ON-BOTTOM STABILITY ANALYSIS AND DESIGN

OF SUBMARINE PIPELINE











MOHD. RIDZA BIN MOHD. HANIFFAH












UNIVERSITI TEKNOLOGI MALAYSIA


PSZ 19:16 (pind. 1/97)

UNIVERSITI TEKNOLOGI MALAYSIA

BORANG PENGESAHAN STATUS TESIS

JUDUL: ON-BOTTOM STABILITY ANALYSIS AND DESIGN OF
SUBMARINE PIPELINE

SESI PENGAJIAN : 2006/2007

Saya MOHD. RIDZA BIN MOHD. HANIFFAH
(HURUF BESAR)

mengaku membenarkan tesis (PSM/Sarjana/Doktor Falsafah)* ini disimpan di Perpustakaan
Universiti Teknologi Malaysia dengan syarat-syarat kegunaan seperti berikut :

1. Tesis adalah hakmilik Universiti Teknologi Malaysia.
2. Perpustakaan Universiti Teknologi Malaysia dibenarkan membuat salinan untuk tujuan
pengajian sahaja.
3. Perpustakaan dibenarkan membuat salinan tesis ini sebagai bahan pertukaran antara
institusi pengajian tinggi.
4. **Sila tandakan ( )

(Mengandungi maklumat yang berdarjah keselamatan atau
kepentingan Malaysia seperti yang termaktub di dalam
AKTA RAHSIA RASMI 1972)

(Mengandungi maklumat TERHAD yang telah ditentukan
oleh organisasi/badan di mana penyelidikan dijalankan )




Disahkan oleh




( TANDATANGAN PENULIS ) ( TANDATANGAN PENYELIA )

Alamat Tetap: No 66, JLN SS 19/5, PM. Dr. Nordin Yahaya
47500 Subang Jaya, Nama Penyelia
Selangor Darul Ehsan.

Tarikh : 23 April 2007 Tarikh : 23 April 2007



TIDAK TERHAD
TERHAD
SULIT

CATATAN: * Potong yang tidak berkenaan
** J ika tesis ini SULIT atau TERHAD, sila lampirkan surat daripada pihak
berkuasa/organisasi berkenaan dengan menyatakan sekali sebab dan tempoh tesis ini
perlu dikelaskan sebagai SULIT atau TERHAD.

Tesis dimaksudkan sebagai tesis bagi Ijazah Doktor Falsafah dan Sarjana secara
penyelidikan, atau disertai bagi pengajian secara kerja kursus atau penyelidikan, atau
Laporan Projek Sarjana Muda (PSM).















I hereby declare that I have read this project report and in my opinion this project
report is sufficient in terms of scope and quality for the award of degree of Bachelor
of Civil Engineering.


Tandatangan : ...........
Nama Penyelia : PM. Dr. Nordin Yahaya
Tarikh : 23 April, 2007





ON - BOTTOM STABILITY ANALYSIS AND DESIGN OF SUBMARINE
PIPELINE





MOHD. RIDZA BIN MOHD. HANIFFAH





This thesis is submitted as a partial fulfilment of the requirements for the award of
the Bachelor Degree in Civil Engineering




Faculty of Civil Engineering
Univeristi Teknologi Malaysia




APRIL 2007





ii













I pledge that this thesis is my original work except the quotations and summaries
that I have stated the sources clearly


Signature : ____________
Authors Name : MOHD. RIDZA BIN MOHD.HANIFFAH
Date : 23 APRIL 2007














iii















Dedication

To my beloved parents who gave me the endless guidance and support and to my
lecturers and friends for giving me a wonderful campus life here in UTM.


Thank You












iv



ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS




I would like to present my sincere appreciation to my supervisor, PM. Dr.
Nordin Yahaya for his interest, help and encouragement throughout this study. His
advices during the preparation of this project are very much appreciated. Ive gained
a lot of knowledge not only about the study, but also other things in life from him.


I want to express my gratitude to my loving family especially my parents for
their encouragement and support. Finally, but by no means least, I would like to
thank my friends who were involved, directly and indirectly in helping me
completing this research.


All the people mentioned above have made this research a successful one and
contributed to a very memorable experience for me.










v



ABSTRACT




All submarine pipelines should be stable under the combined action of
hydrostatic and hydrodynamic where the environmental conditions and the
hydrodynamic forces take place. On-bottom stability analysis is performed to ensure
the stability of the pipeline when exposed to wave and current forces. The
requirement to the pipeline is that no lateral movements at all are accepted, or
alternatively that certain limited movements that do not cause interference with
adjacent objects or overstressing of the pipe are allowed. A spreadsheet is developed
for the analysis of on-bottom stability of submarine pipeline. The analysis is based
on the DNV RP E305: On-Bottom Stability of Submarine Pipeline code and
guidelines from Petronas Standard PTS 20.196 and PTS 31.40.00.10. Data from a
case study in Baram, Sarawak will be taken as the input for the spreadsheet analysis.
The stability analysis of a pipeline is obtained based on the case study. Graphs are
then obtained to study the behaviour of pipeline under different environmental and
pipeline parameters such as wave height and thickness of concrete coating. The
minimum concrete coating for this case is 75 mm. The study provides understanding
of the mechanisms that are involved in analysis and design of submarine pipeline
especially on the aspects of stability.









vi



ABSTRAK




Semua paip dasar laut mesti berada dalam keadaan yang stabil daripada
tindakan hidrostatik dan hidrodinamik yang disebabkan oleh pengaruh alam sekitar.
Analisis kestabilan paip dasar laut dilakukan untuk memastikan paip adalah stabil
apabila terdedah pada daya yang terhasil disebabkan pengaruh ombak dan arus air.
Bagi mencapai kestabilan paip, pergerakan mendatar tidak dibenarkan berlaku.
Sebagai alternatif, pergerakan paip yang terhad dibenarkan dimana pergerakan
tersebut tidak akan menyebabkan paip mengalami tekanan yang berlebihan. Bagi
menganalisis kestabilan paip dasar laut, satu sistem mudah dibentuk menggunakan
perisian Microsoft Excel. Analisis tersebut dilakukan berdasarkan kod DNV RP E305
: On-Bottom Stability Design of Submarine Pipeline dan garis panduan daripada
piawai Petronas, PTS 20.196 dan PTS 31.40.00.10. Data daripada kajian kes di
Baram, Sarawak diambil sebagai input untuk analisis tersebut. Keputusan analisis
kestabilan paip dari kajian kes tersebut diperoleh. Graf-graf diperolehi untuk
mengkaji kelakuan paip dengan nilai parameter-parameter alam sekeliling dan paip
seperti ketinggian ombak dan ketebalan penebat konkrit yang berlainan . Ketebalan
penebat konkrit minimum bagi kajian kes ini adalah 75 mm. Kajian ini memberikan
pemahaman kepada elemen-elemen yang terlibat dalam analisis dan rekabentuk paip
dasar laut terutama sekali pada aspek kestabilan.








vii




TABLE OF CONTENTS




CHAPTER CONTENT PAGE


TITLE OF PROJECT i
DECLARATION ii
DEDICATION iii
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS iv
ABSTRACT v
ABSTRAK vi
TABLE OF CONTENTS vii
LIST OF TABLES xi
LIST OF FIGURES xii
LIST OF SYMBOLS xiv
LIST OF APPENDIX xvi


I INTRODUCTION 1

1.1 Introduction 1
1.2 Background of Problem 2
1.3 Objectives 3
1.4 Scope of Study 3
1.5 Significance of Study 4



viii
II LITERATURE REVIEW 5

2.1 Introduction 5
2.2 Composition of a Pipeline 6
2.3 Types of Pipeline 7
2.4 Loads 7
2.4.1 Functional Loads 8
2.4.2 Environmental Loads 8
2.4.3 Accidental Loads 8
2.4.4 Installation Loads 9
2.5 Construction Practices and Equipments 10
2.6 Fundamental of Pipeline Design 11
2.6.1 Pipeline Design 12
2.6.1.1 Key Design Terms 13
2.7 Analysis and Design of Submarine Pipelines 16
2.7.1 Design Conditions 16
2.7.1.1 Codes and Standards 16
2.7.1.2 Serviceability Limit State (SLS) 17
2.7.1.3 Ultimate Limit State (ULS) 18
2.7.1.4 Accidental Limit State (ALS) 18
2.7.2 Wall Thickness Determination 18
2.7.3 On-Bottom Stability 19
2.7.4 Free Spanning 20
2.7.5 Corrosion Requirement 21
2.8 On-Bottom Stability Analysis and Design 23
2.8.1 General 23
2.8.2 Analysis Method Selection 23
2.8.3 Stability Criteria 25
2.8.3.1 Minimum Pipeline Submerged
Weight 25
2.8.3.2 Pipeline Submerged Weight 26
2.8.4 Environmental Parameter 29


ix
2.8.5 Hydrodynamic Forces 32
2.8.5.1 Drag Loads 33
2.8.5.2 Inertia Loads 33
2.8.6 Gravity Waves (Linear Wave Theory) 34
2.8.7 Assumptions for On-Bottom Stability
Analysis 36


III METHODOLOGY 37

3.1 Introduction 37
3.2 Flow Chart of Study 38
3.3 Background of Case Study 40
3.4 Data as an Input for the Spreadsheet 41
3.5 Findings of Study 43


IV ANALYSIS AND RESULTS 44

4.1 Introduction 44
4.2 Spreadsheet Development 44
4.2.1 Minimum Pipeline Submerged Weight
Spreadsheet 45
4.2.2 Calculation of Pipeline Weight
Spreadsheet 51
4.2.3 Graphs from DNV RP E305 for the
Calculation of Calibration Factor (F
w
)
Spreadsheet 54
4.3 Results for Minimum Pipeline Submerged
Weight Spreadsheet 57
4.4 Results for Calculation of Pipeline Weight
Spreadsheet 58
4.5 Parametric Analysis 60

x

V DISCUSSIONS 63

5.1 Introduction 63
5.2 Discussions 63
5.2.1 The 3 Forces Involved and the Minimum
Pipeline Submerged Weight for a Cycle
Period of Time 63
5.2.2 Stability Analysis 64
5.2.3 Parametric Analysis 65


