Free Span Versus Trenching in Sandwave Report

PETROVIETNAM GAS CORPORATION
PETROVIETNAM SOUTH-EAST GAS PROJECT

MANAGEMENT BOARD
PROJECT
NAM CON SON 2 GAS PIPELINE PROJECT PHASE 1
PHASE
EPC
FREE SPAN VERSUS TRENCHING IN

SAND WAVE REPORT
14/07/14
Issued For Review
Rev.
Date
Description
PVE
EPC CONTRACTOR
(VIETSOVPETRO)
VSP
Approval
PVGAS
Approval
CA
Approval
Document Number:
NCS2-PVE-DD-1-00-02-RP-009
Number of pages: 09 (including this page)

EPC PHASE FREE SPAN VERSUS TRENCHING IN SAND
WAVE REPORT
TABLE OF CONTENTS
1.
PROJECT DESCRIPTION ..................................................................... 4
2.
GENERAL INFORMATION AND REQUIREMENTS ................................. 5
2.1
Purpose of Document ................................................................................ 5
2.2
Definitions and Abbreviations ..................................................................... 5

2.2.1
Definitions ................................................................................... 5
2.2.2
Abbreviations ............................................................................... 6
2.3
Codes and Standards ................................................................................. 6
2.4
Referenced Documents .............................................................................. 6
3.
STUDY RESULTS ................................................................................. 7
3.1
Seabed and Sand Wave Mobility Study ........................................................ 7
3.2
Free Span and On-Bottom Roughness Assessment ....................................... 8
4.
SEABED INTERVENTION ..................................................................... 8
5.
POST LAY SUREYING .......................................................................... 9
6.
COST ESTIMATE .................................................................................. 9
7.
CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATION ............................................. 9
NCS2-PVE-DD-1-00-02-RP-009
Rev. A
Page 3/9

WAVE REPORT
1.
PROJECT DESCRIPTION
Nam Con Son 2 (NCS2) Gas Pipeline Phase 1 project is part of the overall
Petrovietnam gas project to recover and process gas reserved from Thien Ung
and Dai Hung fields then transporting to Bach Ho field prior to delivering gas
to onshore facilities via the existing 16 Bach Ho Dinh Co Gas Pipeline.
Petrovietnam Gas Corporation is the project owner and has assigned
Petrovietnam South - East Gas Project Management Board (PVGAS SEG) on
their behalf to manage the execution of this project. The NCS2 Gas Pipeline Phase 1 project consists of approximately 150 km 26 offshore pipeline from
the riser hanger flange on Thien Ung platform to the PLEM tie-in point (at KP
207.5) for connecting to Bach Ho field via NCS2-BH pipeline.
The NCS2 Gas Pipeline Phase 1 project is detailed in the overall block
diagram below:
NCS2-PVE-DD-1-00-02-RP-009
Rev. A
Page 4/9

WAVE REPORT
Other related projects are:
Dai Hung to Thien Ung (DH-TU) pipeline is part of Dai Hung Gas
Gathering project whose owner is PVEP. This pipeline consists of
approximately 20 km 16 offshore pipeline to transport recovery gas from
Dai Hung field to Thien Ung platform.
Thien Ung Development Project whose owner is VIESOVPERO. This

project consists of the processing platform for extracting gas from Thien
Ung field.
NCS2 to Bach Ho (NCS2-BH) pipeline is part of the Supplement/

Upgrading Infrastructure at Bach field project whose owner is
VIESOVPERO. This pipeline consists of approximately 12 km 26
offshore pipeline to transport gas from NSC2 Phase 1 pipeline to Bach
Ho field via new BK4A Platform.
2.
GENERAL INFORMATION AND REQUIREMENTS
2.1
Purpose of Document
The purpose of this document was to consolidate the results of the free span
and on-bottom roughness analyses and the study of the mobility of the
seabed and sand waves along the 26 Inch Phase 1 NCS2 Gas Pipeline corridor.
Therefore, a recommendation on the seabed intervention method, i.e. free
span correction versus trenching can be made.
2.2
Definitions and Abbreviations
2.2.1 Definitions
CLIENT
PetroVietnam Gas Joint Stock Corporation (PVGAS)
REPRESENTATIVE OF
CLIENT/ COMPANY
PetroVietnam South-East Gas Project Management

Board (PVGAS SEG)
EPC CONTRACTOR
Vietsovpetro (VSP)
SPMB
Service Project Management Board, a VSPs affiliate

working full time on the project
PVE
PV Engineering J.S.C - An entity subcontracted by

VSP to perform the detailed engineering design
DNV
Det Norske Veritas (Certify Agent)
NCS2-PVE-DD-1-00-02-RP-009
Rev. A
Page 5/9

WAVE REPORT
Project
Nam Con Son 2 Gas Pipeline (NCS2) Phase 1
2.2.2 Abbreviations
2.3
3LPE
3-layer Polyethylene
API
American Petroleum Institute
DN
Nominal Diameter
DNV
Det Norske Veritas
KP
Kilometre Point
OS
Offshore Standard
PVGAS SEG
PetroVietnam Gas Southeast Gas Project Management

Board
Ref.
Reference
Codes and Standards

[1]
2.4
DNV OS F101, 2007 Submarine Pipeline Systems.
Referenced Documents
[2]
Basis of Design NCS2-PVE-DD-1-00-00-DB-001.
[3]
PVSEG and Fugro, Desktop Study and Metocean Design Report, Nam
Con Son 2 Gas Pipeline Marine Survey, Doc.No. PTSCM/ DS/ 2010/
NCS2/ FR, Final Report Rev 1.0.
[4]
Offshore Pipeline On-Bottom Stability Analysis Report NCS2-PVEDD-1-00-02-RP-002.
[5]
Bottom Roughness Analysis Report, Doc. No.: NCS2-PVE-DD-1-0002-RP-010.
[6]
Offshore Pipeline Free Span Analysis Report, Doc. No.: NCS2-PVEDD-1-00-02-RP-005.
[7]
Offshore Pipeline Overall Field Layout, DWG No.: NCS2-PVE-DD-102-G-0101.
[8]
HR Wallingford Study Report Nam Con Son 2 - Sandwave Mobility

Assessment, Report No.: DDR5314-RT001-R00-03.
NCS2-PVE-DD-1-00-02-RP-009
Rev. A
Page 6/9

WAVE REPORT
3.
STUDY RESULTS
3.1
Seabed and Sand Wave Mobility Study

An investigation of seabed mobility has been carried out by HR Wallingford
(Ref. [8]) (Refer attached HR report in Appendix I) with the following
preliminary findings:
The sedimentology, bathymetric assessment and the interpretation of the

geophysical investigations suggest that the sandwaves are not very
mobile. The sandwaves are relatively rounded and symmetrical, suggesting
stationary bedforms. The internal composition suggests regular deposition,
without evidence of the vertical layering associated with moving bedforms;
The sedimentology suggests that the mobile layer is present along the
majority of the sandwave fields. The only exceptions are: KP60 to KP70;
from KP152 to KP186; from KP194 to KP197; from KP201 to KP210; from
KP241 to KP250; and from KP252 to KP260. These stretches are assumed
immobile, or only mobilised during extreme weather events (such as
typhoons);
The differences between the 2010 and 2012 data suggest there is some
movement, between KP50 and KP60; KP75 and KP120; and between
KP260 and KP300. However, the quality of the data, in particular the
accuracy in the positioning, makes it impossible to provide conclusive
evidence. Therefore, dynamic sandwaves cannot be excluded for the
stretches between KP45 and KP55; KP75 and KP120; and between KP260
and KP300. No estimates show more than 6m migration per year, but
these values would still be enough to cause the development of free spans
over the lifespan of the pipeline;
From the anlaysis findindgs above, the seabed mobility study has not
recommended that the pipeline to be trenched and buried. However, the
conclusion is not firmed yet as the study has not finalized and completed;
If the pipeline is to be trenched and buried, a preliminary trench depth of 3

m is proposed based on the analysis of seabed level surveys between 2010
and 2012;
A pipe scour assessment has also been carried out as part of the seabed
mobility study for pipeline exposed on seabed. It is expected that a scour
depth between 0.05 m and 0.3 m may form underneath the pipeline
depending on the flow directions and water depths.
NCS2-PVE-DD-1-00-02-RP-009
Rev. A
Page 7/9

