3URFHHGLQJVRIWKH$60(WK,QWHUQDWLRQDO&RQIHUHQFHRQ2FHDQ2IIVKRUHDQG$UFWLF(QJLQHHULQJ

20$(
-XQH5RWWHUGDP7KH1HWKHUODQGV

20$(325

BURST CAPACITY OF REINFORCED THERMOPLASTIC PIPE (RTP) UNDER

INTERNAL PRESSURE

Yong Bai Fan Xu

ZheJiang University ZheJiang University
HangZhou, China HangZhou, China
baiyong@zju.edu.cn tmgcxf@126.com

Peng Cheng Mohd Fauzi Badaruddin Mohd Ashri

ZheJiang University Petronas Caligali Sdn Bhd Petronas Caligali Sdn Bhd
HangZhou, China (PCSB) (PCSB)
chengpeng@zju.edu.cn Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia

ABSTRACT This paper focus on the calculation of RTP pipes burst

Being corrosion resistant, light weight, and easy to install
at relatively low cost, Reinforced Thermoplastic Pipe (RTP) is
now increasingly being used for offshore operations. RTP pipe
in this study is mainly composed of three layers: a wound high
strength fiber reinforced layer to improve the resistance of the
pipe to internal pressure; a plastic inner layer to transport fluid;
a plastic outer layer to protect the pipe.
A precise calculation of the burst strength of RTP pipe will
be useful for the safe use of RTP pipe's internal pressure
resistance. The Finite Element Analysis (FEA) method and
mathematical analysis are employed to study the properties of
pipe under internal pressure. The Finite Element Analysis
method is used to simulating the pipe under increasing internal
pressure using ABAQUS. The model is established with the
conventional shell element, and the anisotropic property of
plastic is also considered in the model.
In the mathematical analysis, the reinforcement layer of the
pipe is assumed to be anisotropic and other layers are assumed
to be isotropic. Based on the three-dimensional (3D)
anisotropic elasticity theory, an exact elastic solution for burst
strength of the pipe under internal pressure has been studied.
strength, using mathematical approach and FEA approach, on
the basis of elaborated study of RTP pipes failure process. Our
results from mathematical and FE simulation agree each other
for burst pressure of the RTP pipe. Our FEA models are also
compared with the experimental research in order to validate
our FEA models.
1. INTRODUCTION
  RTP is a reelable high strength synthetic fibre (such as
Glass, Aramid or Carbon) reinforced thermoplastic pipe,
initially developed in the early 1990s by Wavin Repox, Akzo
Nobel and by Tubes dAquitaine from France.
The main technical advantages of RTP are:
RTP is flexible and supplied on long-length coils,
allowing a simple and very fast installation
Corrosion resistance
High pressure resistance
Very high impact strength
The pipes studied are produced by the helical tape
wrapping method. Fibre yarns are encapsulated in a
thermoplastic, to form a tape, which can be more easily
handled. The tape is subsequently wrapped and welded to the

1 Copyright 2011 by ASME

Downloaded From: http://proceedings.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/ on 03/10/2013 Terms of Use: http://asme.org/terms