VI CONCLUSIONS 67

6.1 Conclusion 67
6.2 Recommendations 68

REFERENCES 69

BIBLIOGRAPHIES 70

APPENDIX 71
Appendix A 71











xi



LIST OF TABLES




TABLE NO. TITLE PAGE

2.1 Weight of Pipe for Different Cases 28
2.2 Grain Size for Seabed Materials 30
3.1 Data for Minimum Pipeline Submerged Weight 42
3.2 Data for Pipeline Submerged Weight 42
4.1 Final Results for On-Bottom Stability Analysis of a
Submarine Pipeline for all 4 Cases 58


















xii



LIST OF FIGURES




FIGURE NO. TITLE PAGE

2.1 Typical Cross-Section Through a Pipeline 6
2.2 Corrosion Requirement Coating for a Pipeline 22
2.3 Pipeline Cross Section 26
2.4 Determination of Significant Wave Velocity 29
2.5 Calibration Factor (F
w
) 31
2.6 Rest Frame 34
3.1 Flow of Study 38
3.2 Flowchart for the Development of Spreadsheet 39
3.3 Location of Baram, Sarawak 41
4.1 Wave Profile and Environmental Data Inputs 45
4.2 Values for Horizontal and Vertical Velocities for a
Cycle Period of Time 46
4.3 Values for Horizontal Acceleration for a Cycle Period
of Time 47
4.4 Drag, Inertia and Lift Forces for a Cycle Period of Time 48
4.5 Minimum Pipeline Submerged Weight for a Cycle
Period of Time 49
4.6 Determination of Calibration Factor (F
w
) and the
Outputs of First Spreadsheet 50
4.7 Pipeline Data Inputs 52
4.8 Final Outputs for the On-Bottom Stability Analysis
of a Submarine Pipeline 53
4.9 Graph from DNV RP E305 Fig. 2.1 54

xiii
4.10 Table A1 - Grain Size for Seabed Materials from
DNV RP E305 55
4.11 Calibration Factor (F
w
) from Figure 5.12 DNV RP E305 56
4.12 3 Forces involved over a Cycle Period of Time 57
4.13 Minimum Pipeline Submerged Weight for a Cycle
Period of Time 57
4.14 Pipeline Submerged Weight with Different Thickness
of Concrete Coating 59
4.15 Pipeline Specific Gravity with Different Thickness of
Concrete Coating 59
4.16 Minimum Pipeline Submerged Weight with Varying
Values of Wave Height (H) 60
4.17 Minimum Pipeline Submerged Weight with Varying
Values of Mean Water Depth (d) 61
4.18 Minimum Pipeline Submerged Weight with Varying
Values of Grain Size (d
50
) 61
4.19 Minimum Pipeline Submerged Weight with Varying
Values for Diameter of Pipeline (D) 62
















xiv




LIST OF SYMBOLS




D - Hydrodynamic diameter of pipe
ID - Internal diameter of pipe
K - Keulegan-Carpenter number, K = Us Tu / D
M - Current to wave velocity ratio, M = Uc / Us
C
D
- Drag coefficient
C
L
- Lift coefficient
C
M
- Inertia coefficient
D
st
- Steel pipe outside diameter (nominal)
F
D
- Drag force
F
I
- Inertia force
F
L
- Lift force
F
W
- Load factor
H - Significant wave height
Tn - Wave parameter, g d T
n
/ =
T - Spectral peak period
Tu - Mean zero up-crossing period
Uc - Steady current velocity at reference height z
r
above seabed
Us - Significant wave velocity perpendicular to pipe ( no reduction factor
included)
Ws - Submerged pipe weight
d - Water depth
d
50
- Mean grain size
g - Gravity constant
t - Wall thickness of steel
xv
t
c
- Concrete coating thickness
t
cc
- Corrosion coating thickness
t
ic
- Insulation coating thickness
t
mg
- Marine growth thickness
t
CA
- Corroded material thickness
t
L
- Internal corrosion liner thickness

ca
- Corrosion allowance usage factor

- Soil friction coefficient

c
- Density of concrete coating

cc
- Density of corrosion coating

i
- Density of contents

mg
- Density of marine growth

st
- Density of steel

sw
- Density of seawater

ic
- Density of insulation coating

L
- Density of internal corrosion liner
W
cs
- Weight of carbon steel
W
L
- Weight of internal corrosion liner
W
cc
- Weight of corrosion coating
W
ic
- Weight of insulation coating
W
c
- Weight of concrete coating
W
mg
- Weight of marine growth
W
i
- Weight of contents
W
CA
- Weight of corroded material
W - Weight of pipe
B - Pipeline buoyancy
SG - Pipeline specific gravity
y - Negative distance between pipe and seawater level
U
r
- Current velocity at bottom
L - Wave Length
F
w
- Calibration Factor
z
o
- Roughness of seabed
xvi




LIST OF APPENDIX




APPENDIX TITLE PAGE

A Hand Calculation for On-Bottom Stability 71
Analysis of a Submarine Pipeline


























CHAPTER I




INTRODUCTION




1.1 Introduction


A pipeline system is defined as a pipeline section extending from an inlet point,
typically an offshore platform or an onshore compressor station, to an outlet point,
typically another offshore platform or an onshore receiver station.


The first oil-producing well at sea was drilled in 1947 (in the Mexican Gulf) , the
first pipelay barge commissioned in 1952, and the first pipeline laid on the seabed in
1954. It is estimated that close to 90 000 km of marine pipelines were installed for the
transportation of hydrocarbons during the following four decades, with approximately
5000 km being added each year [1]. The majority of the pipeline systems are located in
the heavily developed regions of the Arabian Gulf, the Gulf of Mexico and the North
Sea.

The objective of a marine pipeline is to transport a medium from one location to
another. Many different parameters such as economic, technical, environmental and etc.
determine whether or not a marine pipeline system will be installed.
2
In analysis and design of marine pipelines, on-bottom stability analysis is one of
the scopes, besides determination of pipe size and wall thickness, free spanning and
corrosion requirement. On-bottom stability analysis is performed to ensure stability of
the pipeline when exposed to wave and current forces and other internal or external
loads [2].




1.2 Background Of Problem


All submerged pipelines, i.e. offshore pipelines and sections of onshore pipelines
in swamps, floodable areas, high water table areas, river crossings, etc., should be stable
under the combined action of hydrostatic and hydrodynamic where the environmental
conditions and the hydrodynamic forces takes place [3]. The hydrodynamic forces on the
pipeline and on the seabed are functions of the wave and current climate. It is important
to correctly predict the forces imposed on a pipeline since they have a direct bearing on
the safety and economy of the project. If the pipeline does not have enough submerged
weight to resist the hydrodynamic forces, the pipeline will be unstable, moving up and
down (due to lifting force) and back and forth (due to drag and inertia force). The
excessive pipe movement and oscillatory motions may cause high stress and fatigue
damage to the pipe [2]. Special considerations should be taken to pipelines installed in
liquefied seabeds which will have sinking depth and weak soils, where differential
settlements may lead to pipeline loss of integrity. In the design phase, the possibility of
local scouring under submarine pipelines must be taken into consideration. If local scour
occurs under the submarine pipelines, the pipelines may either vibrate due to the
hydrodynamic forces or induce additional static or dynamic loads due to self-burial.
Moreover, they might be destroyed partially or fully and thus be unable to perform their
functions. Pipeline stresses due to loss of support will occur by depressions or scour
below submarine pipelines

3
1.3 Objectives


The objectives of this study are:

i. To look into the available procedure of pipeline analysis and design
ii. To identify the mechanisms and parameters involved in on-bottom stability
of pipeline
iii. To develop a spreadsheet on on-bottom stability in pipeline design
iv. To obtain the stability analysis of a pipeline based on a case study




1.4 Scope of Study


The scope of this study is the design, analysis including the typical construction
of submarine pipelines . Generally, this study includes the history of the pipeline, the
composition and the types of load involved in analysis of a submarine pipeline.
However, focus will be on on-bottom stability of submarine pipeline based on code
DNV RP E305: On-Bottom Stability of Submarine Pipeline. Data from a case study
in Baram, Sarawak will be taken as the input for the spreadsheet analysis of stability .









4
1.5 Significance of Study

This study provides understanding of the mechanisms that is involved in analysis
and design of marine pipeline especially on the stability. The identified mechanism will
be supported by findings from case study of on-bottom stability of a pipeline. Hence, the
safety of marine pipeline design is ensured and this will build up the confidence of
public on the development of offshore structures.



































CHAPTER II





LITERATURE REVIEW




2.1 Introduction


A network of sophisticated pipeline systems transports oils, natural gas, and
petroleum products from producing fields around the world to consumers in every
nation. This network gathers oil and gas from hundreds of thousands of individual wells,
including those in some of the worlds most remote and hostile area. Pipelines bring oil
and gas produced from offshore wells to shore through water with certain depth. This
vast gathering and distribution system comprises hundreds of thousands of miles of
pipeline varying in size between 2 in. to 60 in. in diameter. Oil and gas pipeline systems
are remarkable for their efficiency and low transportation cost rather than using a barge,
rail and trucks. The link between pipeline size and economy is apparent as well as the
relationship between size and capacity. A 36-in. diameter line can carry up to 17 times
more than a 12-in. diameter pipeline, but construction and operating costs do not
increase at nearly the same ratio [1].


