Advanced Topics in Buried Analysis

Michael Dowhopoluk, M.Eng., P.Eng. PVP Engineering Ltd.

04.09.13

Advanced Topics in Buried Analysis

04.09.13

Overview Todays Topics

Overview of Buried Pipeline Codes and Design Pipeline Stress Analysis Different modeling techniques Nonlinear Stress Analysis / Limit States Design Nonlinear analysis with linear tools Total strain theory of plasticity Validation and Verification

04.09.13

OVERVIEW OF BURIED PIPELINE CODES AND DESIGN

Overview
Applicable Codes B31.4 Liquid Petroluem First appeared in 1959 B31.8 Gas Transmission First appeared in 1958 CSA Z183 Oil Transmission 1967 CSA Z184 Gas Transmission 1968 CSA Z662 Replaced Z183 / Z184 in 1994

04.09.13

Buried Pipeline Design

Code Requirements Hoop Stress Expansion Stress Combined Stress Additional Loadings Contrast to B31.3 No combined limit why not? Limit on gross deformation due to yielding Only a concern when there are large axial compressive forces

04.09.13

B31.4 Liquid Petroleum Pipelines

Basic Allowable Stress = 0.72 ; =
2

Hoop Stress

, 1.0

Longitudinal Stress =
2

+ 0.75 = 0.525

Thermal Expansion Stress Range

Restrained = = Max ,
04.09.13

0.9
8

B31.4 Liquid Petroleum Pipelines

Thermal Expansion Stress Range Unrestrained =

2 + 4 2 0.7

04.09.13

B31.8 Gas Transmission Pipelines

Basic Allowable Stress = ; = =
2

Hoop Stress

, 0.72 0.8

Thermal Expansion Stress Range

2 + 4 2 0.72

04.09.13

10

CSA Z662 Oil and Gas Pipelines

Basic Allowable Stress = ; =
2

Hoop Stress

, 0.8

Longitudinal Stress =
2

Combined Hoop and Longitudinal

Restrained = 0.9
04.09.13

11

CSA Z662 Oil and Gas Pipelines

Combined Stress for Restrained Spans
+

Thermal Expansion Stress Range =

2 + 4 2 0.72

04.09.13

12

PIPELINE STRESS ANALYSIS

Analysis
Buried pipeline can be classified into fully restrained, partially restrained, and unrestrained sections Fully restrained => plane strain problem, no bending
Longitudinal stresses, but no strains Can be analysed by hand calculations

Partially restrained/Unrestrained => 3D stress state, often approximated as plane stress

FEA required to capture nonlinear soil response ie. CAESAR Axial elongation due to pressure and thermal loads Lets try a sample model

04.09.13

14

Sample Problem
Single 15 Bend, Virtual Anchor on each side CSA Z662 design NPS 12, 7.9mm (.311 in), Gr. 414 (X60) Design Pressure 9.93 MPa (1440 psi) Design Temperature - 60C (140F) Install Temperature - -25C (-13F) Depth of Burial 1500mm (5 ft)

04.09.13

15

Basic Code Calculations

04.09.13

16

CAESAR Model
Five elements 15D Induction Bend

04.09.13

17

Soil Model
ALA method preferred Detailed soils information usually not available Best Practice
Parametric Study Minimum of four soil models Cohesive and non-cohesive High/low compaction Extra caution required for: Frozen Backfill High Water Table / Muskeg Slopes

04.09.13

18

Results

04.09.13

19

Discussion
All Done!
Lets call ourselves pipeline experts and all go home.

But,.perhaps a little Validation and Verification before we go. Hoop Stress

= /2 = 323.9 * 9.93 / (2*7.9) = 203.6 MPa vs. 193.6 MPa = 1 = 1 .3 203.6 + 2.07 1.2 5 60 25

Restrained Longitudinal Stress

Allowable Stress

= 353.7 MPa vs. 327.5 MPa

Fully restrained should be 0.9*Sy = 372.6 MPa vs 414 MPa

04.09.13

20

Hoop Stress
What is being reported in the Sustained case?
Not hoop stress, but the longitudinal stress due to pressure ie. = 0.5 * 193.6
1 2

Revise model inputs

= 96.8 MPa 97.3 MPa

Hoop Stress Calc based on OD Mill tolerance not required for CSA Change Poissons ratio to 0.3

04.09.13

21

Hoop Stress

One Down!

