Flexible Pipe - An Overview - ScienceDirect Topics

16/02/2019 Flexible Pipe - an overview | ScienceDirect Topics
Flexible Pipe
Flexible pipe should be designed or selected to prevent failure due to the combined
effects of external pressure, internal pressure, torsional forces, axial forces, and
bending (see API RP 17B).
From: Surface Production Operations, 2016
Related terms:
Pipelines, Floating Production Storage and Offloading, Installation, Steam Engines,
Turbines, Solar energy, Solar Cells, Polymer, Flexible Riser, Mooring System
View full index
Flexible Pipe
Qiang Bai, Yong Bai, in Subsea Pipeline Design, Analysis, and Installation, 2014
1 Introduction
The origin of flexible pipes can be traced to pioneering work carried out in the late 1970s. Initially, flexible pipes were
used in relatively benign weather environments, such as offshore Brazil, the Mediterranean, and the Far East. However,
the technology of flexible pipes advanced so rapidly that nowadays they have been used in various areas in the North
Sea and gained popularity among designers in the Gulf of Mexico. The flexible pipe can be applied in the environments
with water depths down to 8000 ft, high pressure reaching to 10,000 psi, and high temperatures above 150°F, as well as
withstanding large vessel motions in adverse weather conditions. Figure 24.1 illustrates typical flexible risers used in
deep water, in which different configurations are designed for different water depths. This type of dynamic application
is typically used for floating production systems with high-pressure production risers, export risers,
chemical/water/injection lines, and gas lift lines.
https://www.sciencedirect.com/topics/engineering/flexible-pipe 1/20
Download full-size image
Figure 24.1. Typical flexible riser configurations.

Source: Ismail et al. [1].
The applications of flexible pipe result from its composite structure, which combines helical steel armor layers with high
stiffness to provide strength and polymer sealing layers with low stiffness to provide fluid integrity. As a result, this kind
of pipe has low bending stiffness in comparison to axial tensile stiffness, which allows a much smaller radius of
curvature than the homogenous pipe with the same antipressure capacity. This particular structure gives the
flexible pipe a number of advantages over other types of pipelines and risers, such as steel catenary risers, which include
reduced transport and installation costs by prefabrication in long lengths stored on reels and suitability for use with
compliant structures, which allow permanent connection between a floating support vessel with large motions and
subsea installations.
Integrity Management of Flexible Pipes

Yong Bai, Qiang Bai, in Subsea Pipeline Integrity and Risk Management, 2014
Abstract
Flexible pipe integrity management aims at managing the risks of failures and keeping the pipes in normal operating
condition during the service life through risk-consistent inspection, monitoring, repairing and maintenance strategy.
The composite construction of unbonded flexible pipes makes the failure modes complex and the way to mitigate the
risks of failures becomes an important aspect in the system selection. Flexible pipe integrity management programs
with definite methodologies have been established in the industry according to the related JIPs. This Chapter mainly
deals with the risk assessment and integrity management of flexible pipes. The failure modes and related mechanisms
are summarized. Against these failures, the integrity management strategies in every stage of the flexible pipe industry
are introduced. Then the inspection and monitoring technologies are discussed as well as the testing and analysis
methods.
Design Codes for Risers and Subsea Systems

Yong Bai, Qiang Bai, in Subsea Pipelines and Risers, 2005
1 Flexible Pipe Guidelines

Flexible pipes have been used for decades. The early pipes and hoses were of the bonded type (vulcanized rubber and
armoring). The designs were primarily governed by the ratio burst to design pressure.
From the early seventies, large resources were put into the development of reliable non-bonded flexible pipes. As a
result of the product development work, the confidence in flexible pipes increased, and flexible pipes are considered
attractive for many applications. The use of flexible pipes was, however, still limited partially because no general industry
standard was available. In the middle eighties, Veritec (1987) developed a general design standard for flexible pipes,
based on a JIP. These guidelines were based on the design methods used by the manufacturers and the offshore design
codes. These design codes represented the state of the art of flexible pipe design. With the exception of Brazil, the use
of flexible pipes was still moderate during this period. There was, however, a continuous growth in demand and
requirements (temperature, pressure and diameter) to flexible pipes. Many oil companies developed their own
specifications for flexible pipes and the industry faced the following problems:
– Many operators had their own design standards;
– The manufacturers used their in-house standards for design. To prepare additional documentation conforming with
the operators' standards was often cumbersome and expensive;
– The general design standards were not updated and were considered to be increasingly inadequate.
The design requirements were divided into two categories:

– Mandatory requirements that are auditable should be included in the specification (API Spec 17J).
– Recommendations with respect to how to satisfy the mandatory requirements, as well as guidance for the design of
flexible riser systems, are included in a separate Recommended Practice (RP) such as API RP 17B. The RP will
include methodology for the design of risers outside the experience range. Deepwater will be one such area.
Cross-Sectional and Dynamic Analyses of Flexible Pipes

2 Flexible Pipe Guidelines

Flexible pipes have been used for decades. The early pipes and hoses were of the bonded type (vulcanized rubber and
armoring). The designs were governed primarily by the ratio of burst to the design pressure.
From the early 1970s, large resources were put into the development of reliable unbonded flexible pipes. As a result of
the product development work, the confidence in flexible pipes increased, and flexible pipes are considered attractive for
many applications. The use of flexible pipes was, however, still limited, partially because no general industry standard
was available. In the middle 1980s, Veritec [1] developed a general design standard for flexible pipes, based on a JIP.
These guidelines were based on the design methods used by the manufacturers and the offshore design codes. The
design codes represented the state of the art of flexible pipe design in the 1990s. With the exception of Brazil, the use of
flexible pipes was still moderate during this period. There was, however, a continuous growth in demand and
requirements of temperature, pressure, and diameter to flexible pipes. Many oil companies developed their own
specifications for flexible pipes, and the industry faced the following problems:
• Many operators had their own design standards.
• The manufacturers used their in-house standards for design. To prepare additional documentation conforming with
the operators’ standards was often cumbersome and expensive.
• The general design standards were not updated and were considered to be increasingly inadequate.
The design requirements were divided into two categories [2]:

