallay tension
T., non-linear axial force
T, pressure axial force
Te thermal axial force
T, Poisson axial force
T. wave period
t pipe wall thickness
corrosion allowance

"""'
concrete coating thickness
t., externa! corrosion coating thickness

101

Contents
u total velocity of seawater
U, steady current velocity from surge and tidal currents
u. wave induced velocity
ü. maximum wave induced velocity

u longitudinal displacement

Ur usage factor

X axial co-ordinate
x* non-dimensional axial deflection

y norrnalised deflected shape

y lateral co-ordinate
Y< central displacement of clamped pipe
y, amplítude of pipe vibrations
Yo, Yos central displacement of span
y, deflected shape during vibration of pipe span
y* non-dimensional lateral deflection

a coefficient of therrnal expansion of steel

axial force parameter

combined axial force parameter
effective axial force parameter
linear axial force parameter
linear axial force parameter for multiple spans
non-linear axial force parameter
pressure axial force parameter

y soil stiffness parameter

Y• soil stiffness parameter for multiple spans

strain
non-linear strain
bending strain

soil/pipe friction parameter

ambient temperature
temperature of pipe contents
temperature difference of pipe contents over surrounding water
wave phase angle

seabed slope parameter

seabed slope parameter atA
seabed slope parameter at B

longitudinal friction coefficient

V Poisson's ratio for sted

v, Poisson's ratio for soil

characteristic displacement parameter

102

Contents
Po density of concrete
p, density of externa\ corrosion coating
1' density of contents pipe
p, density of steel
p, submerged density of soil
p. density of seawater

cr, longitudinal stress

cr, axial stress
cr, bending stress
cr, expansion stress range
<>• Von Mises equivalent stress
cr. equivalent tensile stress
crH, cry hoop stress
cry yield stress

t shear stress

<l>r angle of interna! friction of soil

scabcd slope
"''
lj/A
'1'•
pipe slope at A
pipe slope at B

Óljl relative angle

O) angular velocity

NOTE:
1) The following subscripts are added to the above notation:
h = horizontal
v = vertical
max maximum
mm = minimum
a = allowable

103

Contents
DEFINITIONS

Longitudinal stress
Normal stress acting parallel to pipe axis.

Hoopstress
Normal stress acting in the circumferential direction.

Pipe bending moment

Bend.ing moment (M) in the pipe cross section as a whole.

Pipe bending stresses

Longitudinal stresses dueto pipe bending moment.

Interna/ pressure
Pressure inside the pipe. May be given as absolute pressure or gauge pressure.

Externa/ pressure
Pressure (immediately) outside the pipe. May be given as absolute pressure or gauge
pressure.

lnitiation pressure
Externa! overpressure required to initiate a propagating buckle from an existing local buckle
or dent.

Propagation pressure
Externa! overpressure required to initiate a propagating buckle that has been initiated (at a
higher pressure).

Design pressure
Maximum interna! operating pressure.

Maximum operating pressure

Maximum pressure to which a piping system will be subjected in operation, which .should
include static pressure and pressure required to overcome friction.

Test preSsure
Pressure specified to be applied to a pipe on completion of manufacture and/or on
completion of construction. It may also be the pressure specified to be applied to a pipe
after appropriate periods in operation.

Mínimum design temperature

Lowest possible steady state temperature which the pipeline system experiences during
installation and operation. Environmental as well as operational temperatures are to be
considered.

Maximum design temperature

Highest possible steady state temperature which the pipeline system may be exposed to
during installation and operation. Environmental as well as operational temperatures are to
he considered.

Restrained lines
Pipelines which cannot expand or contrae! in the longitudinal direction due to fixed
supports or friction hetween pipe and soil.

104

Contents
Unrestrained Unes
Pipelines without substantial axial restraint (Maximum one fixed support and no
substantial friction).

Span length
Length of a pipeline without contact with the sea bottom or other supports (= unsupported
length).

Laying parameters
Essential parameters affecting the stresses in a pipeline during laying, such as applied
tension, stinger curvature, etc.

