Saipem Pres2

saipem
Deepwater Pipelines Design for

Installation and Operation
Roberto Bruschi [email protected]
Lorenzo Marchionni [email protected]
Antonio Parrella [email protected]
Lorenzo Maria Bartolini [email protected]
Pavia, November 21st, 2014
CHALLENGES BY DISCIPLINE
MECHANICAL
DESIGN
SEABED
MECHANICS
DESIGN FOR
INSTALLATION
OCEAN
ENGINEERING
PIPELINE
INTEGRITY
MANAGEMENT
MATERIALS &
WELDING
DESIGN FOR
OPERATION
FLOW ASSURANCE
saipem
Deepwater Pipelines Design for Installation and Operation Pavia, November 21st, 2014
MECHANICAL DESIGN MEETING DEFINED SAFETY TARGETS

Design guidelines such as ISO and DNV OS-F101 adopt a LRFD (Load Resistant Factor Design)
approach relating failure modes and consequences to Safety Class categorization.
A set of limit state design formats, including partial safety factors for both load and resistance, are
defined.
The partial safety factors to meet a predefined safety target have been calibrated using structural
reliability methods.
Reliability methods applied directly to specific structure, avoiding the use of pre-established partial
safety factors, are allowed and sometimes recommended.
saipem
SLS serviceability limit state ; ULS ultimate limit state; FLS fatigue limit state; ALS accidental limit state
DNV OS-101 2013

MECHANICAL DESIGN DEFINITION OF RELEVANT LIMIT STATES
Probability Distribution
Load and Resistance Factors Targeting given Safety Level
fL>1 fR<1
Load
Distribution, L
Nominal
Safety
Domain
Resistance
Distribution, R
The limit state format is a

functional relationship
including any parameter
influencing the relevant failure
mode
LIMIT STATES DESIGN FORMAT
Ld( F, C S) < Rd (SC m)

where:
Nominal Load
Nominal Resistance
Ld
Rd
C
F
S
design load effect function

design resistance function
condition load factor
environmental load factor
functional load factor
system safety factor
resistance usage factor
saipem
MECHANICAL DESIGN - LRFD DNV OS-101
ULTIMATE LIMIT STATES (ULS):

Bursting / Pressure Containment
Collapse
Propagating Buckling
Local Buckling due to Combined Loading (DCC and LCC)
Fracture/Plastic Collapse/ Ductile Tearing of Defective Girth Welds
Ratcheting (accumulation of plastic deformation in case of excessive
bending at the S-lay Stinger)
SERVICEABILITY LIMIT STATES (SLS):
Ovalization Limit due to Bending
FATIGUE LIMIT STATES (FLS)
ACCIDENTAL LIMIT STATES (ALS)
saipem
MECHANICAL DESIGN - LRFD DNV OS-101 (BURSTING LS)

Minimum wall thickness for pressure containment/bursting according to DNV OS F101 design criteria
The criterion shall be fulfilled in both Operating and System Pressure Test conditions at the applicable water depths.
pli p d inc cont g h
pb (t1 )
pli p e
SC m
pb(t1)
pli
pe
sc
m
Pressure Containment Resistance

Local Incidental Pressure
Local External Pressure
Safety Class Resistance Factor
as per Tab. 5-5 of DNV RP F101
Material Resistance Factor
as per Tab. 5-4 of DNV RP F101
p b ( x) min( pb ,s ( x); pb ,u ( x))

2x
2
f y
Dx
3
f
2x
2
p b ,u ( x )
u
D x 1.15 3
x t1
pb,s ( x)
Operational t1 t nom t fab t corr

Pressure Test t1 t nom t fab
pli p d inc cont g h
Note:
cont
Pb
D
fy
tnom
tfab
tcorr
= Density pipeline content

= Bursting Pressure
= Nominal outside Diameter
= SMYS
= Nominal wall thickness of pipe (un-corroded)
= Fabrication thickness tolerance
= Corrosion allowance
According to DNV OS F101 Sect. 3 B305, the incidental over design pressure ratio, inc, can be set to 1.05, which is the
minimum allowed ratio, provided that the requirements to the Pressure Safety System are satisfied.
This implies that the Pressure Safety System shall guarantee the maximum incidental pressure does not exceed the
design pressure by more than 5%.
saipem
MECHANICAL DESIGN - LRFD DNV OS-101 (COLLAPSE LS)

pc t1
2
2
pe pmin
m sc
Pe
External Pressure
Pmin
Minimum Internal Pressure

(zero for installation except in
case of flooded pipe)
Pc
sc
Characteristic Resistance to
External Pressure (collapse)
Safety Class Resistance
Factor
as per DNV OS-
pc pel pc p p pc pel p p f o D
t
t
2E
D
p el
1 2
Elastic Collapse
Pressure
p p = 2 SMYS U fab
t2
Do
Plastic Collapse
Pressure
fo
Dmax D min
D
Ovality
Note:
D
Nominal Outside Diam.
F101 Tab. 5-5
Dmax Maximum In/Outside Diam.
Dmin Minimum In/Outside Diam.

