12 MEPL P 1019 0 (Pipeline Calculation Book)

VECO Doc. No.
20298-90-EL13-901
Project Title
MEHAR GAS DEVELOPMENT PROJECT

Area Location Discipline Document No. Rev. Page
12 MEPL P 1019 0 2 OF 40
TABLE OF CONTENTS
1.0 INTRODUCTION................................................................................................................4
2.0 OBJECTIVES ....................................................................................................................4
3.0 DEFINITIONS ....................................................................................................................4
4.0 ABBREVIATIONS .............................................................................................................5
5.0 CODES AND STANDARDS ..............................................................................................5
6.0 REFERENCE DOCUMENTS .............................................................................................6
7.0 DESIGN DATA ...................................................................................................................6

7.1 Environmental Conditions ..................................................................................................6
7.2 Pipeline Design Data..........................................................................................................6
7.3 Miscellaneous Design Data................................................................................................7
8.0 CALCULATION METHOD .................................................................................................8

8.1 General ..............................................................................................................................8
8.2 Wall Thickness Selection ...................................................................................................8
8.3 Pipe Section Properties and Weights.................................................................................8
8.4 Combined Stress Check.....................................................................................................9
8.5 Elastic Bending Radius ......................................................................................................9
8.6 Free End Expansion and Anchor Blocks............................................................................9
8.7 Upheaval and Lateral Buckling ..........................................................................................9
8.8 Hydrostatic Test Pressure ................................................................................................10
8.9 Asphalt Road / Track Crossing Design (Uncased)...........................................................10
8.10 Rig Crossing Design (Uncased).......................................................................................11
9.0 RESULTS.........................................................................................................................11
9.1 New Condition..................................................................................................................11
9.2 Corroded Condition ..........................................................................................................12
9.3 Hydrostatic Test Pressures...............................................................................................12
10.0 CONCLUSIONS...............................................................................................................13
10.1 Wall Thickness .................................................................................................................13
10.2 Elastic Bending Radius ....................................................................................................13
10.3 Expansion Control............................................................................................................13
10.4 Upheaval and Lateral Buckling ........................................................................................14
VECO Doc. No. 20298-90-EL13-901
Project Title

12 MEPL P 1019 0 3 OF 40
10.5 Hydrostatic Test Pressure ................................................................................................14
10.6 Crossing Design...............................................................................................................15
11.0 RECOMMENDATIONS ....................................................................................................15
APPENDICES
APPENDIX-A WALL THICKNESS CALCULATION
APPENDIX-B GENERAL DESIGN CALCULATIONS
APPENDIX-C HYDROSTATIC TEST PRESSURE CALCULATIONS
APPENDIX-D.1 UNCASED ROAD/TRACK CROSSING DESIGN CALCULATIONS (10”

FLOWLINES)
APPENDIX-D.2 UNCASED ROAD/TRACK CROSSING DESIGN CALCULATIONS (14”

TRUNK LINES)
VECO Doc. No. 20298-90-EL13-901
Project Title

12 MEPL P 1019 0 4 OF 40
1.0 INTRODUCTION
PETRONAS CARIGALI (Pakistan) Ltd. (PCPL) is undertaking the development of

Mehar Gas Field in Mehar Block (Block 2767-1) located in Sindh and Balochistan
Provinces of Pakistan.
Mehar Block is located in the Kirthar Fold belt area, in the Middle Indus Basin. Mehar
field is located about 190 km west of Sukkur and 400 km north of Karachi in Sindh
province (distances by road). The environment is arid and the terrain is mountainous.
Mazarani gas field, operated by PPL is situated about 25 km to the north, while
Zamzama gas field operated by BHP is situated about 70 km to the north of Mehar
Field.
Mehar field consists of Pab and Ranikot formations. The wells will be connected to the
new GPF through a Gathering System. There will be a total of 6 wells (3 Wells from
the North and 3 Wells from the South). 3 Wells will be producing in Phase-1 and 3
Wells in Phase-2 (future). ME-1 well is from PAB reservoir. ME-2 wells is from Ranikot
reservoir. Wells, ME-3, ME-4, ME-5 and ME-6 are dual completion.
PCPL intends to develop the Mehar Field by installing a Gathering System, Gas
Processing Facility (GPF) and Product Storage & Loading Facilities. The field facilities
will be developed in two phases, Phase-I and Phase-2.
2.0 OBJECTIVES
This calculation book presents all the relevant pipeline design calculations to finalise
various parameters of the 10” Flow lines and 14” Trunk line.
This calculation book shall be read in conjunction with ‘Pipeline Wall Thickness Report’
(12-MEPL-P-1023) to get the complete picture.
3.0 DEFINITIONS
For the purpose of this report, the following definitions shall apply:
COMPANY The Petronas Carigalli Pakistan Ltd (PCPL) or any

third Parties assigned by COMPANY.
CONCESSION REQUEST A deviation requested by the SUBCONTRACTOR,

CONTRACTOR or MANUFACTURER, usually after
receiving the contract package or purchase order.
Often, it refers to an authorization to use, repair,
recondition, reclaim, or release materials, components,
or equipment already in progress or completely
manufactured but which does not comply with project
requirements. A CONCESSION REQUEST is subject
to COMPANY approval.
VECO Doc. No. 20298-90-EL13-901
Project Title

12 MEPL P 1019 0 5 OF 40
ENGINEER Party which carries out all or part of the design,

engineering of the PROJECT. VECO Engineering, Abu
Dhabi is the ENGINEER.
PROJECT MEHAR GAS DEVELOPMENT PROJECT
SHALL Indicates a mandatory requirement.
SHOULD Indicates a strong recommendation to comply with the

requirements of this document.
4.0 ABBREVIATIONS
The following abbreviations are used in this Report:
3LPP Three Layer Polypropylene
FBE Fusion Bonded Epoxy
HFW High Frequency Electric Welding
OTC Offshore Technology Conference
SMYS Specified Minimum Yield Strength
TOP Top of Pipe
5.0 CODES AND STANDARDS
The following codes and standards are followed:
American Society of Mechanical Engineers (ASME)
ASME B31.8 Gas Transmission and Distribution Piping Systems
American Petroleum Institute (API)
API 5L : 2004 Specification for Line Pipe
API RP 1102-1993 Steel Pipelines Crossing Railroads and Highways
Others
OTC Paper 6335-1990 Design of Submarine Pipelines against Upheaval Buckling

VECO Doc. No. 20298-90-EL13-901
Project Title

12 MEPL P 1019 0 6 OF 40
Offshore Technology Rules for Classification and Construction, III-Offshore
Technology, Part 4-Subsea Pipeline and Risers, Appendix
B, Germanischer Lloyd
6.0 REFERENCE DOCUMENTS
Following document has been taken as reference while preparing the wall thickness
calculation:
12-MGDP-G-1101 Design Basis Memorandum
12-MEPL-P-1023 Pipeline Wall Thickness Report
7.0 DESIGN DATA
7.1 Environmental Conditions
Maximum Ambient Temperature 55°C

Minimum Ambient Temperature 0.5°C
Wet bulb temperature (design) 30°C
Relative humidity (Max / Nor /min ) 90 / 65 / 20 %
North East (Nov to Feb) and
Direction of prevailing wind
South East (March to Oct)
Wind Velocity (Max/Normal) 100 knots (Hold) / 2.9 knots
Elevation above mean sea level (GPF) 54m
Average barometric Pressure 1001.2 mbara (29.56 inches of Mercury)
Ice/Snow None
Zone 2B, upper moderate with ground
Seismic Zone
acceleration of 0.2 (HOLD)
Annual Rainfall min. 63.3 mm (year 2006)
Annual Rainfall max. 139.9 mm (year 2005)
7.2 Pipeline Design Data
Gas Gathering Flow Gas Gathering