WAVE REPORT
3.2
Free Span and On-Bottom Roughness Assessment

Based on the analysis results from the Free Span Assessment (Ref. [6]) and the
On-Bottom Roughness Assessment (Ref. [5]), the followings have been
estimated.
There will be a total of 373 locations where the free spans exceed the
allowable free spans for Operating Condition;
Out of the 373 locations, there will be 183 locations where the free spans
exceed the allowable free spans for Installation (empty) Condition;
exceed the allowable free spans for Installation (Flooded) Condition
exceed the allowable free spans for Hydrotest Condition
Based on the above, it is estimated that up to 183 locations, pre-lay span

rectification may be required. Further span optimization can significantly
reduce the number of span pre-lay rectification. This will require each
individual span to be assessed taking into account the pipeline stress as well
as the time duration the pipeline span is uncorrected on the seabed.
4.
SEABED INTERVENTION
To place a structure on the seabed securely, the seabed should be as flat and
regular as possible. If the seabed is irregular or undulating, the structure, for
this instance is a pipeline, will suffer the risk of spanning and overstressing.
The subsea pipeline is subjected to tidal movements, currents and scour
unless buried or trenched in the seabed. Preparation of the seabed is
therefore of crucial importance. For pipeline encroached sand wave area, a
large amount of seabed rectification is often required. The design of these
works, i.e. pre-sweep dredging and post-lay trenching is generally a major
technical challenge and has a significant effect on the cost-effectiveness and
long term safety of the pipeline. Large scale movement of sand waves could
result in pipe exposure and generation of free spans. Potential mitigation
measures generally involve large cost.
With the selected route presented in Offshore Pipeline Overall Field Layout
(Ref. [7]), the pipeline will run through a sand wave area from KP 69 to KP
111.5 spreading about 42.5km. Dynamic seabed changes may occur as a
result of migrations of the sand waves. Seabed rectification work may be
required. The design of these works, i.e. presweep dredging and post-lay
trenching is generally a major technical and an important input to the
NCS2-PVE-DD-1-00-02-RP-009
Rev. A
Page 8/9

WAVE REPORT
costeffectiveness and long term safety of the pipeline. Large scale movement
of sand waves could result in pipe exposure and generation of free spans.
Potential large costs would be incurred if intervention is required. The purpose
of this document is to achieve a technically feasible, cost-estimation of free
span rectification and trenching while securing long term pipeline integrity. To
achieve this aim, the following tasks should be carried out:
-
To determine the seabed variability along the pipeline route.
To determine the required pre-sweeping cut lines and the burial depth
(post-trenching) of the pipeline if required.
Cost estimation and optimization.
Further discussions on the various pre-lay and post-lay trenching and /or
seabed intervention methods can be found in the attached mobility study
report.
5.
POST LAY SUREYING

The sandwave assessment has concluded that there is little evidence to
suggest that the sandwaves are moving quickly. Bed changes are most likely
associated with episodic events such as passing typhoons. Moreover, the
seabed slopes along the pipeline route are small (generally 1V:10H or less).
Therefore, there is no need for a high frequency of post-lay surveys.
However, the quality of the available bathymetric data is poor. Therefore it is
necessary to confirm these findings with high resolution multibeam
echsoundings, by three surveys: one post lay, another one after 1 year and
the third one after 3 years. The positioning of these surveys should be
recorded using a RTK Differential Global Positioning System. Unless these
measurements show different results, from then on a repeat survey every 5
year would be sufficient to identify any critical free spans developing.
6.
COST ESTIMATE
HOLD
7.
CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATION

HOLD
NCS2-PVE-DD-1-00-02-RP-009
Rev. A
Page 9/9

WAVE REPORT
APPENDIX 1
PRELIMINARY SEABED MOBILITY ASSESSMENT REPORT
HR WALLINGFORD DOC. DDR5314-RT001-R00-03
(47 pages, including this page)
Nam Con Son 2

Sandwave Mobility Assessment
DDR5314-RT001-R00-03
July 2014
Nam Con Son 2

Document information
Document permissions
Confidential - client
Project number
DDR5314
Project name
Nam Con Son 2
Report title
Report number
RT001
Release number
R00-03
Report date
July 2014
Client
PV Engineering J.S.C.
Client representative
Nguyen Quoc Phong
Project manager
Michiel Knaapen
Project director
Richard Whitehouse
Document history
Date
Release
Prepared Approved Authorised Notes
11 Jul 2014
00-03
JLH
MAK
RJSW
Draft subject to review. Summarising technical

analysis only. Advice and costs to follow.
This unsigned document has not been formally checked and authorised for release. Until it has
been reviewed and signed off by qualified technical staff within HR Wallingford, this document
must not be considered complete or final.
HR Wallingford Ltd
This report has been prepared for HR Wallingfords client and not for any other person. Only our client should rely upon the contents of this report and any
methods or results which are contained within it and then only for the purposes for which the report was originally prepared. We accept no liability for any
loss or damage suffered by any person who has relied on the contents of this report, other than our client.
This report may contain material or information obtained from other people. We accept no liability for any loss or damage suffered by any person, including
our client, as a result of any error or inaccuracy in third party material or information which is included within this report.
To the extent that this report contains information or material which is the output of general research it should not be relied upon by any person, including
our client, for a specific purpose. If you are not HR Wallingfords client and you wish to use the information or material in this report for a specific purpose,
you should contact us for advice.
DDR5314-RT001-R00-03
Nam Con Son 2

Summary of the sandwave mobility assessment

VSP (VIETSOVPETRO) and PVE (PV Engineering J.S.C.) are undertaking the detailed
design of the 26 inch gas pipeline for the NCS (Nam Con Son) 2 Phase 1 project. This
project focuses on a 150 km stretch of the NCS pipeline between from approximately
KP60 to KP 210. During the FEED design stage, the pipeline was anticipated to be laid on
seabed. However the site survey report for the detailed design identified approximately
40% of the pipeline corridor is subjected to dynamic sand waves. There is concern the
movement of sand may expose the pipeline to free spans and increasing the threat to the
pipeline integrity.
To assess the sandwave mobility, data from two bathymetric surveys are compared, seismic profiles are
analysed and metocean and geological reports are reviewed. Based on this desk assessment, it is
concluded that there is no hard evidence of significant sandwave migration. Most of the differences in the
bathymetric surveys are associated to spatial offsets in the data, i.e. the two profiles are not identical.
Correction for the offset, reduces the variability of the bed changes dramatically.
A SWAT (Sand Wave Analysis Tool) analysis on the profiles suggests that the expected migration is
minimal. Seismic surveys confirm this, while the sediment mobility assessment, suggest that the sediment
transport of the bed material is small, except for episodic events such as storms. However, sandwave
migration cannot be excluded for the stretches between KP50 and KP60; KP75 and KP120; and between
KP260 and KP300. The migration estimates of up to 6m per year are enough to potentially cause the
development of free spans over the lifetime of the pipeline.
As these conclusions are based on poor bathymetric survey data, it is advisable to do a multibeam
bathymetric survey using a RTK Differential Global Positioning System as well as repeat surveys after 1 and
3 year after pipe-laying to confirm the absence of bed form migration. Unless, that test identifies significant
seabed changes, repeat surveys every 5 years would be sufficient to identify any free spans that would
require reburial using jetting technology.
DDR5314-RT001-R00-03
Nam Con Son 2

