SAGE Profile V6.3.2 User Manual - Volume 3

SAGE Profile Version 6.3.
2
User Manual
VOLUME 3
THEORY MANUAL
Prepared By
Fugro Engineers SA/NV
Document Ref.: SAGE Profile V6.3.2 User Manual - Volume 3.doc
Revision: 04
Date: 17/03/2005
Document Title:
SAGE Profile V6.3.2 - User Manual - Volume 3 - 04

Theory Manual
Document Ref.:
SAGE Profile V6.3.2 User Manual - Volume 3.doc
REVISION STATUS
Rev
Status
Compiled
Reviewed
by
Date
by
Date
Approved
by
Date
JWI
Nov 2003
00
Issued for
Comments
MMA
July 2003
JFW
July 2003
01
Issued for V6.3
MMA
Oct 2003
DCA
Nov 2003
02
Issued for V6.3.1
HFA
May 2004
JWI
May 2004
03
Issued for V6.3.1
MMA
Sept 2004
04
Issued for V6.3.2
RDE
Feb 2005
HFA
Mar 2005
JWI
Mar. 2005
Signatory Legend: DCA David Cathie
MMA Matthieu Malli
HFA
Hendrik Falepin
JWI
Jean-Franois Wintgens
Copyright 1995 - 2005 Fugro Engineers SA/NV

No warranty, expressed or implied is offered as to the accuracy of results from this program. The
program should not be used for design unless caution is exercised in interpreting the results, and
independent calculations are available to verify the general correctness of the results.
Fugro Engineers SA/NV accept no responsibility for the results of the program and will not be deemed
responsible for any liability arising from use of the program.
CONTENT
Content
1.
GENERAL DESCRIPTION ................................................................................................ 5

1.1. Introduction....................................................................................................................... 5
1.2. Overview............................................................................................................................ 6
1.2.1.
General ................................................................................................................... 5
1.2.2.
Non-linearities......................................................................................................... 6
1.2.3.
Capabilities ............................................................................................................. 7
1.2.4.
Pipeline Analysis Features ..................................................................................... 8
1.2.5.
Main Assumptions .................................................................................................. 8
1.3. Pipeline Modelling .......................................................................................................... 10
1.3.1.
Meshing the pipe .................................................................................................. 10
1.3.2.
Lay Down.............................................................................................................. 10
1.3.3.
Residual Lay Tension ........................................................................................... 11
1.3.4.
Soil-Pipe Interaction.............................................................................................. 11
1.3.5.
Modelling Three-Dimensional Problems ............................................................... 12
1.3.6.
Buried Pipe ........................................................................................................... 13
1.3.7.
Current and Waves............................................................................................... 14
2.
FINITE ELEMENT ............................................................................................................ 16

Element Description....................................................................................................... 16
Element Loading............................................................................................................. 17
2.2.1.
General Loading ................................................................................................... 17
2.2.2.
Internal and external pressures ............................................................................ 17
2.2.3.
Temperature ......................................................................................................... 19
2.2.4.
Effective axial force............................................................................................... 19
Material Properties ......................................................................................................... 20
2.3.1.
Pipe Plasticity ....................................................................................................... 20
2.3.2.
Ovalisation ............................................................................................................ 26
2.3.3.
Soil Plasticity......................................................................................................... 29
Contact ............................................................................................................................ 34
2.4.1.
Introduction ........................................................................................................... 34
2.4.2.
Synchronous Contact Algorithm ........................................................................... 34
2.4.3.
Asynchronous Contact Algorithm ......................................................................... 37
Geometrical Non-Linearity............................................................................................. 38
Solution Techniques ...................................................................................................... 39
2.6.1.
Incremental/Iterative Process ............................................................................... 40
Sign Convention ............................................................................................................. 45
Flow Charts ..................................................................................................................... 48
Glossary .......................................................................................................................... 50
2.1.
2.2.
2.3.
2.4.
2.5.
2.6.
2.7.
2.8.
2.9.
SAGE Profile V6.3.2 - Theory Manual
GENERAL DESCRIPTION
3.
REFERENCES ................................................................................................................. 54
GENERAL DESCRIPTION
1. GENERAL DESCRIPTION
1.1
Introduction
SAGE Profile is a suite of programs for pipeline profile analysis developed by Fugro
Engineers SA/NV (Formerly THALES GeoSolutions). Operating with a standard
Graphical User Interface (GUI) under Microsoft Windows, the suite enables the full
range of pipeline profile analysis tasks to be performed efficiently.
Volume 3 (this volume) of the set of documentation for SAGE Profile is concerned with
the theory on which SAGE Profile is based and its finite element engine, PipeNet.
The series of SAGE Profile documentation comprises:
SAGE Profile User Manual Volume 1: SAGE Profile Interface
SAGE Profile User Manual Volume 2: PipeNet
SAGE Profile User Manual Volume 3 (this document)
SAGE Profile Validation Reports
1.1.1 General
PipeNet is a finite element program for two- and three-dimensional pipeline stress
analysis. Its capabilities include non-linear pipe bending, non-linear soil response
(bearing capacity, and axial and lateral frictional resistance), large deformation analysis
and buckling. General forms of loading include: self weight (including piggy-back lines),
lay tension, point loads (e.g. anodes), distributed loads (e.g. current), prescribed
displacements (e.g. lifting during trenching) as well as internal and external pressures
and general temperature distributions. A schematic diagram depicting some of the
programs 2D capabilities is shown in Figure 1.
GENERAL DESCRIPTION
1.2
Overview
Figure 1: Schematic showing some features of pipe2D.

Analyses are divided into loading stages corresponding to different stages in the life of
the pipeline. Within each stage the loading is applied incrementally to follow the
geometric and material non-linearities which may ensue. Thus, a typical pipeline
analysis is defined by a laydown stage, followed by (for example) hydrotest loading in a
second stage. A third operational stage could follow. In fact, an unlimited number of
loading stages are possible with loading applied in any sequence following laydown.
1.2.1 Non-linearities
Non-linearities in SAGE Profile arises from:
Material non-linearity: pipe plasticity and ovalisation (see Sections 2.3.1 and
2.3.4)
Soil non-linearity: soil plasticity and friction (see Section 2.3.5)
Geometric non-linearity: large displacements (including large rotations) and
buckling (see Section 2.5).
Contact non-linearity: touch-down/lift-off phenomena (see Section 2.4).
The principal mechanisms of non-linear pipe bending and buckling are illustrated in
Figure 2.
GENERAL DESCRIPTION
Figure 2: Pipe Bending Non-linearities.
1.2.2 Capabilities
Two- and three-dimensional analysis

Euler-Bernoulli beam-column elements
Variable pipe diameter and wall thickness
General specification of vertical, lateral, axial distributed loads (e.g. weight of
pipe, current loads)
Point loads at arbitrary spacing and location
Prescribed displacements (local and global coordinates)
Arbitrarily or uniformly spaced field joints with reduced stiffness
Two non-linear pipe moment-curvature models (Moment-curvature defined by
the Ramberg-Osgood curve or based on a uniaxial stress-strain curve)
General seabed profile including a cross-slope (3D)
General pipeline profile in plan (3D)
Non-linear vertical, axial and lateral soil support
Modelling of column buckling (upheaval and snaking)
Pipe air filled or fluid filled, submerged or in air
Internal and external fluid pressures
GENERAL DESCRIPTION
General variation of temperature along pipe axis

General variation of initial tension along pipe axis
End fixity: free, rigid, pinned
Calculation of hoop stresses and true wall stresses
Restart capability
Output control and plot file
1.2.3 Pipeline Analysis Features

Stress analysis of a pipeline in a finite element model requires special handling of the
circular pipe cross-section if simple beam-column elements are used as in PipeNet.
While the beam-column elements model satisfactorily the overall pipeline configuration,
the analysis must handle the effects of internal and external fluid pressure on the
stresses in the pipe wall as well as the thermal strains that can develop due to
temperature effects. All of the most important features of circular pipe behaviour are
included in PipeNet:
Effect of internal and external pressure on the ends of the pipe

Hoop stress developed by internal and external pressure
Axial force developed in the pipe wall due to the Poissons effect of the hoop
stress
Thermal strains and axial force in pipe wall due to temperature changes
Output of true wall stress and hoop stress for equivalent stress calculation
Lay tension may be specifically included
Sag tensions are calculated automatically as a result of modelling geometric
changes (large deformations)
Moment-curvature relationship based on longitudinal stresses in the pipe wall
and the uniaxial stress strain behaviour, accounting for the biaxial stress
conditions in the pipe wall
1.2.4 Main Assumptions

All finite element modelling makes certain simplifying assumptions regarding reality.
The principal assumptions existing in the present version of SAGE Profile are noted in
this section.
Plane sections normal to the pipe axis remain plane.