as per DNV OS-F101 Tab. 5-4
Material Strength Factor
t1 = tnom tfab (Install & Hydrotest)

t1 = tnom tfab tcorr (Operating)
tnom Nominal Steel Wall Thickness
tfab
Fabrication Thick. Tolerance
tcorr Corrosion Allowance
saipem
MECHANICAL DESIGN - LRFD DNV OS-101 (LOCAL BUCKLING LS LCC)

2
m SC SSd
MSd
m SC
M
t
S
t
c p 2
c p 2
Pe
External Pressure
Pmin

Pc
Flow Stress Parameter
MSd
Design Moment
SSd
Design Effective Axial Force
sc

Factor
= f
M
p
C
el
p p
m SC e min 1
pc t2
t 2 t 2
= f y D 0 t 2
- 1
pC
p
p
c 1
0 .5
for
60 D 0 t 2

for
90
for
0
Plastic Axial Capacity
t2
-1= f
Plastic Bending Capacity

0
pC D o
p p t2
Collapse Pressure
f0 = f(Dmax, Dmin, D0)
pel = f(E, D0, t)
fu
fy
pp = f(SMYS, U, fab, D0, t)

D0
15
D0
t2
t2
D0
15
Note:
t2
60
60
D0
Material Strength Factor
t2 = tnom (Install & Hydrotest)

t2 = tnom tcorr (Operating)
tnom Nominal Steel Wall Thickness
saipem
10
MECHANICAL DESIGN - LRFD DNV OS-101 (LOCAL BUCKLING LS DCC)

t2
gw
- 0.01 3
D0
2
C = 0.78
Sd m SC pe pmin
+
,
0
t
t
p
C 2
C 2
0.8
Pe
Pmin
h ,d max SMYS SMTS
Yield to Tensile
Strength Ratio
External Pressure
Characteristic Bending Strain

Resistance
Sd
Design Compressive Strain
Pc
sc

Factor
gw
1 .0
D 0 20
t2
1 .0
100
not defined
pC
p C

1
p
p
el
p
- 1= f
D0
if
20
if
if
t2
D0
D0
t2
t2
20
60
Girth Weld
Factor
60
Collapse Pressure
pC D o
p p t2
f0 = f(Dmax, Dmin, D0)

pel = f(E, D0, t)
h,d
Resistance Strain Factor

saipem
pp = f(SMYS, U, fab, D0, t)

Note:
D0
t2 = tnom (Install & Hydrotest)

t2 = tnom tcorr (Operating)
tnom Nominal Steel Wall
Thickness
11
SEABED
MECHANICS
MECHANICAL
DESIGN
DESIGN FOR INSTALLATION
OCEAN
ENGINEERING
PIPELINE
INTEGRITY
MANAGEMENT
MATERIALS &
WELDING
DESIGN FOR
OPERATION
FLOW ASSURANCE
saipem
13
DESIGN FOR INSTALLATION RELEVANT LIMIT STATES

The relevant failure modes and limit states for offshore
pipeline installation are the following:
Collapse due to external pressure.
Buckle propagation due to the external pressure in case of buckle
initiation.
Local buckling due to external pressure and bending at the sagbend and
due to tensioner and bending on the stinger in case of S-Lay installation or
in flute of the J-Lay tower.
Concrete crushing at the stinger in case of S-lay technology.
Plastic collapse & fracture of defective girth welds.
Fatigue damage of the girth welds due to severe loads and long time
interval from ramp exit to touch down point.
saipem
14
DESIGN FOR INSTALLATION - PIPE S AND J LAYING

J-laying: the pipe departs from the lay vessel at
a near vertical angle, hanging like a cable and
gently curving towards the horizontal as it
approaches the seabed.
Low tension forces required to hold the pipe in suitably J
shaped lay span
Slow lay rate, 2-3 (5) km/day
Low curvatures of the lay span
overbend
Stinger tip
stinger
Touch down
point
sagbend
Shallow
water
Rationale for safe installation of

subsea and sealines:
pipeline
lay operation mode
lay equipment
vessel strength/stability capacity
calculation
S-laying: consists of assembling the pipe joints

on the horizontal ramp of the lay vessel.
Even for large diameter pipes, 2-4 (6) km/day
High curvature applied on the overbend
High tensioner forces required to hold the pipe in suitably S
shaped lay span
stinger
tip
Shallow
water
sagbend
down
touch
point
Sea bottom
saipem
15
DESIGN FOR INSTALLATION - CRITERIA

Laying Criteria aiming to define allowable moments and strains
is the following:
At the Overbend region (mainly S-Lay):
Strain (DNV OS F101) Simplified Criteria

Strain (DNV Design Guideline) Design Criteria
Allowable Bending Moment (JIP Design Guideline) Design Criteria
At the Stinger Tip (mainly S-Lay):
Allowable Bending Moment (DNV OS F101) Design Criteria

No contact to the Stinger Tip (Recommended Practice)
At the Sagbend region (both S & J-Lay):
Bending Moment (DNV OS F101) Design Criteria (2)

Bending Strain (JIP Design Guideline) Design Criteria
Bending Strain of 0.15% (API Recommended Practice) Design Criteria
(3)
1. The red one are generally used.

