Proceedings of the Fifth (1995) International Offshore and Polar Engineering Conference

The Hague, The Netherlands, June 11-16, 1995

Copyright 1995 by The International Society of Offshore and Polar Engineers
ISBN 1-880653-168 (Set); ISBN 1-88065318-4 (Vol 11)
Evaluation of Fishing Gear Induced Pipeline Damage
c. P. Ellinas
Advanced Mechanics & Engineering Ltd.
Croydon, United Kingdom
B. King and R. DavieS
Phillips Petroleum Company UK Ltd.
Woking, United Kingdom
ABSTRACT
Impact and damage to pipelines due to fishing activities is one of the
hazards faced by North Sea pipelines during their operating lifes.
Available data [6] indicate that about one in ten of reported incidents are
due to fishing activities. This paper is concerned with one such
occurrence, the assessment of the resulting damage, the methods used to
confirm pipeline integrity and the approaches developed for its repair.
KEY WORDS: Subsea pipeline; damage; span; strain based methods;
fishing gear incident; plastic deformations; repairs.
INTRODUCTION
This paper presents. the results from an investigation of the damage to a
to-inch pipeline caused through interaction with fishing gear. The
incident took place in early 1992 and led to the lifting of the pipeline
accompanied by plastic deformations, so that it formed a vertical span
about 15m above the seabed.
The assessment study involved evaluation of strain levels induced during
the installation of the line by reeling and strains developed during the
damage process. The results of this woric were used to prove the integrity
of the deformed pipeline up to and including the wellhead tie-in spool
swivel ring flange. A repair could then be effected which involved the
replacement of the hard-pipe tie-in spool with a flexible flowline from
the wellhead to the Original pipe flange. This eliminated the requirement
for any hyperbaric welding or metrology and fit-up for the installation
of a hard-pipe tie-in spool, thus saving diving support vessel time and
associated costs for the reinstatement of the Della pipeline.
The main conclusions drawn from the study were as follows:
The integrity of the pipeline was not affected in any significant
way as a result of the damage it incurred due to the fishing gear
incident.
134
The damage to the pipeline was limited to plastic deformation at
levels of strain which were considered to be acceptable from the
viewpoint of pipeline integrity during future operation, provided
that the pipeline was stabilised and secured on the seabed
following repairs, so that it was not subject to further movement
in the future.
The paper draws from the findings from this study to highlight
important parameters which need to be considered in the' assessment of
such incidents, especially in demonstrating the integrity of the pipeline
and ensuring that repairs are carried out at the appropriate level.
BACKGROUND TO THE PIPELINE AND THE INCIDENT
The 10" OD 18.3mm wall thickness X46 intrafield pipeline running
between the Hewett 48/29-A platform and the Della subsea well number
48/30-11 was installed in 1988 as an extension to the Hewett Field in the
southern North Sea.
A considerable amount of information was available on the Hewett to
Della pipeline, which included the following :
Physical characteristics.
British Steel mill certificates for the pipeline and closing spool at
the subsea well.
Pre and post pipelaying survey data.
Details of pipeline installation method.
Video survey of pipeline span/damage.
Details of pipeline configuration and orientation.
Current and wave data for the area around the Della subsea well.
The pipeline was installed by the reeling vessel Apache and was tied-in at
each end using closing spools. The portion of the pipeline at the Della
end, shown in Figure I, represents the section of line that was reeled onto
the vessel first and was closest to the reeling drum.
Detailed test certificates were available for the Hewett to Della X46
pipeline and the closing spool to the well. From records kept by Phillips
it was possible to identify the corresponding material properties for the
pipe joints affected by the fishing incident, and these are presented in
Table 1. Pipe joint 1 represents the closing spool, which was not subject
. to reeling, whilst joints 3 to 7 make up the length of the pipeline
affected.
