Вы находитесь на странице: 1из 8

PIPE TOC

Proceedings of OMAE2002:

Proceedings of OMAE02
June 23-28, 2002, Oslo, Norway
21 International Conference on Offshore Mechanics
and Artic Engineering
June 23-28, 2002,Oslo, Norway
st

OMAE2002-28591

Strength of Process Pipes Subjected to Jet Fire


Odd Kristensen
CorrOcean ASA
Claude Monts all 5
1338 Sandvika, Norway
Tel.: +47 67 55 38 00
Fax: +47 67 55 38 10
E-mail: odd.kristensen@corrocean.no

Jerzy Czujko
CorrOcean ASA
Claude Monts all 5
1338 Sandvika, Norway
Tel.: +47 67 55 38 00
Fax: +47 67 55 38 10
E-mail: jurek.czujko@corrocean.no

Jun Xu
Intec Engineering Ltd.
15600 JFK Boulevard, 3rd Floor
Houston, TX 77032, USA
Telephone: +1 (281) 987-0800
Fax: +1 (281) 987-3838
E-mail:jun.xu@intecengineering.com

NOMENCLATURE

ABSTRACT
This paper presents the application of different analytical
methods to determine critical temperature-pressure conditions
for the burst of typical pipes used in offshore process plants. The
applications of a dynamic non-linear Finite Element method and
a simplified analytical method are presented and compared. The
application of the Finite Element method is based on the
Arbitrary Lagrangian Eulerian (ALE) formulation allowing for
the simultaneous simulation of pipe burst and hydrocarbon gas
flow to the environment. Numerical predictions are compared
with available experiments.

Ci

Coefficients in the equation of state for the


Eulerian model of hydrocarbon gas and air

Pipe diameter

Youngs modulus

Et

Tangent modulus

Impulse of the impact force

Relative volume in the equation of state

Pressure in the pipe

The paper also presents the behaviour of pipes after burst with
the following impact on neighbouring pipes. The study covers
impact between large pipes as well as impact between large and
small pipes. Due to impact between pipes, the impacted pipes
can collapse, disintegrate and in some cases become projectiles.
Impact forces between pipes, together with impact energies are
calculated for typical process pipe sizes and materials. Effects of
different boundary conditions for pipes and forces in pipe
supports are also presented in the paper.

Pipe wall thickness

Strain

VM

Von Mises stress

Yield strength of the material

INTRODUCTION
Pressurized pipes are the most common elements in process
installations of offshore and onshore plants. In such
installations, hydrocarbons are normally processed under high
pressure and temperature. In emergency situations, such as gas

Copyright 2002 by ASME

release detection or other danger for explosion and fire, the


process system is depressurised to reduce the amount of
hydrocarbons in the system. Even though the pressure is
reduced, the pressure is still high enough to cause pipe burst
when pipes are subjected to fire. Due to jet forces arising at the
pipe burst location, the damaged pipe will impact neighbouring
pipes and structures, and cause additional structural damage and
release of hydrocarbons.

this paper.

Stress

Increasing temperature

The application of new knowledge, regarding the behaviour


of process pressurized pipes subjected to jet fire, allows for
further improvement of design procedures and increased safety
of hydrocarbon installations offshore.

Strain

PIPE BURST IN JET FIRE

=0.45

Figure 2. Stress/strain relations for various


temperatures.

Strength reduction in fire


Assume that a closed pipe is subjected to an internal pressure
p, see Fig. 1.

Crack development
In order to estimate the critical pressure-temperature
conditions, when a crack initiates under the combined action of
internal pressure and temperature loads, and what crack pattern
that develops after the pipe burst occurs, the plastic limit strain
criteria have to be established. Normally, fracture occurs when
the plastic strain reaches a critical value. At room temperature,
the critical strain limit for carbon steel is about 20% and even
higher for stainless steel. At a high temperature, the material
becomes more ductile, a critical plastic strain of 45% is
considered to be appropriate.

D
t
Figure 1. A pressurized pipe.
In calculation of Von Mises stress of the pipe, VM, the pipe
end effects are considered. Von Mises stress VM is given by:
VM =

3 pD
--- ------4 t

(1)

A sensitivity study is carried out in order to establish the


effect of strain limit uncertainties on the pipe burst temperature.

where D is the nominal diameter of the pipe and t is the wall


thickness.

