Proceedings of OMAE’07

26st International Conference on Offshore Mechanics and Arctic Engineering

June 10-15, 2007 – San Diego, USA

OMAE2007-29703

NUMERICAL SIMULATION OF OFFSHORE PIPELINE INSTALLATION BY

LATERAL DEFLECTION PROCEDURE

Danilo Machado Lawinscky da Silva Rodrigo Almeida Bahiense Breno Pinheiro Jacob
LAMCSO – Laboratory of Computational Methods and Offshore Systems – PEC/COPPE/UFRJ
Rio de Janeiro, RJ, Brazil

Fernando Gomes da Silva Torres Antonio Roberto Medeiros Marcos Nadalin Vaz da Costa
PETROBRAS – Petróleo Brasileiro S.A.

ABSTRACT
Conventional offshore pipeline installation operations in
Brazil have been performed in an S-Lay procedure employing
the BGL-1 barge, owned by Petrobras. However, this
procedure has some limits, and may not be feasible in some
particular scenarios. Therefore, the objective of this work is to
present the numerical simulation of an alternative pipeline
installation procedure. This procedure basically consists of
performing the pipeline assembly on shore, and deflecting it to
the sea using a tug boat.
The numerical simulations employ the SITUA-Prosim
computational tool, which is able to incorporate the correct
definition of the seabed and shore from bathymetric curves. An
actual pipeline installation by this lateral deflection procedure
is analyzed and discussed. The characterization of the
procedure passes through the determination of the better
velocity and direction of the tug boat in order to minimize the
efforts on the pipeline (especially due to the curvatures).
INTRODUCTION
Usual pipelaying operation procedures in offshore Brazil
employ the BGL-1 barge (Figure 1) owned by Petrobras. This
barge performs installation operations by moving forward
using its own mooring lines. This involves the definition of a
complex mooring procedure, as a sequence of operations that
determine the mooring line positions and induce the laybarge
movement as it lays the pipeline. Basically, tug boats drop
anchors at some predefined positions; then the barge winches
release the stern mooring cables, and collect the mooring cables
located at the bow.
Figure 1: The BGL-1 Pipeline Launching Barge
Since the laybarge usually operates at locations where the
sea bottom is congested with other pipelines, Christmas trees,
manifolds, or fiber optics, the definition of the mooring
procedure (leading to the motion of the barge) must take into
account not only the desired pipeline route, but also possible
interferences between the mooring lines and subsea obstacles.
In order to allow the correct representation of the seabed,
Petrobras developed a database system named SGO (Obstacles
Management System)[1]. This system contains frequently
updated information about the bathymetry and position of
subsea obstacles, gathered by a special vessel - RSV Salgueiro,
equipped with a ROV (Remote Operated Vehicle). In order to
avoid interference and accidents with such obstacles, the
definition of the mooring procedure includes the placement of
buoys attached to the cables, with the purpose of lifting the
mooring lines and increasing the distance between cables and
subsea obstacles [2]. The definition of the mooring procedure
should also provide information about the amount and length of
buoys' cables, pendants, and all related material such as
shackles, swivels, cables, etc as illustrated in Figure 2.