Description
Lines Trunk Lines
Pipeline Size (NS), inches 10” 14”
Transported medium Gas Gas
Design Pressure 1350 psig 1350 psig
VECO Doc. No. 20298-90-EL13-901
Project Title

12 MEPL P 1019 0 7 OF 40
Gas Gathering Flow Gas Gathering

Description
Lines Trunk Lines
Design Temperature (Max. \ Min.) 95ºC \ 0ºC 95ºC \ 0ºC
Installation Temperature 21°C 21°C
Maximum Temperature at 1.0m
38°C 38°C
depth of soil
Minimum Temperature at 1.0m
21°C 21°C
depth of soil
H2S Designation Sour & HIC Sour & HIC
Corrosion Allowance 6.0 mm 6.0 mm
ANSI Class Rating 600# 600#
Design Code ASME B31.8 ASME B31.8
Pipeline Material API 5L X65, PSL2 API 5L X65, PSL2
(6)
Location Class (Note ) Class 2 Class 2
Design Factor 0.6 0.6
No. of Block Valve Stations Nil Nil
Line Pipe Process of Manufacture Seamless/HFW Seamless/HFW
Carbon Steel Carbon Steel
Material of Construction
(Note-1) (Note-1)
Pipe Roughness 0.0254mm 0.0254mm
Internal Coating Nil Nil
3 Layer 3 Layer
External Coating
Polypropylene Polypropylene
Cathodic Protection Impressed Current Impressed Current
Piggability Piggable Piggable
Design Life 20 Years 20 Years
Note:
1. All pipeline material shall conform to the requirement of NACE MR0175/ ISO15156.
7.3 Miscellaneous Design Data
Description Value
Steel Density, kg/m³ 7850
Steel Modulus of Elasticity, Pa 207.0 x 109
VECO Doc. No. 20298-90-EL13-901
Project Title

12 MEPL P 1019 0 8 OF 40
Description Value
Steel Poisson’s Ratio 0.3
FBE Thickness, mm 0.3
FBE Density, kg/m³ 1550
Adhesive Thickness, mm 0.25
Adhesive Density, kg/m³ 900
Polypropylene Thickness, mm 1.45 (10”) & 1.65 (14”)
Polypropylene Density, kg/m³ 990
Contents Density, kg/m³ 100
Uncompacted Soil Density, kg/m³ 1450
Compacted Soil Density, kg/m³ 1900
Groundwater Density, kg/m³ 1025
Friction Coefficient, Pipe - Soil 0.3
Minimum Asphalt Road/Track Crossing Depth to TOP, m 2.0
Modulus of Soil Reaction, Pa 3.4 x 106
Soil Resilient Modulus, Pa 69 x 106
Asphalt Road / Track Crossing Pavement Type Flexible Pavement
Single Axle Load Track/Asphalt Road, kN 448
Wheel Contact Area, m² 0.093
8.0 CALCULATION METHOD
8.1 General
Report of calculations described below is presented in Appendix A, B, C and D of this

Report. Empty and operating conditions are considered, where applicable.
8.2 Wall Thickness Selection
Wall thickness calculations were performed in accordance with clause 841.11 of ASME
B31.8. For pipe section at track/asphalt road /rig crossing areas, wall thickness
calculations were performed with a design factor indicated in Section 7.2 above and in
accordance with the formula in clause 841.11 of ASME B31.8. Stresses have been
checked for adequacy of wall thickness using method specified in API 1102. The result
is rounded up to the nearest API 5L thickness to give the selected wall thickness.
8.3 Pipe Section Properties and Weights
Pipe section properties and weights were calculated using standard formulae.
VECO Doc. No. 20298-90-EL13-901
Project Title

12 MEPL P 1019 0 9 OF 40
8.4 Combined Stress Check
The net longitudinal compressive stresses for fully restrained conditions, due to the
combined effects of temperature rise and fluid pressure, were calculated in accordance
with clause 419.6.4(b) of ASME B31.4. According to the Tresca maximum shear theory
of failure, this net longitudinal compressive stress adds directly to the hoop stress to give
the equivalent tensile stress available to cause yielding. This equivalent tensile stress
was therefore compared against the maximum allowable value of 90% SMYS, as
specified in clause 402.3.2(c) of ASME B31.4, to give the margin available for elastic
bending in the fully restrained condition. This margin should be positive to confirm that
the selected pipe is satisfactory for the design pressures and temperature range.
8.5 Elastic Bending Radius
Minimum elastic bending radius allowable in the fully restrained sections were calculated
using standard formulae, based on the margin available for bending determined in the
combined stress check.
8.6 Free End Expansion and Anchor Blocks
Anchor forces required to achieve full restraint were calculated using standard pressure
and temperature expansion load formulae, assuming long, straight pipeline approaches.
In the event that anchors are not installed, the free ends of each pipeline will expand due
to the expansion forces calculated above. The magnitude of this expansion was
calculated using standard pressure and temperature expansion formula, assuming long,
straight pipeline approaches. Anchor blocks are not required if these free end
expansions are below 40mm (as per section 9.3.6.8 of ‘Design Basis Memorandum 12-
MGDP-G-1101’).
8.7 Upheaval and Lateral Buckling
In the restrained sections of the pipeline subjected to high internal pressure and
temperature, an axial compressive force is induced due to the restraint of the strains
associated with internal pressure and temperature loading. When this compressive force
is sufficiently large it can cause two types of buckling in the pipeline. The first buckling
mode involves various snaking lateral movements in the horizontal plane against
frictional resistance, while the second results in part of the line lifting itself vertically from
the sand bed.
The buckling in the lateral mode becomes possible at relatively smaller compressive
forces than the vertical mode for realistic friction coefficients. Thus, unless trenching the
line provides lateral restraint, for example, the lateral modes will be dominant. Therefore,
an unburied line will snake laterally, while a buried line may emerge out of the trench
under sufficiently high axial compressive force.
When the pipeline is trenched, the soil restraints in the lateral direction are generally
higher due to the large mass of soil in the lateral direction. On the other hand, in the
VECO Doc. No. 20298-90-EL13-901
Project Title

12 MEPL P 1019 0 10 OF 40
vertical direction, the stabilizing force is the weight of the cover on the top and
associated passive resistance of the cover layer.
An analysis is carried out to asses the stability of the pipeline against buckling in the
vertical plane and to determine the required depth of backfill cover, which prevents
buckling in this direction.
The simplified analytical model presented in OTC paper 6335, “Design of Submarine
Pipelines against Upheaval Buckling”, 1990, is used to check that the selected depth of
cover is adequate to prevent upheaval buckling. An initial imperfection height of 100, 200
and 300mm is considered for calculation purpose. CONTRACTOR will elaborate in
method statement that how this imperfection depth and length will be controlled and
monitored.
The imperfection length is determined by using the equation in Germanischer Lloyd,

Rules for Classification and Construction, III-Offshore Technology, Part 4-Subsea
Pipeline and Risers, Appendix B.
8.8 Hydrostatic Test Pressure
The hydrostatic strength test pressure at any point of the test section shall be at least
equal to the test pressure required in the ASME B31.8 (ref. table 841.322 (f) and clause
841.32), or to the pressure creating a hoop stress of 90 percent SMYS of the line pipe
material, based on the minimum wall thickness, whichever is higher.
During the hydrostatic pressure test the combined stress shall not exceed 95 percent
SMYS of line pipe material based on minimum wall thickness. Also, hydrostatic test
pressure shall not exceed the mill test pressure of the line pipe which is the pressure
creating a hoop stress of 95 percent SMYS of the line pipe material, based on the
minimum specified wall thickness.
The margin between the hoop stress of 90% of SMYS and the combined stress of 95%
of SMYS allows the elevation difference in the pipeline section.
Hydrostatic leak tightness test pressure shall be 80 percent of hydrostatic strength test
pressure.
Equipment other than that connected in the pipeline may impose lower values than
those calculated as above. All equipments & fittings connected in the pipeline (including
line pipe) shall have a shop test pressure equal or more than those calculated as above.
Road crossing will be pre-tested to a pressure of creating a hoop stress of 95 percent