Nominal wall thickness

The pipe wall thickness that is specified for supply of pipes.

Nominal pipe diameter

The outside pipe diameter to be used in the design calculation.

Submerged weight of pipe

The weight of the pipe, coatings and contents, per unit length, after allowing for buoyancy.

Design Premise
A document listing al! necessary information to carry out design of a pipeline.

Route Survey
Detailed inspection along the proposed pipeline route, performed to provide sufficient data
for design and construction.

Seabed Topography
The mapping of the seabed to give sufficient detail of uneveness and features such as spans
along the pipeline route.

Vortex Shedding Response

A situation where a free span on a pipeline experiences periodic disturbing loading, due to
unsteady fluid flow past the pipe forming vortices. This may lead to oscillations of the pipe
normal to its axis.

Vortex Shedding Frequency

The frequency at which vortices are formed, dueto steady fluid flow pasta pipe span.

105

Contents
APPENDIX 8

REFERENCES

107

Contents
 REFERENCES

l. OET NORSKE VERITAS

Rules of Subinarine Pipeline Systems
H0vik, Norway 1981.
2. INSTITUTE OF PETROLEUM
Model Code of SaJe Practice Petroleum Pipelines
Part 6, 3rd Edition, London, 1967.
3. TIMOSHENKO, S., ANO GERE, J.M.
Theory of Elastic Stability
2nd Edition, McGraw-Hill Book Co, New York, 1961.
4. ROARK, R.J., ANO YOUNG W.C
Formulas for Stress and Strain
5th Edition, McGraw-Hill International Book Co, New York, 1975.
5. OEPARTMENT OF ENERGY
The Assessment of Submarine Pipeline Spans. Evaluation of Vortex Shedding
Frequency - Dynamic Span Response
Background Oocument One, Prepared by J.P. Kenny & Partners Ltd., London,
1984.(Now OTI 93 614)
6. HOSKINS, E.C.
Subsea Pipeline Free Span Vibration Analysis
lnstitute ofPetroleum IP 82-013, London, 1982.
7. TOTAL OIL MARINE
Frigg Pipelines Freespan 1982, Lines 1 and 2
(Via UKOOA), London, 1982.
8. OEPARTMENTOF ENERGY
The Assessment of Submarine Pipeline Spans. Pipeline Spanning Analysis. Current
Practice Report and Sensitivity Study
Prepared by J.P. Kenny & Partners Ltd, London 1983.
9. BOWLES, J.E.
Foundation Analysis and Design
3rd Edition, McGraw-Hill Book Co., New York, 1982.
10. LAMBE, T.W., ANO WHITMAN, R. V.
Soil Mechanics
John Wiley and Sons Inc., New York, 1969.
11. RA YLEIGH, J.W.S.
Theory of Sound, Volume 1
2nd Edition, McMillan, London, 1984 (Reprint Power Pubtications New York,
1945).
12. NA VAL FACILITIES ENGINEERING COMMAND
Design Manual- Soil Mechanics, Foundations and Earth Structures
US Naval Publications and Forms Centre, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, January
1971.
13. KIRK, C.L.
Sorne Considerations of the Oscillation of Pipelines
Report Number One, Prepared for J.P. Kenny & Partners, London, October 1982.
14. KIRK, C.L.
Analysis of Single Spans under Tension or Compression on Rigid and Linear
Elastic Foundations
Report Number Two, prepared for J.P. Kenny & Partners Ltd., January 1983.

