Accepted Manuscript

Application of the Finite Element Method for Evaluating the Stress Distribution
in Buried Damaged Polyethylene Gas Pipes

R. Khademi-Zahedi

PII: S2467-9674(18)30027-8
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.undsp.2018.05.002
Reference: UNDSP 59

To appear in: Underground Space

Received Date: 18 February 2018

Revised Date: 18 April 2018
Accepted Date: 6 May 2018

Please cite this article as: R. Khademi-Zahedi, Application of the Finite Element Method for Evaluating the Stress
Distribution in Buried Damaged Polyethylene Gas Pipes, Underground Space (2018), doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/
j.undsp.2018.05.002

This is a PDF file of an unedited manuscript that has been accepted for publication. As a service to our customers
we are providing this early version of the manuscript. The manuscript will undergo copyediting, typesetting, and
review of the resulting proof before it is published in its final form. Please note that during the production process
errors may be discovered which could affect the content, and all legal disclaimers that apply to the journal pertain.
Application of the Finite Element Method for Evaluating the Stress Distribution in Buried

Damaged Polyethylene Gas Pipes

Khademi-Zahedi R1.

1
Shahid Chamran University of Ahvaz, Ahvaz, Iran

Abstract: During the loading process, buried gas pipes can experience severe stresses due to soil-

structure interaction, the presence of traffic load, the soil’s column weight, daily and/or seasonal

temperature changes and uniform internal pressure. In this research, the finite element method is

employed to evaluate the behavior of buried Medium Density Polyethylene (MDPE) pipes which have

been subjected to damage at the pipe crown. The modeled pipe damage ranges from a very small circular

hole to a large circular hole and elliptic holes with various minor to major diameter ratios, a/b, to simulate

circular to crack-shaped defects. The computer simulation and stress analyses were performed using the

ANSYS software finite element package. The stress distribution around the defect was determined under

the aforementioned mechanical and thermal loading conditions. Then, the maximum values of Von Mises

stresses in the damaged buried PE pipes, which were evaluated by finite element solution, were compared

with their corresponding reduced strength for safe operation with a life expectancy of fifty years. Based

on the results, the maximum Von Mises stress values in the defective buried polyethylene gas pipeline are

significantly above the pipe strength limit at 35°C. The previously mentioned stress values increase with

the following factors: temperature increase, increase in circular hole diameter and decrease in elliptic hole

diameter ratio (a/b). The maximum stress in the damaged PE pipe is due to the simultaneous loading

effects of soil column weight, internal pressure, vehicle wheel load and pipe temperature increase.

Additionally, the novel finite element models and stress plots for the buried damaged pipe and the pipe

1
material allowable strength will be used to investigate the correct repair method for the damaged gas

pipeline and to choose the best patch arrangement which will assure a safe repair.

Keywords: buried gas distribution pipes, circular and elliptical defects, Medium Density Polyethylene

(MDPE), Von Mises Stress, Finite Element Method, temperature variation

1. Introduction

In recent years, polyethylene materials have been the subject of vast attention and research. These

materials have a wide range of industrial applications. The commercial advantages of polyethylene pipes

including their flexibility, fatigue resistance, durability, coilability, high ductility, light weight, corrosion

and chemical resistance, seismic resistance, low life cycle costs, reduced installation costs and their

excellent long-term performance as pressure pipes have increased the interest of gas distribution

companies to use them in ploughing applications for gas distribution networks. The steady growth in the

use of polyethylene pipelines for natural gas transmission and distribution networks and the plan of

natural gas distribution companies to extend the number of miles of distribution and transmission PE pipe

in the immediate future warrants the need for safe, reliable and efficient operation of these pipelines

(Green, 2007). Buried pipes are supported by embedment which is built by surrounding pipes with firm

and stable material (The Plastic Pipe Institute, 2006b). Among a range of polyethylene materials, medium

density polyethylene (MDPE) pipe materials are recognized as offering excellent long-term performance

as pressure pipes. The applied loads on buried medium density polyethylene pipe for gas distribution

which should be considered in all the designs and stress analysis calculations can be categorized as

follows (Shishesaz, 2003; Shishesaz and Shishesaz, 2008):

1- Temperature variations in the soil (and therefore in the pipe)

2- The weight of the soil column above the pipe

2
 3- The surcharge loads including live traffic and dead loads above the pipes

4- Gas internal pressure, which is considered to be approximately 4 bar (405300 pascal)

5- Stress concentration due to local changes in the pipe geometry

Careful attention is required to minimize the stress level on the buried pipe caused by the aforementioned

applied loads (Nasirian, 2007; Watkins and Anderson, 2000). The first calculations on buried pipe

stresses and deformations were performed by Marston (Moser and Folkman, 2007). Since then, several

authors (Alawaji, 2008; Goddard, 1994; Kolonko and Madryas, 1996; Uponor Aldyl Company, 2004)

have investigated the soil-pipe interaction effects on buried pipes, experimentally, analytically and

numerically. Experimental investigations of underground spaces are cumbersome, expensive and in some

cases, impractical. Furthermore, while the finite element method (FEM) is mostly used in CAE (Nguyen-

Thanh et. Al., 2011), several researchers have employed commercial FE packages to model the buried

pipe problem. For example, Shishesaz and his colleague (2008) applied the finite element method and

used ANSYS v8.0 software to analyze the resulting stress effects of different simultaneous loads on

buried gas distribution pipes 120 centimeters deep in soil. In this research, the capability of utilizing

Medium Density Polyethylene Pipes (MDPE) and the proper sockets made of High Density Polyethylene

material (HDPE) in natural gas distribution networks in areas with hot climate conditions such as

southwest Iran and Ahvaz city was investigated. Nasirian (2007) investigated stresses in simple pipes

with 90-millimeter diameter and polyethylene material with connections buried 1.45 m underground. The

gas pressure in the pipe was considered to be 4 bar. In the mentioned analysis, the soil and pipe were

assumed to be elastic. The soil, pipe and the surroundings are meshed using the ANSYS software and

discretized with the appropriate finite elements, Solid 95 elements, which are adopted in the present

paper.

3
Polyethylene piping systems in gas distribution networks may be damaged during installation or through

third party damage after being placed in service due to several reasons. All imperfections or damaged

sites that would impair the serviceability of the buried polyethylene pipe must be detected and repaired.