Figure 3 shows sensitivity of the burst temperature to the


critical strain limit. It is seen from this figure that the critical
strain value has no significant effect on the burst temperature.
mainly due to low Et for high temperature.

If a bi-linear stress-strain relation is assumed, the equivalent


strain in the pipe becomes:

Burst temperature ratio

VM
---------- ;
( VM < y )
E
=
VM ( VM y )
---------; ( VM > y )
E + --------------------------Et

(2)

Where y is the yield stress of the material, E is the elastic


modulus and Et is the tangent modulus. Note that material
properties such as y, E and Et are normally functions of pipe
wall temperature.

0.99
2"

0.98

4"
8"

0.97

16"
0.96
0.95
0

For a given stress level, strains are calculated according to


Eqn. (2) for various temperatures as indicated in Fig. 2. If the
critical strain cr is defined, the burst temperature can be
establish by interpolation.

10

20

30

40

50

Critical strain (%)

Figure 3. Sensitivity to critical strain limit.1


1.
Burst temperature ratio = Burst temperature/Burst temperature at 45%
critical strain

Validity of the simplified equation will be discussed further in

Copyright 2002 by ASME

FINITE ELEMENT MODELLING

There are 60 elements along the pipe span.

Arbitrary Lagrangian-Eulerian formulation


400

fy [N/mm2]

The arbitrary Lagrangian-Eulerian formulation applied,


allows for a full gas medium-structure interaction with nonlinear structural response, including damage, crack development
and propagation and internal pressure reduction due to gas
outflow to the external environment.
Computer program

350

ASS 316

300

CS 316 LT

250
200
150

All FE modelling and analyses are performed using computer


program LS-DYNA [LSTC, 2001]. It is an explicit computer
code well-suited to handle transient dynamic phenomena. LSDYNA is also able to handle the coupling of the Lagrangian and
Eulerian models, i.e., Arbitrary Lagrangian Eulerian
formulation. The computer program chosen can handle
temperature dependent material properties, simulate the crack
opening process and has an efficient impact-contact solution
procedure.

100
50
0
0

200

400

600

800

1000

1200

1400

Temperature (deg C)

Figure 4. Yield stress of the employed materials for


different temperatures.
250000

Pipes, materials and material models


In the analyses presented here, two different materials are
used, austenitic stainless steel 316 (ASS 316 or just SS) and
carbon steel Type 360 LT (CS 316 LT or just CS). Their material
properties are established for the whole temperature range.
Material data have been taken from [ScandpowerSintef, 1992],
[European Committee for Standardisation, 1993], [Norwegian
Technology Standards Institution, 1999] and [Action Stainless
Kwa Zulu Natal, 2001].

ASS 316
200000

E [N/mm2]

CS 316 LT

150000

100000

50000

For the austenitic stainless steel 316 and the carbon steel Type
360 LT the following material properties are assumed to be
constant with temperature:

0
0

200

400

600

800

1000

1200

1400

Temperature (deg C)

Density : =7850 kg/m3.

Figure 5. Elastic modulus of the employed materials


for different temperatures.

Poissons ratio : =0.3


Linear thermal expansion coefficient : k=14*10-6 m/(mK).

The FE model symmetry is not utilized, as the symmetric


boundary conditions can not be applied, due to asymmetric jet
fire heat field applied to the pipe.

The yield stress and elastic modulus vary with temperature


and are given in Fig. 4 and Fig. 5, respectively.

FE model of hydrocarbon gas and air (Eulerian model)

FE-model of the pressurized steel pipe (Lagrangian


model)

The internal gas is modelled to the nominal diameter of the


pipe and the external gas is modelled 2 pipe diameters from the
pipe wall and 500 mm from the pipe ends.

A 4-node Belytchko-Tsay shell element with 5 DoF (Degree


Of Freedom) at each node is used to model the pipe [LSTC,
2001]. A fully integrated shell with 4 integration points in
quadrature and 5 integration points through the thickness is
applied.

A 8-node solid element is used to model the air. A complete


Eulerian mesh, including internal gas for both pipes and
external gas, is illustrated in Fig. 6 and Fig. 7.

