KSCE Journal of Civil Engineering (2021) 25(12):4771-4779 pISSN 1226-7988, eISSN 1976-3808

DOI 10.1007/s12205-021-2351-4 www.springer.com/12205

Structural Engineering
TECHNICAL NOTE

Numerical Investigation of the Method of Structural Performance

and Rehabilitation of Large-Diameter Buried Steel Pipes
Subjected to Excessive Deformation: A Case Study of China
a a a a
Jin-Hong Yu , Chang-Zheng Shi , He-Gao Wu , and Zhu Ma
a
State Key Laboratory of Water Resources and Hydropower Engineering Science, Wuhan University, Wuhan 430072, China

ARTICLE HISTORY ABSTRACT

Received 5 January 2021 Large-diameter buried steel pipes (BSPs) play critical roles in water transport for major water
Revised 26 April 2021 diversion and hydropower projects. Due to poor pipe-soil composite system properties and
Accepted 18 June 2021 installation conditions, they are prone to excessive deformation, resulting in safety hazards.
Published Online 6 August 2021 This paper takes a BSP project subjected to excessive deformation as an example. A simplified
numerical model is first established to analyze the structural performance, including the stress
KEYWORDS and plasticity, and the relationship between the stress and deformation of the pipe.
Furthermore, a jacking method to rehabilitate the pipe-soil composite system is conducted to
Buried steel pipes explore its influences on pipe deformation, stress, and plasticity. The results show that
Deformation considerable bending stresses occur in the pipe and that sections of the midspan and stiffening
Rehabilitation ring are in the pure bending state and eccentric bending state, respectively. Areas of high stress
Jacking method
and plasticity center at the crown, springline, and invert of the pipe, and steel pipes with ring
Numerical analysis
deformation of 8.9% can be continued to be used, as the full yielding of the pipe walls occurs
at the ring deformation of 15.8%. The jacking method is an effective solution for the
rehabilitation of BSPs subjected to large deformation and can reduce pipe deformation
significantly while increasing the stress at the pipe crown and the pipe plasticity only slightly.

1. Introduction Unlike rigid pipes, steel pipes have an inherent property of

high flexibility, and accurately predicting and controlling pipe
Large-diameter buried steel pipes (BSPs), which have pipe deformation is essential in their design and construction. Currently,
diameters larger than 1.2 m, are recognized as a critical element the Iowa formula has been widely utilized to predict the
to transport water in major water diversion and hydropower projects deformation of flexible pipes, and the soil parameters are the
due to their characteristics of high strength, high plasticity, good pivotal influencing factors. To take into consideration the soil’s
self-sealing properties, and low construction cost. BSPs have influence, in-depth research of buried pipes has been conducted.
been used in many engineering applications worldwide; for Dessouki and Monforton (1986) indicated the significant effect
instance, BSPs with diameters of 4 m, 3.13 m, and 2.74 m have of soil failure on the load-carrying capacity of pipe-soil structures by
been applied in the Yamadu Hydropower Station, Lesotho Highlands finite element (FE) analysis and field tests. Alzabeebee et al.
Water Project, and Integrated Pipeline Project, respectively (Webb et (2018) presented that poor haunch support can significantly
al., 2002; Zheng, 2012; Gozarchi, 2014). BSPs have a complex increase pipe deformation and that the effect increases as the
pipe-soil composite system, wherein the steel pipe must have pipe diameter increases. As soil properties are stochastic and
enough strength and stiffness to bear internal or external pressures uncertain in nature, Sivakumar Babu et al. (2006) conducted a
such as the water pressure, soil pressure, and traffic load, and the reliability assessment of pipe deformation, showing that the
surrounding soil provides support for the steel pipe to strengthen conventional tolerable pipe diameter deformation limit is
the structural rigidity and maintain the shape (Bildik and Laman, conservative. Oswell et al. (2019) studied the impact of assuming
2019). probabilistic distributions of geotechnical properties and determined