• Mandatory requirements that are auditable should be included in the specification (API Spec 17J [3]).
• Recommendations with respect to how to satisfy the mandatory requirements, as well as guidance for the design of
flexible pipe systems, are included in a separate recommended practice (RP). such as API RP 17B [4]. The RP
includes the methodology for the design of flexible risers outside the experience range. Deep water is one of the
such area.
API Specification 17K

The design of flexible pipe is according to API Specification 17J for unbonded pipes and API Specification 17K for
bonded pipes. These documents provide a checklist of all the essential parameters and guidelines that pipe operators
need to verify when ordering flexible pipes from pipe manufacturers. The rest of this section deals with API Spec 17J for
unbonded pipes, but API Specification 17K contains essentially identical information and specifications for bonded
pipes.
API Specification 17J

API 17J [3] describes the parameters that need to be determined before carrying out a flexible pipe design. These
essential parameters (in addition to the external environmental conditions) are the internal bore characteristics, such as
pressure, temperature, and fluid composition. These parameters determine much of the pipe design, such as material
selection, and layer thickness.
API 17J lists the flexible pipe system requirements, such as inspection and condition monitoring, gas venting, and
installation. Another section deals with the allowable loads that can be imposed on the pipe during its lifetime. Once a
pipe cross section is established during design work, calculations are carried out to ensure that all allowable loads are
not exceeded throughout the pipe design life. Any anomalies in this work require a new pipe cross section to be
established. As shown in Table 6, Flexible pipe layer design criteria of API 17J, during normal operational conditions, the
tensile armor layer maximum load cannot exceed 0.67 of the ultimate tensile strength (UTS) of the armor material. The
pressure armor layer is allowed a maximum load of 0.55 of UTS. During abnormal and installation conditions, the
allowable load may be increased to 0.85 of UTS, and during factory acceptance tests, the load may be increased up to
0.91 of UTS.
Further sections of API 17J describe other conditions and limitations that need to be considered during design work.
One of the most important of these requirements is the minimum bend radius that the pipe is able to withstand
without unlocking the pressure armor layer. An important aspect of design work is the calculations for ensuring that the
pipe does not exceed its minimum bend radius under extreme load conditions. The two areas of pipe most susceptible
to overbending are the touchdown zone and the upper region just before the hang-off location. Once the minimum
bend radius is known, ancillary devices, such as bend stiffeners or bend restrictors, can be designed to ensure that the
pipe does not exceed this minimum bend radius under all possible extreme loading conditions.
API 17J contains useful information for the design of the various layers that make up the flexible pipe. Details are also
available on the design of the end-fitting arrangement, bend stiffeners, and bend restrictors. In addition to the local
cross-section design, the flexible pipe also needs to be verified under a global static and dynamic analysis. Since
unbonded flexible pipes have a large damping factor (due to the presence of a number of unbonded layers), they do not
suffer from fatigue damage induced by vortex-induced vibration (VIV). Hence, flexible pipes do not need to be installed
with strakes or fairings to limit VIV. This means that fatigue damage is primarily due to wave motions and installation
damage. A detailed fatigue life analysis is required, and the pipe manufacturer needs to prove that the pipe fatigue life
is 10 times the pipe’s required service life.
Procedures are required for pipe installation, since incorrect installation induces a greater risk of exceeding the tensile
limits of the armor layer material, overbending, and causing impact damage to the flexible pipes. There are
documented cases of flexible pipe damage during installation, for example, the piercing of the pipe’s outer sheathing
that required expensive mitigation measures to be undertaken to prevent the replacement of the whole pipe before
commencing operations.
API 17J also includes guidelines for the manufacture of the flexible pipe, and the qualification testing required before
the pipe is issued to the operator.
Safety against Collapse

API Spec 17J is based on working stress design. Present standards have been based on a permissible utilization of 67%
of the pipe capacity for external pressure. In practice, this means that the stresses in the carcass must be less than 67%
of the stresses required to collapse the carcass.
API Spec 17J uses the formulae shown in Table 25.1 to limit stress in the internal carcass from local buckling.
For water depths less than 300 m, the permissible utilization is as before. Due to the negligible uncertainty related to
hydrostatic pressure in deep water, the permissible utilization is gradually increased with water depth. The maximum
value of 0.85 is reached at 900 m water depth.
Design Criteria
The design criteria for unbonded flexible pipes are given in the following terms [3], [4]:
• Strain for polymer sheath.
• Creep for internal pressure sheath.
• Stress for metallic layers and end fitting.
• Hydrostatic collapse due to buckling load.
• Mechanical collapse due to stress induced from armor layers.
• Torsion.
• Crushing collapse and ovalization during installation.
• Compression (axial and effective).
• Service-life factors.
API RP 17B
Another useful document for flexible pipe operators is API Recommended Practice 17B [4]. This document is not a
specification; hence, it is not binding on any party. However, many of the recommendations in API 17B are enforced in
practice, since they provide additional measures to maintain the integrity of the flexible pipes and ensure a more
efficient and safe operation. API 17B contains useful information on integrity management procedures and inspection
and monitoring measures that can be undertaken to manage any risk of damage or failure modes of the flexible pipes.
This document also contains useful information on the design and analysis methods that can be used to verify the pipe
design and service life. Figure 25.1 shows a simplified design and analysis flowchart of unbonded flexible pipes. More
detailed process charts for static flowlines and dynamic risers are illustrated in Figures 19 and 20 of API 17B. The
recommended practice discusses various methods for carrying out these design calculations and is a useful tool for pipe
operators and manufacturers to ensure an efficient and cost-effective solution for many flexible pipe applications.
Introduction to Flexible Pipelines