Pipe Joint
Property 1 3 4 S 6 7
Yield Strength
380 346
(MPa)
363 368 389 349
Ultimate Strength
541 493 501 506 528 497
(MPa)
Elongation
48 48 50 51 44 50
(%)
Charpy -V-Notch
282 282 298 232 286 298
Average (1)
Table 1 Material Properties from Mill Certificates
Detailed data were available on wave heights and associated periods and
current profiles. The maximum I-year signific'ant wave is Hs = 5.8m
and the associated period Tz = 8.2s. The maximum I-year current
velocity is 0.6 mls at 3.Om above the seabed.
Duringthe annual survey in July 1992 it was discovered that a large
section of the pipeline near the Della well had been raised a significant
distance above the seabed. On closer inspection fishing gear was
discovered entangled in the swivel ring flange between the pipeline and
the well closing spool, as shown in Figure 2. It was assumed that the
fishing gear had been caught on the flange studs as a vessel trawled over
the top of the pipeline which was subsequently pulled away from the
seabed. Once the fishing cable snapped the pipeline assumed the shape
of an arch with its apex approximately 14m height over a span length of
40m.
An ROV was used to inspect the damage to the pipeline and to obtain an
estimate of the geometry of the span and videos of the ROV surveys
were made available to to the study.
From a study of the videos it became apparent that there was no
significant damage to the pipeline. The span appeared to rise steadily
from the seabed to an apex at the hydrotight flange and then fell
gradually back to the seabed, without any indications of local wall
buckling or visible ovalisation. However, there was damage to the
spoolpiece between the flange and the well. Figure 2 summarises the
detail contained on the ROV survey videos, such as the touchdown
points and areas of spoolpiece damage.
INTEGRITY IMPUCA nONS
One of the important aspects in assessing the suitability of the damaged
pipeline for further use was evaluation of:
the strain levels it was subject to during the damage process;
total cumulative strains it experienced since installation.
13S
These could then be assessed with regards to material characteristics,
levels of strain implicit in North Sea practice and requirements in
Reference [1] to enable conclusions to be drawn on acceptability.
Figure 2 shows three regions where plastic deformation would appear to
be significant: the two bends near the seabed, ie one in the pipeline and
the other in the subsea well closing spool, and at the apex of the span,
close to the hydrotight flange. As it was intended to remove and replace
the subsea well closing spool, the strains in this part of the flowline were
of no concern. The maximum damage-induced strain levels at the other
locations are discussed later.
The cumulative plastic strain, ps, experienced by the pipe at the various
installation stages, assuming it was placed on the reel drum, was
estimated to be 4.7%. The maximum (one way) plastic strain, m,
experienced by the pipe at anyone stage of the reeling process was
estimated to be 1.5%.
As a result, the maximum cumulative strain, comprising the sum of
plastic strains induced during reeling and those associated with damage
due to the incident, was estimated to be about 8% (see Figures 5 and 6).
The damaged span was also analysed to determine whether it was subject
to vortex shedding and potentially to fatigue damage. Due to the
complex, irregular, shape of the damaged. pipeline in the free span, it was
necessary to perform finite element analysis to determine its natural
frequency. This was performed using the general purpose FE package
ABAQUS, which has very good capabilities for analysis of pipeline
related problems.
Using these results and steady current velocities and available wave
kinematics data, vortex shedding analysis was carried out on the basis of
the method and requirements in DnV [11. This showed that the span had
been subject to low amplitude in-line oscillations. These were found to
induce mainly small, elastic, torsional stresses at the span supports, with
insignificant consequences on fatigue life.
Code Requirements
Codes, such as DnV [11, place limitations on the cumulative plastic strain
the pipeline is allowed to experience. This is to ensure that its material
characteristics, and in particular ductility and toughness, do not
deteriorate below acceptable limits.
DnV allows pipelines to undergo cold bending during installation of up
to 2% plastic strain. It is specified that during operation: " ... the
permissible strain depends on the ductility of the material and on
previously experienced plastic strain".
DnV also states that cold deformation may affect fracture toughness and
recommends that if the material is to be subject to large strains it should
be demonstrated that minimum fracture toughness requirements are met.
Where necessary this can be demonstrated through strain ageing testing.