108

Contents
15. KIRK, C.L.
Effects of Non-Linearities on Natural Frequencies of Spans
Report Number Three, prepared for J.P. Kenny & Partners Ltd., London, August
1983.
16. KIRK, C.L.
Natural Frequencies of Untensioned Double Spans and Double Spans ata Tie-ln
Report Number Four prepared for J.P. Kenny & Partners, London, October 1983.
17. ELLINAS, C.P., ANO TAM, P.
Structural Behaviour of Pipelines on Uneven Seabed
to be presented at 4th International Conference on Behaviour of Offshore Structures,
BOSS '85, De1ft, The Netherlands, 1-5 July, 1985.
18. TOTALOILMARINE
Span Analysis
Chapters Five, Six and Seven (Via UKOOA), London.
19. MOUSELLI, A.H.
Offslwre Pipeline Design, Analysis and Metlwds
Pennwell Books, Tulsa, Oklahoma, 1981.
20. PALMER, A.C.
Application of Offshore Si te Investigation data to the Design and Construction of
Submarine Pipelines
Offshore Site Investigation Conference in March 1979, Proceedings, Graharn and
Trotman, 1980.
21. MATTEELLI, R., LALLI, D., SILVESTRI, A.
Lay Trials in the Sicilian Channel in 2,000ft of Water
Offshore Technology Conference, Houston, Texas, 1977.
22. ROODUYN, J.
Transportation of prefabricated pipelines by the controlled depth tow methods
(CDTM)
Offshore Oil and Gas Pipeline Technology European Seminar, Birmingharn, 1984.
23. MATTEELLI, R., MAZZOLI, A.
Deep Water Pipelines: lntervention requirements, befare, during and after laying
Snamprogetti, Ita! y, OTC 4235, 1982.
24. ELLIS, J.W.
Scours and Spanning Threaten Sea Lines
Oil and Gas Journal, p.67, July 7th, 1975.
25. GRASS, A.J.
Self Burial of Seabed Pipelines, Preliminary Laboratory Testing at University
College, London
Prepared for J.P. Kenny & Partners Ltd., London, December 1983.
26. LITTLEJOHNS, P.S.G.
A Study of Scour around Submorine Pipelines, Field Tests on the Behaviaur of
Pipes when Laid on the Seabed and Subjected lo Tidal Currents
Report No. Int. 113, Hydraulic Research Station, London, 1977.
27. BROWN, R.C., ANO PALMER, A.C.
The Mechanics of Pipeline Reeling
Offshore Oil and Gas Pipeline Technology, European Seminar, Birmingharn, 1984.
28. HERBICH, J.B.
Offslwre Pipeline Design Elements
Maree! Dekker Inc., Switzerland, 1981.
29. CORBISHLEY, T.J., ANO LUYNENBURG, R.W.E.
Pipeline Span Detection, Assessment and Correction
Offshore Oil & Gas Pipeline Technology, European Seminar, January 1980.
30. TIMMERMAN, W.J.
Vertical Lay Vessel M ay Cut Offshore Pipeline Cost
Oil and Gas Joumal, July 9th, 1979.

