Applied Ocean Research 21 (1999) 281293

www.elsevier.com/locate/apor

A refined analytical analysis of submerged pipelines in seabed laying

F. Guarracino*, V. Mallardo
Dipartimento di Scienza delle Costruzioni, Universita` degli Studi di Napoli Federico II, via Claudio, 21-80125 Napoli, Italy
Received 29 April 1999; accepted 27 July 1999

Abstract
The paper analyzes the elastic deflection of submerged pipelines laid with a stinger by taking into account the overall effects of the
ovalization of the cross section. The analysis is performed by means of a singular perturbation technique and the analytical solution obtained
is shown to offer different advantages over the finite element method. Two examples demonstrate the effectiveness of the procedure by means
of a comparison with results from other less refined analytical solutions and from the commercial finite element code Abaqus. q 1999
Elsevier Science Ltd. All rights reserved.
Keywords: Submerged pipelines; Ovalization; Singular perturbation technique

1. Introduction
The unceasing demand for pipelines in very deep waters,
both for oil and gas transportation, requires a continuous
refinement of the offshore technology and necessitates
more accurate designing tools for the analysis of pipelines
and risers [1]. In the past 30 years a large number of papers
have been published on this subject, mostly dealing with
numerical solution techniques and primarily with finite
element analysis. Nevertheless, the pipeline and riser analysis, particularly at the installation stage, poses mathematically interesting problems also from a continuum analysis
point of view. Essentially, the study of the configuration of a
submerged pipeline when laid from a vessel to the seabed is
that of a non-linear rod problem which requires for accurate
solution a particular care with regard to the boundary layers
behavior. Among the several classical papers which have
tackled the problem by means of asymptotic expansions
there are the pioneering works of Plunkett [2], and Dixon
and Rutledge [3], which both owe much to the inspiring
work of Wasow [4]. Also of importance is the work of
Konuk [5], who discussed an analytical solution to the
boundary layer problem for the pipelaying in the S-lay
mode pointing out the importance of a careful treatment
of the boundary conditions and attaching a clear physical
significance to the terms in the expansion. More recently,
Zhu and Cheung [6] have proposed the employment of the
* Corresponding author. Tel.: 139-081-768-3370; fax: 139-081-7683332.
E-mail address: fguarrac@unina.it (F. Guarracino)

analytical treatment for the optimization of pipelaying with

an articulated stinger in which the buoyancy in every
element is adjustable. The value of that proposal is emphasized by the fact that for the same problem, the finite
element method would require, on account of the non-linearity, a great deal of computer time and therefore a full
optimization on the laying parameters cannot be easily
performed by means of a mathematical programming
method. Moreover, due to large deflections, the numerical
solution may suffer a loss of accuracy and convergence
which originate from the boundary layers and whose physical implications cannot be easily controlled.
It is well known from practical experience that most pipelines are likely to encounter their highest stresses during the
laying process [7,8] and that a static bidimensional analysis
is sufficient to identify the parameters influencing the laying
operations and to form the validation basis for a subsequent
three-dimensional static and dynamic analysis [912].
However, to the best of the authors knowledge of the
subject, the variation of stiffness which stems from the
ovalization of the cross section has never been included in
the analytical treatment of the problem.
In fact the curvature of the sealine during the installation
process tends to cause the ovalization of the cross section
according to the well-known von Ka`rma`n effect [13] and in
turn the consequent reduction of the bending stiffness influences the pipeline axis configuration. Besides, this effect is
emphasized by the presence of the external pressure. Thus
the rod equilibrium problem, apart from being non-linear in
the displacements and further complicated by the fact that
the suspended span is a priori unknown, becomes non-linear

0141-1187/99/$ - see front matter q 1999 Elsevier Science Ltd. All rights reserved.
PII: S0141-118 7(99)00020-6

282

F. Guarracino, V. Mallardo / Applied Ocean Research 21 (1999) 281293

y
T0
h2

A
y= (x)

CO

h1

h
x

Fig. 1. Operation diagram of the pipeline installation by the S-lay mode.

also in the bending momentcurvature relationship. The

complication brought by this additional non-linearity in
the analytical treatment of the pipeline installation may
have been considered not worth an additional effort as
long as one is dealing with pipelaying in shallow waters
and the ratio between the diameter D and the thickness t
is sufficiently high D=t . 40: Yet the progress towards
deeper offshore waters and more hostile ambient conditions,
like high external pressure, renders structures such as pipelines and risers particularly vulnerable during the installation process to collapse under the combined effects of
bending and external pressure [1] and justifies further
investigations.
The present study proposes a new method for calculating
the large deflections and stresses of off-shore pipelines laid
with the S-lay method taking into account the effect of the
ovalization of the cross section and the consequent reduction of bending stiffness. The solution is analytical, with all
the consequent advantages in computing time and stability,
and is obtained by means of a singular perturbation technique. The accuracy of the proposed method is demonstrated
by two examples. The first one compares the results from
the present solution with those from the treatments of [5,6]
and shows the influence of the ovalizing effect even in the
case of a pipeline laid in fairly shallow waters. The second
one performs a comparison between the results from the
present solution and those obtained from the finite element
code Abaqus v.5.7 in the extreme case of a pipeline laid in
deep water. In this last case all the significant values of the
two solutions were very similar, but the analytical solution
has the advantage of requiring a very small fraction of the
V+dV

M+dM
H

M
H

ds

Fig. 2. Forces acting on an elementary segment of the pipeline.

finite element computing time and presents a more regular

fulfillment of the boundary conditions.

