OTC3736

THESPI RALARRESTOR - A NEWBUCKLE

ARRESTORDESI GNFOROFFSHORE PI PELI NES
by Stelios Kyriakides and Charles D. Babcock,
California Institute of Technology
@Copyright 1980 Offshore Technology Conference
This paper was presented at the 12th Annual OTC i. Houston, Tex., May 5.8.1980. The matedal IS sublnct to correction by the author. Permlsslon to COPYIs restricted to an abstract of not more than 3W words.
ABSTRACT tances in both directions due to the hydrostatic
pressure. In such an event it is desirable to
If a pipeline buckles in the presence of restrict the length of pipe destroyed, to as small
sufficiently large external pressure, a propagat- a length of pipe as possible, which is subsequent-
ing buckle is initiated. The buckle propagates ly replaced. This is achieved by the proper use
along the pipeline until it encounters a region of a buckle arresting device.
of adverse conditions--low pressure or an arrest-
ing device. This paper suggests a new buckle Buckle arrestor is the name given to any
arrestor design. It is comprised of a rod tightly device which locally reinforces the pipe and pre-
wound around the pipe to form a number of turns. vents the buckle from propagating any further.
The ends of the rod are welded in order to secure These are installed at regular intervals along the
it in place. Its main characteristic is that it pipeline and if properly designed restrict the
can be used in continuous pipelaying methods damage to the pipe to the section ~, between two
(e.g., reel pipelaying). It can also be used in arrestors (fig. 1). A designer then has to choose
the case of pipes coated with concrete where it a balance between a more economical pipeline and
can be inserted into the concrete. This arrestor the possibility of damage occuring to a length J?
has the unique quality of restricting the stress of the pipe. Some of the factors one should con-
concentration at the discontinuity in the case sider in deciding the value of ~ are the total
where bending moment is applied to the pipe and length of the pipe, the diameter, thickness and
does not affect the bending rigidity of the pipe. unit length cost of the pipe, the water depth at
Experiments have shown that its efficiency is which it is laid and the cost of retraction and
comparable to other arrestora. An empirical replacement of a unit length of damaged pipeline.
expression for the arrestor efficiency is pre-
sented. A number of arresting devices have been sug-
gested to date. They vary in shape, coat, ease of
INTRODUCTION application, etc. Reference 1 describes a device
which is temporarily placed on the inside of the
During offshore pipelaying operations, a pipe to locally prevent circumferential deforma-
continuous length of pipe is payed out from a tion. References 2 - 5 describe devices which are
vessel into the water (fig. 1). The pipeline is permanently placed on the outside of the pipe.
under the combined effect of bending, tension and Some of these designs are schematically shown in
pressure. Circumstances exist under which the fig. 2(a-d).
buckling limit of the pipe can be exceeded, caus-
ing local buckling. Local buckling or large local The Slip-On arrestor is a close fitting
plastic deformation (dents) can also occur after ring slipped on the pipe as shown in fig. 2-a.
the laying operation is completed due to falling This device was the subject of an extensive and
objects (anchors or other heavy equipment) or due detailed study carried out by the authors [ref. 4
to natural causes such as earthquakes, sea bottom and 5] where an empirical design formula for its
instabilities or undersea currents. efficiency waa derived. The Grouted arrestor
(fig. 2-b) is a similar device but with a gap
When any type of large dent occurs at any between the pipe and the arrestor; this is filled
point in the pipeline, the collapse at that point with grout--usually cement. Figure 2-c represents
may propagate along the pipeline for great dis- another version of the Slip-On but in this case
the ends of the ring are welded to the pipe either
References and illustrations at end of paper.
all around or in atich form. The Heavy walled
cylinder arrestor (fig. 2-d) consists of a length
,-.
Y
of pipe having usually the same internal diameter
as the p$pe but hqving & th~cker section.
This iS
welded between two sections of pipe.
