Attribution Non-Commercial (BY-NC)

Просмотров: 1.1K

Attribution Non-Commercial (BY-NC)

- Seismic Design of Buried Pipe
- pipeline design calculations.pdf
- Pipeline Stability Calculation of 24 Oil Empty
- Seismic Design and Assessment of Natural Gas and Liquid Hydrocarbon Pipelines
- Pipeline Buckling Caused by Axial Loads
- Pipe Soil Interaction
- Seismic design of continuos buried pipeline
- buoyancy calculation example
- BEHAVIOUR OF BURIED PIPELINES SUBJECTED TO EXTERNAL LOADING.pdf
- A Seismic Design Considerationof Oil and Gas Transmission Systems
- Extended Model for Pipe Soil Interaction
- (1982 Newmark & Hall - EERI) Earthquake Spectra and Design
- Seismic
- Guidelines for Seismic Design & Assessment of Pipelines
- 50262011-37347055-Autopipe-Training-Outline
- As 2885 1 Pipeline
- Evaluation of Pipeline Failure Causes
- API Rp 1111 Design, Construction, Operation, _ Maintenance of Offs. Hydrocarbon Pipelines (LSD)
- (1970) Correlation for Design of Laterally Loaded Piles in Soft Clay
- Eurocode 8 Design of structures for earthquake resistance_Part 4 Silos, tanks and pipelines

Вы находитесь на странице: 1из 10

Pipeline Design

14.1 Introduction

Oil and gas pipeline routes often pass through large geographical areas, from the supply point

to the end-user, crossing seismic-active areas. Earthquake damage to oil and gas pipelines can

cause significant financial loss, including secondary losses resulting in service interruption,

fires, explosions, and environmental contamination. Examples of such catastrophes include

the 1964 Alaska Earthquake; the San Fernando Earthquake of 1971; the Guatemala

Earthquake in 1976; the 1987 Ecuador Earthquake; the Kobe Earthquake in 1995 and the 2003

Algeria Earthquake. A general conclusion drawn from a review of many earthquake events

shows that, for buried steel pipelines, the direct effect of seismic ground wave on the integrity

of long and straight pipelines is generally not significant. Where there is permanent ground

deformation due to soil failure, there may be a severe influence upon pipeline integrity. For

unburied pipelines, both seismic ground wave and permanent ground deformation can cause

severe damage to pipelines, depending on the pipeline geometry and connected structures.

Damage to pipeline systems during an earthquake, whether onshore or offshore, can arise from

the traveling ground waves and permanent ground deformation due to soil failures. The

primary soil failures are:

• Faulting;

• Landslides;

• Liquefaction;

• Differential Settlement;

• Ground-cracks.

Seismic ground waves produce strains in buried pipelines. However, because there are little

or no inertia effects from dynamic excitation, the strains tend to be small and often are well

within the yield rupture threshold of the pipeline material. The direct effect of seismic waves

is, therefore, generally not expected to cause rupture or buckling failure to buried pipelines.

Nonetheless, seismic waves can cause damage to unburied pipeline systems, especially in the

interfacing area, such as in the pipeline transition section from buried-to-unburied and the

pipeline tie-in spool to the subsequent structure. In general, the seismic analyses of the

permanent ground deformation for buried pipes and unburied pipes, and seismic ground waves

for unburied pipes are required for designing pipeline systems.

220 Part II Pipeline Design

Offshore pipelines are normally buried for stability and mechanical protection; otherwise they

are laid on the seabed. This Chapter will:

• Address available seismic design codes and standards for offshore pipelines;

• Discuss a general design and analysis methodology for fault crossing and seismic

ground wave;

• Present design and analysis examples using a static model for buried pipe, subjected to

permanent ground deformations due to the foundation failure and a time history

dynamic model for unburied pipelines subjected to seismic ground waves.