 liner and cover. For its cost-effectiveness on a strength per unit Fig. 1 Structure of RTP pipe
cost basis and no damage occurring due to fibre-fibre friction,
aramid fibre is chosen as the reinforcing fibre.
Prediction of the burst capacity of RTP is an important
consideration for safety and reliability in its design and
application. There exist two failure modes, short-term burst and
long-term burst. This research is mainly concerned with the
short-term failure behavior of RTP.
The mechanical response of filament wound structures
under internal pressure has been studied by many researchers.
Xia et al.(1) in 2001 developed the stress analysis of the
multi-layered filament-wound composite pipes under internal
pressure based on the 3D anisotropy elasticity theory. M.P.
Kruijer et al.(2) in 2005 developed a multi-layer generalized
plane strain model based on a plane strain characterization for
RTP under hydrostatic pressure. Kobayashi et a1.(3) in 2007
proposed an elastic-plastic analysis on the filament wound
carbon fiber-reinforced composite pipes by applying partially
plastic thick-walled cylinder theory. Zheng et a1.(4) in 2008
presented an analytical procedure to predict the short-term burst
pressure of PSP (Plastic pipes reinforced by cross helically
wound steel wires) based on the 3D anisotropic elasticity and
Maximum Stress Failure Criterion. An elastic solution Fig. 2 Schematic diagram of RTP pipes cross-section
procedure based on Lekhnitskiis theory was developed by Aziz
Onder et a1.(5) in 2009 to predict the burst failure pressure of Table 1 shows the nominal geometric parameters of a
the pressure vessels by using the Tsai-Wu failure criterion, prototype RTP, provided by Nanjing Chenguang Group Co.,
maximum strain and stress theories. P. Xu et a1.(6) in 2009 Ltd. (NCGC). Table 2 presents the Mechanical parameters of
proposed a 3D parametric finite element model to predict the each layer. Wall thickness of RTP specimen is presented in
damage evolution and failure strength of the composite Table 3.
hydrogen storage vessels.
In this paper, the authors employed a solution which is Table 1 Nominal geometric parameters of each layer (ID:
developed by Zheng et al.(4) to predict the short-term burst internal diameter, ED: external diameter)
pressure and the mechanical behavior of RTP pipe, by applying
the 3D anisotropic elasticity and Maximum Strain Failure nominal diameter of each Magnitude (mm)
Criterion. The Finite Element Analysis method is also layer
employed to simulate the pipe under increasing internal ID of ply 1 97.4
pressure using ABAQUS. ED of ply 1 110
ED of ply 2 121
2. LABORATORY TEST ED of ply 3 125

2.1 Material Properties of the RTP. Table 2 Mechanical parameters of each layer
The structure of RTP pipe is shown in Fig. 1. The RTP pipe
consists of three continuous layers, inner PE layer, reinforced Layer Material Young modulus Poisson Shear
layer and outer PE layer, as shown in Fig. 2. The winding angle No. ratio modulus
of the fibres is r 55q 1 PE80 E=0.953 GPa 0.42 345.5MPa
HDPE
2 Aramid E PE80 =0.953 0.42 276.4Mpa
imbedded in GPa
PE80 E ARAMID =75G
Pa
3 PE100 E=1.178GPa 0.42 276.4MPa
HDPE

Table 3 Wall thickness of RTP specimen

2 Copyright 2011 by ASME

Downloaded From: http://proceedings.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/ on 03/10/2013 Terms of Use: http://asme.org/terms

 Layer No. Nominal value Measured value (mm) Fig.4 and Fig.5 show the experimental results of RTP
(mm) Mean value Max/min under internal pressure.
1 3 2.95 1.86
2 5.5 4.3 1.30
3 6.30 5.65 1.29

2.2 Short-term Burst Test and Internal Pressure Test

Two kinds of tests were employed, short-term burst test

and internal pressure test to study the mechanical behavior.
Short-term burst tests were carried out by NCGC and the
short-term burst pressure was provided by NCGC. The tests
were operated according to ASTM D 1599 99 Standard Test
Method for Resistance to Short-Time Hydraulic Pressure of
Plastic Pipe, Tubing, and Fittings (8). The RTP samples were
0.69 m long and terminated at both ends by non-reusable steel
swage fittings. The RTP samples were free to deform during
the tests. During the tests, the pressure increased uniformly and Fig.4. Experimental tangential strain for hydrostatic pressure
continuously until the specimen fails, and the specimens failed load-case
between 60 and 70 s. The experimental temperature was
controlled at 23f2C. Equipment of burst tests was Sans pipe
hydrostatic pressure test machine (produced by SANS Testing
Machine Inc).
Internal pressure tests were carried out by us to study the
mechanical behavior under internal test. The RTP samples were
0.69 m long and terminated at both ends by non-reusable steel
swage fittings. The RTP samples were free to deform during
the tests. Axial and tangential strains were obtained in the tests.
Eighteen measuring points were placed outside of the sample.
The schematic of locations of the measuring points is shown in
Fig. 3. The internal pressure increased uniformly to certain
values and was maintained until the value read by the strain
gauges remained changeless. The internal pressure was applied
by a pump. The experimental temperature was controlled at 23
f2C.
Fig.5. Experimental axial strain for hydrostatic pressure
load-case

