0% found this document useful (0 votes)
103 views10 pages

Fang Et Al. - 2018 - Investigation On Mechanical Properties of Fibreglass Reinforced Flexible Pipes Under Torsion

Uploaded by

PAN FANG
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
0% found this document useful (0 votes)
103 views10 pages

Fang Et Al. - 2018 - Investigation On Mechanical Properties of Fibreglass Reinforced Flexible Pipes Under Torsion

Uploaded by

PAN FANG
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
You are on page 1/ 10

Proceedings of the ASME 2018 37th International

Conference on Ocean, Offshore and Arctic Engineering


OMAE2018
June 17-22, 2018, Madrid, Spain

OMAE2018-77354

INVESTIGATION ON MECHANICAL PROPERTIES OF FIBREGLASS REINFORCED


FLEXIBLE PIPES UNDER TORSION

Pan Fang Yuxin Xu


Zhejiang University Zhejiang University
Hangzhou, Zhejiang, China Hangzhou, Zhejiang, China

Shuai Yuan* Yong Bai Peng Cheng


Zhejiang University Zhejiang University Zhejiang University
Hangzhou, Zhejiang, China Hangzhou, Zhejiang, China Hangzhou, Zhejiang, China

ABSTRACT bonded pipes, it has a higher density and shows better subsea
Fibreglass reinforced flexible pipe (FRFP) is regarded as a great mechanical behavior.
alternative to many bonded flexible pipes in the field of oil or FRFP studied in this paper, shown in (Fig.1), consists of a
gas transportation in shallow water. This paper describes an polyethylene liner, eight layers of reinforced tape made of
analysis of the mechanical behavior of FRFP under torsion. The polyethylene and fibreglass wrapping around the liner and an
mechanical behavior of FRFP subjected to pure torsion was outer polyethylene coating. The inner liner pipe is ultra high
investigated by experimental, analytical and numerical methods. molecular weight polyethylene (UHMWPE) and the outer
Firstly, this paper presents experimental studies of three 10-layer coating pipe is high density polyethylene (HDPE), while the
FRFP subjected to torsional load. Torque-torsion angle relations reinforced tape is made of HDPE and fibreglass.
were recorded during this test. Then, a theoretical model based
on three-dimensional (3D) anisotropic elasticity theory was
proposed to study the mechanical behavior of FRFP. In
addition, a finite element model (FEM) including reinforced
layers and PE layers was used to simulate the torsional load
condition in ABAQUS. Torque-torsion angle relations obtained
from these three methods agree well with each other, which
illustrates the accuracy and reliability of the analytical model
and FEM. The impact of fibreglass winding angle, thickness of
Figure 1. Structure of FRFP
reinforced layers and radius-thickness ratio were also studied.
Conclusions obtained from this research may be of great
Flexible pipes under various loads have been studied by
practicality to manufacturing engineers.
many scholars, however, most of the research is confined to
unbonded flexible pipes. On the numerical side, A. Bahtui et al.
KEY WORDS: Torque; Flexible pipe; Numerical solution;
[1,2] modeled an unbonded flexible riser under various loads in
Experiment; Torsional rigidity
which all layers are separated with contact interfaces between
each layer. Hector E. M. Merino et al. [3] created a FEM under
INTRODUCTION
torsion considering the friction and adhesion between layers,
Recently, fibreglass reinforced flexible pipe (FRFP) has
the results show that finite element estimations agree quite well
been widely used in offshore transportation due to its high
with the experimental measurements. Then M. S. Liu et al. [4]
corrosion resistance, light weight characteristic and relatively
imported a model into ABAQUS to simulate the riser’s
low fabrication and installation cost. Compared to other types of
mechanical behavior under torsion. This model takes into

*Corresponding author.
E-mail address: [email protected]

1 Copyright © 2018 ASME

Downloaded From: https://proceedings.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org on 01/04/2019 Terms of Use: http://www.asme.org/about-asme/terms-of-use