Boyun Guo, ... Tian Ran Lin, in Offshore Pipelines (Second Edition), 2014
10.1 Introduction
Flexible pipes have been used in the oil industry since 1972, when Coflexip was awarded a patent to build a high-
pressure, flexible steel pipe. The first application was used in drilling as a 15,000 psi kill and choke line. Since then,
flexible pipe designs have improved to produce the flowlines and risers that are now used in the offshore oil industry.
For deepwater, the flexible pipes are used mainly for dynamic risers from a subsea pipeline end manifold or riser tower
to a floating production system (FPS) such as a floating storage and offloading (FSO) unit or a floating production,
storage and offloading (FPSO) unit and tension-leg platforms (TLPs). The other uses are static risers, static flowlines,
subsea jumpers, topside jumpers, and expansion joints. Flexible pipes are used for versatile offshore oil and gas
applications including production, gas lift, gas injection, water injection, and various ancillary lines including potable
water and liquid chemical lines.
The main advantages of flexible pipelines are as follows:
• Ease and speed of installation
• No large spans because it follows the contours of the seabed
• Almost no maintenance for life of the project
• Good insulation properties are inherent
• Excellent corrosion properties

• No field joints because the pipe is of continuous manufacture
• No need of expansion loops
• Can be made with enhanced flow characteristics
• Sufficient submerged weight for lateral stability
• Accommodates misalignments during installation and tie-in operations
• Diverless installation is possible—no metrology necessary
• Load-out and installation is safer, faster, and cheaper than any other pipe application
• Retrievability and reusability for alternative application, thus enhancing the overall field development economics
and preserving the environment
• Fatigue life longer than steel pipe.
The codes that are used for the design of flexible pipe are as follows:
• API SPEC RP 17B—“Recommended Practice for Flexible Pipe”
• API SPEC RP 17J—“Specification for Unbonded Flexible Pipe”
• API SPEC RP 17K—“Specification for Bonded Flexible Pipe”
• ISO 10420—“Flexible Pipe Systems for Subsea and Marine Riser Applications”
• API Spec RP 2RD—“Design of Risers for FPSs and TLPs.”
Since there are only three manufacturers, and the manufacturing of flexible pipe requires wrapping of many
intertwining layers of high-strength stainless steel carcass and special polymers, the material price of a flexible line is
hundreds of times more expensive than an equivalent high-strength carbon steel pipe. Consequently, general use is
limited to special applications and in small quantities compared to the use of high-strength carbon steel pipe.
Ultra-deepwater use of flexible pipe is limited, due to the inability of these pipes to withstand high external hydrostatic
pressure. Presently, the maximum depth at which flexible pipes have been used is 2000 m.
The main flexible pipe layers are shown in Figure 10.1. The material makeup of each layer is described below.
Figure 10.1. Flexible pipe layers.
Layer 1 Carcass: The carcass is a spirally wound interlocking structure manufactured from a metallic strip. The
carcass prevents collapse of the inner liner and provides mechanical protection against pigging tools and abrasive
particles.
Layer 2 Inner liner: This is an extruded polymer layer that confines the internal fluid integrity.
Layer 3 Pressure armor: This is made up of a number of structural layers consisting of helically wound C-shaped
metallic wires and/or metallic strips. The pressure armor layers provide resistance to radial loads.
Layer 4 Tensile armor: The tensile armor layers provide resistance to axial tension loads. This is made up of a number
of structural layers consisting of helically wound flat metallic wires. The layers are counter wound in pairs.
Layer 5 Outer sheath: The outer sheath is an extruded polymer layer. Its function is to shield the pipe’s structural
elements from the outer environment and to give mechanical protection.
These are the primary layers. Some of the other layers that are not shown are the antiwear layers and insulation layers.
The antiwear layers are nonmetallic layers that are inserted between the structural elements to prevent wear and tear.
Additional layers of material with low thermal conductivity can be applied in order to obtain specific thermal insulation
properties of the pipe.
All the flexible pipes have the same fundamental concept. Some variation may occur in choice of materials in case of
special operating environments such as high pressures, high temperatures, sour service (high H2S and/or CO2 content),
and deepwater.
The end fitting of the flexible pipe is extremely important as it seals the different layers preventing any water ingress
and also allows it to be connected to other pipeline appurtenances. The common end fittings that are used are as
follows:
• Flanges
• Grayloc connectors
• Hydraulic subsea connectors.
Another device that is used at the end of the flexible pipes is the bend restrictor. This is used to prevent excessive
bending because most flexible pipes have a minimum allowable bend radius. Any bending beyond this would comprise
the integrity of the flexible pipe.
Offshore Installation of RTP

