Proceedings of the Seventeenth

Sixteenth (2007)
(2007)
International
International
Offshore
Offshore
andand
Polar
Polar
Engineering
Engineering
Conference
Conference
Lisbon, Portugal, July 1-6, 2007
Copyright © 2007 by The International Society of Offshore and Polar Engineers(ISOPE)
ISBN 978-1-880653-68-5; ISBN 1-880653-68-0(Set); ISSN 1098-6189 (Set)

The Challenges of Pipeline Burial

Damian R Morrow and Peter D Larkin
Acergy Ltd
Aberdeen, UK

ABSTRACT A discussion of the challenges associated with pipeline burial needs to

be considered within the context of the advantages pipeline burial
Burial of sub sea pipelines provides a number of advantages and as part provides. The principle advantages of burial to a pipeline system are:
of the installation process all or part of a sub sea pipeline system may
be buried, either with or without provision of backfill. While much of • Protection
the sub sea environment is largely flat significant local slopes of natural • Stability Under Thermal Or Pressure Driven Expansion
or man made origin can occur in areas where pipeline burial is required, • Hydrodynamic Stability
posing a number of challenges. Having reviewed the advantages of • Thermal Insulation
pipeline burial and the origin and environment of seabed slopes the • Freespan Mitigation
pipeline burial assets available to the sub sea installation contractor are
considered. The importance of an appropriate bathymetric survey and Pipeline Protection
the role of route optimisation is emphasised. After discussing some
consequences that can result from sloping seabeds these consequences The protection of pipelines is perhaps the most common driver for
are elaborated on and given context by discussing examples from pipeline burial. In Northern Europe intensive fishing activity and the
pipeline burial projects. large amount of closely spaced infrastructure associated with mature oil
and gas developments results in the need to provide protection from
KEY WORDS: pipeline; burial; slopes; sedimentary features; trawl gear for small diameter lines. Large diameter trunk lines are
pockmarks plough; trencher; route optimisation. typically considered to have sufficient mass and strength remain on the
seabed during the course of their design life. In addition to protection
INTRODUCTION from fishing activities, burial can also protect a pipeline from dropped
objects and vessel anchors. Protection can be provided by methods
As part of the installation process a sub-sea pipeline may be buried over other then burial, such as covering the pipeline with flexible concrete
some or all of its length. Post lay burial is particularly prevalent within mattressing or rock dump berms. However, generally these are only
the North Sea as well as in other parts of the world where it is required economic solutions for short sections of pipeline.
to address specific pipeline design issues. When pipeline burial is
undertaken trench backfill may also undertaken providing a covering of The specification for a pipeline burial solution is typically expressed in
soil over the pipeline. terms of depth of lowing (DoL) relative to mean sea bed level (MSBL),
depth of cover (DoC) of the soil backfill may also be specified. The
Although much of the subsea environment can be considered to be flat design of the burial specification may need to consider other drivers for
or shallow gradient, there are however exceptions. When these slopes burial, or the requirement to provide sufficient download to mitigate
occur they can have a significant effect on sub-sea construction upheaval buckling (UHB). When considering the issue of protection
activities. This paper discusses the challenges posed to pipeline burial alone it is appropriate to take a risk based approach, such as that
in areas with sloping seabed. To give context to these discussions the outlined in DNV RP F107 (2002). The nature and frequency of the risk
causes of seabed slopes will be presented along with the range of factor is considered (e.g. fishing or dropped object), along with the
pipeline burial techniques available to the sub sea installation amount of protection given by the seabed soils the trench is formed in
contractor. and any trench backfill. Trench geometry can also be a factor. As an
example; 0.6 m DoL in a very soft clay seabed provides significantly
ADVANTAGES OF PIPELINE BURIAL less protection then 0.6 m DoL in very dense sand. A further extreme
example would be a pipeline trenched into a rocky seabed, in this case