The American Society of Civil Engineers, ASCE (1984) collected some published

systematical papers in seismic analysis and design as a standard, giving seismic design

guidelines for oil and gas pipeline systems. These guidelines provide valuable information on

seismic design considerations for pipelines, primarily onshore-buried pipelines, and also

force-deformation curves of the pipe-soil interactions for pipelines buried in both clay and

sand. ASCE (2001, 2002) has also developed seismic design guidelines for onshore piping

systems and buried pipes, but not for petroleum pipelines and offshore pipelines. The

American Society of Mechanical Engineers (ASME) states that the limit of calculated stresses

due to occasional loads, such as wind or earthquake, shall not exceed 80% of SMYS of the

pipe, but this specification does not provide guidance for the design method. Det Norske

Veritas (DNV) in the code of "Submarine Pipeline Systems" classifies the earthquake load

into accidental or an environmental load depending on the probability of earthquake

occurrence. It also does not provide an earthquake design method for offshore pipelines.

The current Design Code and Guidelines for pipeline systems basically specifies the loads for

analysis and the acceptable stress/strain levels for the system design. For buried pipelines, the

parameters of interest are the displacement, stress and strain under the imposed permanent

ground deformation due to foundation failure. Although the mechanism of the seismic

foundation failure varies for different types, a pipeline response model can be generated with

only minor modifications. For the unburied pipeline, earthquake design motions are typically

presented in the form of a seismic time history ground motion or a design response spectrum,

which is based upon the estimated ground waves and characteristics of the ground structure.

Several seismic analysis approaches for pipeline design were developed to predict the pipeline

behavior in response to differential ground movements. Two main structural response models

are considered:

1. Static Model for Buried Pipelines, subjected to fault crossing due to soil failure.

2. Dynamic Analysis Model for Unburied Pipelines, subjected to ground wave load.

Chapter 14 Seismic Design 221

Fault crossing is one of the major hazards to offshore pipelines, whether buried or unburied.

Numerous investigations have been carried out for fault crossing with different soil

movements. The ability of a pipeline to deform in the plastic range under tension helps

prevent rupture at fault crossings. If compression of the pipeline in a fault crossing is

unavoidable, the compressive strain should be limited to within the local buckling criteria.

The amount and type of ground surface displacement is the main factor for designing pipelines

to resist permanent ground deformation at fault crossings. Bonilla (1982) summarized a simple

equation relating the maximum displacement at ground surface to the earthquake surface-wave

magnitude as:

log Z =-6.35+ 0.93M, .^^ j .

where, L is the maximum surface displacement in meters and M^ is the earthquake surface-

wave magnitude. The earthquake magnitude is one of the design criteriae based on the

historical seismicity and geological data. Displacement data from the fault of similar

earthquakes might be used in selecting a value for designing pipelines because of a big

deviation in earthquake surface displacement data, which the equation is based on.

Two typical analytical methods under certain assumptions were suggested for the fault

crossing analysis, Newmark-Hall (1975) and Kennedy et al (1977). Kennedy and others

extended the ideas of Newmark and Hall and incorporated some improvements in the method

for evaluation of the maximum axial strain. They considered the effects of lateral interaction

in their analyses. The influence of large axial strains on the pipe's bending stifftiess is also

considered. O'Rourke and Liu (1999) reported that the Kennedy model for strike slip faulting,

which results in axial tension, provides the best match to ABAQUS finite element results,

based on an independent comparison of the available analytical approaches. The ASCE

Guidelines give a detailed description of both the Newmark-Hall and Kennedy schemes. It

must be emphasized that both schemes are only valid for pipe under tension, since this

condition may not be guaranteed under other various combined modes of fault movement.

Due to the largely non-linear nature of the problem, a finite element analysis (FEA) is the

most general tool for pipeline fault crossing design. Non-linear finite element modeling allows

accurate determination of pipeline stress/strain at various locations along the pipeline route

with a wide range of parameters. The pipe-soil interaction can be modeled as discrete springs

in three dimensions. The pipeline is represented as a sequence of finite straight beam elements

supported on the bottom by the bearing springs. The imposed fault movement is then input

into the FE model as a static displacement boundary condition. The analysis is performed to

determine the equilibrium nodal position of the pipe, bending moment, axial force, strains and

stresses. The next section explains a detailed example of finite element analysis for the fault

crossing using ABAQUS software.

222 Part II Pipeline Design

Both permanent ground deformation and seismic ground wave can cause severe damages to

unburied pipelines and connected equipments. There are three basic methods available for

analyzing the responses of a structure subjected to seismic ground wave,

1. Static Analysis;

2. Response Spectra Analysis;

3. Time History Analysis.

In general, a static analysis is sufficient for the long-term response of a structure to applied

loads. However, if the duration of the applied load is short, such as in the case of an

earthquake event, a time history dynamic analysis is required.