Evaluation of Material Characteristics
The material characteristics of the pipe joints, summarised in Table I, are
such that ductility and toughness are considerably greater than
minimum requirements, implying that the pipeline has sufficient
capacity for cold deformation without significant adverse effects on
material properties. It was, therefore, concluded that this is a case where
the material characteristics would justify tolerance to high strains,
provided these are within accepted practice.
Assessment of the maximum cumulative strain experienced by the Della
pipeline and comparison with strains experienced by other pipelines
installed by reeling in the North Sea, indicated that these strains are
within the range implicitly accepted in past practice.
I
An additional limit on strain is that in order to avoid pipe wall buckling,
the maximum beI).ding strain should not exceed [2,3]:
where t is the pipe steel wall thickness and D is the OD. For the Della
pipeline this gives Eb= 6.7%, which is considerably greater than the
maximum strains experienced by this pipeline during the incident.
The subsea well closing spool had characteristics very similar to those of
the pipeline. As this was removed during repairs, it was possible to use it
to perform tests to confirm the above observations.
Suitability of the Pipeline for further Use
It is evident from the results presented earlier that the integrity of the
pipeline had not been affected in any significant way as a result of the
damage it incurred due to the fishing gear incident: However, further
material tests were planned. using the removed well closing spool, to
confirm these initial findings.
PLANNED REPAIR OPERATIONS
The steps involved in the repair operations planned for the Della
pipeline included:
the cutting of the damaged well closing spool at an appropriate
location and subsequently its removal
disconnection of the 10" swivel ring flange and lowering of the
pipeline to the seabed
followed by reconnection of a replacement flexible spoolpiece
to the flange at the end of the pipeline and to the wellhead.
As a result of the complexity of these operations, and potential effects
on the pipeline, it was necessary to simulate the fishing gear incident and
these operations through FE analysis to demonstrate that the pipeline
would not suffer any adverse effects during repair.
SIMULATION OF THE FISHING GEAR INCIDENT
The simulation of the fisbing gear incident and the planned repair
operations were carried out using ABAQUS, which is a general purpose
3-D finite element package well known for its capabilities in handling
complex non-linear structural problems. In the present investigation,
this involved use of geometric, material and contact types of fully non-
linear elements.
The pulling of the pipeline by the fishing gear during the incident was
simulated by using a 'cable' element, available in ABAQUS, capable of
developing tensile but not compressive forces. One end of the cable
136
element was connected to the pipeline flange. The other end was
connected to a fixed nodal point 40m above the seabed, representing the
location of the fishing boat, so that the distance between these two nodal
points represented the length of the fishing gear warp.
Simulation. of the pulling of the pipeline by the fishing gear was
achieved by shortening the cable length. Simulation of the snapping of
the fishing gear was achieved by releasing the cable element.
The initial condition of the pipeline was simulated, Ifollowed by
application and shortening of the cable element which simulated pulling
during the fishing gear incident. A number of possible locations of the
fishing boat were investigated with various cable lengths and pull angles.
In addition to Simulating the incident, the objective of this investigation
was to examine the response of the pipeline during the planned repair
operations. During these operations, which involved cutting of the
pipeline, some of the locked-in stresses induced as a result of the fishing
gear incident would be released. This would be expected to lead to
movements of the pipeline. As the pipeline response would depend on
the level of damage and these stresses, their accurate evaluation was
expected to depend on a representative simulation of the fishing gear
incident.
Commonly used fishing gear in the North Sea and cable snap loading
capacities were investigated and by comparing these capacities, it was
possible to establish that the pull loads evaluated from the finite element
simulations were in general within the range of possible cable strengths.
The residual deformation in the damaged pipeline, resulting from finite
element simulations, is shown in Figure 3, which appears to provide a
good correlation with the ROV measurements of the damaged pipeline.
The locations of maximum strain were found to be the field joint, the
flange and the pipeline near the burial point. These are discussed later
and are summarised in Figure 4.
RECOMMENDATIONS FOR THE CUTTING OPERATIONS
By comparing the response of the pipeline and the spool piece during
the FE simulation of each of the waterfilling. cutting and flange
disconnection operations, it was possible to make the following
recommendations:
the operation could be performed in a more controlled manner
if the field jOint was to be cut first, having previously placed
concrete mattresses on the spoolpiece either side of the joint;
sling supports should be placed on either side of the 10" swivel
ring flange to control the pipeline and spoolpiece during and
after disconnection;
the flange should then be disconnected and the pipeline lowered
to the seabed;
the pipeline end could then be weighted down to bring it into
contact with the seabed.