04.09.13

22

Longitudinal Stress
Revise some more inputs
Replace temperature with thermal strain Revise elastic modulus Re-run the analysis

04.09.13

24

Longitudinal Stress

Two Down!

04.09.13

25

One more thing.Pressure Thrust

+20% !

Why did the restrained stress go up?

04.09.13

27

Pressure Loading
By definition, pressure acts in all directions
For a closed cylinder, there are stresses and strains in all 3 directions When the end cap forces are present, the general treatment is,
=

= /2 =
1

/4

= , , generally neglected
1

= =
04.09.13

3 2

1/2

1/2

) 2

) 2

) 2

28

Pressure Loading
What happens when end cap forces are not present?
Eg. Expansion joint

= 0

= /2 = 0 = = =
04.09.13

+ +

( (

1 ) 2 ) 2

) 2

29

Pressure and Thermal Loads

Thermal expansion causes a stress free strain, unless it is restricted.
= ; = 0

Thus, we can solve for the restrained stress,

+ = 0 =
1

= ; = 0 +

For the unrestrained case

= 0

04.09.13

30

Pressure Loading
How are the end cap loads treated in CAESAR?
As a uniform tensile (+ve) strain applied over the entire system =
1

In actuality, it should be a tensile force and a ve strain

For restrained sections, = 0, this results in a compressive stress

1/2

) 2

This method is computationally attractive, but has some drawbacks Point of application of the force is lost; this leads to an incorrect distribution of forces, stresses, and strains in the pipeline model Compressive stresses in the restrained portions of the pipeline are over-reported. Lets look at this in more detail

04.09.13

31

Pressure Loading
Returning to the sample problem,
=
1 2

Now we know what CAESAR is calculating

+ = 353.7 + 40.7 = 394.4 . 391.3

.5.3 2.07

9.93

323.8 27.9

= .02% ; = 40.7 ;

How can we go about improving this model?

04.09.13

32

Pressure Loading PVP Method

Step #1 Add thrust forces at the correct locations
Thrust force = ( 2 )

Use the near and far points on the bend Bend mid-point is not advisable

Step #2 Convert to an equivalent strain; subtract from thermal strain

Set Poissons ratio to a very small value (0.001)

Step #3 Post-process the bend manually

Introduction of thrust forces generates compressive forces in the bend that are not real Pressure thrust acts on the projected area of the pipe tangents, on the backside of the bend; there is no net section compression

04.09.13

33

Step #1 Add Thrust Forces

Thrust Force = 2 = 9.93 (
323.9 2

7.9)2 = 740 !

04.09.13

34

Step 2 Poisson Effect

Calculate the compressive strain / = -.3*203.5/2.07e5 = .000295 Subtract from thermal strain (.00102 - .000295 = .000725) Note that the Poisson strain can be converted to an equivalent temperature by dividing by the co-efficient of thermal expansion (ie. .000295/1.2e-5 = 24.5C)

Now, run the analysis! Note the load cases Ive set up.

04.09.13

35

Step 3 Post-process
Take the local axial forces for the bend in the OPE (W+T1+P1+F) case Subtract the local axial force over the bend from the OPE (F) case Manually calculate the axial and bending stresses Excel time!

04.09.13

36

Post Processing - Excel

04.09.13

37

Results Discussion
What do you end up with?
Maximum OPE stress of 571 MPa vs 704 MPa (23% reduction) Displacements 36mm vs 44mm (23% reduction) Restrained Axial Force 1176 kN vs 1951 kN Restrained Stress 353 MPa vs 391 MPa

Is it worth the effort?

For the right problem, yes.

