Proceedings of the 2012 9th International Pipeline Conference IPC2012 September 24-28, 2012, Calgary, Alberta, Canada

IPC2012-90619
MITIGATION TECHNIQUE TO REDUCE PIPELINE STRAINS IN TRANSVERSE UNSTABLE SLOPES

Mauricio Pereira
Msc., Civil Engineer - SOLSIN S.A.S Bogota, Colombia

Juan D. Colonia
Pipeline Engineer - Oleoducto Central S.A Bogota, Colombia

Hugo A. Garca
MSc., Geotechnical Engineer - Oleoducto Central S.A Bogota, Colombia

ABSTRACT A mitigation technique using EPS (Expanded PolyStyrene) blocks is being used in the OCENSA pipeline system (Colombia) in order to reduce the buried pipe response due to soil displacements during landslide events and in creeping slopes. The purpose of the EPS blocks is to constitute a lowdensity fill with very low Young modulus reducing the soilpipeline interaction forces. These blocks are located near the landslide limits in both, the stable and un-stable zones in order to eliminate the pipe fixed condition. These blocks allow the pipe to move beyond the landslide limits, reducing the bending strains. The extension of the EPS backfill is determined by means of the geotechnical investigation of the place in study and using the in-line inspection tools data to determine the length of the pipe affected by the soil movement. To evaluate the efficiency of the blocks, 3D finite element models were developed. The results obtained with the numerical modeling showed that the EPS blocks had a significant effect on the pipe response, reducing the total strains compared with those obtained with a normal backfill. This technique can be used to reduce the frequency of the strain-relief excavations in unstable slopes. That means a cost reduction in the pipe maintenance activities and a more efficient integrity management program. INTRODUCTION The oil and gas buried pipeline systems often cross a wide range of geological zones, encountering different stability problems. Those problems related with landslides and creep of slopes are stabilized with different kinds of geotechnical works within the pipeline maintenance programs, but sometimes these problems reach large dimensions making very difficult to

stabilize them, so mitigation techniques are necessary in order to ensure the pipe integrity. Usually, these mitigation techniques are focused in the improvement of the slope behavior, for example reducing the landslide speed, but rarely they intend to reduce the soil-pipe interaction forces. In the OCENSA pipeline system in Colombia, a mitigation technique using EPS (Expanded Poly-Styrene) blocks is used in order to reduce the pipe response due to the soil displacements. This paper describes the proposed mitigation technique, starting with the description of the different type of soil-pipe movements in which the proposed technique can be applied. It also shows the main variables affecting the soil-pipe interaction phenomenon and finishes with the evaluation of the EPS blocks effectiveness. 2. DIFFERENT TYPES OF PIPE-SOIL MOVEMENTS Soil-pipe movements can be classified according to the landslide speed, the slope failure mechanism and the orientation of the pipe in the landslide as follows: 2.1. Landslide Speed The landslide speed has a great influence in the pipe response. To classify the landslides according to their speed, the Varnes (1978) classification scale is used. This scale is shown in Table 1.

Copyright 2012 by ASME

TABLE 1. LANDSLIDE CLASSIFICATION SCALE, VARNES (1978).

Un-stable mass pipeline

Description Extremely fast Very fast Fast Moderate Slow Very Slow Extremely Slow

Speed > 3 m/s 0.3 3 m/s 1.5 m/day 0.3 m/s 5 cm/day 1.5 m/day 0.41 cm/day 5 cm/day 0.014 cm/day-0.41cm/day <0.014 cm/day
Slip surface

FIGURE 2. TRANSLATIONAL PIPE-SOIL MOVEMENT

The proposed mitigation technique was studied and implemented for slow to extremely slow landslides (see Table 1). This speed is commonly found in Colombia in active coluvial deposits, where a continous displacemet is presented affecting the pipelines in a long term.

The proposed mitigation technique was studied and implemented for translational movements (Figure 2). This kind of failure mechanism usually appears in Colombian coluvial deposits with huge depths and widths. In these places remediation works are extremely expensive so mitigation techniques always have a better cost/benefit relation. 2.3. Orientation of the Pipe in the Landslide In unstable slopes, the pipeline can be subjected to transverse movements (Figure 3a.), longitudinal movements (figure 3b.) and oblique movements (Figure 3c.)

2.2. Failure Mechanism When a pipe crosses unstable slopes (Factor of safety <1), a rotational landslide with circular slip surface can occur (See Figure 1). In this case the neutral axis of the pipe varies while the movement increases, detail that must be taken into account in the strain analysis.

a)

Un-stable mass

b)
pipeline

Slip surface

FIGURE 1. ROTATIONAL PIPE-SOIL MOVEMENT

c)

A translational landslide with a flat slip surface can also occur (See Figure 2). In this case the neutral axis of the pipe stays constant, so the position of the maximum compression and tension strains are almost the same while the movement increases. Except in the transition points between the moving and stable land masses.