EVALUATION OF STRAINS AND OV ALITIES
Accurate shape measurements were obtained using the 'chord' method.
prior to commencement of the repair operations. and the data was
analysed to obtain the bending strains in the pipeline.
. The maximum strains were found to be 1.4% near the pipeline
touchdown point (6/12 o'clock plane) and about 4.0% near the
hydrotight flange (3/9 o'clock plane).
The predicted maximum bending strain distribution and the
corresponding measured data are compared in Figure 4. It can be seen
that the finite element simulation results are in good agreement with
these measurements. This gave added confidence to the simulation of
the fishing gear incident and confirms the results of the FE analysis.
The data from the survey of pipeline deformations were then analysed to
determine strain and ov8J.ity levels due to the fishing incident damage
and cumulative strains and ovalities. which incorporated the effects of
installation of the line by reeling.
In order to assist presentation and assessment. the locally maximum
strains and ovalities have also been plotted in terms of distance from the
flange. as follows:
Figure 5:
Figure 6:
Touchdown position. 32m from the flange - 6/12
o'clock plane
Close to Flange - 3/9 o'clock plane
Examination of these Figures leads to the following observations:
The maximum strain due to damage caused by the incident was
about 4.0% and occurred close to the flange in the 3/9 o'clock
plane, as shown in Figure 6; the correspOnding ovality is shown
to be 4.4%.
The weld connecting the pup piece to the adjacent pipe joint was
1.52m from the flange and it was close to the position of
maximum strain. As a result. the maximum strain in this weld
was estimated from Figure 6 to be 3.2% and the corresponding
ovality is shown to be about 3%.
Due to the rotation of the pipeline close to the flange from its
position on the seabed to its position at the crown of the span.
the 3/9 o'clock plane in the damaged position corresponds to the
6/12 o'clock plane of the pipeline in its undamaged position on
the seabed. This gave a maximum cumulative strain. shown in
Figure, of 8%. The corresponding cumulative ovality is 4%.
At the touchdown point the maximum strain due to the damage
is shown in Figure S to be about 1.4% and the corresponding
ovality to be about 0.8%.
The maximum cumulative strain at the touchdown point is
shown in Figure S to be 6.1 % and the corresponding ovality is
1.2%.
The data in Table 1 indicate that the pipeline possesses sufficient
ductility and f r c ~ r e toughness for such strains not to pause any
problems with regards to its long term integrity.
137
However. it was considered that the performance of strain ageing tests to
confirm this conclusion would be beneficial in providing additional
confidence with regards to the long term operation of the line. Such tests
could be performed on the recovered closing well spoolpiece which had
material characteristics very similar to those of the pipeline.
The tests were performed on both parent and weld material subject to
8% and 4% pre-strain respectively and are discussed later.
IMPLICATIONS OF OTHER RELEVANT INFORMATION
In addition to the measurement of pipeline deformations. other available.
relevant, information included data from:
the pigging inspection of the line
NDT testing of the welds in the damage zone
observations from the hydrotest per/ormed following repairs
Pigging Inspection of the Line
A pigging inspection of the line was carried out after the damage was
discovered and before repairs were carried out. During this. a pig with
gauging plates having maximum diameter 90% of the pipeline ID
passed through the line successfully, without any damage.
This is Compatible with the evaluation of ovality in the line based on the
deformation measurements. The maximum oVality was estimated to be
4.4% occurring close to the flange. This corresponds to a minimum
clearance inside the line of 9S.6% of its ID.
NDT Testing of the Welds in the Damaged Zone
Welds in the damaged zone were inspected visually and through
magnetic particle inspection and no external defects were detected. This
added further confirmation to the conclusion that the large strains
evaluated earlier did not pause any significant threat to the pipeline's
integrity. due to its high ductility and resistance to fracture.