The previous investigations on the computer modeling and analysis of underground PE pipes have been

performed only for intact buried pipes with no defects. However, finite element modeling of buried

polyethylene damaged pipes can be helpful in designing efficient repair methods and tools. Therefore,

gaining a fundamental understanding of material failure, which is a major research topic in material

science as well as mechanics, is necessary to keep structures working properly (Areias and Rabczuk,

2014; Ghorashi et. al., 2015; Ren et. al., 2016; Ren et. al., 2017). Rabczuk (2013) performed research on

computational methods for fracture and stated that simulating failure and fracture requires devising

suitable models, discretizing the resulting partial differential equations, and solving them numerically.

Achieving polyethylene pipe repair without interrupting the gas flow by the application of stronger

polyethylene material is known as pipe patching. In gas transmission networks suffering from different

kinds of damage, designing a patch with a specific shape, size and mechanical properties such that it can

strengthen the injured buried polyethylene pipe under different loading conditions requires study, research

and extensive experiments (Green et. al.,2007). Hence, there is an urgent need for a comprehensive study

to calculate the stresses on the damaged pipe in order to design a proper patch for reducing the stress

values to the allowable limits or below. However, fracture simulations are computationally expensive,

utilizing several minutes to hours of CPU time (Hamdia, 2017).

In this research, geometrical discontinuities in the form of damage, including holes of different sizes in

buried MDPE with a nominal diameter of 4 inches and a standard diameter ratio (SDR) of 11.5 are

simulated. Subsequently, other types of pipe damage in the form of elliptical holes with different diameter

ratios (a/b) are considered. After modeling the polyethylene pipe and different surrounding soils and

4
discretizing the models using a continuum mechanics-based finite element package (ANSYS software),

the stress analysis in the damaged pipe is obtained. Considering the physical characteristics of the pipe

and the soil, linear elasticity relationships are used for the theoretical component of the analysis. This

paper is organized as follows: Section 2 presents the design theories for polyethylene buried gas pipe. The

geometric and finite element modeling of the buried damaged pipe using the ANSYS package are

discussed in detail in Section 3. Section 4 concludes the evaluation of the stress results for various loading

conditions. Section 5 concludes and summarizes the manuscript.

2. Basic design theories for polyethylene underground gas pipes

In the design of underground gas pipes, the principle of soil–pipe interaction controls the pipe performance. In this

study, to investigate this interaction and determine the effect of local changes in pipe geometry in terms of

imperfections or damaged sites at the pipe crown on the resulting stress concentrations, the following thermal

and mechanical loads (explained in sections 2a, 2b, and 2c) are introduced and applied to the underground

polyethylene gas pipe for selected defect arrangements, namely, circular and elliptical holes. Essentially,

polyethylene pipes are viscoelastic in nature and their creep behavior is an important issue. Meanwhile, in the

structural and mechanical analysis of polyethylene, linear elasticity equations can be used for stress

calculations. In the study of the polyethylene structures for long life applications, it is customary in design

to use a reduced strength, based on a 50-year life and then treat the material as linearly elastic in the

calculations (Chevron Philips Chemical Company LP, 2003; The Plastic Pipe Institute, 2001; The Plastic

Pipe Institute, 2006a). This procedure is done either by the use of an effective modulus or by applying the

minimum required strength (MRS), for which the values are available for polyethylene materials and the

design stress (or maximum allowable stress) that can be applied to the pipe is obtained from (International

Organization For Standardization, 2004; Shishesaz and Shishesaz, 2008):

5
 MRS
s  (1)
C

Here,  s is the design stress, MRS corresponds to the minimum required strength, and C is the design coefficient

(at least 1.25 for all PE types).

2a. Analytical stress calculations in an unburied, thick-walled cylindrical pipe with circular holes

under internal pressure

Stress analysis of damaged shells is important in many engineering applications such as pressurized

pipelines, storage tanks and others (Chau-Dinh, 2012). The analytical solution for the stress can be

derived to estimate stress associated with the presence of holes in complex stress fields. Figure 1

demonstrates a small circular hole which is created radially in the wall of a pressurized cylinder and

shows the applied effective stress field to the hole in the plane perpendicular to its axis. The applied loads

on the pipe are considered as static pressure vectors as shown in Figures 1a and 1b. Taking the plane

containing the highest stress values which occur at the inner surface of the cylindrical pipe, the equations

for a thick-walled vessel yield the following for a large cylinder:

  

Pi k 2  1  (2)
(k 2  1)

 rr  Pi (3)

2vPi
 zz  (4)
(k 2  1)

in which  rr  Pi is the radial stress with respect to the cylinder axis and is applied normal to the plane

shown in Figure 1a. In Eqs. (2) and (4), k =Do /Di, is the diameter ratio (where Di and Do are the inside and

outside pipe diameters, respectively), v is Poisson's ratio, and Pi is the internal pipe pressure. Due to tensile stress

6
σθθ, the greatest stress concentration occurs at points Y (as illustrated in Fig. 1a). For perforated plates it

can be proven that the maximum tensile stress is σxx,=3σθθ. Considering this assumption, we can write:

3Pi  k 2  1
 xx  (5)
(k 2  1)

where the x-axis is in the hoop direction of the cylindrical pipe. Due to the presence of tensile stress σzz,

its effect should also be considered on the tensile stress at point Y. Therefore, the greatest stress

concentration is at the points Y, where

3Pi  k 2  1
 xx '  3 xx   zz    zz
(k 2  1) (6)

By substituting Equation (4) into the above equation, we obtain:

Pi  3k 2  3  2 
 xx 
'

(k 2  1) (7)

Now, if the internal pressure is also applied inside the hole, the stress value at point Y in the axial

direction of x is more than  xx ' obtained from Equation (7), because the further contribution of pressure

at point Y creates an effective hoop stress at the inner wall equal to that of a cylindrical with an infinite

radius ratio. It can be shown that the aforementioned extra hoop stress in the limit will approach +Pi,

which may be superimposed on Equation (6) to give the maximum hoop stress in a large cylindrical pipe

with a small circular hole:

  

Pi 4k 2  2  2  (8)
(k  1)
2

7
 For an isotropic elastic pipe material with Young’s modulus of E=427 MPa and Poisson’s ratio of υ=0.35

for MDPE, (similar to polyethylene pipes in gas transmission networks), the previous equations can be

simplified to obtain the principal stress values. Therefore, the principal stresses in the three principal

coordinate directions at point Y of the inner wall of perforated MDPE pipe can be simplified as follows:

