Proceedings of the 2012 9th International Pipeline Conference IPC2012 September 24-28, 2012, Calgary, Alberta, Canada

IPC2012-90281
UPHEAVAL BUCKLING OF SMALL DIAMETER PIPELINES INDUCED BY STRONG GROUND SHAKING
Hiroyuki HORIKAWA JFE Engineering Corporation Yokohama, Japan Hajime SHINKAI Japan Gas Association Tokyo, Japan Yoji TSUNASAWA JFE Engineering Corporation Yokohama, Japan Nobuhisa SUZUKI JFE Techno-Research Corporation Kawasaki, Japan

ABSTRACT Upheaval buckling of small diameter gas pipeline occurred due to strong seismic excitation during the 2007 Niigata-ken Chuetsu-Oki earthquake whose diameters were 4 and smaller. This paper deals with investigation of the upheaval buckling of gas pipes conducted by Ministry of Economy, Trade and Industry of Japan to establish seismic design guidelines to mitigate upheaval buckling. Sand box and field tests were conducted using small diameter pipes to simulate the upheaval buckling behaviors and construct a simple finite element model. The results clarified that the tensile properties of pipe material and pipe-soil interaction were the most effective parameters to explain the buckling behaviors. Interaction curve of pipes can be found in the relationship between compression and bending moment in the combined loading tests. The deformation behaviors of the buried pipe tests followed the interaction curve and local buckling of buried pipes occurred in lower bending moment than that of pipes not buried. INTRODUCTION Upheaval buckling of a 4 pipeline, shown in Fig. 1, was found after the 2007 Niigata-ken Chuetsu-Oki earthquake (the 2007 Chuetsu Offshore earthquake) which was a powerful earthquake with moment magnitude of 6.6. No permanent ground deformation was observed at the place where the buckling occurred, therefore it had been estimated that the damage was induced by the strong ground shaking during the earthquake. For seismic ground shaking, the seismic deformation method for buried gas pipelines is regulated in the JGA Guideline 2006-03, the Seismic Design Standard of JGA [1], and a longitudinal strain of pipes can be calculated. It was

considered that the pipe longitudinal strain at the site overtook a limit strain for upheaval buckling, shown in Fig. 2.

Figure 1 Upheaval buckling of 4 pipe

Pipe strain Tension Compression Pipeline Upheaval buckling occurs when maximum compressive strain exceeds limit strains of pipes. Wave propagation Tension

Figure 2 Distribution of pipe strain due to seismic waves

Copyright 2012 by ASME

Nominal stress MPa

Once the upheaval buckling occurs, lateral deflection of pipe may develop remarkably. During the deformation stage, bending deformation tends to increase with increasing axial compression and finally local buckling occurs. A three year research program had been conducted by Ministry of Economy, Trade and Industry of Japan (METI) to investigate the mechanism. In the program validation of finite element analysis (FEA) was performed comparing with results of sand box and field tests of upheaval buckling of 4 pipe. Sand box and field tests were conducted in order to observe pre-buckling and post-buckling behaviors of the 4 pipe. Additionally, pipe bending tests subjected to combined compression and bending were performed to investigate an interaction between compression and bending for the upheaval buckling. LABORATORY AND FIELD TESTS In the research program, sand box and field tests were conducted to investigate the upheaval buckling behaviors of small diameter pipes. Equipments of sand box and field tests are shown in Figs. 3 and 4, respectively. Lengths of test pipes were 9m (sand box tests) and 22m (field tests), and depth from ground surface to the top of pipe was 1.2m in the buried sections of both tests. Axial compression was given on the both ends of test pipes by same hydraulic cylinders. The test pipes had 4 in diameter and 4.5mm in thickness, and they are standard piping material for city gas distribution pipelines in Japan, shown in Table 1 about the pipe grade. The test cases of sand box and field tests are shown in Table 2. For the test pipes, two types of material properties were distinguished about longitudinal stress-strain (s-s) curves. Table 2 presents two test pipe materials, one is Round-House (RH) type material and another is Luders Elongation (LE) type material. Typical pattern of the s-s curves are drawn in Fig. 6. Standard and loose conditions were considered for the backfill soil compaction. The standard compaction was defined strength of soil spring was equal to a soil resistance force shown in the JGA Guideline 2006-03. The loose compaction had about a half of the standard compaction. Internal pressure for the city distribution lines is less than 1.0MPa in Japan and approximately corresponds to 4.5%SMTS of hoop stress. Therefore no internal pressure was considered in these tests and analyses. Table 1 Required and actual pipe strengths Required strength Actual strengths of test pipes YS TS YS TS (MPa) (MPa) (MPa) (MPa) Not 290~ 337~381 378~417 required