CORRESPONDENCE He-Gao Wu [email protected] State Key Laboratory of Water Resources and Hydropower Engineering Science, Wuhan University, Wuhan
430072, China
ⓒ 2021 Korean Society of Civil Engineers
4772 J.-H. Yu et al.

that the mean values of the undrained soil properties may established to explore the influences on the pipe deformation,
underestimate important pipe stresses and strains in some pipe- stress, and plasticity.
soil interaction scenarios. Field studies and practical experience
have shown that installation quality is as critical to the performance 2. Project Overview
of buried flexible pipes as ring stiffness and embedment selection
(BSI, 2020). Moser et al. (1985) discussed the effects of the soil The studied buried pipe project is located in Jiangxi Province,
density, pipe stiffness, soil type, and installation techniques on China. The project required the construction of large-diameter
fiberglass-reinforced plastic pipes, presenting that installation water pipes with a total length of 1145 m. Two sets of steel pipes
conditions have remarkable influences on pipe deformation and with an inner diameter (D) of 3.6 m and a wall thickness of 18
strain. Kawabata et al. (2008) adopted field tests and numerical mm were constructed by the open-cut method. The open-cut
analysis of a 3.5 m-diameter steel pipe, referring to the fact that method is a traditional construction method for the erection of
the backfill material and construction method have significant large-diameter buried pipes and is still widely used. The soil is
influences on the pipe behavior and that the inhomogeneous first excavated by an excavator from the ground surface to the
strength of backfill materials can induce local pipe deformation. required depth, followed by the installation of a large-diameter
Dezfooli et al. (2015) developed the nonlinear FE technique to steel pipe, and then backfills are added above the pipe and
model and predict large-diameter pipe behavior, wherein a compacted by a roller, layer by layer, until the ground level is
compaction force and staged construction were simulated by reached. In this project, the steel pipes were reinforced by
using uniform thermal forces and mesh activation/deactivation stiffening rings at an interval of 2 m. The stiffening rings were
algorithms, respectively. made of the same material and have the same wall thickness as
With increases in pipe diameter and length, the deformation the steel pipes, and the width and height of the cross section were
control of large-diameter steel pipes becomes more challenging 180 mm and 66 mm, respectively. The steel pipes were buried in
in engineering practice, as the pipe is a thin-walled structure with a trench with a slope of 1:0.2 and covered by a 2.5 m backfill, as
high flexibility and complex installation conditions. The design shown in Fig. 1.
codes of different countries generally limit pipe deformation from 2 In practice, the construction stage of a buried pipe project is
to 5% of the pipe diameter for various lining systems (CECS, not strictly performed following design requirements, resulting
2002; AWWA, 2017; BSI, 2020). Actually, BSPs are designed to in prominent elliptical deformation. The change in pipe diameter
bear the external soil load and other loads to resist deformation mainly varies from tens to hundreds of millimeters, far beyond
and buckling with conservative factors of safety, greater than the design limit of 108 mm (3% of the pipe diameter). The
four, to consider the uncertainties in the design values (Sivakumar considerable deformation is mainly caused by the low compactness
Babu, 2006). Unfortunately, there are many engineering cases in of backfills, no supports inside the pipe, and heavy traffic loads
which pipe deformation exceeds the design limit after construction
completion, and rehabilitation measures need to be performed
for structural safety, as BSPs subjected to large deformation pose
great safety risks and may shorten service life. Zhen et al. (2014)
analyzed a 1.8 m-diameter steel pipe subjected to large deformation
by the FE method and proposed two effective schemes to prevent
further deterioration: increasing the wall thickness and installing
stiffeners. Du (2015) studied a 2.64 m-diameter BSP with a
maximum ring deformation (ratio of pipe deformation to
diameter) of 7.83% and presented that a jacking method can
effectively rehabilitate the deformed pipe and surrounding soils
in practice. However, the influences of this method on the
structural performance of pipes have not been analyzed in detail.
In summary, the structural performance and rehabilitation
method of BSPs subjected to large deformation due to poor pipe-
soil composite system properties and installation conditions
require more attention. This paper takes a buried pipe project
subjected to excessive deformation as an example and conducts a
comprehensive investigation. A simplified numerical model is
first established and verified by field tests to analyze the structural
performance of deformed steel pipes, including the pipe stress
and plasticity, and the relationship between the stress and
deformation of deformed steel pipes. Furthermore, a jacking Fig. 1. Buried Pipe Project: (a) Trench Size and Design Parameters of
method to rehabilitate the poor pipe-soil composite system is the Backfills, (b) Site Layout
 KSCE Journal of Civil Engineering 4773