6
2.2 Composition of a Pipeline


A typical cross-section through a large diameter pipeline is shown in Figure 2.1.
The pipe itself is most frequently manufactured of steel. Often not other materials are
used, e.g. reinforced plastic. Steel pipelines without protection would be susceptible to
corrosion in contact water. Therefore, the outer surface is provided with protective
coating. Efficiency of the coating is increased by electrochemical measures such as
cathodic protection [4]. Need for corrosion protection of inner surfaces depends on the
chemical characteristics of the transported fluid. An internal coating may be applied to
reduce wall roughness.


The external corrosion coating is protected by reinforced concrete cover which
also provides additional weight required for in-place stability (resistance against
flotation of a buried pipeline and resistance to unacceptable lateral motion of pipelines
on the seabed.







Concrete Cover
Pipe
Fluid

Figure 2.1 : Typical cross-section through a pipeline






7
2.3 Types of Pipeline


Most oil and gas pipeline fall into one of three groups which are gathering, trunk
/ transmission or distribution. Small diameter pipelines within an oil or gas field, called
flowlines are usually owned by the producer. They connect individual oil or gas wells to
central treating, storage or processing facilities within the field. Another gathering
system made up of larger diameter pipelines, normally owned by a pipeline company
rather than the oil or gas producer, connects these field facilities to the large-diameter,
long distance trunk or transmission line.


Crude trunk lines move oil from producing areas to refineries for processing. Gas
transmission lines carry natural gas from producing area to city utility companies and
other customers.




2.4 Loads


Loads on a submarine pipeline can be divided into the following categories [5],

i. Functional loads
ii. Environmental loads
iii. Accidental loads
iv. Installation loads




8
2.4.1 Functional Loads


Functional loads are defined as actions that result from the operation of the
pipeline. The most significant force is caused by the pressure difference between
operation pressure inside and pressure outside. The pressure difference induces
tangential stress in the steel pipe.




2.4.2 Environmental Loads


Environmental loads are defined as actions resulting from the interaction of the
pipeline with its environment. In addition to gravity forces (self-weight, buoyancy and
hydrostatic pressure), environmental loads are primarily generated by wave and current
action. Other loads that can be characterised as environmental are soil pressure and other
natural actions, including the temperature of the surroundings.




2.4.3 Accidental Loads


Accidental loads are defined as loads which have a low probability of
occurrence. For submarine pipelines, such loads may be grouped into the following:




9
i. Natural hazards such as earthquakes and mudslides.
ii. Third party hazards such as dropped objects (near platforms), fishing activities
(trawling), shipping (anchoring, sinking) and military activities (firing).




2.4.4 Installation Loads


Installation of marine pipelines is to great extent weather dependant, and part of
the installation engineering is the determination of the acceptable limits (wind speed,
wave height, current) for the installation to take place. Apart from the pipeline self
weight and the normal environmental loads, specific actions during installation will
mostly be imposed static and dynamic force (from laybarge stingers, tie-in tools,
trenching equipment, etc.). The actions are ,

i. Installation of pipe strings (laying, reeling, towing, pulling)
ii. Tie-in
iii. Trenching and backfilling
iv. Hydrostatic testing


An exception is hydrostatic testing, where the test pressure is normally prescribed
by regulations, typically corresponding to 15% above the design pressure, although
substantially different values may be specified [2].






10
2.5 Construction Practices and Equipments


Pipeline construction methods differ depending on the geographical area, the
terrain, the environment, the type of pipeline and the restrictions and standards imposed
by governments and regulatory agencies.


Construction costs also vary according to location, line size, environmental
conditions, equipment required and the construction schedule. Pipeline construction
projects have these features [1]:

i. Comprehensive environmental impact studies are required in many countries
before construction permits can be issued. Construction plans must provide for
the protection of scenery, wildlife and historic assets.

ii. Most oil and gas pipelines are constructed by welding short lengths, or joints, of
pipe together. There are a few exceptions to the use of welded connections, but
these are in short lines within a producing field or in similar application.

iii. Extensive testing of welders and the welds they produce is an important part of
the construction of all long-distance petroleum pipelines.

iv. Most pipelines are buried below the sea bed for protection. There are cases in
which large segments of a major pipeline are not buried, the most notable
example is the trans-Alaska crude pipeline where above ground sections were
installed.




11
v. All pipelines are tested for leaks following construction before the line is put in
service. The hydrostatic testing is the most common techniques, filling the line
with water and subjecting it to a pressure greater than the design operating
pressure.

vi. The construction of all pipelines follows this general sequence, design and route
selection, obtaining right of ways, installation, tie-in to origin and destination
facilities and pumping or compressor testing and testing.


Submarine pipelines are built by welding individual pipes into a continuous line.
Quality of all welded joints are thoroughly by X-ray methods, sometimes also by
ultrasonic. Several construction methods can be used for submarine pipelines
construction, including the conventional lay barge method, the reel barge method, the
vertical lay method and the tow method. All require large sophisticated marine vessels.




2.6 Fundamentals of Pipeline Design


The amount of fluid that must flow through the pipeline is one of the first items
of information required for design. But a characteristic of many proposed pipeline
projects is that future capacity requirements are difficult to forecast. Determining the
capacity requirements for a pipeline gathering system to gather crude from producing
fields can be difficult. When oil and gas is discovered in an area, several years may pass
before the field is fully developed and maximum required capacity is known [4].
Additional capacity will be needed as more wells are put on stream, but the pipeline is
needed early in the fields life to transport production from the first wells.


12
2.6.1 Pipeline Design


The most appropriate approach to pipeline design depends on the system, the
designer, the number of fixed variables, the availability of pipe and equipment and the
cost. Both installation (cost) and operating/maintenance expense must be considered in
choosing the optimum design. Often a design having a lower installation cost than
another alternative will be more expensive to operate. When compared based on
economic indicators over the life of the system, the design with the lowest installation
cost may not be the best solution.


One of the most design criteria which is the volume of oil or gas to be
transported is sometimes the most difficult to determine. There is often some uncertainty
in volume estimates, and making the best projection of volumes to be handled
throughout the life of the pipeline is the key to a profitable project. With projected
volumes and the origin and the destination of the pipeline known, pipeline design
typically follow these general steps [1]:

i. A required delivery pressure is determined at the pipelines destination. This
pressure may be set by the customers facilities.

ii. Pressure losses due to friction and the pressure required to overcome changes in
elevation are added to the delivery pressure to determine the inlet pressure. In
single-phase flow, the pressure drop in the line must be overcome by pumps or
compressors is essentially the friction loss plus the pressure exerted by a liquid or
gas column whose height equals the difference in elevation between the ends of
the line.



13
iii. With the line size and operating pressure determined, the pumping or
compression horsepower needed to deliver the desired volume of fluid at the
specified delivery pressure can be accurately calculated. If more than one pump
or compressor station is required, its location and size is set by calculating
pressure loss along the line and determining how much pump or compressor
horsepower is needed to maintain operating pressure.

iv. In most cases, it is necessary to perform economic calculations to compare the
design with other combinations of line size, operating pressure and horsepower
in order to choose the best system.


This outline represents the basic steps involved in a preliminary design of a
single pipeline with no branch connections, no alternative routes and no significant
changes during its life. Few pipeline systems are that simple. Most have several branch
lines feeding into a main line that consists of more than one pipe size, beginning with a
smaller pipe at the inlet end and requiring larger pipe as flows from the branches feed in.




2.6.1.1 Key Design Terms


It is important that term fluid includes both liquids and gases. Most of the
following fluid properties and other variables are considered in designing liquids or
natural gas pipeline.

i. Pipe diameter. The larger the inside diameter of the pipeline, the more fluid can
be moved through it, assuming other variables are fixed.


14
ii. Pipe length. The greater the length of a segment of pipeline, the greater the total
pressure drop. Pressure drop can be the same per unit of length for a given size
and type of pipe, but total pressure drop increases with length.

iii. Specific gravity and density. The density of a liquid or gas is its weight per unit
volume. The specific gravity of a liquid is the density of the liquid divided by the
density of water and the specific gravity of a gas is its density divided by the
density of air. The specific gravity of water and air is therefore is 1.

iv. Compressibility. Because most liquids are only slightly compressible, this term is
usually not significant in calculating liquids pipeline capacity at normal
operating conditions. In gas pipeline design, it is necessary to include a term in
many design calculations for the fact that gases deviate from laws describing
ideal gas behavior when under conditions other than standard or base
conditions. This term supercompressibility factor is more significant at high
pressures and temperatures. Near standard conditions of temperature and
pressure (60F and 1 atm), for example, the deviation ideal gas law is small and
the effect of the supercompressibilty factor on design calculations is not
significant.


v. Temperature. Temperature affects pipeline capacity both directly and indirectly.
In natural gas pipeline, the lower the operating temperature, the greater the
capacity, assuming all other variables are fixed. Operating pressure also can
affect other terms in equations used to calculate the capacity of both natural gas
and liquid pipelines. For example, viscosity varies with temperature.

vi. Viscosity. The property of a fluid that resists flow, or relative motion between
adjacent parts of the fluid. It is an important term in calculating line size and
pump horsepower requirements when designing liquid pipelines.


15
vii. Pour point. The lowest temperature at which an oil will pour, or flow when
cooled under specified test conditions. Oils can be pumped below the pour point,
but the design and operation under these conditions present special problems.

viii. Vapor pressure. The pressure that holds a volatile liquid in equilibrium with its
vapor at a given temperature. Vapor pressure is an especially important design
criterion when handling volatile petroleum products. The minimum pressure in
the pipeline must be high enough to maintain these fluids in a liquid state.

ix. Reynolds number. This dimensionless number is used to describe the type of
flow exhibited by a flowing fluid. In streamlined or laminar flow, the molecules
move parallel to the axis of flow where else in turbulent flow, the molecules
move forth and back across the flow axis.

x. Friction factor. A variety of friction factors are used in pipeline design equations.
They are determined empirically and are related to the roughness of the inside
pipe wall.



Other properties of the fluid and pipe may be used in specific calculations, but
these are the basic terms used to determine pressure drop and flow capacity. Many
system variables are interdependent. For example, operating pressure depends on
pressure drop in the line. Pressure drop, in turn, depends on flow rate and maximum
flow rate is dictated by allowable pressure drop.