Case B-1 B-2 B-3 B-4 F-1 F-2

Table 2 Cases of sand box and field tests Test Diameter Thicknes Material Soil (mm) s (mm) type compaction Box 114.3 4.5 RH Standard Box 114.3 4.5 RH Loose Box 114.3 4.5 LE Standard Box 114.3 4.5 LE Loose Field 114.3 4.5 LE Standard Field 114.3 4.5 LE Loose

RH type LE type

Luders elongation % Nominal strain %

Figure 6 Types of longitudinal stress-strain curves VALIDATION OF THE FINITE ELEMENT MODEL (1) Assumptions of FEA Information of FE model is represented in Table 3. The material stress-strain curve was idealized with a multi-linear curve based on the tensile test data. Pull-up tests were conducted using a short pipe to obtain load-displacement relationship. Figure 7 presents the test results which presents very similar properties described in the JGA Guideline 200603, and the result of loose compaction is approximately a half of the standard compaction. For properties of backfill soil, multi-linear approximation curves for the pull-up tests data are used. In the experiments, the center of test pipes were upheld 1cm height by making mound on the base of the center, and the longitudinal shape of pipe was measured before the test. In FEA, the shape data were applied for simulation models. Table 3 FE model information Items Modeling Element for pipe 4-node shell element Pipe-soil interaction Truss element Isotropic material Material model of pipe with kinematic hardening FEA code ADINA ver8.6

Pipe grade SGP [2]

Copyright 2012 by ASME

Sand boxL8mW2.5mH2m Rigid pillar Compression 9m test pipe Hydraulic cylinder Test bed Hydraulic cylinder 1.2m Backfill soil Rigid pillar Compression

Figure 3 Laboratory test set-up (sand box test)

Hydraulic cylinder Compression Wall 22m test pipe 1.2m Wall Backfill soil Hydraulic cylinder Compression

Trench for loading

Loading frame

Trench for loading buried span = 20m

Figure 4 Field test set-up

(a) Test pipe in the sand box

(c) Test pipe in the trench

(b) Backfill compaction in the sand box

(d) Completion of field test

Figure 5 Laboratory (left) and field (right) tests

Copyright 2012 by ASME

40 Soil spring force per unit area (N/cm ) 35 30 25 20 15 10 5 0 0 2 4 6 8 10 Vertical displacement of buried pipe (cm)

Loose compaction Standard compaction Seismic design of JGA

Figure 9

Deformation of test pipe in sand box test, case B-2

Figure 7 Property of soil spring pull-up test results (2) Definition of Critical Points In the experiments and FEA, two critical conditions are defined. First critical point is the onset of upheaval buckling and second critical point is the onset of local buckling. The upheaval buckling point is same as the point of maximum compressive stress, the circle point shown in Fig. 8. After the onset of upheaval buckling, beam-mode bending deformation progresses with decreasing the compressive stress and the condition reaches to the second critical point, local buckling point. The local buckling point corresponds to the point of maximum bending moment, the triangle point shown in Fig. 8. After the onset of local buckling, bending deformation becomes significant due to large deformation of the pipe cross section.
Axial nominal stress n (MPa) Bending moment M (kNm) Upheaval buckling point Local buckling point

Nominal stress and strain relationships of the RH type and the LE type materials are presented in Figs. 10 and 11, respectively. The relationship of the LE type material has a sharp peak on the point of upheaval buckling and following stress drop-off is more rapid than that of the RH-type material. Comparing FEA with experimental data, the FEA results of the LE type shows good agreement with the test data compared to that of the RH type material. However, FEA of the RH type shows very good agreement up to the onset of local buckling which is enough to determine the critical strain of upheaval buckling and local buckling.
500

Nominal stress n (MPa)

400 300 200

Upheaval Buckling Local Buckling

EXP. 100 FEA 0.0 1.0 2.0 3.0 Nominal strain n (%) 4.0

n M Axial nominal strain n (%)

Figure 8 Upheaval buckling and local buckling (3)Test Results and Validation about stress-strain relationships Sand box test results Deformation of test pipe (case B-2) after loading is shown in Fig. 9 for instance. Upheaval deformation is observed near the center of test pipe. Most significant local buckling occurred at the top of the upheaval and two small deformations occurred at the both ends of the upheaval section. Similar deformations were found in the other sand box tests.