109

Contents
31. DE SIVRY, B.
]-Curve Laying with Electron Beam Welding Technique
Offshore Oil & Gas Pipeline Technology, European Seminar, January 1984.
32. LANGNER, C.G.
Relationshipsfor Deep Water Suspended Pipe Spans
Intemational Offshore Mechanics and Arctic Engineering Symposium, New Orleans,
Louisiana, 1984.
33. SINGHAL, A.
How to Design Pipelines for Eartlu¡uake Resistance 1, 2 and 3
Oil and Gas Jo urna!, July, August, September 1983.
34. TVERGAARD, V., ANO NEEDLEMAN, A.
On Localised Thennal Track Buckling
International Joumal of Mechanical Science, Vol. 23, pp. 577-587, 1981.
35. ANAND, S., AND AGARWAL, S .L.
Field and Laboratory Studies for Evaluating Submarine Pipeline Frictional
Resistance
Paper 3781, Offshore Technology Conference, Houston, Texas, 1980.
36. AGARWAL, S.L., AND MALHOTRA, A.K.
Frictional Resistance for Sub marine Pipelines in Soft Clay
IGS Conference on Geotechnical Engineering, Vol. 1, pp. 373-379, 1978.
37. CAMPBELL, G.L., MITCHELL, W.W., ANO BUGNO, W.T.
Southern California Spread Mooring lnstallation
Paper 2061. Offshore Technology Conference, Houston, Texas, 1974.
38. L YONS, C.G.
Soil Resistance to Lateral Sliding of Marine Pipelines
Paper 1876, Offshore Technology Conference, Houston, Texas, 1973.
39. YEN, B.C., ALLEN, R.L., AND SHATTO, H.H.
Geotechnicallnput for Deepwater
Civil Engineering in the Ocean, Vol. l.
40. AUDIBERT, J.M.E., LA!, N.W., BEA, R.G.
Designing Subsea Pipelines to Resisf Seajloor lnstabilities and Hydrodynamic
Forces
ASME, New York, 1979.
41. LE MÉHANTÉ, B.
An Introduction to Hydrodynamics and Water Waves
Springer' Verlag, Dusseldorf, W. Germany, 1976.
42. SARPKA YA, T., ANO ISAACSON, M.
Mechanism ofWave Forces on Offshore Structures
Van Nostrand Reinhold Co., New York, 1981.
43. SARPKA YA, T., AND RAJABI, F.
Hydrodynamic Drag on Bottom-Mounted Smooth and Rough CylindÚs in Periodic
flow
Paper 3761, Offshore Technology Conference, Houston, Texas, 1979.
44. MOUSS~LLI, A.H.
Pipe Stresses at the Seabed During lnstallation and Trench Operations
Paper 2965, Offshore Technology Conference, Houston, Texas, 1977.
45. NIELSEN, R.
Spanning - Sorne Aspects of Statics and Dynamics
Offshore Oil and Gas Pipeline Technology Seminar 1979.
46. ELLINAS, C.P., ET AL
Limit State Philosophy in Pipeline Design
ASME Energy Sources Technology Conference and Exhibition, Third Offshore
Mechanics and Arctic Engineering Symposium, New Orleans, Louisiana, 12-16
February, 1984.

110

Contents
47. TIMOSHENKO, S., YOUNG, D.H., WEAVER, W.
Vibration Problems in Engineering, 4th Edition
J. Wiley & Sons, New York, 1984.
48. CELANT, M., ET AL
Fatigue Analysisfor Submarine Pipelines
Paper 4233, Offshore Technology Conference, Houston, Texas, 1982.
49. ALEXANDER, H.C.. ET AL.
Fatigue Considerationsfor Offshore Pipelines
Proc. 2nd Intemational Offshore Mechanics and Arctic Engineering Symposium,
ASME, Houston, Texas, January 30-February 3, pp. 243-249, 1983.
50. AMERICAN PETROLEUM INSTITUTE
API Specijication for High Test Line Pipe
API-5L, Dalias, Texas, March 1983.
51 THROFT-CHRISTENSEN, P., AND BAKER, M.J.
Structural Reliability Theory and its Applications
Springer-Verlag, Berlin, 1982.
52. DET NORSKE VERITAS (DNV)
Rules for the Design, Construction and lnspection of Offshore Structures
H0vik, Norway, 1977.
53. ELLINAS, C.P., SUPPLE, W.J .. AND WALKER, A.C.
Buckling ofOffshore Structures
Granada, London, 1984.
54. AMERICAN PETROLEUM INSTITUTE (API)
Recommended Practice for Planning, Designing and Constructing Fixed Offshore
Platforms
API RP 2A, 13th Edition, Washington D.C.. 1982.
55. BRAZIER, L.G.
On the Flexure ofThin Cylindrical She/ls and Other Thin Sections
Proc. Royal Soc., Series A, Vol. 116, pp. 112-116, 1926.
56. ROW, D.G., ET AL.
Local buckling Analysis of Pipelines
Proc. 2nd Inter. Offshore Mechanics and Arctic Engineering Symposium, ASME,
Houston, Texas, January 30-February 3, 1983, pp. 496-503, 1983.
57. REMSETH. S.N .. ET AL
Tube CollaPse Analysis using Finite Elements
Computérs and Structures, Vol. 8, pp. 383-390, 1978.
58. CALLADINE, C.R.
Theory of Shell Structures
Cambridge, Cambridge University Press, 1983.
59. SHERMAN. D.R.
Bending Capacity of Fabricated Pipes
Department of Civil Engineering, University of Wisconsin - Milwaukee, Report,
February 1983.
60. MESLOH. R., ET AL
The Propagating Buckle
Proc. BOSS 76 Conference, Norweigen Institute ofTechnology, pp. 787-797, 1976.
61. KYRIAKIDES, S., AND SHAW, P.K.
Response and Stability of Elastoplastic Circular Pipes under Combined Bending and
Extemal Pressure
lnt. J. Solids and Structures, Vol. 18, pp. 957-973, 1982.
62. KYRIAKIDES, S., AND BABCOCK, C.D.
Experimental Determination ofthe Propagating Pressure ofCircular Pipes
J. ofPressure Vessel Technology, Trans, ASME, Vol. 103, 1981.