Bending moment can be obtained by integrating for x around the pipe wall
as shown in Equation .
Axial non-linearity arising from pure axial stresses/strains is assumed to be
negligible.
The pipe section is thin-walled (i.e. the wall thickness is less than about one
tenth of the radius). Therefore:
o The hoop stress is considered to be constant over the pipe wall (i.e. no
variation with the radial co-ordinate).
o Biaxial stress state prevails in the pipe wall (effect of radial
stresses/strains is negligible).
Material stress-strain curve can be approximated by the Ramberg-Osgood
form.
GENERAL DESCRIPTION
Non-linearities in the vertical soil support curves and in the explicit momentcurvature method are non-linear rather than plastic. Unloading results in the
same non-linear relationship being followed. For axial soil springs and for the
stress-strain based moment curvature model, unloading following plasticity is
elastic.
The pipe is assumed to have zero diameter for seabed contact - the soil
friction and support acts on the centreline of the pipe.
Soil supports are "lumped" at each node and act in translation only. Soil
rotational stiffness is ignored.
For 3D analysis, the non-linearity in the pipe (Ramberg-Osgood model) is not
history dependent. The single moment-curvature relationship is assumed to
apply on the plane of maximum bending moment, irrespective of previous
loading history (i.e. bending on other planes).
External water pressures are calculated based on the seabed elevation. This
avoids continual updating of the loading at each loading increment when
most depth variations are very small for profile analysis.
GENERAL DESCRIPTION
1.3
Pipeline Modelling
1.3.1 Meshing the pipe

The pipe mesh is based on the discrete seabed profile. The seabed is defined by a
series of KPs versus Elevation points, called KP points. To each defined KP point of
the seabed, there will be a corresponding pipe node. In other words, the coordinates of
ith pipe node will be equal to the coordinates of the ith KP point:
x = KPi
i i
y i = Elevationi
Equation 1
With
xi,yi
KPi
Elevationi
horizontal and vertical coordinates of pipe node i

horizontal coordinates of the ith KP point
vertical coordinate of the ith KP point
If the *HORIZONTAL_PIPE option is activated, the pipe is set horizontal and touching
the highest point of the seabed. Therefore,
Equation 2
x = KPi
i i
y i = Max(Elevationk , k )
In this case, the initial pipe length, on which the weight loading will be computed, is
equal to the KP length. The KP length corresponds to the length of the seabed
profile projection on the horizontal axis.
The mesh can be refined either by increasing the number of KP points either by directly
interpolating the seabed or by specifying the number of pipe elements between two
seabed KPs (see control parameter 13 or the FE Tune window of the interface).
Important note:
SAGE Profile interface will always start the analyses using the *HORIZONTAL_PIPE
option and then lay the pipeline on the seabed nodes (see Section 1.3.2).
1.3.2 Lay Down

Pipelay is simulated in a simplified manner by "lowering" the pipeline in 2D to the
frictionless seabed in a series of increments (typically 100 or more) selected by the
program such that no more than one node touches down per increment. The standard
boundary conditions for lay down consist in fixing axially the left-hand extremity. In
order to stabilise the solution, very soft springs are added at both ends. When a point
touches down the soil stiffness is invoked; conversely, if a point is lifting off the soil
stiffness is removed. Two different contact algorithms can be used:
the Synchronous Touch-Down (see Section 2.4.2)
the Asynchronous Touch-Down (see Section 2.4.3)
The pipelay process is thus one of the non-linear problems that the program solves.
Note that usually the axial friction is not activated during the lay down phase to avoid
any axial constraint. In 3D the lay down is done also in 2D. Once the pipeline is on the
seabed the model is then deformed into 3D (see Section 1.3.5).
10
GENERAL DESCRIPTION
1.3.3 Residual Lay Tension

Before the laying process the pipe lay tension may be modelled by specifying the
appropriate nodal load at the right extremity of the pipeline.
1.3.4 Soil-Pipe Interaction

The soil is modelled as a series of lumped springs distributed along the pipeline route
as sketched in Figure 3. The soil springs models are described in Section 2.3.5. The
pipe-seabed contact algorithms are described in section 2.4.
Spring Force
Spring Force
ux
y (Positive Upwards)
Frictional Spring
uy
Vertical Spring
KP
PipeLine
Seabed
Figure 3: Soil-Pipeline Interaction
11
GENERAL DESCRIPTION
1.3.5 Modelling Three-Dimensional Problems

Three-dimensional analyses in PipeNet require additional information to 2D analyses.
Some of this information is indicated schematically on Figure 4
Figure 4: Additional features for 3D pipe model.

In particular, the route co-ordinates and 3D boundary conditions must be supplied
along with a definition of the lateral soil resistance for the pipe.
Although PipeNet is a general analysis program, a recommended method for
performing 3D pipeline analysis has been developed. This consists in performing the
pipe laydown in the normal 2D way - equivalent to ignoring the plan pipe curvature
effects during the lay process. Equilibrium in the vertical plane (including pipe nonlinearity) is thus found. The second step is to "switch" into 3D mode using the
appropriate keyword. This process involves the calculation of the out-of-balance
moments due to the plan curvature of the pipe and the application of these loads to the
laterally restrained pipeline (by soil resistance) in full 3D mode. A true equilibrium
position is found in which the soil resistance and the internal pipe bending moments
are in equilibrium. Some lateral movement of the pipeline is observed at this stage.
12
GENERAL DESCRIPTION
Once the equilibrium positions on the seabed in both the vertical and seabed plane
have been found the analysis can proceed in the normal way.
1.3.6 Buried Pipe

A risk of upheaval buckling exists for subsea buried pipelines subject to a large
temperature increase and axial restraint (due to friction with the sea bed for example).
This tendency of the pipe to lift is restricted by the weight of soil above the pipe and by
the shear resistance generated along the failure surface in the backfill soil.
SAGE Profile interface allows the user to add an extra uniformly distributed load (UDL)
due to soil cover (i.e. backfill).
Basically this udl is equal to the weight of soil cover. However, it can also incorporate
the equivalent shear resistance of the backfill by using the two following models:
Schaminees formula
FCover = 'D e Z1 + f
D e
Equation 3
With
Fcover
Uplift resistance (equivalent UDL)
'
Soil submerged unit weight (kN/m)
De
Pipe diameter (m)
Cover depth (m)
Uplift coefficient
Pedersens formula
Equation 4
FCover
D e Z D e
'
= D e Z 1 + 0.1 + f 1 +

Z
D
2
Z
13
GENERAL DESCRIPTION
1.3.7 Current and Waves

Currents and waves action can be taken into account as an equivalent UDL using the
Morisons equations. DnV RP E 30.5 is used to calculate the forces on the pipeline due
to current and wave as described below.
Forces acting in the x- and z-directions:
Drag force (kN/m):
fd =
Equation 5
1
2
w D e C d (U s cos i + U c )
2
Inertia force (kN/m)
2U S
D e2
sin i
w C m
fi =
4
TU
Equation 6
Forces acting in the y-direction:
Lift force (kN/m)
fl =
Equation 7
1
2
w D e C l (U s cos i + U c )
2
With
w
De
Us
Uc
Tu
i
Cd
Cl
Cm
Sea water unit weight (kN/m)