Pi  4k 2  1.3
(9-a)
  
(k 2  1)

 rr  Pi (9-b)

0.7 Pi
 zz  (9-c)
(k 2  1)
In mechanical engineering design, it is typical to compare equivalent stresses to the actual three-

dimensional stress state and link them to yield and failure criteria. One commonly used criterion involves

the definition of von Mises stress  e as below:

1/ 2 (10)
 (   ) 2  ( 2   3 ) 2  ( 3   1 ) 2 
e   1 2 
 2 
in which σ1, σ2 and σ3 are the principal stresses. Therefore, in the present problem, by substituting the

principal stress equation in a perforated pipe (Equation 9) into Equation 10, the equivalent (Von Mises)

stress at point Y in the presence of a hole is:

1/2
Pi  21k 4  3.6k 2  0.27 
e  (11)
(k 2  1)

However, research on shell fracture mechanics is complex compared to continuum problems due to the

combination of in-plane and out-of-plane loading. Because analytical solutions have been derived only

for shells of simple geometries and boundary conditions, numerical methods have been developed to

8
address practical shell problems with complicated shapes and boundaries. A popular method to analyze

shell structure is the finite element method (FEM), for example, the numerical solutions developed by T.

Belytschko’s group (Rabcuk, Areias and Belytschko, 2007; Rabczuk, Gracie, Song and Belytschko,

2010). Additionally, alternative methods have been developed recently by T. Rabczuk’s group (Amiri et.

al., 2014; Areias and Rabczuk, 2013; Areias et. al., 2016; Nguyen-Thanh et. al., 2017; Nguyen-Thanh et.

al., 2015) to model problems of damaged and cracked shells under various loading conditions.

2b Temperature variation in the soil and pipe

To obtain thermal stress values in buried pipelines, it is necessary to have ground temperature

information. Temperature variations in the soil and pipe can occur over a day or a season. Knowledge of the

ground temperature change is necessary to estimate the thermal stresses which may develop in the underground

pipe. In this research, we selected Ahvaz city in the hot climate area of southern Iran as temperature

variations are very great and induce significant thermal stresses in structures even in underground spaces

(Khademi-Zahedi, 2011; Nasirian, 2007; Shishesaz and Shishesaz, 2008). The ground temperature

variation at any depth can be formulated and determined for different areas. The ground temperature may

be calculated at any depth, according to Eq. (1) as:

 1
  1

  2  2 t   2  (12)
T ( y, t )  T  A exp  y    cos   y  
   to    t   t  
 
o
 

where T(y,t) is the induced temperature in the soil, y is the depth in question (cm), t is the time (sec), T is

the average climate temperature for the time period and location of interest, A is the difference between

maximum and minimum temperatures for the time period and location of interest,is the thermal

diffusivity of the soil (cm2/sec) at the penetration depth and to is the time for one complete temperature

cycle. This equation also shows that increasing the pipe’s installation depth to any reasonable value

makes the pipe (and its surrounding medium) more insensitive to changes in temperature during the

9
daytime at ground level. Although the results in this research are extracted for a special area (the city of

Ahvaz), they can be used for other locations with similar seasonal changes in climate during a year.

According to Tabatabaii et. al. (1999) and Williams and Gold (1976), on a 50°C summer day, the soil

temperature at 125 cm depth remains constant and equal to approximately 35°C. Therefore, assuming the

worst case of a sudden temperature reduction in a pipe in direct contact with the soil, it can experience a

15°C temperature reduction (ΔT=(35-50)°C) after installation. Additionally, on a cold winter day, a

similar trend is observed: the minimum soil temperature at 125 cm depth remains constant and equal to

approximately 13°C. If a pipe with a minimum temperature of 8°C is installed, a 5°C temperature

increase (ΔT=(13-8)°C) will occur in the pipe (Khademi-Zahedi, 2011). In this research, the effects of

temperature variations are also investigated based on the previously mentioned temperature changes.

2c. Soil column weight above the pipe

An estimation of the load from the weight of the soil and the pavement is of great importance in buried

pipe design. In the design of buried polyethylene pipelines, it is assumed that the overburden load applied

to the pipe crown is equal to the weight of the soil column projected above the pipe. However, the actual

load applied to a buried polyethylene gas pipe may be considerably lower, since shear resistance transfers

part of the soil load to the trench sidewalls and embedment. Theoretical approaches for calculating the

soil column weight load on the buried pipe crown are well described in (Chevron Philips Chemical

Company LP, 2003).

2d. Surcharge load in terms of traffic load on the pipe

The pressure on the pipe due to a surface vehicular live load, mainly wheel loads from trucks and trains,

depends on vehicle weight, tire pressure and size, vehicle speed and many other factors. The most

common loading used in design is H20 highway loading. Wheel loading for H20 trucks is calculated

according to American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials (AASHTO) standards.

10
 Chevron Philip

Chemical Company LP (2003) and Shishehsaz and his colleague (2008) describe the theoretical

approaches for calculating vehicular live load on buried pipes.

In addition to the loads described in sections 2a, 2b, 2c and 2d, the internal gas pressure results in

significant stresses in the pipe wall material. In this research, the operating inside pressure is assumed to

be equal to 4 bars. This is the working pressure in the metropolitan gas line in Iran.

3.0 Geometric and finite element modeling (ANSYS software)

In this work, the finite element modeling package of ANSYS V12 software is used to calculate the

applied stresses in buried, damaged MDPE gas pipe. The pipe, soil layers and the surrounding material

are modeled and meshed in 3D by proper finite elements. Soil grades around the pipe’s circumference

were selected according to ASTM standards. The ground surface was assumed to be covered by a thick

layer of asphalt. The physical properties of soil layers around the pipe and covering asphalt in this

research, which are selected according to ASTM standards, are listed in Table 1. According to Fig. 2a, a

burial depth of 125 cm was selected for the pipe, an optimum burial depth used by gas companies at

which daily weather changes do not seem to affect the pipe’s temperature. The dimensions of the trench,

pipe and surrounding soil in our model are presented in Figure 2a. The numbers shown beside the model

in Figure 2a are based on the layer numbers indicated in Table 1. The stiffness modulus of asphalt can be

estimated by the equations mentioned in Nasirian (2007):

kg N
Sm  17.3 104 2
 173 106 2
cm m (13)

In this research, it is assumed that the damaged polyethylene gas pipe is buried in a 415 mm-wide trench

surrounded by a layer of fine gravel.