111

Contents
63. KYRIAKIDES, S., ET AL.
lnitiation of Propagating Buckles from Local Pipeline Damages
Proc. 2nd Inter. Offshore Mechanics and Artic Engng. Symposium, ASME,
Houston, Texas, January 30-February 3, 1983, pp. 471-480, 1983.
64. JOHNS, T.G., ET AL.
Propagating Buckle Arrestorsfor Offshore Pipelines
J. Pressure Vessel Technology, Trans. ASME, Vol. 100, pp. 206-214, 1978.
65. KYRIAKIDES, S., ANO BABCOCK, C.D.
On the Slip-On Buckle Arrestar for Offshore Pipelines
J. Pressure Vessel Technology, Trans. ASME, Vol. 102, pp. 188-193, 1980.
66. MAXEY, W.A.
Fracture lnitiation, Propagation andArrest
5th Symposium on Line Pipe Research, American Gas Association, Houston,
Texas, November 1974.
67. MAXYE, W.A., ET AL.
Fracture lnitiation and Propagation in Underwater Pipeline
Proc. 10th Annual Offshore Technology Conference, Houston, Texas, Paper OTC
3303, 1978.
68. DE VITO A., ET AL.
Bursting Full Scale Tests on 48-inch and 56-inch Diameter Pipes for Gas
Transmissions
Proc. 12th Annual Offshore Technology Conference, Houston, Texas, Paper OTC
3745, 1980.
69. WESTWOOD, J.D.
Inspection of Underwater Pipelines - Technical and Commercial Considerations
Offshore Oil and Gas Pipeline Technology, European Seminar, Birmingham,
January 1984.
70. REDDY, B.O.
An Experimental Study of the Plastic Buckling of Circular Cylinders in Pure
Beruling
lntemational Jnl. Solids and Structures, Vol. 15, pp. 669-683, 1979.
71. GELLIN,S.
The Plastic Buckling of Long Cylindrical Shells under Pure Bending
Int. Jnl. Solids and Structures, Vol. 16, pp. 397-407, 1980.
72. KARAL, K.
A conceptfor Design ofSubmarine Pipelines to Resist Ocean Forces
OCS 3rd Inter. Offshore Mechanics and Arctic Engineering Symposium, ASME,
New Orleans, Louisiana, February 1984.
73. MONHAGEN, H, ET AL.
Fishing Gear Loads and Effects on Submarine Pipelines
Proc. 12th Annual Offshore Technology Conference, Houston, Texas, Paper OTC
3782, 1980.
74. J.P. KENNY & PARTNERS LTD
The Assessment nf Submarine Pipeline Spans - Draft Guidance Notes
Discussion Document prepared for the Departrnent ofEnergy, February 1985

112

Contents
 ~~
HSE
BOOKS
MAILORDER
HSE priced and free
publications are
available from:
HSE Books
PO Box 1999
Sudbury
Suffolk CO 1O 6FS
Te!, 01787 881165
Fax, 01787 313995

RETAIL
HSE priced publications
are available from
good booksellers.

HEALTH AND SAFETY ENOUIRIES

HSE lnfoLine
TeL 0541 545500
orwrite to:
· HSE lnforrnation Centre
Bread Lane
Sheffield 53 7HQ

ISBN 0-7176-0639-2

€12.50 net

Contents