Contents
Summary of the sand wave mobility assement
1.
Introduction _________________________________________________________ 1
2.
Data available _______________________________________________________ 2

2.1. Bathymetry ........................................................................................................................................ 2
2.1.1. Data sets .............................................................................................................................. 2
2.1.2. Data correction and accuracy .............................................................................................. 2
2.2. Geology ............................................................................................................................................. 3
2.3. Metocean ........................................................................................................................................... 4
2.3.1. Waves .................................................................................................................................. 4
2.3.2. Tides and wind driven currents ............................................................................................ 4
3.
Seabed analysis ____________________________________________________ 23

3.1. Sediment mobility ............................................................................................................................23
3.2. Bedforms .........................................................................................................................................23
3.2.1. Bedform orientation............................................................................................................23
3.2.2. Seabed variability...............................................................................................................23
3.2.3. Seismology ........................................................................................................................24
3.2.4. SWAT analysis ...................................................................................................................24
3.2.5. Bed slopes .........................................................................................................................25
3.2.6. Discussion ..........................................................................................................................25
3.3. Conclusions on seabed mobility......................................................................................................25
4.
Pipe scour _________________________________________________________ 29
5.
Mitigation options ____________________________________________________ 30

5.1. Approaches .....................................................................................................................................30
5.1.1. Dredge pre-sweeping and/or trenching .............................................................................30
5.1.2. Dredging control .................................................................................................................32
5.1.3. Post lay jetting ....................................................................................................................33
5.1.4. Post lay backfilling & rock placement ................................................................................35
5.2. Post lay surveying ...........................................................................................................................35
5.3. Cost estimates.................................................................................................................................36
5.3.1. Trenching ...........................................................................................................................36
5.3.2. Jetting ................................................................................................................................36
6.
References ________________________________________________________ 36
Appendix ______________________________________________________________ 37
A.
SWAT
DDR5314-RT001-R00-03
Nam Con Son 2

Figures
Figure 1.1: Location map of the NCS2 pipeline route and the existing NCS1 pipeline .............................. 2
Figure 2.1: Location of the wave and current analysis points (from the Fugro report) ............................... 5
Figure 2.2: Seabed profiles along the Nam Con Son pipeline surveyed in 2012 (black) and 2010
(colours) ...................................................................................................................................................... 6
Figure 2.3: The 6 tracks taken along the route of the TU spur line ............................................................ 6
Figure 2.4: Cross surveys sandwave area 1 .............................................................................................. 7
Figure 2.5: Cross surveys sandwave area 2 .............................................................................................. 8
Figure 2.6: Cross surveys sandwave area 3 (a) ......................................................................................... 9
Figure 2.7: Cross surveys sandwave area 3(b) ........................................................................................10
Figure 2.8: Cross surveys sandwave area 3(c) ........................................................................................11
Figure 2.9: Cross surveys sandwave area 3(d) ........................................................................................12
Figure 2.10: Cross surveys sandwave area 3(e) ......................................................................................13
Figure 2.11: Cross surveys sandwave area 3(f) .......................................................................................14
Figure 2.12: Cross surveys sandwave area 4 ..........................................................................................15
Figure 2.13: Cross surveys sandwave area 5 ..........................................................................................16
Figure 2.14: Repeat surveys of the same track along the TU spur line show a vertical offset .................17
Figure 2.15: Histogram of the measurement errors on TU spur line data ................................................17
Figure 2.16: Profile comparison assuming a horizontal offset of -345 m and a vertical offset of 2.3m
on the central track of the 2010 data ........................................................................................................18
Figure 2.17: Profile comparison assuming a horizontal offset of -650 m and a vertical offset of 1.6 m
on track 2 of the 2010 data .......................................................................................................................18
Figure 2.18: Profiles along the Nam Con Son 2 pipeline as measured in 2010 and 2012 .......................19
Figure 2.19: Histogram of the bed level changes between 2010 and 2012 after correction of the
horizontal and vertical offset .....................................................................................................................19
Figure 2.20: Mean wave height (m) on the continental shelf ....................................................................20
Figure 2.21: Mean wave height (m) on the continental slope ...................................................................20
Figure 2.22: Mean wave period (s) on the continental shelf .....................................................................20
Figure 2.23: Mean wave period (s) on the continental slope ....................................................................20
Figure 2.24: Wave height standard deviation (m) on the continental shelf...............................................20
Figure 2.25: Wave height standard deviation (m) on the continental slope .............................................20
Figure 2.26: Wave period standard deviation (m/s) on the continental shelf ...........................................21
Figure 2.27: Wave period standard deviation (m/s) on the continental slope ..........................................21
Figure 2.28: Mean near-bed current (m/s) on the continental shelf (lines on top of each other). Note
that some lines overlap .............................................................................................................................21
Figure 2.29: Mean near-bed current (m/s) on the continental slope .........................................................21
Figure 2.30: Maximum near-bed current (m/s) on the continental shelf (lines on top of each other) .......21
Figure 2.31: Maximum near-bed current (m/s) on the continental slope ..................................................21
Figure 2.32: Mean mid-depth current (m/s) on the continental slope .......................................................22
Figure 2.33: Maximum mid-depth current (m/s) on the continental slope ................................................22
Figure 2.34: Variation of near-bed main current direction(s) at depth 30 m .............................................22
Figure 2.35: Variation of near-bed main current direction(s) at depth 80 m .............................................22
Figure 2.36: Variation of near-bed main current direction(s) at depth 100 m ...........................................22
Figure 2.37: Variation of near-bed main current direction(s) at depth 130 m ...........................................22
DDR5314-RT001-R00-03
Nam Con Son 2

Figure 3.1: Bedforms observed on the pipeline route. Note that the large dip in the bed on the
offshore end (KP20-KP30) is an interpolation effect, not a real seabed feature ......................................26
Figure 3.2: Change in the bed levels between 2010 and 2012.The red lines denote the average
error margins in the data (0.3 m) ..............................................................................................................27
Figure 3.3: Histogram of the survey measurement errors for KP60-225 (left) and KP225-300 (right) .....27
Figure 3.4: Migration rate estimates along the pipeline between KP40 and KP280. Positive values
indicate migration in the offshore direction ...............................................................................................28
Figure 3.5: Measured wave height of the sandwaves ..............................................................................28
Figure 3.6: Measured wavelength of the sandwaves ...............................................................................28
Figure 3.7: Bed slope along the pipeline route .........................................................................................29
Figure 5.1: General lay out TSHD.............................................................................................................34
Figure 5.2: Dredging a trench in stretches ................................................................................................34
Figure 5.3: Typical trench profile, and dredging methodology ..................................................................34
Tables
Table 3.1: Sandwave orientation ..............................................................................................................23
DDR5314-RT001-R00-03
Nam Con Son 2