16
2.7 Analysis and Design of Submarine Pipelines


In order to analysis and design a submarine pipeline, the design conditions, wall
thickness determination, on-bottom stability, free spanning and corrosion requirement
are the aspects to be looked into.


2.7.1 Design Conditions


There are a few number of codes and standards that can be used to analyse and
design a submarine pipeline.


2.7.1.1 Codes and Standards

Pipeline design codes that are widely recognised include:

i. ASME B31.8-1999 Chapter VIII
ii. BS 8010 Part 3
iii. ISO 13623
iv. DNV OS-F101

A large number of pipelines have been successfully designed to the above codes.
In this research, DNV code is used. This is because the code has had international
approbation [2]. The DNV code is therefore considered the most appropriate standard
for future design. DNV code adopts the Load and Resistance Factor Design (LRFS)
format as a basis for the given structural limitations.



17
The use of limit states in the LRFS format is detailed in the subsections below.
Traditionally the following different limit states are considered:

i. Serviceability Limit State (SLS)
ii. Ultimate Limit State (ULS)
iii. Accidental Limit States (ALS)




2.7.1.2 Serviceability Limit State (SLS)


The SLS refers to a given load condition that, if exceeded can cause pipeline to
be unsuitable for continued operation. The following situations are normally considered:

i. Deformation and movement due to waves and currents (hydrodynamic stability)
ii. Longitudinal deformations due to restrained temperature and pressure variations
(pipeline expansion)
iii. Lateral deformations due restrained temperature and pressure expansion
iv. Blockage of the pipeline, due to hydrate formation or wax deposition


In the case of permanent local damage or permanent unacceptable deformation
the SLS is not the appropriate formulation and the ULS design factors shall be
introduced.






18
2.7.1.3 Ultimate Limit State (ULS)


It shall be ensured that the pipeline has the required safety against failure in the
ULS, defined in terms of:

i. Plastic deformations (yielding)
ii. Local instability (buckling)
iii. Crack instability (bursting)
iv. Repeated loading (fatigue)




2.7.1.4 Accidental Limit State (ALS)


The design of the pipeline is closely related to the risk analysis, in the sense that
scenarios entail a risk that is unacceptable, typically due to their high frequency of
occurrence, shall be considered in the ALS design.




2.7.2 Wall Thickness Determination


The primary objective of the pipeline design is to determine the optimal wall
thickness and steel grade of the pipeline. For the vast majority of existing pipelines the
wall thickness will have been selected following a simple hoop stress calculation.


19
A usage factor applied to the Specific Minimum Yield Stress (SMYS) defines
the allowable stress which, when inserted into the hoop stress formula, determines the
minimum required thickness of the pipe. Then, select the nearest standard American
Petroleum Institute (API) wall thickness above the required minimum. For liquid or two-
phase pipelines a corrosion allowance may have been added. Calculations that aim at a
specified design life are often backed up by extensive testing, but the corrosion
allowance may also simply be based on experience with existing lines or on owner
preferences.




2.7.3 On-Bottom Stability


On bottom stability analysis is performed to ensure the stability of the pipeline
when exposed to wave and current forces and other internal or external loads (e.g.
buckling loads in curved pipe sections). The requirement to the pipeline is that no lateral
movements at all are accepted, or alternatively that certain limited movements that do
not cause interference with adjacent objects or overstressing of the pipe are allowed.


Hydrodynamic stability is generally obtained by increasing the submerged
weight of the pipe by concrete coating. There are other ways such as increasing the steel
wall thickness, placing concrete blankets or bitumen mattresses across the pipeline,
anchoring or covering it with gravel or rock. Alternatively, the hydrodynamic forces
may be reduced by placing the pipeline in a trench on the seabed, prior or subsequent to
installation. The natural backfilling of a pipeline depends on the environmental
conditions and the seabed sediment at the location.



20
A pipeline on the seabed forms a structural unit where displacement in one area
is resisted by bending and tensile stresses. The real situation most probably involves a
great variety of pipeline-seabed interface conditions. Pipeline self lowering may result in
some sections of a pipeline being embedded to a larger degree than determined by
touchdown forces, and parts may even be fully buried. The embedment is influenced by
soil characteristics and phenomena such as scour, sediment transport and other seabed
instabilities. In other sections the pipe may be slightly elevated above the seabed due to
seabed undulations or scour processes. For both conditions, the hydrodynamic forces are
reduced relative to the idealized on bottom condition.




2.7.4 Free Spanning


The free span shall have adequate safety against failure modes and deformation
such as excessive yielding, fatigue, buckling and ovalisation. Free span analysis should
be based on generally accepted static and dynamic calculation methods, including non-
linear structure structural modeling, soil reaction description and deflection induced
axial forces.


The following pipeline conditions are considered:

i. Empty pipeline
ii. Water filled pipeline
iii. Pipeline during hydrotesting
iv. Operating pipeline



21
The analysis of free spans normally requires:

i. Static analysis for determining pipeline configuration, sectional forces and
stresses under functional loads.
ii. Eigen value analysis for determining natural frequencies and modal shapes
iii. Dynamic analysis for determining pipeline deflection, sectional forces and
stresses under combined functional and environmental loads or accidental
loading
iv. Fatigue analysis for determining accumulated fatigue damage due to cyclic loads
from wave action and vortex shedding




2.7.5 Corrosion Requirement


Corrosion is defined as a destructive attack on metal by a chemical or
electrochemical reaction with its environment. The driving force is the tendency for the
refined metal to return to a natural state characterized by a lower level of internal
energy. In the case of steel pipeline, the iron will tend to revert to its natural state as
ferrous oxide (iron ore).


Internal corrosion of pipelines depends upon the aggressiveness of the
transported medium and may be prevented by inhibitor injection, internal coating or use
of corrosion resistant alloys. The lifetime of the pipeline can also be extended by
introducing a corrosion allowance, i.e. an additional wall thickness over and above that
needed for pressure containment.


22
External corrosion of a pipeline in seawater is an electrochemical process. A
galvanic element is created where an electric current flows between an anodic area and a
cathodic area, with the seawater acting as an electrolyte. Coating the steel surface
protects against corrosion by creating a physical barrier between the pipe and the
electrolyte, preventing oxygen from reaching the steel. Cathodic protection renders the
steel immune to corrosion by lowering the electrical potential.


A barrier coating is seen as the primary defense against corrosion with cathodic
protection being a back up measure against coating damage or breakdown. However,
cathodic protection might also be considered the principal corrosion prevention method
with the coating being introduced to reduce the necessary current consumption.





Figure 2.2 : Corrosion requirement coating for a pipeline








23
2.8 On-Bottom Stability Analysis and Design


2.8.1 General


Subsea pipelines resting on the bed or placed in the trench are subjected to
lateral instability due to environmental loads comprising of wave and current forces. The
lateral instability is countered by lateral soil frictional resistance due to submerged
weight of pipeline. If the submerged weight is inadequate, the increase in submerged
weight is normally achieved by increasing weight of the pipeline or else reducing the
environmental loads by trenching or burial. In present analysis the stability is presumed
to be achievable by adding sufficient weight in form of concrete coating.


The purpose of design for on bottom stability is determination of wall thickness
of steel pipe and the pipeline submerged weight required to withstand action of
functional loads combined with environmental loads. While functional loads are
important only for steel pipe thickness, environmental loads are most decisive for the
pipeline submerged weight and less important for steel pipe thickness.




2.8.2 Analysis Method Selection


Pipeline stability analysis shall be carried-out in accordance with DNV RP E305.
Three methods are provided for the stability check [6]:



24
i. Dynamic Analysis Method.
ii. Generalized method and
iii. Simplified Method,


Dynamic analysis involves dynamic simulation of a section of pipeline under the
action of waves and current. The dynamic analysis is to be used in specialized
circumstances. Generalized pipeline stability analysis is based on generalization of the
results from Dynamic Analysis, through the use of a set of non-dimensional parameters
and for particular end conditions.


The simplified method is suitable for most of the design cases [4]. The DNV RP
E305 Simplified Static Stability method is based on a quasi-static equilibrium approach.
The calibration factor, Fw, ties the classical static design approach to the generalized
stability method. A safety factor of 1.1 is inherent in the calibration factor Fw.


The equilibrium condition in vertical direction is not always studied. The
equilibrium condition is of interest for finding the expected penetration of a pipeline
only in the case of a very soft seabed. Thus, it is restricted to examination of equilibrium
in the horizontal direction.









25
2.8.3 Stability Criteria


2.8.3.1 Minimum Pipeline Submerged Weight



The minimum submerged weight required to prevent any horizontal movement
of the pipeline under the extreme environmental loading, is calculated by a simple static
force balance of the horizontal hydrodynamic and soil frictional forces. The stability
criteria may be expressed as based on DNV RP E305.


W
L I D
sub
F
F F F
W

+ +
=

) (
(2.1)

where:
W
sub
= submerged weight of pipeline; (N/m)
F
L
= hydrodynamic lift force per unit length (N/m)
F
D
= hydrodynamic drag force per unit length (N/m)
F
I
= hydrodynamic inertia force per unit length (N/m)
= Coefficient of friction between pipe and soil from
Cl 5.3.3 DNV RP E305.
F
W
= Calibration factor from Cl 5.3.7 DNV RP E305.