Pipe diameter (m)
Significant near bottom velocity amplitude (m/s)
Current velocity (m/s)
Mean zero up crossing period (s)
Incidence angle ()
Drag coefficient
Lift coefficient
Inertia coefficient
The approach angle of the current/waves, (measured relative to north, anticlockwise

being positive) must be entered for 3D analysis only. In 2D analysis, the angle of
incidence does not have to be entered.
The lift force fl is always computed assuming = 0.
The drag and inertia forces, fd and fi respectively, are computed for all values of . Only
the maxima are used as input in the analysis.
14
GENERAL DESCRIPTION
In the y-direction:
Equation 8
UDL = f l (i = 0) =
1
2
w D e C l (U s + U c )
2
In the x-direction:
Equation 9
UDL X = sin(i ) max(f d + f i )
In the z-direction:
Equation 10
UDL Z = cos(i ) max(f d + f i )
15
FINITE ELEMENT
2. FINITE ELEMENT
2.1
Element Description
Modelling of the pipeline is performed using a finite element approach with standard six
degree of freedom in 2D and twelve degree of freedom in 3D elastic beam-column
elements (axial, lateral, and rotational deformations).
Elastic behaviour of the pipeline is defined by the elastic modulus (E), the moment of
inertia (I) and the cross-sectional area (As) of the pipe wall.
DIEGREESOF FREEDOM
uy1
uy2
z1
ux1
A, E, I
Node 1
ux2
Node 2
z2
ELEMENT FORCES
M1
M2
N1
T1
T2
N2
Figure 5: Bernoulli Beam 2D Element.

The effect of axial load on the element stiffness is included (Cook et al, 1989) using a
stability function method (Smith and Griffiths, 1988).
16
FINITE ELEMENT
2.2
Element Loading
2.2.1 General Loading

Point loads and distributed loads are computed in the normal way (see Cook et al,
1989).
Loadings may be specified as distributed by defining a KP range or point by point
defining a single KP value. Distributed loading applies to pipe weight, weight of
contents, pressure, temperature, current and waves, etc. Point definitions are useful for
defining pipe lay tension, anode weight, clump weights, buoyancy attachments, etc.
2.2.2 Internal and external pressures

The effects of external water pressure and internal fluid pressure on pipelines and
risers has been elaborated by Sparks (1980, 1984) and Chakrabati and Frampton
(1982). These works form the basis of the implementation in SAGE Profile.
While the beam-column elements model satisfactorily the overall pipeline configuration,
the analysis must handle the effects of internal and external fluid pressure on the
stresses in the pipe wall as well as the thermal strains that can develop due to
temperature effects. The most important features of circular pipe behaviour are:
Effect of internal and external pressure on the ends of the pipe
Hoop stress developed by internal and external pressure
Axial force developed in the pipe wall due to the Poissons effect of the hoop
stress
Thermal strains and axial force in pipe wall due to temperature changes (see
section 2.2.3)
Note that the formulae presented in this section are based on the assumption of thinwalled pipe. A pipe can be considered as thin-walled if its wall thickness is less than
about on e tenth of its radius (see Roark and Young, 1975).
This section provides a summary of the implementation following the work of Hoskins
(1982).
An axially restrained pipe is subject to both axial and hoop stresses as a result of the
external and internal pressure loading on the pipe wall and over the cross-section of
the pipe. These may be quantified approximately (Hoskins, 1982):
Hoop stress:
Equation 11
h =
( pi Di - pe De )
2t
Axial wall stress:

Equation 12
a =
( pi Di - pe De )
2t
Resulting in an axial tensile force due to the Poisson effect (Fp1) which may be
approximated as:
17
FINITE ELEMENT
Equation 13
Fp1 =
( pi Di2 - pe De2 )
2
The axial force induced by fluid pressure (Fp2) over the cross-section is compressive if
pi > pe, thus yielding
Equation 14
Fp2 =
- ( pi Di2 - pe De2 )
4
Thus a resultant axial force over the whole cross-section for a fully restrained pipe
(often called the effective axial force) of Fp = Fp1 + Fp2 is obtained:
Equation 15
Fp = -
( p Di 2 - p e D e 2 ) ( 1 - 2 )
4 i
Note that if pi > pe then a > 0 (tensile) while Fp < 0 (compressive), resulting in a
tendency of the pipe to buckle despite the tensile wall stress.
The force Fp is introduced into the finite element analysis as a fixed end force ("body
force") and causes deformation in the pipe according to the degree of restraint
provided by the boundary conditions and soil resistance. Clearly, the computed
effective axial force in the beam/column will be different from this full-restrained value.
In order to calculate the axial stress in the wall of the pipeline for stress checks, it is
necessary to obtain the true wall axial force from the calculated axial force by removing
the end effects of the fluid pressure (Sparks, 1984):
Equation 16
Ftw = F - Fi + Fe
Where F is the calculated effective tension or compression (tension positive but with
water pressure considered positive in compression), and Fi and Fe are the internal and
external fluid pressure forces on the section.
Equation 17
Fi = - pi Ai
Fe = - pe Ae
Alternatively, the true wall stress (tw) can be defined according to:
Equation 18
tw =
Ftw
As
Note that the External water pressures are calculated based on the seabed elevations.
This avoids continual updating of the loading at each increment when most depth
variations are very small for pipeline profile analysis.
18
FINITE ELEMENT
Note also that SAGE Profile includes the internal fluid pressure head in the calculation
of the internal pressure pi. We have
p i = p io + fluid gh
Equation 19
where
pio
Hydrotest or operational pressure defined at the mean sea level.
fluid
Internal fluid density
2.2.3 Temperature
For an axially restrained pipe, an increase in temperature creates a compressive force
in the pipe wall:
Ft = - As E th T
Equation 20
With
As
Cross-sectional area of steel (m2)
th
Coefficient of thermal expansion (1/C)
Elastic modulus of steel
This force is introduced as a "body force" in the same way as pressure induced loads.
2.2.4 Effective axial force

As explained in section 2.2.2, the effective axial force Feff is defined combining
Equation 16 and Equation 17 (Sparks, 1984):
Feff = Ftw pi A i + pe A e
Where
Ftw
True-wall axial force (kN)
pi
Internal pressure (kPa), sum of the test/operational pressure

defined at the mean sea level and the pressure induced by the
internal fluid.
pe
External pressure (kPa)
Ai, Ae
Internal and external cross-section (m)
Ftw is the axial force in the pipe generated by the combination of all applied loads. It is
important to notice that the external pressure is applied at the lay down phase during
which the pipe is axially unrestrained (see section 1.3.2). Therefore, since the pipe is
free to deform axially, the external pressure wont generate any axial stress, hence no
axial load.
This definition is in accordance with the DnV recommended formulae for the effective
axial force for fully restrained pipe (see section 5C210 znd 5C211, DnV 2000).
19
FINITE ELEMENT
2.3
Material Properties
2.3.1 Pipe Plasticity

Two methods of modelling pipe plasticity (bending) are available in SAGE Profile.
These are:
1.
The explicit moment-curvature method in which the moment-curvature

relationship is expressed in the form of a single Ramberg-Osgood curve.
2.
A stress-strain based moment-curvature relationship in which the momentcurvature relationship is continually updated according to the stress state
in the pipe wall.
2.3.2 Moment Curvature Relationship

The spread of plasticity across a pipe section is characterised by a reduction in the
stiffness and results in a non-linear moment-curvature relationship. This may be
defined in terms of the Ramberg-Osgood equation (Murphey and Langer, 1985;
Ramberg and Osgood, 1943):
Equation 21
M
+ A
M0
M0
M
With
o and Mo
nominal curvature and moment
A and B
Ramberg-Osgood coefficients
20
FINITE ELEMENT
B=2
3
5
10
1.0
El
1.0 1+A
Figure 6: Ramberg-Osgood Curve
The parameters (A, B, Mo and o) are chosen to fit the moment-curvature relationship
(see Figure 6) obtained by integrating across the section for a given curvature:
Equation 22
M = A x y dA
21
FINITE ELEMENT
Figure 7: Stress-Strain Curve with y at 0.2% strain
The Ramberg-Osgood parameters A, B and Mo depend on steel yield stress and

section properties D and t. However, if the nominal moment, Mo, is nondimensionalised via the yield moment My, the parameters can be found for a particular
steel grade.
Myield = 2 yield I / De
Equation 23
Typically, y may be defined as the 0.2% proof stress, or as the nominal yield stress
corresponding to a nominal strain e.g. 0.5% (see Figure 7).
For example, for X65 steel, the integration yields:
A = 0.49
B = 9.04
M0 / Myield = 1.175
22
FINITE ELEMENT
2.3.3 Stress-Strain Relationship