2. Formulation of the general equations

Today most pipelines are installed by the S-lay mode
from a laybarge, as shown in Fig. 1. This is partly because
the nearly horizontal ramp and the full length of the
laybarge can be exploited for multi-station welding, X-ray
analysis and tension application and monitoring, and partly
because many contractors have large investment in this kind
of equipment and have gained substantial experience in
S-laying over a long period of time. The formulation and
the solution of the problem studied here will be therefore
developed with reference to this method of pipelaying, but it
goes without saying that there is no difficulty at all in
extending the same procedure to the J-lay method, which
actually has simpler boundary conditions.
If we assume that the gravitational and hydrostatic forces
are the only actions upon the suspended portion of the pipeline during laying operations and that no torsional moment
is applied at either end, the problem can be reduced to a
bidimensional one and referred to a fixed plane system of
orthogonal coordinates xy. The origin of the coordinate
system is coincident with the contact point C, where the
pipeline begins to depart from the seabed. The x-axis is
horizontal and is directed along the pipeline route. h is the
maximum water depth, T0 is the tension applied at the
laybarge and A is the point where the pipeline leaves the
stinger. u is the first Eulerian angle, i.e. the angle between
the tangent to the pipe and the x-coordinate of the fixed
reference system, and s is the curvilinear abscissa along
the pipe axis measured from the origin C.
In order to write the equilibrium equations for a generic
element with length ds, as shown in Fig. 2, some preliminary considerations are required. The element is subject to a
system of external forces given by its own weight and by the
net fluid action yielded by the water pressure acting on the
lateral surface. Actually the net fluid action on the element
results in a force directed toward the center of curvature of

F. Guarracino, V. Mallardo / Applied Ocean Research 21 (1999) 281293

the deflected axis of the pipeline because the plane faces

represented by the cross sections which define the element
length are not capped. In fact the net fluid action can be
straightforwardly obtained as the difference between the
Archimedess buoyancy force acting vertically and a system
of loads constituted by imaginary forces acting on the
element plane ends which are equal but opposite to the
missing pressures. However, as it is evident that the system
of imaginary loads on the generic element plane ends
consists only of axial forces and gives rise only to an
axial tension, N, equal but opposite to the applied force, it
follows that it is convenient to compute its effects and those
of Archimedess buoyancy separately and then add the
results together. In other words, we can write the equilibrium equations of the generic element subject only to the
difference between its own weight and the vertical Archimedess buoyancy, integrate the resulting differential
problem and obtain the corresponding solution, which will
provide deflections, bending moments and shear forces. The
axial tension due to pressure will be obtained by the addition
of the axial tension resulting from the integration of the
differential problem with the effect of the missing end cap
pressure.
At this point, with w as the submerged weight per unit
length of the pipeline and with reference to Fig. 2, we can
write the following equilibrium equations:
dM
2 H sin u 1 V cos u 0;
ds
dV
ws:
ds

1
2

Manifestly, in such a case the horizontal force H is a

constant.
In order to take into account the ovalization of the cross
section, we consider the second moment of area of the cross
section in the plane of flexure to be dependent on the curvature k of the longitudinal axis according to the following
rule:
 2
du
2
;
3
I I0 2 c 1 k I0 2 c 1
ds
where I0 is the second moment of area of the undeformed
cross section and c1 is a constant.
Eq. (3) leads to a constitutive relationship of the type
 3
du
du
2 Ec1
;
4
M EI0 2 c1 k2 k EI0
ds
ds
where E is Youngs modulus for the material. By assuming
c1

3 R70
p 1 2 n2 ;
2 t

where R0 is the mean radius of the undeformed cross section,

t the pipe wall thickness and n is Poissons ratio, Eq. (4)
coincides with that given by Brazier [14]. In fact, even if
several studies on the response of long tubes to combined

283

bending moment, axial load and external pressure were

carried out both in the elastic [15,16] and in the plastic
[1719] range of strains, it turns out that under pure bending
and in the vicinity of the unstrained configuration the results
given by more refined models can be well approximated by
the original Braziers theory [20]. Therefore, given that the
present analysis is intended to constitute a basis for design
optimization procedures limited to the realm of elasticity
and that the axial load is tensile, so that bifurcation types
of instability can be ruled out, the constitutive rule (3) can
be assumed to be totally adequate to the description of the
phenomenon. The inclusion of the effects of external pressure is not completely trivial and requires some additional
considerations in order to lead to an analytically solvable
formulation. Consequently, this subject will be considered
in detail in Section 4 of this paper.
For the sake of simplicity, it is convenient to introduce a
dimensionless variable, that is j s=L: L is the length of the
suspended span between the points C and A, so that j [
0; 1: By letting du=dj u_ ; we have
du
1
u_ ;
L
ds

d2 u
1
2 u :
2
L
ds

Substitution of Eq. (4) into Eq. (1) leads to

EI0 
3Ec
u 2 4 1 u u_ 2 1 V cos u 2 H sin u 0;
L2
L

and, if we divide Eq. (7) by H, we can write

1u 2 1c2 u u_ 2 1

V
cos u 2 sin u 0;
H

with 1 EI=HL2 and c2 3c1 =I0 L2 : The parameter 1 is

much smaller than unity for the range of tensions usually
used in practical installation; c2 is also smaller than unity. In
order to obtain a formulation formally similar to an other
work [6], we take j 0 in Eq. (8) and by setting q
2u 0=cos u0 and a tan u0 we obtain
V0
a 1 1q;
H

which holds true on account of the natural boundary condition u_ 0 0:

The equilibrium equation (Eq. (2)) along the y-direction
trivially states that
dV wjL dj;

10

which implies
Vj V0 1 L

Zj
0

wj dj:

11

Therefore we can write Eq. (8) in the form

1u 2 1c2 u u_ 2 1 Wj 1 a 1 1q cos u 2 sin u 0; 12

R
where Wj L=H j0 wj dj:
Eq. (12) is a second-order non-linear differential equation
in the unknown variable u . The effect of the ovalization is

284

F. Guarracino, V. Mallardo / Applied Ocean Research 21 (1999) 281293

embedded in the term 21c2 u u_ 2 ; and its addition turns out to

constitute the difference with the formula taken into consideration by Zhu and Cheung [6]. Nevertheless this addition
involves the product of the second-order derivative term by
the square of the first-order derivative term and requires
some additional work in the solution of the problem by
means of an asymptotic expansion.
The natural boundary conditions at our disposal are

u_ 0 0;

u0 a0 ;

13

a 1 Wjcos u0 2 sin u0 0:

16

Order 11=2 :
{a 1 Wjsin u0 1 cos u0 }u1 0:

17

Order 1 1:
{a 1 Wjsin u0 1 cos u0 }u2 2 qcos u0 2 u 0
2 c22 u_ 0 u 0 0:

and
L
u_ 1 ;
r

14

where r is the radius of curvature of the stinger at the pipeline departure point A. The problem is further complicated
by the fact that the values of the horizontal force H and the
length of the suspended span L are not known in advance.
Therefore, additional relationships are needed and this
matter is fully treated in Section 6.