1. Introduction
VSP (VIETSOVPETRO) and PVE (PV Engineering J.S.C.) are undertaking the detailed design of the 26 inch
gas pipeline for the NCS (Nam Con Son) 2 Phase 1 project. This project focuses on 150 km stretch of the
NCS pipeline between from approximately KP60 to KP210. During the FEED design stage, the pipeline was
anticipated to be laid on seabed. However the site survey report for the detailed design identified
approximately 40 per cent of the pipeline corridor is subjected to dynamic sand waves. There is concern the
movement of sand may expose the pipeline to free spans and increasing the threat to the pipeline integrity.
PV Engineering J.S.C. has asked HR Wallingford to analyse the sandwave dynamics and to advise on the
optimal strategy in rerouting and trenching to prevent free spans developing (reference Scope of Work
document NCS-PVE-DD-1-00-02-SW-001). HR Wallingford has analysed the geophysical, met-ocean
information and two bathymetric surveys, to predict the bed variability due to the sandwave dynamics and
help PV Engineering J.S.C. to optimize the pipeline routing and trenching strategy for the detailed pipeline
design.
The project is situated in the Yellow Sea, off the coast of Vietnam (Figure 1.1). The pipeline landfall is about
50 km from the mouth of the Mekong river. The pipeline route has approximately a South-East alignment and
extends over nearly 350 km. The seabed bathymetry reaches depths of 140 m at the end of the pipeline.
This report first summarises the available geophysical and met-ocean data (Section 2) and describes the
seabed mobility assessment (Section 3) and related risk of free span development (Section 3.3). Pipeline
scour is analysed in Section 4. This is followed by an explanation of the mitigation options (Section 5) and
survey requirements (Section 5.2) as well as their cost implications (Section 5.3).
DDR5314-RT001-R00-03
Nam Con Son 2

Figure 1.1: Location map of the NCS2 pipeline route and the existing NCS1 pipeline
2. Data available
2.1. Bathymetry
2.1.1.
Data sets
Bathymetric profiles are provided by PV Engineering, of the NCS 2 pipeline over a stretch of 300 km, and of
the Spur pipeline from platform TU to the NCS2 (Figure 2.2 and Figure 2.3). These are provided for 2010
and 2012. Additionally, cross profiles are provided in the areas of the sandwave fields; the cross profiles are
perpendicular to the pipeline route (Figure 2.4 to Figure 2.13).
2.1.2.
Data correction and accuracy
In the data sets a few repeat surveys are available. One of these repeat surveys is used to test the reliability
and accuracy of the bed level values. In the TU spur profiles (the dark and light blue lines in Figure 2.3) are
DDR5314-RT001-R00-03
Nam Con Son 2

taken along the same track, but at different times. Figure 2.14 shows that the recorded bed levels differ
significantly. The median of these differences is 0.278 m (Figure 2.15).
When comparing the 2010 and 2012 surveys, several problems are encountered. Both horizontal and
vertical offsets are present in the data. As a result a straightforward comparison is impossible. For the
section from KP190 to KP300, the 2012 profile does not match the central profile taken in 2010. It does
however look very similar to the profile along one of the other tracks (second track from the north).
Moreover, in both the central track and track 2, there is an offset in the KP distance between the 2010 and
2012 data. These are corrected using information on the bed composition. Two points are identified that can
be assumed unchanged over the two year period. Between KP69 and 70 (alignment chart 10 and 11, of the
geophysical survey) a channel like feature is visible covered with silty sand, assumed to be a partly infilled
paleochannel (VSP-PTSC, 2010). The 2012 profile matches up with track 2 of the 2010 survey if a positional
offset of -650 m is applied and a vertical offset of 1.6 m (Figure 2.16). The offset for the central track here is
50 m.
Between KP297 and 299, there is a wide depression in the bed filled with soft silt, which can be assumed to
be unchanged. On this location the profiles match well, if an offset of -345 m is applied to the central track of
the 2010 data (Figure 2.17). For track 2, a 1500 m offset has to be applied.
After this correction, the profiles can be compared (Figure 2.18), showing a spatially varying vertical offset of
on average 1.4 m (Figure 2.19).
On top of the offsets, noise is visible in the survey data. This noise is caused by small scale bed variations,
with a length less than the resolution of the measurements and noise from the echo sounding procedures.
This noise seems to vary with depth, being about 0.2 m in shallow water to almost 0.5 m in deeper water.
The majority of all differences is within the error margins of the surveys. The wide tails suggest that there is
bedform migration.
2.2. Geology
The geophysical report has identified three main geological strata. The lower one of those (stratum C), is of
unknown origin and contains consolidated clay and other non-erodible layers. This layer is exposed on some
stretches of the route, notably around KP70, where a paleochannel is visible at the bed surface.
On top of this, stratum B was formed since the last ice age. This layer contains (quoted from VSP-PTSC,
2010):
- medium dense or dense, fine, silty or clayey SAND (with or without: traces of shell fragments; clay pockets;
silt; organic material; coarse laterite gravels; ferrous nodes and sandstone cobble)
- very soft or soft, lean or fat, sandy or silty CLAY (with or without: traces of sand pockets, partings and
seems; shell fragments; gravels; traces of laterite and ferrous nodules; traces of organic material and
decayed woods)
- soft SILT (with or without traces of organic material)
These sediments are wide spreading along the whole of the pipeline route, excluding the following parts of
the route: from KP100.00 to KP109.00, from KP111.00 to KP140.00, from KP207.00 to KP225.00, from
KP269.00 to KP295.00, from KP308.00 to KP317.00, and from KP319.00 to KP320.00 , where the
sediments are of the underlying Stratum C seabed outcrop.
DDR5314-RT001-R00-03
Nam Con Son 2

The top layer (stratum A), consists predominantly of medium dense poorly graded SAND with silt and/ or
shell fragments. This sediment is wide spreading along the whole of the pipeline route, with the exception of
the following route sections:
KP060.00 to KP070.00, from KP152.00 to KP186.00, from KP194.00 to KP197.00, from KP201.00 to
KP210.00, from KP241.00 to KP250.00, and from KP252.00 to KP260.00 where the sediments are of
Stratum B seabed outcrop.
2.3. Metocean
The Metocean data for this project is extracted from a report prepared by Fugro GEOS (Fugro, 2010). This
data was derived from an analysis with the SEAMOS South Fine Grid Hindcast (SEAFINE). The analysis
points are shown on Figure 2.1.
The general Metocean conditions in the zone of interest are dominated by the influence of the monsoon, with
a North-East monsoon between October and April, and a South-West monsoon between June and
September. The North-East monsoon is the more severe one. Although tropical storms can occur at any time
during the year, they are more frequent between October and December and tend to pass to the North of the
zone of interest.
2.3.1.
Waves
For the 6 wave analysis points closest to the shore (on the continental shelf, depths up to 35 m), the wave
direction has a similar pattern during the year. The waves come from the East for most of the year, except
between May and September when the waves come from South-West. For the 5 other points (on the
continental slope, depth from 50 m to 140 m), the waves have a less well defined variation pattern during the
year and there are many months where there are several principal wave direction rather than a single one.
The variation of mean wave height during the year is shown on Figure 2.20 and Figure 2.21. There is a
similar pattern between the two groups of points (shallow depths and large depths), but as expected there
are more similarities between the points in deep water than for the shallow depth points. A similar comment
can be made for the mean wave period plots (Figure 2.22, Figure 2.23). The wave height standard deviation
is lower between May and October (Figure 2.24 to Figure 2.27). The wave period standard deviation is
almost constant for most of the year except for a peak between September and November.
2.3.2.
Tides and wind driven currents
We note that for the currents there are only 2 analysis points available, compared to 6 analysis points on the
continental shelf. Consequently, some curves representing the flow conditions are overlapping for the depths
15 to 35 m (only two curves visible).
The mean near-bed current is almost constant during the year (it varies between 0.15 and 0.18 m/s) for the
analysis points on the continental shelf (Figure 2.28). For the 5 points on the continental slope, there is more
variability, both during the year and between points (Figure 2.29). The maximum near-bed current has a
variation similar to that of the wave height with two distinct phases for the continental shelf. The maximum
near-bed currents are smaller between April and October, and they are larger between November and March
(Figure 2.30). The variation of the maximum near-bed current on the continental slope is not as clear but
also shows larger values between November and March (Figure 2.31).
DDR5314-RT001-R00-03
Nam Con Son 2