The static stability design is based on the following main assumptions:

i. Pipe movements are not allowed, requiring equilibrium between loads
(hydrodynamic forces) and reactions (soil resistance forces)
ii. Near bed wave flow is time varying and only the component perpendicular to the
pipe axis is considered
iii. Soil resistance is calculated based on two-dimensional assumptions, and may
include simple friction as well as passive soil resistance

26
2.8.3.2 Pipeline Submerged Weight


Submerged weight shall consider the weight of the following components [7] :


i. Steel
ii. Internal corrosion liner (if any)
iii. Corrosion coating (if any)
iv. Insulation coating (if any)
v. Concrete coating (if any)
vi. Marine growth (if any)
vii. Internal contents
viii. Metal loss through internal/external corrosion



Internal Contents
Internal Corrosion
Liner
Steel
External Corrosion
Coating
Insulation Coating
Concrete Weight Coating
Marine Growth

Figure 2.3 : Pipeline cross section





27
The hydrodynamic diameter of the pipe is given by,

D = D
st
+ 2(t
cc
+ t
ic
+ t
c
+t
mg
) (2.2)


The weight of the components (in air) are calculated as follows:


i. Carbon Steel Weight W
cs
= (D
st
t) t
st
(2.3)
ii. Internal Corrosion Liner Weight W
L
= (D
st
2t - t
L
) t
L

L
(2.4)
iii. Corrosion Coating Weight W
cc
= (D
st
+ t
cc
) t
cc

cc
(2.5)
iv. Insulation Coating Weight W
ic
= (D
st
+ 2t
cc
+ t
ic
) t
ic

ic
(2.6)
v. Concrete Coating Weight W
c
= (D
st
+ 2t
cc
+ 2t
ic
+ t
c
)
t
c

c
(2.7)
vi. Marine Growth Weight W
mg
= (D
st
+ 2t
cc
+ 2t
ic
+ 2t
c

+ t
mg
) t
mg

mg
(2.8)
vii. Internal Diameter of Pipe ID = D
st
2t 2t
L
(2.9)
viii. Weight of Contents W
i
= /4 (ID)
2

i
(2.10)
ix. Weight of Corroded Material W
corr
= ( (D 2t + t
CA
)t
CA
)

st

CA
(2.11)

where,
CA
= corrosion allowance usage factor





28
Four cases are of interest [8]:

i. Operational Pristine no marine growth or metal loss to corrosion
included.
ii. Operational End of Life marine growth included and
CA
of corrosion
allowance (as an annular area) has been lost to corrosion.
iii. Installation pipeline empty, no marine growth and no loss of corroded
material.
iv. Hydrotest as for installation but pipe full of hydrotest water.



Table 2.1 : Weight of pipe for different cases

Case Outer Diameter, OD Weight of Pipe, W
Operational
Pristine
D + 2t
cc
+ 2t
ic
+ 2t
c
Wcs + W
L
+ Wcc + Wic + Wc + Wi
Operational End of
Life
D + 2t
cc
+ 2t
ic
+ 2t
c
+
2t
mg
Wcs + W
L
+ Wcc + Wic + Wc + Wmg +
Wi Wcorr
Installation / Hydrotest D + 2t
cc
+ 2t
ic
+ 2t
c
Wcs + W
L
+ Wcc + Wic + Wc + Wi

Pipelines buoyancy, submerged weight and specific gravity are calculated as follow [7],

Pipeline buoyancy, B = /4 OD
2

sw
(2.12)
Pipeline submerged weight Ws = W B (2.13)
Pipeline specific gravity SG = W/B = Ws/B + 1 (2.14)





29
2.8.4 Environmental Parameter


The defining sea-state parameters are H
s
and T
p
, which are used to calculate the
significant wave velocity perpendicular to the pipe (U
s
).



Figure 2.4 : Determination of Significant Wave Velocity (DNV RP E305)






30
The T
n
and T
p
are determined using following relationship.



g
d
T
n
= and g H T
s p
250 = (2.15)



From Figure 2.4, (U
s
*T
n
)/Hs is determined for the given T
n
/T
p
. Then, significant
wave velocity perpendicular to the pipe (U
s
) is determined.



Table 2.2 : Grain size for seabed materials (DNV RP E305)


Seabed
Grain
Size Roughness

d50
(mm) zo (m)
Silt 0.0625 5.21E-06
Very Fine Sand 0.125 1.04E-05
Fine Sand 0.25 2.08E-05
Medium Sand 0.5 4.17E-05
Coarse Sand 1 8.33E-05
Very Coarse Sand 2 1.67E-04
Gravel 4 3.33E-04
Pebble 10 8.33E-04
25 2.08E-03
50 4.17E-03
Cobble 100 8.33E-03
250 2.08E-02
Boulder 500 4.17E-02

















31
Grain size (d
50
) and roughness (z
0
) of the seabed is determined based Table 2.2.

+
= 1 1 ln 1
1 ln
1
o
o
o
r
avg
z
D
D
z
z
z
U (2.16)

= U
avg
U
D
/U
r

U
r
=

Current velocity at reference height
Z
r,
= reference height for the current velocity, assumed 3 m
z
0
= bottom roughness parameter
d
50
= mean grain size


















Figure 2.5 : Calibration Factor, Fw (DNV RP E305)



32
Current to wave velocity ratio, M = U
D
/ U
s
Keulegan Carpenter number, K = (U
s
T
p
) / D

From Figure 2.5, the calibration factor can be obtained after determining the
value of M and K. Calibration factor is used in the calculation of pipeline submerged
weight.



2.8.5 Hydrodynamic Forces


When using the calibration factor F
w
to calculate W
sub
the hydrodynamic loading
on the pipe is determined using the following relationship.


Drag Force, F
D
= C
D
U
n
U
n
D (2.17)

Inertia Force, F
I
= C
M
D
2

n
/ 4 (2.18)

Lift Force, F
L
= C
L
U
n
2

D (2.19)

U
n
= (U
n
2
+ V
n
2
) (2.20)



where, D = the total outside diameter
= density of seawater
C
L
= 0.9, is the lift force coefficient
C
D
= 0.7, is the drag force coefficient
C
M
= 3.29, is the inertia force coefficient
U
n
= water particle horizontal velocity
V
n
= water particle vertical velocity

n
= water particle horizontal acceleration

33
2.8.5.1 Drag loads


As fluid passed over a body a shear layer develops in the fluids flow. The body
experiences a force caused by skin-friction due to the tangential viscom shear layer
between body and flow. In addition, it experiences a pressure or form drag from the
pressure on the body.

Thus,
( )
P F D
F F D k Kc F + / , Re, (2.21)


Total drag Friction Pressure
drag




2.8.5.2 Inertia Loads



A body immersed in fluid is generally associated with an entrained mass of watt
called the added mass. In some cases the added-mass is directly proportional to the
immersed of the body. This is often assumed.










34
2.8.6 Gravity Waves (Linear Wave Theory)



The simplest mathematical description of a gravity ( ocean ) wave is given by
linear wave theory [10].

Important parameters in linear wave theory,

i. wave height, H all other value may be calculated using
ii. mean water depth, d these three
iii. wave period, T






H

d



Figure 2.6 : Rest frame ( waves moving to left to right )



A few assumptions have to be made which are,


i. Ignore surface tension and viscosity
ii. Two-dimensional small amplitude waves permanent form
iii. Wave propagate through initially still watt
iv. Irrotational and incompressible







35
The wavelength, L is calculated based on the formula below [7],

=
L
d gT
L

2
tanh
2
2
(2.22)




In order to calculate the force on a structure immersed in moving fluid we need
to determine the particle kinematics. ( i.e. Velocity and accelerations ).
i) Particle velocities

Horizontal Velocity, U = H cosh [ 2 ( y + d ) / L ] . cos ( 2 ( x t ) ) (2.23)
T sinh (2 d / L ) L T

Vertical Velocity, V = H sinh [ 2 ( y + d ) / L ] . sin ( 2 ( x t ) ) (2.24)
T sinh (2 d / L ) L T


ii) Particle Accelerations

Horizontal Acceleration, = 2 H
2
cosh [ 2 ( y + d ) / L ] . sin ( 2 ( x t ) ) (2.25)
T
2
sinh (2 d / L ) L T




Therefore linear wave theory is most suitable for dealing with deep water wave
of small amplitude.









36
2.8.7 Assumptions for On-Bottom Stability Analysis


The following assumptions have been made in the pipeline on-bottom stability
analysis:

i. No pipe burial has been considered
ii. No water absorption on the concrete is considered
iii. No marine growth on the pipeline is taken into consideration
iv. Current and wave acting perpendicular to the pipeline
v. No pipe burial has been considered
vi. No water absorption on the concrete is considered
vii. No marine growth on the pipeline is taken into consideration
viii. Current and wave acting perpendicular to the pipeline
ix. The soil friction for clay is calculated based on fig 5.11 in DNV RP E305
x. The 1 year significant wave height and peak period plus 1 year current
are considered for the installation condition. Pipeline is assumed to be
empty during this condition
xi. The 100 year significant wave height and peak period plus 100 year
current are considered for the operating conditions. Minimum internal
product density of 733 kg/m
3
has been used
xii. For the immediate and long term vertical settlement calculation, the most
conservative case of hydrotest and operating (max product density of
1025 kg/m
3
) conditions respectively are considered









CHAPTER III




METHODOLOGY




3.1 Introduction


This chapter is about the methods to achieve the objectives of the study such as
acquiring the data, determination of code to be used and developing a spreadsheet. Data
and information is required through books, internets and journals on pipeline and
submarine pipelines. Studying and understanding about the study itself is a part of this
study.


A part of that, a spreadsheet is developed based on the code DNV RP E305 for
analysis of on bottom stability of a submarine pipeline. A case study from Baram,
Sarawak will be used with the data acts as the input to the spreadsheet analysis of
stability developed.





38
3.2 Flow Chart




Collecting and reviewing of
information and data


Study and understanding of
information and data gathered

Determining the code that will be
used as a guide in stability analysis


Developing a spreadsheed for on
bottom stability analysisof a
pipeline




Requiring the relevant datas as an
input for the spreadsheet

Analysing and collection of results


Interpretation of results achieved
and conclusion as a whole for the
study



Figure 3.1 : Flow of study



39


Figure 3.2 : Flowchart for the development of spreadsheet.