18

This holds true, provided an implicit expansion of trigonometric terms is performed and the series (15) is truncated
to the term i 2:
Solution of Eq. (16) yields

u0 j arctana 1 Wj:

19

By substitution of this expression in Eq. (17) we obtain

u1 j 0:

20

Finally, solution of Eq. (18) gives

3. Solution by perturbation approach

A solution of the boundary-layer problem expressed by
the non-linear differential equation (12) can be pursued by
means of a singular perturbation technique [21]. The basic
idea consists in finding a general solution to Eq. (12) valid
everywhere with the exception of the two boundary layers in
the vicinity of the points j 0 and j 1: This general
solution is obtained by means of a so-called outer asymptotic expansion and is called the external solution. At the
boundary layers, two other solutions hold true, respectively.
These solutions are obtained by means of a so-called inner
asymptotic expansion and are called internal solutions. The
effective solution for the whole region j [ 0; 1 is called
the synthetic solution and is obtained by matching the
external and internal solutions.

u2 j

_ j2
 j
2a 1 WjW
W
2
{1 1 a 1 Wj2 }3=2
{1 1 a 1 Wj2 }5=2
1

_ j4
q
2c2 a 1 WjW
2
1 1 a 1 Wj2
{1 1 a 1 Wj2 }9=2

_ j2
 jW
c2 W
:
{1 1 a 1 Wj2 }7=2

Therefore, the external solution results

(

u o j; 1 arctana 1 Wj 1 1

u j ; 1

1i=2 ui j:

15

 j
W
{1 1 a 1 Wj2 }3=2

_ j2
2a 1 WjW
q
1
1 1 a 1 Wj2
{1 1 a 1 Wj2 }5=2

_ j4
2c2 a 1 WjW
{1 1 a 1 Wj2 }9=2

3.1. Outer expansion

Given the layout of the differential equation (Eq. (12))
and the arrangement of the terms affected by the parameter
1 , let us seek an exponential expansion of its solution uj; 1
in the form

21

_ j2
 jW
c2 W
2
{1 1 a 1 Wj2 }7=2

1 01 2 :

22

3.2. Inner expansion at j 0

i0

From a mathematical standpoint this can be carried out as

long as the function uj; 1 is analytic for 1 [21], and we can
assume that this is the case without loss of generality.
If we substitute the expansion (15) into the differential
equation (12) and equate coefficients of like powers of 1 to
zero, we obtain the following set of recurrent equations.
Order 1 :
0

For convenience of the mathematical treatment and with

a reasonable degree of approximation, we can assume that w
is a constant over the boundary layer near the end j 0 and
set v wL=H: As a straightforward consequence, Eq. (12)
can be written in the simplified form

1u 2 1c2 u u_ 2 1 vj 1 a 1 1q cos u 2 sin u 0:

23

In order to obtain a convenient magnification of the

F. Guarracino, V. Mallardo / Applied Ocean Research 21 (1999) 281293

independent variable over the small region near the end j

0 [21], we can perform a simple transformation of the type

j
dz
1
z p ;
p
1 dj
1

24

Order 1 2:

f 2 2 c2 f 2 f_ 21 2 2c2 f 2 f_ 0 f_ 2 2 2c2 f 1 f_ 1 f_ 2 2 c2 f 0 f_ 22
2 b2 f2 cosf0 1 q cosf0 1 a0 2 f1 vz sinf0 1 a0

and write

uj; 1 fj; 1 1 u0 f 1 a0 ;

2 sinf 1 a0 0

26

with df=dj f_ and d2 f=dj2 f : In virtue of the boundary condition (13), it is a tan u0 tan a0 :
By multiplying Eq. (26) by 1 and with the help of simple
trigonometric relations which are reported in the Appendix
for the convenience of the reader, we obtain
p
1f 2 c2 f f_ 2 1 1vz 1 1 1q cosf 1 a0
2 b sinf 1 a0 0;
2

where
p
b2 1 1 a2 :

27

fz; 1

1i=2 fi z:

28

29

i0

Again, we substitute the expansion (29) into the differential equation (27) and equate the coefficients of like powers
of 1 to zero to obtain the following set of recurrent
equations.
Order 1 0:
c2 f 0 f_ 20 0:

It is worth noticing that, as we have multiplied Eq. (26) by

1 , in order to maintain the same degree of approximation
and to match the external solution, we must now extend our
analysis to the terms of the order of 1 2.
By virtue of Eq. (25), the boundary condition (13) implies
that f0 0: Therefore, we can assume the trivial solution

f0 ; 0;

30

v
f 1 2 c2 f 1 f_ 21 2 b2 f1 1 2 z 0
b

f1

v
z:
b4

31

Order 1 1:

v2
q
av 2
f 2 2 c2 8 f 2 2 b2 f2 1 4 2 6 z2 0;
b
b
b

32

37

38

whose general solution can be given in the form

!
!
b5 z
b5 z
f2 A1 exp 2 p 1 A2 exp p
b8 2 c 2 v 2
b8 2 c 2 v 2
q
2av2 8
av 2 2
2
2

b
2
c
v

2
z:
2
b4
b18
b8

39

In order to match the inner expansion (29) with the external solution (22) we can resort to Van Dykes matching rule
[21] and obtain A2 0: Moreover, the boundary condition
f0 0 requires that

f 0 2 c2 f 2 f_ 20 2 2c2 f 1 f_ 0 f_ 1 2 c2 f 0 f_ 21
A1 2

q
2av2 8
1
b 2 c2 v2 :
b4
b18

40

Finally, we obtain
"
#
!
q
2av2 8
b5 z
2
f2 2 4 1 18 b 2 c2 v exp 2 p
b
b
b8 2 c2 v2