SMYS of the line pipe material, based on the minimum wall thickness.
This calculation does not cover the station piping which are designed to ASME B31.3.
8.9 Asphalt Road / Track Crossing Design (Uncased)
The pipeline wall thickness selected for the crossings was checked for compliance with
the Barlow stress, total effective stress and fatigue criteria defined in API RP 1102, to
VECO Doc. No. 20298-90-EL13-901
Project Title

12 MEPL P 1019 0 11 OF 40
determine whether heavier wall thicknesses would be required at uncased asphalt road
crossings. Design factor 0.6 has been considered for checking allowable effective stress
at crossings. Allowable effective stress is taken as 90% of SMYS as per section 9.3.6.9
of ‘Design Basis Memorandum 12-MGDP-G-1101’.
8.10 Rig Crossing Design (Uncased)
Rig crossings are not envisaged along the pipeline route; hence no calculation is carried
out.
9.0 RESULTS
Appendix-A of this report presents the wall thickness selection calculations. Appendix-B
presents the other calculations (including combined stress, upheaval buckling, free end
expansion) based on the selected wall thicknesses. Hydrostatic test pressure calculation
results are presented in Appendix-C. The results of the track and asphalt road crossing
designs are presented in Appendix-D. The results of these calculations are summarised
below:
9.1 New Condition

Description Flow Line Trunk Line
Pipeline Diameter, NB 10” 14”
Outside Diameter, mm 273.1 355.6
Calculated Pipeline Wall Thickness with 0.6 Design
11.1 12.7
Factor, mm
Calculated Pipeline Wall Thickness (Asphalt /Track Road
11.1 12.7
Crossing), mm
Bare Pipe Weight, empty, kg/m 71.71 107.40
Coated Pipe Weight, empty, kg/m 73.56 110.01
Coated Pipe Weight, operating, kg/m 78.50 118.57
Hoop stress, MPa 114.53 130.34
Compressive Longitudinal Stress, MPa (Note-1) 144.86 140.12
Margin for Elastic Bending, MPa (Note-2) 143.81 132.74
Minimum Elastic Bend Radius, m 196.55 277.27
Total Anchor Load, tonne (Note-4) 181.84 276.68
Propensity for Upheaval Buckling NONE NONE
Active Length – uncompacted, m 687.14 793.30
Active Length – compacted, m 535.69 620.40
Free End Expansion – uncompacted, mm (Note-3) 324.06 380.15
Free End Expansion – compacted, mm (Note-3) 252.63 297.30
VECO Doc. No. 20298-90-EL13-901
Project Title

12 MEPL P 1019 0 12 OF 40
9.2 Corroded Condition

Outside Diameter, mm 273.1 355.6
Calculated Pipeline Wall Thickness with 0.6 Design
5.1 6.7
Factor excluding 6mm corrosion allowance, mm
Calculated Pipeline Wall Thickness (Asphalt/Track Road
5.1 6.7
Crossing) excluding 6mm corrosion allowance, mm
Bare Pipe Weight, empty, kg/m 33.71 57.65
Coated Pipe Weight, empty, kg/m 35.54 60.26
Coated Pipe Weight, operating, kg/m 40.97 69.46
Hoop stress, MPa 249.27 247.06
Compressive Longitudinal Stress, MPa (Note-1) 104.44 105.10
Margin for Elastic Bending, MPa (Note-2) 49.49 51.04
Minimum Elastic Bend Radius, m 571.14 721.15
Total Anchor Load, tonne (Note-4) 97.23 165.96
Propensity for Upheaval Buckling NONE NONE
Active Length – compacted, m 296.27 384.85
Free End Expansion – compacted, mm (Note-3) 158.97 206.09
9.3 Hydrostatic Test Pressures

Hydrostatic Strength Test Pressure, barg 295 260
Hydrostatic Leak Tightness Test Pressure, barg 102.5 102.5
Notes:
1. A positive value indicates that the pipeline is in compression. A negative value

indicates that the pipeline is in tension.
2. A positive value must be achieved to demonstrate that the selected line pipe is
satisfactory for the given conditions of temperature and pressure.
3. Values less than 40mm can normally be accommodated by the inherent flexibility
of the adjoining above ground pipe work. Values greater than 40mm are not
acceptable and should be reduced either by consideration of the pipeline approach
or by utilization of a pipeline anchor block or a combination of both.
VECO Doc. No. 20298-90-EL13-901
Project Title

12 MEPL P 1019 0 13 OF 40
4. Anchor block load calculated here is based on manual calculation. Actual load and
requirement of anchor block shall be as per ‘Stress Analysis Report’.
5. Extent of test section/pressure shall be as shown in the ‘Pipeline Hydrotest

Diagram’.
10.0 CONCLUSIONS
10.1 Wall Thickness
The following combinations of material grade and wall thickness satisfy the stress criteria
specified in ASME B31.8, for the analysed loading conditions:

Calculated Pipeline Wall Thickness with 0.6 Design Factor
11.1 12.7
(General), mm
Calculated Pipeline Wall Thickness (Asphalt /Track Road
11.1 12.7
Crossing), mm
10.2 Elastic Bending Radius
The route and profile of any fully restrained sections of the pipelines should be controlled
to ensure that the following minimum elastic bending radius is met:

Minimum Elastic Bend Radius, m 572 722
Where changes of direction or profile are required that cannot be achieved by elastic
bending, field fabricated cold bends (minimum radius 40D) or factory fabricated 5D hot
bends should be used.
10.3 Expansion Control
In all cases, the calculated free end expansion is too great to be accommodated by the
inherent flexibility of the adjoining above ground pipe work. Expansion control measures
are required by the utilization of a pipeline anchor block withstand the following axial
forces:

Anchor Force, tonne 182 277
VECO Doc. No. 20298-90-EL13-901
Project Title

12 MEPL P 1019 0 14 OF 40
Anchor block forces to be confirmed by stress analysis using formal computer analysis.
10.4 Upheaval and Lateral Buckling
The ‘required down load’ and ‘actual down load’ for the different imperfection heights
(300mm, 200mm and 100mm) are tabulated below:
New Condition:
Imperfection Required Down Actual Down load Actual Down load

Height δ, mm Load Wru, N/m Uncompacted Q, N/m Compacted Qc, N/m
300 4134.83 4226.22 8952.06
10” Flow
200 2703.42 4833.75 10866.47
Line
100 837.96 5469.73 12967.27
300 3573.34 5444.75 10426.76
14” Trunk
200 1901.61 6170.20 12495.69
Line
100 -277.03 6924.10 14751.01
Corroded Condition:
Imperfection Height Required Down Load Actual Down load

δ, mm Wruc’, N/m Compacted Qc’, N/m
300 2387.01 8583.90
10” Flow
200 1597.90 10498.31
Line
100 569.52 12599.11
300 2369.84 9944.96
14” Trunk
200 1339.80 12013.89
Line
100 -2.57 14269.21
From the above table the uplift value is less than the actual down load, which means the
pipe line is safe against uplift. Hence the pipeline has no propensity for upheaval
buckling for the range of conditions analysed.
10.5 Hydrostatic Test Pressure
Following pressures shall be used for hydrostatic testing of the pipeline.
Flow Line Trunk Line