1 Copyright © 2007 by ASME


Figure 2: Mooring Procedure over Seabed with Obstacles
However, the procedure described above has some
limitations, such as: i) It has a very restrictive limitation
according to the weather conditions; ii) The procedure is
extremely complex when performed in congested areas.
Therefore, the objective of this work is to present results of
numerical simulations of a pipeline installation using a
procedure called Lateral Deflection. This procedure basically
consists of performing the pipeline assembly on shore, and
deflecting it to the sea using a cable connected to a tug boat.
The characterization of the deflection procedure involves the
determination of the better velocity and direction of the tug
boat in order to minimize the efforts on the pipeline (especially
due to the curvatures).
To perform the analyses of such procedure, Petrobras
considered the use of the SITUA-Prosim system. In order to
illustrate some steps of the lateral deflection procedure, Figure
3 presents snapshots of results obtained with this system, for
the scenario and numerical model that will be presented in the
following sections of this work.
Figure 3: Lateral Deflection Procedure
The SITUA-Prosim system has been developed since 1997
[3], in cooperation by Petrobras and LAMCSO (Laboratory of
Computational Methods and Offshore Systems, at the Civil
Eng. Dept. of COPPE/UFRJ, Federal Univ. of Rio de Janeiro).
It performs all the mooring calculations with an interface with
the SGO system. In other words, the software reads the SGO
seabed data and simulates the pipeline launching operation
considering the actual bathymetric information and obstacle
positions [4].
The following sections of this work describes the actual
pipeline installation operation considered, employing the lateral
deflection procedure, and discusses the results of the analyses.
SCENARIO AND CHARACTERISTICS OF PIPELINE
PETROBRAS intends to rehabilitate a 10” pipeline that is
in the end of its lifetime. The pipeline is located at the Xaréu
field, interconnecting the PXA-1 platform to the buoy frame,
with the basic purpose of transporting the oil production of
Xaréu, Atum and Curimã fields, in Ceará State (northeast of
Brazil), to the NT ALIANZA Ship.
Therefore, a new pipeline will be installed on the left side
of the present pipeline. The new pipeline has a total length of
721m, and follows the route presented in Figure 4, which
intends to minimize crossings with existent lines.
Figure 4: Pipeline Route
The pipeline will be assembled at Canto Beach, in
Paracuru city, deflected from shore to the sea, and transported
with buoys to the installation location, where it will be
positioned on the guideline and sunk by flooding the buoys.
Bathymetry of the beach
A photo of Canto beach is presented in Figure 5.
Information about level curves, obstacles and tide lines are
supplied by bathymetric map shown in Figure 6. With those
data the SITUA-Prosim system generates a bathymetric mesh
for the analyses.
2 Copyright © 2007 by ASME
 Table 1: 10” Pipeline data
Parameter Value Unit
Outside Diameter 0.27305 m
Inside Diameter 0.2445 m
Yield Stress of steel 414000 KN/m2
Modulus of Elasticity of steel 207000 MPa
Axial Stiffness (EA) 2402252.49 KN
Flexional Stiffness (EI) 20169.39 KN*m2
Poisson Coefficient 0.3 -
Density of steel 77 KN/m3
Corrosion Protection 0.0027 m
Corr. Protection Specific Mass 9.32 KN/m3
Hydrodynamic Diameter 0.27875 m
Figure 5: Canto Beach Tube Length 12 m
Weight in Air 0.91099 KN/m
Weight in Water 0.32220 KN/m

Figure 8: Buoy

Figure 6: Bathymetry of Canto Beach Table 2: Buoy Data

Parameter Value Unit
During assembly, the pipeline will be positioned on "big-
Diameter 0.762 m
bags" (bags of sand with 1m³ of volume) as illustrated in
Length 1.129 m
Figure 7.
Weight in Air 1.2851 KN
Buoyancy 3.4138 KN
Three-dimensional frame elements are employed also for
the representation of the pipe segments with buoys. An
equivalent element represents both the pipeline physical
Figure 7: Pipeline Assembly scheme properties and the buoy hydrodynamic properties. The
characteristics of the equivalent pipeline+buoy element are
The soil-resistance coefficients for the axial and lateral shown in Table 3.
directions of the pipeline were supplied by PETROBRAS:
lateral = 1.0; axial = 0.5. Table 3: Pipeline + Buoy data
Parameter Value Unit
Outside Diameter 0.27305 m
Characteristics of Pipeline and Buoys Inside Diameter 0.2445 m
The physical and geometric properties of the pipeline and Axial Stiffness (EA) 2402252.49 KN
of the buoys are presented in the following tables. Three- Flexional Stiffness (EI) 20169.39 KN*m2
Hydrodynamic Diameter 0.762 m
dimensional frame elements are employed in the generation of
Weight in Air 2.23530 KN/m
the numerical model for the pipeline.
Weight in Water -3.06225 KN/m
The buoys (illustrated in Figure 8) are fastened to the
pipeline at each 8m measured from the center of each buoy.