Order 1 2 :

f 1 2 2c2 f 2 f_ 0 f_ 1 2 c2 f 1 f_ 21 2 2c2 f 1 f_ 0 f_ 2
2 2c2 f 0 f_ 1 f_ 2 2 b2 f1 cosf0 1 vzcosf0 1 a0
0:

36

Also the integral (37) satisfies the boundary condition

f0 0 and, substituted into Eq. (34), leads to

2 2c2 f 0 f_ 0 f_ 2 2 b2 sinf0 0:

35

which straightforwardly satisfies Eqs. (30)(32). Eq. (33)

becomes

Order 1 2 :
c2 f 1 f_ 20 1 2c2 f 0 f_ 0 f_ 1 0:

34

and it is easy to verify that it admits the integral

At this point we can seek an exponential expansion of the

solution of the differential equation (27) fz; 1 in the form

0:

25

so that Eq. (23) becomes

p
c
f 2 2 f f_ 2 1 vz 1 1 a 1 1q cosf 1 a0
1

285

33

q
2av2 8
av 2 2
2
2

b
2
c
v

2
z;
2
b4
b18
b8

41

286

F. Guarracino, V. Mallardo / Applied Ocean Research 21 (1999) 281293

and the internal solution near the end j 0 results

p v
u i z ; 1 a0 1 1 4 z
b
#
!
("
q
2av2 8
b5 z
2
11 2 4 1 18 b 2 c2 v exp 2 p
b
b
b8 2 c2 v2
)
q
2av2 8
av2 2
2
(42)
1 4 2 18 b 2 c2 v 2 8 z 1 013=2 :
b
b
b

Order 11=2 :
c2 c 1 c_ 20 1 2c2 c 0 c_ 0 c_ 1 0:

50

Order 1 1:

c 0 2 c2 c 2 c_ 20 2 2c2 c 1 c_ 0 c_ 1 2 c2 c 0 c_ 21 2 2c2 c 0 c_ 0 c_ 2
2 sinc0 1 a1 1 a 1 v cosc0 1 a1 0:

51

Order 1 2 :

3.3. Inner expansion at j 1

Under the same assumptions made in the case of the inner
expansion at j 0; in the small neighborhood of the end
j 1 we can make reference to Eq. (23) as well. Thus,
in order to obtain a convenient magnification of the
independent variable we can perform the following
transformation:
12j
h p ;
1

dh
1
2 p
dj
1

43

2 2c2 c 0 c_ 1 c_ 2
2 cosc0 1 a1 1 a 1 v sinc0 1 a1 c1
2 vh cosc0 1 a1 0:

52

Order 1 2:

c 2 2 c2 c 2 c_ 21 2 2c2 c 2 c_ 0 c_ 2 2 2c2 c 1 c_ 1 c_ 2 2 c2 c 0 c_ 22

and write

uj; 1 cj; 1 1 arctanv 1 a c 1 a1

44

with a1 arctanv 1 a:
On account of the above positions, Eq. (23) becomes
p
c
c 2 2 c c_ 2 1 v1 2 h 1 1 a 1 1q cosc 1 a1
1
2 sinc 1 a1 0:

45

By multiplying the above equation by 1 and with the help

of trigonometric relationships formally similar to those
already employed for the internal solution at j 0; we
obtain
p
1c 2 c2 c c_ 2 1 1v1 2 h 1 1 1q cosc 1 a1
2 a2 sinc 1 a1 0;
where
q
a2 1 1 v 1 a2 :

46

1i=2 ci h:

47

48

i0

By substituting the expansion (48) into the differential

equation (46) and by equating coefficients of like powers
of 1 up to 1 2 to zero, we obtain the following set of recurrent
equations
Order 10 :
c2 c 0 c_ 20 0:

2 cosc0 1 a1 1 a 1 v sinc0 1 a1 c2
1 vhc1 sinc0 1 a1 1 q cosc0 1 a1 0:

53

By assuming

c0 ; 0

54

Eqs. (49)(51) are identically satisfied. Eq. (52) becomes

v
c 1 2 c2 c 1 c_ 21 2 a2 c1 2 2 h 0
a

55

and it is easy to verify that it admits the solution

c1 2

v
h;
a4

56

which, substituted into Eq. (53) yields

Once again, we seek an exponential expansion of the

solution of the differential equation (46) ch; 1 in the form

ch; 1

c 1 2 2c2 c 2 c_ 0 c_ 1 2 c2 c 1 c_ 21 2 2c2 c 1 c_ 0 c_ 2

49

v2
q
v2
c 2 2 c2 8 c 2 2 a2 c2 1 2 2 6 a 1 vh2 0:
a
a
a

57

The general solution to Eq. (57) can be given in the form

!
!
a5 h
a5 h
c2 B1 exp 2 p 1 B2 exp p
a8 2 c2 v2
a8 2 c2 v2
1

q
2v2
v2
8
2
2
a
1
v

a
2
c
v

2
a 1 vh2 :
2
a4
a18
a8
58

In order to match the inner expansion (48) with the external solution (22) we can again make use of Van Dykes
matching rule and obtain B2 0: Moreover, the boundary

F. Guarracino, V. Mallardo / Applied Ocean Research 21 (1999) 281293

results in

condition (14) requires that

L p
c_ 0 2
1;
r
which, by virtue of Eqs. (48) and (56), implies


1 v
L
_
c 2 0 p
2
:
1 a4
r

59

60

Thus we conclude that


 p
1 v
L
a8 2 c2 v2
2
B1 2 p
4
1 a
r
a5

61

and we have
!