Figure 10 Validation of FEA on the stressstrain curve of case B-1, RH-type material

Copyright 2012 by ASME

500 Nominal stress n (MPa) Nominal stress n (MPa)

Upheaval Buckling

500 Upheaval Buckling 400 300 200 100

0

400 300 200 100 0 0.0

Local Buckling

Local Buckling

EXP. FEA

EXP. FEA

1.0 2.0 3.0 Nominal strain n (%)

4.0

Figure 11 Validation of FEA on the stressstrain curve of case B-5, LE-type material Field test results Field tests were conducted for the LE type in order to investigate effects of soil compaction and test pipe length. Deformation of the test pipe (case F-1) is shown in Fig. 12 for instance. Vertical upheaval deformation is observed near the center of the test pipe. Most significant local buckling occurred at the top of upheaval and two small deformations occurred at the both ends of the upheaval section. The deformation mode is similar to the deformations of the sand box test pipes. Figure 13 indicates nominal stress and strain relationships of the experiment and FEA for the case F-1. The stress drop-off of FEA is larger than that of the experiment on the postbuckling. However, the FEA result has good estimation up to the onset of local buckling and the estimation is enough to decide the critical strain for upheaval buckling and local buckling.

1.0 2.0 3.0 4.0 Nominal strain n (%) Figure 13 Validation of FEA on the stressstrain curve of case F-1, LE-type material

0.0

(4) Validation about critical strains Critical strains obtained by the tests and FEA are shown in Table 4. Comparisons between FEA and the experiments about the critical strain of upheaval buckling and local buckling are represented as Figs. 14 and 15, respectively. FEA relatively has good estimates of critical upheaval buckling strains and has little conservative estimates for critical local buckling strains. Table 4 Critical strains of upheaval buckling and local buckling Case Material Upheaval buckling Local buckling type EXP. FEA EXP. FEA B-1 RH 0.44 % 0.45 % 0.79 % 0.66 % B-2 RH 0.25 % 0.27 % 0.60 % 0.58 % B-3 LE 0.25 % 0.25 % 0.46 % 0.41 % B-4 LE 0.25 % 0.21 % 0.45 % 0.41 % F-1 LE 0.27 % 0.24 % 0.46 % 0.50 % F-2 LE 0.25 % 0.22 % 0.82 % 0.79 %
0.5
B-1

0.4 0.3

FEA (%)

B-2 B-3 F-1 F-2 B-4

0.2 0.1

Figure 12

Deformation of test pipe in field test, case F-1

0 0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 EXP. (%)

Figure 14 Validation of FEA about upheaval buckling strain

Copyright 2012 by ASME

1.2
1

1
0.8 0.6
F-1 B-2 F-2

0.8 n / y
B-1

RH-type

FEA (%)

0.6 0.4
LE-type

0.4 0.2 0 0 0.2

B-4 B-3

0.2 0 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 Nominal strain n (%) Figure 16 Deformation properties for standard compaction 1.2 1 0.8 n / y
RH-type

0.0

0.4

0.6

0.8

EXP. (%)

Figure 15 Validation of FEA about local buckling strain EFFECTS OF S-S CURVE TYPES AND SOIL SPRING PROPERTIES The experiments and FEA results indicate that the material stress-strain curves have a great influence on the upheaval deformation. For the standard compaction, deformation properties of the RH type and the LE type materials are shown in Fig. 16. Herein, the vertical axis is the ratio of nominal stress to yield stress. For the LE type, the nominal stress at the upheaval buckling point is almost equal to yield stress. The stress proportionally increases up to the point and then decreases rapidly. Therefore when axial force given by seismic waves equals to yield force, upheaval buckling occurs and it is highly possible that the deformation immediately progresses to post-buckling mode through the local buckling point. On the contrary, for the RH type the nominal stress gradually increases from the elastic limit to the upheaval buckling point and then decreases gradually. Even though the deformation overtakes the upheaval buckling point, the deformation may stop before local buckling, depending on amplitudes of seismic waves, because the deformability of the RH-type is larger than that of the LE-type. Deformation properties for the loose compaction are shown in Fig. 17. For the LE-type, the stress drop-off after upheaval buckling is more significant than that in the standard compaction. For the RH-type, the curve shape becomes similar to the LE-type and the stress drop-off is larger than that for the standard compaction. Therefore, it is considered that upheaval buckling of pipes with LE type material may be apt to occur compared to that with RH type material. In the case of the loose compaction, upheaval buckling of pipes with RH type material tends to occur easily as same as the pipes with LE type material.