consideration material nonlinearity and nonlinear boundary subjected to pure torsion. Specimens used in this research were
conditions. On the analytical side, Bahtui et al. [2] created an produced by Shang Hai Fei Zhou Bo Yuan Petroleum Equipment
analytical model based on the hypothesis of small Company. Components of the FRFP are: an inner UHMWPE, an
displacements and strains. REN Shao-fei [5] exhibited an outer HDPE and 8 reinforced layers consist of HDPE and
analytical model taking local bending and torsion of helical fibreglass. The fibreglass in odd reinforced layers wind in one
strips into consideration. Results show these two factors may direction, while the fibreglass in other reinforced layers wind in
have great influence on torsional stiffness. Yong Bai et al. [6] the converse direction. Detailed material properties and
developed a modified theoretical model based on the model geometric parameters of the specimens are listed in Table 1 and
initially proposed by Knapp et al. [7]. An FEM under tension- Table 2.
torsion load was established and compared with the theoretical
model. The results of these two methods agree well with each Table 1. Material properties of testing specimens
other. Secant Modulus E Poisson’s Ratio
As for the bonded flexible pipes, M. Xia et al. [8] Materials
(MPa) 
developed an analysis method for multi-layered filament-wound Fibreglass 72607 0.3
composite pipes under internal pressure in the elastic range by HDPE 850 0.4
assuming each layer of the pipes as anisotropic. Yong Bai et al. UHMWPE 570 0.4
[9] investigated the mechanical properties of reinforced
thermoplastic pipe under internal pressure. The analytical part Table 2. Geometric parameters of testing specimens
was extended from the theory initially proposed by M.P. Kruijer
Parameter Value
et al. [10]. It introduced a new model based on a plane strain
Inner radius (mm) 25
characterization and non-uniform strain distribution through the
Outer radius (mm) 38
thickness. Y. Zhao et al. [11] developed an analytical model
Thickness of inner PE layer (mm) 4
based on the mechanics of composite materials and performed a
Thickness of outer PE layer (mm) 3
finite element analysis using the software COSMOS/M, then
Number of reinforced layers 8
composite pipe samples were tested to obtain the relationship
Winding angle of the fibreglass (°) ±55
between applied torque and torsional angles . Results shows
Thickness of reinforced layers (mm) 6
that the relationship of these three methods agree with each
other well.
However, research on bonded flexible pipes is still not Experimental Process
quite enough. Previous studies have not given detailed a) Measured the valid length and diameter of the specimens
solutions about bonded flexible pipes. In the analysis of this and recorded the data (see Table3).
paper, a 3D analytical model of FRFP was established to explore b) Conditioned the specimen at room temperature for no less
the mechanical properties in the elastic range. FRFP in the than 2 hours.
analytical solution was considered as a thick cylinder and the c) Assembled the samples onto the torsion testing machine
stress situation in the pipes was characterized as generalized and took care to align the axis of the specimen with the end
plane strain. The inner layer and outer layer were both connectors of torsion machine.
considered to be homogeneous, continuous and isotropic while d) Tightened the end connectors evenly and firmly to the
the reinforced layers were considered to be homogeneous, necessary degree in order to prevent slippage between the
continuous and transverse isotropic. Because all the layers are specimen and end connectors of the testing machine.
bonded together firmly, the strains of all layers were assumed to Adjusted the test machine dial pointer to zero.
be continuous at the interface, and the interface remains e) Set the speed of the machine at 0.18 deg/min and started
constant during the analysis. In addition, the cross section of the machine. Tested the specimen until the pipe failed.
the FRFP always remained perpendicular to its central axis and f) Recorded the data of the relation between torque and twist
the deformation in the axial direction was assumed to be angle, found the failure angle of the sample pipes.
uniform. Then an FEM was established to simulate the real
situation when the FRFP was subjected to torque. Finally, three Table 3. Valid length and diameter of specimens
specimens were subjected to torque to obtain the torque-torsion Specimen number Valid length (mm) Diameter (mm)
angle relationship. Results from these three methods were #1 1005 76.53
compared, ultimately proving the reliability of the analytical #2 1008 76.48
model and FEM. #3 998 76.13

EXPERIMENTS Experimental Results


A full-scale laboratory test was conducted at the Ningbo- During the experiment process, the samples were
OPR factory in China to study the mechanical behavior of FRFP completely fixed at one end, and only a torsion angle was

2 Copyright © 2018 ASME

Downloaded From: https://proceedings.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org on 01/04/2019 Terms of Use: http://www.asme.org/about-asme/terms-of-use


applied on the other end. It can be observed that the samples
were twisting along with the fixed side and slight bulge was
gradually appearing on the surface of the pipe, followed by
continuous snapping sound of fibreglass in the pipe. There
were small areas of the pipe that showed twisting deformation.
However, these deformations were located at different points on
the pipe for each of the three samples . The bulge area of the first
sample was located at 1/4 of distance from the pipe’s fixed end,
and the bulge area of the second sample was located at 2/5 of
distance from the fixed end, while the bulge area of the third
sample was located at 1/5 of distance from the fixed end. The
deformations of three samples are shown in Fig.2. Figure 4. The cross section in the bulge area of Specimen 3