Static Analysis

The pipeline is divided into individual spans or into a series of segments. Static seismic loads

are considered to be in direct proportion to the weight of pipe segments. The peak acceleration

from the response spectrum is applied as a lateral force distributed along the pipe and bending

stresses and support reactions are calculated. The seismic static coefficients are usually

obtained from the seismic "zone", which is corresponding to a level of seismic acceleration.

Many design software programs can perform static analysis, but these methods are primarily

used in building seismic design.

In response spectra analysis, the ground motion vs. frequency method is used. The maximum

acceleration for a given frequency and damping is determined based on seismic maps and soil

characteristics. The higher the damping, the lower its acceleration will be. The responses of

displacements (translations and rotations), loads (forces and moments) and stresses at each

point for each natural frequency of the system and for each direction are obtained after

analysis. The calculated loads, displacements and stresses of the piping system are typically

calculated by taking the square root sum of squares of the response in each of the three

directions. The response spectra method is approximate, but is often a useful, inexpensive

method for preliminary design studies.

This analysis method involves the actual solution of the dynamic equation of motion

throughout the duration of the applied load and subsequent system vibration, providing a true

simulation of the system response at all times. In time history analysis, the seismic time

history ground motions (displacement, velocity or acceleration as a ftmction of time) of

seismic ground waves in three directions are applied to a finite element model of a system to

obtain time history excitations of the system, including stresses, strains and reaction forces.

Time history analysis is a more accurate, more computationally intensive method than

response spectrum analysis, and is best suited to the transient loadings where the profile is

known.

Chapter 14 Seismic Design 223

An example of time history analysis with a finite element model for the ground wave

movement with ABAQUS software is detailed in the next section. ABAQUS is the selected

program to develop finite element models of ground soil, pipelines and subsea manifold

connection because of its capability to accurately simulate solid objects, pipes, elbows,

material and geometric non-linearities, and interactions between soil and pipelines. ABAQUS

also provides analytical models to describe the pipe-soil interaction. These models describe

the elastic and perfectly plastic behavior by defining the force exerted on the pipeline and its

displacement. These definitions are suitable for use with sands and clays and can be found in

detail in the ASCE guidelines for the Seismic Design of Oil and Gas Pipeline Systems.

Two design levels are normally adopted for the design criteria:

1. Contingency design earthquake (CDE), and

2. Probable design earthquake (PDE).

evaluation with a typical return period of 200 to 1000 years for pipelines. The intensity of

CDE is taken as the design limits, exceeding causes of pipe failure, or at least sufficient

damage to cause an interruption of service. On the other hand, the PDE is a lower level

earthquake, which assumes only minor damages to the pipeline system without interrupting

the service. These events are likely to occur during the life of the pipeline and are therefore

incorporated as part of the design environmental load. PDE is usually taken to have a return

period of 50 to 100 years.

To explore the seismic responses of offshore pipeline systems, two study examples are

presented here:

the pipeline is fully buried under the natural seabed.

Dynamic response of a 42-inch unburied pipeline system to seismic waves where the

pipeline is laid on the seabed and connected to a subsea manifold.

A buried steel pipeline with a 42-inch diameter and a 0.875-inch wall thickness, material of

API 5L Grade-X65, contains oil at a specific gravity of 0.8. The pipeline is backfilled with a

3-foot sand depth median, with a density of 120 pounds per cubic foot and a friction angle of

35°.

224 Part II Pipeline Design

ANCHOR POINT

ANCHOR POINT

PUN

A GROUND POSITION

_^^^TER_EARTHOUAKE

ANCHOR POINT-'

ELEVATION

Figure 14.1 shows a sketch of a buried pipeline under a fault crossing due to an earthquake.

The fault length in the plan direction is set as 1.2 m, in the vertical direction, with set as 1.0

m. A static analysis of buried pipeline was analyzed by using ABAQUS, the Finite Element

software. Here, the unanchored length varies depending on the pipeline size and axial pipe-soil

interaction force (friction force). The 1000 m long pipeline, with both ends fixed, is modeled

by using pipe elements in the example.