The stress-strain based moment-curvature model deals with the bending of a circular
pipe section under combined axial loading and bending. In this model, the stress state
at various points around the circumference forms the basis of the allowable longitudinal
stress state, which in turn defines the moment that can be supported by the section.
Axial and hoop stress/strain effects are combined with bending effects to define the
longitudinal stress and strain state around the pipe wall. Bending in both planes is
considered and bending strains are related to curvatures from simple bending theory.
The maximum longitudinal stresses are governed by the Von Mises yield criterion and
strain hardening properties of the material. Given any particular stress/strain state that
satisfies equilibrium and the material stress-strain relations, the incremental stresses
for a known increment of strain can be found. Thus, by an incremental procedure the
stress at the new strain state can be found. The moment supported by the pipe may be
found by integrating the longitudinal stress around the section.
Figure 8: Pipe Bending

The formulation of bending in a single plane is presented below. Bending in both
planes is obtained by analogy.
23
FINITE ELEMENT
The strain in the longitudinal direction, x , at a distance y from the pipe centroid (see
Figure 8) is given by
x = - i + (zz + zz) y
e
Equation 24
With
I
initial axial strain arising from thermal loading and from the Poisson effect
of hoop strains/stresses caused by pressure loads.
kzze, kzzp
deformation strain calculated from the change in axial length
elastic and plastic curvatures about the z-axis
For the case of elastic behaviour, the associated stresses in the longitudinal direction
can be calculated from:
e
x = tw + BF E zz y
Equation 25
Where
tw
true wall stress, defined as the mean axial stress in pipe wall
BF
Bending factor (required by some codes practice)
elastic modulus
For elastic-plastic behaviour, it is necessary to use appropriate stress-strain

relationships involving plastic deformation. It is assumed that the stresses in the pipe
wall may be approximated as biaxial; this means that radial stress is assumed
negligible. Therefore biaxial stress-strain relations may be developed from standard
elasticity and plasticity theory (e.g. Valliappan, 1981).
The equivalent stress, eq, is given by:
eq =
Equation 26
(2x + 2h - x h + 3 2)
With
hoop stress
shear stress (i.e. xh)
Yielding will occur when eq becomes equal to the yield stress in uni-axial tension y.
24
FINITE ELEMENT
The equivalent plastic strain peq is normally derived from the component plastic strains
in the principal directions, which are not computed in the simplified pipe bending model.
However, as shown by Klever et al (1994), it can be approximated by basing it on the
longitudinal plastic strain px and the ratio of the hoop stress to the yield stress using
the formula:
p
eq =
Equation 27
x
3
1 - m2
4
m = x / h
where
Since this approximate formula does not account for reductions in the hoop stress, in
the program the maximum value calculated during a series of load stages is output.
For complex loading cases, is it recommended to base engineering decisions on the
longitudinal plastic strain rather than the equivalent strain.
From laboratory tests, the relation between uniaxial stress and strain may be obtained
for a particular material. In the formulation used in SAGE Profile, a stress-strain curve
in the Ramberg-Osgood form has been adopted
Equation 28
yield
yield
With
nominal yield strain (typically at 0.5%)
yield
nominal yield stress
a and b
Ramberg-Osgood parameters.
This equation can be written alternatively as:

Equation 29

= 1+

E
yield
For multi-axial stresses and strains, this equation is generalized in terms of equivalent
stress and strain. Thus, for any given strain state, the corresponding equivalent stress
can be found. In pipe bending analysis the hoop stress and shear stress is assumed to
be constant during a load increment. Thus the allowable longitudinal stress x can be
established.
This simplified approach enables the effect of hoop stress changes to "harden" or
"soften" the moment-curvature relationship, as well as incorporating the "softening"
effects of increases in axial stress. It also permits kinematic hardening behaviour to be
incorporated whereas the plasticity formulations of Franzen and Stokey (1973) and
Klever et al (1994) assume isotropic loading and do not address the effects of changing
hoop stress.
25
FINITE ELEMENT
2.3.4 Ovalisation
Ovalisation refers to the reduction in circular cross-section diameter, which occurs
when a pipe is subject to increasing bending moment. This causes a reduction of the
bending stiffness leading to a greater curvature and ovalisation. This rapid loss in
bending resistance can eventually lead to bifurcation buckling. At the same time, the
strain hardening of the steel walls permits to gradually increase the resisting moment of
the pipe. The combined effects of ovalisation and plastic straining therefore result in a
flatter moment-curvature relationship (see Figure 9).
Figure 9: Modified Ramberg-Osgood due to Ovalisation

Taking into account pipe ovalisation is done by selecting appropriate Ramberg-Osgood
coefficients to defined the M-K relation, based on empirical relationship (Murphey,
1985), in order to combine the ovalisation effects with plasticity. Therefore, as
implemented in SAGE Profile, ovalisation and plasticity may be treated together when
defined by a M-K relation. Equations are derived here below.
The critical bending moment Mb, corresponding to the critical curvature Kb, is the
bending moment at which bifurcation buckling occurs or at which the ovalisation effect
exceeds the strain hardening effects.
26
FINITE ELEMENT
Figure 10: Ovalisation Critical Point

This limit is dependent on the D/t ratio. At greater curvatures, for D/t ratios < 35,
ovalisation results in a gradual fall-off in the moment resistance, whilst for D/t ratios >
50, bifurcation buckling is postulated with a rapid reduction in the moment resistance
(see Figure 11).
Figure 11: Ovalisation Bifurcation Point

In practice, the curve defined by the Ramberg-Osgood relationship is considered valid
only up to the value of b. Curvatures beyond b represent strain states far in excess of
those permitted.
27
FINITE ELEMENT
It has been observed on the basis of experiment (Murphey, 1985; Gellin, 1980) that Mb
is approximately equal to the fully plastic moment, Mp. The relationship being given
empirically by:
Equation 30
M b = M p ( 1.0 - 0.002
De
)
t
Corresponding to the bending stress (at the outer fibre)

Equation 31
b = -
E De b
M
= - b De
2
2I
The critical bending strain, b, for a homogeneous pipe material with strain-hardening
properties is reached when the curvature becomes approximately (Murphey and
Langer, 1985):
b =
Equation 32
t
D e2
The Ramberg-Osgood parameter A is then chosen so that

Equation 33
Mo = Mb,
And
Equation 34
A = b - 1
0
Where
Equation 35
0 = M0 / E I
The second Ramberg-Osgood parameter B is:

Equation 36
B = 16 - 0.07 De / t
The pipe ovalisation, defined as the relative change in diameter, is computed as:
Equation 37
D2
D e
=
= 0 + e
De
t
Where 0 is the initial out-of-roundness and defined as:

Equation 38
= 0.015 1 + e
120 t
A typical moment-curvature curve is shown in Figure 9.