A typical FE model for the burst analysis is developed as


follows:

Eulerian model, equation of state

The internal and external gas is modelled by solid Eulerian


elements. The initial pressure or static pressure is defined by
EOS (Equation of State) function.

The model consists of 1560 elements (whole model).


There are 24 elements in circumferential direction.

Copyright 2002 by ASME

Validation of FE models

The polynomial equation of state, linear in the internal energy


per initial volume, E, is given by:
2

p = C 0 + C 1 + C 2 + C 3 + ( C 4 + C 5 + C 6 )E

Predictions of the critical pressure-temperature conditions


from the FE models have been validated using results from full
scale experiments [Sintef, 1998]. Typical results of the full scale
experiments and numerical predictions of crack development
and pipe bend are shown in Fig. 8 and Fig. 9, for carbon steel,
and in Fig. 10, for stainless steel. Results of validation for
carbon and stainless steel are given in Table 1.

(3)

in which C0, C1, C2, C3, C4, C5 and C6 are constants and:
= --1- 1
V

(4)

Table 1: Pipe dimensions and burst temperature

where V is the relative volume. In this study, the following


coefficients have been used, to defined the equation of state for
the internal and external gas:

Model B

Carbon Steel

Duplex Steel

Pipe length, mm

3000

3000

Outer Diameter, mm

273.1

273.0

Wall thickness, mm

9.27

9.27

Burst pressure (bar)

45.1

88.0

Burst temperature,
experiment( oC)

780

844.0

Burst temperature,
FE model( oC)

756

837.0

Ratio FEM/Test

0.97

0.99

Material

C0 = C1 = C2 = C3 = C 6 = 0
C 4 = C 5 = 0, 31

Model A

(5)

The internal pressure in the pipe will be controlled by the


internal energy. If the relative volume, V, is 1.0 and the internal
energy, E, is 16.13 MJ, the pressure will be:
p = 5MPa = 50bar
Outer Eulerian gas model

FE model validation has been performed against two test


cases Model A (carbon steel) and Model B (stainless duplex
steel). Results can be summarized as follows:

Inner Eulerian gas model

Figure 6. FE gas models illustrated for constant


longitudinal value (x-co-ordinate).

Inner Eulerian gas model

If calibrated material data are utilized, the calculated burst


temperature is in an excellent agreement with experiment
data.
Initial crack shape of a burst pipe can be simulated by FE
model. This implies that the fracture criterion based on critical plastic strain is acceptable.
The ALE models have successfully captured the global
deformation of the pipes at burst (about 90 degrees bending). This means that this type of modelling is suitable for
pipe impact analysis.

Outer Eulerian gas model

Figure 7. FE gas models shown in the longitudinal


direction.

Figure 8. Model A - experiments.

Copyright 2002 by ASME

temperature, especially for a larger diameter pipe. This is partly


due to idealization of the temperature field, and stress
distribution, in the simplified approach. Jet fire temperature
field used in this study is based on the results of laboratory tests
by [Sintef, 1998].

Figure 9. Model A - FE results.

30
Pipe centre, away from crack
Crack zone, pipe wall

20

Crack zone, pipe centre


Crack area
Crack zone, external air

10

External air

Figure 10. Model B - experiments and FE results.

0.01

0.02

Time [s]

PIPE BURST STUDY

Figure 11. Pipe burst process with following


pressure reduction.

Pressure-Temperature critical conditions, FE simulations


Figure 11 illustrates pipe burst process, caused by a combined
effect of the internal pressure and high temperature, with the
associated internal pressure reduction. Using FE models
developed a series of analysis is performed to assess the critical
pressure-temperature conditions.
Burst temperatures, calculated by the analytical method and
FE method, are compared in Fig. 12 and Fig. 13 for typical pipe
classes. In these figures lines represent analytical solutions
while markers FE predictions. The predictions based on FEanalyses are in average 1% higher than the results from the
analytical procedure. The largest under-prediction by the
analytical procedure as compared to the FE-analyses is 6%, and
the largest over-prediction by the analytical procedure as
compared to the FE-analyses is 10%.

Figure 12. Burst temperature vs. internal pressure,


stainless steel 316, 8 and 16 DC2 class pipes.
Continuous lines - analytical solutions, markers - FE
results.

