See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/320181365

Strength and Deformation Capacity of Lined Pipelines using Advanced FE

Modelling

Conference Paper · November 2017

DOI: 10.2118/188246-MS

CITATIONS READS
0 388

5 authors, including:

Lorenzo Marchionni Lorenzo Maria Bartolini

Saipem S.p.A. Saipem Singapore
22 PUBLICATIONS   49 CITATIONS    17 PUBLICATIONS   48 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

Roberto Bruschi Antonio Parrella

Saipem S.p.A. Saipem S.p.A.
80 PUBLICATIONS   236 CITATIONS    11 PUBLICATIONS   32 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:

Strength and Deformation Capacity of Lined Pipelines View project

CRA liner stability View project

All content following this page was uploaded by Lorenzo Marchionni on 19 October 2018.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

SPE-188246-MS

Strength and Deformation Capacity of Lined Pipelines using Advanced FE

Modelling
Lorenzo M. Bartolini, Roberto Bruschi, Lorenzo Marchionni, Antonio Parrella, Luigino Vitali, Saipem S.p.A.

Copyright 2017, Society of Petroleum Engineers

This paper was prepared for presentation at the Abu Dhabi International Petroleum Exhibition & Conference held in Abu Dhabi, UAE, 13-16 November 2017.

This paper was selected for presentation by an SPE program committee following review of information contained in an abstract submitted by the author(s). Contents
of the paper have not been reviewed by the Society of Petroleum Engineers and are subject to correction by the author(s). The material does not necessarily reflect
any position of the Society of Petroleum Engineers, its officers, or members. Electronic reproduction, distribution, or stora ge of any part of this paper without the
written consent of the Society of Petroleum Engineers is prohibited. Permission to reproduce in print is restricted to an abstract of not more than 300 words;
illustrations may not be copied. The abstract must contain conspicuous acknowledgment of SPE copyright.

Abstract
DNV GL has recently carried out a JIP to propose rational design criteria for clad and lined pipes.
Attention has been paid to pressure containment, local buckling/wrinkle, fracture and fatigue limit states.
In the DNV GL JIP design guideline, a strain criterion for the liner wrinkle limit state is proposed. The
criterion is based on experimental test results and does not include any safety factor. Advanced FE
Model, purposely calibrated through dedicated experimental tests, can be developed to quantify the
strength and deformation capacity of lined pipes considering installation and operational loads, pipeline
geometry and fabrication technology and tolerances.
The FEM analyses reproduced effectively the behaviour of clad/lined pipelines subject to combined
loads. The presence of liner contributes to overall pipeline strength and deformation capacity, although it
introduces an issue due to the risk of wrinkling and detachment from the baking steel. For lined pipes
with no or low internal pressure, the liner will normally separate, i.e. wrinkle, from the backing steel
prior to reaching the local buckling capacity of the backing steel alone.
The advanced FEM analysis approach can be very helpful for lined pipe strength and deformation
capacity assessment, thus aiding engineers during the design process. The accurate reproduction of
failure modes under combined loads can drive engineers through a proper design of clad/lined pipe in
offshore extreme environment/loading conditions.

Introduction
Clad and lined pipeline materials have been used in the oil and gas industry for handling corrosive
media for more than 25 years, particularly when fluids from wells are very aggressive. This choice is
ultimately a need either when the traditional carbon steel is unable to meet the cracking resistance
requirements that severe sour service requires, or when the anticipated corrosion rates impose the
adoption of excessive corrosion allowance and/or additional mitigation measures (inhibitors, pig runs
etc.) that impact operational costs unacceptably.
2 SPE-SPE-188246-MS-MS