Non-linear pipeline-soil interactions in axial, lateral, and vertical directions are modeled with

pipe-soil interaction elements and soil characteristics inft-Xt,fp-yp and fq-Zq force-deformation

curves. Based on the formulas suggested in the ASCE guidelines, the maximum axial

interaction force per unit length at the pipe-soil interface (ft is 36.6 kN/m, and corresponding

maximum deformation, Xt) is 0.004 m. The maximum lateral interaction force per unit length

(fp is 175.4 kN/m, and corresponding maximum deformation, yp) is 0.08 m. The maximum

upward interaction force per unit length fq is 38.0 kN/m and corresponding maximum

deformation zq is 0.044 m. The maximum downward interaction force per unit length fq is

1450 kN/m and corresponding maximum deformation Zq is 0.13 m.

Figure 14.2 shows the displacements of the pipeline in y and z directions under the fault

crossing. The corresponding stress distribution at the bottom wall along the pipeline is shown

in Figure 14.3. The maximum stress exceeds 80% of SMYS of the pipe, which is within

ASME criteria. Therefore, the designed buried pipeline is not suitable for the seismic level

which can cause inputted fault distances.

Chapter 14 Seismic Design 225

0.2

oa T 1 1 1 ' \ ' A ' ' ' ' j ^

rq 1 1 1 ' V' A ' ' ' ^ yW

o> -0.21 — -. 1 1 1—Ar--V-f 1 } - - -Jy^ - -

>i 1 ] [ , [ 1 V 1 \ 1 J^J^\ 1

•| -0.6 \--\ 1 \----\ ^ V-VSr-fV-l----!----

<» 1 1 I 1 1 1 \ 1 p I 1

S -0.8 [- 1 1 T 1 r %I^,iV^ ' T 1

"Q- 1

-100

I

-80

!

-60

!

-40

I

-20

!

0

I

20

!

40

1

60

I

80 100

CO 1 1 1 1 1 1 I I I 1

s . 1 \ \ \ \ \

Coordinate of X direction, [m] \ \ \ \ 1

["•-Displacement In y direction -«•>Displacement in z direction |

5.0E+08

4.0E+08

£ 3.0E+08 A

= 2.0E+08 \

Q.

o) 1.0E+08 1\

1

w O.OE+00 f t- 1 * *^ i - - ^ - ^ j «lf«*V»H»HiS.H« "K Miifii f e

--•-*•»»

i

1 mn naiiiitoJ

CO

CO

^

....IU..4 r K^'^

V

% -1.0E+08

CO

-2.0E+08 ¥

-3.0E+08

-100 -50 0 50 100

Pipeline axial direction, [m]

Figure 14.3 Stress distributions at the bottom wall along the pipeline.

Sensitivity calculations of different buried depths of the pipeline also show that the maximum

stress and strain of the pipeline are proportional to the buried depth, when other parameters are

the same. To decrease the damage of the pipeline, in the possible area of the seismic fault

cross, the pipeline should not be buried.

A seismic dynamic analysis was performed, using ABAQUS, for an offshore pipeline system.

This analysis consisted of two 42" OD x 0.875" WT (API X65 pipelines) and a 300 metric ton

subsea manifold, as shown in Figure 14.5. The pipelines contained oil at a specific gravity of

0.8 with an internal pressure of 600 psi. A settlement of 0.1 m for the subsea manifold due to

sand liquefaction in the earthquake, is considered.

226 Part II Pipeline Design

-0.4

0 2 4 6 8 10 0 2 4 6 8 10 2 4 6 8 10

Time (s) Time (s) Time (s)

Figure 14.6 Seismic ground motions: E-W, N-S and vertical accelerations.

A 10-second seismic event was used in the dynamic analysis. Figure 14.6 shows the

acceleration time history in the E-W, N-S and Vertical directions. The maximum accelerations

are 0.34g, 0.26g and 0.25g for E-W, N-S and vertical directions, respectively.

In the ABAQUS model, the subsea manifold was modeled as a solid box. The straight and

curved pipeline sections were modeled as 3D beam elements and elbow elements,

respectively. The seabed was modeled as a rigid surface with frictions in both longitudinal and

lateral directions. The pipeline-soil interaction was modeled by a linear contact pressure

relationship. The accelerations in three directions were applied to the seabed. As shown in

Figure 14.7, the maximum Von Mises stress of 191.9 MPa (27.8 ksi) occurs at the spools.