FIGURE 3. DIFFERENT ORIENTATIONS OF A PIPE IN A LANDSLIDE: A) TRANSVERSE MOVEMENT B) LONGITUDINAL MOVEMENT C) OBLIQUE MOVEMENT

Copyright 2012 by ASME

Depending on the orientation of the pipe in the landslide, it can behave primarily in tension, compression and or bending. In transverse movements the pipe behaves primarily in bending. In these movements strain localizations appear near the landslide edges. If the strain localization point coincides with a joint a tension failure can occur (Figure 4). Otherwise, if the strain is localized in the pipeline body, a bending failure can occur in the compression zone resulting in a wrinkle (Figure 4)

In oblique landslides, a combination of transverse and longitudinal movements failures can occur (Figure 6). The axial component reduces the probability of a tension failure in the lower part of the landslide.

FIGURE 6. PIPE COMPRESSION AND TENSION FAILURES IN LONGITUDINAL LANDSLIDES.

FIGURE 4. JOINT TENSION FAILURE AND WRINKLE DUE TO BENDING IN TRANSVERSE LANDSLIDES (LANDSLIDE IMAGE MODIFIED FROM CHEONG 2005).

The proposed mitigation technique was studied and implemented for transverse movements. This kind of movement is the one that usually affect the pipelines crossing active coluvial deposits. 3. MAIN VARIABLES IN THE PIPE-SOIL INTERACTION PHENOMENON To determine the main variables in the soil-pipe interaction phenomenon, 3D finite element models were developed (Nieves C. and Pereira M. 2009). After various case studies, three main variables in the soil-pipe interaction were found: the pipe embedment ratio, defined as the relation between cover depth and pipe diameter (H/D), the landslide length and the soil stiffness. These main variables were determined for transverse soil movements, slow to extremely slow landslides and translational movements as it is shown in section 2. In this research the pipe diameter (36) and the internal pressure (1000 psi) were constant. The mitigation technique presented was implemented as a result of finding the soil stiffness as one of the main variables in the soil-pipe interaction phenomenon. As it is very difficult to change the pipe embedment ratio and impossible to change the landslide length, the soil stiffness is the variable to work on.

In longitudinal landslides, a tension failure at the top and/or a compression failure at the bottom of the landslide can occur (Figure 5).

FIGURE 5. PIPE COMPRESSION AND TENSION FAILURES IN LONGITUDINAL LANDSLIDES.

The following subsections show the influence of the main variables found in the soil-pipe interaction phenomenon.

Copyright 2012 by ASME

3.1. Pipe Embedment Ratio The embedment ratio (H/D) has influence in the pipe response due to the geostatic stresses produced by the soil. As the depth increases, it becomes harder for the pipeline to relief the stresses deforming the soil. Figure 7 shows the influence of the pipeline depth in a 120 meters length landslide in soft soil.

FIGURE 8. LANDSLIDE LENGTH INFLUENCE

3.3. Soil Stiffness Figure 9 shows the effect of the soil stiffness of the moving mass on the pipe maximum strain in a 120 m long landslide with a maximum soil displacement of 1.7m.

FIGURE 7. EFFECT OF THE PIPES EMBEDMENT RATIO

3.2. Landslide Length It was found that the landslide length, measured along the pipeline, is a determining variable in the pipeline response due to soil movements. The bigger the landslide length is, a more favorable response of the pipeline is expected as its curvature radios in the landslides edges are bigger so the bending strains decrease. Figure 8 shows the pipelines maximum strains for two landslides of different length (40m and 120m) in hard soil.
FIGURE 9. EFFECT OF THE SOIL STIFFNESS IN THE PIPE MAXIMUM STRAIN.

It is clear that the pipeline strain reaction increases proportionally to the soil stiffness. When the stiffness increases, it generates a fixing condition of the pipeline in the landslide edge. This causes the pipeline curvature to decrease and therefore, the bending strains to increase. 4. BACKFILL REPLACEMENT USING EPS BLOCKS The proposed mitigation technique consists of replacing the normal backfill of the pipeline trench with expanded polystyrene (EPS) blocks. EPS is a thermoplastic material commonly used in roads, embankments and buildings

Copyright 2012 by ASME

construction where a light weight material is required. It has a low density and a low stiffness (10% of a hard clay). The EPS is a extremely durable material when it is protected from ultraviolet radiation. The EPS used in OCENSA pipeline system are manufactured in blocks and include a fire extinction chemical. 4.1. Physical and Mechanical Properties The blocks used have 2m of length, 1m of width and 0.5m of height as it appears in Figure 10.

Location of the EPS Blocks

Location of the EPS Blocks

Landslide edges Soil movement Pipe original position

FIGURE 11. LOCATION OF THE EPS BLOCKS IN THE LANDSLIDE EDGES. FIGURE 10. EPS BLOCK DIMENSIONS.

The blocks are made with different mechanical properties and are available in the construction industry with the characteristics shown in Table 2. The results shown in this paper correspond to the 15 kg/m3 density blocks.
TABLE 2. MECHANICAL PROPERTIES OF THE EPS BLOCKS.