 p
1
v
L
a 8 2 c 2 v2
a5 h
c2 2 p
2
exp 2 p
1 a4
r
a5
a 8 2 c 2 v2

q
2v 2
v2
8
2
2
a
1
v

a
2
c
v

2
a 1 vh2 :
2
a4
a18
a8

287

u j; 1 arctana 1 Wj
(
 j
_ j2
W
2a 1 WjW
2
11
{1 1 a 1 Wj2 }3=2
{1 1 a 1 Wj2 }5=2
_ j4
q
2c2 a 1 WjW
2
1 1 a 1 Wj2
{1 1 a 1 Wj2 }9=2
)
_ j2
 jW
c2 W
2
{1 1 a 1 Wj2 }7=2
"
#
2av2 8
q
2
b 2 c2 v 2 4
11
b18
b
!
!
p
p

b5 j = 1
1 v
L
2
 exp 2 p 2
a a4
r
b8 2 c 2 v 2
!
p
p

a8 2 c 2 v 2
a5 1 2 j = 1
p 1 0 13=2 :
exp
2

5
8
2
a
a 2 c2 v
1

65
62

Finally, the internal solution near the end j 1 results

"
! p
p v
v
L
a8 2 c2 v2
i
u h; 1 m 2 1 4 h 1
2
4
r
a
a
a5
" 2
!#
a5 h
2v
 exp 2 p
a 1 v
21
8
2
a18
a 2 c2 v
#


v2
q
8
2
2
 a 2 c2 v 1 8 a 1 vh 2 4 1 0 13=2 : 63
a
a

3.4. Synthetic solution

Eqs. (22), (42) and (63) provide three separate expansions. The first one, namely uo j; 1; is valid everywhere
except in a small neighborhood of j 0; the second one,
namely ui z; 1; is valid only in a small neighborhood of j
0; the third one, namely ui h; 1; is valid only in a small
neighborhood of j 1: Although both the couples uo j; 1
and ui z; 1; and uo j; 1 and ui h; 1 have overlapping
domains, in order to avoid the difficulty of switching from
one expression to another we can combine all these three
expressions into a so called composite expansion [21]
defined by

u j; 1 uo j; 1 1 ui z; 1 1 ui h; 1 2 ui o0 2 ui o1 ; 64
where the subscripts 0 and 1 denote the external limit of
the internal solutions in the neighborhoods of the points j
0 and j 1; respectively. To summarize, the synthetic solution to Eq. (12) with the boundary conditions (13) and (14)

4. The effect of the external pressure

The ovalization of the cross section, which leads to a
reduction of the second moment of inertia (Eq. (3)) and,
consequently, to the non-linear constitutive relationship
(Eq. (4)), tends to be increased by the hydrostatic external
pressure. In order to reduce this effect, which may become
severe for installation in deep waters, installation procedures that involve the pipeline being internally pressurized
with nitrogen have been devised [1]. However, the necessity
of plugs which could resist the differential pressure and the
safety implications of such a procedure render this technique quite impractical and laybarge pipelaying is still
performed at atmospheric internal pressure.
As stated when we formulated the general equations of
the problem, the operation of taking into consideration the
effect of the hydrostatic external pressure is not completely
trivial. In the present work we assume that this effect
can be related to the ovalization which the cross section
experiences under bending by means of a relationship of
the type
 2 

du
p
11
:
66
I I0 2 c 1
ds
pcr 2 p
This can be obtained by considering the deformed shape of
the cross section on account of the von Ka`rma`n effect as a
kind of imperfection and by amplifying the response to
bending by the factor p=pcr 2 p [20,22]. pcr is the buckling
load of the pipe under uniform external pressure.
Hence, we have a constitutive relationship of the following type:
 3 

du
du
p
2 Ec1
11
:
67
M EI0
pcr 2 p
ds
ds

288

F. Guarracino, V. Mallardo / Applied Ocean Research 21 (1999) 281293

From Eqs. (66) and (67) it clearly appears that the main
difficulty in incorporating the effect of external pressure in
the general equations of the problem lies in the fact that the
pressure p is dependent on the actual subsea depth of the
segment of pipeline under consideration. This would require
the deflection of the pipeline axis to be known in advance.
However, in order to obtain a formulation which can be
treated analytically, a modeling expedient may consist
of assuming the hydrostatic pressure to be linearly variable with the curvilinear abscissa s. From a physical
point of view this assumption can be considered
adequate, yet maintaining the additional difficulties at
a reasonable level. Thus, Eqs. (66) and (67) become,
respectively
 2 

du
c3 L 2 s
11
;
68
I I0 2 c 1
ds
pcr 2 c3 L 2 s
 3 

du
du
c3 L 2 s
2 Ec1
11
;
M EI0
ds
ds
pcr 2 c3 L 2 s

69

where c3 gw h=L: gw is the weight of the seawater per unit

volume.
Again, by substituting Eq. (69) into Eq. (1) and referring
to the dimensionless variable j s=L; we can retrace the
steps of Section 2 and obtain

1u 2 1c2 u u_ 2 f j 1 Wj 1 a 1 1q cos u 2 sin u 0

70
with
f j 1 1

c3 L1 2 j
:
pcr 2 c3 L1 2 j

71

It must be noticed that in pursuing Eq. (70) the only

additional approximation has been in discarding the term
involving the cube of the longitudinal axis curvature, i.e.
du=ds3 ; which is actually negligible in comparison to the
others. Eq. (70) is similar to Eq. (12) of Section 2. The
difference resides in the fact that the term 21c2 u u_ 2 ;
which takes into account the effect of the ovalization, is
now multiplied by the function f j: As all the boundary
conditions remain the same, in this case also we can proceed
to seek a solution of the problem by means of a singular
perturbation approach.

outer expansion in form (15) gives origin to the following

external solution to Eq. (70):
(

u j; 1 arctana 1 Wj 1 1
o

 j
W
{1 1 a 1 Wj2 }3=2

_ j2
2a 1 WjW
q
1
2 5=2
1 1 a 1 Wj2
{1 1 a 1 Wj }

_ j4
2c2 qcr a 1 WjW
qcr 2 c3 L1 2 j{1 1 a 1 Wj2 }9=2

_ j2
 jW
c2 qcr W
2
qcr 2 c3 L1 2 j{1 1 a 1 Wj2 }7=2
1 013=2 :

The steps which lead to the expressions of the outer

and inner expansions are formally the same of those
reported in Section 3 and for the sake of brevity will not
be reported again in extenso. Therefore, we will limit
ourselves to writing the final results of the above mentioned
expansions.
5.1. Outer expansion
After all calculations were performed, the adoption of an

72

5.2. Inner expansion at j 0

As in the case of Section 3.2, for the convenience of
mathematical treatment and with negligible approximation
we can assume that w is a constant over the boundary layer
near the end j 0 and set v wL=H: Further, we may
consider that the hydrostatic pressure attains a uniform
maximum value at the boundary layer j 0; in the vicinity
of the sea bed (from a mechanical standpoint this simplification may be seen as conservative in terms of the reduction
in stiffness). In this manner Eq. (70) can be written in the
simplified form