1 Introduction
Flexible pipes, as a technical alternative to the traditional rigid steel pipes, have been used in oil and gas fields for more
than 30 years. The major offshore applications include risers in floating production systems (FPSs) and transportation
lines from satellites to subsea manifold center. Especially, composite pipelines, which are a kind of flexible pipeline, are
now increasingly being used as transport pipelines in selected offshore projects. Several materials, such as Kevlar fiber,
glass fiber, and carbon fiber, are available for fiber-reinforced plastic composites (RTP). The application of composites in
marine field for oil and gas industry is encountering big boom currently.
Unlike steel pipes, flexible pipes are usually lightweight and flexible as well as corrosion resistant. These merits provide
fast and low-cost installation of flexible pipe. Flexible pipe can be manufactured in long lengths, thus it can be supplied
by reels on the vessel. A sufficient top tension by tensioners is needed to avoid overbending of pipe near the touchdown
zone. As shown in Figure 29.1, flexible pipe can be lowered onto the seabed along a ramp or a wheel. Due to the unique
construction of flexible pipe, special attentions should be paid for a successful installation [1]. In contrast with rigid steel
pipes, flexible RTP pipes do not have a particularly high collapse resistance, so special precautions must be made to
ensure no significant positive external pressure difference occurs. The external collapse resistance of pipe must be taken
as a primary consideration in selecting subsea pipelines. Flooding the pipeline with water during installation is often
used to mitigate the collapse problem. The virtue of the light weight mitigates the required top tension, but it may also
bring about problems of submerged weight and stability during laying process. As shown in Figure 29.2, the RTP
pipeline is often filled with water before installation and additional weight modules are always attached to pipeline to
gain its submerged weight and ensure stability, other methods such as rock bolts or a mattress can also protect the
pipeline.
Figure 29.1. Installation method of flexible pipes.
Figure 29.2. Pulling pipe to minimize local buckling.
Figure 29.3 illustrates the float and sink method for the installation of RTP in shallow water. The sinking operation
basically consists of the controlled addition of water from the onshore end of the pipe and the release of the entrapped
air from the opposite end. The sinking is conducted so that it starts at the shore, where the pipe enters the body of
water, and gradually progresses into deeper waters. To achieve this, an air pocket is induced by lifting the floating pipe
close to the shore. As the water is allowed to enter the pipe from the shore side, the added weight causes this initial air
pocket to move outward and the intermediate section of pipe between the air pocket and the shore end to sink. As
additional water is added, this pocket moves to deeper waters causing the sinking to progress to its terminal point in
the body of water.
Figure 29.3. Float and sink method of RTP.
Source: PPI [2].
A potential risk during the submersion operation is that the bending of the pipe between the water-filled and air-filled
portions may be deformed sharply enough to risk the development of a kink, a form of localized pipe buckling, when
the pipe sinking occurs too quickly. As a pipe is bent, its circumferential cross section at the point of bending becomes
increasingly ovalized. This ovalization reduces the pipe’s bending moment of inertia. On sufficient ovalization, a kink
may form at the location of the maximum bending and lead to a sudden reduction of the bending capacity. The risk of
local buckling may be minimized by applying a suitable pulling tension during the installation, as illustrated in
Figure 29.2. Therefore, special designs should be used to provide a good grip of RTP as well as to avoid the RTP
crushing at the tensioners. Some measures, such as lubricating the ramp, may be needed to avoid the abrasion damage
of RTP. Figure 29.4 shows an installation of RTP through a laying wheel to avoid kinks due to overbending in the
overbend segment.
Figure 29.4. Installation of RTP through a laying wheel.

(For color version of this figure, the reader is referred to the online version of this book.)
The offshore installation analysis of pipelines is to obtain the pipeline configuration and stress and strain distributions
along the pipeline to verify the security of installation. The mechanical properties of a flexible pipeline are much more
complicated than that of a metallic pipeline, the sectional properties of flexible pipeline must be predetermined before
the offshore installation analysis. The following properties are relevant to installation of RTP:
• Axial loading capacity.
• Bending loading capacity.
• Tensional loading capacity.
• Crushing capacity.
• Hydrostatic resistance.
During the installation phase, the following critical parameters must be constantly monitored to help control the states
of pipeline:
• Top tension at tensioners.
• Departure angle.
• Bending radius near the TDP.
This chapter details an offshore installation analysis of reinforced thermoplastic pipe, which is a kind of composite
flexible pipe. The works of theoretical analysis and FEA in the section are quoted from Bai et al. “Offshore Installation of
Reinforced Thermoplastic Pipe (RTP)” [3].
New developments in pipes and related network components

for district heating
S.F. Nilsson, in Advanced District Heating and Cooling (DHC) Systems, 2016
9.3.2 Flexible pipes

Flexible pipes have been used for a long time, but the concept was not added to the family of product standards until
2009. According to the standard series, EN 15632-1 to 4, flexible pipe systems can be categorized in those with metal
and plastics service pipes, respectively. Plastic pipes systems can be further categorized as bonded and non-bonded
systems, i.e. depending on whether or not the pipe insulation layer adheres to the service and casing pipes and is able
to transfer axial friction forces. Service pipes are usually made from copper, thin-walled steel, cross-linked polyethylene
(PEX) or polybutylene (PB).
The main benefit with flexible pipes is that they can potentially reduce installation costs. They can be coiled and hence
delivered in very long lengths, reducing the number of, and to some extent eliminating the need for, buried joints.
Additionally, they do not require straight trenches, allowing for easier passage of obstacles. On the other hand, they
cannot usually carry as high a pressure as regular steel pipes and – in particular for plastic pipes – the service
temperature must be limited. For all these reasons, flexible pipes are primarily used in heat-sparse areas. A general
review of flexible pipes can be found in Reidhav (2010).
9.3.2.1 Plastics service pipes