(a) Specimen 1

(b) Specimen 2

Figure 5. The damage of reinforced layers of Specimen 1 after


parting from outer layer
(c) Specimen 3
Figure 2. Torsion deformation of three specimens

In order to determine reasons for the failure of FRFP, a


section along the circumferential direction at the twist shape of
the pipe was cut so that the deformation situation inside the
pipe could be examined. It can be seen from Fig.3 and Fig.4 that
some gaps appear in the reinforced layer and there is some
arcuate deformation on the inner layer, however, these gaps on
the reinforced layers appear at different areas for each specimen.
The cross-section form of specimen 1 is similar to Fig.3. By
removing the outer PE layer of specimen 1, it can be seen in
Fig.5 that the outermost reinforced layer separates slightly from
the inner layers.
Figure 6. Torque-torsion angle curves of three test specimens

As shown in Fig.6, the torque-torsion angle relationship of


three test specimens closely align with one another. In the
beginning phase, there are some fluctuations of the first sample
which may be due to the fact that connectors of the torsion
machine were not tight enough. Therefore, the torsion angle and
small amount of torque for the first specimen in the beginning
period is not counted in the results. After passing the unstable
state, the torque goes up steadily until it drops suddenly at a
peak point, and the maximum torque recorded is regarded as the
Figure 3. The cross section in the bulge area of Specimen 2
failure torque. The failure torque obtained from the tests are
2343N·m for the first sample, 2650N·m for the second sample,
and 2777N · m for the third one, which demonstrates low

3 Copyright © 2018 ASME

Downloaded From: https://proceedings.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org on 01/04/2019 Terms of Use: http://www.asme.org/about-asme/terms-of-use


variability. The average value of the failure torque is 2590N·m. Elastic Constants of Reinforced layers
The maximum torque difference of these three specimens is (k  2,3 (n  1))
15.6%, and the maximum rotation angle difference is 8.24%, In order to investigate the mechanical properties of the
demonstrating the accuracy and repeatability of the experiment. reinforced layers, elastic parameters of reinforced layers should
The above differences came into being because of the different be determined first.
directions the torque applied on the pipe’s end, the different Based on a representative volume unit (RUV), nine elastic
winding angle of fibreglass in the outermost reinforced layer, the constants of the reinforced layer
different amount of fibreglass and the different distance E L ,ET ,E r ,G LT ,G Lr ,GTr ,LT ,Lr ,Tr can be determined
between each fibreglass during fabrication.
[12]. It is assumed E 2  E 3 due to the similar property in
ANALYTICAL SOLUTION π
these two directions. In these formulas, VI  ,
2
Coordinate Systems
VII  1  VI , VFB  60% and VPE  40% . The results of
A cylindrical coordinate system was used, as shown in
Fig.7. The coordinate axes r ,  and z denote radial, hoop and elastic constants are listed in Table 4.
axial direction, respectively.
E L  E FBVFB  E PEVPE (1)

E FB E PEVI
ET  E r   E PE (1  VI )
VFB VFB (2)
E PE  E FB(1  )
VI VI
VFB
G FB G PE
VI VFB (3)
G LT  G Lr   G PE (1  )
G PEVI  G FB(1  VI ) VI
G FB G PEVI
GTr   G PE (1  VI )
VFB V (4)
G PE  G FB(1  FB )
VI VI
LT  Lr  FBVFB  PE(1  VFB ) (5)
Figure 7. Cylindrical coordinate system
E FB
FBVFB  PE (V  VFB )
, E PE I
Tr   PE (1  VI ) (6)
VFB E V
 FB (1  FB )
T Z VI E PE VI

θ
L Table 4. Elastic constants of reinforced layers

Elastic constants Value


EL 27400MPa
ET 1379MPa

Figure 8. Relationship between on-axis coordinate (L,T,r) and Er 1379MPa


off-axis coordinate (z, θ, r)
G LT 1204MPa

The local material coordinate system of the reinforced


G Lr 1204MPa
layers is designated as ( L, T , r ) , where L is the direction in GTr 493MPa
which the fibre winded, T is the direction perpendicular to the
LT 0.36
aramid strand in the plane, and r is the normal direction just
as in the cylindrical coordinate system. Lr 0.36
The relation of the local material coordinate system (on-
axis coordinate) and the cylindrical coordinate system (off-axis
Tr 0.40
coordinate) is shown in Fig.8.