In some circumstances, particularly in deep waters, meeting the challenges of minimum leak risk due to
corrosion in sensitive areas and/or of interruption of production requires the adoption of corrosion
resistant alloys. A “clad pipe” is a double-wall pipe consisting of a load-bearing high-strength, low-alloy
carbon steel outer pipe, lined with a thin-walled sleeve made from a corrosion-resistant material. It is an
alternative solution, less expensive than a full corrosion resistant pipe wall with which to tackle the issue
of structural integrity of oil and gas steel pipelines transporting aggressive fluids. Clad pipes make the
best use of corrosion-resistant alloys together with low-alloy steels that require protection from oil or
gas pollutants (e.g. hydrogen sulphide, chlorides, and water) in order to meet the required pipelines
performances during the lifetime without the prohibitive cost of producing line pipes from a stainless
steel or a nickel alloy thick enough to withstand pressure and structural loads.
Pipe producers provide two types of clad pipes: metallurgically clad pipes and mechanically clad pipes,
also known as lined pipes. The most frequently selected cladding and liner materials have to date been
AISI 316L, Incoloy 825 or Inconel 625, with typical diameters for clad and lined pipes of 14 - 36” and 6
– 24”, respectively.
When producing metallurgically clad pipes, the bonding process for joining the corrosion-resistant
internal sleeve to the strong external low-alloy carbon steel can be performed in several different ways:
by weld cladding, centrifugal casting, extrusion, or rolling laminated plates. During this metallurgical
process, however, only one single heat treatment is used for both the ferritic external layer and the
austenitic internal layer, but in some cases material combinations may not be technically feasible. In any
case, regardless of the manufacturing process, what defines the metallurgically clad pipes is the union of
the two materials into a single mass.
On the other hand, mechanically clad pipes are composed of a corrosion-resistant liner inserted into a
low-alloy external carbon steel pipe. The nature of the mechanical bond depends on the manufacturing
process, meaning that whichever method is chosen to combine the two pieces, the bond is purely
mechanical; therefore, the materials of the outer pipe and the liner pipe, unlike those of the
metallurgically clad pipes, remain two different masses, not fusing together to become a single body.
The mechanically clad pipe, in particular, seems to have a promising future, being less expensive.
Previous studies made on single-wall pipes have clearly shown that taking into account the installation
process of offshore pipelines is of great importance when designing these pipes. During this stage, the
pipeline is subjected to a combination of bending deformation and external pressure. Under both these
loading conditions, significant stress levels are developed in the pipeline wall. These stresses are
commonly associated with excessive cross-sectional ovalisation and possible local buckling, which may
result in pipeline collapse, particularly if “buckle propagation” is triggered. During the last twenty years,
a considerable amount of research has been dedicated to the subject, helping develop new design tools
incorporating them to gain a better understanding on how these pipeline materials perform under
different installation and service conditions, and hence enabling the pipeline and materials engineers to
make more appropriate decisions with regard to how these materials may be utilised in order to optimise
future pipeline projects.
In particular, in the case of installing underwater clad pipes, those tools could also be used to ensure the
structural stability of the load-bearing thick-walled outer pipe. Under the combined action of bending
and pressure, the thin-walled liner pipe exhibits significant deformation, which may cause wrinkling of
its wall, while the outer pipe is structurally stable. A wrinkled liner may not be acceptable, because it
does not allow proper pipeline pigging. It is an obstacle to hydrocarbon flow and is associated with
unacceptable stress raisers at the buckled area, which would lead to fatigue cracks under repeated
loading during operational conditions.
The objective of this paper is to (1) discuss the main technical issues related to lined pipes; (2) present
the developed FE Model aiming to quantify the strength and deformation capacity of lined pipes; and (3)
show the results of the FEM parametric study performed to quantify their effect on the strength and
deformation capacity of the lined pipe.
SPE-SPE-188246-MS-MS 3

Mechanical behaviour of lined pipes

There are two types of cladded pipes:
 the thickness of CRA sheet is metallurgically bonded to the CS steel plate, before cold working
to get the 12m (approx.) long cladded pipe joint;
 the thickness of CRA liner is mechanically forced against the external CS pipe, then fixed at the
ends of each joint by overlay welding, to get the 12m (approx.) long lined pipe joint.
Afterwards, the work along the firing line, from the mechanical viewpoint, is quite similar to that for
traditional line pipes, while end preparation and line up of single joints can substantially differ, due to
the coupling requirements of the double walls. The fabrication technology influences the mechanical
behaviour under the loads imposed during installation and in operation. This is not the case for the
cladded pipes, for which the double walls are inherently integral and can be considered as one. On the
contrary, for lined pipes, there is a substantial difference.
First, a dimensional difference: CRA cladded pipes are commonly OD 12in and more, lined pipes
OD 12in and less. This is due to the fabrication capacity. In both cases, the thickness of CRA commonly
ranges from between 2mm and 4mm. Therefore, the structural concerns for the lined pipes regard CRA
liners e.g. for 8in to 12in OD CS pipes, with the wall thickness of CS casing pipe determined by global
strength requirements that often implies diameter to thickness ratios, D/t, from 15 to 25.
A lined pipe is subject to the same loading conditions as a traditional CS pipe. Loading conditions and
safety targets are therefore the same. Instead, design criteria, particularly the limit deformability, must
account for the thin wall of the liner as well as its interference with the casing pipe.
The relevant loading conditions that generate interference are:
 axial loads, which are transferred from the casing pipe to the liner at the welded ends;
 external or internal overpressure, which is exchanged as normal pressure between opposed
cylindrical faces according to any gap or initial residual pressure from the fabrication process;
 bending loads, which are transferred from the casing pipe to the liner, by activating the stress
field that provides congruence of the rotation of casing and liner at pipe ends, as well as the
normal pressure and friction that develop between the cylindrical faces of liner and casing as a
consequence of global curvature and differential ovalisation along the pipe joint.
Therefore, the deformation under installation and operating loads is dominated by the stiffness of the
thick CS casing pipe, but the limitation is imposed by the stability of the thin CRA liner. The limit
condition is the separation of the liner from the casing, which due to increasing bending develops into
wrinkles.
The wrinkling limit state, activated by compression and bending of pipe joints and counteracted by
internal pressure, is inherently linked to the thin wall. The performance of thin cylinders under axial
loads is well known. The most relevant parameter that characterises the performance is D/t of the CS
pipe; as an example, for D/t ranging between 15 and 25 and OD ranging between 8in and 12in, it would
mean liners with D/t ranging between 44 and 88 for the liner of OD 8in and between 66 and 132 for the
liner of OD 12in. To provide an indication of the initiation of wrinkling, reference can be made to
literature that reports simple close formats that provide critical stresses and strain according to certain
assumptions, the principal of which is that the liner is free to deform as it is not encased in another
cylinder of such a thickness that it can be assumed as rigid. Referring to Gresnigt, moving from D/t
equal to 45 to 120 would give very low critical axial strains, ranging between 0.2% to 0.6%. Indeed, the
case of radial containment from CS pipe would provide higher values; however, this fact does not
change the criticality.
When the lined pipe is subject to bending, an additional aspect is the ovalisation or Brazier’s effect,
which in the present case may contribute to the detachment of the liner from the casing, which in turn
would trigger wrinkling. In general, the limit moment due to Brazier’s effect, for D/t exceeding 120, is
4 SPE-SPE-188246-MS-MS