In addition to the near-bed current, data is available for the mid-depth current in the Fugro report (Fugro,
2010) but only for depths greater than 80 m. The mean mid-depth current values show a two peaks pattern
with peak values in August and December (Figure 2.32). The maximum mid-depth current values do not
show a clear pattern in the year (Figure 2.33).
The variation of near-bed current direction is shown for depths of 30, 80, 100 and 130 m (Figure 2.34 to
Figure 2.37). It is difficult to identify clear patterns from these plots, as the main directions are quite different
for the 4 considered representative depths.
Figure 2.1: Location of the wave and current analysis points (from the Fugro report)
DDR5314-RT001-R00-03
Nam Con Son 2

Figure 2.2: Seabed profiles along the Nam Con Son pipeline surveyed in 2012 (black) and 2010 (colours)
Figure 2.3: The 6 tracks taken along the route of the TU spur line
DDR5314-RT001-R00-03
Nam Con Son 2

Figure 2.4: Cross surveys sandwave area 1
DDR5314-RT001-R00-03
Nam Con Son 2

DDR5314-RT001-R00-03
Nam Con Son 2

Figure 2.6: Cross surveys sandwave area 3 (a)
DDR5314-RT001-R00-03
Nam Con Son 2

Figure 2.7: Cross surveys sandwave area 3(b)
DDR5314-RT001-R00-03
10
Nam Con Son 2

Figure 2.8: Cross surveys sandwave area 3(c)
DDR5314-RT001-R00-03
11
Nam Con Son 2

Figure 2.9: Cross surveys sandwave area 3(d)
DDR5314-RT001-R00-03
12
Nam Con Son 2

Figure 2.10: Cross surveys sandwave area 3(e)
DDR5314-RT001-R00-03
13
Nam Con Son 2

Figure 2.11: Cross surveys sandwave area 3(f)
DDR5314-RT001-R00-03
14
Nam Con Son 2

DDR5314-RT001-R00-03
15
Nam Con Son 2

DDR5314-RT001-R00-03
16
Nam Con Son 2

Figure 2.14: Repeat surveys of the same track along the TU spur line show a vertical offset
Figure 2.15: Histogram of the measurement errors on TU spur line data
DDR5314-RT001-R00-03
17
Nam Con Son 2

Figure 2.16: Profile comparison assuming a horizontal offset of -345 m and a vertical offset of 2.3m on the
central track of the 2010 data
Figure 2.17: Profile comparison assuming a horizontal offset of -650 m and a vertical offset of 1.6 m on track
2 of the 2010 data
DDR5314-RT001-R00-03
18
Nam Con Son 2

Figure 2.18: Profiles along the Nam Con Son 2 pipeline as measured in 2010 and 2012
The 2010 data is a composite of two survey tracks and has been corrected for the differences in the
coordinate system between 2010 and 2012.
Figure 2.19: Histogram of the bed level changes between 2010 and 2012 after correction of the horizontal
and vertical offset
DDR5314-RT001-R00-03
19
Nam Con Son 2
3.0
3.0
2.5
2.5
2.0
1.5
Depth 5 m
Depth 15 m
Depth 20 m
1.0
Depth 25 m
0.5
Depth 30 m
Mean WaveHeight (m)
Mean WaveHeight (m)
2.0
Depth 50 m
1.5
Depth 80 m
1.0
Depth 100 m
Depth 130 m
0.5
Depth 35 m
Figure 2.21: Mean wave height (m) on the

continental slope
9.0
9.0
8.0
8.0
6.0
Depth 5 m
Depth 15 m
Depth 20 m
5.0
Depth 25 m
4.0
Depth 30 m
Mean Wave Period (s)
Mean Wave Period (s)
Figure 2.20: Mean wave height (m) on the

continental shelf
7.0
7.0
Depth 50 m
6.0
Depth 80 m
5.0
Depth 100 m
Depth 130 m
4.0
Depth 35 m
3.0
1.0
0.9
0.9
0.8
0.5
Depth 5 m
Depth 15 m
0.4
Depth 20 m
0.3
Depth 25 m
0.2
Depth 30 m
0.1
Depth 35 m
0.0
Figure 2.24: Wave height standard deviation (m) on

the continental shelf
DDR5314-RT001-R00-03
WaveHeight Std Dev (m)
WaveHeight Std Dev (m)
Figure 2.23: Mean wave period (s) on the continental

slope
1.0
0.6
Depth 140 m
3.0
Figure 2.22: Mean wave period (s) on the continental

shelf
0.7
Depth 140 m
0.0
0.0
0.8
0.7
0.6
Depth 50 m
0.5
Depth 80 m
0.4
0.3
0.2
0.1
Depth 100 m
Depth 130 m
Depth 140 m
0.0
Figure 2.25: Wave height standard deviation (m) on

the continental slope
20
Nam Con Son 2
3.0
3.0
2.5
2.5
2.0
1.5
Depth 5 m
Depth 15 m
Depth 20 m
1.0
Depth 25 m
0.5
Depth 30 m
Wave Period Std Dev (s)
Wave Period Std Dev (s)
2.0
Depth 50 m
1.5
Depth 80 m
1.0
Depth 100 m
Depth 130 m
0.5
Depth 35 m
Depth 140 m
0.0
0.0
0.25
0.20
0.20
0.15
Depth 15 m
Depth 20 m
0.10
0.05
Depth 25 m
Depth 30 m
Depth 35 m
0.00
Max Near-Bed Current (m/s)
Figure 2.28: Mean near-bed current (m/s) on the

continental shelf (lines on top of each other). Note
that some lines overlap
Mean Near-Bed Current (m/s)
0.25
0.15
Depth 80 m
0.10
0.05
0.80
0.80
0.60
Depth 20 m
0.50
Depth 25 m
Depth 30 m
0.40
Depth 35 m
0.30
Figure 2.30: Maximum near-bed current (m/s) on the

continental shelf (lines on top of each other)
DDR5314-RT001-R00-03
Depth 130 m
Depth 140 m
0.90
Depth 15 m
Depth 100 m
0.00
0.90
0.70
Depth 50 m
Figure 2.29: Mean near-bed current (m/s) on the

continental slope
Max Near-Bed Current (m/s)
Mean Near-Bed Current (m/s)
Figure 2.26: Wave period standard deviation (m/s) on Figure 2.27: Wave period standard deviation (m/s) on
the continental shelf
0.70
Depth 50 m
0.60
Depth 80 m
0.50
Depth 100 m
Depth 130 m
0.40
Depth 140 m
0.30
Figure 2.31: Maximum near-bed current (m/s) on the