3. FINITE ELEMENT ANALYSIS

3.1 Finite Element Model

The finite element model was developed to predict not

only the short-term burst pressure, but also the mechanical
behavior of RTP pipe. The analysis was performed by
employing finite element analysis software ABAQUS. 4-node
conventional shell element was used to discretize the structure.
The geometric parameters were defined using the measured
value as in table 3. In the ABAQUS model the pipe consists of
four layersas shown in Fig. 6. Layer 1 is the outer layer, and
Layer 4 is the inner layer. Layer 1 and 4 considered to isotropic
Fig. 3 Schematic of locations of the measuring points of axial and plastic. The strain-stress curves used in analysis are shown
and hoop strains in Fig. 6. The reinforced layer is modeled to two anisotropic
layers (Layer 3 and Layer 4) with different winding angles, one
2.3 Experimental Results

3 Copyright 2011 by ASME

Downloaded From: http://proceedings.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/ on 03/10/2013 Terms of Use: http://asme.org/terms

 is  55q and another is -55q . The Elastic constants of Layer 3
and Layer 4 are listed on Table 4.
Fig.6. ABAQUS model cross-section with 4 layers
Fig.6. strain-stress curves of PE80 and PE100
The mesh of the model is shown in Fig. 8. The length of
the model was 690 mm, equal to the length of the specimens in
the test.
4 Copyright 2011 by ASME
Downloaded From: http://proceedings.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/ on 03/10/2013 Terms of Use: http://asme.org/terms
Fig.8. the mesh of the ABAQUS model
One of the pipes end surfaces was fixed in X, Y and Z
direction, representing that the end was totally fixed by the end
fitting. Another end surface was fixed in X and Y direction,
providing an axially free boundary condition, as shown in Fig.
9.
Fig.9. the boundary condition of the ABAQUS model
Internal pressure P was applied on the inner face of the
shell, and shell edge load F was applied on one end of shell,
as shown in Fig. 10. Shell edge load could be determined by
2 PRo2
F , (1)
Ro  Ri
where Ro is the internal radius and Ri is the outer radius.
Fig.10. Loads applied on the ABAQUS model
3.2 Finite Element Analysis Results
To obtain short-term burst pressure, the Maximum strain
failure criteria was employed to determine the failure initiation
of ABAQUS model. It was considered that once the aramid
fibres reach it strain limit, the RTP pipe fails. The strain of the
reinforced layer in fibre direction can be obtained. By
comparing the calculated strain and aramid fibres strain limit,
the short-term burst pressure can be determined. In this study,
when the internal pressure increased to 28.52 MPa, aramid
wires reached their maximum strain limit.
The mechanical behavior of RTP pipe was also studied
with Finite Element Analysis method. Axial strain and
tangential strain of RTP pipe under internal pressure are
represented on Fig. 11 and Fig. 12
 The reinforced tape layer has three symmetrical
performance planes and is orthotropic. The material coordinate
system of the tape layer is designated as ( L , T , r ), where L
is the aramid wound direction. T is the direction vertical to
the aramid wire in plane, and r is the normal direction of the
tape layer. The cylindrical coordinate system is designated as
( z , T , r ), where z , T , r is the axial, circumferential
and radial direction of RTP pipe, respectively. The two
coordinate systems have the same coordinate direction of r ,
and D is the angle between L and z direction.
3D laminated plate prosperities can be determined by
(k )
1 P LT P Lr
E   0 0 0
ET Er
L
 PTL 1