1u 2 1c2 u u_ 2 f 0 1 vj 1 a 1 1qcos u 2 sin u 0

73

and the corresponding internal solution near the end j 0 is

p v
u i z; 1 a0 1 1 4 z
b
8
>
>
>
>
"
!#
>
<
q
2av2
c2 v2 qcr
8
1 1 2 4 1 18 b 2
>
qcr 2 c3 L
b
b
>
>
>
>
:
0

5. Solution by perturbation approach

C
B
C
B
b5 z
q
C
B
exp B2 s C 1 4
C
B
b
c v2 qcr A
@
b8 2 2
qcr 2 c3 L

2av2
c v2 qcr
b8 2 2
18
qcr 2 c3 L
b

!
2

9
>
>
>
>
>
=

av2 2
z 1 013=2 :
b8 >
>
>
>
>
;

74

F. Guarracino, V. Mallardo / Applied Ocean Research 21 (1999) 281293

289

5.3. Inner expansion at j 1

6. Pipelinestinger continuity conditions

Assuming that w is a constant over the boundary layer

near the end j 1 and that the hydrostatic pressure attains a
negligible value at the boundary layer j 1; in the vicinity
of the water surface, the problem results expressed by the
same Eq. (23) treated in Section 3.3. Thus, also in this case
the internal solution near the end j 1 Eq. (63) holds true,
that is

As stated in Section 2, the problem under analysis is

additionally complicated by the fact that neither the value
of the horizontal force H, nor the length of the suspended
span L are known in advance. As a matter of fact, neither of
the synthetic solutions (65) and (76) can be employed for
any calculation until the parameters H, L and q are determined. Therefore, from a mathematical standpoint we need
some additional relationships to offset the presence of these
unknowns. To some extent these relationships are provided
by the matching conditions between the suspended span and
the part of the pipeline which is supported by the stinger.
Moreover, we can still make reference to the second of the
boundary conditions (13), which we stated in Section 2 but
we did not employ in pursuing the expressions (65) and (76).
In order to employ a symbolism consistent with that
employed for the suspended span, let us denote the length
of the part of the submerged pipeline supported by the stinger as Lst and let the origin of the curvilinear abscissa along
this part be fixed at the water surface.
From a purely geometrical point of view and with reference to Fig. 1, we have the following relationships:
Z1
sin u dj;
77
h1 L

u i h; 1
p
m2 1

"

v
h1
a4

v
L
2
r
a4

a5 h
2 p
a8 2 c2 v2

exp

! p
a8 2 c2 v2
a5
"

!#
21

v2
q
1 8 a 1 vh2 2 4
a
a

2v2
a 1 va8 2 c2 v2
a18

#
1 013=2 :

75

5.4. Synthetic solution

At last, the synthetic solution to the pipelaying problem

in presence of the external hydrostatic pressure turns
out to be
(
 j
W
o
u j; 1 arctana 1 Wj 1 1
{1 1 a 1 Wj2 }3=2
2

_ j
2a 1 WjW
q
1
5=2
2
1 1 a 1 Wj2
{1 1 a 1 Wj }

_ j
2c2 qcr a 1 WjW
qcr 2 c3 L1 2 j{1 1 a 1 Wj2 }9=2

_ j2
 jW
c2 qcr W
qcr 2 c3 L1 2 j{1 1 a 1 Wj2 }7=2
"

q
2av2
c v2 qcr
1 1 2 4 1 18 b8 2 2
qcr 2 c3 L
b
b
0

!#

1 013=2 :

Given that the profile of the laybarge stinger is known and

can be described by means of a function of the type
y Gx;

79

it follows that
x2 G 21 h2 ;

80



 dG 

ust 1 arctan
;
dx xx2

81

 2 
d G


 2
 dx xx
u_ st 1 "

 2 #3=2 ;
 dG  2


11

 dx xx

82

! p
v
L
a8 2 c 2 v2
2
exp
4
r
a
a5

78

where the subscript st indicates that the variable is relative

to the supported part of the pipeline. The length of the part
of the submerged pipeline supported by the stinger, Lst, can
be obtained from Eq. (79) with a simple integration, too.
On account of the above relationships, the natural continuity conditions at the point A, i.e.

C
B
C
B
b5 z
C
s

 exp B
2
C
B
2
A
@
c
v
q
2
cr
8
b 2
qcr 2 c3 L
p
1
2
a

h 2 h 2 h1 :

p !
a 1 2 j= 1
2 p
a8 2 c 2 v2
5

(76)

u 1 ust 1;

L
u_ 1 u_ st 1 ;
r

83

become two additional relationships which can be employed

for the solution of the whole problem.
From a mechanical point of view, if we neglect the

290

F. Guarracino, V. Mallardo / Applied Ocean Research 21 (1999) 281293

Q

T0

r
V

Fig. 3. Forces acting on the segment of the pipeline supported by the

stinger.

friction between the pipeline and the stinger, the reaction r

of the stinger is directed orthogonally to the axis of the
pipeline, as shown in Fig. 3, and the equilibrium of a
small element of the pipeline in the tangential direction
gives
dT 1 Q dust 1 wLst sin ust dj 0;

84

with Q denoting the shear force. Of course, from the

constitutive relationship (4) it follows
Q

dM
u
u u_ 2
EI0 2st 2 2Ec1 st 4 st ;
ds
Lst
Lst

and therefore

u u_
u u_ 3
dQ EI0 st 2 st 2 2Ec1 st 4 st
Lst
Lst

85

!
dj:

86

As already carried out in Section 4, we can neglect

the term involving the cube of the longitudinal axis
curvature, i.e. u_ 3st ; and by a simple integration of Eq. (84)
we obtain
Z1
EI Z1  _
u st u st dj 2 wLst
sin ust dj: 87
Tst 1 T0 2 20
Lst 0
0
With reference to the point A where the pipeline leaves the
stinger, from Fig. 4 it clearly appears that the following
relationships hold true:
H Tst 1 cos ust 1 1 Qst 1 sin ust 1;