900
even small depth of lowering can provide a significant amount of Hydrodynamic Stability
protection. A more detailed review of this approach to burial protection Hydrodyamic stability is generally an issue confined to shallow water
for the specific hazard of ice scour is give by Palmer (1997). Another depths, although the presence of strong currents over a range of water
example is the analogous situation of burial protection for submarine depth should not be discounted without due consideration. Dependent
telecommunication cables discussed in Allan & Comrie (2001). on the pipe soil interaction with the seabed (friction, adhesion and
passive earth pressure due to embedment) the pipeline has a certain
Stability Under Thermal Or Pressure Driven Expansion resistance to lateral movement. If a pipelines lateral resistance to
movement is exceeded by the hydrodynamic loading associated with a
Many pipelines associated with oil and gas infrastructure are used to given metocean design case e.g. a 25 or 50 year storm, the stability may
transport warm fluids under pressure. This requirement on pipeline need to be increased. This could be achieved by increasing pipeline
systems should also be set against an increasing trend to high pressure weight either by adding concrete weight-coating or by increasing wall
high temperature (HPHT) lines. This trend to HPHT is occurring in thickness of the steel component of the pipeline. Rock dump berms or
association with advances in material and welding technology, making concrete matressing could also be used. In place of, or in addition to
possible development projects previously regarded as unfeasible remedial measures an allowable displacement philosophy may be
(Collberg and Levold 2005, Spinazze et al 2005). adopted dependent on pipeline location, one such approach is adopted
in DNV-RP-E305 (1988). Horizontal directional drilling (HDD) or
Pipelines are lain on the seabed at ambient temperature. During and cofferdams may also provide a method for shore approaches. However,
following pipeline start up hot fluids travel through the bore of the as with pipeline protection these methods can quickly become
pipeline, heating the line to temperatures significantly above ambient. uneconomic and alternatives to surface lain lines may need to be
This heating leads to thermal expansion of the steel materials of the considered for longer sections of pipeline.
pipeline. At a small scale this expansion may appear to be insignificant,
however, in an axial direction this expansion or the forces associated Even trenching a pipeline to half a diameter or placing the pipeline in a
with the potential to expand are to some extent cumulative. Thermal open trench can significantly increase its resistance to lateral
expansions lead to a complex process of pipe soil interaction that can movement. Lowering a pipeline produces increased lateral resistance
result in large forces and/or displacements within a given section of either due to passive earth pressure on the embedded section or from
pipeline. Axial forces and displacements are also an important the slope of the trench it is placed in. In association with this effect the
consideration for the design of inline structure or the spools that hydrodynamic loading on a pipeline is also reduced as it is lowered into
connect pipelines to structures. the seabed. Full burial and backfill effectively removes hydrodynamic
forces from a pipeline, ensuring stability. There is however the need for
Depending on the relationship between axial and lateral pipe soil caution. When considering pipeline burial for hydrodynamic stability
interaction axial expansion may be restrained. This can result in the the seabed by implication is an unstable and dynamic environment.
expansion forces propagating lateral buckling of a pipeline. Buckling of This needs to be fully accounted for in the design process including
a pipeline is generally an undesirable event inducing stress in the line depth of burial. For example sediment scour and deposition may need
and potentially plastic deformation and/or fatigue associated with a to be considered, wave induced liquefaction may also be a factor in
series of buckling cycles. In extreme cases lateral buckling can over pipeline stability as discussed in Sumer et al (1999) and Teh et al
stress a pipeline resulting in loss of integrity. In the case study (2006).
discussed by Oliveira et al (2005) a pipeline on soft clay seabed
buckled laterally 4.1m over a length of 44m resulting in loss of pipeline Thermal Insulation
integrity and a large release of oil into the environment.
As previously discussed many pipelines associated with the offshore oil
It has been noted that buckling is generally undesirable. However, in and gas industry have to transport fluids at high temperature. In
recent deepwater developments buckling has been judged to be addition there is also the requirement to maintain the temperature of
unavoidable. In this case buckling is propagated at specific locations this fluid within certain tolerances to prevent the deposition of
using various buckle inducement measures e.g. sleepers, buoyancy precipitates (e.g. wax's) within the system. To maintain temperature the
(Bruton et al 2005). pipeline may incorporate a layer of insulation coating within their
construction. As the insulation requirements of a pipeline system
Burial of a pipeline significantly alters the pipe soil interaction increases there is an associated increase in cost as well as potential
providing stability against lateral buckling and significantly reducing manufacturing and installation issues. In this scenario there can be an
axial expansion. However, it should be noted while pipeline burial can advantage in utilising the insulation properties of trench backfill to
solve lateral stability issues there is the potential to introduction the reduce the thickness of pipeline insulation coating. Finch et al (2000)
equally challenging issues of upheaval buckling (UHB). In UHB the and Young et al (2001) discuss some of the issues relating to thermal
axial expansion forces over come the downloaded provided by trench insulation and pipeline burial.
backfill resulting in upwards buckling (Schaminee et al 1990, Bolton
and Barefoot 1997). This has the potential to over stress the pipe and/or Freespan Mitigation
present a section of pipeline that is susceptible to snag loading by
fishing equipment. On a uneven seabed, the geometry of the seabed, pipe soil interaction
and the residual axial tension from the lay process can result in the
This discussion on pipeline expansion has been largely limited to rigid pipeline being suspended above the seabed i.e. the pipeline is in
steel pipeline and has therefore focused on thermal expansion. Broadly freespan. This can be undesirable for a number of reasons; a free-
analogous processes can occur with flexible pipelines. Although with spanning pipeline is subject to increased hydrodynamic loading
flexible lines pressure is more of an influence then temperature effects potentially contributing to instability as well as inducing stress in the
(Kodaissi 1995). The construction techniques utilised to produce the line. In addition the suspended self weight of the pipeline also applies
carcass of a flexible pipeline is also a important consideration. loads on the line in the vicinity of the touch down points.