Description
Min. Max. Min. Max.
Hydrostatic Strength Test Pressure, barg 295 311.4 260 273.6
Hydrostatic Leak Tightness Test Pressure, barg 102.5 311.4 102.5 273.6
VECO Doc. No. 20298-90-EL13-901
Project Title

12 MEPL P 1019 0 15 OF 40
Following are the maximum test pressures (which are the shop test pressures) for the
equipment/fitting connected to the pipeline:
Flow Line Trunk Line

Equipment/Fitting
Test Pressure, barg Test Pressure, barg
Pig Launcher/Receiver 153 153
Flange (600#) –max. allowable 153 153
Ball Valve Shell Test (600#) 153 153
Ball Valve Seat Test (600#) 112 112
Barred Tee / Reducing Tee 312 274
Isolating Joint 312 274
Anchor Flange 312 274
As the pig trap and ball valve shop test pressure is less than pipeline strength test
pressure, these items should not be included with pipeline strength test.
10.6 Crossing Design
For asphalt/track road crossings, pipeline designed as per ASME B31.8/API RP1102,
with wall thickness as specified in Section 9.1, to be used. These crossings do not
require sleeves. Following summarises the outcome of the calculations:

Wall Thickness, mm 11.1 12.7
Burial Depth at Crossing, m 2.0 2.0
Allowable Effective Stress, N/mm² 403.2 403.2
Actual Effective Stress, N/mm² 335.06 335.66
11.0 RECOMMENDATIONS
The combinations of wall thickness and material grade presented in Section 9.1 of this
Report are recommended.
Pipeline routing during detailed design should take account of the limits on elastic bend
radii presented in Section 9.2 of this Report. Where changes of direction or profile in
pipeline alignment cannot be achieved by elastic bending, 40D cold field bends or 5D
hot bends should be used.
VECO Doc. No. 20298-90-EL13-901
Project Title

12 MEPL P 1019 0 16 OF 40
Unnecessary bending should be eliminated by deepening the trench excavation at high
points, and not by grading the Right of Way.
Pipeline expansion should be controlled to prevent excessive movement and stresses at

below ground, above ground and pigging station on the pipelines.
More accurate anchor block forces shall be confirmed by stress analysis using formal
computer analysis (CAESAR II). Anchor blocks shall be avoided if the stress analysis out
put shows so.
Hydrostatic testing of pipeline shall be conducted with a pressure as presented in

Section 9.5 of this Report
VECO Doc. No. 20298-90-EL13-901
Project Title

12 MEPL P 1019 0 17 OF 40
APPENDIX-A
SUBJECT : WALL THICKNESS CALCULATION
PROJECT : MEHAR GAS DEVELOPMENT PROJECT
PIPELINE : 10" FLOWLINES AND 14” TRUNK LINES
Pipeline wall thickness has been calculated as per following Codes:
For pipe lines: As per clause 841.11 of Code ASME B31.8
The Wall Thickness for pressure containment only has been calculated based upon the formula
for Steel Piping Systems.
Pi * D
t= +C
2 * F * E *T * S
Where t = the wall thickness required for pressure containment alone.

Pi = Design Pressure
D = Outside Diameter of the Pipeline
S = Material’s Specified Minimum Yield Stress
F = Design Factor
T = Temperature De-rating Factor
E = Weld joint factor
C = Corrosion Allowance
The results are tabulated below:
Pipe Outside Diameter D, mm 273.1 355.6

Pipe Material API 5L X65 API 5L X65
Internal Design
Pi, psi(g) 1350 1350
Pressure
Specified Minimum
S, psi 65000 65000
Yield Strength
Design Factor F 0.6 0.6
Weld Joint Factor E 1 1
Temperature De-rating
T 1 1
Factor
Corrosion Allowance C, mm 6 6
Calculated Selected
Pipe Size Design t = PiD/2FES
Thickness Thickness
Factor
(Inch) (mm) tm = t+C mm (mm)
10" 0.6 4.73 10.73 11.1
14" 0.6 6.15 12.15 12.7
VECO Doc. No. 20298-90-EL13-901
Project Title

12 MEPL P 1019 0 18 OF 40
APPENDIX-B
SUBJECT : GENERAL DESIGN CALCULATIONS
1. Input Data
Flow line Trunk Line

Nominal Pipe Size NB 10” 14”
Outside Diameter D 273.1 355.6 mm
Design Wall Thickness t 11.1 12.7 mm
Corrosion Allowance C 6 6 mm
Material Grade API 5L X65 API 5L X65
Specified minimum yield strength SMYS 448 448 MPa
Design pressure Pi 9.31 9.31 MPa
Installation (backfill) temperature T1 21 21 °C
Design Temperature Below Ground T2 95 95 °C
Steel coefficient of thermal expansion α 0.0000117 0.0000117 per °C
Steel Poisson's ratio ν 0.3 0.3
Steel modulus of elasticity E 2.07 x 105 2.07 x 105 MPa
Effective depth of cover H 1.0 1.0 m
Backfill dry soil density over active length
ρbc 1900 1900 kg/m³
(compacted)
Backfill dry soil density over active length
ρbuc 1450 1450 kg/m³
(uncompacted)
Steel density ρs 7850 7850 kg/m³
FBE thickness t1 0.3 0.3 mm
FBE density ρfbe 1550 1550 kg/m³
Adhesive thickness t2 0.25 0.25 mm
Adhesive density ρad 900 900 kg/m³
Polypropylene thickness t3 1.45 1.65 mm
Polypropylene density ρpp 990 990 kg/m³
VECO Doc. No. 20298-90-EL13-901
Project Title

12 MEPL P 1019 0 19 OF 40
Contents density ρcont 100 100 kg/m³

Coefficient of friction between pipe and soil μ 0.3 0.3
Imperfection height for upheaval buckling check 300, 200 & 300, 200 &
δ mm
100 100
Uplift coefficient (for uncompacted backfill) for
Fuc 0.1 0.1
upheaval buckling check
Uplift coefficient (for compacted backfill)for
Fc 0.5 0.5
upheaval buckling check
2. Pipe Section Properties
2.1 New Condition
10” Flow Line 14” Trunk Line
Internal diameter d = D – 2t 250.90 330.20 mm
π (D 2 − d 2 )
Pipe cross section area As = 9136.38 13681.10 mm²
4
πd 2
Internal area Ai = 49441.45 85633.56 mm²
4
π (D 4 − d 4 )
Moment of Inertia I= 78535.42 x 103 201354.52 x 103 mm4
64
Flexural rigidity EI 16256.83 x 103 41680.39 x 103 Nm²
Internal diameter d’ = D – 2 (t-C) 262.90 342.20 mm
π (D 2 − d 2 )
Pipe cross section area As’ = 4293.93 7343.88 mm²
4
πd 2
Internal area Ai‘= 54283.90 91970.78 mm²
4
π (D 4 − d 4 )
Moment of Inertia I’ = 38564.85 x 103 111788.65 x 103 mm4
64
Flexural rigidity E I’ 7982.93 x 103 23140.25 x 103 Nm²
VECO Doc. No. 20298-90-EL13-901
Project Title

12 MEPL P 1019 0 20 OF 40
3. Pipe Weights
10” 14”
Flow Trunk
Line Line
Outside diameter over
OD = D + 2 t1 + 2 t2 + 2 t3 277.10 360.00 mm
all coatings
π
FBE weight Wfbe= [ (D + 2 t1)² – D² ] ρfbe 0.40 0.52 kgf/m
4
π
Adhesive weight Wad= [ (D + 2 t1+ 2 t2) ² – (D + 2 t1) ² ] ρad 0.19 0.25 kgf/m
4
π
Polypropylene weight Wpp= [ OD2 – (OD - 2 t3) ² ] ρpp 1.24 1.84 kgf/m
4
3.1 New Condition
10” Flow 14” Trunk