88

Qst 1 H sin ust 1 2 Vst cos ust 1;

and, as a consequence, we have
Tst 1
2 Vst 1 tan ust 1
cos ust 1


Z1
EI Z1  _
T0 2 20
u st u st dj 2 wLst
sin ust dj
Lst 0
0

cos ust 1

2 Vst 1 tan ust 1:

(1)

st

89

The mechanical continuity at the point A between the

suspended span of the pipeline and the part supported by

Fig. 4. Components of the force R acting on the pipeline cross section at the
lift-off point from the stinger.

the stinger requires that

V1 Vst 1;

90

where V1; on account of Eq. (9), is given by

V1 V0 1 wL a 1 1qH 1 wL:

91

The term q can be determined by means of the above

mentioned boundary condition (13), i.e. u_ 0 0; that is
by derivation of the synthetic solution (65) or (76).
In conclusion, the additional relationships (83) and (89),
in conjunction with the synthetic solution (65) or (76), can
be employed to set up a collection of non-linear equations in
the independent unknowns L, H, and r , which can be effectively solved by means of a standard iterative procedure.
It is worth noticing that the whole treatment of the
problem is absolutely general and therefore it can be
employed for any kind of design optimization which may
involve the profile of the stinger or the optimization of the
buoyancy [6].
7. Discussion of two examples
In order to discuss two applications of the proposed
procedure, we start by making reference to the example
worked out by Konuk [5]. The parameters of the pipeline
are those of the Ninian pipeline laid in the North Sea, i.e.
pipeline diameter 914.4 mm (36 in.), pipe wall thickness
17.8 mm (0.7 in.), pipe dry and submerged weight
9.61 kN/m (980 kgf/m) and 0.883 kN/m (90 kgf/m), respectively. Konuk took into consideration a laying operation in
150 m water depth with a stinger radius of 228.6 m, a freeboard of 13.2 m and a ramp angle of 2.28. The tension of the
tensioner was 588.6 kN (60 000 kgf) and the slope of the
sea bed a0 0:
Even if this example represents a pipeline laid in relatively shallow waters, with a D=t ratio of 51.4, never the less
it offers an occasion for comparing the results of the present
method with those of Konuk [5] and Zhu and Cheung [6]
and drawing some conclusions about the sensibility of the
configuration to the influence of the ovalization of the cross
section.
Fig. 5 shows the juxtaposition of the pipeline deflections

F. Guarracino, V. Mallardo / Applied Ocean Research 21 (1999) 281293

291

Fig. 5. Laying operation in 150 m water depth: comparison of pipeline

geometries.

obtained by recalculating the example of Konuk by means

of the present and Zhu and Cheungs solutions. It appears
evident that the last two solutions compare quite well (the
suspended pipe span length results 468.02 m according to
Zhu and Cheung and 464.73 m according to the present
method), with a maximum difference in the range of 2
3%. A more appreciable difference is found with the
solution by Konuk, which gives a suspended pipe span
length of 426.62 m. This is not surprising, given that the
expansion of Konuk was arrested to the first order terms,
while the present and Zhu and Cheungs expansions were
carried to a higher degree of approximation (for the sake of
correctness it must be noticed that at the end of Konuks
paper it is stated that in principle the expansion process
can be continued indefinitely and a second-order composite expansion is given, although not employed in the
calculation).
A much more marked difference is found in the plots of
the absolute value of the curvature udu=dsu, shown in Fig. 6,
where the discrepancy between the proposed solution and
that of Zhu and Cheung becomes more noticeable. In fact,
between the abscissae x 310 2 350 m the difference in
the curvature is in the range of 1113% with the present
solution exhibiting higher values, as it was expectable on
account of the reduced stiffness due to the ovalization of the
cross section. In the vicinity of the point A, where the pipeline leaves the stinger, this difference increases and reaches
a remarkable percentage of about 32%. In fact, even if the
value of the curvature for the part of the pipeline which lies
on the stinger is obviously the same for both solutions and
coincides with that of the stinger, the curvature of the
suspended span, according to the proposed formulation,
tends more smoothly to the fixed value at the matching
point A. On the contrary, the plot from Konuks formulation
shows a poor convergence to the boundary values, with
jumps which again indicate the opportunity of taking
into account expansions carried to a higher degree of
approximation. The value of the stress in the pipeline wall
is related quite closely to the value of the curvature and
therefore shows the same discrepancies between the formulations. The maximum discrepancy, once the actual axial
tension is obtained by addition of the effect of the missing
end cap forces, reaches the 30%. It is worth noticing that in
this example the inclusion of the effect of the external

Fig. 6. Laying operation in 150 m water depth: comparison of pipeline

curvatures.

pressure increases the degree of ovality of the cross sections

up to a maximum of 80%.
The second example is a theoretical one, especially
devised to perform a comparison with the results from a
well-known commercial finite element code, i.e. Abaqus
v. 5.7. It represents the case of a pipeline laid in 750 m
water depth, with diameter 508 mm (20 in.), wall thickness
13.6 mm (0.54 in.) and a submerged weight of 3.12 kN/m
(325.2 kgf/m). The stinger radius is assumed to be 120 m,
the free-board is zero and the ramp angle is 08. The tension
of the tensioner is 4905 kN (500 000 kgf) and the slope of
the sea bed, a 0, is zero. The FEM modeling was performed
by means of 2000 elements of the type ELBOW31B, which
account for non-linear behavior and pipe ovalization [23].
Fig. 7 shows the juxtaposition of the pipeline deflections
obtained by the FEM output and by the present method. It is
evident that two solutions compare decidedly well (the
suspended pipe span length results 1264.7 m according to
the FEM solution and 1265.6 m according to the present
method). Also the absolute values of the curvature udu=dsu,
shown in Fig. 8, compare very well for most of the
suspended span, with the exception of the boundary zones
near the seabed and at the connection with the stinger. Here
the behavior of the proposed analytical solution is noticeably smooth in contrast to the FEM solution, which shows
quite an erratic conduct. This can be probably ascribed to
the difficult convergence in presence of a problem of unilateral contact on a fundamentally rigid support with very large
deflections. The degree of
ovality of
the cross sections,
measured by the formula Dmax 2 Dmin =2D is very similar
and is in the range of 0.0020.005 for the suspended span. It
can be pointed out that the effect of the external pressure
leads to an increment of the pipe ovality up to a maximum of
400%.
In this example the main advantage of the proposed