Cross-linked polyethylene (PEX) pipes were already being used in Sweden in the 1970s (Zinko, 2004). At that time,
however, it was unknown that oxygen diffuses from the ambient atmosphere into the service water. Hence, PEX pipes
without any diffusion protection were used, which resulted in corrosion problems in a number of systems. From the
point of view of flexible pipe solutions, this was unfortunate, as plastic pipes then had a bad reputation in the DH
business. At present, plastic pipes are protected against oxygen diffusion by a barrier material, e.g. EVOH, or an
aluminum layer.
The Swedish GRUDIS5 concept was an effort in the 1980s to adapt to the potential problem of oxygen diffusion. A
GRUDIS network comprises one central heat exchanger for a district of houses, where the heat is distributed via a
plastic pipe system in the hot tap water circuit. In each house, a heat exchanger was used to connect the radiator circuit.
The service medium would thus influence only components originally designed to be in contact with oxygen-rich water,
hence no further corrosion problem would occur due to oxygen diffusion. Zinko (2004) reviewed a number of GRUDIS
systems in service – up to 17 years of age. No abnormal damage frequency was seen, and in particular, there were no
pipe ruptures due to exhausted long-term strength. There was, however, a slightly higher frequency of damage related
to couplings, in particular to older coupling types.
The gas permeability of a plastic service pipe has another interesting aspect; namely the transport of water vapour
outwards from the service medium. A PEX service pipe and a PE casing pipe have approximately the same vapour
permeability. But in the case of a heating pipe with hot water, the much higher vapour pressure potential over the
service pipe yields a much higher permeation rate into the insulation foam than out from it. Hence, vapour will
accumulate and condense in the colder parts of the insulation. The process is, however, slow, and significant effects
from water accumulation on thermal insulation capacity take several decades to materialize. The phenomenon has been
theoretically described by Zinko et al. (2002).
PEX is the standard plastic material of choice for high temperature applications. One drawback, however, is the fact that
it cannot be welded due to its thermoset properties from the cross-linked molecular structure. Therefore, couplings are
required for PEX systems. PB, on the other hand, is a regular weldable thermoplastic polyolefin with good temperature
resistance. Various PB systems have been analyzed (see Korsman et al., 2008a,b; De Boer et al., 2008; Engel and Baars,
2010). Another non-cross-linked material option is the polyethylene variant PE-RT6 (Wang et al., 2009).
9.3.2.2 Thermal insulation

Insulation of flexible pipes is quite often applied with open-structured materials, such as PE foams or mineral wool,
which are not affected by aging from cell gas diffusion. There is, however, also a ‘semi-flexible’ PUR foam variant, which
is slightly more flexible than regular PUR foam and thus allows the pipe to be coiled. Reidhav et al. (2008) studied cell
gas diffusion in such foam and concluded that it is much more rapid than in regular foams and that such pipes should
be equipped with a diffusion barrier.
9.3.2.3 Network designs
There are other, more exotic, pipe designs available. One such example is the EPS PEX concept, where PEX service pipes
are placed in blocks of expanded polystyrene (EPS) that, in turn, are buried directly in the ground. The main benefits of
these are low price and easy installation. Reportedly, thermal properties are good, due to large volumes of insulation
material. It must be noted, however, that EPS is completely permeable to liquid water. Hence, groundwater, if present,
will enter the pipe structure and significantly reduce the thermal insulation capacity (Sällberg et al., 2004).
Another novel design that was tested in Sweden in 2006 is the Finnova concept. It is based on regular pipes, but with a
new philosophy for cost-efficient connections of heat sparse areas, namely by connecting the grid to a service box with
the heat exchanger outside the customer’s house. Expected benefits were low installation costs due to uniform and
well-structured work, and that the heat supplier would have access to the connection point at all times for maintenance
and service without disturbing the customer (Gudmundson, 2006). The principle was tested in large-scale, and that test
was evaluated a few years later (Larsson et al., 2009). Apart from failing to reach the low-cost target, it also turned out
that the service box philosophy gave rise to other concerns for example customers feel a need to be able to read their
own energy meters, and maintenance personnel still needs access to the house for verifying function, filling up radiator
circuits, etc.
Pipeline Design and Construction

Malcolm J. Brandt BSc, FICE, FCIWEM, MIWater, ... Don D. Ratnayaka BSc, DIC, MSc, FIChemE, FCIWEM, in Twort's
Water Supply (Seventh Edition), 2017
17.10 Buried Flexible Pipes

Flexible pipe design principles apply to steel and plastics but can also be applied to large diameter DI pipe under large
loads. For steel pipes greater than about DN 750 (or D/t about 120–140, depending on conditions) the theoretical pipe
thickness for normal water supply applications may be less than that required to limit deflection under backfill load.
This also applies to high-pressure pipe using high-grade steels with relatively low wall thickness.
To save adding thickness to stiffen the pipe against backfill load, the pipe may be laid under ‘controlled backfill’
conditions on a thin layer of uncompacted sand or on a preformed circular invert (60° width) in sand or fine gravel and
with selected and carefully compacted sidefill to achieve a required soil stiffness. At large diameters, temporary jacks
may be inserted (in steel pipes) to maintain circularity or to pre-deflect the pipe upwards but care must be taken to
spread jack loads to avoid damage to the lining. As the sidefill progresses the jacks may be removed depending on the
degree of pre-deflection. Deflection is measured during embedment construction and, if it exceeds the permissible
value, the backfill should be removed and replaced to obtain the necessary circularity. Measurements should be
continued periodically after installation and checked at critical sections before the pipe is filled for testing.
Deflection limits vary according to pipe material. Limits quoted in AWWA M11 for steel pipe are as follows:
▪ mortar lined and coated 2% of diameter
▪ mortar lined and flexible coated 3% of diameter
▪ flexible lined and coated 5% of diameter
If steel pipes are lined with cement mortar after installation or for flexible linings, deflections can be allowed to exceed
the limit of 2% frequently quoted. However, if large deflections are to be permitted for steel pipes, analysis of buckling
and ring bending should be carried out, allowing a design factor greater than 0.5 and taking into account the stress–
strain characteristics of the material. Note that ASME B31.1 limits deflection to 5% for non-metallic piping while the
water industry allows up to 6% for PE and PVC pipes.
Deflection of flexible pipes is usually calculated using the Spangler (Spangler, 1951) formula:
ΔD=k(PeD1+Ps)8S+0.061E′,
where:
Δ=pipe deflection (assuming horizontal and vertical deflections are equal);
D=mean diameter of the pipe;
k=a constant, dependent on the angle, between contact points, over which the trench bed supports the pipe
(typically 0.1 for 65°, 0.083 for 180°);
Pe=soil load per unit area (kN/m2);
Ps=surcharge or traffic load per unit area (kN/m2);
Dl=deflection lag factor, dependent on soil type and compaction;
S=diametrical ring bending stiffness=1000E (t/D)3/12 (kN/m2);
E=modulus of elasticity of the pipe wall (N/mm2);
E′=soil stiffness (kN/m2); and 0.061 is derived from assumed (parabolic) loading over a 100° lateral support angle.
For granular soils Dl is unity; long term, in clay, the value may be 3 or more. Where the cover is less than 2.5 m and
where the pipeline will be under sustained pressure within a year of installation, long-term deflection may be reduced
by a re-rounding factor:
DR=1–(Pi/40)
where Pi is the internal pressure in bar.
Diurnal variations in pressure in distribution mains should be taken into account in deciding the re-rounding factor.
Embedment soil stiffness E′2 depends on the nature of the soil, the degree of compaction, the amount of overburden
and degree of saturation. Values for granular soils are given in BS EN 1295-1 for different degrees of compaction. These
values may be considered to be suitable for the least favourable situations – soil fully saturated and with little cover.
Stiffness values quoted by AWWA and AASHTO tend to be rather higher and some sources show variation with soil
cover and groundwater level (Little, 2004). Compaction is quoted either as percent Proctor (modified Proctor density
(Mp) – which corresponds to the heavy compaction test to BS 1377 or ASTM D1557) or, for granular materials, to
relative density to ASTM D6938. Soil stiffness can also be derived from laboratory tests. Native soil stiffness (Little, 2004)
may be estimated from SPT or other test results with correction for depth or from undrained shear strength. AWWA
M11 quotes the accuracy of predicted deflections for different degrees of soil compaction; it does not cover native soil
modulus.
Ring bending stress is not addressed in thin wall steel pipe design but is included in design of PVC and PE
(thermoplastics) pipe; bending strain is considered for design of GRP (thermosetting) pipe. Wall thickness for plastic
pipe is usually expressed as a minimum but thickness tolerance is not covered. Bending stress is given by:
σbs=EDf(Δ/D)(t/D)
where E is the flexural modulus of elasticity of the pipe material and Df is a strain factor, dependent on pipe and soil
stiffness, and is given in BS EN 1295-1 and other references. For PVC and PE pipe the sum of bending stress and hoop
stress is required to be less than the design value. The approach is similar for GRP but uses a criterion of strain. Designs
for plastics pipes need to take into account both the initial short-term and the long-term characteristics.
FAILURE OF A FLEXIBLE PIPE WITH A CONCRETE LINER