during the construction stage. along the circumferential and axial directions of the steel pipe,
respectively. The mesh sensitivity analysis was conducted to
3. Performance Analysis figure out the effect of the element size. Table 1 presents the
critical hoop stresses of the outer walls under different element
Due to the complexity of soil properties, pipe-soil interactions, divisions in the pipe circumferential and axial directions. The
and construction processes, it is difficult to directly adopt a results show that the division numbers have a minor effect on the
practical computation model including pipes and soils to analyze structural stress, even if the division numbers are large, which
the structural performance of deformed pipes in detail. Therefore, a indicates that the mesh density adopted in this study is reasonable
simplified FE model including steel pipe and stiffening rings is considering the calculation efficiency and accuracy. The linear
established and verified by field tests to perform preliminary kinematic hardening plasticity constitutive model is defined to
analysis. Since the stiffening rings are intended to support the include nonlinearity. For the steel material, the density, elastic
stability of the steel pipes under external pressure and not the modulus, and Poisson's ratio are 7,850 kg/m3, 2.06 × 105 MPa,
main bearing structure, the structural performances of the steel and 0.3, respectively; the yield stress, tensile stress, and finite
pipes are mainly considered in this study. plastic strain are 300 MPa, 430 MPa, and 0.3, respectively, based
on material testing. The boundary conditions are fully constrained at
3.1 Simplified FE Model and Verification the bottom of the pipe.
The FE model, including steel pipe and stiffening ring, is built Figure 2(b) shows the vertical and horizontal changes in the
with the commercial software ABAQUS, as illustrated in Fig. diameter of the steel pipe determined by the field test and
2(a). Shell elements S4R are employed for the simulation of the numerical results, wherein positive denotes elongation and negative
steel pipe and stiffening ring in the model, as the shell element is represents compression. Based on the measured results, the
a commonly used and reliable element type for the FE simulation change in the horizontal diameter of the pipe is generally smaller
of thin-wall structures according to a literature review and than that in the corresponding vertical diameter. Moreover, the
engineering practice (Systèmes, 2013). Taking calculation efficiency numerical results are very close to the trend line of the measured
and accuracy into consideration, 58 and 11 elements are discretized results, and the deviation from the measured horizontal deformation

Fig. 2. Numerical Model and Verification: (a) Finite Element Model, (b) Comparison of the Calculated and Measured Pipe Deformation

Table 1. Mesh Sensitivity Analysis

Hoop stress of the outer wall in the B1 /MPa Hoop stress of the outer wall in the B2 /MPa

Circumferential division Axial division numbers Circumferential division Axial division numbers
numbers 7 11 15 201 numbers 7 11 15 201
36 -340.6 -340.0 -339.7 - 36 174.9 177.6 177.9 -
58 -344.7 -344.0 -343.8 - 58 174.5 177.1 177.3 -
76 -345.5 -344.8 -344.6 - 76 175.5 177.9 178.2 -
200 - - - -345.8 200 - - - 178.0
4774 J.-H. Yu et al.