greater than the bending moment for which, at the sector in compression, the stress is equal to the
critical stress for axial compression case. In other words, wrinkling starts to develop at amoment that is
lower than Brazier’s. Again, this applies for a thin shell that is free to deform or that is not constrained
by a rigid casing as in the case of the liner. Except from external pressure or collapse limit state, there
are no close formats to describe the effect of containment on wrinkling. It is noteworthy the literature
dedicated to buckling of thin shells, which reports as guideline the dominance of D/t aramenter as far as
the development if local buckling is concerned: D/t between 45 and 60 and D/t between 90 and 120 are
boundaries that delimit the development of deformation mode at instability.
However, in the case of thin cylinders, in addition to D/t the most relevant parameter is the imperfection
of the liner or the deviation from the perfect circularity along the pipe joint. Imperfections can be caused
by local dents, misalignments due to initial ovality or high low of pipe joints, initial mismatching from
regular contact, etc. It is quite difficult to have indications as to how much the imperfections may impact
the axial and bending deformability of the liner without developing wrinkles. The current approach is
parallelling experimental tests with FE modelling, in order to obtain a calibration. This can be a starting
point for a comprehensive set of FE runs, the objective of which is twofold: to provide a basis for
defining a good approximation of the deformation capacity; to identify on which parameters the
outcome depends, with the aim to go in depth likely addressing specific tests.

Lined pipeline design – Analytical guideline

Recently, big efforts have been made in the creation of suitable guidelines addressing the clad/lined
pipeline design. In particular, DNV issued a guideline (DNV, 2013a) presenting the results of a JIP on
lined and clad pipeline materials. This guideline constitutes a supplement to DNV-OS-F101
(DNV, 2013b) in design, construction and operation of clad/lined pipelines.
The guideline provides design criteria for:
 pressure containment (bursting);
 local buckling with internal overpressure utilising the strength of the clad (for both load and
displacement controlled combined loading);
 local buckling of liner for non-pressurised lined pipes;
 fracture of the girth welds;
 fatigue of the girth welds.
Guidance on materials engineering, requirements for manufacturing (linked to the design capacity),
guidance on welding of girth welds and on AUT qualification are also provided.
DNV OS-F101 limit state design equations have been modified to take into consideration clad/liner
effect. Design equations have been calibrated for the limit compressive strain of lined pipe under
combined loads. The equations are applicable for lined pipes with or without low internal pressure since
in said condition the liner starts to wrinkle prior to reaching the local buckling capacity of the backing
steel alone. In lined pipes with low internal pressure (or without internal pressure), the liner will
normally separate (wrinkle) from the backing steel prior to reaching the local buckling capacity of the
backing steel. This implies that the local buckling capacity of the lined pipe is far lower than for the
backing steel.
The JIP does not have enough statistics to propose a safety factor for the above formula. This formula
constitutes a lower bound fit and a safety factor that needs to be determined on an engineering
judgement basis.
The local buckling failure mechanism of a low pressurised lined pipe will begin as wrinkling of the
liner. In order to define the local buckling capacity, a suitable definition of a wrinkle should therefore be
established. Two levels of initial imperfection affecting liner geometry have been addressed in the
guideline: 1mm and 0.1mm, respectively. The wrinkling height is defined as the liner radial deformation
and therefore does not include roughness from the backing steel or undulation geometry due to the wall
SPE-SPE-188246-MS-MS 5

thickness tolerance. The modified DNV OS-F101 DCC criterion are given in Figure 1 for gap height of
1mm and 0.1mm, respectively.