901
In areas where freespans are likely to occur analysis may be undertaken All localised natural slopes result from the removal or deposition of
to assess the allowable freespan length and assess the likelihood of this seabed sediments by natural processes. Common causes of natural
length being exceeded for a given pipeline route. Holdon et al (2005) slopes include:
describe this process for routing of the Ormen Lange Pipelines in the
challenging seabed terrain associated with the Storegga slide in the • Sedimentary Features
Norwegian sector of the North Sea. In conjunction with route • Ice Scour
optimisation, rock dumping, dredging and trenching provide methods • Pockmarks
of mitigating freespans. • Slope Processes

ORIGIN OF SEABED SLOPES Sedimentary Features

The sub sea environment can be classified into the following three For the purposes of this paper sedimentary features (bedforms) are
broad zones: defined as seabed features formed by the erosion and deposition of
sediment due to hydrodynamic processes. Classification of these
• Continental Shelf bedforms is conveniently approached with a hierarchical system based
• Continental Slope on height (amplitude) and wavelength, however, there is no universally
• Deep Sea Environment accepted classification system or agreement on nomenclature. For the
purposes of this paper the system used by Passchier & Klienhans
The continental shelf can be considered to be a shallow water setting (2005) will be utilised. Ripples are not discussed by Passchier &
including near shore and shore approaches. However, although shallow, Klienhans (2005) and are not particularly relevant to the subject of this
continental shelves can extend hundreds of kilometres from the shore in paper. However, for completeness ripples will be considered to have a
some areas. In addition the definition of shallow water can vary widely; height of less then 0.3 m and wavelengths of less the 1 m. This
in this case it encompasses water depths of several hundred metres. On classification is summarised below in Table 1.
a regional scale this zone is extremely flat with a mean slope of < 1°.
Transition to continental slope typically occurs at water depth between Name Height Wavelength
130m to >350m with the variation relating to the geographical and
Sandwaves 1.5 m to 17 m or larger 40 m – 800 m or larger
geological setting (Friedman et al 1992). It is this zone where most
pipeline burial is undertaken. Megaripples 0.3 m to 1.5 m 1 m to 40 m
Ripples Less them 0.3 m Less then 1 m
The continental slope represents the transition from the relatively
shallow water depths to the deep sea environment. At a regional level
continental slopes typically have a slope angle of 3° to 6°, although Table 1. Bedform Classification
there is significant variation as well as this being a zone where extreme
localised slopes are common. There is also significant variation in the A detailed discussion of bedform morphology is outside the scope of
range of water depth this zone extends over (Friedman et al 1992). In this paper, however issues such as bedform asymmetry should be given
recent years sub sea infrastructure associated with the oil and gas consideration. When hydrodynamic forces have a prevailing direction
developments extends into or crosses this zone, although pipeline burial bedforms trend towards a morphology consisting of a relatively shallow
in this zone is rare. rising slope (stoss slope) and a steeper down slope (lee slope) (Soulsy
1997). In plan the morphology of bedforms can also be relevant when
The deep sea environment encompasses a range of settings considering pipeline routing.
characterised by reduction in slope angles from the continental slope
zone. Slope angles may be a few degrees for features associated with In addition to active features a site may also contain palimpsest features
the edge of the continental slope with a trend towards negligible slopes. formed under different hydrodynamic regimes. Example of these are
Traditionally this zone and even the continental slope were of little the gravel features found in some areas of the Southern North Sea as
interest for those considering sub sea infrastructure. However, as the discussed in Cameron et al (1992).
practical depth for oil and gas developments increases the trend towards
deeper water has focused attention on these areas in recent years. Ice Scour

It can be seen from the discussion above that with the exception of the Ice scour features form when an ice sheet or more commonly an ice
continental slope much of the sub sea environment tends towards being burg enters shallower water and its base or keel is grounded. When this
flat when considered on a regional scale. However, at a local scale there happens the wind, waves or currents may continue to move the ice,
are significant slopes with a variety of origins. Primarily it is these which in turn scars or ploughs the seabed. This can have a dramatic
localised slopes that effect pipeline burial the most, partly due to the effect on seabed morphology. In addition to changes in seabed profile
steep gradients and the change from a relatively flat seabed to a slope the action of ice can also effect the geotechnical properties of seabed
over a short distance. soils, effecting soils below the base and adjacent to the walls of a scar,
further discussion is given in Palmer (1997).
It is convenient to discuss the development of localised seabed slopes
in terms of their origin. These in turn can be subdivided into natural The presence of ice scour is dependent on location, climate and water
phenomena and those resulting from the human activities. depths. For example routing a pipeline into deeper water can be an
effective protection measure. However, when considering the effect of
Natural Slopes ice scour features on pipeline burial the presence of relict features
formed under differing climatic and sea level conditions may be of
influence. An example of active and relict ice burg scour in close
association is given Lewis and Woodsworth Lynas (1990). Lewis and