0.6 0.4 0.2 0 0.0 0.5 1.0 1.5 Nominal strain n (%) 2.0
LE-type

Figure 17 Deformation properties for loose compaction BUCKLING TESTS UNDER COMPRESSION AND BENDING Test method Axial compression due to seismic waves and bending moment generated by lateral deformation of pipes cause local buckling after upheaval buckling. The experiments that pipes were bent by a combination of primary axial compression and secondary bending load were conducted in order to investigate mechanism of the upheaval buckling and the local buckling. Figure 18 shows the equipments of the tests. The diameter and thickness were 114.3 mm and 4.5 mm, respectively, same as the tests described above and the pipe length was 1.5m. The moment arms were located on both ends of the pipe and the hydraulic cylinder for bending load was set between lower ends of the arms. The hydraulic cylinder for axial compression was positioned on the outside of the arms. Bending moment by the bending cylinder was only applied to induce lateral deformation of the pipe under compression and bending deformation of the pipe was mostly

Copyright 2012 by ASME

Hydraulic cylinder for axial compression Pin 1.5m Test pipe Pin P1

Rigid block

0.9m

Bending arms P2

Rigid block

Hydraulic cylinder for bending Test bed

Figure 18 Equipments of buckling tests with compression and bending derived from the axial compressive force. Figure 19 shows the diagram of compression and bending load with axial displacement to explain the loading procedure. In step 1, the axial cylinder was only active. When the axial compression, P1, reached to target load, 75% SYMS or 90% SMYS, the bending cylinder activated to bend the pipe with maintaining the axial compression in step 2. The bending cylinder load, P2, leaded to lateral bending deformation of the pipe and the load had maximum value when the beam-mode buckling initiated, it corresponded to the onset of upheaval buckling. After the peak of bending load, it reduced to zero. The pipe could not stand the maintained axial compression at this moment and the compression decreased with deformation progress in the step 3. Table 5 shows test cases of combined load tests. Two material properties, RH type and LE type materials, and three load levels of initial compression are prepared. Herein 0%YS means pure bending test with keeping zero for the axial compression. Deformation The deformed pipe of the case, LE-3, is shown in Fig. 20, and buckling appearances of the RH-type and the LE-type are represented in Fig. 21. The deformation shape of LE-type is irregular, whereas the pipe of RH-type has a smooth kink.
Load P1(Axial cylinder)

Case RH-1 RH-2 RH-3 LE-1 LE-2 LE-3

Table 5 Cases of combined load tests Diameter Thickness Material Initial (mm) (mm) type compression 114.3 4.5 RH 0% YS 114.3 4.5 RH 75% YS 114.3 4.5 RH 90% YS 114.3 4.5 LE 0% YS 114.3 4.5 LE 75% YS 114.3 4.5 LE 90% YS

Figure 20 The combined load test appearance after local buckling

P2(Bending cylinder)

RH-3 LE-3 Figure 21 Local buckling due to bending

Displacement

Step 1 Step 2 Step 3 Figure 19 Loading procedure of the combined load tests

Compression and bending relationship A chart of compression and bending moment relationship is leveraged to explain the behavior of the pipe bending. It has a compression in a vertical axis and a bending moment in a horizontal axis. The relationships for the RH-type and the LEtype tests are shown in Figs. 22 and 23, respectively. For the

Copyright 2012 by ASME

cases of pure bending, RH-1 and LE-1, data are plotted along the horizontal axis with no compression. The relationship consists of four lines except for pure bending. First line is along the vertical axis, corresponding to the step 1 in Fig. 19. Second line is horizontal line with maintaining the compression in step 2. Third line is drawn toward the maximum moment point because axial compression is decreasing with progress of bending deformation. And then data in post-buckling are plotted to the origin as fourth line. FEA results are also indicated in the charts. Four lines of FEA are in good agreement with the experiments. In the both charts, the initial compression has no influence with the deformation property on and after decreasing the compression, the third line, the peak moment point and the fourth line. It is significant that the third lines of the FEA cases with initial compression overlap perfectly.
700 600 Compression P1 (kN) 500 400 300
FEM:RH-1 (0%YS) EXP:RH-1 (0%YS) FEM: RH-2 (75%YS) EXP: RH-2 (75%YS) FEM: RH-3 (90%YS) EXP: RH-3 (90%YS)

INTERACTION OF COMPRESSION AND BENDING The relationships between dimensionless compression and bending moment of FEA are shown in Fig. 24. Herein, the compression is divided by the load of axial compression buckling and the bending moment is divided by the maximum moment of pure bending cases, LE-1 or RH-1, for dimensionless variables. All third lines approximately overlap and all maximum moment points as the onset of local buckling are located within the narrow zone of 0.80~0.90 in dimensionless bending moment and 0.37~0.42 in dimensionless compression. It is considered that the interaction curve of pipe is defined as the envelope curve between the axial compression buckling point, the third line of bending deformation to the maximum bending moment points and the maximum bending moment point for pure bending, superposed in Fig. 24. The pipe deformation with compression and bending progresses within the curve and if compression is the primary load, local buckling occurs on fixed maximum bending moment point, except for axial compression buckling.
1.2 Interaction curve of pipe