Gap Height = 1mm Gap Height = 0.1mm

Figure 1 – Modified DNV DCC Design Criteria (DNV, 2013 a).

Numerical assessment of clad/lined pipeline

As explained above, international standards recently provided indications for the assessment of lined
pipelines in several offshore common load condition scenarios. Nevertheless, the applicability range of
proposed equations and design criteria does not cover the wide variety of loading scenarios, in
particular, the case of pioneering deep water and ultra-deep water applications. This scenario is further
complicated by the even higher complexity of subsea fields, often characterized by uneven seabed, harsh
environments, out-of-standard parts and complex or unusual shaped tubular components necessary for
the production and safety transport of hydrocarbons from sea depths to the Earth surface. Each subsea
component can represent a potential location for the onset of threats. However, this gap can be easily
filled thanks to FEM analysis.
In the last few years, FEM tools have become a powerful and reliable aid for pipeline and subsea
structure design, predicting the realistic behaviour of subsea systems under a wide range of external load
conditions. FE Modeling provides an important contribution to the pipeline engineering, reducing step
by step the conservativism of the simplified theoretical approaches without loss in terms of system
safety and solution reliability. Reliable and cost effective technical solutions can be easily identified and
assessed. Several commercial softwares (general purpose or offshore industry dedicated) have been
developed with the aim of predicting pipeline and structure behaviour.
The FEM approach is a valid tool for helping designers in the assessment of strength and deformation
capacity of a lined/clad pipeline in particular for the prediction of liner wrinkling under bending moment
and low internal pressure condition. FEM methods allow one to obtain an accurate reproduction of
pipeline behaviour, catching the wrinkling occurrence of internal liner under operation loads.
Several studies (both theoretical and experimental case) available in the open literature have investigated
the strength and deformation capacity of clad/lined pipe. In such cases the FEM methodologies proposed
in the studies have been validated by considering the results of experimental campaigns: full scale tests
performed have been reproduced and simulated in FEM environment, confirming a good
correspondence between experimental results and numerical predictions obtained through commercial
software.
Furthermore, recently a numerical lab (Bartolini et al., 2014) has been developed in support of designers
in pipeline strength and deformation capacity assessment. This numerical lab (powered by in-house built
and commercial programmes) is helpful in the pre and post processing of local FEM analysis of a
clad/lined pipeline, driving the user in the selection of the pipe geometry and mesh characteristics, in the
assignment of proper materials and external load conditions and load history.

FEM Analysis Methodology

FEM analyses are performed using the commercial code ABAQUS. Solid element-based FE Models are
realised using the automatic tool developed in Matlab (Bartolini et al., 2014). The mesh size in the
radial, hoop and axial direction was selected on the basis of the characteristic pipe dimensions (diameter,
steel baking steel wall thickness, clad/liner wall thickness, etc.) and loading conditions, in order to
obtain an adequate element aspect ratio. The number of elements along wall thickness selected was
6 SPE-SPE-188246-MS-MS

sufficient to capture bending in the pipeline wall.

The different behaviours of clad and lined pipes are managed as follows:
 Clad Pipes: the external surface of the internal pipe (i.e., clad) is tied to the internal surface of
external pipe (i.e. steel pipe). This configuration mimics the metallurgical bonding between clad
and steel pipes. The radial detachment of clad is not allowed.
 Lined Pipes: a contact interaction property is defined between external liner surface and internal
steel surface. This interaction property governs both the normal contact (hard contact as default)
and the tangential friction (free-slip by default, but a proper friction coefficient can be defined at
will). The surfaces are unbound and the radial detachment of liner is allowed. The overlay zone,
i.e. where the liner is welded to the baking steel, is simulated adding tie elements in a limited
zone of the model (at girth weld, ties extend along the whole circumference).
Element type C3D8R, an 8-node linear brick with reduced integration and hourglass control, is used. In
lined pipes the mesh size is automatically refined adjacent to the overlay region aiming to better
reproduce the local behaviour, wrinkle/buckle formation and growth. For lined pipeline an initial
imperfection is introduced to trigger the failure mechanism. After this region, the longitudinal elements
dimension was increased gradually in order to reduce the computational size of the model. A gradual
transition between the two different refined regions is given by the presence of a bias zone, in which the
element dimension downscales from the characteristic element size of coarse mesh to the characteristic
element size of the refined one.
FE modelling permits investigation of the problem by considering:
 Initial Imperfection (type and geometry);
 Load Conditions:
o Installation: sagbend zone.
o Operation: snake lay, soil interaction, cyclic loads due to temperature and pressure
variations.