Carbon steel tubes generally show a reasonably good


agreement between simplified method and numerical analyses.
In most cases, the simplified method underestimates the burst

Copyright 2002 by ASME

Figure 14. Typical disintegration of the burst pipe


during impact.
350
300
250
200
150
100

Figure 13. Burst temperature vs. internal pressure


carbon steel, 2, 4, 8 and 16 CA3 class pipes.
Continuous lines - analytical solutions, markers - FE
results.

50
0
0.22

0.23

0.24

0.25

0.26

0.27

0.28

0.29

0.3

Time [s]

PIPE TO PIPE IMPACT STUDY


Behaviour of burst pipes
In this study, the impact between a rupturing pipe and an
undamaged, but pre-heated pipe is examined. Either the
impacted pipe has the same diameter as the blasting pipe, or the
diameter of the blasting pipe is 4 times the diameter of the
impacted pipe. The distance between the pipe and the support
lengths of the pipes are according to design procedures for
insulated pipes [umoe, 1997]. In one of the studies the thickness
of the blasting pipe is altered.

Figure 15. Carbon steel pipes. 16 vs. 16 pipe


impact.
200

160

FE analyses

120

The bursting pipes in the pipe to pipe impact analyses


presented here are 400 mm (16) in diameter. The longest
rupturing pipe is 16300 mm long.

80

40

The impacted pipe is either 400 mm or 100 mm in diameter. If


the impacted pipe is 400 mm in diameter, it has the same
dimensions as the rupturing pipe.

0
0.25

0.26

0.27

0.28

Time [s]

Pipe impact forces


An extensive investigation of pipe to pipe impact has been
carried out including both carbon steel and austenitic stainless
steel pipes, [CorrOcean, 2001]. A typical consequence of pipe
to pipe impact, pipe disintegration, is shown in Fig. 14. The time
dependent impact forces with pipe deformation at different
stages of response are given in Fig. 15 and Fig. 16 for carbon
and stainless steel pipes, respectively.

Figure 16. Stainless steel pipes. 16 vs. 16 pipe


impact.

Copyright 2002 by ASME

0.29

Pipe impact, discussion of results


The main focus has been on studying behaviour of the
bursting pipe after time of rupture, and the damage it causes on
the impacted pipe. Besides a visualisation study of the events,
which is very illustrative, the impact force between the two
pipes is calculated. If these impact forces are integrated in time,
they will show the total momentum exchanged between the two
pipes. The momentum exchanged, constitute the basis for pipe
impact damage.

100

80

60

40

20

Figure 19 shows the maximum contact force and the total


momentum exchanged between the impacted pipes for the
different pipe impact cases analysed. The cases shown in the
figure includes numerical studies of pipes with different
materials and pipe diameters. The thickness of the rupturing
pipe and the guide distance of the impacted pipe have also been
altered. Based on the numerical results it is difficult to draw
clear conclusions, but it is obvious that increasing the thickness
of the rupturing pipe decreases the peak of the impact force. The
momentum transferred to the impacted pipe before the rupturing
pipe hits the guides is also decreased. The reason for this
behaviour is the increased inertia of the thicker pipe, resulting in
lower transverse velocity of the rupturing pipe.

0
0.22

0.23

0.24

0.25

0.26

Time [s]

Figure 17. Carbon steel pipes. 16 vs. 4 pipe impact.

Altering the guide distance seems to have little influence


concerning the value of the impact force. It remains almost the
same, but the impacting pipe hits the guides of the impacted
pipe earlier, resulting in a shorter time before rupture, and less
momentum given to the pipe before rupture. In this study the
pipe guides are assumed to resist impact force from the
impacted pipes. This assumption requires additional study to
validate the behaviour of typical guides used in offshore
installations.

200

160

120

80

350

40

300
0
0.25

0.26

0.27

250

0.28

Time [s]

200
16/16 C

150

16/16 S
16/4 C
16/4 S

100

16/4 C T
16/4 C B

50
0
0

I [kNs]

Figure 19. Maximum contact force and total


momentum exchanged between the impacted pipes
for the different pipe impact cases. C and S refer to
carbon and stainless steel pipes, respectively. T and
B refer to thickness and guide distance effects,
respectively.