MARK TALESNICK, RAFAEL BAKER, in Failure Analysis Case Studies II, 2001
4 GENERAL DESIGN PERSPECTIVE AND PURPOSE OF INVESTIGATION

It is common to define two major categories of soil-pipe systems:
Flexible pipes. In this case the pipe is prevented from collapsing through the mobilization of soil reaction. In order to
mobilize the soil reaction the pipe must deform. A successful design in this case depends on the ability of the pipe to
retain its functional and structural integrity under the deformation required to mobilize soil resistance. This case
represents a typical soil structure interaction problem.
Rigid pipes. The common design assumption for this category of pipe is that their load carrying capacity is independent
of the reaction of the surrounding soil, and pipe deformation is neglected.
It is not obvious to which of the above categories the present pipe belongs. On one hand, being basically a thin-walled
steel pipe its unrestrained load carrying capacity is rather low, making it a natural member of the flexible pipe category.
On the other hand, the brittle inner concrete liner may be damaged (cracked) at deformations below those required to
mobilize sufficient soil reaction.
It appears, therefore, that the pipe under consideration represents a borderline case which does not obviously belong to
either one of the common design categories. Proper pipe design requires analysis of the soil pipe system, rather than
use of standard design methodologies.
The objective of the present investigation was to determine the cause(s) of damage and the areas responsible. For this
purpose it was necessary to determine mechanical properties of the pipe section, and soil conditions in the field. A
secondary objective of the investigation was to study the suitability of the pipe as a structural shell for a more flexible
insert which would act as a barrier between the flowing corrosive sewage and the steel pipe. For this purpose it was
necessary to evaluate the structural integrity of the pipe in its present, damaged, condition.
5 EXPERIMENTAL PROGRAM
The experimental program consisted of two components. The first was laboratory testing of pipe sections in order to
determine their stiffness (stiffness factor = EI), vertical deflection or strain, which induces cracking in the inner pipe liner
and collapse loads. The second was a field investigation which included opening of test pits at several sections along the
pipeline. Excavation of the test pits allowed for visual description of the soil-trench cross section, and performance of
dynamic cone penetration (DCP) tests within the sand backfill alongside the pipe. The field investigation was limited to
a 330 m pipeline segment.
5.1 Results of tests on pipe sections

Ring compression (bending) tests were carried out on three sections of pipe. Each section was placed in a hydraulic
press and loaded across its vertical diameter by a line load along the full segment length. Throughout loading of each
test section, vertical and horizontal deflections were monitored. Visual physical damage to the inner pipe lining
(cracking) was also recorded. Figure 3(a) presents the experimental load deformation curve of one of the pipe sections
together with observations with respect to crack development throughout the test. Figure 3(b) shows that the results for
the three sections are fairly similar.
Fig. 3. Pipe load–deformation tests: (a) including damage observations, (b) comparison of results for three sections tested.
Based on the data presented in Fig. 3 it is possible to obtain the following information:
(1) The collapse load of the pipe section is between 50 and 55 kN/m. Collapse occurred at vertical deflections of 63–87
mm which correspond to diametrical strains of 5–7%. It is noted that these values characterize the unsupported
behavior of pipe sections.
(2) The maximum moment acting in the pipe section at the collapse load may be determined by eqn (1), after
Timoshenko and Gere [1]. For the pipes tested the maximum moments at collapse varied between 5.6–6.0 kN m/m,
Mmax╡=P⋅R2⋅[π2−1], (1)
where P is the collapse load per unit length as noted above, and R is the pipe radius.
(3) The stiffness factor of the pipe (EI) can be determined based on the linear section of the force deflection curve using
eqn (2) [1].
EI=PR34⋅Δy(π−8π), (2)
where Δy is the vertical pipe deflection under load per unit length P.The calculated stiffness of the three pipe
sections was found to be approximately 13.5 kN m. It is noted that the EI is an inherent property of the pipe section
which is independent of lateral support conditions. This experimentally determined pipe stiffness is representative
of the composite pipe cross section, which includes both concrete layers and the steel core.
(4) Severe cracking of the inner liner wall (defined as a crack opening of 0.3 mm [2]) occurred at a vertical diametric
strain of approximately 1.2%. The working assumption used throughout the investigation has been that cracking
occurs at the same strain value irrespective of the support conditions. Obviously the load required to impose this
strain level is dependent upon lateral support conditions.
5.2 Results of field investigation