continental slope
21
Nam Con Son 2

1.80
0.60
1.60
0.40
0.30
Depth 80 m
Depth 100 m
0.20
Depth 130 m
0.10
Depth 140 m
0.00
Max Mid-Depth Current (m/s)
Mean Mid-Depth Current (m/s)
0.50
1.40
1.20
1.00
Depth 80 m
0.80
Depth 100 m
0.60
Depth 130 m
0.40
Depth 140 m
0.20
0.00
Figure 2.32: Mean mid-depth current (m/s) on the

continental slope
Figure 2.33: Maximum mid-depth current (m/s) on

Figure 2.34: Variation of near-bed main current

direction(s) at depth 30 m



DDR5314-RT001-R00-03
22
Nam Con Son 2

3. Seabed analysis
3.1. Sediment mobility
Three different strata are identified in the bed (Section 1). Stratum C is a non-erodible layer of clay and
occasional rocky outcrops. This stratum occasionally outcrops at surface. No sandwaves are present for
these locations.
Stratum B consists of silty fine sand. This type of sediment generally only exists in areas with little or no
sediment transport rates. With any significant transport capacity in the flow, the silt would be filtered out. Any
sandwaves in these sections are most likely to be moribund (relict) features with low mobility.
Stratum A, consisting of well mixed sand, is found in the majority of the sandwave sections. This stratum
shows evidence of reworking, and is assumed to be actively altered by the current flow and wave conditions.
However, as there is no evidence of sediment sorting, it is very likely that the sediment transport is
dominated by short bursts of high energy events, when all the sediment is reworked. Such high energy
events could be related to typhoons and gravity driven currents on the continental slope.
3.2. Bedforms
3.2.1.
Bedform orientation
From the cross profiles taken in the sand wave areas, the orientation of the sandwaves is estimated. The
results are given in Table 3.1.
It shows that the near shore sandwaves (KP250 and KP310) have crests that are roughly perpendicular to
the shoreline and consequently perpendicular to the principle tidal flow direction which at 30 m water depth is
along the east-west axis (Figure 2.34). Further offshore, the crest lines are running northwest to southeast.
This is quite oblique to the principle tidal current direction, which is east to west. However during the windy
season, November to January, the flow directions vary significantly.
Table 3.1: Sandwave orientation
KP
Angle crest line with

North
48
-60
53
-60
85
-30
103
-60
250
-10
310
3.2.2.
Seabed variability
The corrected profiles of 2010 and 2012 are then filtered using a window averaging to remover the large
scale topography, exposing the bedforms (Figure 3.1). This is a collection of sandbanks, sandwaves, megaripples and fixed bed features in non-erodible layers. By taking the difference between the two surveys, we
DDR5314-RT001-R00-03
23
Nam Con Son 2

can identify the areas in which the bedforms are stable. Figure 3.2 shows that there are significant stretches
where the bed change is less than the measurement uncertainty error of about 0.2 m in shallow water and
0.5 m in deep water. It should be noted that many of the highest peaks in the bed change are caused by
measurement errors in the 2010 data set.
The measured bed level changes now differ clearly between the sand sandwave area (KP60-225) and the
clay area (KP225 and higher), as can be seen from Figure 3.3. The standard deviation in the clay area is
0.2 m, whereas the standard deviation in the sandy area is 1.5 m. In practice, vertical accuracy of
bathymetric surveys is about 0.3 m. Therefore, the correction can be assumed successful for the clay area.
Although this is no guarantee for success in the remaining part of the profile, we will assume that the survey
in the sand area has been corrected sufficiently for a sand wave assessment.
3.2.3.
Seismology
The seismic profiles and cross profiles of the echo-sounder data show a consistent layering of the sand
along the profiles. There is no evidence of the typical interrupted layering associated with the erosion due to
bedform migration. This suggests that the bedforms are stable.
3.2.4.
SWAT analysis
Although the data quality is limited, SWAT (Sandwave Analysis Tool) is applied to the two bathymetric
profiles. This tool identifies the location and bed level of the crests and troughs of the bedforms. From these
positions, the height, length and asymmetry of the bedforms can be determined. As there are two surveys
available, the migration rate can be determined by comparing the crest positions of the bedforms.
Additionally, following Knaapen (2005), the migration rate can be estimated from a single profile based on
the median shape characteristics of the sand waves to determine the migration rate C:
| |,
In which L is the median wavelength in the area, H is the median wave height and A the east-west
asymmetry. Based on the cross profile data (Section 2.1.1), the length measured along the profile is adjusted
for the angle between the profiles and the sandwave orientation. On the continental shelf, the sandwave
crests are running North to South.
To reduce the noise levels in the bathymetric data, the median values are taken for sections of 25 km.
Combined, the SWAT provides us with 3 estimates of the migration rate (Figure 3.4), from the shape of the
bedforms in the 2010 data, from the shape of the bedforms in the 2012 data and from the changes in the
crest position.
Consistently, the estimated migration rates are of the order of a few metres per year or less towards deeper
water. This is consistent with published migration rates about sandwaves around the world in literature
(Knaapen, 2005).
For completion and context the height and wavelength of the sandwaves are given in Figure 3.5 and
Figure 3.6, respectively.
DDR5314-RT001-R00-03
24
Nam Con Son 2

3.2.5.
Bed slopes
Based on the 2012 bathymetry profile, the bed slopes along the profile are calculated. Figure 3.7 shows the
results. In general the slopes are below 1V:10H (i.e. 0.1), with a few exceptions, although many of those are
due to spikes in the data related to measurement errors.
3.2.6.
Discussion
The sandwave analysis has been restricted by the quality of the data available. The resolution of the data,
the accuracy in the positioning, and the noise in the recorded bed levels make it difficult to assess the
bedform migration accurately.
Despite the problems identified with the available data, i.e. limited resolution; positional errors; profiles not
perfectly aligned, the three migration rate predictions are fairly consistent. They suggest migration rates of
only a few metres per year. More accurate estimates are not possible, given the limitations of the data.
The migration predictions are group speed predictions only. There might be individual sandwaves moving
quicker due to reconfiguration, in particular near crest ends or bifurcations between sandwave crests. The
2D bathymetric data is too coarse to identify these.
These findings appear to be confirmed by the seismic profiles, in which no geological evidence is visible of
the erosional effect of bedform migration.
The sandwaves on the continental shelf (between KP180 and KP300) are aligned perpendicular to the
principle current direction, suggesting they are actively maintained by the tides. On the continental slope the
crests are oblique to the tidal direction. This suggests that they are either moribund or related to intermittent
flow conditions related to typhoons or density currents during the windy season.
In the bathymetric profile, there appear to be two sandbanks around KP200. Around these banks, sandwave
mobility might be higher as pointed out by Knaapen (2005), and the shape predictor used is likely to underpredict migration rates. However, for this location, the migration prediction based on the change in crest
positions does not show up significant migration either.
3.3. Conclusions on seabed mobility