is only -6.71% at the maximum vertical deformation of 320 mm. and invert, respectively, while the outer wall exhibits the opposite
It can be concluded that the numerical results are in good trend. The pipe plasticity also concentrates within these three
agreement with the field data and that the simplified FE model areas, as presented in Fig. 3(d).
can be employed as a reliable tool for the following analysis. Figures 3(e) and 3(f) show the hoop stress at key points. A1
and A2 are at the crown and springline in the midspan section,
3.2 Pipe Stress and Plasticity respectively; B1 and B2 are at the crown and springline in the
The hoop stresses of the steel pipe with a vertical deformation of stiffening ring section, respectively, as depicted in Fig. 2(a). The
320 mm are illustrated in Figs. 3(a) − 3(c). The sign convention midspan section is in a nearly pure bending state, while the
in the figures is that tension is positive and compression is stiffening ring section is in an eccentric bending state. For the
negative, following the traditions of structural mechanics. It can midspan section, the hoop stress along the pipe wall is linearly
be concluded that the pipe wall experiences a significant bending distributed and similar to those of the inner wall and outer wall,
phenomenon. The inner wall of the pipe exhibits tensile stress, and the hoop stress of the middle surface is small. However, the
compressive stress, and tensile stress at the pipe crown, springline, stress distribution in the middle surface is not linear at the

Fig. 3. Hoop Stress and Plasticity of the Steel Pipe: (a) Stress in the Inner Wall, (b) Stress in the Middle Surface, (c) Stress in the Outer Wall,
(d) Equivalent Plastic Strain, (e) Stress Distribution at A1 and B1, (f) Stress Distribution at A2 and B2

Fig. 4. Relationship of Stress and Deformation in Key Points: (a) A1 and B1, (b) A2 and B2
 KSCE Journal of Civil Engineering 4775

stiffening ring section and is more than 100 MPa. improve the compactness of backfills. Fig. 5 illustrates the
procedures of the jacking method, and the details of the steps are
3.3 Relationship between Stress and Deformation presented as follows:
The relationships between the stress and deformation of the 1. The soils in the trench are first excavated to expose the pipe
model are shown in Fig. 4. The stress initially presents a linear springline to further strengthen the pipe and backfill.
increasing trend as the deformation increases; subsequently, the 2. The pipe is forced by the jack to recover the diameter
stress remains unchanged as the yield strength is reached. The change. During the loading stages, the pipe deformation is
stress at the stiffening ring section is greater than that of the monitored in real time, ensuring that any change in pipe
midspan section due to the constraint effect of the stiffening ring, diameter is recorded. To simulate the action of jacks,
and the stress at the crown is greater than that of the springline. external vertical forces of 59 kN and 85 kN, determined by
Due to the bending deformation of the pipe wall, the deformation trial calculations, are applied on the crown and invert of the
corresponding to yield varies with position within the pipe wall. The pipe in the middle span section and the stiffening ring section,
inner wall at the stiffening ring section first yields at the deformation respectively.
of 120 mm (3.3% of the pipe diameter), while the middle surface 3. The supporting soil is strengthened by filling grout after
first yields at the deformation of 570 mm (15.8% of the pipe pipe shape recovery. Several groups of soil samples from
diameter), which is greater than the maximum pipe deformation of different locations are selected, and the elastic modulus of
320 mm (8.9% of the pipe diameter). It can be concluded that the each sample is examined.
steel pipe of this project still has a considerable plastic reserve and 4. After the completion of grouting, the pipe is backfilled with
thus can continue to be used (it does not need to be replaced yet). soil layer by layer to the ground level. During the placing
process, the soil layers are compacted by the roller, and an
4. Rehabilitation Method in situ compactness measurement of a borehole sample is
taken after each layer of soil is compacted to ensure that the
A BSP subjected to a large deformation needs to be strengthened target compacted density is reached.
and rehabilitated to minimize the cross-sectional deformation of 5. The jacks inside of the pipe are removed after backfilling,
the pipe and enhance the surrounding soil modulus to maintain and the pipe deformation is examined during the unloading
pipe operations. In this section, the jacking method is adopted for process.
rehabilitation of the pipe, and the structural behavior of the steel 6. Finally, the mechanical performance of the BSP after
pipe is examined after rehabilitation by numerical analysis. rehabilitation is tested and verified under the load combination
of vacuum condition, as it is the most critical working
4.1 Jacking Method condition. The vacuum condition corresponds to a vacuum
pressure of 0.05 kPa and a traffic pressure of 750 kPa in an
4.1.1 Method Description area of 0.1 m2. The traffic load is applied on the ground
Rehabilitation is performed to reduce pipe deformation and surface above the stiffening ring and perpendicular to the

Fig. 5. Rehabilitation Procedures of the Jacking Method: (a) Soil Excavation, (b) Pipe Jacking to Round, (c) Soil Strengthening by Filling Grout,
(d) Soil Refilling and Compaction to Ground Level, (e) Jack Removal, (f) Performance Verification by Load Test
4776 J.-H. Yu et al.