902
Woodsworth Lynas (1990) also noted differing ice scour morphology form the foundation interface for the jack up legs. Dimensions and
dependent on seabed soils. Stiffer clays exhibit deep (up to 6m) scars geometry varies, however, circular spud cans with a diameter of 10m to
with steep sides up to 60°, where as sandy soils exhibited shallower 20m are perhaps most common. Penetration of spud cans during
scar (<1m) with low angle slopes of less the 6°. In the northern North preloading and operation varies with soil conditions, shallow
Sea relict ice scour features have also been observed, these are typically penetration of a few metres is typical for sandy conditions, whilst 10m
2 m deep and 20 m across with some post formation infill with sandy to 20m is not uncommon for soft clay conditions penetrations of up to
sediments (Johnson et al 1993). As with bedforms the morphology of 40m recorded in some locations (Clarom 1993). At larger penetrations
ice scour features in plan can be important for pipeline routing. backflow of soil is likely, however there is significant disturbance of
Although in heavily scarred areas with variation in scar orientation the seabed during penetration and extraction. In areas where there has
routing options can be limited. been jack up activity spud can depressions can form steep localised
slopes, generally in groups of three in a triangular geometry.
Pockmarks
Anchor Scars
Pockmarks are fluid escape structures that are particularly prominent
when gas or water escapes through soft cohesive sediments. Their An alternative to jack up rigs are floating mobile drilling units such as
occurrence is common in soft clay sites around the world where these semi-submersible rigs. In shallow water these rigs typically maintain
sediments occur in association with thermogenic and biogenic methane. station using a spread of drag embedment anchors. Drag embedment
Pockmarks can also be ground water driven, although these are thought anchors are also utilised by some pipe lay vessels and in more
to be less common (Judd 2001). Typical examples of pockmarks found permanent applications for floating production units (FPU). In soft clay
in the North Sea have a diameter of 50m to 100m and are 2 - 3m deep, conditions penetrations of 10m to 20m are not uncommon for larger
although larger pockmarks up a diameter of 200m and 6m deep can anchors loaded close to their ultimate holding capacity (API 1997,
also occur. Pockmark density greater than 30 per square kilometre are Vyhof 2000). Drag anchor installation and recovery can result in scars
not uncommon (Long 1986). Pockmark morphology typically consists and depression that have the potential to effect pipeline burial activities.
of a steep slope adjacent to the edge which can exceed 10°. The base of Anchor chains and lines can also result in seabed scaring, however this
the pockmark is typically a flatter area, especially if pockmark is generally not significant enough to effect pipeline burial operations.
formation has been inhibited by firmer soils at depth. In plan,
pockmarks can exhibit an asymmetric morphology, which is common Trawling Scars
in North Sea pockmarks (Judd 2001). In addition to their occurrence in
the North Sea, pock marks can also be found in other areas of the The use of trawling equipment in an area results in scaring of the
world, for example; Gay et al (2006) discuss pockmarks in West Africa seabed. The typical geometry of trawl scars results in their prominence
and Cifi et al (2002) notes pockmark activity in the Black Sea. on side scan sonar records. They tend to be less prominent on
bathymetric surveys, although this is dependent on the resolution of the
Variation in geotechnical properties in association with pockmarks and survey and the processing techniques utilised. As with many of the
the presence of cemented material can also influence pipeline burial in other man made features the geometry of trawl scars is highly
pockmarked areas. If the trend towards deeper water continues then in dependent on the properties of the seabed sediments. Generally
addition to encountering pockmarks deep water geohazards such as speaking trawl scar do not pose a significant hazard to pipeline
mud volcanoes may also be features to consider. installation.

Slope Processes METHODS OF PIPELINE BURIAL

Sediment transport associated with these slopes can result in features It is convenient to consider pipeline burial assets in two broad
which have a significant influence. An extreme example would be categories:
slope failures and the resulting scaring in the failure zone and the
deposition of slide blocks in down slope areas. An example of pipeline • Ploughs
routing in this sort of terrain is discussed by Holden et al (2005). • Trenchers

Manmade Slopes Ploughs

In addition to slopes resulting from natural processes pipeline burial Ploughs, not surprisingly, bear some similarity to agricultural
can also effected by slopes of manmade origin. implements of the same name. A share cuts a V shaped trench with side
slopes in the region of 35°, two spoil mounds of excavated material are
• Spudcan Depressions deposited to the side of the trench. During the ploughing process the
pipeline is held in roller cradles within the body of the plough. This
• Anchor Scars
protects the pipeline, picking it up from the seabed ahead of the
• Trawling Scars
excavation and deposited it back into the trench behind the plough.
Manmade debris has been excluded from this list. The issues
surrounding debris are primarily related to the nature of the debris
A pipeline plough is a passive tool albeit with a range of control
rather then any associated slopes.
mechanisms and surveillance equipment. A tow wire from a plough
support vessel (PSV) provides the force required to excavate the trench
Spudcan Depressions
and ensure forward progress of the plough. The PSV also provides all
Jack up rigs are typically used in water depths of less then 100 m
the equipment and personnel for launch, recovery, operation and
although some recently constructed rigs have extended this limit by a
maintenance of the plough.
few tens of metres. Jack ups act as mobile offshore drilling units
(MODU’s) or in a support role to other platforms e.g. flotels. Spud cans

903
 The Trencher category describes a wide range pipeline burial
equipment. They have been separated from ploughs as they are active
assets which do not require towing by a surface vessel. Trenchers can
be sub divided into two further categories; jetting trenchers and cutting
trenchers. Trenchers operate as a remotely operated vehicle controlled
by a umbilical connected to a trenching support vessel (TSV).