PTr
0 0 0
Fig.11. Predicted (Finite Element Analysis) axial strain for EL ET Er
hydrostatic pressure load-case P P rT 1
 rL  0 0 0
S (k ) EL ET Er ,
1
0 0 0
GTr
0 0

0 1
0 0 0 0
GrL
1
0 0 0 0 0
GLT
(2)
is the on-axis flexibility matrix of kth layer.
k
Where S
Elastic constants of the tape layer ( E L , ET , E r , G LT ,
GTr , GrL , P LT , PTr , P rL ) were be determined.
Fig.12. Predicted (Finite Element Analysis) tangential strain for Considering that E L is reinforced by aramid fibre, can be
hydrostatic pressure load-case
calculated by
EL E f X f  E PE (1  X f ) , (3)
4. MATHEMATICAL SOLUTIONS
where E f and E PE are the elastic modulus of aramid and
Zheng et al. (4) developed a new solution for predicting HDPE in the L direction; Xf is the ratio by volume of aramid
the short-term burst pressure of PSP, by applying the 3D
anisotropic elasticity and Maximum Stress Failure Criterion. yarns in RTP pipe. ET , E r , G LT , GTr , GrL , P LT , PTr ,
The same method was employed to calculate the short-term P rL are considered equal to corresponding values of PE.
burst pressure of RTP pipe, except that Maximum Strain Failure
Values of elastic constants are listed Table 4.
Criterion is adopted.
Provided that the interfaces between the fibre yarns and
Table 4 Elastic constants of the tape layer (MPa)
PE are perfectly bonded, the strain of the aramid wire and PE in
the aramid wound direction can be considered to be equal. EL 5766
Because the Youngs modulus of the aramid fibre is far greater ET 953
than that of PE, the stresses in the aramid fibre are much greater
than those in the PE. Er 953
When the RTP is subjected to internal pressure, aramid G LT 276.4
wires first reach their strength limits and break, resulting in that
the RTP loses the reinforcement of the fibre yarns and bursts in GTr 276.4
a short-term. GrL 276.4

5 Copyright 2011 by ASME

Downloaded From: http://proceedings.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/ on 03/10/2013 Terms of Use: http://asme.org/terms

 P LT 0.42 where V
( 2)
V ( 3) tc (2t ) , V (1) tm t ,V ( 4) t n t , and
PTr 0.42 t m , tc , t n is the thickness of the inner layer, reinforcing layer,
P rL 0.42 outer layer. t is the wall thickness of PTP pipe.

The on-axis stiffness matrix C

(k )
is the inversion of Cij C ji 0, i 1,2,3,6; j 4,5, (7)
on-axis flexibility. The off-axis stiffness matrices S (k ) and 4
V (k ) (k )
C (k ) can be calculated from the on-axis flexibility and k 1 'k
Ci
Cij
stiffness matrices S and C , by using flexibility and V ( k ) V (l )
(k ) (k ) 4 4

stiffness transformation matrices TH and TV , respectively,

k 1 l 1 ' '
(C44( k )C55(l )  C45( k )C54(l ) )
k l
written as, i, j 4,5, (8)
T
S (k ) TH S ( k )TH , (4)
C44(k) C45(k)
C (k ) (k )
TV S TV ,
T where k C44(k)C55(k)  C45(k)C54(k) .
(5) C54(k) C55(k)
where
The global flexibility matrix S can be obtained by
m2 n2 0 0 0  mn
2 inversing the global stiffness matrix C .
n m2 0 0 0 mn According to the lame equation, the 3D stresses in the
0 0 1 0 0 0 cylindrical coordinate can be described as
TH , PRi PR R 1
2 2 2