2. Load Controlled Condition (LCC) i.e. Bending moment criterion is generally used in Shallow Waters.
3. Displacement Controlled Condition (DCC) i.e. Bending strain criterion is generally used in Deep Waters.
saipem
16
DESIGN FOR INSTALLATION - J-LAY LOAD CONDITIONS

The required residual
lay tension is low due
to the very large exit
(~90 deg).
Rollers reactions are
due to pipe lay pull
(not to pipe weight).
Tensioner tension is a
function of pipe
column weight.
Tensioner
Tension
Waves
vessel
Thruster
exit
Rollers
Reactions
Current
Pipe
Submerged
Weight
WD
Residual Lay
Tension
saipem
Seabed
Reaction
17
DESIGN FOR INSTALLATION - S-LAY LOAD CONDITIONS
Tensioner Tension
Mean sea level
Overbend
Stinger
Tip
From:
Average Stinger Radius Exit Angle
Allowable Strain at Stinger Wall Thickness
To:
Top Tension Tension Capacity
Bottom Tension Propeller Capacity
Main Relationship:
STT~ BT + SW*WD - BK2/2
Where:
STT is the stinger Tip Tension
BT is the bottom tension
SW is the submerged weight per unit length
WD is the water depth
B is the bending stiffness
K is the pipe curvature at the point
where STt is applied
Touch down point
Bottom Tension
Bollard Pull
(Propeller Capacity)
Stinger Radius
Sagbend
Shallow
water
Water Depth
Sea Bottom
TDP
saipem
18
DESIGN FOR INSTALLATION - S-LAY LOCAL LOAD CONDITIONS
M
N
F
M =f(Rstinger)
F = f(N, Rstinger)
N = EJ * k2 + RLT + WD*SWeight
saipem
19
DESIGN FOR INSTALLATION - S-LAY LOCAL LOAD CONDITIONS
Bending Strain (%)
Pipe Curvature Amplification
The amplification of the pipe local curvature increases

considering a concentrated contact (1 roller vs. 4
rollers) and reducing the stinger curvature radius
saipem
20
DESIGN FOR INSTALLATION MINIMUM PIPE WALL THICKNESS

3.0
40.6
2.5
35.6
33.9
Felastic 3.9 y t
Generally:
for pipeline exposed to frequent point load events (occurrence >=
10-4 per year per km)
16<OD<20
20<OD<36
OD>36 :
:
14 mm wall thickness
:
1.5
29.0
28.4
FORCE
Forces (MN)
(MN)
2.0
25.4
25.4
23.7
1.0
20.3
20.3
20.3
saipem
:
:
MILD LAYING
16.3
for pipeline not exposed to frequent point load event

10<OD<16
16<OD<20
17.8
16.9
0.5
15.2
SEVERE LAYING
22.6
14.5
13.5
12.2
10.2
8.7
7.6
12.7
IGE
11.6
10.2
0.0
10
15
20
25
OD
30
35
40
45
OD"
(inches)
21
DESIGN FOR INSTALLATION - ANALYSIS

Installation Project
Inputs
Tasks
Ramp
Management
vs.
Water Depth
Metocean
condition
along the
route
Activities
Stinger Setting
vs.
KP
Limit Sea State

Conditions
vs.
Pipe Dynamics
Tools/Analysis
Normal Laying
Initiation / Lay-Down
Abandonment & Recovery
Stinger Movimentation
Accidental Flooding
Vessel Loss of Position
Dynamic Analyses
Fatigue Analyses
Offpipe (static)
Abaqus (static)
Pipelay (static)
Offpipe
(dynamic reg.&
irreg. wave)
Pipelay
(dynamic reg.&
irreg. wave)
Station
Keeping
Fully integrated DP
and Pipelay Analyses
FIPLA
Lay Vessel
Operability
Metocean forecasting
Operation Wave
Nowcasting
In-house
software
saipem
22
DESIGN FOR INSTALLATION ANALYSIS OUTCOME

Analysis results (Overbend region & Stinger Tip)
SEMAC1 - Wheatstone Project - OD = 44.0 in - WTsteel = 24.6 mm - WTconc = 110 mm
Tenstop = 329 Tons
10
Pipe
Configuration
Y Coord [m]
5
0
-5
R10 - 0.2525 %
WD = -124 m
Sagm ax = 0.1238 %
Dout = 44.0 in (1.1168 m)

wtsteel = 0.0246 m
Tensbottom = 245 Tons
Dout conc = 1.3468 m
-10
wtconc+cc = 0.115 m
-15
W air = 19.8708 kN/m

W sub = 4.5609 kN/m
-20
clr = 15.25 cm
out = 28.50 deg
-25
Bending Strain [%]
-60
Reactions
-20
20 X Coord [m] 40
60
80
100
120
0.2
R10 = 0.2525 %
0.1
0
R19
R18
R17
R16
R15
R14
R13
R12
R11
R10
R09
R08
R07
R06
R05
T03
R08
R07
R06
R05
T03
R06
R05
T03
10000
Roller Reaction [kN]
Moment
Roller Moment [kNm]
Strain
-40
0.3
R10 = -9616 kNm