4 Copyright © 2018 ASME

Downloaded From: https://proceedings.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org on 01/04/2019 Terms of Use: http://www.asme.org/about-asme/terms-of-use


Reinforced Layers Stiffness Matrix m  cos , n  sin  , where  is the winding
(k  2,3 (n  1)) angle of the fibreglass.
The reinforced layers are considered transversely isotropic According to Eq. (7) and Eq. (8), on-axis stiffness matrix
with the same elastic properties on the plane ( T  r ), the on- can be written as
(k )
axis stiffness matrix C (k ) of k-th layer is given by C11 C12 C12 0 0 0
C C C 0 
C ( k )  (S ( k ) ) 1 , k  2,3n  1 (7)  12 22 23 0 0
 1 LT LT  C C C 0 0 0
 E   0 0 0  C ( k )   12 23 22  (13)
 L EL EL  0 0 0 C44 0 0
  1 Tr  0 0 0 0 C55 0 
  LT  0 0 0   
 EL ET EL   0 0 0 0 0 C55 
 
  LT Tr 1 According to Eq. (10), off-axis stiffness matrix can be
 0 0 0  written as
 EL EL ET 
S (k )    (8) C11 C12 C13 0 0 C16 
(k )

 0 0 0
1
0 0   
 GTr  C12 C 22 C 23 0 0 C 26 
   
 1  C 
(k ) C13 C 23 C 33 0 0 C 36 
(14)
 0 0 0 0
G LT
0   0 0 0 C 44 C 45 0 
   
 1   0 0 0 C 45 C 55 0 
 0 0 0 0 0   
 G LT  C16 C 26 C 36 0 0 C 66 
Where the symbol S is on-axis flexibility matrix. The
superscript “-1” in Eq. (7) denotes the inverse matrix. Inner Layer and Outer Layer Stiffness Matrix (k=1, n)
By introducing the flexibility and stiffness transformation As a homogenous isotropic material, the off-axis stiffness
matrices T and T which are a function of the angle  , the
(k )
matrixC of kth layer is given as
relationships between the off-axis and on-axis elastic constants (k )
 C11 C12 C13 0 0 0
are expressed as C C C 0 
S ( k )  T S ( k ) (T  21 22 23 0 0
(k ) (k ) T
) (9)
C C C 0 0 0
C ( k )  T C ( k ) (T ) , k  2,3n  1
(k ) (k ) T
(10) C ( k )   31 32 33  (15)
Where 0 0 0 C44 0 0
(k ) 0 0 0 0 C55 0 
 m2 n2 0 0 0  mn   
 2   0 0 0 0 0 C66 
n m2 0 0 0 mn 
It can be calculated by
 0 0 1 0 0 0  (k ) ( k ) 1
T    (S ) , k  1, n.
(k )
 (11) C (16)
 0 0 0 m n 0   1 k k 
(k )

 
 0 0 0 n m 0   E Ek Ek
0 0 0 
 k 
   k 1 k 
2mn  2mn 0 0 0 m 2  n 2   E Ek

Ek
0 0 0 
 k 
(k )  k k 
m 2 n 2 0 0 0  2mn   
1
0 0 0 
 2  S
(k )

Ek Ek Ek 
n m2 0 0 0 2mn   1  (17)
 0 0 0 0 0 
0 0 1 0 0 0   Gk 
T  
(k )
 (12) 
 0 0 0 0
1
0 

0 0 0 m n 0   Gk 
0 0 0 n m 0   1 
 0 
  
0 0 0 0
Gk 
mn  mn 0 0 0 m 2  n 2 

5 Copyright © 2018 ASME

Downloaded From: https://proceedings.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org on 01/04/2019 Terms of Use: http://www.asme.org/about-asme/terms-of-use


(k )
where the symbol S is the off-axis flexibility matrix. Ek  z 
(k ) C11 C12 C13 0 0 C16   ( k )
     z 
is the elastic modulus of PE and  k is the Poisson’s ratio of PE.    C 12 C 22 C 23 0 0 C 26 
 
 
The superscript “-1” in Eq. (16) denotes the inverse matrix.  r  C13 C 23 C 33 0 0 C 36   r 
     (23)
  r  0 0 0 C 44 C 45 0    r 
Stress and Deformation Analysis  
 zr   0   zr 
When the pipe is subjected to axial symmetric loads   0 0 C 45 C 55 0
   