After the determination of DNV RP E305: On-Bottom Stability Design of
Submarine Pipeline as the code to be referred to, the development of the Microsoft Excel
Spreadsheet starts with the determination of pipeline and wave conditions.



40
Pipeline conditions consist of the thickness and density of the steel and other
coatings used for the submarine pipeline. From here, the pipeline weight can be
calculated and the pipeline submerged weight can be determined as well as the pipeline
specific gravity.


Wave conditions consist of the wave height, wave period, the mean depth of
seawater and etc. In order to calculate the forces acting on the pipeline, the wave
kinematics have to be determined based on the wave conditions. Then, the minimum
pipeline submerged weight can be determined and compared for on-bottom stability.




3.3 Background of Case Study


The Baram Field is located approximately 25 km offshore Lutong, Sarawak with
the water depths ranges up to 61 metres. Some of Baram facilities and pipelines are
aging and susceptible to corrosion due to inadequacy of corrosion management
programme. As a mitigation measure in addressing the risk, some of the aging pipelines
have to be replaced. On-bottom stability of the BARAM Pipeline Replacement Project
pipelines has to be checked.












41


Figure 3.3 : Location of Baram, Sarawak




3.4 Data as an Input for the Spreadsheet


Data are taken from Baram Pipeline Replacement Project in Baram, Sarawak.
The 100 year significant wave height and peak period plus 100 year current are
considered for the operating conditions. Minimum internal product density of 733 kg/m
3

has been used.


The 1-year significant wave height and peak period plus 1-year current are
considered for the installation and hydrotest conditions. Pipeline is assumed to be empty
during installation and filled with hydrotest water (assumed seawater) during hydrotest.











42
Table 3.1 : Data for minimum pipeline submerged weight

Parameters Symbol(Unit) Case 1 & 2 Case 3 Case 4
Gravity g(ms
-2
) 9.81 9.81 9.81
Wave Height H(m) 2.7 2.2 2.2
Spectral Peak
Period
T (s) 11.6 9.9

9.9
Mean Water
Depth
d (m) 4.4 4.1

4.1
Distance between
pipe and SWL
y (m) -4.19 -3.89 -3.89
Diameter of Pipe OD (m) 0.6174 0.6174 0.6174
Density of
Seawater
P (kgm
-3
) 1025

1025

1025

Zero Up Crossing
Period
T
u
(s) 9.16 7.91

7.91
Current Velocity
at Bottom
U
r
(ms
-1
) 0.5 0.4

0.4
Friction
Calibration Factor
u 1.3 0.9 1.3
Grain Size d
50
(mm) 0.5 0.5 0.5



Table 3.2 : Data for pipeline submerged weight

Diamater of Steel, Dst (mm) 406.4
Thickness of , (mm)
1) Steel, t 14.3
2) Internal Corrosion Liner, t
L
0
3) Corrosion Coating, t
cc
5.5
4) Insulation Coating, t
ic
0
5) Concrete Coating, t
c
85
6) Marine Growth, t
mg
0
7) Corroded Material, t
CA
0
Density of , (kg/m
3
)


1) Steel, p
st
7850
2) Internal Corrosion Liner, p
L
0
3) Corrosion Coating, p
cc
1280
4) Insulation Coating, p
ic
0
5) Concrete Coating, p
c
3044
6) Marine Growth, p
mg
1025
7) Content, p
i
750
8) Seawater, p
sw
1025
Corrosian Allowance Usage Factor, u
CA
3

43
3.5 FINDINGS OF STUDY


This study will provide an overview of the analysis in design of submarine
pipeline as it is a fairly new field. Besides, a further understanding will be developed on
the procedure of pipeline design. Through the spreadsheet analysis of on bottom
stability, the results that can be expected are minimum concrete coating thickness,
calculated submerged weight of the pipeline which should be bigger than the minimum
submerged weight of the pipeline.






CHAPTER IV




ANALYSIS AND RESULTS




4.1 Introduction


This study focuses on the on-bottom stability of a submarine pipeline which sits
on an even seabed without any trenching and burial. The stability is calculated based on
the spreadsheet developed using Microsoft Excel Spreadsheet. The analysis is done
based on data from the project in Baram, Sarawak. Four cases are being analyzed which
are operational pristine, operational end of life, installation and hydrotest.




4.2 Spreadsheet Development


The spreadsheet is developed using formulas from DNV RP E305 - On-Bottom
Stability Design of Submarine Pipeline and Linear Wave Theory.
45
Literature review has to be made to understand the nature and symbols used in
the formulas. Below are the results of the spreadsheet developed.




4.2.1 Minimum Pipeline Submerged Weight Spreadsheet


Figure 4.1 shows the 2-Dimensional Wave Profile and its parameters and also
the inputs to be entered in the spreadsheet. The inputs consists of wave height (H),
spectral peak period (T), mean water depth (d), distance between pipeline and seawater
level (y), outside diameter of pipe (OD), zero up crossing period (T
u
), and current
velocity at bottom (U
r
). The wave length (L) requires try and error method to determine
its value and is calculated using Equation 2.22 in Chapter II.



Figure 4.1 : Wave profile and Environmental Data Inputs
46
Figure 4.1 also describes the use of colour fonts. Blue fonts means that a value is
to be inserted in the cell. Green fonts are for excel calculated values, black fonts are for
fixed values and red fonts are for important excel calculated values.


Figure 4.2 and Figure 4.3 shows the calculated values of wave water particle
kinematics, which are horizontal and vertical velocities as well as horizontal
accelerations based on the values of the inputs and are calculated using Equations 2.23 -
2.25 . The values are plotted on graphs as shown in the same figure.



Figure 4.2 : Values for Horizontal and Vertical Velocities for a Cycle Period of Time



47


Figure 4.3 : Values for Horizontal Acceleration for a Cycle Period of Time


The drag, inertia and lift forces values for a cycle period of time are as shown in
Figure 4.4. The values are calculated using Equations 2.17 - 2.19 based on the input
values and the wave water particle kinematics determined earlier. The three forces are
then plotted in a single graph as shown in the figure. The fixed values shown in the
figure are drag force, inertia force and lift force coefficients with the value of 0.7, 3.29
and 0.9 each respectively.





48


Figure 4.4 : Drag, Inertia, and Lift Forces for a Cycle Period of Time


The minimum pipeline submerged weight values over a cycle period of time are
calculated using Equation 2.1 and are shown in Figure 4.5. These are important values as
it is the output needed for this particular spreadsheet. The values are then plotted on a
graph as shown in the figure. From Figure 4.5, a new input must be inserted which is the
friction calibration factor (u). But for calibration factor (F
w
), the value has to be
determined first as in Figure 4.6.




49

Figure 4.5 : Minimum Pipeline Submerged Weight for a Cycle Period of Time








50

Figure 4.6 : Determination of Calibration Factor and the Outputs of MIN Weight
Spreadsheet


Figure 4.6 shows the calculation of calibration factor and also the output, which
is the maximum value between the minimum pipeline submerged weights. In calculating
calibration factor, the value of U
s
*T
n
/H
s
is taken from DNV RP E305 Figure 2.1. As for
the grain size, the value is taken from DNV RP E305 Table A1 and lastly the value of
calibration factor itself is taken from DNV RP E305 Figure 5.12. These figures and table
from DNV RP E305 are inserted in the Microsoft Excel Spreadsheet developed but in
the third spreadsheet (Graph Spreadsheet). Hyperlinks from this spreadsheet are used to
link with the Graph Spreadsheet. The values taken from Graph Spreadsheet are inserted
there and will automatically be shown in this spreadsheet.

51
The minimum pipeline submerged weight required for on-bottom stability is only
for a case. The value is then inserted in the specified blue cell. New environmental
inputs are then inserted and the same processes as before is undertaken to get the
minimum pipeline submerged weight required for the other three cases and are then
inserted according to their case in the blue cells. These four values will be automatically
shown in the second spreadsheet which is CALC. Weight Spreadsheet. Click the To
Calculating Weight of Pipe hyperlink to move to the second spreadsheet.




4.2.2 Calculation of Pipeline Weight Spreadsheet


Figure 4.7 shows the input for this particular spreadsheet. These are the diameter
of steel (D
st
), thickness of materials such as steel (t), internal corrosion line (t
L
),
corrosion coating (t
cc
), insulation coating (t
ic
), concrete coating (t
c
), marine growth (t
mg
)
and corroded material (t
CA
) as well as the density of the materials which are steel (
st
),
internal corrosion liner (
L
), corrosion coating (
cc
), insulation coating (
ic
), concrete
coating (
c
), marine growth (
mg
), content (
i
) and seawater (
sw
). A corrosion allowance
usage factor (u
CA
) value is to be inserted.








52

Figure 4.7 : Pipeline Data Inputs


The values of internal diameter of pipe (ID) and the weight of materials such as
carbon steel (W
cs
), corrosion coating (W
L
), corrosion coating (W
cc
), insulation coating
(W
ic
), concrete coating (W
c
), marine growth (W
mg
), content (W
i
) and corroded material
(W
CA
) are calculated using Equations 2.3 - 2.11 based on the inputs inserted as shown in
Figure 4.8.


53

Figure 4.8 : Final Outputs of On-Bottom Stability Analysis of Submarine Pipeline


Figure 4.8 also shows the final outputs of on-bottom stability analysis of a
submarine pipeline. The outer diameter (OD), weight of pipeline (W) and pipeline
buoyancy (B) are calculated automatically for all four cases with the same value of
inputs. The main outputs are the pipeline submerged weight (Ws) and the pipeline
specific gravity (SG) which are calculated each using Equation 2.13 and Equation 2.14
of Chapter II. The pipeline submerged weight values for all four cases are compared
with the minimum pipeline submerged weight values calculated in the first spreadsheet
and the stability is determined whether its stable or not to withstand the forces exerted
to the pipeline.