04.09.13

38

Results Discussion
Axial force in the line

04.09.13

39

A little V&V
Those numbers look good, but.
weve always used the CAESAR defaults with/without Bourdon the CAESAR method is the industry standard weve never had any issues

We thought the same, so..

PVP developed an ANSYS APDL Pipeline design suite. Linear/nonlinear steel plasticity models Large deformation theory New generation pipe elements including shell deformation modes We benchmarked the same problem using ANSYS

04.09.13

40

ANSYS Results

Results Agreement 2% on Stress 10% on Displacement

04.09.13

41

NONLINEAR STRESS ANALYSIS

Nonlinear Pipeline Design

What is Nonlinear Analysis? Metal Plasticity Geometric (ie. bend ovalization) Path dependent loading

Why bother for a Pipeline? Reduction in capital cost Better defined safety margin Failure assessment

04.09.13

43

Cost Reduction
Comparison of Required Wall Thickness
NPS 12, Gr. 483, 9.93 MPa

04.09.13

44

Cost Reduction
Substitution of Lower Grade
NPS 12, 7.9mm, 9.93 MPa

04.09.13

45

Safety Margin
Higher stress = increased safety margin ?
Pipelines fail for many reasons. (corrosion, external damage, denting, cracking) Does a single allowable stress appropriately address these failure modes?

Limit states design

Reliability based design method based on factored loads and factored resistances Based on identification of failure modes Assignment of appropriate safety factors for Ultimate, Serviceability

Conclusion
Better defined safety margin Remove waste in the design from by using a consistent safety margins

04.09.13

46

Plasticity
Theory of strain past yield Two main theories Incremental and Total
Incremental Increments of plastic strain related to plastic stress by the tangent modulus Overall response is the integral over the load path Total (Secant) Total strain related to total stress by the secant modulus

04.09.13

48

Incremental Theory
More widely known and implemented (ANSYS, ABAQUS, etc) Capable as a general theory More computationally intensive
= (, )

Much more complex than we have time for.

04.09.13

49

Total strain theory

Total strains related to total stresses by secant modulus For a certain class of problems its much easier to apply Restrictions Stress history effects cannot be accounted for Proportional loading only Isotropic hardening only Lets investigate this further

04.09.13

50

Nonlinear Material Models

Many well known models to choose from
Bilinear = ; Ramberg-Osgood =

= 1 + 1 ; > + ( ) ;

ASME VIII

= 10. . 30

Multi-parameter

04.09.13

51

Yield Criteria
Two main theories
Maximum Shear Stress ( ) =
1 2

Equivalent Stress

1 2 2 + 2 3 + 3 1 2

2 =

04.09.13

52

Yield Surfaces

04.09.13

53

Hardening Laws
What happens when you load a material past yield? Elastic-Plastic
No change in stress Strain is undefined

Isotropic
Uniform expansion of yield surface Same center point

Kinematic
A shift in the yield surface Same size

04.09.13

54

Plastic Incompressibility
Elastic deformation is compressible
Obvious since Poissons ratio is < , usually about 0.3

Plastic deformation is incompressible

Less obvious, had been assumed; proven experimentally by Bridgman Poisson ratio equal to 0.5

What about the range in the middle?

There is a transition, =

It can be proven that the relation is as follows

=
04.09.13

1 2

1 [ 2

]
55

Load Path Dependence

Ex. - Thin Cylinder with Tension and Torsion
Yield Curve after Hardening

Initial Yield Curve

04.09.13

58

Load Path Dependence

Ex. Thin Cylinder with Tensile Loading Load along OABAO Yield at point A, strain harden to point B, remove load ( = 0)

= ; = = ; = 0

Yield Curve after Hardening Initial Yield Curve

04.09.13

59

Load Path Dependence

Ex. Thin Cylinder with Torsional Loading Load along OCDCO Yield at point C, strain harden to point D, remove load ( = 0)

= 0 ; = ; = = 0

Yield Curve after Hardening Initial Yield Curve

04.09.13

60

Load Path Dependence

Ex. Arbitrary Loading Two different load paths - OABAEF and OCDF. Same final stress state. Different strains. What are they?