0 0 0 m n 0 VT  20 i 2 2 , (9)
R0  Ri R0  Ri r
2 2
0 0 0 n m 0

PRi PR R 1
2 2 2
2mn  2mn 0 0 0 m 2  n 2 Vr  20 i 2 2 , (10)
R0  Ri R0  Ri r
2 2
m 2
n 0 0 0  2mn
2

2 PRi
2

n m2 0 0 0 2mn Vz , (11)
R0  Ri
2 2
0 0 1 0 0 0
TH ,
0 m n 0 where P is the internal pressure, MPa ; Ro , Ri are the
0 0
outer and insider radii of RTP pipe, m ; r is the radius of
0 0 0 n m 0
calculation position, m .
mn  mn 0 0 0 m 2  n 2 From the generalized Hookes law, the 3D strains in the
cylindrical coordinate can be described as
m cosD , n sinD , and D is the cylindrical angle of
VT Vz Vr
the aramid fibre yarns from the pipe axis. HT  P zT  P rT , (12)
Chou et al. (7) presented a control volume approach to ET Ez Err
yielding a closed-form solution to determine global elastic
Vr Vz VT
constants for a laminated medium composed of individual Hr  P zr  PTr , (13)
layers. The RTP pipes global stiffness matrix C can be Er Ez ET
obtained in this way. The element Cij of the global stiffness Vz VT Vr
Hz  PTz  P rz , (14)
Ez ET Err
matrix C can be calculated from
The relation of kth layers strains between the
4 V (1) C ( l )
(k ) (k ) Ci 3
(k ) 3j

cylindrical and material coordinates is respectively expressed as
4
Ci 3 C3 j (l )
C33 H z (k ) TH H L
(k )
Cij V ( k ) Cij( k )   i 1

. (15)
C33 (k ) 4
V (l )
k 1
C33( k ) (l ) Then the 3D strains in the material coordinate can be
i 1 C33 described as
H L(k ) TH H z
-1 (k )
. (16)
i, j 1,2,3,6 , (6)

6 Copyright 2011 by ASME

Downloaded From: http://proceedings.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/ on 03/10/2013 Terms of Use: http://asme.org/terms

 The Maximum Strain Criterion considers that the aramid
yarns will fail as soon as strain exceeds the strain limit in the
wound direction. Without the reinforcement of the aramid
yarns, the pipe will burst in a short-term.
Based on the analysis above, the short-term burst pressure
can be calculated.
The mechanical behavior of RTP pipe was also studied by
mathematical method. Predicted axial strain and tangential
strain of RTP pipe under internal pressure are represented on
Fig. 13 and Fig. 14.
defect existed on the RTP specimen, which led to the decrease
of the burst capacity of tested specimens.
In the FEA method, the FEA result is 19.6% larger than
experimental data. The reinforced layer was also considered
elastic, which caused the burst pressure larger than
experimental data. The defect existed on the RTP specimen
could cause the decrease of the burst capacity of tested
specimens.
Aramid yarns strain in wound direction calculated from
FEA and mathematical method is shown in Fig. 15. The
comparison between these two methods indicates that there is a
good agreement between them. It can be concluded that these
two methods are available for the calculation of the burst
capacity of RTP pipe.

Table 5 Mathematical, experimental data and FEA data of

short-term burst pressure
Type Mathematical Experimental data FEA data
No. data (Mpa) (Mpa) (Mpa)
1 28.76 24.69 29.54

Fig.13. Predicted (Mathematical) axial strain for hydrostatic

pressure load-case

Fig.15. Comparison of predicted (Mathematical) and predicted

(Finite Element analysis) aramid yarns strain in wound
direction for hydrostatic pressure load-case.