11
Polymer pipes made of MDPE with nominal diameter of 4 inch (IPS Standard) and a standard dimension

ratio (SDR) of 11.5 are widely used in the gas distribution industry (Symons, 1997). In the pipe

manufacturing industry, especially for plastic pipes, the standard dimension ratio (SDR) is defined as the

ratio of pipe outside diameter, Do to the pipe wall thickness h, as (European Committee for

Standardization, 1996):

D (14)
SDR 
h

To investigate the stress distribution in a pressurized PE gas pipe, a 114.3 mm outside diameter pipe was

selected with SDR = 11.5. Based on the selected pipe diameter, its thickness was calculated according to

its SDR value. Table 2 presents the geometry of the aforementioned widely used MDPE pipe in gas

transmission networks, based on the standards tables provided by the dominant polyethylene pipe

manufacturers. For computational models in this research, the mechanical properties of MDPE pipe of

type PE80 (according to Table 3) are used, according to the properties of polyethylene materials

manufactured in Iran (Khademi-Zahedi, 2018).

3.1 Finite element modeling and solution for an unburied pipe with a circular wall hole

In this section, to verify the applicability and accuracy of the computer simulation and the finite element

method to solve damaged pipe problems, an unburied MDPE pipe with a 4-inch nominal diameter was

modeled and loaded to a final pressure of 405,300 Pa (4 bar). The modeled pipe had circular holes with

various diameters (5, 7.5, 10, 12.5, 15, 17.5, 20, and 22.5 mm) at the pipe crown. A geometric computer

model of the pipe was created in ANSYS so that the center of the coordinate system aligned with the

center of the pipe and the z-axis aligned with the pipe’s axis. Various types of finite elements can be used

for computational analysis of the problem. The finite element code used for modeling and analysis of the

pipe and its surrounding was ANSYS V12. In this research, since stress distribution in the pipe wall is

12
very important, 3D brick-type elements called SOLID95, available in the ANSYS software package

elements library, are employed to model the pipe, patch, and the surrounding medium. This is a

hexahedron (having six faces), twenty-node element designed for modeling structural problems. The

SOLID95 element has three degrees of freedom at each node (translations in the x, y, and z coordinate

directions). Because this kind of element includes middle nodes, they are very suitable for solving curved

boundary problems. To have the best mesh control with a minimal number of finite elements and to

reduce the computational time and costs, the author spent a great deal of time obsessing over the meshes.

Because a mapped (structured) finite element mesh typically has a regular pattern, with obvious rows of

elements, the author built the geometry as a series of fairly regular volumes and performed a mapped

mesh to control the mesh efficiency. Figure 3 illustrates the finite element model (FEM) of half the pipe

and hole to use a symmetric boundary condition. To have a good mesh quality and to minimize the

number of elements to reduce the computational cost, the meshing step is performed in separate parts. As

we illustrated in the magnified view of the pressurized pipe in Fig. 3, in the region surrounding the hole,

where the accuracy of results is more important than other areas, we tried to produce finer meshes. In

other areas further from the hole, the meshes become gradually coarser. However, the meshes used for

calculations are regular for both mentioned areas. For proper finite element modeling, considering the fact

that the pipe is long, the plane strain constraint in the direction of the pipe axis is assumed (this constraint

is applied to the nodes located at the related coordinates). Considering Table 2, the outer radius to inner

radius ratio in the investigated pipe in this paper is as follows:

57.15 (15)
k  1.2103
47.22
To achieve an approximate (analytical) solution of the stresses in the perforated pipe, Equations (9) and

(11) can be used. As mentioned earlier, many simplifications are assumed to drive these equations; the

13
effects of circular hole diameter variations, bending stresses and 3D stress concentration factors are not

included. To solve for the analytical stress in perforated pipes, the maximum values of stresses in the

perforated pipe wall in this research are obtained by substituting Equation (15) into Equations (9) and

(11), yielding:

   6242663Pa

 rr  405300Pa (16)

 e  6202806Pa

The good performance of the present method is demonstrated in Table 4 by a number of numerical

examples. Maximum values of hoop and Von Mises stresses for different hole diameters derived by the

finite element method and their relative percentage difference from the analytical solution are presented.

Additionally, to obtain accurate results, the postulated model was run based on different mesh conditions

(and element numbers) until proper convergence was reached. Specifically, to investigate the effect of

mesh size on the accuracy of the results, identical models with various numbers of meshes were created.

The results are presented in Table 4. Considering the obtained solutions for the hoop and Von Mises

stresses from the finite element solution and comparing them with the analytical solution values

(Equation 15), it can be concluded that:

1- For damaged pipes models longer than 0.5 m, increasing the pipe length will not affect the

maximum stress values at the damage location significantly.

2- Increasing the hole diameter of the damaged pipe will increase the value of hoop and Von Mises

stresses.

3- If the distribution of the implemented finite elements is done properly, increasing the number of

elements will not affect the results. Therefore, the computational costs can be reduced

significantly.

14
 4- The relative error values between analytical and finite element solutions are acceptable for smaller

hole sizes but they increase for larger hole diameters. The main reason for this difference is that

the assumption of plane stress for simplicity in the analytical solution is not valid for larger holes.

Another influencing factor is the 3D effects of the model. In addition, the effect of bending stress

is more important for pipes under internal pressure with larger-size damage. All these issues are

ignored in the analytical solution but considered in the finite element solution.

5- In the finite element solution, the maximum values of hoop and Von Mises stresses (according to

Figure 3) in the perforated pipe occur on the internal surface (inside) of the pipe and around the

hole at the sides of the damage. This result for the location of maximum value of hoop and Von

Mises stresses was consistent with the analytical solution.

Based on these results, the selected finite elements and applied boundary conditions in this section are

appropriate for carrying out the next stages of the research and the finite element modeling of perforated

pipes (Khademi-Zahedi, 2011). However, in the case of simulating the fracture process, it has been

known for decades in the computational mechanics community that traditional finite element polynomial

interpolation is inadequate and efficient fracture methods should be developed (Areias et. al., 2016;

Areias and Rabczuk, 2017; Khademi-Zahedi et. al., 2017).