Clad contribution to pipeline strength capacity

In this section the effect of clad layer contribution to the overall pipeline strength and deformation
capacity is investigated considering a 28in x 15.9mm X60 steel pipeline, with an internal 3.0mm
Inconel 625 clad. FEM analyses have been carried out in order to calculate the limit strength capacity
relevant to the following failure modes (Figure 2):
 Bursting Pressure;
 Limit bending moment capacity (local buckling) in combined load condition (internal pressure
9.7MPa and axial compression of 2780kN);
 Limit axial compression load.
In this study three different pipeline configurations have been taken into account (Figure 3):
 Pipe #1  WTsteel=15.9mm (X60), no clad assumed;
 Pipe #2  WTsteel=18.9mm (X60);
 Pipe #3  WTsteel=15.9mm (X60) + WTclad=3.0mm (Inconel 625).
SPE-SPE-188246-MS-MS 7

FAILURE MODES
BURSTING PRESSURE

LOCAL BUCKLING
COMBINED LOAD (BM, Pi, N)

AXIAL LOAD

Figure 2 – FEM investigated Failure Modes.

PIPE #1 PIPE #2 PIPE #3

FULL STEEL FULL STEEL STEEL+CLAD
OD=716.8mm OD=716.8mm OD=716.8mm
WTSTEEL=15.9mm WTSTEEL=18.9mm WTSTEEL=15.9 mm + WTCLAD=3.0mm

STEEL

CLAD
STEEL

Figure 3 – Pipeline Dimensions assumed in FEM Study.

FEM analyses results evidences the significant improvement of the overall pipeline bending capacity
given by the contribution of the internal cladding (Figure 4). The maximum bending moment capacity of
clad pipe (Pipe #3) is about 38% higher than the pipeline without clad (Pipe #1).
Results are collected in Table 1 and compared with analytical prediction as per DNV OS-F101 and
Guidelines. FEM analyses performed considering clad contribution confirmed the pipeline strength
predicted, using DNV OS-F101 LCC design equation modified as per JIP guideline (DNV, 2013a). The
bending moment associated to ISO criteria (90% SMYS) calculated considering the clad layer, is much
lower (about 35%) than the allowable bending moment as per DNV LCC JIP equations. Imposed stress
based design (ISO) neglecting clad contribution would result in very small vertical OOS, not realistic
from an engineering and trenching technology point of view. The contribution of clad layer to overall
pipeline strength performance is necessary to establish an allowable imperfection height in line with
actual trenching equipment capabilities.
8 SPE-SPE-188246-MS-MS

2925kNm – DNV
limit
15.9mm STEEL + 3mm
CLAD

2107kNm – DNV
allowable
15.9mm STEEL + 3mm
CLAD

Figure 4 – Bending Moment Capacity – FEM Results Comparison.

Axial
Pressure Local Buckling
Compression
Containment Bending Moment
Capacity
[MPa] [kNm]
[kN]

Pipe #1 Pipe #2 Pipe #3 Pipe #1 Pipe #2 Pipe #3 Pipe #1 Pipe #2 Pipe #3

Steel WT [mm] 15.9 18.9 15.9 15.9 18.9 15.9 15.9 18.9 15.9

Clad WT [mm] - - 3.0 - - 3.0 - - 3.0

FEM 23.1 27.7 30.1 3445 4358 4778 14675 18632 21173

DNV (No Safety Factor) 21.5 25.7 25.6 2047 2783 2925 15634 18919 20454
Table 1 – Pipeline Capacity – Comparison between FEM and DNV (No Safety Factor assumed).

Mechanical clad: liner stability

In this section the internal liner wrinkling susceptibility is investigated considering a swaged PIP. Pipe
basic data and field joint configuration (geometry and material) are given in Figure 5.
PIP solutions are commonly used in such applications characterised by the need of thermal insulation, in
order to avoid the fluid temperature dropping below given values, correspondent to hydrates and wax
formation. In the considered application, the 16in Inner Pipe is internally lined with 3.0mm of
AISI 316L, aiming to prevent corrosion on the internal surface of steel pipeline.
SPE-SPE-188246-MS-MS 9

Figure 5 – PIP Basic Data.