Figure 14.8 shows the time history of the maximum Von Mises stress in the pipelines.

Chapter 14 Seismic Design 227

S, Hises

naltiple sec^cn points

(Ave. C r i t . : 1S%)

+1. 916©+08

+ 1 . 7S6e+08

+ 1 . S96e+08

+1.437e+08

+1.277«+08

+1.118e+08

+9. S79e+07

+7. 983e+07

+6.387e+07

+4. 791e+07

+3.19Se+07

•i-1. 599a-i-07

4-2.514e-i-04

ODB: s e i s l _ 2 1 . o d b JffiAQUS/Standard 6 . 4 - 3 Sun J u l 25 1 4 : 1 5 : 0 9 C e n t r a l D a y l l ^ ^ ^ J i i t t e 2004

Increment. 6 6 7 : S t e p Time = 3.265

Primary Var: S , H i s e s

Deformed Var: U D e f o r m a t i o n S c a l e Fact:or: -fLOOOe+OO

Figure 14.7 Maximum Von Mises stress in the pipelines and tie-in spools.

The maximum Von Mises stresses in tlie time history always occurs in the spool areas. The

difference of natural frequencies and weights for the subsea manifold and pipelines causes the

response difference between subsea manifold and pipelines. Therefore, the maximum stress

occurs in the spool areas.

I:K)

2.0 4.0 6.0 8i) 10.0 12.0

T\fm(s)

228 Part II Pipeline Design

14.3 Conclusions

This seismic design and analysis methodology as presented here was developed for offshore

pipeline design. It has been successfully applied in seismic analyses of buried pipelines under

fault crossing and unburied pipelines with a subsea manifold by using a static analysis and a

dynamic time history analysis. The sensitivity analysis results show that the buried depth of

buried pipeline and the soil stiffness in the pipeline-soil interaction are the primary factors

affecting pipeline stress in an earthquake. As discussed, the seismic analysis within this

technical note is intended for assistance in developing seismic analysis and design guidelines

for offshore pipelines.

14.4 References

1. Bai, Q., Zeng, W., and Tao, L. (2004), "Seismic Analysis of Offshore Pipeline Systems",

Offshore, Vol. 64, No. 10, 2004, pp.100-104.

2. ASCE, (1984), "Guidelines for the Seismic Design of Oil and Gas Pipeline Systems".

3. ASCE, (2001), "Guideline for the Design of Buried Steel Pipe".

4. ASCE, (2002), "Seismic Design and Retrofit of Piping Systems".

5. ASME B31.4, (1998), "Pipeline Transportation System for Liquid Hydrocarbons and

Liquids".

6. Bai, Y., (2003), "Marine Structural Design", Elsevier.

7. Bonilla, M. G., (1982), "Evaluation of Potential Surface Faulting and other Tectonic

Deformation", Open File Report 82-732, U.S. Geological Survey.

8. DNV-OS-FIOIDNV, (2000), "Submarine Pipeline Systems", Det Norske Veritas.

9. Kennedy, R. P., Chow, A. W., and Williamson, R. A., (1977), "Fault Movement Effects on

Buried Oil Pipeline", Journal of the Transportation Engineering Division, ASCE, Vo. 103,

No. TE5, pp. 617-633.

lO.Newmark, N. M. and Hall, W. J., (1975), "Pipeline Design to Resist Large Fault

Displacements", Proc. US National Conference on Earthquake Engineering, Ann Arbor,

Michigan.

11. O'Rourke, M. J. and Liu, X., (1999), "Response of Buried Pipelines Subject to Earthquake

Effects", Monograph No.3, Multidisciplinary Center for Earthquake Engineering

Research.