292

F. Guarracino, V. Mallardo / Applied Ocean Research 21 (1999) 281293

accounts for the von Ka`rma`n ovalizing effect has been

obtained. The adoption of some mathematical expedients
allowed a consequent treatment of the internal solutions of
the asymptotic expansion and avoided the recourse to additional terms in order to satisfy the boundary conditions
accurately.
The analysis of two practical examples shows that the
influence of the ovalizing effect can be found even in pipelines laid in quite shallow waters and that the proposed
solution can offer some advantages over the finite element
method with essentially the same (and at the boundary zones
even superior) degree of accuracy.
The procedure is absolutely general and in principle
can be applied to other relationships which account for
variations of the bending stiffness of the pipe.
Fig. 7. Laying operation in 750 m water depth: comparison of pipeline
geometries.

Acknowledgements
solution, apart from its intrinsic stability, lies in the fact that
the time required for the computer analysis is in the range of
a few seconds on a laptop PC and thus turns out to be more
than three orders of magnitude lower that the finite element
analysis approach. This is emphasized by the fact that the
program ABAQUS runs on a RISC workstation. From this
point of view the procedure results highly suitable
for the analysis of variations of laying parameters and
their real-time adjustment at the installation stage, as
well as for optimization by mathematical programming
methods.

The authors express their gratitude to Prof A.C. Walker

for helpful discussions and critical reading of the manuscript
and to Mott MacDonald Ltd for allowing the use of the
ABAQUS code.

Appendix
Starting from the definition
a tan a0 ;

A1

it follows
8. Conclusions
By following a fundamentally rigorous approach an
analytical solution to the pipelaying problem which

a cos a0 sin a0 ;

A2

a sin a0 cos a0 sin2 a0 ;

A3

a sin a0 cos a0 1 cos2 a0 1;

A4

a sina0 1 cos a0

q p
1
1 1 tan2 a0 1 1 a2 b2 :
cos a0

A5
Therefore the following relationship holds true
cosf 1 a0 2 sinf 1 a0
a cos f cos a0 2 a sin f sin a0 2 sin f cos a0
2 sin a0 cos f
cos f sin a0 2 b2 2 cos a0 sin f 2 sin f cos a0
2 sin a0 cos f
Fig. 8. Laying operation in 750 m water depth: comparison of pipeline
curvatures.

2b2 sin f:

(A6)

F. Guarracino, V. Mallardo / Applied Ocean Research 21 (1999) 281293

References
[1] Palmer A. Deep water pipelaying. Trans IMarE 1994;106:20916.
[2] Plunkett R. Static bending stresses in catenaries and drill strings.
ASME J Engng Ind 1967;89:316.
[3] Dixon DA, Rutledge DR. Stiffened catenary calculations in pipeline
laying problem. ASME J Engng Ind 1968;90:15360.
[4] Wasow W. Singular perturbations of boundary value problems for
nonlinear differential equations of second order. Commun Pure
Appl Math 1956;9:93113.
[5] Konuk I. Higher order approximations in stress analysis of submarine
pipelines. ASME J Energy Res Technol 1980;102:1906.
[6] Zhu DS, Cheung YK. Optimization of buoyancy of an articulated
stinger on submerged pipelines laid with a barge. Ocean Engng
1997;24(4):30111.
[7] Powers JT, Finn LD. Stress analysis of offshore pipelines during
installation. OTC. 1071, 1969.
[8] Brando P, Sebastiani G. Determination of sealines elastic curves and
stresses to be expected during laying operations. OTC. 1354, 1971.
[9] Brewer WV, Dixon DA. Influence of lay barge motions on a deep
water pipeline laid under tension. OTC 1072, 1969.
[10] Gnone E, Signorelli P, Giuliano V. Three-dimensional static and
dynamic analysis of deep-water sealines and risers. OTC 2326, 1975.
[11] Clauss GF, Weede H, Riekert T. Offshore pipe laying operations
interaction of vessel motions and pipeline dynamic stresses. Appl
Ocean Res 1992;14:17590.

293

[12] Tikhonov VS, Safronov AI. Numerical analysis of pipeline dynamics

in seabed laying. Int J Offshore and Polar Engng 1996;6(3):2128.
[13] von Ka`rma`n Th. Ueber die Formanderung dunnwadinger Rohre,
insbesondere federnder Ausgleichrohre. Zeit Ver Deutsch Ing
1911;55:188995.
[14] Brazier LG. On the flexure of thin cylindrical shells and other thin
sections. Proc R Soc A 1927;116:10414.
[15] Reissner E, Weinitschke HJ. Finite pure bending of circular cylindrical tubes. Q Appl Math 1963;20:30515.
[16] Fabian O. Collapse of cylindrical, elastic tubes under combined bending, pressure and axial loads. Int J Solids Struct 1977;13:125770.
[17] Ades CS. Bending strength of tubing in the plastic range. J Aeronaut
Sci 1957;24:60510.
[18] Gellin S. The plastic buckling of long cylindrical shells under pure
bending. Int J Solids Struct 1980;10:397407.
[19] Kyriakides S, Corona E. On the collapse of inelastic tubes under
combined bending and pressure. Int J Solids Struct 1988;24:50535.
[20] Guarracino F, Minutolo V. Analisi della ovalizzazione di condotte
circolari in regime di spostamenti finiti. Scritti in onore di Mario
Ippolito, Assoc. Idrotecnica Italiana, Napoli, Italy (in Italian), 1996.
[21] Nayfeh AH. Perturbation methods, New York: Wiley, 1973.
[22] Timoshenko SP, Gere JM. Theory of elastic stability, New York:
McGraw-Hill, 1963. p. 29497.
[23] Hibbitt, Karlsson, Sorensen, Abaqus Users manual, theoretical
manual and example manualversion 5.7. Providence, RI: H.K.S.,
1997.