Yield Curve after Hardening Initial Yield Curve

04.09.13

61

Load Path Dependence

Ex. Arbitrary Loading OABAEF - = ; = =

They are unchanged. All unloading/reloading is elastic!

OCDF - =

Yield Curve after Hardening Initial Yield Curve

04.09.13

62

Load Path Dependence

Ex. Deformation Plasticity Recall that it only can handle proportional loading. Path OF is proportional

Yield Curve after Hardening Initial Yield Curve

04.09.13

63

CAESAR Nonlinear Analysis

Step #1 Linear solution Step #2 Extract Element Stress Step #3 Calculate effective modulus (E) and effective Poisson ratio (v) Step #4 Repeat Steps #2 and #3 by element Step #5 Solve Step #6 Compare change in stress to convergence criteria. If converged, then stop, else Step #2.

04.09.13

64

CAESAR Nonlinear Analysis

Step #1 Start with Solution from PVP Method Step #2 Extract Element Stress
Select range of elements with stress above yield

Step #3 Calculate E and v

Use material model to calculate E and v

Step #4 Repeat by Element Step #5 - Solve

04.09.13

65

CAESAR Nonlinear Analysis

Compare change in stress to convergence criteria (eg. 5%) Repeat.repeat.repeat

Iteration #1

Iteration #2

Iterations #3,4,5,6

04.09.13

66

CAESAR Nonlinear Analysis

Max + , Bend Midpoint
Iteration #1 571 MPa Iteration #2 234 MPa Iteration #3 494 MPa Iteration #4 461 MPa Iteration #5 485 MPa Iteration #6 477 MPa

We have convergence to 2%, and have achieved a 20% stress reduction Based on the material model, we have 0.2% plastic strain.

04.09.13

67

Results Discussion
Is it worth the effort?
Quite laborious and time consuming Lots of data manipulation, error prone.

But, for the right problem,

You get a much better understanding of the actual stress in the line. You are not forced to make design changes due to the limitations of your analysis method.

That all looks very nice, but have you validated the results?
Of course we did.

04.09.13

68

ANSYS Nonlinear
Kinematic Hardening, Small Def. Theory, Pipe289 Elements

Agreement to 2.5%!

04.09.13

69

ANSYS - Nonlinear
Kinematic Hardening, Small Def. Theory, Pipe289 Elements

Agreement to 5%.

04.09.13

70

A Word of Caution
There are limits to the capabilities of the beam theory elements
Key problem is the assumption that cross-sections remain plane and undistorted after deformation Not capable of capturing ovalization, wrinkling, or collapse

Ovalization has a pronounced effect at higher strain levels

Be wary of problems with high D/t

Initial imperfections play a large role in wrinkle and buckle initiation We do not consider the method to be sufficiently robust to do a full strainbased design. So what is it good for?

04.09.13

71

CAESAR Nonlinear
Stress based design! There is a lot to be gained between 70% SMYS and 90% SMYS Codes dont say you cant vary E and v. About .1% more strain allowed

04.09.13

72

RISER DESIGN

Design Philosophy

Why is there an issue? Numerous failures Reasons difficult to model Backfill conditions Compaction Local stresses

Restrained or Unrestrained? Design Robustness

04.09.13

74

Backfill
Can be somewhat different than what you model.

04.09.13

75

Piled Risers
The outcome of multiple lawsuits. About the worst stress design you could come up with. Lets discuss

04.09.13

76

Piled Risers
And a common outcome.

04.09.13

77

Restrained Risers
Restrained = Anchor Block Usually concrete due to load requirements. Points to Consider Familiarity with the design and installation of an anchor block Design of the attachment to the pipe Protection of pipe coating Availability of concrete Load calculation Cost Recommendation Least preferred option

04.09.13

78

Unrestrained Risers
Unrestrained is a matter of degree Shallow angle riser Buried Offset Points to Consider Extra space requirements May required controlled backfill compaction May require imported backfill Generally more economical Easiest to implement early in design process Recommendation This is my preferred riser solution

04.09.13

79