3.2 Finite element modeling of damaged polyethylene pipe buried in a trench

To further investigate the effect of the aforementioned applied mechanical and thermal loads on the

underground MDPE pipe, we performed a 3D finite element modeling of the pipe, soils and surrounding

materials by employing 3D elements of type Solid95 from the ANSYS package (for the entire model

components) which are appropriate for analyzing soil-structure problems. Additionally, the soil and pipe

surrounding materials including the soil in the trench, unaffected ground and asphalt are assumed to be

linear elastic, isotropic materials. Therefore, mechanical constants such as Poisson’s ratio and the

15
modulus of elasticity (the main inputs to the software) are applied according to Table 1. As mentioned

before, Figure 2a illustrates the dimensions of the trench and pipe surrounding model and Figure 2b

shows the related 3D finite element model of one-half the pipe in its surrounding medium. Only half of the

problem is modeled because of the geometric and loading symmetry. Conta172 and Target170 elements

are employed from ANSYS to incorporate the soil-pipe interaction into the model through the use of

these face to face contact elements. A fine mesh was applied to regions near the damaged area, but the

mesh became coarser in areas far from the damage. Additionally, applied boundary conditions for all

finite elements in this research are as given in Equation (17):

l
@z  ; uz  0
2

@ x  0; ux  0 (17)

@ y  207.15mm ; ux  u y  uz  0

Additionally, in order to find an optimum dimension for the finite element model of the pipe, soil and

surroundings, the simultaneous effects of the soil column weight and the internal pressure for various x

and y (per the upper surface of Figure 5) on the maximum hoop and Von Mises stresses in the damaged

buried pipe are investigated. The results obtained are presented in Table 5, showing that x=1.5m, z=1.5m

can be employed as acceptable model dimensions. With these dimensions, the maximum values of the

hoop and Von Mises stresses in a pipe with a certain type of damage will not vary significantly as we

increase the dimensions of the model. The induced stresses in polyethylene gas pipes are due to a

combination of internal and external loads. The most common internal force originates from the gas

pressure, while for buried gas pipes, the most common external loads are the earth and surcharge loads as

well as the thermal and soil–pipe interactions. As mentioned earlier in section 2d, vehicle wheel loading

can be treated to act as a distributed or a concentrated force on the pavement.

16
 is evaluated to be 112,869 N in this research. This value accounts for any dynamic load

exerted on the pipe by the wheels. The magnitude of the traffic loading was selected to be 544,780 Pa for

the half finite element model. This value is exerted on the top of the model as the wheel concentrated

load. In addition, the thermal stresses induced in PE pipes are considered in finite element models. The

input temperatures used in ANSYS models are based on the values explained in section 2b and the MDPE

pipe of type PE80 temperature is taken to be the same as that of the soil around its circumference at the

specific depth. The thermal expansion coefficient for pipe is considered as follows:

mm
 pipe  2 104 (18)
mm o C

Additionally, as stated before, the internal pipe pressure was assumed to be equal to 4 bars

(405,300 Pa). This is the actual pressure used in domestic gas pipelines in metropolitan areas of Iran. In

this research, after investigating buried pipe damage, small and large circular holes as well as elliptical

holes with various minor to major diameter ratios, a/b, namely, 1.0, 0.8, 0.6, 0.4, and 0.2, to simulate

damage shapes ranging from circular to crack-shaped are chosen for investigation. During each stage, the

ellipse larger diameter is considered to be 25.4 mm (2b=1.0 inch). Computer models are prepared such

that the larger diameter is aligned with the pipe axis. In all finite element models, the pipe at the hole

location is also encased by the soil (the same as the undamaged part) and the effects of gas leakage to the

trench are ignored.

4. Evaluation of the results

17
As previously mentioned, the effect of traffic load, soil weight, pipe temperature change, internal pressure

and the presence of the damaged area were all included to investigate their overall effect on the stress

distribution in the buried PE pipe. In this research, the value of 1.5 is selected for the design coefficient

(factor of safety). Considering the operating temperature of 35°C for underground pipes buried at a depth

of 125 cm (based on climate conditions in hot areas and Ahvaz city (Khademi-Zahedi and Shishesaz,

2018; Nasirian, 2007;Shishesaz and Shishesaz, 2008; Tabatabaii and Ameri, 1999), according to the

reported minimum strength value for polyethylene PE80 material (International Organization for

Standardization, 2004), the design stress (maximum allowable stress for the pipe) for this research is 4.3

MPa (Khademi-Zahedi, 2011). In all stages of this investigation, the mentioned values are considered as

the maximum applicable stresses on the pipe.

4.1 Results of finite element solution for the perforated buried pipe

In this section, various thermal and mechanical loading applied to the buried damaged pipe during the

operation period are considered to be software inputs, and the resulting induced stresses are investigated

and analyzed. The damage is in the form of circular holes with diameters of 5, 7.5, 10, 12.5, 15, 17.5 and

20 mm in the pipe wall located at its crown.

4.1a The effect of soil column pressure and pipe internal pressure

Figure 6 demonstrates the simultaneous effects of the soil column weight and pipe internal pressure on

the maximum Von Mises stresses in buried perforated pipe for different circular hole diameters. The

strength of the pipe based on a 50-year life expectancy is also superimposed. Figure 6 shows that in

perforated pipe, the stress values are well above the strength limit of the pipe at 35˚C for a 50-year life

(dashed line) and by increasing the hole size, the maximum Von Mises stress increases. Therefore, the

pipe should be properly repaired.

18
4.1b Vehicle wheel load

The results of investigating the effects of the concentrated load and the distributed vehicle wheel load for

different hole diameters on the maximum circumferential and Von Mises stresses in a pipe indicate that

the concentrated load and the distributed load at 1.25 m depth (depth of pipe crown) have similar effects.

Resulting values show that the stress for the concentrated wheel load is slightly higher than that for the

distributed wheel load (maximum 5%); therefore, in the subsequent modeling and analysis, a concentrated

wheel load is applied.

4.1c The simultaneous effect of vertical soil pressure, pipe internal pressure, vehicle wheel load and

temperature variations

Figure 7 demonstrates the simultaneous effect of the soil load, internal pressure, concentrated vehicle

wheel load and thermal load on the maximum Von Mises stress in buried perforated pipe for different

hole diameters. The plots shown in Figure 7 demonstrate that:

1- In the damaged pipe, the values of the Von Mises stresses are considerably above the allowable

stress.