The conclusions are based on measured bathymetric data with limited resolution and accuracy. It is highly
recommended that these are confirmed using multibeam echo-sounding with an accurate positioning system
(RTK Differential Global Positioning System).
The sedimentology, bathymetric assessment and the interpretation of the geophysical investigations suggest
that the sandwaves are not very mobile. The sandwaves are relatively rounded and symmetrical, suggesting
stationary bedforms. The internal composition suggests regular deposition, without evidence of the vertical
layering associated with moving bedforms.
The differences between the 2010 and 2012 data suggest there is some movement, between KP50 and
KP60; KP75 and KP120; and between KP260 and KP300. However, the quality of the data, in particular the
accuracy in the positioning, makes it impossible to provide conclusive evidence.
The sedimentology suggest that the mobile layer is present along the majority of the sandwave fields. The
only exceptions are: KP60 to KP70; from KP152 to KP186; from KP194 to KP197; from KP201 to KP210;
DDR5314-RT001-R00-03
25
Nam Con Son 2

from KP241 to KP250; and from KP252 to KP260. These stretches are assumed immobile, or only mobilised
during extreme weather events (such as typhoons).
Therefore, it is concluded that the bedforms do not migrate much. However, dynamic sandwaves cannot be
excluded for the stretches between KP45 and KP55; KP75 and KP120; and between KP260 and KP300. No
estimates show more than 6m migration per year, but these values would still be enough to cause the
development of free spans over the lifespan of the pipeline.
Figure 3.1: Bedforms observed on the pipeline route. Note that the large dip in the bed on the offshore end
(KP20-KP30) is an interpolation effect, not a real seabed feature
DDR5314-RT001-R00-03
26
Nam Con Son 2

Figure 3.2: Change in the bed levels between 2010 and 2012.The red lines denote the average error
margins in the data (0.3 m)
Figure 3.3: Histogram of the survey measurement errors for KP60-225 (left) and KP225-300 (right)
DDR5314-RT001-R00-03
27
Nam Con Son 2

Figure 3.4: Migration rate estimates along the pipeline between KP40 and KP280. Positive values indicate
migration in the offshore direction
Figure 3.5: Measured wave height of the sandwaves
Figure 3.6: Measured wavelength of the sandwaves
DDR5314-RT001-R00-03
28
Nam Con Son 2

Figure 3.7: Bed slope along the pipeline route
4. Pipe scour
Pipeline scour is a response to the flow interaction with the outside diameter of the pipeline. When the
pipeline is laid on the seabed it causes a local disturbance to the flow which, if large enough, creates a scour
profile underneath the pipeline. Over time the pipe scour may lead to some settlement of the pipeline.
The two pipelines of interest are outside diameters of 26 inch and 16 inch, without external coatings. These
diameters have been used in the scour calculations using methods based on Whitehouse (1998) and Sumer
and Fredse (2002). The assessment has been made on the basis of the near-bed current.
The first part of the assessment is to consider the current speed required to cause the onset of scour
underneath the pipeline. An initial embedment of 5 per cent of the pipeline diameter has been assumed on
laying. The current speed for onset of scour in sandy sediment for the 26 inch pipeline is 1.1 m/s and for the
16 inch pipeline 0.9 m/s. An increased initial embedment will increase the current speeds required to initiate
scour.
For a pipeline laid on the seabed, and current running perpendicular (i.e. across) the pipeline, the scour
formulae indicate scour depth of about 0.4 m for the 26 inch pipe and 0.3 m for the 16 inch pipe. These
results apply in sand which is mobile, reduced sediment mobility will reduce the scour depths. Reduced
sediment mobility occurs because the flow speeds are below threshold of motion for the seabed sediment or
the resistance to erosion is enhanced by cohesive sediment content in the sandy sediment.
The other factor that might reduce scour depths is the angle between the current axis and the pipeline, which
might reduce the scour depth to 75 per cent of the above values at an acute angle of (say) 30.
The mean near-bed currents in Figure 2.28 and Figure 2.29 are generally below 0.2 to 0.3 m/s at all water
depth locations. This suggests that mean currents will not cause appreciable pipe scouring underneath the
pipeline. The maximum near-bed currents are larger, Figure 2.30 and Figure 2.31, and whilst they do not
exceed the speeds required for onset of scour based on the available prediction formulae, it is expected that
some scouring will occur over the period of the project lifetime to provide local embedment and spans.
The effect of wave horizontal orbital velocity can also cause pipeline scour as the oscillating flow interacts
with the external diameter of the pipeline. In 50 m water depth scour depth for the 26 inch pipe is predicted
DDR5314-RT001-R00-03
29
Nam Con Son 2

to increase from 0.1 m for 0.5 year Return Period conditions to 0.3 m for 100 year Return Period conditions.
The relevant depths for the 16 inch pipe are 0.1 to 0.2 m. In 100 m of water depth the scour at the 26 inch
pipe is predicted to be between 0.05 and 0.2 m and for the 16 inch pipe between 0.05 and 0.15 m.
Based on the available information for soils and metocean, it is expected that scour that does form to a depth
of 0.05 to 0.3 m underneath the pipeline will be persistent. The smallest scour depths may be of the same
depth as the initial embedment and the larger depths will cause a free span. Span lengths can be calculated
by the pipeline engineering team based on the pipe external diameter and stiffness length (plus other
relevant parameters).
5. Mitigation options
5.1. Approaches
The following sections review some of the equipment and technologies that can be used to overcome some
of the more notable seabed characteristics which may pose difficulties in the offshore pipeline installation.
Sections of the pipeline route for the NCS project pass through areas where sand bars and sandwaves are
present for many kilometres. To avoid the risks posed by these irregular and/or undulating sandwaves,
dredging techniques may be needed to intervene to level the peaks; construct a trench corridor through the
sandwave terrains; and possibly constructing supports for the pipeline by sand filling and/or burying the
pipeline with coarse materials after laying.
A number of dredging techniques are available depending on the seabed characteristics:
Pre-sweeping/flattening sharp peaks of the sand waves and/or ripples;
Constructing a pre-trench corridor through the sand wave terrain;
Jetting of trench pre or post pipe laying;
Backfilling/Burying of trench after pipe laying.
There are a number different types of dredging equipment available to undertake the methods described
above, however, the choice of the dredging equipment is primarily influenced by three main factors; Depth
below the water surface at which the pipeline is located on the seabed; soil type of seabed along the pipeline
route; dimensions and length of pipeline route.
Dredging for pipelines in deep water faces a number of challenges including:
Limitation of equipment choices due to the deeper sea beds are not accessible using conventional
excavation equipment;
Deployment/handling of equipment due to the requirement for very long cables, hoses or devices;
Accuracy of positioning to control the equipment to within the tolerances of the trench during the
dredging process;
Precision of surveys in a timely fashion before, during and after dredging process.
5.1.1.
Dredge pre-sweeping and/or trenching
If a pipeline does not have to be buried (provided it is sufficiently heavy and safe), it is often sufficient to presweep/peak-shave the crests/peaks of the sand waves and/or ripples to prevent excessive bending and
span formation at those locations. If the pre-sweeping operation can prepare a seabed flat enough to lay the
DDR5314-RT001-R00-03
30
Nam Con Son 2