(  0 ), the stresses and strains are independent of θ. In  z  C16 C 26 C 36 0 0 C 66   z 

addition, the radial and axial displacements do not depend on Substituting Eq. (20) and Eq. (23) into Eq. (21), the
the axial z and radial r directions, respectively. equilibrium equations lead to:
With the above assumption, the displacement fields can be  r( k )  ( k )   ( k )
 r 0 (24a)
expressed by r r
ur  ur (r ), u  u (r , z ), uz  uz ( z) (18)  ( kr ) 2 ( kr )
 0 (24b)
where, ur , u and u z are radial, hoop and axial r r
 zr( k )  zr( k )
displacements, respectively.  0 (24c)
The strain-displacement relations can be described as: r r
u ( k ) 1 u( k ) ur( k ) u ( k ) Substituting the stress-strain relation of Eq. (23) into Eq.
 r( k )  r , ( k )   ,  z( k )  z ,
r r  r z (24), and using Eq. (20), we get the expressions of ur , u and
1 u z (k )
u (k )
u (k )
u (k )
u z of reinforced layers through solving equation:
 z(k )    ,  zr( k )  z  r ,
r  z r z (19) u( k )   0 rz  A( k )
1 ur (k )
 u  (k )
 ( kr )  r    uz( k )   0 z  B( k ) (25)
r  r  r  k  k 
ur( k )  D( k ) r   E   r    1  0 r   2  0 r 2
k k k
Substituting Eq. (18) into Eq. (19), Eq. (19) can be simplified
, E
(k ) k
as: where, A( k ) , B ( k ) , D are unknown integration
u ( k ) u(k ) u ( k ) constants to be determined.
  r , ( k )  r ,  z( k )  z   0( k ) ,
(k )

r z
r
r (k ) (k )
  u( k )  u( k ) u( k ) u ( k )
(20)  ( k )  C 22 / C 33 (26a)
 zr  0,   r  r 
(k ) (k )
  ,  z(k )     0 r
r  r  r r z (k ) (k )
k  C12  C13
Where, 0 is twist of pipe per unit length which is 1  (k ) (k )
(26b)
C 33  C 22
independent of z. The axial deformation of all layers is equal to a (k ) (k )
 k  C 26  2C 36
constant 0. 2  (k ) (k )
(26c)
In the absence of body forces, equilibrium equations in 4C 33  C 22
cylindrical coordinates can be described as: For the anisotropic materials (reinforced layers) used in
 r( k ) 1  ( kr )  zr( k )  r( k )   ( k ) this study, there exists
   0 (21a)
r r  z r (k ) (k ) (k ) (k )
C 22 / C 33  0 and C 22 / C 33  1 .
 ( kr ) 1  ( k )  z(k ) 2 ( kr )
   0 (21b) Using transformation matrix T
(k )
and T
(k )
, strains and
r r  z r
 zr( k ) 1  z(k )  z( k )  zr( k ) stresses in local material coordinates can be obtained:
r

r 

z

r
0 (21c)  ( k )  T( k )  ( k )
(27)
 ( k )  T( k )  (k )
Reinforced Layers Analysis ( k  2,3(n  1) )
The stress-strain relations of the k-th layer are given as Inner Layer and Outer Layer Analysis ( k  1, n )
  C  
(k ) (k ) (k )
(22) For isotropic materials, the stress -strain relations of the kth
layer are given as
   C ( k )  
(k ) (k )
(28)

6 Copyright © 2018 ASME

Downloaded From: https://proceedings.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org on 01/04/2019 Terms of Use: http://www.asme.org/about-asme/terms-of-use


 zr k  (rk )   zr k 1 (rk )
(k )
 z 
(k ) C11 C12 C12 0 0 0   ( k ) (33d)
     z 
   C 12 C11 C12 0 0 0     kr   rk    kr 1  rk  (33e)
 r   
 C12 C12 C11 0 0 0   r  Where, k  1, 2 n 1
     (29)
  r  0 0 0 C 44 0 0    r  Axial equilibrium for a cylinder with closed ends
 
 zr   
0 0 C 44 0   zr 
n
2    z  r  rdr  0
rk k
  0 0 (34)
 
 z  
rk 1

0 C 44   z 
k 1
 0 0 0 0 Torsion condition
Substituting Eq. (20) and Eq. (29) into equilibrium equation n
2    z   r  r 2 dr  T
rk k
Eq. (21), the equilibrium equations lead to: rk 1
(35)
k 1