2- A temperature rise increases the maximum Von Mises stress in the pipe. The maximum Von

Mises stress in the pipe occurs with simultaneous loading and a 5°C temperature increase.

3- A temperature decrease reduces the maximum Von Mises stress.

4.2 Finite element modeling of buried polyethylene pipe with elliptical-shaped damage

In this section, to investigate a more critical type of damage, elliptical-shaped defects on the crown of the

buried MDPE pipe were modeled. In this case, minor to major diameter ratios, a/b were selected and used

19
to simulate a circular to a longitudinal crack-shaped defect by allowing a/b to approach a small value. The

results of the finite element solution method are discussed as follows. Additionally, the elliptical hole is

designed so that its major diameter lies along the pipe length.

Figure 8 illustrates the effect of soil load and internal pressure on the maximum Von Mises stress values

in the buried gas distribution pipe with elliptical holes with different a/b diameter ratios. Like most of the

figures, the upper curve pertains to the damaged pipe. Dashed curves indicate the allowable stress values

for two design temperatures (20°C and 35°C).

Figure 9 demonstrates the effect of simultaneous soil load, internal pressure, wheel load and thermal loads

subjected to a maximum temperature drop of 15˚C and increase of 5˚C on the maximum Von Mises stress

values for a buried gas distribution pipe with elliptical holes with different diameter ratios, along with the

strength of the pipe based on a 50-year life expectancy.

5. Conclusion

If the replacement of damaged MDPE pipes in gas transmission networks is not intended, their correct

repair is the only acceptable choice. Therefore, stress values should be calculated for the damaged section

of the pipe so that by applying the proper repair method, the stress is reduced to levels below the

allowable values to prevent damage propagation. For this purpose, in this research, 3D finite element

modeling of buried damaged pipes is performed using ANSYS software. Stress variations in the buried

damaged MDPE gas pipe were fully investigated in a hot climate region (city of Ahvaz in southwest Iran)

to determine the critical stress values caused by defects at the pipe crown, enabling us to find the

applicable method for repairing damaged MDPE gas transportation piping in such areas. The optimum

burial depth was found to be 1.25 m, while the maximum and minimum ground surface temperatures at

this depth were calculated to be 35°C and 13°C, respectively. Furthermore, the soil column weight above

the pipe, the surcharge loads in terms of H20 traffic load, the gas pressure of 4 bar inside the pipe and the

20
stress concentrations due to a local change in geometry (in the form of damage) were imposed on the pipe

resulting in the following conclusions:

1- The results of the finite element solution for stress values in a perforated pipe under internal

pressure agree with the approximate values obtained from the analytical solution. By increasing

the hole diameter, the percentage difference between the analytical solution and the finite element

solution increases. This difference in results is mainly due to the invalid assumption of plane

stress for simplification of the analytical solution and the presence of 3D effects. Additionally, in a

perforated pipe under internal pressure, bending stresses appear. In the analytical solution, these

effects are ignored, while in the modeling solution, all the described effects are considered.

2- The presented method is simple to implement, computationally efficient and can be easily applied

to buried pipe models. If the model elements are chosen and distributed properly, increasing the

number of elements causes only minor changes in the results. Therefore, the cost of the analysis or

the computational costs can be reduced significantly.

3- The results of the finite element solution indicate that in the perforated pipe, the maximum values

of hoop and Von Mises stresses occur in the inner pipe surface and around the hole (as it was

concluded from the analytical solution).

4- The maximum value of the Von Mises stress in the perforated buried pipe is far more than the

maximum allowable stress on the medium density polyethylene material used for manufacturing

the pipe. Therefore, a damaged pipe should be replaced or repaired immediately.

5- By increasing the diameter of the circular hole and the ratio of elliptical hole diameters, the value

of maximum Van Mises stress in the buried damaged pipe increases continually.

21
 6- As the temperature rises, the maximum Von Mises stress in polyethylene pipes increases. The

maximum stress values in the damaged pipe occur for simultaneous soil load, internal pressure,

vehicle wheel load and pipe temperature increase.

7- While investigating the effects of circular hole damage is important, elliptical hole damage shows

higher stress values.

8- By considering the obtained plots for stress values in buried damaged pipe and comparing it with

allowable stress values for the pipe, the correct damage repair method can be investigated.

Finally, the innovation in the current study is that this study develops and implements very simple and

effective computational methods to treat real industrial fully three-dimensional complicated problems in a

large underground space with different soil, pipe materials and geometries and geometrical discontinuities

including a crack in the pipe. Although the real model is very large and complicated, the author prepared

the simplest possible effective computational model to make it applicable for real physical conditions.

The most appropriate finite elements were selected to model the pipe and the surrounding medium and

the pipe-soil interactions. To have the best mesh control with the fewest finite elements and to reduce the

computational time and cost, the author spent a great deal of time obsessing over the meshes and built the

geometry of the physical underground space model as a series of fairly regular volumes and prepared the

best mapped volume meshes. The author evaluated and increased the quality of the mesh in the damage

and crack regions to increase the model accuracy. For example, to model an underground space of

dimensions 1.5 m depth×1.25 m height× 1.5 m depth (trench length) including soil material and a small

longitudinal crack, only 82,994 elements were employed. This number of finite elements can be modeled

and run using a normal personal computer in a reasonable period of time without suffering problems with

solution accuracy. Therefore, these models are computationally cost-effective. The three-dimensional

finite element models created in this research, including selected boundary conditions, applied loads and

22
material properties are used to investigate the appropriate patch repair method for the buried damaged gas

pipes. This can be done by simply applying and modeling a patch with a specific shape and dimension at

the damaged area of the buried pipe. The generated finite element models in this research are the best

basis with which to prepare computationally cost-effective patch repair models.