Note that the non-linear pipe model is based on ovalisation and plasticity due to
bending only. Axial force and hydrostatic pressure effects on the moment-curvature
relation are not considered. However, these effects may be included on a case-by-case
basis by providing SAGE Profile with an appropriate set of A, B, and Mo parameters,
thus defining a Ramberg-Osgood curve that does include these effects.
28
FINITE ELEMENT
2.3.5 Soil Plasticity

Soil Bearing Capacity
Soil reaction (soil bearing capacity) may be modelled as piecewise linear spring
supporting the pipe, or as a simple elastic-perfectly plastic, or bilinear elastic-plastic
curve (see Figure 12).
Figure 12: Typical forms of vertical soil support curves.
29
FINITE ELEMENT
In SAGE Profile, the vertical soil support curves act non-linearly rather than plastically
e.g. unloading results in the same non-linear relationship being followed. When the
pipe is above the seabed level the springs have zero stiffness. Note that the soil spring
curves calculated in SAGE Profile interface take into account the circular shape of the
pipe and the increase in bearing area with pipe penetration.
In SAGE Profile, the soil spring curves can be either calculated by different methods or
defined manually by the user. The following consists in a brief description of the
methods that have been implemented in SAGE Profile.
The two first methods are issued from the DNV standards and apply for both cohesive
and cohesionless material. The two others methods presented apply only for cohesive
soil. Note that in SAGE Profile, rocks are modelled by high strength clay.
2.3.6 DNV CN30.4

The DNV CN30.4 suggests the following equations for the computations of the vertical
soil reaction:
Equation 39
For Sands Qu ( y ) = (0.5 ' BN + ' yN q d q ) B
Equation 40

N q = e tan tan 2 +
4 2
Equation 41
N = 2(1 + N q ) tan
Equation 42
d q = 1 + 1.2 tan( )(1 sin( )) 2
Equation 43
For Clays Qu ( y ) = 5.14Cu 1 + 0.3 tan( ) + y ' B

B
With
Bearing depth
Qu
Vertical soil reaction per unit length at bearing depth y
Bearing width
'
Soil submerged unit weight
Nq, Ng
Bearing capacity factors (function of the friction angle )
Cu
Undrained shear strength
30
FINITE ELEMENT
2.3.7 DNV RP F105

According to the DNV RP F105, the computation of the vertical soil reaction is as
follow:
Equation 44
For Sands Qu ( y ) = (0.5 ' BN + ' yN q ) B
Equation 45

N q = e tan tan 2 +
4 2
Equation 46
N = 1.5(N q 1) tan
Equation 47
For Clays Qu ( y ) = (5.14Cu + ' y ) B
With the same notations as above.
2.3.8 Verley and Lund method

The model presented herein is based on a dimensional analysis and back calculation
of pipelines with external diameter from 0.2 to 1m. It has been developed to assess the
vertical soil reaction of a pipeline lying on cohesive materials under its own weight. The
equations are presented hereafter:
y
= 0.0071( SG 0.3 ) 3.2 + 0.062( SG 0.3 ) 0.7
D
Equation 48
Equation 49
S=
Qu
DCu
Equation 50
G=
Cu
D
With:
Bearing depth
Qu
Pipe diameter
Cu
Soil unit weight
31
FINITE ELEMENT
The following range of application is recommended:
Cu: 0.8 70kPa

D: 0.2 1m
y/D: 0 0.35
S: 0.05 7.5
G: 0.02 5
Specific weight of pipe: 1.06 2.5
2.3.9 Buoyancy method

This method should be used only with very soft clay. The buoyancy method assumes
that the soil behaves like a liquid and that the soil-induced buoyancy of the pipeline is
equal to the vertical soil reaction. The equation used in this model is presented
hereafter:
Qu ( y ) =
Equation 51
y
(3 y 2 + 4 B 2 ) '
6B
With:
Bearing depth
Qu
Bearing width
'
2.3.10 Rigid Seabed

A "rigid" model (i.e. a very stiff spring with a stiffness of 107 kN/m/m) is available if no
soil response curves are specified or the rigid seabed option is selected in the SAGE
Profile interface.
Soil Friction
Axial and lateral soil resistance is modelled as an elastic-perfectly plastic shaped curve
as shown in Figure 13.
32
FINITE ELEMENT
Figure 13: Typical forms of axial and lateral soil resistance curves
The peak resistance (Fmax) is defined in general terms as the sum of a frictional and an
adhesive (cohesive) component.
If V is the vertical force (per unit length), then:
Equation 52
Fmax = Fa + V
Where is the friction factor and Fa is the adhesion per unit length (either or Fa may
be zero according to the soil resistance model required, or both may be used together).
Axial and lateral resistance use the same form but different values of Fa and .
When unloading occurs the axial soil resistance behaves as an elastic-plastic material
and unloads/reloads elastically when below the yield resistance.
33
FINITE ELEMENT
2.4
Contact
2.4.1 Introduction
PipeNet uses two pipe-seabed contact algorithms:
Simple touch down algorithm with or without scale-back (Synchronous TouchDown): The assumption adopted in the simple touch down algorithm is that all
contact between the pipe and the seabed is restricted to a pipe node touching
down on a seabed node with the same KP value. Contact occurs whether the
height of a pipe node is above or below the corresponding seabed node (see
Figure 14). Note that this determines the finite element discretisation as the
seabed and the pipeline meshes must have the same number of nodes.
Automatic load increment size (scale-back) can be activated to ensure only
one node touches down per load increment and in order to avoid excessive soil
reaction forces. This algorithm becomes increasingly approximate as the
unevenness of the seabed profile increases.
Contact search algorithm (Asynchronous Touch-Down): The synchronous

touchdown is appropriate for most pipeline problems. However, if the pipe is laid
on a steep slope, the pipe nodes (KP points) and the seabed x-co-ordinates (KP
points) drift apart (see Figure 16). This leads to testing pipe touchdown against
seabed points that are not directly below the pipe nodes
Both algorithms are explained hereafter.
2.4.2 Synchronous Contact Algorithm

Unlike the classical two-mesh contact algorithms, which comprise both contactor and
target meshes, SAGE Profile synchronous contact algorithm is based on a single
mesh, namely that of the pipe. The seabed is represented as a set of nodes forming a
boundary in space.
Nodes in Contact
KP
PipeLine
Seabed
Figure 14:
Synchronous Touchdown
The fundamental unknowns in the problem are the pipe displacements. The relative
displacements of the soil-pipe interface elements do not appear as independent
variables in the solution, as the non-linearities associated with the soil forces at the
interface are introduced as residual forces in the solution.
34
FINITE ELEMENT
If any pipe node attempts to cross the seabed boundary, a soil-pipe interface element
is introduced into the solution, and a soil force mobilized. The advantages of this
method are as follows:
The classical algorithms require the concept of master

nodes/surfaces on order to determine potential contact pairs,
Only those spring elements at nodes touching the seabed are introduced into
the solution, thus saving considerable computational effort,
Pipelines undergo a sequence of touchdown/lift-off states during installation,

whereby the final position of the pipe may differ from that of first contact. A more
realistic solution is thus obtained by redefining and re-orientating the soil-pipe
interface at each touchdown.
and
slave
Contact state decisions are based on displacement considerations. This has distinct
advantages over decisions based on contact forces. This is especially important when
dealing with stiff soils, where very large contact forces may develop.
The constraint condition is based on the location of the pipe nodes relative to the
seabed. This is equivalent to the node-to-node contact adopted in multi-mesh
configurations. This leads to a simple, yet highly efficient contact search algorithm. The
position of the pipe nodes relative to the seabed determines whether or not the pipe
has touched-down. We identify the contact states as follows:
1.
Open State: where the pipe is above the seabed (see Figure 15). The
displacement condition is
u p + u sp > u g
Equation 53
With
up
pipe displacement relative the initial position
usp
new relative seabed-pipe displacement
ug
initial gap between the pipe and the seabed
In this case the contact force, between the pipe and the soil, V is zero, as the soil-pipe
interface element has not been mobilized.
35
FINITE ELEMENT
ADHESIONSTATE
OPENSTATE
Initial PipeLine Position
Initial PipeLine Position

KP
KP
up
Current PipeLine Position
ug
ug
up
usp
Seabed
Seabed
usp
Current PipeLine Position
Figure 15: Contact Search: Open and Adhesion States Definition