Observations from the Hydrotest
A hydrotest was performed following repair of the line, in accordance
with the pre-damage installation specifications. to 1.2SxMAOP. This was
carried out successfully confirming the integrity of the line following
repairs after the fishing incident.
ImpUcatlons
The information obtained from these various tests confirmed the
findings and conclusions from this study. Performance of the additional
strain ageing tests was then considered to be sufficient in demonstrating
the integrity of the pipeline.
STRAIN AGEING I MATERIAL TESTS
Charpy V-notch tests
Charpy V -notch and tensile tests were performed on specimens obtained
from the spoolpiece removed following repairs to the 10" Della pipeline.
The tests were performed in accordance with the specifications in
Reference [1]. Ageing was performed at 2000C for 1 hour.
The results from the tests are summarised in Tables 2 and 3.
Material Condition Yield Stress Ult. Stress Fracture
(MPa) (MPa) Strain (%)
Parent As received 366 539 56
Material Strained to 8% 484 573 37
Strained to 8% &aged 489 574 34
Mid-weld As received 377 550 43
Material Strained to 4% 453 575 34
Strained to 4% &aged 466 575 33
I
Table 2 Tensile Test Results
Material . Condition Test Temp Charpy Av.Charpy
(OC) (Joules) (Joules)
Parent As received -10 207J08,210 208
Material Strained to 8% -10 180.206.196 194
Strained to 8% &aged -10 208194.206 203
Mid-weld As received -10 97154115 122
Material Strained to 4% -10 596486 70
Strained to 4% &aged -10 77122(1) 89
Table 3 Charpy V -notch Test Results
It is clear from Tables 2 and 3 that the parent material characteristics are
very similar in all cases and that fracture resistance does not appear to
have been affected in any significant way by the straining and ageing.
The weld material in Table 3 has the lowest fracture resistance, but it is
well above minimum requirements. Straining reduces fracture resistance
but it partially recovers following ageing.
Relevant code requirements for API 5L X46 grade steel are summarised
in Table 4.
Material Condition Test Temp Min. Charpy Av.Charpy
(OC) (Joules) (Joules)
DnV Base material -10 23 31
[1] Weld material -10 23 31
BS 4515 Base material -10 27 32
[4] Weld material -10 27 32
Table 4 Minimum Code Requirements
It is clear that all test results under all conditions provide Charpy impact
energy values well in excess. of twice the minimum required energy
levels.
The results presented in this Section indicate clearly that the large strains
experienced by the pipeline as a result of the fishing incident damage do
not pause any threat to its integrity. Even in the damaged condition, the
pipeline's ductility and fracture resistance are well' above minimum code
requirements.
This confirms the fitness of the pipeline for long term operation.
138
CTOD Tests and Tolerable Defect Size
CTOD specimens were obtained from 100mm long cross-weld
specimens which were subjected to 4% tensile strain. Two specimens
were tested in the strained condition, and another two in a strained and
aged condition. Ageing was performed as described earlier.
The results from the CTOD tests are summarised in Table 5.
Material Condition CTOD
6m (mm)
HAZ Strained 0.53, 1.03
Material Strained &Ilged 0.27,0.65
Table 5 CTOD Test Results
The minimum CTOD value in Table 5 is 0.27mm and corresponds to a
strained and aged specimen.
The required minimum CTOD appropriate to the Della pipeline is given
in BS4515 [4], which for the X46 material of the main line the
minimum value is O.09mm.
The defects considered in this analysis have been assumed to be semi-
elliptical surface defects and have been analysed using the methods
recommended in Reference [5].
The pipeline was assumed to be in a restrained condition and the effect
of temperature was conservatively ignored since it would induce
compression in the pipeline under restrained conditions.
Two types of defect were considered:
Circumferential defects near welds, subject to axial stresses.
For these the minimum strained and aged HAZ material CTOD
in Table 5, ie 0.27mm, was used.
Longitudinal defects ~ the main body of pipe joints, subject to
hoop stresses.
The appropriate CTOD for this type of defect should correspond
to that for parent material. In the absence of such information,
the appropriate strained and aged material CTOD has been taken
on the basis of Table 5 to be 0.65mm.