Jet trenchers achieve pipeline burial by fluidising the soils around and
below the pipeline with medium pressure high volume water jets. These
water jets originate from a series of nozzles mounted in “jet swords”
which are pushed down either side of the pipe. Backfill is achieved
over the pipeline when the fluidised/suspended sediment is re-deposited
around and above the pipeline. Jet trenchers come in a range of types,
sizes and power output and can take the form of tracked trenchers, free
flying vehicles or pipe riders. Jet sleds would also loosely fall into this
category. .is significantly affected and no progress is likely in higher
shear strength soils. The second category of trenchers, cutting trenchers
are suitable for higher shear strength clays, some are also suitable for
cemented soils and rock. These trenchers mechanically cut a slot into
Figure 1: An animated view of the aft of a pipeline plough the seabed using a toothed chain, belt or wheel, some trenchers also use
jetting in combination to remove cutting waste and provide backfill.
A high bollard pull vessel is required as a PSV as steady tensions of
200 - 250 Te are not uncommon to ensure adequate progress in sandy ROUTE OPTIMISATION
soils. Further information on performance predictions of ploughs is
provided in Finch et al 2000 and Cathie 2001. When seabed slopes pose difficulties to pipeline burial there is often
scope to mitigate their effect by careful route planning, reducing their
When backfill is required over a ploughed pipeline this can be achieved influence. This usually, although not always, results in an increase in
using a backfill plough. This burial asset typically rides in the ploughed pipeline route length. Route optimisation balances the cost of increased
trench with skids located either side of the pipeline. Large backfill length against the effect a slope has on pipeline installation and burial.
blades extend in a V from the body of the plough, encompassing the Experience indicates that moderate rerouting around individual features
spoil mounds previously deposited when the trench was formed by the results in a surprising small increase in route length, so the benefits
pipeline plough. Backfill is swept into the trench as the backfill plough should always be considered.
follows the route of the pipeline. As with a pipeline plough a backfill
plough is a passive tool towed by a PSV, although the bollard pull The potential of route optimisation has increased with the advent of
requirement is lower. advanced software generically referred to as geographical information
systems (GIS). The use of GIS in the offshore oils and gas industry has
initially been slow with limited uptake, but has gathered pace over
recent years. Simple route optimisation can be undertaken by using
software to generate themed maps. For example; slopes within a certain
range can be highlighted in prominent colours. Routes can then be
adjusted to avoid features, slope statistics and route lengths can be
produced to quickly compare route options. This approach is generally
adequate for short simple routes between two fixed points such as a
short tie back between a well and platform. As route length increases,
complicated seabed conditions are encountered and variables such as
start and end point are introduced optimisation quickly becomes
complicated and difficult to interpret by eye. In this scenario least cost
algorithms can be utilised. A cost surface is compiled for the seabed,
this surface assigns a cost to crossing a given terrain with the algorithm
considering a total route cost based on length and terrain. The cost
surface and the cost algorithm typically require some "tuning" to
account for the characteristics of the pipeline burial asset and project
priorities. It is relatively simple to incorporate other elements into this
analysis, for example geohazards.

SURVEY TECHNIQUES

Having discussed some of the causes of seabed slopes and the use of
Figure 2: A tracked jetting trencher being launched. The inset image
route optimisation the importance of an accurate and appropriate
shows the jetting swords for this trencher
bathymetric survey should be emphasised. A survey that adequately
characterises the seabed morphology is an important aspect of pre
Trenchers trenching engineering as well as being relevant to other subsea
construction activities. The absence of such a survey can result in