Symbols and Abbreviations

A Difference between maximum and minimum temperatures for the time period in question (oC)

C Design coefficient

Di Pipe inside diameter (mm)

Do Pipe outside diameter (mm)

E Embedment soil modulus (MPa)

Ep Pipe elastic modulus (MPa)

h Pipe thickness (mm)

Kb Bedding factor

l Pipe length in the model (mm)

Ld Deflection lag factor

MRS Maximum reduced strength (MPa)

pi Pipe inside pressure (mm)

PT Total load above the pipe (MPa)

D
SDR Standard dimension ratio (SDR = )
h

t Time (sec)

to Time for duration of one complete cycle (sec)

T(y,t) Induced temperature in the soil (oC)

Average temperature for the time period in question (oC)

T
W Combined weight of the first two axles (N)

23
y Depth of the pipe (cm or mm)

 Thermal diffusivity of the soil (cm2/sec) at penetration depth

t Pipe coefficient of thermal expansion 1/oC

T Temperature change (oC)

x Pipe horizontal deflection (mm)

 Poisson’s ratio

 Normal stress in the pipe (MPa)

e Von Mises stress (MPa)

 Tangential stress in the pipe (MPa)

rr Radial stress in the pipe (MPa)

zz Longitudinal stress in the pipe (MPa)

References

Alawaji HA, 2008. Temprature effects on polyethylene (HDPE) and fiberglass (GRP) pipes,

http://www.ksu.edu.sa/sites/Colleges/Engineering/final Report/CE-23-26-27.pdf.

Amiri F., Milan D., Shen Y., Rabczuk T., Arroyo M., 2014. Phase-field modeling of fracture in linear

thin shells, Theoretical and Applied Fracture Mechanics, 69, 102- 109.

Areias P., Rabczuk T., 2013. Finite strain fracture of plates and shells with configurational forces and

edge rotation, International Journal for Numerical Methods in Engineering, 94(12), 1099-1122.

Areias P., Rabczuk T., 2017. Steiner-point free edge cutting of tetrahedral meshes with applications in

fracture, Finite Elements in Analysis & Design, 132, 27-41.

Areias P., Msekh M.A., Rabczuk T., 2016. Damage and fracture algorithm using the screened Poisson

equation and local remeshing, Engineering Fracture Mechanics, 158, 116-143.

24
Areias P., Rabczuk T., Msekh M., 2016. Phase-field analysis of finite-strain plates and shells

including element subdivision, Computer Methods in Applied Mechanics and Engineering, 312(C),

322-350.

Areias P.M.A., Rabczuk T., Camanho P.P., 2014. Finite strain fracture of 2D problems with injected

anisotropic softening elements, Theoretical and Applied Fracture Mechanics, 72, 50-63.

Chau-Dinh T., Zi G., Lee P.S., Song J.H., Rabczuk T., 2012. Phantom-node Method for Shell Models

with Arbitrary Cracks, Computers & Structures, 92-93, 242-256.

Chevron Philips Chemical Company LP, 2003. Buried pipe Design, Bull, PP900, Book 2, Ch. 7, 81-

115.

European Committee for Standardization, 1996. EN 1555 – 1, Plastic Piping Systems for the Supply

of Gaseous Fuels – Polyethylene (PE) – Part 1: General.

Ghorashi S., Valizadeh N., Mohammadi S., Rabczuk T., 2015. T-spline based XIGA for Fracture

Analysis of Orthotropic Media, Computers & Structures, 147, 138-146.

Goddard JB, 1994. Plastic Pipe Design, Columbus, Ohio, ADS, Technical note 4.103, 1-30.

Green K.H., Rochefort W.E., Wannenmacher N., clark J.A., Harris K., 2007. Development of a

remote External Repair tool for Damaged or Defective Polyethylene Pipe, final report, Department of

chemical Engineering, organ state university, contract/Grant no. DE-FC26-03NT41879.

Hamdia K., Zhuang X., Silani M., He P., Rabczuk T. 2017. Stochastic analysis of the fracture

toughness of polymeric nanoparticle composites using polynomial chaos expansions, International

Journal of Fracture, 206(2), 215-227.

25
International Organization For Standardization, 2004. ISO 12162, Thermoplastics materials for pipes

and fittings for pressure applications –Classification and designation –Overall Service (design)

coefficient.

Khademi-Zahedi R., 2011. Stress distribution in patch repaired polyethylene gas pipes, Ms. C. thesis,

Shahid Chamran University, Iran.

Khademi Zahedi R., Alimouri P., Nguyen-Xuan H., Rabczuk T., 2017. Crack detection in a beam on

elastic foundation using differential quadrature method and the Bees algorithm optimization.

Proceedings of the International Conference on Advances in Computational Mechanics, Vol. 36, pp.

439-460.

Khademi Zahedi R., Shishesaz M., 2018. Application of a finite element method to stress distribution

in burried patch repaired polyethylene gas pipe. Underground Space, In press.

Kolonko A, Madryas C, 1996. Modernization of underground pipes in towns in Poland, infrastructure,11, 215-

220.

Moser A. P., Folkman S., 2008. Buried Pipe Design, third edition, Mc-Graw Hill book company, Chapter 7, p.

387.

Nasirian, A. 2007. Investigating the application of polyethylene Gas Pipes for gas trasportation, MS

Thesis, Shahid Chamran University, Ahvaz, Iran.

Nguyen-Thanh N., Kiendl J., Nguyen-Xuan H., W uchner R., Bletzinger K.U., Bazilevs Y., Rabczuk

T., 2011. Rotation free isogeometric thin shell analysis using PHT-splines, Computer Methods in

Applied Mechanics and Engineering, 200(47- 48), 3410-3424.

26
Nguyen-Thanh N., Valizadeh N., Nguyen M.N., Nguyen-Xuan H. , Zhuang X. , Areias P., Zi G., Bazilevs Y.,

De Lorenzis L., Rabczuk T., 2015. An extended isogeometric thin shell analysis based on Kirchhoff-Love

theory, Computer Methods in Applied Mechanics and Engineering, 284, 265 – 291.

Nguyen-Thanh N., Zhou K., Zhuang X., Areias P., Nguyen-Xuan H., Bazilevs Y., Rabczuk T., 2017

Isogeometric analysis of large-deformation thin shells using RHT- splines for multiple-patch coupling,

Computer Methods in Applied Mechanics and Engineering, 316, 1157-1178.

Rabczuk T., 2013. Computational Methods for Fracture in Brittle and Quasi-Brittle Solids: State-of-the-art

Review and Future Perspectives. ISRN Applied Mathematics, , Article ID 849231, 38 pages,

doi:10.1155/2013/849231.

Rabczuk T., Areias P.M.A., Belytschko T., 2007. A meshfree thin shell method for non- linear

dynamic fracture, International Journal for Numerical Methods in Engineering, 72(5), 524-548.

Rabczuk T., Gracie R., Song J.H., Belytschko T., 2010. Immersed particle method for fluid-structure

interaction, International Journal for Numerical Methods in Engineering, 81(1), 48-71.