5000
0
Stip = -2920 kNm

R19
R18
R17
R16
R15
R14
R13
R12
R11
R10
R09
R7 = 428 kN
( 44 Tons )
600
400
200
0
R19
R18
R17
R16
R15
R14
R13
R12
R11 R10
Roller ID
R09
R08
R07
saipem
23
DESIGN FOR INSTALLATION LARGE CAPACITY EQUIPMENT

A&R/SUBSEA DEPLOYMENT SYSTEM WITH HIGHER CAPACITY
Fabrication: feasibility up to dia 180mm, MBL 2500mT, length 3800 m
Testing: availability of test facilities up to 2500 t
Alternative solutions (use of multiple steel wires system) move problems
from the fabrication/testing of the steel wire to the inspection/discard
criteria
DESIGN CRITERIA
Applicable standards for offshore A&R/Subsea deployment
winches/steel wire
Safety factor definition criteria in Normal/Emergency Operation
Wire Rope Fatigue Life design Criteria
Test Requirements: break testing and test facilities available
MAINTENANCE/INSPECTION CRITERIA
Maintenance of subsea ropes: lubrications (type of lubricants,
application methods, regulations)
Monitoring/inspection during operation: method and criteria
(visual inspection, NDE, cut back and test, cycles data logging
and fatigue monitoring )
Discard criteria: definition, methodology and regulation
saipem
25
DESIGN FOR INSTALLATION INCIDENTAL FLOODING

Pipe S and J Laying, Water Flooding during Installation
Accidental Flooding Scenarios failure modes:
Excessive Bending Moment/Strain combined with

Point Load Force at stinger tip (mainly Deep
Water scenarios);
Excessive Bending Moment/Strain at TDP
region (mainly Shallow Water scenarios)
Defective through thickness girth weld
Leaking valve on special items
SHALLOW
Stinger tip region is not
critical for the pipeline
integrity.
Stinger Tip
Development
of
excessive
bending
moment/strain at the
sagbend occurs due
to residual lay tension
reduction.
Sagbend
Accidental Flooding Scenarios shall take

into account:
Distinguish Deep vs. shallow water scenarios;

Distinguish Trunkline vs. flowline (different
pipe flooding time and evolution);
Contingency measures, if any, and lay vessel
structural integrity more than pipe integrity;
Accidental flooding is generally driven by the
lay equipment and vessel integrity;
Vessel equipment includes a smart wet buckle
detection system.
DEEP
Stinger Tip
Stinger tip region is critical

for the pipeline integrity due
to development of excessive
bending
moment/strain
combined with a point load
force.
Sagbend
Development of excessive
bending moment/strain at
sagbend is limited.
saipem
26
DESIGN FOR INSTALLATION AFT, SPECIAL EQUIPMENT
Principles / Application
Use a market available pipeline isolation tool for reducing flooding
risk when laying in deepwater.
Objectives
Drastically reduce the need for a compression station at land, which
is needed for pipeline recovery operations in case of pipeline rupture
during laying.
Compression station cost reduction.
Reduce time to recover a pipeline damage situation, because only
the last part of the pipeline need to be deflooded.
Parametersonalargeand
complexproject
55000hp=>1000hp
100M =>10M
3600psi=>36psi
RTO72h=>72s
RTO=ReadyToOperate
saipem
27
DESIGN FOR INSTALLATION IAU, SPECIAL EQUIPEMET

Remote Buckle Detection
Buckle Risk area

TECHNOLOGYCOMPARISON
Principles / Application
Injecting a signal (radio, pressure wave) into a waveguide (pipeline) faceend, each geometrical anomaly reflect part of the signal depending on its
characteristics.
Objectives
Pros
Cons
A system which can provide a certified Buckle Measure up to the end of

the stinger and capable to detect obstructions up to about 4 Km.
Radio(RF),
Fast
HiRepeatability
Onboard noise proof
Accuracy
Range
Complex technology
PressureWave (AC)
Good Range
HiRepeatibility
Simpletechnology
Accuracy
Onboard noise influence
Reduce risk in case of mechanical BD failure and retrieval. Reduce time

for corrective actions.
saipem
28
DESIGN FOR INSTALLATION MANUFACTURING VERY THICK LP

FINITE ELEMENT
MODELING
EXTERNAL
Hoop
INTERNAL
360
180
Comparison:
Test vs
numerical
EXTERNAL
Sample
location
360
Oing die
180
INTERNAL
U ing
A sample
Plate
die
B sample
Tensile stressstrain test
Compressive
stress-strain
test
C sample
D sample
Obtained curves
from simulation
WHERE (across thickness) and WHEN (plate, pipe, before

or after coating) to characterise the compression capacity
of the line pipe steel afab
Line Pipe
Manufacturing
Issues (JC vs. UO)
Bauschinger effects included in

design criteria equation by afab
(see DNV OS-F101)
saipem
30
DESIGN FOR INSTALLATION - COLLAPSE CAPACITY vs FAB