3 Copyright © 2007 by ASME

Visualization of Numerical Model
Some views of the numerical model thus generated are
presented in Figure 9. The water surface is indicated in blue;
the beach is indicated in green.
Figure 9: Details of the Numerical Model
LATERAL DEFLECTION: PARAMETRIC STUDIES
As mentioned before, the pipeline is assembled on shore
and deflected to the sea using a tugboat. According to the
predominant effort in the pipeline, the lateral deflection
procedure can be classified in two ways, as shown in Figure 10.
Figure 10: Lateral Deflection:
Compression (left) and Tension (right)
When compression predominates, the tugboat force needed
to displace the pipeline from the beach is smaller; however
stresses in the pipeline due to curvatures are larger. On the
other hand, when tension predominates, the tugboat force is
larger while stresses due curvatures are smaller.
Basically these two forms of deflection are differentiated
by the angle between the axial pipeline axis, in the towing
extremity (axis X in Figure 10), and the tugboat route. Angles
smaller than 90o, in general, implicate in compression, while
angles larger than 90 o, in general, implicate in tension.
Therefore, the objective of the parametric studies presented
here is to define adequate combinations of tugboat route and
velocity for the lateral deflection procedure. Several nonlinear
dynamic analyses were performed:
¾ Tugboat route: -5º, 0º, 5º, 10º, 15º e 20º (angles measured
from axis Y, Figure 10, clockwise). The PETROBRAS
background in such operations suggested an angle of 10o
as a starting point.
¾ Tugboat velocity: 1km/h, 2km/h e 3km/h
In each analysis, the tugboat is modeled by prescribing its
motion at the end of the tug cable, varying in time according to
the specified velocity. Since the operation is performed in a
sheltered scenario, with benign environmental conditions, no
environmental loading of wave or current is applied to the
pipeline.
The dynamic analyses are performed using a time step
value ∆t = 0,01s. The total simulation time T varies with the
tugboat velocity: T = 3610s, 1810s and 1210s respectively for
velocities of 1km/h, 2km/h and 3km/h (as expected, smaller
velocities require a larger simulation time).
The results of the parametric studies are presented in the
Figures that follow. Initially, Figures 11 and 12 illustrate one
initial step of the deformed configuration, for three different
tugboat routes.
Figure 11: General view of -5o, 10 o and 20 o configurations
Figure 12: Detail of -5o, 10 o and 20 o configurations
In order to define an adequate combination tugboat route-
velocity, that leads to small values of forces in the tugboat
cable and Von Mises stresses in the pipeline, the results of the
4 Copyright © 2007 by ASME
sequence of analyses comprising the parametric studies are Mises stresses along the pipeline during the analysis. The red
summarized in the graphs that follow. Initially, Figures 13 to line indicates the allowable stress.
15 summarizes, for each tugboat velocity, the time-history of
the tugboat forces for different tugboat routes. The maximum

Von Mises (KN/m2)

800000 Direction (-5)
Direction (0)
forces are summarized in Table 4 700000
Direction (5)
600000 Direction (10)
500000 Direction (15)
Traction (KN)

300.0 Direction (20)

400000
Direction (-5) Yield Stress
250.0 300000
Direction (0)
200000
200.0 Direction (5)
100000
150.0 Direction (10)
0
Direction (15)
100.0 0.0 100.0 200.0 300.0 400.0 500.0 600.0 700.0
Direction (20) Pipeline Length (m)
50.0

0.0
Figure 16: Von Mises stress in the pipeline – 1 Km/h

Von Mises (KN/m2)

0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 900 1000 1100 1200 1300 1400 1500 800000 Direction (-5)
Time (s) Direction (0)
700000
Direction (5)
Figure 13: Tension in the cable – 1 Km/h 600000 Direction (10)
500000 Direction (15)
Traction (KN)

300.0 Direction (20)

400000
Direction (-5) Yield Stress
250.0 300000
Direction (0) 200000
200.0 Direction (5)
100000
150.0 Direction (10)
0
Direction (15)
0.0 100.0 200.0 300.0 400.0 500.0 600.0 700.0
100.0 Direction (20) Pipeline Length (m)
50.0
Figure 17: Von Mises stress in the pipeline – 2 Km/h
0.0
Von Mises (KN/m2)

0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 900 1000 1100 1200 1300 1400 1500 800000 Direction (-5)
Time (s) Direction (0)
700000
Direction (5)
600000
Figure 14: Tension in the cable – 2 Km/h Direction (10)
500000 Direction (15)
T ra ct io n (K N)