Ren H., Zhuang X., Cai Y., Rabczuk T., 2016. Dual-Horizon Peridynamics, International Journal for

Numerical Methods in Engineering, , 108, 1451-1476 (HC).

Ren H., Zhuang X., Rabczuk T., 2017. Dual-horizon peridynamics: A stable solution to varying

horizons, Computer Methods in Applied Mechanics and Engineering, 318, 762-782.

Shishesaz M. R., 2003. Determination of design parameters in large size reinforced polyethylene

pipes, Iranian Polymer Journal, Vol. 12, No. 2, pp. 109-114.

Shishesaz, M. Shishesaz, M.R, 2008. Applicability of medium density polyethylene Gas Pipes in Hot

Climate Areas of South-West Iran, Iranian Polymer Jornal. Vol. 17, pp. 503-517.

27
Symons, I.F., 1997. International MDPE Yellow Gas Pipe, J-M Manufacturing Company Inc.

catalogue.

Tabatabaii A., Ameri M., Behbahani H., 1999 (1378). Prediction of Asphalt Cover Temperature in

City of Ahvaz (Iran), Journal of Engineering, Tabriz University, College of Engineering, Vol. 22,

Spring – summer Issue, (in persian).

The Plastic Pipe Institute, 2001. Thermal Expansion and Contraction in Plastics Piping Systems, TR-

21/2001. www.plasticpipe.org.

The Plastic Pipe Institute, 2006a. Handbook of Polyethylene Pipe, Washington DC, Ch 6, 157- 260.

The Plastic Pipe Institute, 2006b. Handbook of Polyethylene pipe, Washington DC, ch. 7, 261-303.

Uponor Aldyl Company, 2004. Installation Guide, Polyethylene gas pipe systems.

Watkins R. K., Anderson, L. R., 2000. Structural Mechanics of buried pipes, CRC press, New York,

pp. 22-57.

Williams G.P., Gold L.W., 1976., Ground Temperatures, CBD-180. Canadian Building Diges http://irc.nrc-

cnrc.gc.ca/pubs/cbd180_e. html.

28
Fig.1. (a)Geometry of a thick walled large cylinder with a small hole in the wall under internal pressure;
(b)stress field in the hole dimensions and applied pressure

29
 (a) (b)
Fig.2. (a) Typical geometry and dimensions of the trench, pipe and surrounding materials. (b) Typical
finite element model of half of the buried defected pipe and surrounding material.

Fig.3. Finite element modelling (FEM) of the perforated pipe using Solid95 elements and presentation of
internal pressure vectors and the magnified view of the pressurized pipe

30
 Fig.4. Contour plot of Von Mises stresses results in perforated pressurized pipe (effect of internal
pressure)

Upper surface
z

x y
x
Fig.5. Three-Dimensional view of the trench and buriedzpipe.
Pipe

31
Fig.6. Plot of maximum Von Mises stress variations in a perforated buried pipe for different sizes of hole
diameters under simultaneous effects of soil column weight and pipe internal pressure

Fig.7. Plot of maximum Von Mises stress variations in pipe for different sizes of hole diameter
(Simultaneous effects of vertical soil pressure, pipe internal pressure, load of vehicle wheel and
temperature variations)

32
 Fig.8. Plot of maximum Von Mises stress variations in buried pipe for different values of elliptical hole
diameter ratios (effect of vertical soil pressure and pipe internal pressure)

Fig.9. Plot of maximum Von Mises stress variations in buried pipe for different diameter ratios in elliptical hole
(simultaneous effect of soil load, internal pressure, wheel load and thermal loads subjected by maximum
temperature drop of 15 ˚C and increase of 5 ˚C)

33
Table1. Physical properties of asphalt and soil layers surrounding the pipe [5, 19, 31]
Layer
Elasticity Poisson
No. Type of material Density (kg/m3)
coefficient (MPa) ratio
(Fig.4(a))
1 Asphalt 173 2 200 0.35
GW soil with 90%
2 6.90 1 700 0.20
compaction
SM soil with 90%
3 6.90 1 900 0.35
proctor density
GW soil with 95%
4 15 2 000 0.35
proctor density
GW soil with 85%
5 4.80 1 600 0.20
proctor density

Table 2. Geometrical characteristics of a widely applied medium density polyethylene pipes (MDPE) for
gas distribution BASED ON ASTM D 2513 [1, 35]
Actual outer Actual inner Standard Minimum pipe
Nominal
diameter in inch diameter in inch Dimension ration thickness in inch
diameter in inch
(mm) (mm) DSDR (mm)
4.5 3.718 0.391
4 11.5
(114.30) (94.44) (9.93)

Table 3. Mechanical properties of medium density polyethylene pipe of type PE80 [9, 13, 20]
Elasticity module Thermal expansion
Yield stress (MPa) Poisson ratio
(MPa) coefficient (℃1)
427 19.3 0.35 0.000 2

Table 4. Relative percentage difference in hoop and von mises stresses derived by analytical and finite
element method
Relative Relative
Maximum
Hole Pipe length Number of Maximum percentage
von mises percentage
diameter hoop stress difference difference
(m) elements stress
(mm) (MPa) in hoop in von
(MPa)
stress (%) mises stress

34
 (%)

10 395 5.82 6.7 5.70 5.32

0.5
13 346 5.82 6.7 5.71 5.15

5 14 715 5.82 6.7 5.70 5.32

1.5
30 517 5.81 6.7 5.72 4.98

10 395 6.01 3.5 6.10 1.33

0.5
13 346 6.02 3.5 6.11 1.49

7.5 14 715 6.02 3.5 6.11 1.49

1.5
30 517 6.03 3.5 6.13 1.83

10 395 6.44 3.0 6.46 7.31

0.5
12 399 6.43 3.0 6.47 7.47

10 16 394 6.42 3.0 6.45 7.14

1.5
32 400 6.43 3.0 6.47 7.47

10 395 6.79 8.8 6.70 8.2

0.5
13 346 6.80 8.9 6.71 8.2

12.5 14 715 6.80 8.9 6.71 8.2

1.5
30 517 6.81 8.9 6.72 8.2

10 395 7.17 15.1 6.96 12.4

0.5
13 346 7.18 15.1 6.97 12.4

15 14 715 7.18 15.1 6.97 12.4

1.5
30 517 7.19 15.1 6.99 12.4

35