Figure 18. Stainless steel pipes. 16 vs. 4 pipe


impact.

Copyright 2002 by ASME

CONCLUSIONS

graphical material used in this paper.

Critical temperature-pressure conditions

REFERENCES

The burst behaviour of pressurized pipes subjected to a jet fire


has been studied using both the simplified analytical method
and the FE method. The FE method showed to be accurate for
the prediction of the burst temperature, calculation of reduction
of internal pressure, crack development and propagation, and
the integrity of pipes.

Action Stainless Kwa Zulu Natal (ASKzn), (2001). Stainless


Steel Grades and Mechanical Properties. Steel properties
database from a cluster of suppliers. The database is available
at web site http://askzn.co.za/.
CorrOcean (2001). Impact Analysis of Pressurized Pipes
Subjected to Jet Fire, Technical Report No.: OD-2001-0097,
Rev. 2.

As a result of the present study, a methodology based on FE


method has been proposed and verified against experimental
data.

European Committee for Standardisation (1993). Eurocode 3.


Design of steel structures. Part 1.2: Structural fire design. Draft,
prENV 1993-1-2. European Committee for Standardisation.

The methodology developed allows for accurate assessment


of the critical temperature-pressure conditions for process pipes.
Also, the analytical procedure for prediction of burst
temperature was found very promising and useful in
establishing the significant parameters of the critical
temperature-pressure conditions.

Livermore Software Technology Corporation (2001). LSDYNA, Keyword Users Manual, Theoretical Manual and
Examples Manual. Livermore Software Technology
Corporation, USA.
Norsk Hydro (1998). AVESTA-SHEFFIELD and JET-FIRE97
Correlation: Comparison of the Rupture Temperatures of Steel
Pipes between the Correlation and the Jet-Fire97 Experiments.
Technical report written by Melanie A. Beaulieu. Norsk Hydro,
Oslo, Norway.

Pipe to pipe impact


Generally, it can be concluded that if the bursting pipe and the
impacted pipe have the same diameter, the bursting pipe will
most probably break, while the impacted pipe will retain its
integrity, but it will experience substantial permanent damage.
However, the results of analyses performed document that the
material strain in the impacted pipes is close to the tensile limits.

Norwegian Technology Standards Institution (1999). NORSOK


Standard M-630. Material Data Sheets for Piping. NTS, Norway.
The standard is also available at web at site http://www.nts.no/.

If the rupturing pipe has four times the diameter of the


impacted pipe, the following can be concluded:

Safetec Nordic AS (2001). Burst analysis of a pressurised pipe


subjected to a jet fire. Doc. No.: OD-2001-006, Rev. 2.

ScandpowerSintef (1992). Handbook for Fire Calculations and


Fire Risk Assessment in the Process Industry. Scandpower A/S,
Norway.

The impacted pipe will be completely disintegrated. It will


loosen from its guides and take off as a projectile.
The impacting pipe will hit the guides of the impacted pipe,
and the guides will be exposed to large forces, much higher
than the previous contact forces between the two pipes.
Current design of pipe guides is expected not to withstand
the forces from the rupturing pipe.

SINTEF Energy Research (1998). Jet-fire on pressurised tubes.


Technical report, report no. TR F 4748, ISBN 82-594-1312-4.
SINTEF Energy Research, Norway.
umoe (1997). Piping Guide Minimum Spacing. Work
Instruction No. 8360-WI-L-114. umoe Oil & Gas, Oslo,
Norway.

This is the case for both the carbon and the stainless steel
pipes.
The application of the FE method to the assessment of the
behaviour of process piping subjected to jet fire may well
substitute expensive laboratory experiments and can be used to
carry out systematic parameter study. The new knowledge
gained in such studies can be utilised to further develop design
guidelines for the safe design of offshore process installations.
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
The authors would like to thank Dr. Jan A. Pappas, Norsk
Hydro, for permission to use the project data and results to
illustrate this article. The authors extend thanks also to Dr.
Bogdan Iwanowski, CorrOcean, for his valuable comments and
discussions during preparation of this paper and to Mr. Ib
Heller, HellerTv, for his assistance in the preparation of the

Copyright 2002 by ASME