300.0 400000 Direction (20)

Direction (-5) Yield Stress
250.0 300000
Direction (0) 200000
200.0 Direction (5) 100000
150.0 Direction (10)
0
Direction (15)
100.0
0.0 100.0 200.0 300.0 400.0 500.0 600.0 700.0
Direction (20) Pipeline Length (m)
50.0

0.0
Figure 18: Von Mises stress in the pipeline – 3 Km/h
0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 900 1000 1100 1200 1300 1400 1500
Time (s)

Figure 15: Tension in the cable – 3 Km/h Table 5: Von Mises Stress (KN/m2)
Direction/Velocity 1 Km/h 2 Km/h 3 Km/h
-5º 333896.6 442877.0 538018.3
Table 4: Maximum Tension in the cable (KN) 0º 356715.5 466120.9 577679.8
Direction/Velocity 1 Km/h 2 Km/h 3 Km/h 5º 397294.4 502232.4 622467.8
-5º 145.59 209.18 281.99 10º 397184.4 548049.9 677823.5
0º 131.48 201.94 268.79 15º 436822.4 578775.1 715493.6
5º 118.97 195.54 254.64 20º 462776.2 623533.7 762678.4
10º 111.89 190.07 242.96
15º 98.46 179.16 227.20 The results above indicate that the 10o direction is the most
20º 88.18 167.92 214.20 suitable, mainly at the first 10 minutes. At this time of
operation, when approximately 250m of pipeline has already
If only tension responses were considered, one could left the beach, the maximum values of Von Mises stress are
deduce that it would be more suitable to deflect the pipeline reached.
with a tugboat route of 20o, and velocity 1km/h, leading to a
The minimum values of curvature radius are shown in
maximum tension value of 88.18 kN. However, the behaviour
figures below.
of the pipeline stresses must also be considered, as shown in
the Figures that follow, containing the maximum values of Von

5 Copyright © 2007 by ASME

Curvature Radios (m)

150
the pipeline. Finally, different headings were considered for the
125

100
system, relative to the environmental conditions.
75 The results of the analyses indicated that, for all cases, the
50
Direction (-5) Direction (0) Direction (5)
maximum values of Von Mises stresses are not an issue, always
25

0
Direction (10) Direction (15) Direction (20)
staying well below the yield stress of the material. The
0.0 10.0 20.0 30.0 40.0 50.0 60.0 70.0 80.0 90.0 100.0
Pipeline Length (m)
objective then is to minimize tugboat forces.
Figure 19: Curvature Radius – 3 Km/h It was observed that, in configurations with two tugboats
such as the illustrated in Figure 22, smaller values of cable
Curvature Radios (m)

150

125
tensions are obtained when the pipeline is nearly aligned to the
100 resultant direction of the environmental conditions. However,
75 the cable tensions are still relatively high during the whole
50

25 Direction (-5) Direction (0) Direction (5)

operation. In such cases, maximum tensions in the tugboat
0
Direction (10) Direction (15) Direction (20)
cable are approximately 51.1KN (5m/s transport velocity) and
0.0 10.0 20.0 30.0 40.0 50.0 60.0 70.0 80.0 90.0 100.0
Pipeline Length (m)
223.9KN (9.26m/s velocity).
Figure 20: Curvature Radius – 2 Km/h
Curvature Radios (m)

150

125

100

75

50

25 Direction (-5) Direction (0) Direction (5)

Direction (10) Direction (15) Direction (20)
0
0.0 10.0 20.0 30.0 40.0 50.0 60.0 70.0 80.0 90.0 100.0
Pipeline Length (m)