Fig. 6. Finite Element Model: (a) General View, (b) Detailed View of the Trench, (c) Detailed View of the Steel Pipe

pipe axis by using the ABAQUS subroutine DLOAD. Table 2. Soil Property Results of the Field Test
Elastic Friction
Poisson's Cohesion Density
4.1.2 FE Model and Verification Material modulus
ratio /kPa
angle
kg/m3
The practical computation model is established according to the /MPa /°
site investigation result for analyzing the BSP subjected to a Silty clay 9.18 0.20 15 12 1,940
large deformation, as illustrated in Fig. 6. The height of the Shaly sand I 15.00 0.25 300 20 2,090
whole model is 24.3 m (6.8D), the width is 44.6 m (12.4D), and Shaly sand II 18.00 0.30 500 30 2,400
the thickness is 2 m to eliminate the boundary effect. The FE Backfill I 2.70 0.18 10 10 1,800
model includes steel pipes, stiffening rings, backfills, and native Backfill II 1.80 0.20 5 4 1,800
soils. S4R shell elements are employed for modeling the steel
pipes and stiffening rings, and C3D8 solid elements are utilized
to simulate the surrounding soils in the numerical analysis. There
are 63651 nodes and 55548 elements in the model. Taking the of the soil properties is provided in Table 2 according to the field
calculation precision and efficiency into account, the mesh of the test.
soils is more refined and much denser closer to the pipe. To verify the FE model, the numerical results are compared
The boundary conditions are roller confinement at the bottom with the data obtained from the field survey after completion.
face and surrounding vertical faces (Kang, 2019). Furthermore, a The pipe deformations by the FE simulation are 331 mm in the
nonlinear contact algorithm is employed to simulate the interface vertical direction and 296 mm in the horizontal direction. Considering
between the outer surface of the steel pipe and the surrounding the vertical compression of 320 mm and the transverse extension
soil. The constitutive model and material properties of the steel of 283 mm measured during the field test, the discrepancies
pipe and stiffening ring are consistent with the FE model in between the numerical and measured deformations are 3.4% in
section 3.1. The Drucker-Prager elastoplastic model is adopted the vertical direction and 4.6% in the horizontal direction. Table 3
as the constitutive model of the soil, which is commonly used to compares the stresses obtained from the numerical and field
simulate geotechnical materials due to its simplicity, high tests. The numerical results agree well with the field data, and the
efficiency, and easy convergence (Wu et al., 2021). A summary stress deviations are within 5%. Thus, the FE model can accurately
 KSCE Journal of Civil Engineering 4777

Table 3. Comparison of Numerical and Measured Pipe Stresses /MPa

Midspan section Stiffening ring section
Location
Numerical Measured Deviation Numerical Measured Deviation
Crown 239 237 -0.7% 176 169 -3.8%
Springline -225 -217 -3.3% -158 -151 -4.3%
Invert 254 259 2.0% 197 194 -1.7%