Ovality and Collapse Resistance vs. Expansion/Compression Strain
UOE / UO / UOC COLD FORMING
PRESSURE vs. OVALITY
-7.00E+07
UOC (C=1.0%)
External Presure [Pa]
-6.00E+07
-5.00E+07
-4.00E+07
UOC (C=0.5%)
-3.00E+07
UO
-2.00E+07
UOE (E=0.4%)
-1.00E+07
UOE (E=1.3%)
0.00E+00
0.0
saipem
0.5
1.0
1.5
2.0
2.5
3.0
3.5
4.0
4.5
5.0
5.5
6.0
7.0
Ovality [%]
31
6.5
31
DESIGN FOR INSTALLATION BENDING CAPACITY vs FAB

Combined External Pressure and Bending
(Baushinger Effect)
X65 OD=24" t=31.8mm - NUMERICAL ANALYSES (ABAQUS)
4.5E+06
BENDING MOMENT (Nm)
4.0E+06
3.5E+06
3.0E+06
2.5E+06
2.0E+06
t=31.8mm; fo=1%; X65, WD=2150m; Afab=1.00
1.5E+06
t=31.8mm; fo=1%; X65, WD=2150m; Afab=0.90
1.0E+06
t=31.8mm; fo=1%; X65, WD=2150m; Afab=0.85
5.0E+05
Maximum or Limit Bending Moment
0.0E+00
0.0%
-0.2%
-0.4%
-0.6%
-0.8%
-1.0%
-1.2%
-1.4%
-1.6%
-1.8%
-2.0%
MINIMUM COMPRESSIVE LONGITUDINAL STRAIN (%)
saipem
32
32
DESIGN FOR INSTALLATION NUMERICAL LAB FOR STRENGTH C.

Combined External Pressure and Bending
X65 OD=24" t=31.8mm - NUMERICAL ANALYSES (ABAQUS)
BENDING MOMENT (Nm)
6.0E+06
5.0E+06
4.0E+06
3.0E+06
Pure Bending, fo=1%, water depth=0m
2.0E+06
1.0E+06
0.0E+00
0.0%
saipem
Pressure + Bending, fo=1%, water depth=500m

Maximum or Limit Bending Moment
-0.5% -1.0% -1.5% -2.0% -2.5% -3.0% -3.5% -4.0% -4.5% -5.0% -5.5% -6.0%
MINIMUM COMPRESSIVE LONGITUDINAL STRAIN (%)
33
33
SEABED
MECHANICS
MECHANICAL
DESIGN
OCEAN
ENGINEERING
PIPELINE
INTEGRITY
MANAGEMENT
MATERIALS &
WELDING
DESIGN FOR
OPERATION
FLOW ASSURANCE
saipem
34
DESIGN FOR OPERATION LIMIT STATES

The relevant failure modes and limit states for offshore
pipeline in operation are the following:
Pressure Containment Capacity due to internal overpressure during
operation and in field pressure tests;
Shear Running Fracture due to internal pressure;
Collapse due to external pressure in case of pipeline depressurization;
Buckle Propagation due to the external pressure in case of buckle
initiation and pipeline depressurization;
Local Buckling due to internal and/or external pressure and bending due
to bottom roughness or lateral buckling in case of pipeline depressurization
and high pressure and temperature conditions.
Stress-Strain Capacity of defective girth welds during operation (it is
normal practice to say that an export pipeline has to withstand applied
tensile stress - strain up to yielding - 0.5%.
Fatigue damage of the girth welds due to environmental loads in operation
(at free spans) and pressure and temperature fluctuations (oligocyclic).
saipem
35
PIPELINE CAPACITY UNDER COMBINED LOADS

Pipeline strength and deformation capacity aims to quantify the maximum
loads and the associated deformation the pipeline can taken when subject
to:
Differential Pressure (Internal and/or External)
Steel Axial Force
Limit Bending Moment Capacity (LBMC)
Curvature at Limit Bending Moment (CLBM)
Bending Moment
Limit Bending Moment Capacity (LBMC)

Curvature at Limit Bending Moment (CLBM)
Lost of Capacity due to Strain Localization (LCSL)
Dimensionless Moment
Low D/t Ratio
High D/t Ratio
Dimensionless Moment
Empty Pipe
Pipe Under Design Pressure
Dimensionless
Curvature
saipem
Dimensionless
Curvature
36

PIPE BENDING MOMENT CAPACITY
FEM ANALYSIS vs. LABORATORY TESTS RESULTS
HOTPIPE 2 - EXPERIMENTAL TESTS - PIPE SPECIMEN NO. 3
BENDING MOMENT VS. CURVATURE RELATIONSHIP
1.30E+06
1.20E+06
1.10E+06
1.00E+06
9.00E+05
BENDING MOMENT (Nm)
8.00E+05
7.00E+05
6.00E+05
T3 Pipe specimen t = 16.2 mm, , fo =0.0%, SMYS = 480 MPa, Mean D FE Mesh, Mid Section,
5.00E+05
4.00E+05
T3 Pipe specimen t = 16.2 mm, , fo =0.0%, SMYS = 480 MPa, Mean D FE Mesh, Mid Section, Triggering Force
3.00E+05
2.00E+05
Specimen 3 - Experimental Test
1.00E+05
0.00E+00
0.000
0.050
0.100
0.150
0.200
0.250
0.300
0.350
0.400
0.450
AVERAGE CURVATURE (1/m)
ABAQUS FE Models have been developed to evaluate the strength

and deformation capacity of pipes subjected to combined loads
saipem(int/ext pressure, axial force and bending)
37