- Seismic Design of Buried PipeЗагружено:tnvish
- pipeline design calculations.pdfЗагружено:jimallen212
- Pipeline Stability Calculation of 24 Oil EmptyЗагружено:baghelrohit
- Seismic Design and Assessment of Natural Gas and Liquid Hydrocarbon PipelinesЗагружено:anup_sahani
- Pipeline Buckling Caused by Axial LoadsЗагружено:Lava Sat
- Pipe Soil InteractionЗагружено:Sherif Gebaly
- Seismic design of continuos buried pipelineЗагружено:amulbaby31
- buoyancy calculation exampleЗагружено:alzuhd
- BEHAVIOUR OF BURIED PIPELINES SUBJECTED TO EXTERNAL LOADING.pdfЗагружено:ktsnl
- A Seismic Design Considerationof Oil and Gas Transmission SystemsЗагружено:limin zhang
- Extended Model for Pipe Soil InteractionЗагружено:Peggy Jan Qorban
- (1982 Newmark & Hall - EERI) Earthquake Spectra and DesignЗагружено:sanpaz75
- SeismicЗагружено:de_imme
- Guidelines for Seismic Design & Assessment of PipelinesЗагружено:Paul Ong
- 50262011-37347055-Autopipe-Training-OutlineЗагружено:Pong Mankind
- As 2885 1 PipelineЗагружено:Chin Fatt
- Evaluation of Pipeline Failure CausesЗагружено:abu_malek_12092
- API Rp 1111 Design, Construction, Operation, _ Maintenance of Offs. Hydrocarbon Pipelines (LSD)Загружено:Ph2ntom
- (1970) Correlation for Design of Laterally Loaded Piles in Soft ClayЗагружено:jackg235
- Eurocode 8 Design of structures for earthquake resistance_Part 4 Silos, tanks and pipelinesЗагружено:reactorului
- Engineering Treatment of SoilsЗагружено:Juan Carlos Patino Bautista
- Seismic Design RC BuildingЗагружено:Asad Naqvi
- Buried PipeЗагружено:Plalvarezcelis
- 93204176-EN-1998-4-2006Загружено:marius
- CN30-4Загружено:frvdabee
- Earthquake Resistant Design Codes in Japan 2000Загружено:sf1553
- Material Damping vs. Radiation DampingЗагружено:Yang Lu
- AS 2885Загружено:vivek_pandey
- 15WCEE Presentation ScheduleЗагружено:marianellachs
- Geo.dgi.Bulletin.no.12Загружено:Erica Walsh

- Flexible PipeЗагружено:naren57
- Doric DictionaryЗагружено:fdoppel
- Deepwater Risers - Issues and ChallengesЗагружено:fdoppel
- To Print - Assessment of Riser System Selection.pdfЗагружено:fdoppel
- Introduction to Unbounded Flexible PipeЗагружено:NoolOotsil
- <!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 3.2 Final//EN"> <html> <head> <style> a:link {font:8pt/11pt verdana; color:red} a:visited {font:8pt/11pt verdana; color:#4e4e4e} </style> <meta HTTP-EQUIV="Content-Type" Content="text-html; charset=Windows-1252"> <title>Cannot find server</title> </head> <body bgcolor="white"> <table width="400" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="5"> <tr> <td id="tableProps2" align="left" valign="middle" width="360"><h1 id="textSection1" style="COLOR: black; FONT: 13pt/15pt verdana"><span id="errorText">The page cannot be displayed</span></h1> </td> </tr> <tr> <td id="tablePropsWidth" width="400" colspan="2"><font style="COLOR: black; FONT: 8pt/11pt verdana">The page you are looking for is currently unavailable. The Web site might be experiencing technical difficulties, or you may need to adjust your browser settings.</font></td> </tr> <tr> <td id="tablePropsWidth" width="400" colspan="2"><fontЗагружено:fdoppel
- Offshore Structures - Analysis and Design by Dr.S.nallayarasuЗагружено:mariusz19781103
- DNV RP B401Загружено:Guillaume Boyer
- SUT Flexibles - 6 Damage, Defects, Degradation, Failure Modes - Selected Case Studies - March 2011 update - compressed.pdfЗагружено:fdoppel
- Mathematics of Flexible RisersЗагружено:fdoppel
- Flexible Riser InstallationЗагружено:fdoppel
- <!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 3.2 Final//EN"> <html> <head> <style> a:link {font:8pt/11pt verdana; color:red} a:visited {font:8pt/11pt verdana; color:#4e4e4e} </style> <meta HTTP-EQUIV="Content-Type" Content="text-html; charset=Windows-1252"> <title>Cannot find server</title> </head> <body bgcolor="white"> <table width="400" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="5"> <tr> <td id="tableProps2" align="left" valign="middle" width="360"><h1 id="textSection1" style="COLOR: black; FONT: 13pt/15pt verdana"><span id="errorText">The page cannot be displayed</span></h1> </td> </tr> <tr> <td id="tablePropsWidth" width="400" colspan="2"><font style="COLOR: black; FONT: 8pt/11pt verdana">The page you are looking for is currently unavailable. The Web site might be experiencing technical difficulties, or you may need to adjust your browser settings.</font></td> </tr> <tr> <td id="tablePropsWidth" width="400" colspan="2"><fontЗагружено:fdoppel
- Floating Production SystemsЗагружено:Winsy Winchh
- Mechanics of deepwater SCRЗагружено:fdoppel
- 23714622 Mooring System Design Considerations for FPSOsЗагружено:Dr R Panneer Selvam
- Global Analysis of a Flexible RiserЗагружено:fdoppel
- A Simplified Procedure to Assess the Fatigue-Life of Flexible RisersЗагружено:fdoppel
- Life Prediction of Composite Armor in an Unbonded Flexible PipeЗагружено:fdoppel
- Opt PaperЗагружено:fdoppel
- 1990_Palmer_Upheaval_BucklingЗагружено:ppyim2012
- Fluid Properties OilЗагружено:fdoppel
- Ommundsen, Marius LoenЗагружено:Yiorgos Pericleous
- DVA Well SystemsЗагружено:fdoppel