904
significant problems, typically occurring when a "off the shelf" or "one pitch of the backfill plough can also be an issue. Of particular relevance
survey fits all" approach is adopted. to areas with bed forms is the datum used to define DoL and DoC. This
is typically based on mean seabed level (MSBL), however in areas with
Perhaps the best approach to a bathymetric survey is a phased approach mega ripples it is common to define (MSBL) as the trough between
including consultation with all end users or the involvement of a mega ripples. This makes the DoL and DoC requirement within these
suitably experienced consultant. The initial phase could consist of a areas particularly onerous.
reconnaissance survey covering a wide route corridor. A desk study
may be utilised for planning of this initial survey with the corridor Slopes can be outside the capability of an asset resulting in an inability
width dictated by the degree of re-routing that is expected. From this to bury a section of pipeline. An example of this would be a freespan
initial survey a course route can be defined. This route then becomes that is elevated over the seabed and out with the travel of a ploughs
the focus for a subsequent route survey producing high resolution data. roller box's or the ability to adjust the height of the front skids. Large
Resolution and processing techniques should focus on the nature of the free spans can also "ground" trenchers that are operating in a ground
hazards and the proposed burial tools. In some projects there may be an bearing mode as the pipeline height exceeds the clearance from the
argument for high resolution bathymetric surveys from a remotely trencher chassis. There are some links with the final point as areas that
operately vehicle (ROV) or autonomous underwater vehicle (AUV). are out with a trenchers capability may include areas where the risk of
asset or pipeline damage is considered to be high. Failure to bury a
PIPELINE BURIAL ON SLOPING SEABEDS section of line is particular serious when burial is relied upon to provide
insulation. Any remedial measures will need to provide insulation to
When pipeline burial is undertaken in areas with seabed slopes avoid a "cold spot". This cannot realistically be achieved by using rock
strategies such as route optimisation may be undertaken as discussed in dump and a combination of sand and rock dumping may be required. In
the previous section. However, at some point the pipeline may need to soft clay terrains the contrast in insulation properties of soft clay and
be buried in an area characterised by a series of localised slopes sand may result in the need to provide significantly more DoC then was
originating from one or more of the mechanisms discussed in this required for the soft clay backfill. Careful planning and pre-trenching
paper. All pipeline burial assets interact with the seabed to some extent. engineering has an important role. It is clearly better to identify areas of
Typically burial assets are ground bearing to some extent, even so concern prior to a trenching campaign. Transitions from trench depth to
called free flying trencher often operate with skids or tracks and the seabed can be pre-planned and remediation can be given due
vehicle ballasted to have a slight negative buoyancy. Even if the a consideration at an early stage.
burial asset is able to reduce its interaction with the seabed when
making forward progress (free flying) the pipeline still rests on the It is perhaps clear why asset and/or product damage is the most serious
seabed. The excavation tool (e.g. jet leg, plough share, chain cutter) consequence that can result from a sloping seabed. In common with
will, by definition, always interact with the seabed. It is therefore most catastrophic or accidental occurrences it likely that other
reasonable to consider that all currently available burial assets are contributing factors play a role, for example poor quality survey data or
affected by seabed slopes. poor route planning. Damage to a pipeline can occur if a burial asset
slides sideways down a slope apply loads to the line. Loads can also be
There is a relatively complex interaction between slope geometry and a applied at freespans if they are out with an assets capability. Pipeline
specific asset. Typical negative consequences are listed in bullet point ploughs pose greater risks of pipeline damage compared to a small
below. trenchers, a pipeline plough can weigh in the region of 150 Te
(submerged) and tow forces in region 200 to 250 Te are typical in
• Out of straightness (OOS) sandy soils. These large forces can create significant damage in the
• Loss of DoC and/or DoL event of an incident associated with steep seabed slopes. Trenchers are
• Slopes outside a burial assets capability lighter with a low driving force in place of high tow forces. Although
• Damage to the product and or burial asset clearly trenchers with cutting tools can still pose a significant risk if the
cutting tool can contact the pipeline in a slope related incident. Damage
Out of straightness (OOS) is a pipeline design term that refers to the can comprise a wide spectrum from minor coating damage to pipeline
profile of the pipe in the vertical plane. OOS is particularly important deformation. Any serious pipeline damage will result in large costs
when considering upheaval buckling (UHB), as OOS incident can involved with mobilising a repair spread. In addition to direct costs
result in a concentration of driving forces resulting in a preferential there is also likely to be effects on the schedule of a sub sea
buckling location. An OOS incident can form due to various reasons development resulting in further significant costs. Damage to a burial
such as transitions in soil conditions, buried boulders, or trench wall asset is also likely to be expensive and time consuming. As with
slumping prior to pipeline touchdown, however seabed profile is often pipeline damage schedule effects can result in significant secondary
considered to be a common cause, especially for smaller OOS costs, possibly for numerous other pipeline burial projects scheduled
incidents. An OOS incident can also be associated with loss of cover. for the same year.
An example of a typical OOS incident would be a pipeline lain over a
mega rippled seabed. A burial asset may be able to correct this to some EXAMPLES AND CASE STUDIES
extent, however pitch and roll of the asset will significantly effect this
ability. Pitch, and to a lesser extent roll, can also result in a non-optimal The previous section provided an introduction to a number of the issues
orientation of the excavation tool. This is particularly the case for and challenges surrounded pipeline burial. In order to give context and
jetting swords where pitch will alter nozzle depth and orientation. to elaborate on some of these points this section presents examples
Multiple passes may be required to reduce OOS, or alternatively spot from pipeline burial projects.
rock dumping may be required.
As noted, sedimentary features are a common challenge to pipeline
As with OOS loss of cover is closely associated with UHB, and as with burial. The authors have experienced these features on shallow water
OOS the pitch and roll of the trenching asset can result in reduced projects in many areas of the world. Within Europe, sedimentary
cover height. If a plough is used then spoil mound stability and the features are particularly prevalent in the shallow water of the southern