 r( k )  ( k )   ( k ) Using Eq. (32b), Eq. (33d) and Eq. (33e) can derive that the
 r 0 (30a)
r r integration constant, A( k )  0 . Therefore, the hoop
 ( kr ) 2 ( kr ) displacement can be expressed as follow:
 0 (30b) u   0 rz
r r (36)
(k ) (k )
As an isotropic material, there exits C / C  1 , 22 33
For N-layered FGRFP, there are 2n+2 unknown constants
C  C13 and C 26  C 36  0 , which leads to   1 ,
(k )
12
(k ) (k ) (k ) (k )
of integration, D k  , E k   k  1, 2 n  , and 0 ,  0 . Eqs.
k 
 1
(k )
  2  0 ( k  1, n ) in Eq. (26) (32a), (33a), (33c), (34), and (35) can give 2n+2 equations to
determine these unknown constants.
Hence, the solutions of ur , u and u z in the inner and The integration constants for the multi-layered FGRFP can
outer layers can be expressed by: be obtained from the solution of the simultaneous equation as
u( k )   0 rz  A( k ) Eq. (37). Elements in the matrix M can be obtained through
transformations of 2n+2 equations.
uz( k )   0 z  B( k ) (31)  D 1 
E
k
  2  0 
u (k )
D r (k )
D  0 
 
r
r  
 
where, A( k ) , B ( k ) , D( k ) , E   are unknown integration  
k
 D n   
constants to be determined.   0 
 E 1  
 0 

    M 2 n  2,2 n  2   (37)
Boundary Conditions E  
2
 0 
The unknown integration constants in Eqs. (25) and (31)    
   
can be determined by substituting these equations into  E  n  0 
boundary conditions and solving the algebraic equations.   0 
 0   
T /  2 * pi  
The traction-free condition at the inner surface and outer   
 2 n  2,1
surface are written as:  0 
 r(1)  r0   0,  r( n )  rn   0 (32a) Once their values are determined, the strains and
displacements are thus obtained from Eq. (20), Eq. (25) and Eq.
1r  r0    zr1  r0   0,  nr   rn    zrn   rn   0 (32b) (31), respectively. Then the stresses can be calculated as
Where r0 and rn are the inner and outer radius, products of strains and stiffness matrices.
respectively.
Geometric Nonlinearity
As a result of the deformation, the change of cross -section
Interface Conditions dimension and the fiber angles are no longer negligible.
Assuming that the interfaces between the core and skin Nonlinearity should be taken into account in the analysis. The
layers are perfectly bound, continuity conditions for the change of cross-section dimension can be obtained from the
displacements and stresses at the interfaces lead to variable radius displacements. The change of fiber angles in the
ur k   rk  =ur k 1  rk  (33a) reinforced layers can be calculated from the following equation
proposed by Kruijer (2005)[1]:
u rk  =u  rk 
k   k 1
(33b)   k   0 k   ( z   )sin 0 k  cos 0 k    z cos2 0 k  (38)
  rk    r k 1  rk 
k 
r (33c) Where,  0 k  is the initial wound angle of the k-th
reinforced layer. Change of the wound angle leads to a non-

7 Copyright © 2018 ASME

Downloaded From: https://proceedings.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org on 01/04/2019 Terms of Use: http://www.asme.org/about-asme/terms-of-use


linear stiffness matrix of the reinforced layer in the cylindrical
coordinate system.