- Soil ParametersЗагружено:Bejay Bermudez
- What is a Fixed SupportЗагружено:bmyertekin
- RMR y Cohesiòn y Friccion en Rocas de Andrew RoseЗагружено:Fabiola Lucero
- Standard Penetration Test (SPT)-Procedure,Precautions, AdvantagesЗагружено:venkateswara rao pothina
- 175_ftpЗагружено:Astrid Aubry
- Detailed Nonlinear Modeling, Pushover and Time History Analysis of Alto Rio Building Using Beam-truss ModelЗагружено:contrerasc_sebastian988
- Ej36 Design DetailЗагружено:Δημήτριος Κρινής
- MSI04 Buckling of Struts[1]Загружено:Tikar Mengkuang
- Excel File Interior Girder Hl93Загружено:Renxiang Lu
- 23.Contact Stress Analysis of Shrink-fitted Joints for Various Fit Forms via Finite Element MethodЗагружено:Parag Naik
- Performance-Based Plastic Design Method for Buckling-restrained Braced FramesЗагружено:pechak1
- Rigid-Pavement-CC- IRC SP 62.xlsЗагружено:amit singh
- IS 4995 (Part 2) 1974Загружено:Nagaraju Chinta
- Notes_04b Shear and Moment as FunctionsЗагружено:LTE002
- CRC Press BooksЗагружено:imran ishaq
- CIVL4111Загружено:hadushberhe
- Unreinforced MasonryЗагружено:Mihai
- Study on Concrete–Filled Steel Member Subjected to Cyclic LoadingЗагружено:saeed-21
- FOUNDATION DESIGNЗагружено:Anonymous ztuJIs
- design of beamЗагружено:Zhar Fernandez
- 105-s29 Control of Flexural Cracking in Reinforced ConcreteЗагружено:Thomas Crowe
- Effective Stress and Pore Water Pressure Changes Week3.pdfЗагружено:Jorge Yitzhak Pachas
- AREMA-MSE.pdfЗагружено:sam
- Group3 EXP3 - UPDATED !.docxЗагружено:Naveenesh Gunasekaran
- RCC11 Element DesignЗагружено:alainbradley
- Design for Simple FootingsЗагружено:Renier Els
- Master Proposal Report EllipseЗагружено:nishanth132
- Comparative Study of Strength of RC Shear Wall at Different Location on Multi-storied Residential BuildingЗагружено:shahkaushal04
- 7A. Pore Pressure PredictionЗагружено:Ibukun Opeyemi
- PEER Report Hutchinson Et Al 2001Загружено:vijjikewlguy7116

## Гораздо больше, чем просто документы.

Откройте для себя все, что может предложить Scribd, включая книги и аудиокниги от крупных издательств.

Отменить можно в любой момент.