Each of these devices has relative merits and
problems associated with its use (ease of applica-
tion, cost of installation, etc.). However, one
common disadvantage of these arrestors is the fact
that they are difficult to use in the case of a
continuous pipelaying proce~s!such as one :.here
the pipe is laid from a shipboard reel onto which
the pipeline has been prewound (see fig. 1). This
is because in such a case no end exists over which
the sleeves can be slipped on or to which the
heavier sections can be welded. Another disadvan-
tage with these arrestors ia that due to their
construction$bending stress concentration points
can be created during the laying process due to
the thickness discontinuity at the end of the
arrestor. This can be designed against but at the
expense of rather extensive machining.
Figure 2-e shows a new arresting device sug-
gested by the authors which due to ita design does
not have these disadvantages. It is called the
Spiral arrestor and it can be simply described
as a rod closely wound to the pipe for a number of
turns and welded at the ends to keep it in place
and prevent it from expanding while a buckle propa-
gating in the pipe is arrested. It can be wound
onto the pipe at any stage of the operation (before
the pipe is wound onto the reel, during laying be-
fore the ten~ioner and straightener, or after these
devices). Due to the relative ease of application
it can also be used in laying by traditional lay
barges as well as in cases where the pipeline is
coated with concrete.
What follows is a detailed experimental study
of this device, based upon the methodology estab
lished in ref. 5 for experimentally obtaining the
efficiency of an arrestor.
SPIRAL ARRESTOR FEATURES
As already mentioned, the spiral arrestor
consists of a rod wound tightly and closely onto
the pipe to form a number of turns. The ends of
the rod are secured, as by welding, to the pipe
(fig. 3-a), to the rod itself (fig. 3-b) or to the
rod and pipe simultaneously, thus forming an ob-
stacle which a propagating buckle must overcome.
The turns may also be individual and unconnected
(fig. 3-c). Due to the relatively small bending
rigidity the device has, in the pipers longitudinal
direction, the pipe can be bent to relatively small
radit without any arrestor induced restriction.
Thus the arrestor can be applied before the pipe is
wound onto the reel or at any stage during the lay-
ing operation. The latter can be achieved since
this device does not require a free pipeline end
for installation. In the case of the traditional
section by section laying process, the arrestor can
be prewound on some of these sections which can be
welded in place at the required intervals. If the
pipe has to be coated with concrete then the arres-
tor can be placed underneath the concrete as shown
in fig. 4, thus providing a smooth outside surface
which can be important for the tensioner. If the
pipe does not have a concrete coating but some
kind of corrosion coating instead, then the arres-
tor can be placed after the coating and it can also
be coated.
The arrestor rod can be of any cross sectional
shape although shapes maximizing the bending rigid-
ity of the cross section of the rod should be pre-
ferred as they are more efficient. Some possible
cross sectional configurations are shown in fig. 5.
Of these, the circular cross section ia considered
the easiest and most economical to use. This was
therefore chosen to carry out a series of experi-
ments to verify the effectiveness of the arrestor
and obtain some design specifications.
PARAMETRIC STUDY OF SPIRAL ARRESTOR EFFICIENCY
Due to the complexity of the mechanics of the
arreat problem (post buckling behavior, large plas-
tic deformations, contact area problems, etc.) an
experimental method for studying arrestor efficien-
cies was established in ref. 5, where it was suc-
cessfully used to derive an empirical expression
for the Slip-On arrestor. This method was used in
order to carry out a similar study for this arres-
tor.
Figure 6 shows the various parameters of the
problem. The pipe is characterized by two critical
pressures.
(a) pJLopag&tin phti~tie (Pp): This is defined as
the lowest pressure at which an initiated buckle
will propagate. An empirically derived expression
for this pressure for a certain family of steel
alloys used in pipelines is given by
t 2.25
Pp = 14.50
0
5
(b) ?3ucting Pzubtie (Pc): This is defined as
the pressure at which a long pipe under external
pressure becomes unstable (buckles); for elastic
buckling
Pc =
2E t3
()
(l-v) 5 -
(1)
(2)
The combined assembly of the pipe and the arrestor
is characterized by one critical pressure referred
to as the arrestor crossover pressure.