NUMERICAL SIMULATIONS
In this part, a finite element model (FEM) is presented
studying the mechanical behavior of FRFP by using
ABAQUS/Standard nonlinear finite element analysis tool. The
geometrical dimensions of the FEM are in accordance with
those from manufacturing.
As shown in Fig.9 and Fig.10, the FRFP consists of 10
layers, an inner layer, an outer layer and 8 reinforced layers. It is Figure 10. Side view of FRFP
assumed that the interfaces between layers are connected
closely. Extrusion and partition commands were used to
separate the reinforced layer into 8 layers. The 8-node linear
brick reduced integration element C3D8R was used to mesh the
pipe. HDPE was considered isotropic and fibreglass was
considered transverse isotropic, therefore, the orientation of
reinforced layers was assigned according to different layers. A
global rectangular system was defined and X, Y, Z represents
three directions. An orientation discrete field defining a spatially
varying orientation was selected, on which a cylindrical Figure 11. Discrete field of one layer before aligning orientation
coordinate system was defined and 1, 2, 3 denotes the axial,
hoop and radial direction, respectively. For example, one layer of
the model before aligning orientation is shown in Fig.11. An
additional rotation of 55°was assigned to this layer along the
radial direction 3, which is shown in Fig.12.
Since the ends of FRFP were fixed with end-fittings in the
test machine, in order to make the loading conditions similar to
the ones from test specimens, one of the ends was totally fixed,
and the other end was considered only rotated along the Z axis.
On one end, the cross-section was coupled to a reference
point RP2 at which point the displacement of u1, u2, u3, ur1, ur2,
Figure 12. Discrete field of one layer after aligning
ur3 were constrained to zero. The other end was coupled to
orientation
another reference point RP1, which was located at the center of
the cross section. At last, only a displacement loading was
applied in the ur3 direction at the reference point RP1 to
RESULTS AND DISCUSSIONS
simulate the torsion of FRFP.
In order to investigate the accuracy and reliability of the
results obtained from the analytical solution and finite element
model, the torque-torsion angle curve from these two methods
were compared with the curve from experiment. The theory
process was solved by MATLAB. In MATLAB the total torque
applied on the pipe was 3,000N·m, which was added evenly over
500 steps, so 6N·m torque was applied on the pipe every step.
While in the FEM, on one of the reference point, UR3 was
rotated 0.4 rad. The deformation and von Mises stress
distribution of the model is shown in Fig.13. The torque-torsion
angle relationship of these three methods agree with each other
well enough in the elastic phase, however, there are still some
differences among these three methods mainly because of the
Figure 9. Front view of FRFP material properties. The average torsional rigidity of these three
methods remains about 8333N·m/rad, as shown in Fig.14.

8 Copyright © 2018 ASME

Downloaded From: https://proceedings.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org on 01/04/2019 Terms of Use: http://www.asme.org/about-asme/terms-of-use


respectively. As shown in Fig.16, the thicker the reinforced layer
is, the higher the torsion rigidity becomes . The torsion rigidity is
11844N·m/rad when the thickness of reinforced layer is 8mm,
57.55% higher than only 5028N·m/rad when the thickness is
4mm. Therefore, torsion rigidity can be influenced greatly by the
thickness of reinforced layer, which, in return, can remarkably
increase the torsional resistance.

Effect of Radius-thickness Ratio


The radius-thickness ratio was modified in ABAQUS while
Figure 13. Deformation and von Mises stress distribution the other parameters were maintained the same as the original
model. The inner diameter was set up as 40mm, 50mm and 60mm,
so the radius-thickness ratios of these three models became
66/13, 76/13 and 86/13, respectively. As seen in Fig.17, the
higher the radius-thickness is, the higher the torsion rigidity
becomes. The highest torsion rigidity is 12598N·m/rad when the
radius-thickness ratio is 86/13, 61% higher than only
4890N·m/rad when the radius-thickness ratio is 66/13. Therefore,
increasing the radius-thickness would be an effective way to
enhance torsion resistance in practical engineering.

Figure 14. Torque-torsion angle relationship of three methods

PARAMETRIC ANALYSIS

Effect of Winding Angle


The failure torsion angles of experiment specimens during
the elastic period do not exceed 0.4rad. In order to save
calculation time, the torsion angle was only taken to 0.4rad in
this parametric analysis. Firstly, the winding angle was modified
Figure 15. Torque-torsion angel relations under different
in ABAQUS while the other parameters were maintained same as
winding angles
the original model. The winding angle changed from 30°to 70°
and the corresponding torque-torsion angle curve is shown in
Fig.15. The differences between 50° and 40°, 30° and 60°, 35°
and 55° is quite small, so in the picture these curves are
overlapped together. It can be seen from this figure that the
highest torsion rigidity appears when the winding angle of
fibreglass is 45° and the value is 8990N·m/rad, 9.35% higher
than 8149N·m/rad at the winding angle of 55°. The lowest
torsion rigidity is 4801N·m/rad when the winding angle of
fibreglass is 70°. Therefore, torsion rigidity can be influenced
greatly by the winding angle of fibreglass. By decreasing the
winding angle the torsion resistance can be increased.