PIPEONE PRE- and POST-PROCESSOR
COLLAPSE
LOCAL BUCKLING UNDER

INTERNAL/EXTERNAL
PRESSURE, AXIAL LOAD
AND BENDING
PIPELINE BENDING
ON S-LAY STINGER
BUCKLE ARRESTOR DESIGN
saipem
POSTPROCESSING
CORRODED PIPES
SPECIAL COMPONENTS FEM ANALYSIS
38
DESIGN FOR OPERATION GIRTH WELD STRENGTH CAPACITY

ECA - MINIMUM STRENGTH CAPACITY REQUIREMENTS
The need of safely withstanding
bending load effects (axial load effects
are minor) both during installation and
in operation (including hoop load
effects).
The strength capacity of girth welds
threatened by weld defects must be
suitably analysed to establish:
For
given
load
allowable defect size
Defect
Pipe
Girth Weld
PROJECT REQUIREMENTS
DEFECTS
ACCEPTANCE
CRITERIA
condition,
Who ECAs???
For given defect acceptance,

allowable stresses and strains
Contractor
to meet
PROJECT
SPECIFICATIONS
(CTOD-R CURVE)
saipem
Company
Ask Contractor
STRAIN (4.0%)
CAPACITY
NEEDED FOR
SPECIFIC/LOAD
SCENARIOS
42
DESIGN FOR OPERATION EXTERNAL LOAD CONDITIONS

The relevant load condition for offshore pipeline in operation
are the following:
Operational conditions i.e. design pressure and min and max design
temperature;
External pressure during shut down;
Sea bottom roughness giving rise to the formation of free span;
Environmental loads (surface waves and marine currents) in the shallow
water section;
High pressure and high temperature conditions giving rise to the
development of lateral buckling;
Geohazards particularly plastic flows and turbidity currents.
saipem
45
DESIGN FOR OPERATION BOTTOM ROUGHNESS

Bottom Roughness and Free Span Analysis
Fatigue
Damage
Cross Flow Total Damage
Seabed morphology indicates
optimum route
alignment
Seabedthe
morphology
indicates
the optimum route alignment
-10
1.2
-20
-30
0.8
-40
0.6
-50
0.4
-60
0.2
-300
Steep deep depression

WD (m)
Water Depth, m
-350
-400
-450
-500
SEABOTTOM PROFILE
-550
54400
56400
58400
60400
62400
64400
66400
KP (m)
-70
99100
99200
99300
99400
99500
99600
99700
99800
99900
Fatigue Usage Factor (-)
-250
0
100000 100100
KP (m)
Cross-Flow Modal Analysis

Cross Flow Vibration Mode - F = 0.370
Sea bed preparation works

(berms) by gravel dumping
-10
1
0.8
-20
0.6
0.4
-30
WD (m)
0.2
-40
0
-0.2
-50
-0.4
-0.6
-60
-0.8
-70
99100
99200
99300
99400
99500
99600
99700
99800
99900
-1
100000 100100
KP (m)
saipem
46
Amplitude ( - )
Bottom Roughness Analysis
DESIGN FOR OPERATION HIGH TEMPERATURE HIGH PRESSURE

In-Service Buckling due to HP/HT Conditions
0 .0 0 2 6 0
0 .0 0 2 4 0
V 10
V 8
1820 m
0 .0 0 2 2 0
V 7
V 1
V 3
V 5
2030 m
0 .0 0 2 0 0
V 4
V 9
V 6
V 2
2080 m
0 .0 0 1 8 0
R =620 m
0 .0 0 1 6 0
1930 m
C r o s s in g
C r o s s in g
C r o s s in g
0 .0 0 1 4 0
1940 m
0 .0 0 1 2 0
R =870 m
2110 m
0 .0 0 1 0 0
1740m
0 .0 0 0 8 0
0 .0 0 0 6 0
2170 m
0 .0 0 0 4 0
0 .0 0 0 2 0
2700 m
V10
V9
V7
V8
V6
V4
V5
V3
V2
V1
0 .0 0 0 0 0
2 0 .5
1 9 .5
1 8 .5
1 7 .5
1 6 .5
1 5 .5
1 4 .5
1 3 .5
1 2 .5
1 1 .5
1 0 .5
9 .5
7 .5
6 .5
5 .5
4 .5
3 .5
2 .5
KP
HTC
-30
-35
8 .5
CURVE 5
CC 90 Defo rmed
0.40
CC 65 As-Laid
CC 65 Defo rmed
0.30
Embedment Inner
Y (m)
-45
Embedment Outer
0.20
-50
0.10
-55
Embedment (m)
-40
0.00
-60
-0.10
-65
LIGHTENING
-70
71500
71550
71600
71650
71700
71750
71800
71850
71900
71950
72000
72050
72100
72150
-0.20
72200
KP (m)
saipem
0 .5
GFC
0.50
CC 90 As-Laid
1 .5
49
INTEGRITY ASSESSMENT IN OPERATION (DESIGN PHASE)