905
North Sea both in the UK and Dutch Sector. Three project undertaken If seabed slopes are encountered during a pipeline burial project the
in recent years illustrate some important aspects of pipeline burial in problems that can occur range from relatively minor problems that are
this type of terrain. An additional example of a project in a pockmarked simple to address with appropriate engineering to catastrophic problems
terrain is also included. resulting in significant costs and delays. Throughout there has been an
emphasis on early front end engineering to address these challenges
Project A was characterised by sand waves with a wavelength of before they are encountered in the field. As the raw material that feeds
between 100 m and 500 m and up to 8m high. Project B was into this engineering a route survey that adequately characterises the
characterised by mega ripples with a wavelength of 10m - 15m and seabed morphology is extremely important. Time and effort focussed
heights up to 1m. The importance of the morphology of the seabed towards this aim is generally well spent. Perhaps the most promising
rather than the absolute angle or height of features is illustrated by these engineering solution discussed in this paper is route optimisation,
two projects. Project A with its gradual transitions between slopes was which in combination with high quality survey data and up front
the less challenging project, freespans were rare and the pipeline engineering provides a powerful combination to meet the challenges
plough used on this project was able to accommodate the gradual posed by pipeline burial on sloping seabeds.
changes in angle between stoss and lee slope. Project B was
considerably more challenging, free spans were present at most features ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
and the sharp changes of angles resulted in jet leg rotation for the
tracked trencher that undertook burial on this project. Multiple passes The authors would like to acknowledge the support and encouragement
were required on project B. Following these multiple passes the provided by Acergy during the course of writing this paper. In
required DoL and DoC were successful achieved, in addition there was particular we would like to thank the individuals involved with Acergy
some evidence of reduction in OOS from the initial as laid profile of library services for their assistance in obtaining some references
the pipeline. referred to in this paper.

Projects A and B also illustrate the issue of survey data quality. On REFERENCES
project A the larger features where adequately characterised by a vessel
mounted multibeam echo sounder (MBE) survey. In contrast to project Allan, PG, and Comrie, RJ, (2001). “The selection of appropriate burial
B the only information was a survey which it subsequently became tools and burial depth,” Suboptic 2001, Kyoto, Japan, May 2001.
clear had failed to adequately characterise the smaller bed forms
prevalent on this site, underestimating their size, frequency and the API (2005). “API Recommended Practice 2SK – Design and Analysis
slopes associated with them. An accurate characterisation of these mega of Stationkeeping Systems for Floating Structures,” American
ripples was achieved using a narrow corridor high resolution MBE Petroleum Institute.
survey undertaken by ROV. The importance of high quality survey data
was also illustrated by Site C. For Site C a survey was undertaken some Bolton, MD, and Barefoot, AJ, (1997). “The variation of critical
time before offshore operations as part of the project tendering process. pipeline trench backfill properties” IBC Conference on Risk Based and
During offshore operations it became evident that the initial survey had Limit State Design and Operation of Pipelines, Aberdeen, May 1997.
only characterised the larger feature. Issues surrounding data resolution
and data processing had resulted in a failure to characterise smaller bed Bruton, D, Carr, M, Crawford, M, and Poiate, E, (2005). “The Safe
forms which where associated with the larger bed forms present at this Design of Hot On-Bottom Pipelines with Lateral Buckling using the
site. Design Guideline Developed by SAFEBUCK Joint Industry Project.”
Deep Offshore Technology 2005, Vitoria, Brazil, November 2005.
Site D was located in a very soft clay area characterised by a
pockmarked seabed terrain. Initially a straight line route was adopted Cameron, TDJ, Crosby, A, Balson, PS, Jeffery, DH, Lott, GK, Bulat, J,
for this project. However, the benefits of route optimisation were and Harrison, (1992). “British Geological Survey – United Kingdom
quickly demonstrated, reducing the angles that the trenching asset had Offshore Regional Report -The geology of the southern North Sea,”
to accommodate with only a moderate increase in route length. The HMSO, London.
importance of a wide route corridor was highlighted when re-routing
went very close to the edge of the survey corridor. A pipeline plough Cifi, G, Dondurur, D and Ergun, M, (2002). “Sonar and High
was used at site D to trench a pipeline which was subsequently Resolution Seismic Studies in the Eastern Black Sea,” Turkisk J. Earth
backfilled with a backfill plough. In addition to the re-routing some Sci., Vol. 11, pp. 61 -81.
benefits in reduced OOS were obtained by making adjustments to the
plough when traversing pockmarks. Speeds where reduced to give Clarom (1993). “Design Guides For Offshore Structures – Stability and
plough operators time to operate the skid and roller box heights in operation of jackups,”. Le Tirant, P and Perol C (eds). Edtions Technip,
response to pitch and roll sensors. Skid adjustment resulted in reduced Paris.
pitch of the asset and changed the trench profile to reduce OOS in these
areas albeit with slightly reduce cover height. Collberg, L, and Levold, E, (2005). “Structural design of HPHT
pipelines - new guideline,” Rio Pipeline Conference and Exposition
CONCLUSIONS 2005, Rio, 17-19 October 2005.