Line Line
Steel weight per unit
W = As ρs 71.71 107.40 kgf/m
length
Total weight, empty Wte= W + Wfbe+ Wad+ Wpp 73.56 110.01 kgf/m
π
Total weight, operating Wto= Wte+ [ d² ρcont ] 78.50 118.57 kgf/m
4

Line Line
Steel weight per unit
W’ = As’ ρs 33.71 57.65 kgf/m
length
Total weight, empty Wte’= W’ + Wfbe+ Wad+ Wpp 35.54 60.26 kgf/m
π
Total weight, operating Wto’= Wte’+ [ d² ρcont ] 40.97 69.46 kgf/m
4
4. Combined Stress Check (fully restrained section)

Line Line
Max. allowable stress Sa = 0.9 SMYS 403.20 403.20 MPa
VECO Doc. No. 20298-90-EL13-901
Project Title

12 MEPL P 1019 0 21 OF 40
4.1 New Condition

Pi D
Tensile hoop stress Sh = 114.53 130.34 MPa
2t
Compressive longitudinal
SL= [ E α (T2 - T1 ) ] - ν Sh 144.86 140.12 MPa
stress
Margin for elastic bending Sb= Sa - Sh - SL 143.81 132.74 MPa
The margin for elastic bending is positive, indicating that the selected line pipe is satisfactory for
the design pressure and temperature range.

Pi D
Tensile hoop stress Sh’ = 249.27 247.06 MPa
2 (t - C)
Compressive longitudinal
SL’= [ E α (T2 - T1 ) ] - ν Sh’ 104.44 105.10 MPa
stress
Margin for elastic bending Sb’= Sa – Sh’ – SL’ 49.49 51.04 MPa
5. Elastic Bend Radius (fully restrained section)
5.1 New Condition

Minimum elastic bend ED
Rr = 196.55 277.27 m
radius 2 Sb
Minimum elastic bend ED

Rr' = 571.14 721.15 m
radius 2 Sb '
6. Anchor Load
6.1 New Condition

Pressure load Pl = Pi Ai 46921.5 81268.96 kgf
Poisson effect load Pel = ν Sh As 31999.62 54531.95 kgf
VECO Doc. No. 20298-90-EL13-901
Project Title

12 MEPL P 1019 0 22 OF 40
Thermal load Tl = α As E (T2 - T1 ) 166914.10 249942.40 kgf
Total expansion load = (Pl - Pel) + Tl 181836.00 276679.40 kgf
Tel = [ (Pl - Pel) + Tl ] 181.84 276.68 tonne

Pressure load Pl’ = Pi’ Ai’ 51517.14 87283.18 kgf
Poisson effect load Pel’ = ν Sh’ As’ 32732.43 55486.14 kgf
Thermal load Tl’ = α As’ E (T2 - T1 ) 78446.53 134166.60 kgf

Total expansion load = (P’l – Pel’) + Tl’ 97231.24 165963.70 kgf
Tel’ = [ (Pl’ – Pel’) + Tl’ ] 97.23 165.96 tonne
7. Upheaval Buckling Check
Equation 12 of 1990 OTC paper 6335 derives the download required to prevent upheaval buckling
for offshore pipeline. In the absence of any other ready made solution the same has been used by
modifying to suit onshore pipeline.
Therefore the following are to be noted:
• ‘w’ is the required download for stability in OTC paper 6335 which is = Wru (in our case).
• ‘wo‘ is the installation submerged weight in OTC paper 6335 which is = total weight ‘Wto‘ (in
our case).
• ‘P’ is the effective axial force in operation in OTC paper 6335 which is = total expansion load
‘Tel‘ (in our case).
The imperfection length ‘Lo’ is determined by using the equation in Germanischer Lloyd, Rules for
Classification and Construction, III-Offshore Technology, Part 4-Subsea Pipeline and Risers,
Appendix B.
7.1 New Condition - Uncompacted Backfill

VECO Doc. No. 20298-90-EL13-901
Project Title

12 MEPL P 1019 0 23 OF 40
This download is provided by the sum the weight of the pipe plus the download exerted by the
backfill.
From Equation 13 of the OTC paper 6335, the download exerted by a given depth of cover in
cohesionless sand is given.
Therefore the total download is given by:
Q = q + Wto
The required down load ‘Wru’ and actual down load ‘Q’ for the different imperfection heights
Imperfection Height Required Down Actual Down load

δ, mm Load Wru, N/m Q, N/m
300 4134.83 4226.22
10” Flow
200 2703.42 4833.75
Line
100 837.96 5469.73
300 3573.34 5444.75
14” Trunk
200 1901.61 6170.20
Line
100 -277.03 6924.10
From the above table the required download is less than the actual download and therefore the
pipeline has no propensity for upheaval buckling in this condition.
7.2 New Condition - Compacted Backfill
backfill.
VECO Doc. No. 20298-90-EL13-901
Project Title

12 MEPL P 1019 0 24 OF 40
Qc = qc + Wto
The required down load ‘Wru’ and actual down load ‘Qc’ for the different imperfection heights
Imperfection Height Required Down Actual Down load

δ, mm Load Wru, N/m Qc, N/m
300 4134.83 8952.06
10” Flow
200 2703.42 10866.47
Line
100 837.96 12967.27
300 3573.34 10426.76
14” Trunk
200 1901.61 12495.69
Line
100 -277.03 14751.01
7.3 Corroded Condition - Compacted Backfill
backfill.
Qc’ = qc’ + Wto’

VECO Doc. No. 20298-90-EL13-901
Project Title

12 MEPL P 1019 0 25 OF 40
The required down load ‘Wruc’’ and actual down load ‘Qc’’ for the different imperfection heights
Imperfection Height Required Down Load Actual Down load

δ, mm Wruc’, N/m Qc’, N/m
300 2387.01 8583.90
10” Flow
200 1597.90 10498.31
Line
100 569.52 12599.11
300 2369.84 9944.96
14” Trunk
200 1339.80 12013.89
Line
100 -2.57 14269.21
8. Free End Expansion
8.1 New Condition - Uncompacted Backfill

Soil friction force f = μ ( 2 ρbuc OD H + Wto) 264.63 348.77 kgf/m
Tel
Active length L= 687.14 793.30 m
f
(Tel ) 2
Free end expansion Δu = 324.06 380.15 mm
2 As E f
8.2 New Condition - Compacted Backfill
Soil friction force f = μ ( 2 ρbc OD H + Wto) 339.44 445.97 kgf/m

Tel
Active length L= 535.69 620.40 m
f
(Tel ) 2
Free end expansion Δc = 252.63 297.30 mm
2 As E f
8.3 Corroded Condition - Compacted Backfill
Soil friction force f’ = μ ( 2 ρbc OD H + Wto’) 328.19 431.24 kgf/m

Tel '
Active length L’ = 296.27 384.85 m
f'
(Tel ' ) 2
Free end expansion Δc’ = 158.97 206.09 mm
2 As ' E f '
VECO Doc. No. 20298-90-EL13-901
Project Title