IN-SERVICE BUCKLING ANALYSIS USING 3-D SEA BOTTOM PROFILE
As -L a i d
H yd ro te s t
Op e ra ti n g _ C o n d i ti o n s
Y-co o rd i n a te (m)
200
100
0
-2 0 0
330
H o ri zo n ta l BOP C urva tu re
R a d i u s (m)
Horizontal Pipeline Configuration
-1 0 0
331
33 2
33 3
334
335
336
337
338
339
340
342
343
344
As - L ai d
345
346
347
H yd ro te s t
349
350
351
352
Sm o o th e d Pi p e l i n e C o n fi g u ra ti o n
4000
2000
0
330
331
332
333
334
335
336
337
338
339
340
Z-coo rd i n ate (m)
341
KP (km )
As -L a i d
342
343
H yd ro te s t
344
345
Op e ra ti n g _ C o n d i ti on s
346
347
348
349
Ve rti ca l Se a b e d Pro fi l e
35 0
351
352
Ve rti ca l Se a b e d Pro fi l e - Mo d i fi e d
Vertical Pipeline Configuration
-7 5
-8 0
-8 5
-9 0
-9 5
330
331
332
333
334
335
336
337
338
339
340
341
KP (km )
342
34 3
34 4
345
346
347
348
As -L a i d
0.08
M a x i m u m L o n g i tu d i n a l
To ta l S tr a i n ( % )
348
Op e ra ti n g _ C o n d i ti o n s
Pipeline Curvatures
6000
-7 0
349
H yd ro te s t
350
351
352
Op e ra ti n g C o n d i ti o n s
Longitudinal Strains / Stresses
0.06
0.04
0.02
0
-0.02
3 30
33 1
33 2
33 3
33 4
33 5
33 6
33 7
33 8
33 9
34 0
1500
34 1
KP (km )
3 42
3 43
3 44
3 45
3 46
3 47
348
349
350
351
352
Lateral and Vertical Bending Moments
1000
500
0
-5 0 0
-1 0 0 0
330
L o c a l B u c k l i n g U n i ty C h e c
L a te ra l Be n d i n g Mo me n t (kN
341
KP (km )
8000
All the relevant pipe

parameters are plotted as a
function of the KP
331
332
333
334
335
336
337
338
339
340
341
KP (km )
342
3 43
344
345
346
347
348
349
350
351
352
Lateral Buckling Unity Check (DNV-OS-F101)
0.8
0.6
0.4
0.2
0
3 30
331
33 2
333
saipem
334
335
336
337
3 38
339
3 40
3 41
KP (km )
342
34 3
344
345
346
347
348
3 49
350
3 51
3 52
50
DESIGN FOR OPERATION IMPACT FROM HUMAN ACTIVITY

Pipeline Structural Integrity against Ship Traffic Related Threats Anchor Hooking
Detailed ABAQUS FEM analyses to:
- Investigate the puncture resistance of the pipe
shell due to the impact
- Quantify the pipe shell behavior due to the
interaction with a dragged anchor during
hooking
- Quantify the global-local behavior of the pipe
beam hooked by large dragged anchors
NORD STREAM PROJECT: Dragged Anchor Analysis

LONGITUDINAL STRAIN VS. ANCHOR FORCE RELATIONSHIP
FINLAND OD = 1.21482m WT= 30.9mm
8.0%
LC5 FREE FEED-IN Pi=19.5MPa - EF=-7.000kN - 0.25/0.30

LC6 FREE FEED-IN Pi=19.5MPa - EF=-7.000kN - 0.50/0.90
6.0%
MAXIMUM & MINIMUM LONGITUDINAL STRAIN
LC7 10000 m Pi=19.5MPa - EF=-7.000kN - 0.25/0.30
4.0%
2.0%
0.0%
0
1000
2000
3000
4000
5000
6000
7000
-2.0%
saipem
-4.0%
ANCHOR FORCE (kN)
52
8000
SEABED
MECHANICS
MECHANICAL
DESIGN
OCEAN
ENGINEERING
PIPELINE
INTEGRITY
MANAGEMENT
MATERIALS &
WELDING
DESIGN FOR
OPERATION
FLOW ASSURANCE
saipem
55
MATERIAL - ALTERNATIVE PIPE CONCEPTS

SOLID CORROSION RESISTANT ALLOY PIPE
DUPLEX OR SUPERDUPLEX
CS OUTER PIPE & CRA INNER PIPE
MECHANICAL BOND OR LINED PIPE
METALLURGICAL BOND OR CLADDED PIPE
Weld Overlay
Seal Weld
saipem
62
MATERIAL - PERFORMANCES OF NEW CONCEPTS