(c) ~OMOVCk?%2AAUM (Po): This is defined as
the pressure at which an incoming buckle penetrates
the arrestor and continues propagating on the other
side. The arrestor efficiency (ii)as defined in
ref. 5 is given by
P 1P. - 1
~=oP
.
PIP-I
CP
(3)
Thus an arrestor which allows a buckle propagating
at P to go through has an efficiency of O (or O%).
E On t e other hand, one that has a crossover press-
ure of Pc has an efficiency of 1 (or 100%).
If the study is restricted to the quasistatic
case, then all inertial parameters can be neglec-
ted which simplifies the problem. Following ref. 5
the crossover pressure can then be expressed as
Iu
P.
/( )
,~,&,~,&,~,N , (4)
did not have an effect on the crossover pressure.
~= 00 00 t ~ t
On the other hand, welding it to the pipe eome-
times caused breakage of the weld when it was
where the symbols are as defined in fig. 6. Ac-
forced to follow the large deformation through
cording to ref. 5 the efficiency can then be
which the pipe undergoea as it buckles. Because
approximated by
of these reasons the ends of the rod were usually
welded to the last complete turn of the spiral.
This technique was used in all experiments.
A+)($ a2($[$V15($7[2-! )
All the pipes used were ti-D-6061-T6.
Four different thicknesses of drawn rod were spec-
ially made and used, having the same material
Al (a constant) together with the unknown Powers ai
have to be found experimentally.
properties (same grade and heat treatment).
(b) Dynamic Experiments
EXPERIMENTAL SET-UP
The procedure of these experiments is exactly
The experiments were conducted in an 0.2 m the same as that described in ref. 5. Briefly a
(8 in) diameter, 3.66 m (12 ft) long pressure dynamic buckle can be obtained if a constant pres-
tank, having a 55 bar (800 psi) working pressure sure environment is provided. This ia experiment-
(see fig. 7). A pneumatically operated knife ally achieved by filling the tank with water but
edge is used in order to initiate the buckle at leaving a large enough air gap which is filled
one end,of the pipe. A 1.22 m (4 ft) long, 13.8 with compressed air. In ref. 5 it was shown that
bar (200 psi) working pressure transparent see- the quasistatically derived efficiency always
tion could be added in series. This was used for underestimated the Slip-On arreator efficiency
direct or photographic observation of the buckle under dynamic buckle conditions.
arrest or buckle crossover.
A number of tests were conducted in order to
(a) Quasistatic Experiments test the validity of such an assumption as far as
the Spiral arrestor is concerned. Exactly the
In the case of the quasistatic buckle arrest, same behavior was observed for all experiments.
control over the speed of propagation was required As a result, further work on the subject was not
so the tank was completely filled with water. An considered necessary and the quasistatic crossover
air driven piston pump was used for pressurizing
the tank. A buckle was initiated at one end of
pressures for the Spiral arrestors are considered
to be conservative for the dynamic conditions.
the pipe and allowed to propagate at a controlled
speed (very small) by monitoring the amount of EXPERIMENTAL RESULTS
water pumped into the tank.
Figure 9 shows a Spiral arrestor etopping a
For the quasietatic experiments a number of buckle and fig. 10 shows a buckle that waa forced
arrestors (4-6) were arranged on 3.66 m (12 ft) through the arrestor. As in the case of the Sl%p-
long pipe specimens. Enough distance was allowed On arreator,
between arrestors to avoid interference between
the mode of penetration is usually
the U-type mode. For low efficiency arrestors the
them (usually 15-20 diameters). A pressure arrestor usually follows the contour of the Elat-
transducer provided continuous reading of the tened pipe and for arrestors with efficiency close
presa,urein the tank. Figure 8 shows schematic- to 1 the flip-flop mode of penetration described
ally the output from the transducer for a typical in ref. 5 was observed.