54
4.2.3 Graphs from DNV RP E305 for the Calculation of Calibration Factor (F
w
)
Spreadsheet


In order to get the value of significant wave velocity perpendicular to the
pipeline (U
s
), the values of T
n
and T
n
/T
p
is calculated in the first spreadsheet and are
transferred in this spreadsheet for the user to use the graph as shown in Figure 4.9. The
value of U
s
*T
n
/H
s
is then inserted in the cell provided and is automatically shown in the
first spreadsheet.



Figure 4.9 : Graph from DNV RP E305 Figure 2.1



55
Figure 4.10 shows the grain size (d
50
) and roughness for seabed (z
o
). The type of
seabed is determined and the grain size is inserted in the cell provided. The values of
roughness will be automatically shown in this spreadsheet. Both of the values will
appear in the first spreadsheet for further calculations.



Figure 4.10 : Table A1- Grain Size for Seabed Materials from DNV RP E305







56
In order to get the value of calibration factor (F
w
), the values of M and K is
calculated in the first spreadsheet and are transferred in this spreadsheet for the user to
use the graph as shown in Figure 4.11. The calibration factors value is then inserted in
the cell provided and is automatically shown in the first spreadsheet and is used to
calculate the minimum pipeline submerged weight values for a cycle period of time.



Figure 4.11 : Calibration Factor from Figure 5.12 DNV RP E305







57
4.3 Results for Minimum Pipeline Submerged Weight Spreadsheet


The following results are based on data inputs from case 3, which is the
installation phase. Figure 4.12 shows the drag, inertia and lift forces acting on the
submarine pipeline over a cycle period if time while Figure 4.13 shows the minimum
pipeline submerged weight required to withstand the stated forces over a cycle period of
time.

Forces vs t/T
1500
1000
500
Force (N/m)
Drag
0
Force
0.0 0.1 0.2 1.0 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9
Inertia
-500
Force
Lift
-1000
-1500

t/T
Force
Figure 4.12 : 3 Forces involved over a Cycle Period of Time


Pipeline Submer ged Weight (Ws) vs t /T
-150
-100
-50
0
50
100
150
200
250
0
.
0
0
.
1
0
.
2
0
.
3
0
.
4
0
.
5
0
.
6
0
.
7
0
.
8
0
.
9
1
.
0
t/T
W
s
u
b

(
k
g
/
m
)

Figure 4.13 : Minimum Pipeline Submerged Weight over a Cycle Period of Time
58
4.4 Results for Calculation of Pipeline Weight Spreadsheet

From the calculation of pipeline weight spreadsheet, the final result whether a
submarine pipeline is stable or not for all for all 4 cases are summarized in Table 4.1
below.

Table 4.1 : Final Results for On-Bottom Stability Analysis of a Submarine Pipeline for
all 4 cases

Outer Weight Of Pipeline
Pipeline
Submerged Stability
Case
Diameter Pipe, W Buoyancy,B Weight, Ws
OD (mm) (kg/m) (kg/m) (kg/m)
1) Operational
Pristine 587.4 639.84 277.77 362.08 OK
2) Operational End
of Life 587.4 639.84 277.77 362.08 OK
3) Installation 587.4 555.77 277.77 278.00 OK
4) Hydrotest 587.4 670.67 277.77 392.90 OK

Pipeline Specific Min SG
Case
Gravity, SG
1) Operational Pristine 2.30
2) Operational End of
Life 2.30
3) Installation 2.00 1.1
4) Hydrotest 2.41



59
Figure 4.14 and Figure 4.15 show the pipeline submerged weight and pipeline
specific gravity with different thickness of concrete coating for the 4 cases.




232.02
Pipeline Submerged Weight (Ws) Vs Thickness of
Concrete Coating (tc)
0
100
200
300
400
500
600
1
0
2
0
3
0
4
0
5
0
6
0
7
0
8
0
9
0
1
0
0
1
1
0
1
2
0
tc (mm)
W
s

(
k
g
/
m
)
Case 1
and 2
Case 3
Case 4










Figure 4.14 : Pipeline Submerged Weight with Different Thickness of Concrete Coating


Pipeline Specific Gravity (SG) Vs Thickness of
Concrete Coating (tc)
0.00
0.50
1.00
1.50
2.00
2.50
3.00
1
0
2
0
3
0
4
0
5
0
6
0
7
0
8
0
9
0
1
0
0
1
1
0
1
2
0
tc (mm)
S
G
Case 1
and 2
Case 3
Case 4











Figure 4.15 : Pipeline Specific Gravity with Different Thickness of Concrete Coating
60
4.5 Parametric Analysis


Parametric analysis is done by varying an input parameter and the others are
fixed. In this study, 4 input parameters are varied which are the wave height (Figure
4.16), mean water depth (Figure 4.17), grain size (Figure 4.18) and diameter of pipeline
(Figure 4.19). This is done to see the behavior of structure in terms of the minimum
pipeline submerged weight (Ws) to varying values of input parameters stated above with
the other environmental parameters are fixed.



Minimum Pipeline Submerged Weight (Ws) Vs Wave
Height (H)
0
100
200
300
400
500
600
1.00 1.50 2.00 2.50 3.00 3.50
H (m)
W
s

(
k
g
/
m
)









Figure 4.16 : Minimum Pipeline Submerged Weight With Varying Values of Wave
Height








61

Mi ni mum Pi pel i ne Submerged Wei ght (Ws) Vs
Mean Water Depth (d)
0
20
40
60
80
10 20 30 40 50 60
d(m)
W
s

(
k
g
/
m
)









Figure 4.17 : Minimum Pipeline Submerged Weight With Varying Values of Mean
Water Depth










Minimum Pipeline Submerged Weight (Ws) Vs Grain
Size (d50)
210
220
230
240
250
260
270
0.001 0.01 0.1 1 10 100
d50 (mm)
W
s

(
k
g
/
m
)


Figure 4.18 : Minimum Pipeline Submerged Weight With Varying Values of Grain Size






62

Mi ni mum Pi pel i ne Submerged Wei ght (Ws) Vs
Di ameter of Pi pel i ne (D)
0
100
200
300
400
500
0.50 0.60 0.70 0.80 0.90 1.00
D (m)
W
s

(
k
g
/
m
)









Figure 4.19 : Minimum Pipeline Submerged Weight With Varying Values for Diameter
of Pipeline





CHAPTER V




DISCUSSIONS



5.1 Introduction


This study focuses on the development of spreadsheet for on-bottom stability
analysis of a submarine pipeline. The data inputs are inserted in the spreadsheet and the
behavior of submarine pipeline are analysed. Analysis is done after the tables and graphs
as in Chapter IV are obtained.

5.2 Discussion

The examples are based on data inputs from case 3 which is the installation
phase.

5.2.1 The 3 Forces Involved and the Minimum Pipeline Submerged Weight for a
Cycle Period of Time

From Figure 4.12, the drag, inertia and lift forces are a function of sinus and
cosines. The drag and inertia forces can be positive or negative depends on its horizontal
movement, whether to the right or left.
64
But lift force consists of positive values only. This is because lift force is a one
way direction, which is upwards. The combination of these 3 forces and using a formula
with the value of calibration factor, the minimum pipeline submerged weight is
determined as shown in Figure 4.13. Negative value means that the combination of the
forces causes the pipeline to be more stable because it is pushed downwards towards the
seabed. From the graph, the minimum pipeline submerged weight required to withstand
the forces is 232 kg/m. The actual weight of the pipeline must be more than this value to
ensure stability.




5.2.2 Stability Analysis


The stability has to be checked for all 4 cases. From Table 4.1, the actual
pipeline submerged weight is bigger than the minimum pipeline submerged weight
required for all 4 cases. So, the pipeline is stable. This is supported by the fact that the
pipeline specific gravity is more than 1.1 for all 4 cases [6].


From Figure 4.15, the minimum thickness of concrete coating is around 75 mm,
based on the installation phase. Installation phase in considered the critical phase. If the
value is less than 75 mm, the pipeline would probably fail due to high stress and fatigue
damage during installation. The minimum concrete thickness is based on the minimum
pipeline submerged weight required, which is 232kg/m.





65
5.2.3 Parametric Analysis


Parametric analysis is done by varying an input parameter and the others are
fixed. In this study, 4 input parameters are varied which are the wave height, mean water
depth, grain size and diameter of pipeline.


From Figure 4.16, the minimum pipeline submerged weight (Ws) increases with
the increment of wave height (H). When the wave height increases, the water particles
kinematics increases (velocity and acceleration). This will increase drag, lift and inertia
forces which contribute to the minimum pipeline submerged weight.


As for Figure 4.17, the minimum pipeline submerged weight (Ws) decreases with
the increment of mean water depth (d). When the mean water depth increases, the wave
length (L) increases. This reduces drag, lift and inertia forces because the water particle
kinematics decrease, which in turn contributes to the decrement of minimum pipeline
submerged weight.



If the grain size of seabed (d
50
) is increased, the pipeline submerged weight
decreased. The maximum pipeline submerged weight is 263 kg/m. This is because it
depends on the calibration factor (F
w
) taken from Fig 5.12- DNV RP E305 with the
maximum value of F
w
is 1.62. When grain size is increased, the roughness of seabed
increased but the value of F
w
decreases. So thus the minimum pipeline submerged
weight. This is shown in Figure 4.18.



66
From Figure 4.19, when the pipeline diameter (D) is increased, the pipeline
submerged weight also increased. Pipeline diameter is not involved in the calculation of
water particle kinematics. It affects the drag, lift and inertia forces directly. The forces
increase with the increment of pipeline diameter.





























CHAPTER VI




CONCLUSION




6.1 Conclusions


Based on the analyses, concrete coating and thickness of steel pipeline
contributes the most to the stability of the pipeline. This is because of their high density
that is involved in the calculation of the pipeline weight. With the given case study, the
minimum concrete coating is 75 mm. This is based on Case 3 (Installation), which is the
installation phase because it gives the minimumpipeline submerged weight between the
four cases. Application of concrete coating is the primary means of achieving stability.
A minimum concrete thickness of 38 mm must be adopted. From the spreadsheet
calculations, the pipeline on-bottom stability of the case study is ok.