This paper has discussed the advantages pipeline burial provides and DNV (1988) “Onbottom Stability Design of Submarine Pipelines” Det
the drivers that can lead to the decision to bury all or part of a pipeline Norske Veritas.
system. The origin of natural and man made slopes have also been
presented along with the range of pipeline burial assets that are DNV (2002). “RP-F107 Risk Assessment of Pipeline Protection,” Det
available to the sub sea installation contractor should burial be Norske Veritas.
undertaken.

906
Finch, M, Fisher, R, Palmer, A, and Baumgard, A, (2000). “ An Palmer, A, (1997). “Geotechnical evidence of ice scour as a guide to
Integrated Approach to Pipeline Burial in the 21st Century,” Deep pipeline burial depth,” Can. Geotech. J. Vol 34, pp 1002 - 1003.
Offshore Technology 2000, New Orleans, Novermber 2000.
Passchier, S, and Kleinhans, MG, (2005). “Observations of sand waves,
Friedman, GM, Sanders, JE, and Kopaska-Merkel, DC, (1992). megaripples, and hummocks in the Dutch coastal area and their relation
“Principles of Sedimentary Deposits – Stratigraphy and to currents and combined flow conditions,” J Geophys Res., Vol 110,
Sedimentology,” Macmillan, New York. pp 1 – 15.

Gay,A, Lopez, M, Cochonat, P, Seranne, M, Levache, D, and Schaminee, PEL, Zorn, NF, and Schotman, GJM (1990). “Soil response
Sermondadaz, G, (2006) “Isolated seafloor pockmarks linked to BSR's, for pipeline upheaval buckling analyses: full-scale laboratory tests and
fluid chimneys, polygonal faults and stacked Oligocene - Miocene modelling,” Offshore Technology Conference, Houston, USA, May
turbiditic palaeochannels in the Lower Congo Basin,” Marine Geology, 1990, OTC Paper No. 6486.
Febuary 2006; 226 (1-2) : 25 40.
Soulsby, R, (1997) “Dynamics of marine sands” Thomas Telford,
Holden, OM, Paulsen, G, Petter, B, and Marthinsen, T, (2005). “Ormen London.
Lange Pipelines Routing and Cost-effective Seabed Preperation,”
ISOPE 2005, Seoul, Korea, June 2005. Spinazze, M, Torselleti, E, and Levold, E (2005). “Hotpipe JI project:
high pressure/ high temperature pipeline laid on uneven seabeds,” Proc.
Judd, AG, (2001). “Pockmarks in the UK sector of the North Sea,” 24th OMAE conference, Halkidikie, Greece. 12-17 June 2005, OMAE
Department of Trade and Industry Technical Report TR_002. Paper No. 67525.

Kodaissi, E, (1995). “Upheaval Buckling Behavior of Flexible Sumer, BM, Fredsoe, J, Christensen, MT, Lind, MT, (1999). “Sinking /
Flowlines” ISOPE 1995, The Hague, Netherlands, June 1995. floatation of pipelines and other objects in liquefied soil under waves,”
Coastal Engineering, Vol 38, pp 53 - 90.
Lewis, CFM, and Woodworth-Lynas, CMT. (1990). “Contraints to
development – Ice Scour” Geology of the Continental Margin of Teh, TC, Palmer AC, Bolton, Damgaard, JS, (2006). “Stability of
Eastern Canada: Keen, M.J. (ed), Geological Survey of Canada, Submarine Pipelines on Liquefied Seabeds,” Journal of Waterway,
Ottawa. Port, Coastal and Ocean Engineering, July/August 2006, pp.244 - 251.
Long, D, (1986) “Seabed Sediments - Fladen Sheet 58°N-00° -
1:250,000 Series” British Geological Survey, Southhampton. Vyhof (2005). “Anchor Manual,” Vyhof Anchors B.V., Netherlands.

Oliveira, JRMS, Almeida, MSS, Almeida, MCF, Borges, RG, Amaral, Young, AG, Osborne, RS, and Frazer, I, (2001) “Utilizing the thermal
CS, and Costa, AM, (2005). “Physical and numerical modelling of properties of seabed soils as a cost effective insulation for subsea
lateral buckling of a pipeline in very soft clay,” Frontiers in Offshore flowlines.” Offshore Technology Conference, Houston, USA,
Geotechnics: ISFOG 2005 – Gourvenec & Cassify (eds). Taylor & April/May 1990, OTC Paper No. 13137.
Francis, London.

907