simulate and reflect the mechanical behaviors of the BSP subject 85 mm and 78 mm, respectively, which are both within the
to a large deformation. deformation limit of 108 mm. In other words, the rehabilitation
method can reduce the vertical and horizontal deformations of
4.2 Pipe Deformation the pipe by 74.3% and 73.6%, respectively, compared with that
Figure 7 depicts the pipe deformation during the rehabilitation before rehabilitation. Furthermore, the pipe deformations under
process. Similar trends are observed in both the vertical and the load test are lower than 108 mm, demonstrating that the pipe
horizontal deformations, and the jacking method has a remarkable deformations in operation satisfy the design requirement after
influence on the pipe deformations. The vertical compression rehabilitation.
and horizontal elongation of the pipe after removing the jacks are
4.3 Pipe Stress
The original and rehabilitated von Mises stresses of the steel pipe
at the stiffening ring section are presented in Fig. 8. It can be
derived that the rehabilitated stresses after the load test are much
smaller than the original stresses after completion. The maximum
stress of the steel pipe at completion is 299.3 MPa, while it is
278.2 MPa after pipe rehabilitation. Consequently, the jacking
method can reduce the maximum stress by 7%, and the pipe-soil
interaction composite system is improved after rehabilitation.
Moreover, the original and rehabilitated stresses have similar
distributions. The stress distributions are nonuniform, and the
localized stress concentration occurs nearly at the crown, springline,
and invert of the pipe.

4.4 Pipe Plasticity

Figure 9 shows the equivalent plastic strains before and after
Fig. 7. Pipe Deformation during the Rehabilitation Process rehabilitation. The results show that the strain tendencies are

Fig. 8. Von Mises Stress of the Steel Pipe: (a) Rehabilitated Stress after the Load Test, (b) Comparison of the Original and Rehabilitated Stresses at
the Stiffening Ring Section
4778 J.-H. Yu et al.

Fig. 9. Equivalent Plastic Strain of the Steel Pipe: (a) Rehabilitated Strain after the Load Test, (b) Comparison of the Original and Rehabilitated
Strains at the Stiffening Ring Section

similar and that the strain peaks at the crown, springline, and 3. The pipe deformation and the maximum stress can be
invert of the steel pipe. The maximum strains before and after reduced by 74% and 7% after rehabilitation, respectively,
rehabilitation are 0.0020 and 0.0024, respectively, which are while the stress at the pipe crown and the pipe plasticity
within the limit. The rehabilitated strain after the load test is will slightly increase. These results are all within the allowable
slightly larger than the original strain after completion, indicating limit specified in the code, demonstrating that the jacking
that the jacking force applied to the pipe inner wall enlarges the method is an effective solution for the rehabilitation of
pipe plasticity. The rehabilitated pipe can operate effectively BSPs subjected to large deformation.
when the pipe-soil composite system and soil resistance are It is worth noting that this study considers the weld seams in
enhanced by grouting. the pipe to be “perfect”, which may not always be true in
practice. Therefore, the quality of weld seams at the site must be
5. Conclusions given attention; additionally, the anti-corrosion material of the
pipe needs to be checked carefully.
The structural performances of large-diameter BSPs subjected to
excessive deformation, including the stress and plasticity and the Acknowledgments
relationship between stress and deformation, are studied by
numerical analysis. Furthermore, the jacking method is investigated This study was supported by the National Natural Science
to rehabilitate a poor pipe-soil composite system. The major Foundation of China [grant number 51409194].
conclusions drawn from this study are as follows:
1. The large deformed steel pipe experiences significant ORCID
bending stress, and the inner and outer pipe walls undergo
the maximum stress. The midspan section is in a nearly Jin-Hong Yu https://orcid.org/0000-0001-7059-0251
pure bending state, while the stiffening ring section is in an Chang-Zheng Shi https://orcid.org/0000-0001-5070-2789
eccentric bending state due to the constraint of the stiffening He-Gao Wu https://orcid.org/0000-0003-0143-6458
ring. Moreover, the areas of the pipe crown, springline, and Zhu Ma https://orcid.org/0000-0002-2850-0117
invert have high stress, and the pipe plasticity also concentrates
within these three areas. References
2. The inner wall at the stiffening ring section first yields at a
vertical deformation of 120 mm (3.3% of the pipe diameter), Alzabeebee S, Chapman DN, Faramarzi A (2018) Innovative approach
while the middle surface yields at a deformation of 570 to determine the minimum wall thickness of flexible buried pipes.
mm (15.8% of the pipe diameter), which is greater than the Geomechanics and Engineering 15(2):755-767, DOI: 10.12989/
gae.2018.15.2.755
maximum pipe deformation of 320 mm (8.9% of the pipe
AWWA (2017) Steel pipe: A guide for design and installation. AWWA
diameter). The steel pipe in the studied project has a Manual of Water Supply Practices M11, American Water Works
considerable plastic reserve and can be continued to be Association, Denver, CO, USA
used, but the pipe must be rehabilitated due to the large Bildik S, Laman M (2019) Experimental investigation of soil-structure-
deformation exceeding the design limit. pipe interaction. KSCE Journal of Civil Engineering 23(9):3753-
 KSCE Journal of Civil Engineering 4779