The results are presented in Figures 7 and 8 for the circumferential and
longitudinal defects respectively. in terms of allowable defect depth as a
function of the defect aspect ratio.
Circumferential defects: It can be seen from Figure 7 that deep
defects can be tolerated provided their aspect ratio is greater than
0.4; in addition, long defects, with aspect ratios less than 0.05,
with depths up to 45% of wall thickness can be tolerated before
the pipeline becomes prone to unstable fracture.
Longitudinal defects: It can be seen from Figure 8 that defects
up to 90% of wall thickness can be tolerated provided their
aspect ratio is less than 0.6; in additiOn, long defects with depth
up to 50% of wall thickness can be tolerated before the pipeline
becomes prone to unstable fracture.
Given that maximum strains as a result of the fishing incident developed
only over a small part of the pipeline, it is evident from this analysis that
their effect on defect tolerance is not significant It is even less than
Figure 7 implies, given that the axial stress in the pipeline will be
considerably less than assumed in the analysis, due to end expansion.
CONCLUSIONS
The main conclusions drawn from this study are as follows:
The integrity of the Hewett to Della pipeline has not been
affected in any significant way as a result of the damage it
incurred due to the fishing gear incident.
The damage to the pipeline was limited to plastic deformation at
levels of strain 'which were considered to be acceptable from the
viewpoint of pipeline integrity during future operation.
Good correlation was obtained between the deformed shape,
obtained through simulation of the fishing gear incident, and
strains in the pipeline evaluated from finite element analysis and
data from the ROV measurements.
Overall, the good agreement between the analysis results and
observations from the actual response of the pipeline has added
confidence to the findings of the pipeline integrity study and the
use of non-linear finite element methods for the solution of
pipeline problems.
Observations from measurements and tests during repairs
confirmed that the strains the pipeline experienced as a result of
the fishing incident did not pose any significant threat to the
pipeline's integrity, due to its reserVes of ductility and fracture
toughness.
Tests showed that the fracture resistance of the parent and weld
material was not affected in any significant way by straining and
ageing. Even the lowest Charpy value obtained in the tests was
found to be more than twice the required minimum in BS4515.
Straining appears to produce an effect which is substantially
recovered following ageing.
Similarly, the minimum measured value of HAZ material CTOD,
following straining and ageing, is more than twice the minimum
required value in ,BS4515. Consequently, defect tolerance does
not appear to have suffered any significant deterioration as a
result of the strains associated with the fishing incident, and the
maximum allowable surface defect depth is 44% of wall
thickness.
The results obtained from this study indicate clearly that the
strains experienced by the pipeline as a result of the fishing
incident damage did not pose any threat to its integrity. Even in
the damaged condition, the pipeline's ductility and fracture
resistance were found to be well above minimum code
requirements. This confirmed the fitness of the pipeline for long
term operation.
139
The information which became available following completion of the
repair operations verified the study findings and the validity of the use
finite element analysis to simulate the incident and pipeline recovery.
Use of strain based methods was found to be effective and justifiable in
demonstrating the continued safe use of the pipeline.
REFERENCES
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
DnV, 'Rules for Submarine Pipeline Systems', Hovik, Norway,
1981.
'Code of Practice for Pipelines', British Standards Institution, BS
8010, Part 3, 1993.
Ellinas, C P, et al., 'Limit State Philosophy in Pipeline Design', J.
Energy Resources Technology, ASME Trans, 1986.
'Process of Welding of Steel Pipelines on Land and Offshore',
British Standard Institution, BS 4515, 1984.
'Guidance on Some Methods for the Derivation of Acceptance
Levels for Defects in Fusion Welded Joints'. British Standard
Institution, PD 6493, 1991.
Ellinas, C p, et al, 'PARLOC - Pipeline and Riser Loss of
Containment North Sea Experience', Proc. Conf. ISOPE 95, The
Hague, 1995.