68

6.2 Recommendations


The wave water particle kinematics are calculated using Linear Wave Theory.
The values are different if calculated based on DNV RP E305 Section 2. A study can be
done to see the comparison of the two stated methods. Possibility of sinking should be
checked for an exposed submarine pipelines resting directly on the seabed.





































REFERENCES




[1] J ohn L. Kennedy. Oil and Gas Pipeline Fundamentals , PenWell Tulsa,
Oklahama. 1993.
[2] Michael W.Braestrup ed., J an Bohl Andersen, Lars Wahl Andersen, Mads
Bryndum, Curt J ohn Christensen. Design and Installation of Marine
Pipelines , Blackwell : Science Ltd. 2005.
[3] Iwan R. Soedigdo, K.F. Lambrakos, Billy L. Edge. Prediction of Hydrodynamic
Forces on Submarine Pipelines Using an Improved Wake II Model, Ocean
Engineering 26. 1999.
[4] B.K Marzurkiewicz. Offshore Platforms and Pipelines , Trans Tech Publication.
1987.
[5] Det NorskeVeritas.DNV OS F101-Submarine Pipeline System, Veritec. 2000.
[6] Det NorskeVeritas.DNV RP E305 - On-Bottom Stability Design of Submarine
Pipeline, Veritec. 1998.
[7] Muhamad Hazlalin Ibrahim. Fundamentals of Pipeline Design: Pipeline On-
Bottom Stability, Seminar UTM City Campus Kuala Lumpur Malaysia. 2005.
[8] Detailed Design Services For Baram Pipeline Replacement Project: Pipeline
On-Bottom Stability Report, PCSB. 2005.
[9] J AE Young Lee, P.E. Stability of Pipeline Under Oblique Waves, CSO Aker
Engineering, Houstan. 2001.
[10] Dr. Nordin Yahaya. Marine Structures, UTM .
[11] PTS 20.196. Pipeline Engineering, Petronas. 1994.





BIBLIOGRAPHIES




(1) PTS 31.40.00.10. Pipeline Engineering, Petronas. 1994.
(2) PTS 20.088. Pipeline Engineering, Petronas. 1994.
(3) S.W. Gong, K.Y. Lam, C. Lu. Structural Analysis of a Submarine Pipeline
Subjected to Underwater Shock, International J ournal of Pressure Vessels and
Piping 77. 2000.
(4) Fuping Gao, Dong-Sheng J eng. A New Design Method for Wave-Induced
Pipeline Stability on a Sandy Seabed, Research Report No R860, The University
of Sydney. 2005.
(5) Kevin C. Ewans, Journal of Offshore Mechanics and Arctic Engineering,
Transactions of the ASME. Vol.125. 2003.
(6) Guidelines for the Design of Buried Steel Pipe, American Lifelines Alliance,
ASME. 2001.






APPENDIX





APPENDIX A


HAND CALCULATION
ON-BOTTOM STABILITY ANALYSIS OF A SUBMARINE PIPELINE BASED
ON A CASE STUDY FROM BARAM, SARAWAK



Example Based on Case 3 (Installation Phase)

Inputs :


Parameters Symbol(Unit) Case 1 & 2 Case 3 Case 4
Gravity g(ms
-2
) 9.81 9.81 9.81
Wave Height H(m) 2.7 2.2 2.2
Spectral Peak
Period
T (s) 11.6 9.9

9.9
Mean Water
Depth
d (m) 4.4 4.1

4.1
Distance between
pipe and SWL
y (m) -4.19 -3.89 -3.89
Diameter of Pipe OD (m) 0.6174 0.6174 0.6174
Density of
Seawater
p (kgm
-3
) 1025

1025

1025

Zero Up Crossing
Period
Tu (s) 9.16 7.91

7.91
Current Velocity
at Bottom
Ur (ms
-1
) 0.5 0.4

0.4
Friction
Calibration Factor
u 1.3 0.9 1.3
Grain Size d
50
(mm) 0.5 0.5 0.5

Data for Minimum Pipeline Submerged Weight
72


Diamater of Steel, Dst (mm) 406.4
Thickness of , (mm)
1) Steel, t 14.3
2) Internal Corrosion Liner, t
L
0
3) Corrosion Coating, t
cc
5.5
4) Insulation Coating, t
ic
0
5) Concrete Coating, t
c
85
6) Marine Growth, t
mg
0
7) Corroded Material, t
CA
0
Density of , (kg/m
3
)


1) Steel, p
st
7850
2) Internal Corrosion Liner, p
L
0
3) Corrosion Coating, p
cc
1280
4) Insulation Coating, p
ic
0
5) Concrete Coating, p
c
3044
6) Marine Growth, p
mg
1025
7) Content, p
i
750
8) Seawater, p
sw
1025
Corrosian Allowance Usage Factor, u
CA
3

Data for Pipeline Submerged Weight


Calculations:

First Spreadsheet,
Wave Length,

=
L
d gT
L

2
tanh
2
2


=
( ) ( )

L
1 . 4 2
tanh
2
9 . 9 81 . 9
2

L
761 . 25
tanh 02 . 153

Try and error to obtain L

L = 61.02 m




73


Horizontal Velocity, U = H cosh [ 2 ( y + d ) / L ] . cos ( 2 ( x t ) )
T sinh (2 d / L ) L T

=
( ) ( )
( ) ( )

+
9 . 9
2 cos
02 . 61 / 1 . 4 2 sinh
02 . 61 / 1 . 4 89 . 3 2 cosh
9 . 9
1 . 2 t

= 1.533 cos -(0.635t) (t = 0 until T = 9.9)


Vertical Velocity, V = H sinh [ 2 ( y + d ) / L ] . sin ( 2 ( x t ) )
T sinh (2 d / L ) L T

=
( ) ( )
( ) ( )

+
9 . 9
2 sin
02 . 61 / 1 . 4 2 sinh
02 . 61 / 1 . 4 89 . 3 2 sinh
9 . 9
1 . 2 t

= 0.033 sin -(0.635t) (t = 0 until T = 9.9)


Horizontal Acceleration, = 2 H
2
cosh [ 2 ( y + d ) / L ] . sin ( 2 ( x t ) )
T
2
sinh (2 d / L ) L T

=
( )
( )
( ) ( )
( ) ( )

+
9 . 9
2 sin
02 . 61 / 1 . 4 2 sinh
02 . 61 / 1 . 4 89 . 3 2 cosh
9 . 9
1 . 2 2
2
2
t

= 0.975 sin -(0.635t) (t = 0 until T = 9.9)


The graphs are then plotted over a cycle period of time.


U
n
= (U
n
2
+ V
n
2
)

= ( ) ( )
2 2
(0.635t) - sin 0.033 (0.635t) - cos 1.533 +

= ) 635 . 0 ( sin 001 . 0 ) 635 . 0 ( cos 35 . 2
2 2
t t +






74






Drag Force, F
D
= C
D
U
n
U
n
D

C
d
= 0.7

= .6174) (0.635t)(0 - cos 1.533 ( ) 635 . 0 ( sin 001 . 0 ) 635 . 0 ( cos 35 . 2 ) 1025 )( 7 . 0 ( 5 . 0
2 2
t t +
F
D
= ( ) 635 . 0 ( sin 001 . 0 ) 635 . 0 ( cos 35 . 2
2 2
t t + )(339.55 cos -(0.635t))


Inertia Force, F
I
= C
M
D
2

n
/ 4

C
m
= 3.29

F
I
= (0.635t)/4 - sin 0.975 ( ) 6174 . 0 ( ) 1025 ( 29 . 3
2

F
I
= 984.345 sin (-0.635t)


Lift Force, F
L
= C
L
U
n
2

D

C
L =
0.9

F
L
= (0.6174) (0.635t) - cos 1.533 )( 1025 )( 9 . 0 ( 5 . 0
2
F
L
= 669.25 cos
2
(-0.635t)


Minimum Pipeline Submerged Weight,
W
L I D
sub
F
F F F
W

+ +
=

) (


Fw = 1.62 = 0.9










75






Weight of Pipeline (Second Spreadsheet),

Carbon Steel Weight W
cs
= (D
st
t) t
st


= (406.4-14.3)(14.3)(7850)
= 138.28 kg/m

Corrosion Coating Weight W
cc
= (D
st
+ t
cc
) t
cc

cc

= (406.4+5.5)(5.5)(1280)
= 9.11 kg/m

Concrete Coating Weight W
c
= (D
st
+ 2t
cc
+ 2t
ic
+ t
c
) t
c

c


= ((406.4+2(5.5)+0+85)(85)(3044)
= 408.38 kg/m

Inte iam r of t 2t rnal D ete Pipe ID = D
st
2
L


= 406.4-2(14.3)-0
= 377.8 mm

Weight of Contents W
i
= /4 (ID)
2

i


= (377.8)
2
(750)/4
= 84.08 kg/m

Case 3 (Installation Phase)

Weight of Pipe

W = Wcs + W
L
+ Wcc + Wic + Wc

= 138.28 + 0 + 9.11 + 0 + 408.38
= 555.77 kg/m

Outer Diameter

OD = D + 2t
cc
+ 2t
ic
+ 2t
c

= 406.4 + 2(5.5) + 0 + 2(85)
= 587.4 mm
76




Buoyancy

B = /4 OD
2

sw

= (587.4)
2
(1025)/4
= 277.77 kg/m

Pipeline Submerged Weight

Ws = W B

= 555.77 - 277.77
= 278 kg/m

The pipeline stability for Case 3 is OK because 278 > 232 kg/m (minimum pipeline
submerged weight

Pipeline Specific Gravity

SG = W/B

= 555.77/277.77
= 2.0

The pipeline specific gravity is more than 1.1, so its OK