Figure 21: Curvature Radius – 1 Km/h

Figure 22: Pipeline Transport – typical configuration
Table 6: Curvature Radius (m)
Direction/Velocity 1 Km/h 2 Km/h 3 Km/h The smaller values of cable tensions were found in
-5º 86.3610 67.7688 54.4201 configurations where the back tugboat is disconnected. In such
0º 79.3458 61.9464 50.5200
cases, tensions in the cable are approximately 19.9KN (5m/s
5º 71.7635 57.7244 46.6055
velocity), 42.4KN (7m/s velocity) and 61.0KN (9.26m/s
10º 71.9409 52.3393 42.4772
velocity). Therefore, significant reductions were obtained in the
15º 65.7438 49.4071 40.2020
20º 61.2436 45.9056 37.5399 cable tension: 61% for the velocity of 5m/s, and 72.8% for the
velocity of 9.26m/s.
As expected, smallest curvature radius was found for largest
velocity and for models in which tugboat route tends to Therefore, the results of the analyses indicated that the best
compress the pipeline. situation occurs when the back tugboat does not tension the
pipe; it needs only to accompany the transport operation, for
safety reasons, and then to perform the maneuvers needed for
TRANSPORT the subsequent pipeline launching process.
The objective of the analyses presented in this section is to
verify the pipeline behavior under environmental loadings FINAL REMARKS
during its transport from Canto beach to PXA-1 platform. This work presented the results of numerical simulations
and parametric studies on the pipeline behavior during some
Table 7: Environmental loads stages of the installation procedure for the pipeline that will
Load Azimuth Value interconnect Xaréu-1 (PXA-1) platform to the buoy frame near
Current 315o 1.18 m/s
the coast of Ceará state, Brazil.
Wave 30o Hs = 1.85m; Tp = 9.7s
Such analyses are intended to verify the pipeline behavior
As the pipeline remains totally submerged and the buoys at during the lateral deflection (when the pipeline leaves the
least 50% submerged, wind effect was not considered. beach), and during transport to the installation site. The results
were presented in terms of forces in the tugboat cable, and Von
During transport, the pipeline may be connected to two Mises stresses in the pipeline.
tugboats, usually aligned as illustrated in Figure 22. Alternative
models were analyzed, with different tugboat velocities, The results of the parametric studies allowed the definition
ranging from 5m/s to 9.26m/s. Also, in some models the back of the most suitable conditions for each stage of the operation.
tugboat is disconnected, and only the front tugboat is pulling

6 Copyright © 2007 by ASME

 During the lateral deflection procedure, it was verified that
the tugboat velocity should not exceed 1km/h (mainly during
the first 10 minutes of operation), and that the better route
would make an angle of 10o with the perpendicular to the
pipeline axis at its connection with the cable (Figure 10).
Of course, these results should be viewed with care, due to
the uncertainties in the supplied friction coefficient values for
the beach sand. Further studies should include a parametric
evaluation of the influence of friction coefficients in the
pipeline behavior. Anyway, the results provide valuable
information regarding the influence of tugboat route and
velocity on the pipeline behavior.
Regarding the transport stage, it was noticed that the best
configuration to transport the pipeline, where tensions in the
tugboat cable are minimized, occurs when the pipeline
direction is close to the resultant of environmental loads and
the back tugboat is disconnected. Therefore, it may be
positioned only to accompany the transport for safety reasons,
and to help performing the necessary maneuvers during the
pipeline installation.
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
The authors wish to acknowledge the participation of Drs.
C.D. Padovezi and C.H. Umeda from IPT, Prof. Celso P.Pesce
from USP – Univ. of São Paulo, and Eng. A.C. Pimenta
Ferreira, in the technical meetings where the idea of studying
the transport condition described here was first proposed.
REFERENCES
[1] SGO User Manual (in Portuguese) – Petrobras, Rio de
Janeiro, 2002.
[2] Masetti, I.Q., Barros, C.R.M., Jacob, B.P., Albrecht, C.H.,
Lima, B.S.L.P., Sparano, J. V., “Numerical Simulation of
the Mooring Procedures of the BGL-1 Pipeline Launching
Barge”. Procs of the 23rd International Conference on
Offshore Mechanics and Arctic Engineering – OMAE,
June 20-25, Vancouver, Canada, 2004.
[3] Jacob, B.P., Masetti, I.Q., “PROSIM: Coupled Numerical
Simulation of the Behavior of Moored Units” (in
Portuguese), COPPETEC-Petrobras Internal Report, Rio
de Janeiro, 1997.
[4] __, “SITUA-Prosim Program: Coupled Numerical
Simulation of the Behavior of Moored Floating Units –
User Manual, ver. 3.0” (in Portuguese), LAMCSO/
PEC/COPPE, Rio de Janeiro, 2005.
.

7 Copyright © 2007 by ASME