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
The authors would like to acknowledge Phillips Petroleum Company
United Kingdom Limited and all co-venturers in the Hewett partnership,
including Area British Ltd, Fina Exploration Ltd, Agip (UK) Ltd, British
Gas E and P Ltd, LASMO North Sea Ltd, Superior Oil UK Ltd, Deminex
UK Oil and Gas Ltd and Sun Oil Britain Ltd, for permission to publish
this paper.
!
i
~
>-
Wellhead
Figure 1 Layout of Pipeline and FE Model
0
Sea Surface
10
20
/. 1\
30
I/.l
~
-40
20 o
. (a) Front View
30
20
10
20 40
X Coordinate em)
..-- ......
/- 1',
.'
V._ ..
--
o
10
20
30
20
/
o
(b) Plan View
20 40
X Coordinate em)
ROlf Measurement
- -As-Iaid
-FERauIIS
60
"
ROlf Measurement
- -As-Iaicl
-FERauIIS
60
Figure 3 Comparison of Predicted and Measured Pipeline Proftle
em)
J5
10
o
140
~
c
. ~
In
..
l
10" Swhel Rina F ......
Figure 2 Sketch from ROV Survey of Pipeline Damage
6
5
4
3
~ \
2
o
o
t
\
\
10
1
i
I
I Measurement
FE ResuIIS
,
i
i
.!

:
y
N
20 30 40 50
Distance from Flange (m)
Figure 4 Comparison of Predicted and Measured Strains
!:
f
8
6
4
D Cumulalhe Strain ('lI
Damase Strain ('lI
2
Distance rrom Flanae (m)
6
S
4
3
D Cumulathe Strain ('lI
2
Damase Strain ('lI
~
0
22 24 26 28 30 32 34
Distance rrom Flanse (m)
Figure 5 Strains and ovalities in the 6/12 o'clock plane
at the touchdown position
"ii
~
1
~
V
I
<
i
.9
~
...
i
Q
...
~
v
I
14
a E:lI.lttn.1ICn..::;'
1.2
+ Inlemal Crxk
1.0

0.8
~
06
,
04
0.2
0.0
0.0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0
Crack Aspect R.nD: ale
Allowable Ciroumlerenlial Crooks in HAZ Maleriol of Welded Pipeline
(Nominal Malerial Grade: API SL-X46; 0 = 273.lmm; 1= 18.3mm)
( Crack Deplh. c . Hall Crack Lenllll: D Pipe o.amele .. I PIpe Thickness)
14
1.2
1.0
0.8
D.6
0.4
0.2
0.0
'00

EalcmalCnck
InrcmalOxk
9
0.2 0.4
a
+

0.6
Cnllck Aspect Ralio: ale

0.8 1.0
Allowable Circumlerential Cracks in HAZ MaCerial 01 Welded Pipeline
Figure 7 Allowable circumferential defects in Della pipeline
based on strained and aged properties
!:
.r;
i
141
6
S
4
3
2
0
Distance rrom Flanse (m)
0 2 3 4
Distance rrom Flan., (m)
S 6
D Cumulative Strain ('lI
Damase Strain ('lI
D Cumulalhe Strain ('lI
Damase Strain ('lI
Figure 6 Strains and ovalities in the 3/1) o'clock plane
close to the flange
"ii
J
i
..
!
1
<
"ii
I;
1.4.-------------------,
a Ex ..... Oack
1.2 + 1nlem3I Cmck
1.0
0.8
0.6
0.4
a2
o . o L L ~ ~ ~ L ~
0.0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0 1.2
Crack AspIC' Rallo: alt
Allowable Longiludinal Cracks in the Pipeline
(Nominal MalCrial Orad.: API SL-X46; 0 = 273.1 mm; \ = 18.3mm)
(a Crack Depth: Hall Cmck .... nllll: D PIpe DIameter; \. PIpe Thickness)
1.4r-----------------,
1.2
a ExtcrnalCnack
+ InlCmllCr.ac:t:
~ 1.0
0.2
o . o L ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
0.0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0 1.2
Crack Aspect Ratio: tic
Allowable Longiludinal Cracks in the Pipeline
Figure 8 Allowable longitudinal defects in Della pipeline
based on strained and aged properties