3763, DOI: 10.1007/s12205-019-0134-y Moser AP, Bishop RR, Shupe OK, Bair DR (1985) Deflection and
BSI (2020) Guide to the structural design of buried pipes. BS 9295, strains in buried FRP pipes subjected to various installation conditions.
British Standards Institution Transportation Research Record 1008:109-116
CECS (2002) Specification for structural design of buried steel pipeline Oswell JM, Hart J, Zulfiqar N (2019) Effect of geotechnical parameter
of water supply and sewerage engineering. CECS 141: 2002, China variability on soil-pipeline interaction. Journal of Pipeline Systems
Association for Engineering Construction Standardization, China Engineering and Practice 10(4):04019028, DOI: 10.1061/(ASCE)
Architecture & Building Press, Beijing, China, 16 (in Chinese) PS.1949-1204.0000402
Dessouki AK, Monforton GR (1986) Effect of soil failure on soil-steel Sivakumar Babu GL, Srinivasa Murthy BR, Seshagiri Rao R (2006)
structures. Journal of Geotechnical Engineering 112(5):522-536, Reliability analysis of deflection of buried flexible pipes. Journal of
DOI: 10.1061/(ASCE)0733-9410(1986)112:5(522) Transportation Engineering 132(10):829-836, DOI: 10.1061/
Dezfooli MS, Abolmaali A, Razavi M (2015) Coupled nonlinear finite- (ASCE) 0733-947X(2006)132:10(829)
element analysis of soil–steel pipe structure interaction. International Systèmes D (2013) Abaqus analysis user’s manual. Simulia Corp.,
Journal of Geomechanics 15(1):04014032, DOI: 10.1061/(ASCE) Providence, RI, USA
GM.1943-5622.0000387 Webb MC, Trebicki DD, Smulders PA (2002) Field testing and buckling
Du J (2015) Cause analysis of large-diameter buried steel pipes and strength of buried large-diameter thin-walled steel pipes. Pipeline
treatment methods. Sichuan Architecture 35:157-158 (in Chinese) division specialty conference 2002, August 4-7, Cleveland, OH,
Gozarchi SF (2014) Comparison of deflection measurement methods of USA, DOI: 10.1061/40641(2002)69
large diameter steel pipes with control low strength material. PhD Wu HG, Yu JH, Shi CZ, Ma Z (2021) Pipe-soil interaction and sensitivity
Thesis, University of Texas at Arlington, Arlington, TX, USA study of large-diameter buried steel pipes. KSCE Journal of Civil
Kang J (2019) Finite element analysis for deeply buried concrete pipes Engineering 25(3):793-804, DOI: 10.1007/s12205-021-0392-3
in proposed imperfect trench installations with expanded polystyrene Zhen L, Chen JJ, Qiao P, Wang JH (2014) Analysis and remedial
(EPS) foams. Engineering Structures 189:286-95, DOI: 10.1016/ treatment of a steel pipe-jacking accident in complex underground
j.engstruct.2019.03.083 environment. Engineering Structures 59:210-219, DOI: 10.1016/
Kawabata T, Mohri Y, Oda T, Shoda D, Ariyoshi M, Nakashima H j.engstruct.2013.10.025
(2008) Field measurement and numerical analysis for buried large Zheng J (2012) Steel pipe deformation control in Yamato Hydropower
diameter steel pipes. International pipelines conference 2008, July Station. Heilongjiang Science and Technology of Water Conservancy
22-27, Atlanta, GA, USA, 1-10, DOI: 10.1061/40994(321)3 11:41-42 (in Chinese)