The blocks are placed in the trench replacing the natural backfill. The placement of the blocks in the trench is shown in Figure 12 and Figure 13.

Density Max. bending resistance Max. Shear resistance Max. Traction resistance Young Module

kg/m3 kPa kPa kPa MPa

15 300 130 290 5.2

20 390 170 350 7

25 480 220 420 9.5

30 570

Stable soil pipeline

260 480

Unstable soil
11.3 Landslide edge Soil movement
FIGURE 12. LOCATION OF THE EPS BLOCKS IN THE TRENCH.

4.2. Location of the EPs Blocks The EPS blocks are located near the landslide edges as it is shown in figure 11.

Copyright 2012 by ASME

Soil-pipe interface pipeline

soil
FIGURE 13. TRENCH SECTION SHOWING THE LOCATION OF THE EPS BLOCKS.

FIGURE 15. MODEL ASSEMBLY.

5. EFFECTS OF THE MITIGATION TECHNIQUE 5.1. 3D Numerical Modeling Three dimensional finite element models were developed to evaluate the effect of the EPS backfill on the soilpipe interaction. The geometry of soil and pipe is shown in Figure 14.

The soil-pipe interface is represented by means of contact surfaces. The friction coefficient m" is determined as it is recommended in the guidelines of ALA 2005 (Equation 1 and 2) m=Tan Where, =(0.5-1) Where is the soil friction angle. The soil in the model is subjected to a displacement that can be obtained in field by topographic and geotechnical monitoring systems. (2) (1)

PIPELINE

SOIL

5.2. Results Figure 16 shows the numerical results, in which the pipe maximum strain is plotted versus the soil maximum displacement. The plot shows the difference between the strains obtained with a normal backfill and those obtained with the proposed mitigation technique. The EPS backfill showed a significant effect in the pipe strains reduction; about 37% less than with the normal backfill. Figure 16 was made with the numerical model of a 120 m length landslide, with a normal backfill with a Young module of 50 MPa (Hard clay) versus EPS backfill with 5.2 MPa.

FIGURE 14. 3D FEM GEOMETRY AND ELEMENTS.

The soil was modeled with the brick second-order isoparametric Abaqus elements (C3D8R). This kind of element is recommended for 3D composites solids. Pipeline is represented with brick or tetrahedral elements, depending of the complexity of the pipe geometry. The model as assembled is shown in Figure 15.

Copyright 2012 by ASME

4 3.5

CONCLUDING REMARKS The EPS blocks had a significant effect on the pipe response, reducing the total strains compared with those obtained with a normal backfill. The low weight of the EPS blocks allow them to be used in sites with difficult access. This constitutes a great advantage in mountain and foothill zones where materials transportation is difficult and expensive. This technique is used in OCENSA to reduce the frequency of the strain-relief excavations in unstable slopes. That means a cost reduction in the pipe maintenance activities and a more efficient integrity management program The proposed numerical model allowed the assessment of the effectiveness of the EPS backfill prior to its installation

Soil Maximum displacement (m)

3 2.5

2 1.5 1 0.5 0 0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1 1.1 With normal backfill With EPS backfill

Pipe max strain (%)

FIGURE 16. NUMERICAL MODEL RESULTS OF EPS EFFECTS ON PIPE STRAINS IN SOIL MOVEMENTS.

To explain the results the results obtained in Figure 16, a comparison of the pipe deformed shape with and without the proposed mitigation technique is shown in Figure 17. With a normal backfill the pipe presents a fixed condition at the landslide limits. This restriction causes small curvature radio and therefore higher strain values appear. With the proposed technique, the EPS blocks reduce the pipe fixed condition due to a lower stiffness compared with the normal backfill (about 90% less). This characteristic result in higher curvature radio at the landslide edges, and therefore lower strains are expected.

REFERENCES AMERICAN LIFELINES ALLIANCE (ALA). Guidelines for the design of buried steel pipes. 2005. CHEONG, TZI PIAU. Three dimensional finite element analyses of soil-pipe interaction. Dissertation, University of Cambridge, 2003. CHOO, Yun Wook et.al. Remediation for buried pipeline systems under permanent ground deformation. Soil Dynamics and Earthquake Engineering, v.27, 2007. NIEVES, C., PEREIRA M. Pipeline modeling and assessment in unstable slopes. Proceedings of the 8th International Pipeline Conference IPC2010-31128. Calgary, Alberta, Canada, 2010. PEREIRA, M. Modelacin numrica de interaccin suelotubera en deslizamientos de tierra. Msc Thesis. Los Andes University, Bogot, Colombia, 2009. YOSHIZAKI, K.., SAKANOUE, T. Experimental Study on soil-pipeline interaction using EPS backfill. Pipelines 2003. pag 1126-1134.

FIGURE 17. NUMERICAL MODEL RESULTS OF EPS EFFECTS ON PIPE DEFORMED SHAPE.

Copyright 2012 by ASME