DUPLEX OR SUPERDUPLEX EXPENSIVE NOT SUITABLE FOR
EXTENSIVE APPLICATION AND SENSITIVE TO THERMAL DE-RATING
CLADDED PIPE AND LINED PIPE ARE LESS EXPENSIVE BUT
SOME TECHNOLOGICAL GAPS TO BE ADDRESSED BY SUPPLIERS,
CONTRACTORS AND OPERATORS JOINT EFFORTS
APPLICATION FOR HT/HP PIP SYSTEM IN A SNAKED LAY
CONFIGURATION PERFORMED BUT EXTREME COMPLEX AND AT THE
TECHNOLOGY LIMIT
LINER
DISBONDMENT
FATIGUE
RESISTANCE
CRACKS
GIRTH WELD
GIRTH WELD
saipem
63
MATERIAL TRADITIONAL, NEW PIPE CONCEPT FOR REEL LAY

Reel-lay is the process where rigid pipes are:
1.
2.
3.
4.
Prefabricated as long strings and stacked in dedicated onshore bases;

Spooled onto a storage reel on-board the reel-lay vessel, yielding the steel;
Transported onto the offshore field;
Unwounded, straightened and laid by a dedicated system on-board the vessel.
New Competitors (Heerema, EMAS) are entering in the market with an

alternative process different from the conventional one by:
2. Spooling the pipe onto a storage reel placed on-board a dedicated barge/supply
vessel;
3. Transporting it onto the offshore field and lifting it by the reel-lay vessel crane.
saipem
64
MATERIAL REEL LAY TECHNOLOGY

Conventional reeling applications (since '70
up to 2k):
More than 6000 km of steel pipelines laid especially
in GoM and North Sea
Mainly flowlines (up to 16") in water depths that
were increasing through the years
In the '90 also more complex products (e.g. PiP, SCR,
thick insulation, ) were laid in deep water (up to
1000 m)by reeling
The best in class vessel of those years, the "Apache",
is still operative (re-hulled in 2010) and owned by
Technip
Late reeling applications (2000-2010):
saipem
More than 14000 km of pipelines laid worldwide

Contractors invested both in new vessels and in onshore
spoolbases to warrant presence in "golden triangle"
Complex field development projects in deep water (up to
3000 m) increases their market share
To face new demanding market needs Technip delivered
the best in class multi-lay vessel Deep Blue (lay tension
550 tons)
65
Thanks!
THANKS
saipem
68

Saipem Pres2

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Saipem Pres2

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Saipem Pres2

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

What challenges are involved in deepwater pipeline design?

What challenges are involved in deepwater pipeline design?

What limit states are considered in mechanical design of deepwater pipelines?

What limit states are considered in mechanical design of deepwater pipelines?

saipem

Deepwater Pipelines Design for

Pavia, November 21st, 2014

MECHANICAL DESIGN MEETING DEFINED SAFETY TARGETS

DNV OS-101 2013

MECHANICAL DESIGN DEFINITION OF RELEVANT LIMIT STATES

Load and Resistance Factors Targeting given Safety Level

The limit state format is a

LIMIT STATES DESIGN FORMAT

Ld( F, C S) < Rd (SC m)

design load effect function

MECHANICAL DESIGN - LRFD DNV OS-101

ULTIMATE LIMIT STATES (ULS):

MECHANICAL DESIGN - LRFD DNV OS-101 (BURSTING LS)

Pressure Containment Resistance

p b ( x) min( pb ,s ( x); pb ,u ( x))

Operational t1 t nom t fab t corr

= Density pipeline content

MECHANICAL DESIGN - LRFD DNV OS-101 (COLLAPSE LS)

Minimum Internal Pressure

Nominal Outside Diam.

F101 Tab. 5-5

Dmax Maximum In/Outside Diam.

Dmin Minimum In/Outside Diam.

Material Resistance Factor

Material Strength Factor

t1 = tnom tfab (Install & Hydrotest)

Fabrication Thick. Tolerance

tcorr Corrosion Allowance

MECHANICAL DESIGN - LRFD DNV OS-101 (LOCAL BUCKLING LS LCC)

Minimum Internal Pressure

Flow Stress Parameter

Design Effective Axial Force

Safety Class Resistance

Material Resistance Factor

Plastic Axial Capacity

Plastic Bending Capacity

pp = f(SMYS, U, fab, D0, t)

Nominal Outside Diam.

Material Strength Factor

t2 = tnom (Install & Hydrotest)

as per DNV OS-F101 Tab. 5-4

MECHANICAL DESIGN - LRFD DNV OS-101 (LOCAL BUCKLING LS DCC)

h ,d max SMYS SMTS

Characteristic Bending Strain

Design Compressive Strain

Safety Class Resistance

Material Resistance Factor

f0 = f(Dmax, Dmin, D0)

as per DNV OS-F101 Tab. 5-4

Resistance Strain Factor

pp = f(SMYS, U, fab, D0, t)

Nominal Outside Diam.

t2 = tnom (Install & Hydrotest)