2.
Adhesion State: where the pipe is in contact with the seabed and no sliding takes
place. Here, the term contact implies penetration into the seabed. The
displacement and force conditions are:
u p + u sp = u g
Equation 54
And the traction force is smaller than the maximum friction resistance (see Figure 15):
Ftraction < Fa + V
Equation 55
With
3.
Ftraction
Traction Force
Fa
Adhesion
coefficient of friction between pipe and soil
normal force
Sliding State: as above, but with the addition of sliding, according to Coulombs
friction law. The displacement condition is as above, and the force condition is
now:
Equation 56
Ftraction = Fa + V
36
FINITE ELEMENT
An important part of a solution scheme involving contact is the search algorithm, which
attempts to determine which elements are in contact. We use the straightforward
criteria that an interface element is mobilized if the pipe node elevation is below that of
the original seabed elevation. Contacts may appear and disappear, as the pipe nodes
touchdown/lift-off the seabed, with the interface elements being subsequently
introduced/removed from the solution.
Note that during the lay down phase, seabed friction is generally switched off in order
to allow free axial movement of the pipe.
2.4.3 Asynchronous Contact Algorithm

The asynchronous contact algorithm will allow the pipe to touch down on the seabed at
its current KP location, and not at the corresponding seabed KP as in the synchronous
touchdown explained above. In order to achieve this an uncoupling of the pipe and
seabed nodes is required.
KP
Underformed PipeLine
Nodes in Contact
Derformed PipeLine
Seabed
Figure 16:
Asynchronous Touchdown
In order to test the pipe-seabed contact, the seabed elevation at current pipe KP is
used. This value is linearly interpolated from the seabed elevation.
37
FINITE ELEMENT
2.5
Geometrical Non-Linearity
Since lateral deformations in pipelines may be relatively large, particularly when large
compressive loads are induced and buckling is approached, the geometric updating of
the pipe configuration is performed each increment. Upheaval buckling will occur if the
axial forces are sufficiently high and the downward restraining loads are insufficient to
maintain contact of the pipe and soil. In a 3D analysis, pipeline snaking may be
observed if sufficient out-of-straightness in plan is defined in the pipeline route coordinates.
The use of the term geometrical non-linearity implies that deformations significantly
alter the location or distribution of loads, so that equilibrium equations must be written
with respect to the deformed geometry, which is not know in advance. Therefore a
displacement state is sought in which the deformed structure is in equilibrium with load
applied to it. Here, the term displacements refers to both rotation and translation.
Typically, pipe snaking or upheaval buckling fall into the category of geometrically nonlinear problems.
Geometric non-linear behaviour is characterized by a non-linear relationship between
load and displacement as the axial force in the member increases. Under compression,
a reduction in stiffness occurs as the critical load is approached. Under tension the
member tends to stiffen as the tensile force is increased (i.e. membrane effect).
A co-rotational formulation has been adopted (Mattiasson et al. 1985) in which a local
Cartesian co-ordinate system is attached to each element, which continuously
translates and rotates as an element deforms. In the co-rotational formulation, each
element has 3 degrees of freedom: the displacement of end 2 relative to end 1 along
the chord, and the moment inducing rotations at each end relative to the chord. Thus,
all rigid body translations and rotations are effectively removed.
The global or column buckling effects are accounted for within the element stiffness
formulation via the use of stability functions (Smith and Griffiths, 1988). The stiffness
matrix (bending components only) is modified dependant on the value of the axial
force, F. The accuracy of the approximation depends on the value of the ratio F/FE,
where FE is the Euler buckling. This formulation also accounts for stiffening effects due
to tensile axial forces.
38
FINITE ELEMENT
2.6
Solution Techniques
2.6.1 Introduction
Non-linearities in the problem require an incremental and/or iterative solution
technique. PipeNet supports the following non-linearities:
Pipeline plasticity (material non-linearity)
Soil non-linearity with friction (material non-linearity)
Large displacements (geometric non-linearity)
Buckling (geometric non-linearity)
Soil-pipe contact (boundary non-linearity)
In PipeNet, these non-linearities are treated in parallel using an incremental solution

technique, with the option of refining the solution within each increment by iteration.
This approach is known as a tangent stiffness method with initial stress iteration (Smith
and Griffiths, 1988; Owen and Hinton, 1980). This procedure is also known as the
modified Newton-Raphson method.
2.6.2 Soil-pipe contact and soil material non-linearities

Laydown is simulated in an unconditionally stable algorithm if the total load is divided
into increments such that no more than one node touches down or lifts off at a time.
This is performed automatically in the program by predicting the pipe behaviour for a
preliminary load increment and then scaling back the solution and load increment such
that the one-node criterion is satisfied. This technique works for all types of seabed.
Since the incremental solution is required for touch-down/lift-off, it is convenient to
iterate for soil and pipe non-linearity within these increments using an "initial stress"
method (Smith and Griffiths, 1988). Thus, during each increment of load, the element
forces or moments are checked with the correct values based on the non-linear
deformation relationship. Excess forces or moments are redistributed to other adjacent
elements until convergence of the iterative solution is achieved. Forces in soil springs
are handled in the same way. When an excess moment is identified at a node, the
"correcting" loads are calculated by applying an equal and opposite moment, plus a
couple which creates zero resultant force on the element.
Experience using the program has demonstrated that an unconditionally stable iterative
solution for the combined soil non-linearity coupled with the lift-off/touch-down is
difficult to achieve. Therefore, by default PipeNet uses a tangent stiffness method (i.e.
the Euler incremental algorithm) to handle the pipe-soil interaction to avoid problems of
non-convergence. As no attempt is made to correct the solution, the number of
increments needs to be selected for each problem but typically about 100 - 200 is
sufficient.
2.6.3 Pipe material non-linearity

Pipe bending non-linearity in the moment-curvature relationship is solved using the
incremental-iterative algorithm (i.e. modified Newton-Raphson). In the finite element
analysis, the displacement-based formulation requires that the moment is derived from
the element curvature. During plastic deformation the plastic curvature is adopted as
the measure of plastic hardening. Because the Ramberg-Osgood formula is implicit for
the moment, an iterative algorithm is used to determine the moment for a given
curvature.
39
FINITE ELEMENT
If the stress-strain based moment-curvature model is used, the moment supported at a

given curvature is defined by equilibrium of a section by equation:
Mzz = A x y dA
Equation 57
The solution proceeds in an incremental manner, determining the variation of x around

the pipe and numerically integrating this stress to determine the associated moment.
Axial and hoop stresses and strains at the end of the previous load increment are
assumed to remain constant during the current increment. During the first iteration for
the new load increment, a set of incremental curvatures is defined.
These curvatures yield incremental longitudinal strains from Equation 24 at the
integration points. These strains are then used along with Equation 26 and Equation 29
as described above, to compute an effective modulus for the increment (Chen and
Han, 1985) and the stiffness matrix for the current stress state. The incremental
moment derives from this tangent stiffness and the applied incremental curvatures.
When axial stresses induce non-symmetric bending - the normal case for plastic
bending in pipeline analysis (i.e. the neutral axis is not coincident with the centroid), a
further level of iteration is required to find the strain at the centroid of the pipe due to
plastic bending and the total moment that can be supported.
If the derived moment is less than the current moment, the "excess" is accumulated as
a body force and the iterative solution proceeds until convergence is obtained.
2.6.4 Incremental/Iterative Process

This section explains, based on Cook and Malkus (1989), the principle of the
incremental-iterative process using the modified Newton-Raphson method.
The non-linear problem can be written (Cook and Malkus, 1989):
Equation 58
K(U) U = F(U)
With
Displacements (unknown)
F(U)
External Forces (known)
K(U)
Stiffness Matrix (function of the displacements)
The stiffness matrix K is

Equation 59
K(U) = Ko + KN(U)
Where Ko and KN are, respectively, the displacement independent and dependent part
of the stiffness matrix.
Consider that the solution is known for a given displacement UA. The purpose is to find
UB corresponding to FB = F(UB), which is the exact solution of Equation .
Assuming that the solution is in the neighbourhood of UA a small increment U is
considered:
40
FINITE ELEMENT
F
F(U B ) F(U A ) +
U
U A
U B = U A + U
Equation 60
Using a truncated Taylor expansion, we have
F
Kt =
U A
Equation 61
The tangent stiffness matrix Kt is defined by
Equation 62
Equation 63
K N U
Kt = K0 +
U A
Obviously, it is also function of the displacements. In 1-D, it represents to the tangent to

the force-displacement curve at point A.
Isolating U in Equation 61, we have
Equation 64
U A = K 1
t R
With
Equation 65
R = F(U B ) F(U A )
Where R is called the force imbalance. The words out-of-balance force or residual
are also used.
Summarising:
1.
F(UA) is know from the solution to Equation for a given displacement states UA.
2.
The load is increased to FB = F(UB), for which the corresponding displacements