experiment. In order to initiate the propagating
buckle the pressure was slowly increased until
In the first series of experiments all the
propagation starts from the damaged section of
the pipe. The pressure
parameters were kept constant and the pitch of
then dropped back to the arrestor winding was varied. It was found
the propagation pressure. On reaching the first that the closer the winding, the greater the ef-
arrestor, the buckle was stopped and the pressure ficiency. As a result, all further experiments
increased. At some pressure the buckle suddenly
(usually) penetrated the arrestor and continued
were wound with no spacing between each turn. In
this case the arrestor length L is equal to Nh and
propagating on the other side of the arrestor at
the fifth parameter in (4) is a product of the
the propagation pressure of the pipe. This con- fourth and sixth, i.e., it is no longer an indepen-
tinued until the buckle encountered another
arrestor. Tht highti~ LKL&ML Od the pJLtiAWLC
dant quantity; it can thus be dropped from (5).
It should be noted that the drop in efficiency is
heacht?d in each CCULZwti .tdum Xo be the chOhh- not great (less than 10%) if the distance between
ova pke.hhut~od .tht LVLUMhk. The propagation
turns is kept less than half of the arrestor rod
pressure of each pipe was also recorded. The diameter.
pipe was connected to the atmosphere so that its
internal pressure was always atmospheric. One of In the next experiment the number of turns
the parameters shown to be important in the case (N) in an arrestor was varied with all other para-
of the Slip-on arrestor waa the gap between the meters constant. The results are shown in fig. 11,
arreator and the pipe. Care waa taken to avoid from which the crossover pressure (and the effic-
this by applying some tension to the rod during iency) is shown to be directly proportional to N
the winding process, thus making sure of good (thus ci~= 1).
contact. l?rompreliminary experiments.it was
found that the way the end of the rod was welded In another experiment the rod diameter (h)
74
.,
was varied. The results appropriately plotted in
fig. 12 indicate that ctIj= 3. It should be noted
that this value is in Agreement with that found
for the power of the corresponding thickness para-
meter (h/t) of the Slip-On arreator [5] .
From the tests discussed so far it is clear
that a great similarity exists betw;en the behav-
ior of the Slip-On and the Spiral arrestors. The
method of resisting penetration and the mechanism
of the crossover are much the same. In fact the
Spiral arrestor can be considered as a series of
narrow slip-on rings slipped onto the pipe with
no spacing between them (in our case). Due to
these similarities between the two arrestors it
was considered reasonable to expect $.hedependence
of the efficiency on D/t, E/oO and CrO/OOin expres-
sion (5) to be the same as in the corresponding
expression for the Slip-On arrestor (see ref. 5).
With this assumption al = O, 0.2= 1 and CL3= -1.
Accepting the above values of ctiall the ex-
perimental results are plotted on an efficiency vs.
parameter plot in fig. 13. The results thus plot-
ted exhibit a linear behavior indicating that the
assumptions made in the dimensional analysis in
ref. 5 were reasonable. Some scatter in the
results is present and can be attributed to possi-
ble small differences in the material behavior of
each tube, differences in the tension that was
applied in winding the different arrestors and
differences in the size and orientation, with
respect to the buckle direction, of the end welds.
However the scatter is acceptable for design pur-
poses.
Like the Slip-On arrestor, this arrestors
performance exhibits a bifurcation behavior when
the crossover pressure reaches the buckling pres-
sure. Any further reinforcement of the arreator
above thts pressure does not help because the pipe
buckles in front of the arrestor independently.
CONCLUSIONS
A new arresting device that can be used in
continuous pipelaying operations, such as the case
of pipelaying off a reel, has been presented. It
can be easily applied to the pipe in any possible
pipelaying technique whether weight coating is
used or not. It has the additional advantage of
not restricting the pipe in longitudinal bending.
It has been ahown to behave very similarly to the
Slip-On arrestor and an empirical expression for
its efficiency has been derived. This expression
was found under quasistatic conditions but it waa
shown experimentally that these results suffice
since the efficiency of the arrestor under dynamic
conditions is underestimated.
NOMENCLATURE
D
E
h
L
L
N
Fc
Po
Pp
t
n
v
00
c1;
Pipe diameter, od.