12 MEPL P 1019 0 26 OF 40
APPENDIX-C
SUBJECT : HYDROSTATIC TEST PRESSURE CALCULATIONS
1. Minimum Hydrostatic Strength Test Pressure
1.1 Based on 90% of SMYS
As per clause 2.1 and 8.2 of PTS 31.40.40.38, the hydrostatic strength test pressure (TP)
required to give a hoop stress of 90 percent of SMYS based on minimum wall thickness, shall be
calculated as:
20 × (t − tm ) × S × F × E × T
TP =
D
Where TP = Hydrostatic strength test pressure (barg)
t = Nominal wall thickness of pipe (mm)
tm = Maximum negative tolerance for wall thickness of pipe (mm)
D = Outside diameter of pipe (mm)
S = Specified Minimum Yield Strength (SMYS) (N/mm²)
F = Design factor (for hydrostatic strength test, i.e.90% stress level, F = 0.9)
E = Longitudinal joint factor (for linepipe in accordance with ASME B31.8)
T = Temperature de-rating factor (for hydrostatic strength test, T = 1.0)
The results are tabulated below:

10” Flow Line14” Trunk Line
Pipe Outside Diameter D 273.1 355.6 mm
Nominal wall thickness t 11.1 12.7 mm
Maximum negative tolerance for -10% as per
tm 1.11 1.27 mm
wall thickness of pipe 12-MEPL-P-1001
Specified Minimum Yield
S 448 448 N/mm²
Strength
Longitudinal Joint Factor E 1 1
Temperature De-rating Factor 1 1
Minimum Hydrostatic Strength

TP 294.98 259.2 barg ………………(A)
Test Pressure
VECO Doc. No. 20298-90-EL13-901
Project Title

12 MEPL P 1019 0 27 OF 40
1.2 As per ASME B31.8
As per clause 841.322(c) of ASME B31.8 and clause 2.1 of PTS 31.40.40.38,
Hydrostatic strength test pressure = 1.25 times the maximum operating pressure (for
location class 2) (operating pressure is taken as
internal design pressure)

Internal design pressure = 93.1 93.1 Barg
Hydrostatic strength test pressure = 116.375 116.375 Barg …………(B)
= 294.98 259.2 Barg

Higher value of (A) & (B) above
Hence minimum hydrostatic = 295 260 Barg

strength test pressure
2. Maximum Hydro Test Pressure of Pipeline
2.1 Based on 95% of SMYS
As per clause 2.1 of PTS 31.40.40.38,
20 × (t − tm ) × S × F × E × T
TP =
D
10” Flow Line14” Trunk Line

Pipe Outside Diameter D 273.1 355.6 mm
Nominal wall thickness t 11.1 12.7 mm
Maximum negative tolerance for -10% as per
tm 1.11 1.27 mm
wall thickness of pipe 12-MEPL-P-1001
Specified Minimum Yield
S 448 448 N/mm²
Strength
Longitudinal Joint Factor E 1 1
Temperature De-rating Factor 1 1
Maximum Hydrostatic
TP 311.4 273.6 barg ………………(C)
Strength Test Pressure
VECO Doc. No. 20298-90-EL13-901
Project Title

12 MEPL P 1019 0 28 OF 40
3. Minimum Hydrostatic Leak Tightness Test Pressure
As per clause 8.3.1 of PTS 31.40.40.38,
Hydrostatic Leak Tightness Test Pressure = 1.1 times the internal design pressure

Line Line
Internal design pressure = 93.1 93.1 Barg
1.1 times the Internal design pressure = 102.41 102.41 Barg
Hydrostatic Leak Tightness Test Pressure = 102.5 102.5 Barg
4. Maximum Hydro Test Pressure of Equipment/Fitting with design code ASME B31.8
4.1 Flange (600#)
Test pressure with pipeline system = 1.5 times the 38°C rating as per clause 2.6 of
ASME B16.5
= 1.5 x 102.1 barg = 153.2 barg
= 153 barg
Hence maximum hydrostatic test pressure with flanges is 153 barg for both 10” flow lines
and 14” trunk lines.
4.2 Pig Launcher/Receiver
Shop Test pressure = fiber stress of 95% of the specified minimum yield
strength calculated on the bases of the minimum
specified wall thickness of connected pipeline section (as
per clause 8.7.2 of 12-MEPL-P-1010)

Line Line
Connecting wall thickness = 11.1 12.7 mm
-10% as per
Minimum wall thickness = 9.99 11.43 mm
12-MEPL-P-1001
Hydro test pressure = 93.1 93.1 Barg
Hydrostatic Test Pressure = 311.4 273.6 Barg
Max. Test Pressure of Flanges = 153 153 Barg
Hence Hydrostatic Shop Test
= 153 153 Barg
Pressure of Pig Traps
VECO Doc. No. 20298-90-EL13-901
Project Title

12 MEPL P 1019 0 29 OF 40
4.3 Ball Valve (600#)
Shell Test Pressure
Shell Test pressure = 1.5 times the 100°F (38°C) rating (as per API 6D clause 10.3)
= 1.5 x 102.1 barg = 153.2 barg
= 153 barg
Hence shop hydrostatic shell test pressure for ball valves is 153 barg for both 10” flow
lines and 14” trunk lines.
Seat Test Pressure
Seat Test pressure = 1.1 times the 100°F (38°C) rating (as per API 6D clause 10.4.3)
= 1.1 x 102.1 barg = 112.3 barg
= 112 barg
Hence hydrostatic seat test pressure for ball valves is 112 barg for both 10” flow lines and
14” trunk lines.
4.4 Pigging Tees
Shop Test pressure = Pressure equivalent to give a hoop stress equivalent to

95 percent SMYS in the adjacent run pipe based on
minimum wall thickness (as per clause 10.3 of 12-MEPL-
P-1009)

Line Line
-10% as per
12-MEPL-P-1001
= 312 274 Barg
Pressure of Pigging Tees
4.5 Isolating Joint
Shop Test pressure = pressure resulting in a hoop stress equivalent to 95

percent of the Specified Minimum Yield Stress (SMYS) in
the connecting line pipe based on minimum wall
thickness (as per clause 10.3 of 12-MEPL-P-1007)
VECO Doc. No. 20298-90-EL13-901
Project Title

12 MEPL P 1019 0 30 OF 40
Line Line
-10% as per
12-MEPL-P-1001
= 312 274 Barg
Pressure of Isolating Joints
4.6 Anchor Flange
Shop Test pressure = pressure shall be based on a fibre stress of 95% of the
Specified Minimum Yield Strength, based on specified
minimum wall thickness of the connecting line pipe
section (as per clause 11.4 of 12-MEPL-P-1008)

Line Line
-10% as per
12-MEPL-P-1001
= 312 274 Barg
Pressure of Anchor Flanges
VECO Doc. No. 20298-90-EL13-901
Project Title

12 MEPL P 1019 0 31 OF 40
APPENDIX-D
D.1 10” FLOWLINES
SUBJECT : UNCASED ROAD/TRACK CROSSING DESIGN CALCULATIONS

PIPELINE : 10" FLOWLINES
1. Input Data
Nominal Pipe Size NB 10”

Outside Diameter D 273.1 mm
Wall Thickness ( = t – C) tw 5.1 mm
Corrosion Allowance C 6 mm
Specified Minimum Yield Stress (SMYS) S 448 MPa
Internal Pressure P 9.31 MPa
Longitudinal Joint Factor, E E 1
Temperature De-rating Factor, T T 1
Design Factor F 0.6
Allowable Design Factor Fa 0.9
Poisson’s Ration νs 0.3
Modulus of Elasticity ES 2.07 x 105 MPa
Thermal Expansion coefficient αT 0.0000117 Per °C
Maximum Design Temperature T1 95 °C
Installation (backfill) Temperature T2 21 °C
Temperature Difference ΔT 74 °C
Pipeline Burial Depth to TOP (for Track) H 2.0 m
Bored Diameter (API RP1102 4.7.2.1) Bd 273.1 mm
Soil Type Loose Sand
Modulus of Soil Reaction (API RP1102 Table A-1) EI 3.4 MPa
Resilient Modulus Er 69 MPa
Unit Soil Weight γ 18.64 kN/m³
Pavement Type No Pavement
Design Wheel Load from single axle PS 112 kN
Wheel Contact Area AP 0.093 m²
VECO Doc. No. 20298-90-EL13-901
Project Title