UB are not know.
41
FINITE ELEMENT
3.
Since the tangent stiffness matrix is defined by the physics of the problem,
Equation 64 allows to compute a first displacement increment U1.
4.
Using Equation 60, a first approximation of the unknown displacements UB,1 can
be found.
5.
Using Equation , the corresponding force FB,1 = F(UB,1) is computed.
If the exact solution has been found, the difference between FB and FB,1 must be zero.
42
FINITE ELEMENT
Force F
FULL NEWTON-RAPHSON
b1
b2
FB
Fb2
Kt1
FB- Fb1
2
FB- FA
Fb1
1
KtA
A
FA
u1
uA
Displacement
ub1
ub2
UB
Figure 17: Full Newton-Raphson

Therefore the full Newton-Raphson iteration involves repeated solution of Equation 64,
where the tangent stiffness matrix Kt and out-of-balance force R are updated after
each cycle i. For a given load increment, the solution process seeks to reduce the force
imbalance, and consequently Ui, to zero.
The modified Newton-Raphson differs from the full Newton-Raphson only in that the
tangent stiffness either is not updated or is updated infrequently (i.e. every x iterations).
This avoids the expensive repetitions of forming and reducing the tangent stiffness
matrix Kt at each iteration. However it requires more iteration to reach a prescribed
accuracy.
The convergence tolerance in SAGE Profile is based on the load and can be written as:
FA FB
Tolerance
FA
Equation 66
With
FA
Force at previous iteration
FB
Force at current iteration
Tolerance
Convergence threshold
43
FINITE ELEMENT
Figure 18: Modified Newton-Raphson
2.6.5 Incremental/iterative Method

The discussion in the previous section deals only with locating a single point on the
force-displacement curve. Since the full curve is required. An incremental approach is
required to which the iterative process is applied. This is the so-called incrementaliterative process (Cook and Malkus, 1989). This procedure is also called the tangentstiffness method with initial stress iteration. The stiffness matrix is formed every load
increment but it is not updated during the iteration process.
If the iterative part of the procedure is ignored, the method reduces to the classical
Forward-Euler method. Here also the stiffness matrix is formed every load increment
but the iterative refinement is not performed. It is also referred as the tangent stiffness
method.
It should be noted that this incremental-iterative scheme will successfully handle nonlinear problems provided that the slope of the non-linear load-displacement curve does
not change in sign. Therefore, situation such as material softening or snap-though
buckling behaviour will require more sophisticated numerical algorithm. This explains
why SAGE Profile cannot handle post-buckling behaviour.
44
FINITE ELEMENT
2.7
Sign Convention
2.7.1 Co-ordinate System

A right hand co-ordinate system with the x-axis along the KP of the pipe (for 2D
analyses) and the y-axis upwards is used in the program (see Figure 19).
Figure 19: Static sign convention for displacements and internal actions.
Positive directions are indicated. A static sign convention, as shown, is used in
PipeNet for deformations and equilibrium forces/moments. x, y, z, , , , are used in
pipe output files.
Seabed elevation is, therefore, the y-coordinate and unless otherwise defined will be
measured as the depth below mean sea level (It will have anegative sign). For 3D
problems, the pipe route is defined by the plan co-ordinates in the X-Z plane (Figure 4).
The KP value defines the plan length of the pipe. Associated with each KP, x, z set is
the seabed elevation at that location.
During load specification and internal computation a static sign convention is operated
(Figure 19).
Curvatures are positive when the beam is sagging (centre of curvature in the positive
axis direction).
2.7.2 Shear Forces and Moments

A deformation sign convention has been adopted in PipeNet output for consistency
with normal engineering design practice (Gere and Timoshenko, 1985):
Shear force is positive when the algebraic sum of the normal forces to the right
of the section is upwards (positive y direction), and
Bending moment is positive when the algebraic sum of the moments to the right
of the section is anti-clockwise (causing sagging and compression in the upper
fibres of the beam).
45
FINITE ELEMENT
2.7.3 Strains and Stresses

Strains and stresses are positive when tensile. Bending strains and stresses are output
for the top of the pipe only in 2D (in the top half of the pipe in 3D). Thus a positive
bending moment produces a positive curvature and a negative strain/stress in the
upper fibre.
For 3D problems, in which bending in two planes can occur, if the pipe is in tension in
the upper half of the pipe a positive stress is assigned.
Figure 20 shows, by an example of a fixed ended beam subject to a uniformly
distributed load, the result of applying this convention.
46
FINITE ELEMENT
Figure 20: Deformation sign convention used in pipe output.
47
FINITE ELEMENT
2.8
Flow Charts
The data input algorithm is described in the form of a flow chart in Figure 21. The
essential aspects of the analysis algorithm implemented in PipeNet are described in
the flow charts given in Figure 22.
Start
Set array parameters

and default values
Open data input file
Start next load step
Null or reset load step arrays

No
Read from data input file

until keyword encountered
Keyword
"Analyse"?
Yes
EOF
Yes
Stop
Perform a
load step
analysis
No
Execute keyword to read

data or control analysis
48
FINITE ELEMENT
Figure 21: Data input flow chart.

Start
load step analysis
Perform basic error checking
Start load increment loop
Set nominal load increment size for this increment
Form elastic pipe stiffness matrix based on current geometry and axial load
Add in tangent soil stiffness terms if below ground
Add in stiffness terms for prescribed displacements
Reduce equations
Null all temporary vectors
Start iteration loop for material non-linearity
Form load vector for this increment including scale back
Add in excess loads from material non-linearity from previous iteration
Solve for latest prediction of unknown displacements
Check for convergence - set convergence flag
Check for new nodes touching and calculate fraction of load for first node to touch
Scale back all incremental loads and deflections
Calculate latest prediction of excess forces from soil non-linearity
Calculate latest prediction of excess forces from pipe non-linearity
Convergence
achieved?
No
Yes
Update displacements, actions and total applied load

Perform system equllibrium check
No
Has 100% of load increment been applied?

Yes
Output load step results to file
Continue to read next
keyword from input file
Figure 22: Analysis flow chart.
49
FINITE ELEMENT
2.9
Glossary
f
Uplift coefficient (backfill resistance)
fd
Drag force due to currents and waves
fi
Inertia force due to currents and waves
fl
Lift force due to currents and waves
pe
External water pressure (compression +ve)
pi
Internal water pressure (compression +ve)
Pipe wall thickness
up
pipe vertical displacement
usp
seabed-pipe distance
ug
initial gap between the pipe and the seabed
Distance from neutral axis
A, B
Ramberg-Osgood curve fitting parameters for moment-curvature
Ae
Total external cross-sectional area of pipe
Ai
Total internal cross-sectional area of pipe
As
Steel cross-sectional area of pipe
Bfooting
Equivalent footing width
Cd
Drag coefficient
Cl
Lift coefficient
Cu
Cm
Inertia coefficient
De
Pipe external diameter
Di
Pipe internal diameter
Elastic modulus of pipe steel
Effective axial force
Force vector
Fa
Soil adhesion force
Fcover
Uplift resistance due to backfill cover
FE
Euler buckling force
Fe
Axial component of effective force due to external pressure on end of pipe
Fi
Axial component of effective force due to internal pressure on end of pipe
FCurrent
Force at current Newton-Raphson iteration
Fold
Force at previous Newton-Raphson iteration
Ftw
True wall axial force in pipe section
Ft
Axial force in pipe wall (constrained section) due to temperature
50
FINITE ELEMENT
Fmax
Maximum frictional resistance
Fp
Effective axial force
Fp1
Axial force due to Poissons effect
Fp2
Axial force induced by fluid pressure (direct effect)
Moment of inertia
Stiffness matrix
Bending moment
Mb
Critical bending moment (Ramberg-Osgood)
Mo
Nominal bending moment
Myield
Yield Moment
Nq, Ng
Bearing capacity factors
Qu
Soil bearing capacity
Displacement vector
Uc
Current velocity
Us
Significant near bottom velocity amplitude
Tu
Mean zero up crossing period
Vertical load on soil spring
Backfill cover depth
Temperature increase
Ramberg-Osgood curve fitting parameters for moment-curvature or