Dynamic cone penetration testing was performed at several stations along the investigated portion of the pipeline.
Technical details of the testing procedure and interpretation of results may be found in [3]. The testing was performed
following excavation of the fill material down to the pipe crown. Two or three DCP soundings were performed within
each excavation to a depth of approximately 1.6–1.8 m. The end point of the sounding was located at a depth of
approximately 0.5 m below the pipe invert. The plots shown in Fig. 4 are typical results found at six stations. It is noted
that, in general, flatter portions of depth–blow count curves represent material more resistant to penetration. The slope
of the depth–blow count curve is called the DCP number (mm/blow) which characterizes the stiffness of the material at
a particular depth. In general a lower DCP number would indicate stiffer material. In homogeneous soils low DCP
numbers infer dense materials. Figure 5 shows the distribution with depth of the DCP numbers as inferred from the
results shown in Fig. 4.
Fig. 4. DCP sounding data.
Fig. 5. DCP number versus depth profiles.
At three locations along the pipeline segment considered, test excavations were opened to depths of 0.5–0.6 m below
the pipe invert. The excavations were made at locations where DCP soundings had been performed. Groundwater was
encountered in each of the excavations. In order to enable visual examination, water in the excavations was pumped
out. The examination revealed the following qualitative features in each of the test pits (see Fig. 6).
Fig. 6. Schematic of visual observations in test excavation: (a) cross-section, (b) longitudinal section.
(1) Sand backfill of thickness between 10–35 cm was found below the pipe invert. It is noted that the design called for
the pipe to be placed directly on the gravel layer. The best available information indicates that the pipe was laid out
according to the design specifications.
(2) Below the sand backfill a layer of natural clay subgrade approximately 5–25 cm in thickness was found. The
thickness of this intermediate layer increases from the invert of the pipe towards the trench wall (see Fig. 6(a)).
(3) Below the intermediate clay layer the gravel base was found, and below it, the natural clay subgrade.
The sand backfill in the zone of the pipe haunches was found to be very loose, significantly less dense than the sand fill
in the upper part of the trench. The gravel layer was seen to be completely impregnated by a mixture of the natural clay
subgrade and the sand backfill.
Figure 7 shows very good correlation between the actual soil profile revealed by the visual examination (Fig. 6) and the
results of the corresponding DCP sounding shown in Fig 4. The location of the discontinuities in the distribution of
DCP numbers shown in Fig. 5 are generally consistent with the layer boundaries in the lower portion of the trench
profile. Breakpoint A shown in Fig. 7 implies that the sand below mid pipe elevation (haunch zone) is considerably
looser than the sand above this level. Breakpoint A is a common feature of all the plots shown in Fig. 4 and Fig. 5.
Fig. 7. DCP sounding profile, excavation profile composite.
Despite variations in the absolute value of the DCP numbers, each of the sounding profiles shown in Fig. 5 have the
following common features:
(1) There is a marked increase in DCP number at depths between 75–145 cm below the pipe crown which corresponds
to the bottom part (haunches) of the pipe section.
(2) There is a marked decrease in DCP number at elevations corresponding to the visually observed gravel layer below
the pipe invert, followed by an increase in DCP numbers as the sounding entered the natural clay subgrade.
Pipeline Design and Construction

Don D. Ratnayaka, ... K. Michael Johnson, in Water Supply (Sixth Edition), 2009
15.6 Flexible Pipe Design