Effect of Thickness of Reinforced Layers


The single layer thickness was modified in ABAQUS as
0.5mm, 0.75mm, 1mm, therefore, the entire thickness of
reinforced layer was changed as 4mm, 6mm and 8mm,
Figure 16. Torque-torsion angel relations under different
reinforced layer thicknesses

9 Copyright © 2018 ASME

Downloaded From: https://proceedings.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org on 01/04/2019 Terms of Use: http://www.asme.org/about-asme/terms-of-use


REFERENCES
[1] Bahtui A, Bahai H, Alfano G. A finite element analysis for
unbonded flexible risers under torsion[J]. Journal of Offshore
Mechanics and Arctic Engineering, 2008, 130(4): 041301.
[2] Bahtui A, Bahai H, Alfano G. Numerical and analytical
modeling of unbonded flexible risers[J]. Journal of Offshore
Mechanics and Arctic Engineering, 2009, 131(2): 021401.
[3] Merino H E M, Sousa J R M, Magluta C, et al. Numerical and
experimental study of a flexible pipe under
torsion[C]//Proceedings of the 29th International Conference on
Offshore Mechanics and Arctic Engineering. OMAE2010-20902.
2010.
[4] Liu M S, Liu X W, Li J Y, et al. Numerical Simulation of
Flexible Multilayered Pipe/Riser Under Torsion[J]. Strength of
Materials, 2017, 49(1): 180-187.
[5] Ren S, Xue H, Tang W. Analytical and numerical models to
Figure 17. Torque-torsion angel relations under different radius-
predict the behavior of unbonded flexible risers under torsion[J].
thickness ratios
China Ocean Engineering, 2016, 30(2): 243-256.
[6] Bai Y, Lu Y, Cheng P. Theoretical and finite-element study of
CONCLUSIONS mechanical behaviour of central, large-diameter umbilical cables
under tension and torsion[J]. Ships and Offshore Structures,
This paper presents experimental studies of three 10-layer
2015, 10(4): 393-403.
FRFP on the torsional experiment machine in Ningbo OPR
[7] Knapp R H. Nonlinear analysis of a helically armored cable
(Offshore Pipelines and Risers Inc.) factory. The torque-torsion
with nonuniform mechanical properties in tension and
angle relations were recorded during the test.
torsion[C]//OCEAN 75 Conference. IEEE, 1975: 155-164.
A 10-layer mathematical model based on 3D classical [8] Xia M, Takayanagi H, Kemmochi K. Analysis of multi-layered
lamination theory was established to study the mechanical filament-wound composite pipes under internal pressure[J].
behavior of FRFP under torsion. This model can give stresses, Composite Structures, 2001, 53(4): 483-491.
strains and torsion rigidity of FRFP. [9] Bai Y, Xu F, Cheng P. Investigation on the mechanical
Then a 10-layer finite element model with different material properties of the Reinforced Thermoplastic Pipe (RTP) under
orientation assigned to each layer was established to further internal pressure[C]//The Twenty-second International Offshore
study the mechanical behavior of FRFP during the elastic and Polar Engineering Conference. International Society of
period. Torque-torsion angle relations obtained from these three Offshore and Polar Engineers, 2012.
methods turned out to be in good agreement with each other, [10] Kruijer M P, Warnet L L, Akkerman R. Analysis of the
which proved that the mathematical model and finite element mechanical properties of a reinforced thermoplastic pipe
model can be used to predict the torsion rigidity of FRFP. (RTP)[J]. Composites Part A: Applied Science and
In the parametric analysis, changes of the winding angle, Manufacturing, 2005, 36(2): 291-300.
thickness of reinforced layers and radius-thickness ratio were [11] Zhao Y, Pang S S. Stress-strain and failure analyses of
taken into consideration. Results find that increasing the composite pipe under torsion[J]. Journal of Pressure Vessel
thickness of reinforced layers and radius-thickness can Technology, 1995, 117(3): 273-278.
obviously improve the torsional rigidity of FRFP. And the [12] Zhu Y C. Buckling Analysis of Plastic Pipe Reinforced by
optical winding angle remains at around 45°. Winding Steel Wires under External Pressure[J]. Zhejiang
University, 2007

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
The authors would like to thank Shang Hai Fei Zhou Bo
Yuan Petroleum Equipment Company and OPR (Offshore
Pipelines and Risers Inc.) for providing the specimens and
laboratory equipment. Also, we appreciate that Kevin Conroy
seriously help us to examine the grammar of this paper.

10 Copyright © 2018 ASME

Downloaded From: https://proceedings.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org on 01/04/2019 Terms of Use: http://www.asme.org/about-asme/terms-of-use

You might also like