1
0.8

P1 / Pcr

200 100 0 0 5 10 15 20 25 Bending moment M (kNm)

FEM:RH-1 (0%YS) FEM:LE-1 (0%YS) FEM:RH-2 (75%YS) FEM:LE-2 (75%YS) FEM:RH-3 (90%YS) FEM:LE-3 (90%YS)

0.6 0.4 0.2

Figure 22 The relationship between compression and bending for the RH-type.
700 600 Compression P1 (kN) 500 400 300 200 100 0 0 5 10 15 20 25 Bending moment M (kNm)
FEM:LE-1 (0%YS) EXP:LE-1 (0%YS) FEM:LE-2 (75%YS) EXP:LE-2 (75%YS) FEM:LE-3 (90%YS) EXP:LE-3 (90%YS)

0
0 0.2 0.4

0.6
M / Mcr

0.8

1.2

Figure 24 The interaction curve in the dimensionless chart The combined loading tests were conducted in air. The dimensionless relationship charts of FEA for the sand box and the field tests are represented in Fig. 25 to Fig. 27 with thick lines. The combined load tests data also superpose the same charts as thin lines. It is recognized that the buried tests data approximately follow the interaction curve. However, the local buckling occurs before reaching to the maximum bending moment point of the interaction curve. The maximum bending moment for the standard compaction is smaller than that of the loose compaction. The local buckling points of pipes in hard backfill soil shift to upper part of the interaction curve because lateral deformations of pipes are arrested by surrounding soil and bending moment does not increase so much.

Figure 23 The relationship between compression and bending for the LE-type.

Copyright 2012 by ASME

1.2 1.0 0.8 P1 / Pcr 0.6 0.4 0.2 0.0 0.0 0.2 0.4 0.6 M / Mcr 0.8

Pini=0%y Pini=75%y Pini=90%y comp. buckling Case B-1 (FEA) Case B-2 (FEA)

1.0

1.2

Figure 25 Dimensionless chart for the sand box tests with the RH-type
1.2
Pini=0%y

1.0 0.8 P1 / Pcr 0.6 0.4 0.2 0.0 0.0 0.2 0.4 0.6 M / Mcr 0.8

Pini=75%y Pini=90%y comp. buckling Case B-3 (FEA) Case B-4 (FEA)

CONCLUSIONS In the three year research program conducted by METI, sand box and field tests for buried pipes and combined load tests of pipes in air were conducted in order to investigate mechanism of upheaval buckling due to strong seismic shaking. Effectiveness of FEA simulations for the upheaval buckling behaviors of buried pipes was also confirmed in this program. From the test results, shapes of material stress-strain curves and backfill soil compactions have a great influence on the buckling behaviors. It is recognized that the LE-type material having Luders Elongation may be apt to occur upheaval buckling and local buckling than the Round-House type material, and upheaval buckling tends to occur easily in loose compaction soil. The interaction curve of pipe can be found as the envelope of the relationships between compression and bending moment. For pipes not buried, local buckling occurs on the condition of low compression and high bending moment. On the contrary, local buckling of buried pipes occurs on higher compression and lower bending moment. Local buckling point is closer to axial compression buckling point for harder soil compaction.

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS This work was carried out as a part of the research program of investigating the upheaval buckling of highpressure gas pipelines and middle-pressure main distribution lines. The authors would like to thank Ministry of Economy, Trade and Industry of Japan for permission to publish this paper. Also the authors would like to express sincere thanks to the members of the committee for their invaluable comments and advices.

1.0

1.2

Figure 26 Dimensionless chart for the sand box tests with the LE-type
1.2
Pini=0%y

1.0 0.8 P1 / Pcr 0.6 0.4 0.2 0.0 0.0 0.2 0.4 0.6 M / Mcr 0.8

Pini=75%y Pini=90%y comp. buckling Case F-1 (FEA) Case F-2 (FEA)

REFERENCES [1] Japan Gas Association, JGA Guideline 2006-03 Seismic design standard for high-pressure gas pipelines (in Japanese), 2006 [2] Japanese Industrial Standards JIS-G-3452, Carbon steel pipes for ordinary piping, 2010 [3] Ministry of Economy, Trade and Industry of Japan, Report of research program, mechanism of upheaval buckling of small diameter pipelines (in Japanese), 2010

1.0

1.2

Figure 27 Dimensionless chart for the field tests with the LEtype

Copyright 2012 by ASME