Flexible pipe design principles apply to steel and plastics but can also be applied to large diameter ductile iron pipe
under large loads. For steel pipes greater than about DN 750 (or D/t about 120 to 140, depending on conditions) the
theoretical pipe thickness to meet usual internal pressures is frequently less than the thickness required to limit
deflection under backfill load. To save adding extra steel thickness for stiffening the pipe against backfill load, the pipe
may be laid under ‘controlled backfill’ conditions with the pipe being laid on a thin layer of uncompacted sand or on a
preformed circular invert (60° width) in sand or fine gravel and selecting and carefully compacting the sidefill in shallow
equal layers either side of the pipe to achieve a required soil stiffness.
At large diameters, temporary jacks may be inserted (in steel pipes) to maintain circularity or to predeflect the pipe
upwards but care must be taken to spread jack loads to avoid damage to the lining. As the sidefill progresses the jacks
may be removed depending on the degree of predeflection. Deflection is measured during embedment construction
and, if it exceeds the permissible value, the backfill should be removed and replaced to obtain the necessary circularity.
Measurements should be continued periodically after installation and checked at critical sections before the pipe is filled
for testing.
Deflection of flexible pipes is usually calculated using the Spangler formula:
ΔD=k(PeD1+Ps)8S+0.061E'
where:
Δ = pipe deflection (assuming horizontal and vertical deflections are equal);
D = mean diameter of the pipe;
k = a constant, dependent on the angle, between contact points, over which the trench bed supports the pipe
(typically 0.1 for 65°, 0.083 for 180°);
Pe = soil load per unit area (kN/m2);
Ps = surcharge or traffic load per unit area (kN/m2);
D1 = deflection lag factor, dependent on soil type and compaction
S = diametrical ring bending stiffness = 1000. E (t/D)3/12 (kN/m2);
E = modulus of elasticity of the pipe wall (N/mm2);
E´ = soil stiffness (kN/m2); and
0.061 is derived from assumed (parabolic) loading over a 100° lateral support angle.
For granular soils D1 is unity. Long term, in clay, the value may be 3 or more. Where the cover is less than 2.5 m and
where the pipeline will be under sustained pressure within a year of installation, long term deflection may be reduced
by a re-rounding factor DR = 1 − (Pi/40), where Pi is the internal pressure in bar. Diurnal variations in pressure in
distribution mains should be taken into account in deciding the re-rounding factor.
Embedment soil stiffness E´2 depends on the nature of the soil, the degree of compaction, the amount of overburden
and degree of saturation. Values for granular soils are given in BS EN 1295-1 for different degrees of compaction. These
values may be considered to be suitable for the least favourable situations—soil fully saturated and with little cover.
Stiffness values quoted by AWWA and AASHTO tend to be rather higher and some sources show variation with soil
cover and ground water level (Little, 2004). Compaction is quoted either as per cent Proctor (modified Proctor density,
Mp—which corresponds to the heavy compaction test to BS 1377) or, for granular materials, to relative density. Soil
stiffness can also be derived from laboratory tests. The overall soil modulus is modified to take account of the trench
side soil if the native soil modulus is less than 5 MN/m2 and if the trench width is less than 4.3 times the pipe diameter.
Native soil stiffness (Little, 2004) may be estimated from SPT or other test results with correction for depth or to
undrained shear strength. AWWA M11 quotes accuracy of predicted deflections for different soil compaction; it does
not cover native soil modulus.
Ring bending stress is traditionally not addressed in steel pipe design but is included in design of PVC and PE
(thermoplastics) pipe; bending strain is considered for design of GRP (thermosetting) pipe. Pipe thickness for plastic
pipe is usually expressed as a minimum but thickness tolerance is not covered. Bending stress is given by σbs = E Df
(Δ/D) (t/D), where E is the flexural modulus of elasticity of the pipe material and Df is a strain factor, dependent on pipe
and soil stiffness and is given in BS EN 1295-1 and other references. For PVC and PE pipe the sum of bending stress
and hoop stress is required to be less than the design value. The approach is similar for GRP but uses a criterion of
strain. Designs for plastics pipes need to take into account both the initial short term and the long term characteristics.
Deflection limits vary according to pipe material. Deflection limits quoted in AWWA M11 for steel pipe are as follows:
■ mortar lined and coated 2% of diameter
■ mortar lined and flexible coated 3% of diameter
■ flexible lined and coated 5% of diameter
Deflections can be allowed to exceed the limit of 2% frequently quoted where pipes are lined with cement mortar after
installation or for flexible linings. However, if large deflections are to be permitted then for steel pipes it would seem
consistent to carry out a more detailed analysis, including ring bending stress, but adopting a design factor greater than
the traditional value of 0.5 and taking into account the stress strain characteristics which differ from those applying to
plastics.
About ScienceDirect Remote access Shopping cart Contact and support

Terms and conditions Privacy policy
We use cookies to help provide and enhance our service and tailor content and ads. By
continuing you agree to the use of cookies.
Copyright © 2019 Elsevier B.V. or its licensors or contributors. ScienceDirect ® is a registered
trademark of Elsevier B.V.

Flexible Pipe - An Overview - ScienceDirect Topics

Hochgeladen von

Dokumentinformationen

Originaltitel

Copyright

Verfügbare Formate

Dieses Dokument teilen

Dokument teilen oder einbetten

Freigabeoptionen

Stufen Sie dieses Dokument als nützlich ein?

Sind diese Inhalte unangemessen?

Copyright:

Verfügbare Formate

Flexible Pipe - An Overview - ScienceDirect Topics

Hochgeladen von

Copyright:

Verfügbare Formate

16/02/2019 Flexible Pipe - an overview | ScienceDirect Topics

View full index

Download full-size image

Figure 24.1. Typical ﬂexible riser conﬁgurations.

Integrity Management of Flexible Pipes

Design Codes for Risers and Subsea Systems

1 Flexible Pipe Guidelines

The design requirements were divided into two categories:

Cross-Sectional and Dynamic Analyses of Flexible Pipes

2 Flexible Pipe Guidelines

The design requirements were divided into two categories [2]:

API Speciﬁcation 17K

API Speciﬁcation 17J

Safety against Collapse

Introduction to Flexible Pipelines

• Excellent corrosion properties

Download full-size image

Figure 10.1. Flexible pipe layers.

Oﬀshore Installation of RTP

Download full-size image

Figure 29.1. Installation method of ﬂexible pipes.

Download full-size image

Figure 29.2. Pulling pipe to minimize local buckling.

Download full-size image

Download full-size image

Figure 29.4. Installation of RTP through a laying wheel.

• Bending radius near the TDP.

New developments in pipes and related network components

9.3.2 Flexible pipes

9.3.2.1 Plastics service pipes

9.3.2.2 Thermal insulation

Pipeline Design and Construction

17.10 Buried Flexible Pipes

FAILURE OF A FLEXIBLE PIPE WITH A CONCRETE LINER

4 GENERAL DESIGN PERSPECTIVE AND PURPOSE OF INVESTIGATION

5.1 Results of tests on pipe sections

Download full-size image

5.2 Results of ﬁeld investigation

Download full-size image

Fig. 4. DCP sounding data.

Download full-size image

Fig. 5. DCP number versus depth proﬁles.

Download full-size image

Download full-size image

Fig. 7. DCP sounding proﬁle, excavation proﬁle composite.

Pipeline Design and Construction

15.6 Flexible Pipe Design

About ScienceDirect Remote access Shopping cart Contact and support

Das könnte Ihnen auch gefallen