12 MEPL P 1019 0 32 OF 40
2. Calculations
2.1 Check For Allowable Barlow Stress, SHi(Barlow)
SHi (Barlow) ≤ F x E x T x S
PD
SHi (Barlow) =
2tw
=
9 .31 x 273 .1
2 x 5 .1
N
= 249.27
mm 2
Allowable stress = FxExTxS
= 0.6 x 1 x 1 x 448 = 268.8 N/mm²
SHi (Barlow) < F x E x T x S, therefore OK
2.2 Circumferential Stress due to Earth Load, SHe
SHe = KHe x Be x Ee x γ x D
From Figure 3 with tw/D = 0.0187 and EI = 3.4 MPa
Stiffness factor KHe = 3424
From Figure 4 with H/Bd = 7.32 and Soil Type A
Burial factor Be = 1.23
From Figure 5 with Bd/D = 1.0
Excavation factor Ee = 0.83
∴ SHe = 3424 x 1.23 x 0.83 x 18.64 x 0.2731
kN N
= 17794 = 17.8
m2 mm 2
VECO Doc. No. 20298-90-EL13-901
Project Title

12 MEPL P 1019 0 33 OF 40
2.3 Impact Factor, Fi and Applied Design Surface Pressure, w
From Figure 7 with H = 2.0 m
Impact factor Fi = 1.45
Applied design surface pressure,w = Ps/AP
∴ w = 112 / 0.093
kN N
= 1204.3 = 1.2
m2 mm 2
2.4 Highway Cyclic Circumferential Stress, ΔSHh
ΔSHh = KHh x GHh x R x L x Fi x w
From Figure 14 with tw/D = 0. 0187and Er = 69 MPa
Highway Stiffness factor KHh = 14.49
From Figure 15 with D = 273.1 mm and H = 2.0 m
Highway geometry factor GHh = 0.944
From Table 2 with D = 273.1 mm and H = 2.0 m (No Pavement, single axle)
Highway pavement type factor R = 1.1
Highway axle configuration factor L = 0.65
∴ ΔSHh = 14.49 x 0.944 x 1.1 x 0.65 x 1.45 x 1204.3
kN N
= 17078. = 17.08
m2 mm 2
2.5 Highway Cyclic Longitudinal Stress, ΔSLh
ΔSLh = KLh x GLh x R x L x Fi x w
From Figure 16 with tw/D = 0. 0187 and Er = 69 MPa
Highway Stiffness factor KLh = 9.81

VECO Doc. No. 20298-90-EL13-901
Project Title

12 MEPL P 1019 0 34 OF 40
Highway geometry factor GLh = 1.014
From Table 2 with D = 273.1 mm and H = 2.0 m (No pavement, single axle)
∴ΔSLh = 9.81 x 1.014 x 1.1 x 0.65 x 1.45 x 1204.3
kN N
= 12419. = 12.42
m2 mm 2
2.6 Circumferential Stress Due to Internal Pressure, SHi
SHi = P( D − t w )
2t w
9 .31 ( 273 .1 − 5.1)
=
2 x 5 .1
N
= 244.5
mm 2
2.7 Principal Stresses, S1, S2 & S3
Maximum circumferential stress, S1
S1 = SHe + ΔSHh + SHi
= (17.8 + 17.08+ 244.5) N/mm²
= 279.4 N/mm²
Maximum longitudinal stress, S2
S2 = ΔSLh– Es αT (T2 – T1) + νs (SHe + SHi)
= [12.42– (2.07 x 105 x 11.7 x 10-6 x 74) + 0.3 (17.8+244.62)] N/mm²
= - 88.0 N/mm²
Maximum radial stress, S3
S3 = - MAOP = -P = - 93.1 bar = - 9.31 N/mm²

VECO Doc. No. 20298-90-EL13-901
Project Title

12 MEPL P 1019 0 35 OF 40
Total effective stress, Seff
=
1
2 [( S1 − S 2 ) 2 + ( S 2 − S 3 ) 2 + ( S 3 − S1 ) 2 ]
= 1
2 [(367 .4) 2 + ( −78 .71) 2 + ( −288 .69 ) 2 ]
= 335.06 N/mm²
Allowable Effective Stress = SMYS x Fa
= 448 x 0.9 = 403.2 N/mm²
Seff < SMYS x Fa, therefore OK
2.8 Check for Fatigue
From Table-3, fatigue endurance limit of girth welds
SFG = 12000 psi = 82.74 N/mm²
From Table-3, fatigue endurance limit of longitudinal welds
SFL = 23000 psi = 158.58N/mm² (for Seamless/HFW linepipes)
Allowable longitudinal stress (girth welds)
= SFG x F = 49.64 N/mm²
Cyclic longitudinal stress, ΔSLh
= 12.42 N/mm²
ΔSLh < SFG x F, therefore OK
Allowable Hoop stress (longitudinal welds)
= SFL x F = 95.15 N/mm²
Cyclic circumferential stress, ΔSHh
= 17.08 N/mm²
ΔSHh < SFL x F, therefore OK

VECO Doc. No. 20298-90-EL13-901
Project Title

12 MEPL P 1019 0 36 OF 40
D.2 14” TRUNKLINES
SUBJECT : UNCASED ROAD/TRACK CROSSING DESIGN CALCULATIONS

PIPELINE : 14” TRUNK LINES
1. Input Data
Nominal Pipe Size NB 14”

Outside Diameter D 355.6 mm
Wall Thickness ( = t – C) tw 6.7 mm
Corrosion Allowance C 6 mm
Specified Minimum Yield Stress (SMYS) S 448 MPa
Internal Pressure P 9.31 MPa
Longitudinal Joint Factor, E E 1
Temperature De-rating Factor, T T 1
Design Factor F 0.6
Allowable Design Factor Fa 0.9
Poisson’s Ration νs 0.3
Modulus of Elasticity ES 2.07 x 105 MPa
Thermal Expansion coefficient αT 0.0000117 Per °C
Maximum Design Temperature T1 95 °C
Installation (backfill) Temperature T2 21 °C
Temperature Difference ΔT 74 °C
Pipeline Burial Depth to TOP (for Track) H 2.0 m
Bored Diameter (API RP1102 4.7.2.1) Bd 355.6 mm
Soil Type Loose Sand
Modulus of Soil Reaction (API RP1102 Table A-1) EI 3.4 MPa
Resilient Modulus Er 69 MPa
Unit Soil Weight γ 18.64 kN/m³
Pavement Type No Pavement
Design Wheel Load from single axle PS 112 kN
Wheel Contact Area AP 0.093 m²
VECO Doc. No. 20298-90-EL13-901
Project Title

12 MEPL P 1019 0 37 OF 40
2. Calculations
2.1 Check For Allowable Barlow Stress, SHi(Barlow)
SHi (Barlow) ≤ F x E x T x S
PD
SHi (Barlow) =
2tw
=
9 .31 x 355 .6
2 x 6 .7
N
= 247.0
mm 2
Allowable stress = FxExTxS
= 0.6 x 1 x 1 x 448 = 268.8 N/mm²
SHi (Barlow) < F x E x T x S, therefore OK
2.2 Circumferential Stress due to Earth Load, SHe
SHe = KHe x Be x Ee x γ x D
From Figure 3 with tw/D = 0.0188 and EI = 3.4 MPa
Stiffness factor KHe = 3379
From Figure 4 with H/Bd = 5.62 and Soil Type A
Burial factor Be = 1.13
From Figure 5 with Bd/D = 1.0
Excavation factor Ee = 0.83
∴ SHe = 3379 x 1.13 x 0.83 x 18.64 x 0.3556
kN N
= 21007 = 21.0
m2 mm 2
VECO Doc. No. 20298-90-EL13-901
Project Title