uniaxial stress-strain curves
th
Coefficient of thermal expansion
Incidence angle
Strain computed from the axial change in length
Longitudinal strain
Nominal yield strain (e.g. 0.5%)
'
Water unit-weight
,0
e
zz ,kzz
Curvature, nominal (normalising) curvature

p
Elastic and plastic curvatures about the z-axis
Critical curvature (Ramberg-Osgood) corresponding to Mb
Friction coefficient of Coulomb
Poissons ratio
Bending stress (at the outer fiber -> maximum)
eq
Equivalent stress
51
FINITE ELEMENT
tw
Axial stress in pipe wall
Hoop stress in pipe wall
Longitudinal stress in pipe wall
yield
Nominal yield stress, (e.g. at 0.5% strain)
Shear stress
Pipe ovalisation
Initial out-of-roundness
52
FINITE ELEMENT
53
REFERENCES
3. REFERENCES
Brazier L.G. (1927), On the Flexure of Thin Cylinders, Shells and Other Thin Sections,
Proc. Royal Society, Series A, Vol.116, pp.104-114.
Chakrabarti, S.K. and R.E.Frampton (1982), Review of Riser Analysis Techniques,
Applied Ocean Research, Vol.4, No.2, pp73-90.
Chen W.F. and D.J.Han, (1985), Tubular Members in Offshore Structures, Pitman.
Cook R.D., D.S.Malkus and M.E.Plesha (1989), Concepts and Applications of Finite
Element Analysis, Wiley.
DnV (2000), DNV 2000: Rules for Submarine Pipeline Systems, Den Norkste Veritas.
Franzen W.E. and W.F.Stokey (1973), The Elastic-Plastic Behaviour of Stainless
Steel Tubing Subjected to Bending, Pressure and Torsion, 2nd Int. Conf. on Pressure
Vessel Technology, Part 1, Design and Analysis, ASME, pp457-467.
Gellin S. (1980), The Plastic Buckling of Long Cylindrical Shells Under Pure Bending,
Int. J. Solid Struct, Vol.16, pp.397-407.
Gere J.M. and S.P.Timoshenko (1985), Mechanics of Materials, 2nd Edition,
Brooks/Cole, Monterey.
Hoskins E.C. (1982), Sub-sea Pipeline Free Span Vibration Analysis, Institute of
Petroleum, Pub. No. IP 82-013.
Klever,F.J., Palmer, A.C. and Kyriakides, S. (1994), Limit State Design of High
Temperature Pipelines, Offshore Mechanics in Arctic Engineering, Vol V, Pipeline
Technology, pp77-92.
Ramberg W. and Osgood W.R. (1943), Description of Stress-Strain Curves by Three
Parameters. NACA Tech Note 902, July.
Mattiasson, K. Bengtsson, A and Samuelsson, K. (1985), On the Accuracy and
Efficiency of Numerical Algorithms for Geometrically Nonlinear Structural Analysis, in
"Finite Element Methods for Non-Linear Problems", Ed : Bergan,P.G., Bathe, K.J., and
Wunderlich, W., Springer-Verlag, Berlin.
Murphey C.E. and Langer C.G. (1985) Ultimate Pipe Strength Under Bending,
Collapse and Fatigue, ASME Proc. 4th OMAE Symp. Vol.1, pp.467-477.
Owen D.R.J. and E.Hinton (1980), Finite Elements in Plasticity, Pineridge Press,
Swansea.
Roark, R.J. and W.C.Young (1975), Formulas for Stress and Strain, 5th Edition,
McGraw Hill.
SAGE (1992), The Effect of Ovalisation on the Moment-Curvature Relationship,
Internal memo by R.Wilkins, 3 November 1992.
Smith I.M. and D.V. Griffiths (1991), Programming the Finite Element Method, 2nd
Edition, Wiley.
54
REFERENCES
Sparks, C.P. (1980), Mechanical Behaviour of Marine Risers Mode of Influence of

Principal Parameters, Trans. ASME, Vol.102, Dec, pp214-222.
Sparks, C.P. (1984), The Influence of Tension, Pressure and Weight on Pipe and
Riser Deformations and Stresses, Trans. ASME, Vol.108, March, pp46-54.
Valliappan, S (1981), Continuum Mechanics Fundamentals, Balkema, Rotterdam.
55

SAGE Profile V6.3.2 User Manual - Volume 3

Загружено:

Сведения о документе

Авторское право

Доступные форматы

Поделиться этим документом

Поделиться или встроить документ

Параметры публикации

Этот документ был вам полезен?

Это неприемлемый материал?

Авторское право:

Доступные форматы

SAGE Profile V6.3.2 User Manual - Volume 3

Загружено:

Авторское право:

Доступные форматы

SAGE Profile Version 6.3.

SAGE Profile V6.3.2 - User Manual - Volume 3 - 04

SAGE Profile V6.3.2 User Manual - Volume 3.doc

Issued for V6.3

Issued for V6.3.1

Issued for V6.3.1

Issued for V6.3.2

Copyright 1995 - 2005 Fugro Engineers SA/NV

GENERAL DESCRIPTION ................................................................................................ 5

FINITE ELEMENT ............................................................................................................ 16

SAGE Profile V6.3.2 - Theory Manual

SAGE Profile V6.3.2 - Theory Manual

SAGE Profile User Manual Volume 1: SAGE Profile Interface

SAGE Profile User Manual Volume 2: PipeNet

SAGE Profile User Manual Volume 3 (this document)

SAGE Profile Validation Reports

SAGE Profile V6.3.2 - Theory Manual

Figure 1: Schematic showing some features of pipe2D.

SAGE Profile V6.3.2 - Theory Manual

Figure 2: Pipe Bending Non-linearities.

Two- and three-dimensional analysis

SAGE Profile V6.3.2 - Theory Manual

General variation of temperature along pipe axis

1.2.3 Pipeline Analysis Features

Effect of internal and external pressure on the ends of the pipe

1.2.4 Main Assumptions

Plane sections normal to the pipe axis remain plane.

SAGE Profile V6.3.2 - Theory Manual

SAGE Profile V6.3.2 - Theory Manual

1.3.1 Meshing the pipe

horizontal and vertical coordinates of pipe node i

1.3.2 Lay Down

the Synchronous Touch-Down (see Section 2.4.2)

the Asynchronous Touch-Down (see Section 2.4.3)

SAGE Profile V6.3.2 - Theory Manual

1.3.3 Residual Lay Tension

1.3.4 Soil-Pipe Interaction

Figure 3: Soil-Pipeline Interaction

SAGE Profile V6.3.2 - Theory Manual

1.3.5 Modelling Three-Dimensional Problems

Figure 4: Additional features for 3D pipe model.

SAGE Profile V6.3.2 - Theory Manual

1.3.6 Buried Pipe

Uplift resistance (equivalent UDL)

Soil submerged unit weight (kN/m)

Pipe diameter (m)

Cover depth (m)

SAGE Profile V6.3.2 - Theory Manual

1.3.7 Current and Waves

Drag force (kN/m):

Inertia force (kN/m)

Lift force (kN/m)

Sea water unit weight (kN/m)

The approach angle of the current/waves, (measured relative to north, anticlockwise

SAGE Profile V6.3.2 - Theory Manual

UDL X = sin(i ) max(f d + f i )

SAGE Profile V6.3.2 - Theory Manual

UDL Z = cos(i ) max(f d + f i )

Figure 5: Bernoulli Beam 2D Element.

SAGE Profile V6.3.2 - Theory Manual

2.2.1 General Loading

2.2.2 Internal and external pressures

Effect of internal and external pressure on the ends of the pipe

Hoop stress developed by internal and external pressure