As discussed in previous paragraphs, the presence of initial imperfection and defect can trigger the
formation of wrinkles on the internal liner, in particular in the presence of quick pressure drops during
shut-in/shut-off sequences and applied bending moment. These imperfections can be imputed to:
 Local dents;
 Misalignment due to ovality of pipe joints;
 Hi-Lo due to wrong axial alignment of pipe joints during installation;
 Initial mismatching/unbonding in liner/pipe contact.
This situation is highly detrimental during installation (local buckling occurring in sagbend) and
operation (snake-lay and interaction with uneven seabed, thermal load, longitudinal compressive strain);
the liner can develop wrinkles in proximity of triggering imperfection, with a consequent loss of
functionality of the whole PIP system, limiting the maximum strain allowable in the pipeline design
(Figure 6).
An FE investigation approach has been performed in order to understand how the initial imperfection
can reduce the strain capacity of a PIP system, both in installation and operation.
10 SPE-SPE-188246-MS-MS

Detachment of
Liner from Pipe
Wrinkles

Figure 6 – Buckled Lined Pipe after Bending Test (Focke, 2007) and Wrinkling Pattern of a TFP (Hilberink et al., 2010).

In the FE model study attention has been paid to the overlay zone at pipe joint extremities, in which the
liner is mechanically bonded (welded) to the baking steel: in operation, the overlay zones fall in a
critical area, characterised by the presence of the girth weld. In this study, in proximity to the girth weld,
the following three scenarios have been assumed:
 Free-to-slip (no weld): in this scenario (unlikely) the liner is unbonded due to a failure of the
overlay welding zone;
 Seal Weld: in this scenario the liner is partially unbonded due to a failure of the overlay zone, at
any rate the liner is still bonded to the baking steel in proximity to the circumferential girth weld;
 Overlaid Weld (120 mm longitudinal extension): this is the normal expected scenario in which
the overlay zone integrity is guaranteed.
The triggering imperfection has been introduced in the model simulating a misalignment of pipe joints
in correspondence of the field joint. This misalignment represents a real scenario that can happen in
particular due to:
 Different ovalisation of pipe joints.
 Improper axial alignment of joints (Hi/Lo).
In this study the effect of initial imperfection has been investigated considering two different scenarios
(Figure 8):
 Perfect pipe (no initial radial imperfection);
 Defected pipe (with an initial radial imperfection).

The FE model used in the analyses is shown in Figure 7. To simplify, only the 18in Outer Pipe and 16in
Inner Pipe have been modelled. The presence of the field joint sleeve has been neglected. Details of the
field joint zone are given in Figure 8.
The pipeline is subjected to the bending moment only; for the sake of simplicity, the internal
overpressure and axial loads are not considered. The bending moment is applied by imposing rotation at
pipeline extremities: the pipe is bent up to pipeline global failure (Figure 9).
Additional FEM have been performed taking into account the internal pressure (for seal weld
configuration only).
The entire set of performed analyses and correspondent results is listed in Table 2.
 SPE-SPE-188246-MS-MS 11

Outer Pipe (18’’)

Liner

Inner Pipe (16’’)

Figure 7 – FE Model of Lined PIP.

Liner – Inner Pipe Junction

Misalignment

STEP 1 Defected Pipe Overlay Seal Weld

Pressure 1 – Free to slip (no weld)

2 – Seal Weld
3 – Overlaid Weld (120 mm longitudinal extension)

Misalignment can be due to:

STEP 2 • Different ovalization of pipe joints.
Perfect Pipe ΔT=100 C • Improper axial alignment of joints (Hi/Lo).
Temperature
Figure 8 – FE Model Details.

STEP 3

Bending

Figure 9 – FEM Analysis – Pipeline Extremities Rotation.

The initial imperfection has a great influence on PIP system behaviour, acting as a trigger of wrinkling
phenomena under external loads. The internal pressure has significant positive effects reducing wrinkle
occurrence (Figure 13): either accidental or programmed shut down can seriously menace the liner
integrity, especially in proximity to high curvature zone of pipelines (as in snake-lay).
The seam weld presence and extension has an influence too: free-to-slip, seal and overlay welded liner
show quite different wrinkling evolution (Figure 11). In the free-to-slip configuration, a single wrinkle is
triggered in proximity to the most curved section; then an additional secondary wrinkle rises up. For seal
weld and overlay configuration two wrinkles develop at two sides of the bonding zone, in proximity to
the section characterised by the highest curvature values.
This results are conservative: it should be considered that in the operation scenario the local curvature at
girth weld is reduced by the presence of field joint sleeve, that reduces the level of curvature at girth
12 SPE-SPE-188246-MS-MS

weld.
BENDING LINER
PIPE PRESSURE LINER MOMENT DETACHMENT
@ FAILURE @ FAILURE

- - MPa - kNm mm

Case 1 Misaligned 0 Free to Slip 697 7.56

Case 2 Misaligned 0 Seal Weld 723 4.55

Case 3 Misaligned 0 Overlay 746 2.99

Case 4 Perfect 0 Free to Slip 758 0.82

Case 5 Perfect 0 Seal Weld 754 1.37

Case 6 Perfect 0 Overlay 754 2.21

Case 7 Misaligned 5 Seal Weld 732 2.44

Case 8 Misaligned 10 Seal Weld 735 1.70

Case 9 Misaligned 15 Seal Weld 732 1.03

Case 10 Misaligned 25 Seal Weld 722 0.62

Table 2 – FE Analysis Results.