12 MEPL P 1019 0 38 OF 40
2.3 Impact Factor, Fi and Applied Design Surface Pressure, w
From Figure 7 with H = 2.0 m
Impact factor Fi = 1.45
Applied design surface pressure,w = Ps/AP
∴ w = 112 / 0.093
kN N
= 1204.3 = 1.2
m2 mm 2
2.4 Highway Cyclic Circumferential Stress, ΔSHh
ΔSHh = KHh x GHh x R x L x Fi x w
From Figure 14 with tw/D = 0. 0188and Er = 69 MPa
Highway Stiffness factor KHh = 14.45
Highway geometry factor GHh = 0.888
From Table 2 with D = 355.6 mm and H = 2.0 m (No Pavement, single axle)
∴ ΔSHh = 14.45 x 0.888 x 1.1 x 0.65 x 1.45 x 1204.3
kN N
= 16021 = 16.02
m2 mm 2
2.5 Highway Cyclic Longitudinal Stress, ΔSLh
ΔSLh = KLh x GLh x R x L x Fi x w
From Figure 16 with tw/D = 0. 0188 and Er = 69 MPa
Highway Stiffness factor KLh = 9.8

VECO Doc. No. 20298-90-EL13-901
Project Title

12 MEPL P 1019 0 39 OF 40
Highway geometry factor GLh = 0.915
From Table 2 with D = 355.6 mm and H = 2.0 m (No pavement, single axle)
∴ΔSLh = 9.8 x 0.915 x 1.1 x 0.65 x 1.45 x 1204.3
kN N
= 11196 = 11.196
m2 mm 2
2.6 Circumferential Stress Due to Internal Pressure, SHi

P( D − t w )
SHi =
2t w
9 .31 (355 .6 − 6 .7 )
=
2 x 6 .7
N
= 242.35
mm 2
2.7 Principal Stresses, S1, S2 & S3
Maximum circumferential stress, S1
S1 = SHe + ΔSHh + SHi
= (21 + 16.02+ 242.35) N/mm²
= 279.37 N/mm²
Maximum longitudinal stress, S2
S2 = ΔSLh– Es αT (T2 – T1) + νs (SHe + SHi)
= [11.196–(2.07x105 x 11.7 x 10-6 x 74) + 0.3 (21+244.35)] N/mm²
= - 88.93 N/mm²
Maximum radial stress, S3
S3 = - MAOP = -P = - 93.1 bar = - 9.31 N/mm²

VECO Doc. No. 20298-90-EL13-901
Project Title

12 MEPL P 1019 0 40 OF 40
Total effective stress, Seff
=
1
2 [( S1 − S 2 ) 2 + ( S 2 − S 3 ) 2 + ( S 3 − S1 ) 2 ]
= 1
2 [(368 .31) 2 + ( −79 .62 ) 2 + ( −288 .69 ) 2 ]
= 335.66 N/mm²
Allowable Effective Stress = SMYS x Fa
= 448 x 0.9 = 403.2 N/mm²
Seff < SMYS x Fa, therefore OK
2.8 Check for Fatigue
From Table-3, fatigue endurance limit of girth welds
SFG = 12000 psi = 82.74 N/mm²
From Table-3, fatigue endurance limit of longitudinal welds
SFL = 23000 psi = 158.58N/mm² (for Seamless/HFW linepipes)
Allowable longitudinal stress (girth welds)
= SFG x F = 49.64 N/mm²
Cyclic longitudinal stress, ΔSLh
= 11.196 N/mm²
ΔSLh < SFG x F, therefore OK
Allowable Hoop stress (longitudinal welds)
= SFL x F = 95.15 N/mm²
Cyclic circumferential stress, ΔSHh
= 16.02 N/mm²
ΔSHh < SFL x F, therefore OK

12 MEPL P 1019 0 (Pipeline Calculation Book)

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

12 MEPL P 1019 0 (Pipeline Calculation Book)

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

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

12 MEPL P 1019 0 (Pipeline Calculation Book)

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

VECO Doc. No.

MEHAR GAS DEVELOPMENT PROJECT

2.0 OBJECTIVES ....................................................................................................................4

3.0 DEFINITIONS ....................................................................................................................4

4.0 ABBREVIATIONS .............................................................................................................5

5.0 CODES AND STANDARDS ..............................................................................................5

6.0 REFERENCE DOCUMENTS .............................................................................................6

7.0 DESIGN DATA ...................................................................................................................6

8.0 CALCULATION METHOD .................................................................................................8

MEHAR GAS DEVELOPMENT PROJECT

11.0 RECOMMENDATIONS ....................................................................................................15

APPENDIX-A WALL THICKNESS CALCULATION

APPENDIX-B GENERAL DESIGN CALCULATIONS

APPENDIX-C HYDROSTATIC TEST PRESSURE CALCULATIONS

APPENDIX-D.1 UNCASED ROAD/TRACK CROSSING DESIGN CALCULATIONS (10”

APPENDIX-D.2 UNCASED ROAD/TRACK CROSSING DESIGN CALCULATIONS (14”

MEHAR GAS DEVELOPMENT PROJECT

PETRONAS CARIGALI (Pakistan) Ltd. (PCPL) is undertaking the development of

COMPANY The Petronas Carigalli Pakistan Ltd (PCPL) or any

CONCESSION REQUEST A deviation requested by the SUBCONTRACTOR,

MEHAR GAS DEVELOPMENT PROJECT

ENGINEER Party which carries out all or part of the design,

PROJECT MEHAR GAS DEVELOPMENT PROJECT

SHALL Indicates a mandatory requirement.

SHOULD Indicates a strong recommendation to comply with the

The following abbreviations are used in this Report:

3LPP Three Layer Polypropylene

FBE Fusion Bonded Epoxy

HFW High Frequency Electric Welding

OTC Offshore Technology Conference

SMYS Specified Minimum Yield Strength

TOP Top of Pipe

5.0 CODES AND STANDARDS

The following codes and standards are followed:

American Society of Mechanical Engineers (ASME)

ASME B31.8 Gas Transmission and Distribution Piping Systems

American Petroleum Institute (API)

API 5L : 2004 Specification for Line Pipe

API RP 1102-1993 Steel Pipelines Crossing Railroads and Highways

OTC Paper 6335-1990 Design of Submarine Pipelines against Upheaval Buckling

MEHAR GAS DEVELOPMENT PROJECT

6.0 REFERENCE DOCUMENTS

12-MGDP-G-1101 Design Basis Memorandum

12-MEPL-P-1023 Pipeline Wall Thickness Report

7.0 DESIGN DATA

7.1 Environmental Conditions

Maximum Ambient Temperature 55°C

7.2 Pipeline Design Data

Gas Gathering Flow Gas Gathering

MEHAR GAS DEVELOPMENT PROJECT

Gas Gathering Flow Gas Gathering

7.3 Miscellaneous Design Data

MEHAR GAS DEVELOPMENT PROJECT

8.0 CALCULATION METHOD

Report of calculations described below is presented in Appendix A, B, C and D of this

8.2 Wall Thickness Selection

8.3 Pipe Section Properties and Weights

MEHAR GAS DEVELOPMENT PROJECT

8.4 Combined Stress Check