Youngs modulus
Arrestor rod diameter
Distance between two arrestors
Arrestor length
Arrestor number of turns
Buckling pressure
Arrestor crossover pressure
Propagation pressure
Pipe thickness
Arrestor efficiency
Poissons ratio
Yield stress
~ pipe
Yield stress, arrestor
ACKNOWLEDGMENT
This work was supported by the California
Institute of Technology and their support is
greatly appreciated. The authors also wish to
thank the Galcit staff for their help in carrying
out the experiments and preparation of this paper.
REFERENCES
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
Joe C. Lochridge, Tony Leon Gibson, Method of
Arresting the Propagation of a Buckle in a
Pipeline, U.S. Patent 3,747,356, July 24, 1973.
Douglas E. Brousaard, Ray R. Ayers, George E.
Walker, Jr.,
llMitigation of Propagating COl-
lapse Failures in Pipelines due to External
Load, U.S. Patent 3,768,269, Oct. 30, 1973.
T. G. Johns, R. E, Mesloh and J. E. Sorenson,
Propagating Buckle Arrestors for Offshore
Pipelines, OTC 2680, May 1976.
S. Kyriakides and C. D. Babcock, On the Dy-
namics and the Arrest of the Propagating
Buckle in Offshore Pipelines, OTC 3479, May
1979.
S. Krviakides and C. D. Babcock. On the Sliu-
On Buckle Arrestor for Offshore Pipelines,
Journal of Pressure Vessel Technology--Trans-
actions of the ASME. Mav 1980. Vol. 102.
/-Reel
v
.
-1. .=
J---l
L Loy surge
Fi g. 1 - Pi pe l ayi ng operati on of f a reel l ay barge.
. . . . . . . . . .
(b)
_
(c)
Fi g. 3 - Di f f erent spi ral arrestor
arrangements and wel di ng methods.
+npe J== =J- ==
.
. ..
TTW
Circular Crossection Rectangular 1 UBeam Crossection Hexagonal
Spiral Arrestor Rod Crossection
Crossection
Fi g. 5 - Possi bl e cross- secti ons f or spi ral
arrestor rods.
m77n77n
03)
- . . -. S!io-OnArrestor
,, ?l, ,,,4

(b)
-. -. Grouted Arrestor
U?,, !,,, !(
(c)
_- . - -_ Welded Arrestor
n7rn77n
(d)
tkOVY Walled
- . -_--.
Cylinder Arrosstor
Ii,,,,,,,l
Spiro! Arrestor
Fi g. 2 - Di f f erent arrestor desi gn.
?
Pip9
Spiral Arrestor
Fi g. 4 - Spi ral arrestor used
under concrete coati ng.
.
b-b c-c
Fi g. 6 - Parameters of the arrest probl em.
t
t
Fi g. 7 - Pressure tank assembl y ( worki ng pressure
800 psi ).
Externally Initiated
,Arros!tns.
1
OAX Arrestor Crossover Pressure (P.J
--___________________ .__ .-_.
n
IP0,2
II
----- ____________________
:ZAL--------------
PP
...... / 4-
{
Pipe Propagation Pressure ( Pp)
I
Time
Fi g. 8 - Schemati c of experi mental determi nati on
of arrestor crossover pressure.
Fi g. 9 - Spi ral arrestor stoppi ng a propagati ng
buckl e.
Fi g. 10 - U type of crossover of propagati ng
buckl e.
& .
PP
Buckling Prossuro
!3
Q
2-
Fi g. 12 - Vari ati on of crossover
pressure wi th spi ral rod di ameter.
2
I
0.2
I
.
r

Buckling Pressure
e
JL=2,2
t
Fi g. 11 - Vari ati on of crossover pressure
wi th number of turns i n spi ral arrestor.
. . .
/
:
.. .
/-y
.
.
.
. .
.
[
Spiral Arrestor
o
. .
E, U.
~E,u:
.
~
o
t
.
.
.
N-turns
/ :
I
01 I 2 3 4 3 6 d
- (4)(+)(H3N
Fi g. 13 - Experimental results plotted against the
Empirical expression f or the Arrestor ef f i ci ency.