Failure

1mm

Figure 10 – Liner Wrinkling in Correspondance of Girth Weld (Detail).

SPE-SPE-188246-MS-MS 13

Defected Pipe Defected Pipe

No Pressure No Pressure
Free to Slip Seal Weld Defected Pipe
No Pressure
Overlay Weld

Perfect Pipe
Perfect Pipe Perfect Pipe No Pressure
No Pressure No Pressure Overlay Weld
Free to Slip Seal Weld

Figure 11 – Liner Wrinkling in Girth Weld.

1 mm liner separation Failure

1 mm

… mm

Figure 12 – Effect of Internal Pressure on Liner Wrinkling Failure.

Figure 13 – Effect of Internal Pressure on Liner Wrinkling Failure.

14 SPE-SPE-188246-MS-MS

Conclusion
Clad and lined pipes are used when fluids from wells are very aggressive. The choice between CS for
sour service and clad or lined pipes is linked to the anticipated severity of corrosion attack from
transported products: CS for mild sour service or low corrosion rate; CRA clad or lined pipes in case of
severe sour service or high corrosion rates. Nevertheless, the choice significantly impacts both
investment (cladded or lined pipes are quite expensive) and operational (corrosion mitigation by
inhibitors, pigging etc..) costs. Cladding or lining with corrosion resistant alloy are commonly selected
and designed for a safe life of field, i.e. without any need for additional devices designed to allow for
specific intervention works on the operating lines. The choice between cladding or lining with corrosion
resistant alloys depends on pipe diameter, in relation to the fabrication capability. Nevertheless, the
reliability of clad and lined pipes in operation depends on careful fabrication and installation processes,
which guarantee the performance parameters used in installation and operation design. For both clad and
lined pipes, an outstanding issue that stays behind the design as well as qualification tests and
installation engineering is the engineering criticality assessment, which is performed to determine defect
acceptance criteria for the girth welds carried out on board. Whether to repair or cut or accept, this
considerably impacts the installation schedule (Bruschi et al., 2017).
For the lined pipes, a remaining issue regards the criteria that drive the design for installation and
operation. In particular, the definition of the allowance for the deformation of lined pipes is crucial. In
fact, the imperfections that fabrication may randomly distribute on the lined pipes significantly affect the
strength capacity, in particular in applications where a minimum deformation capacity is required. This
is the inherent nature of the lined pipe: bi-metallic. Actually, the statistical distribution of the residual
imperfections after the most restrictive quality assurance and controls is not precisely known.
Furthermore, dedicated experimental surveys are not many and, often, the outcomes of those performed
are restricted as project specific. The rationalisation of design criteria, despite current efforts to propose
dedicated guidelines, needs additional data. In this context, the use of FEM as a numerical lab, coupled
with few experimental data made available by their owners, can be promising. FEM can refer to the
relevant model parameters and final behaviour taken from available experimental surveys, which allow
for model calibration.This is an approach that is currently pursued by clad and line pipe suppliers, field
operators, advanced engineering groups and certification bodies. Sharing the outcome, these efforts can
significantly improve the engineering guidelines currently in force.

Nomenclature
AUT Automatic Ultrasonic Testing
CRA Corrosion Resistant Alloy
CS Carbon Steel
DCC Displacement Controlled Condition
FEM Finite Element Model
JIP Joint Industry Project
LCC Load Controlled Condition
OOS Out of Straightness
PIP Pipe in Pipe
SMTS Specified Minimum Tensile Strength
SMYS Specified Minimum Yield Strength
TFP Tight-Fit Pipelines
 SPE-SPE-188246-MS-MS 15