Fig.14. Predicted (Mathematical) tangential strain for

hydrostatic pressure load-case

5. COMPARISON OF RESULTS

The short-term burst pressures obtained by using

experimental, mathematical and finite element method are both
listed in Table 5. The mathematical result is 16.5% larger than
experimental data. It can be explained by that the non-liner
behavior of PE was not considered in the calculation. Then PE
could take larger loads which caused larger result. Also the

7 Copyright 2011 by ASME

Downloaded From: http://proceedings.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/ on 03/10/2013 Terms of Use: http://asme.org/terms

 Fig.16. Comparison of experimental, predicted (Mathematical)
and predicted (Finite Element analysis) axial strain for
hydrostatic pressure load-case.
Fig.17. Comparison of experimental, predicted (Mathematical)
and predicted (Finite Element analysis) tangential strain for
hydrostatic pressure load-case.
The mechanical behaviors calculated from different
methods are presented in Fig. 16 and Fig. 17. It can be
concluded that there is large deviation between axial and
tangential strains obtained from three methods. Axial and
tangential strains obtained from mathematical method are lower
than experimental results, which can be explained by that the
non-liner behavior of PE was not considered. Also the bonding
between different layers of RTP pipe and between fibres and
matrix was not perfect which could cause the mathematical
model was modeled too stiff in the axial and tangential
direction.
Axial and tangential strains obtained from FEA method
are higher than experimental results, but closer than the
deviation between mathematical and experimental results.
6. CONCLUSIONS
The mechanical behavior, including axial and tangential
behavior of RTP pipe was analyzed and explained. The burst
capacity of RTP pipe was studied. A mathematical model
developed by Zheng et al. (2008) was adopted and modified to
study the mechanical property of RTP pipe. Finite Element
model was also established to study the mechanical behavior of
RTP pipe. The short-term burst pressure calculated through
mathematical and FEA method fit the experimental value well.
8 Copyright 2011 by ASME
Downloaded From: http://proceedings.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/ on 03/10/2013 Terms of Use: http://asme.org/terms
However, there is large deviation between axial and tangential
strains obtained from three methods. To further improve the
model it will be necessary to take into account the non-linear
behavior of the PE and reinforced layer, which is the objective
for the ongoing research in this field.
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
This paper is financially supported by OPR (Offshore
Pipelines and Risers Inc.). The authors of this paper wish to
express much appreciation to it. Moreover, many thanks go to
Dr. Qiang Bai for their continual guidance and support.
REFERENCES
1. Xia M, Takayanagi H, Kemmochi K. Analysis of
multi-layered filament wound composite pipes under internal
pressure. Compos Struct 2001;53:483-491.
2. Aziz Onder, Onur Sayman, Tolga Dogan, Necmettin
Tarakcioglu. Burst failure load of composite pressure vessels.
Compos Struct 2009;89: 159-166.
3. P. Xu,J.Y. Zheng, P.F. Liu. Finite element analysis of burst
pressure of composite hydrogen storage vessels. Materials and
Design 2009;30: 2295-2301.
4. J.Y. Zheng, Y.J. Gao,X. Li,J.Y. Zheng,X.F. Lin,Y.B.
Liu,Y.C. Zhu. Investigation on short-term burst pressure of
plastic pipes reinforced by cross helically wound steel wires.
Zhejiang Univ Sci A 2008; 9(5): 640-647.
5. M.P. Kruijer, L.L. Warnet, R. Akkerman. Analysis of the
mechanical properties of a reinforced thermoplastic pipe (RTP).
Composites2005: Part A; 36: 292-300.
6. Kobayashi, S., Imai, T., Wakayama, S. Burst strength
evaluation of the FW-CFRP hybrid composite pipes
considering plastic deformation of the liner. Composites Part A:
Applied Science and Manufacturing2007; 38(5): 1344-1353.
7. Chou, P.C., Carleone, J., Hsu, C.M., 1972. Elastic constants
of layered media. Journal of Composite Materials1972: 6(1):
80-93.
8. American National Standard D 1599-99, 1999. Resistance
to Short-Time Hydraulic Pressure of Plastic Pipe, Tubing, and
Fittings