References
Bartolini, L., Battistini, A., Marchionni, L., Parrella, A., Spinazzè, M., Vitali, L. (2014): “Pipe Strength and
Deformation Capacity: A Novel FE Tool for the Numerical Lab”, 33 rd International Conference on Ocean,
Offshore and Arctic Engineering (OMAE 2014), San Francisco, California.
Bruschi, R., Torselletti, E., Scarsciafratte, D., Ferrulli, A., Leonzio, V. (2017): “CRA Clad/Lined Welding vs Girth
Welds NDT Acceptable Criteria Defined Using Engineering Criticality Assessment Based on FE Models”;
MPWT-M-030
DNV (2013, a): “Guideline for Design and Construction of Lined and Clad Pipelines”, JIP Lined and CLAD
Pipelines, Phase III.
DNV OS-F101 (2013, b): “Submarine Pipeline Systems”.
Fathi, N. (2009): “Local Buckling Behaviour of a Corrosion Resistant Alloy Liner in Tight Fit Pipe due to Axial
Compression”, Ph.D. Thesis, Delft Univ. of Technology, The Netherlands.
Focke, E. (2007): “Reeling of Tight Fit Pipe”, Ph.D. dissertation, Delft Univ. of Technology, The Netherlands.
Gil, C., Tornes, K., Damsleth, P. (2014): “Study of Bending Capacity of an HPHT CRA-Lined Seamless Pipeline”,
33rd International Conference on Ocean, Offshore and Arctic Engineering (OMAE 2014), San Francisco,
California.
Harrison, B., Yuan, L., Kyriakides, S. (2016): “Measurements of Lined Pipe Liner Imperfections and the Effect on
Wrinkling and Collapse under Bending”, 35th International Conference on Ocean, Offshore and Arctic Engineering
(OMAE 2016), Busan, South Korea.
Hilberink, A., Gresnigt, A.M., Sluys, L.J. (2010): “A Finite Element Method Approach on Liner Wrinkling of Snug
Fit Lined Pipe”, Proceedings of International Conference on Ocean, Offshore and Arctic Engineering, (OMAE
2010), Shanghai, China.
Hilberink, A., Gresnigt, A.M., Sluys, L.J. (2010): “Liner Wrinkling of Lined Pipe under Compression, a Numerical
and Experimental Investigation”, 29th International Conference on Ocean, Offshore and Arctic Engineering,
(OMAE 2010), Shanghai, China.
Hilberink, A., Gresnigt, A.M., Sluys, L.J. (2011): “A Finite Element Method Approach on Liner Wrinkling of Lined
Pipe during Bending”, International Offshore and Polar Engineering Conference (ISOPE 2011), Maui, Hawaii,
USA.
Hilberink, A., Gresnigt, A.M., Sluys, L.J. (2011): “Mechanical Behaviour of Lined Pipe during Bending, Numerical
and Experimental Results Compared”, 30th International Conference on Ocean, Offshore and Arctic Engineering,
(OMAE 2010), Rotterdam, The Netherlands.
Mohr, W., Zelenak, P. (2017): “Material Tensile Properties for Strain-Based Deisgn of Clad Pipelines”, International
Offshore and Polar Engineering Conference (ISOPE 2017), San Francisco, California, USA.
Pépin, A., Tkaczyk, T., O’Dowd, N., Nikbin, K. (2015): “Qualification of Reeled Mechanically Lined Pipes for
Fatigue Service”, International Offshore and Polar Engineering Conference (ISOPE 2015), Kona, Big Island,
Hawaii, USA.
Pépin, A., Tkaczyk, T., O’Dowd, N., Nikbin, K. (2017): “Low Cycle Fatigue of Subsea Mechanically Lined Pipeline
with Liner Imperfections”, 36th International Conference on Ocean, Offshore and Arctic Engineering (OMAE
2017), Trondheim, Norway.
Sriskandarajah, T., Rao, V., Ragupathy, P. (2013): “Seal Weld Fatigue Assessment for CRA Lined Pipe for HP/HT
Applications”, International Offshore and Polar Engineering Conference (ISOPE 2013), Anchorage, Alaska, USA.
Tkaczyk, T., Pépin, A., Denniel, S. (2012): “Fatigue and Fracture of Mechanically Lined Pipes Installed by Reeling”,
31st International Conference on Ocean, Offshore and Arctic Engineering (OMAE 2012), Rio de Janeiro, Brazil.
Vasilikis, D. (2008): “Stability of Confined Twin-Walled Steel Cylinders under External Pressure”, Ph.D. Thesis,
Volos, University of Thessaly, Greece.
Vasilikis, D., Karamanos, S. (2011): “Buckling of Clad Pipes under Bending and External Pressure”, 30 th
International Conference on Ocean, Offshore and Arctic Engineering (OMAE 2011), Rotterdam, The Netherlands.
Vasilikis, D., Karamanos, S. (2012): “Wrinkling of Lined Pipes under Bending”, International Offshore and Polar
Engineering Conference (ISOPE 2012), Rhodes, Greece.
Zhao, T., Lee, D., Farahani, K.., Cooper, P. (2011): “Advanced Numerical Simulation to Meet Design Challenges of
XHPHT Metallurgically Clad PIP Platform Riser”, 30 th International Conference on Ocean, Offshore and Arctic
Engineering (OMAE 2011), Rotterdam, The Netherlands.

View publication stats