pipeline and is within the permissible limits with regard to span lengths, pipe stresses and off-bottom
clearances, this can be done just prior to the pipe laying vessels that are following behind.
In some cases, to ensure stability and/or protection, dredging of a trench prior to pipe laying is required. The
trench width has to be sufficient to absorb the trenching and pipe laying tolerances. The curvature of the
pre-trenched ditch has to satisfy the allowable curves of the pipeline during installation, testing and operation
as post-trenching equipment may be limited if not working in loose materials or soft clays.
The trench should be dredged and handed over prior to the start of the pipe lay operations. The trench
depth, length and width should be specified on the drawings issued to the contractor; the slope of trench as
indicated in the specifications may not need to be mandatory but should be as sheer as permissible to
assure a stable slope in the soils encountered. The trench width between the toe-lines has been defined as
5 m wide along the entire trench length (Figure 5.3). The trench depth is assumed to be 2.5 m below the
seabed, with an additional allowance of 0.5 m for siltation, giving a total depth of 3 m. The slope is assumed
to be 1V:3H.
The dredging works covered in this project for the offshore pre-trenching due to the sand waves are
anticipated to be approximately located between KP200 and KP275 in depths of water ranging from 30 to
60 mCD.
A Trailing Suction Hopper Dredger (TSHD) can be used to flatten sandwave ridges and/or dredge trenches
to allow routing a pipeline through sandwaves and/or bars. A TSHD is a sea-going self-propelled vessel
equipped with a hopper and one or two suction pipes (Figure 5.1). At the lower end of the suction pipe(s) a
draghead is fixed. The dragheads are lowered to the seabed and a slurry of sediment and water is pumped
through the suction pipes into the hopper. Dredged material settles in the hopper and the water drains off
through a controllable hopper overflow system. Settlement of the material in the hopper is dependent on
grain size. Once fully loaded, the TSHD sails to the disposal site where the material can be dumped through
its bottom doors. A TSHD may be typically equipped with a dynamic positioning and dynamic tracking
system (DP/DT) are may also be able to install an on-board multi-beam sonar survey in their moon pool.
Upon completion of the pre-survey the TSHD will sail to the area where the trench shall be excavated. Once
in the vicinity of the trenching area the TSHD will position itself along the theoretical centreline of the trench
and lower the suction pipe with drag head to the sea bottom.
The vessel will sail slowly along the centreline at a speed of 1 to 3 knots while removing the soil. The drag
head with the aid of the water jet system cuts and erodes a soil layer. The removed soil mixed with water is
drawn up through the suction pipe by use of centrifugal pumps on board and pumped into the hopper of the
vessel. During this process, the drag head will be kept continuously at a controlled position. The distance
between the seabed and the drag head and the jet water thrust and flow rate can be adjusted during
dredging to suit the soil conditions and to obtain the most optimal soil-water mixture.
Most of the solids will settle in the hopper and the water, together with the suspended fine solids, is
discharged through the adjustable overflow system. When the draught of the vessel reaches the dredging
load mark or when the optimal loading point has been reached, dredging is stopped and the suction pipe is
hoisted onto the deck. The vessel then sails with the dredged material to the designated spoil ground, where
the load will be dumped by controlled opening of the bottom doors. The even distribution of the dumped
materials shall be controlled by keeping records of the used dump blocks. Once empty, the bottom doors will
be closed and the vessel returns to the trench route to restart the dredge cycle.
The typical dredge cycle starts with sailing unloaded to the dredge area followed by loading, sailing loaded to
the spoil ground and dumping.
DDR5314-RT001-R00-03
31
Nam Con Son 2

Using the positioning capabilities of the TSHD, a stretch will be dredged in one or two directions depending
on the realized trench depth, weather, sea state, current, traffic, etc. During each stretch run an amount of
soil will be removed, depending on the soil characteristics. This scheme will be repeated until the stretch is at
the desired depth.
To minimise the loss of time for turning the number of turns will be minimized for each dredge cycle by
adjusting the length of each stretch appropriately.
5.1.2.
Dredging control
Dredging control for the TSHD is maintained by means of the following systems and equipment:
Positioning System i.e. DP/DT system;
Suction Tube Position Monitoring System (STPM).
Dredging control is based upon a vessel positioning system. For this purpose, RTK Differential Global
Positioning System (RTK-DGPS) with differential signals transmitted to the vessel via commercial satellite
will be used to provide horizontal and vertical position data for the vessel. The positioning computer
determine the actual ship and drag head position and presents the results, relative to the area to be dredged,
on navigational displays. These results are derived by calculation from the X, Y, Z inputs from the RTKDGPS and the STPM system as described below and the ships bearing provided by the gyro compass. The
positioning computer also determines the actual horizontal and vertical offset of the drag head as compared
to the target dredge depth. Information outputs from the computer include plots of dredged / dumped tracks
and position of vessel and suction head.
The STPM is a system comprising pressure and angle transducers, which determines the drag-head position
relative to the ship. This makes relative X, Y and Z coordinates of the suction head available to the
positioning system and dredging control computers.
Based on the soil types identified in the geo-physical survey, a TSHD is able to dredge all of the types of
materials. The largest TSHDs in the world (Jumbo and Mega classes) are able to either install an extended
suction pipe (single pipe only) in order to work in water depths of between 60 to 150 mCD (e.g. between
NCS2 KP 0 and 200); or for the two pipe TSHDs, configure their pipes to work at different depths to cover
the full range of dredging depths (e.g. between 30 and 60 m CD) within the trench section of the pipe line
route (e.g. between NCS2 KP200 and 275). Depending on the operation required, either dredging a trench
width of 5 m or performing pre-sweeping, the TSHDs drag heads may need to be modified from their
standard setup.
Typically the soil is dredged by the TSHD in layers of approximately 0.1 to 0.3 m depending on the
characteristics (e.g. compaction) of the soil. The length of one stretch differs per load and is established
during the operations. Figure 5.3 shows a typical cross section of the methodology how to dredge the trench
with the anticipated required bottom width and stable slopes.
The trench is typically dredged according to the following steps (Figure 5.3):
Position the drag head on the slope and start trailing along a predetermined stretch, lift the suction pipe
when the drag head moves out of the trench profile;
Repeat this step following the slope down until the required depth and width is achieved;
Once the trench has (nearly) reached the required depth the last high spots, if any, have to be removed;
this step will require a lot of time and the production of the vessel will decrease significantly.
DDR5314-RT001-R00-03
32
Nam Con Son 2

Typical Working conditions for TSHD:

Maximum swell period with maximum significant wave height Hs, Tz = 2.5m, 7sec ( [beam/head seas]);
Maximum current of 2 3 kn in the side.
5.1.3.
Post lay jetting
Post lay jetting/trenching is another possible mitigation measure to lower the pipeline to the final level and
create additional stability. This methodology uses a jet trencher which is based on a (tracked) ROV and
moves along the pipeline with very powerful water jets which are used to penetrate the seabed and bring the
soil into suspension. The water flow removes the suspended sediment and a trench is created under the
pipeline into which the pipeline is sunk. Alternatively a Mass Flow Excavation device can be used but this is
not as controlled as a jet trencher.
Support trenching vessels are versatile vessels optimised for pipeline trenching/jetting, the flooding gauging
and testing of pipelines, survey activities for support of pipe-laying vessels. Some support trenching vessels
are also equipped with Remote Operated Vehicle (ROV) for performing independent trenching/jetting and
pre-lay, as-laid, as-trenched and out-of-straightness surveys.
The ROV trencher units move along the top of the pipeline and are able to create a V-shaped trench
underneath the pipeline using their mechanical digging arms and very powerful water jets to remove the
material from under the pipeline and gradually sinking it into the seabed behind the trenching unit. The water
for the jetting is supplied from high pressure jets and dredge pumps.
An ROV trencher unit is capable of operating:
In a variety soil types including loose to dense sands as well as soft clays;
Trenching pipelines with an outer diameter of up to 42";
Jetting pipelines with an outer diameter of up to 48";
Operate in a maximum water depth of approximately 450 m;
Can achieve net trench depth of approximately 2 - 5 m.
DDR5314-RT001-R00-03
33
Nam Con Son 2

Hopper
Suction pipe
Drag head
Figure 5.1: General lay out TSHD
Figure 5.2: Dredging a trench in stretches
Figure 5.3: Typical trench profile, and dredging methodology
DDR5314-RT001-R00-03
34
Nam Con Son 2

5.1.4.
Post lay backfilling & rock placement
Depending on the detailed design of the pipeline, the trench can be backfilled by using indigenous materials
or imported rock. In case the soils dredged during the trench dredging are sufficiently coarse and can be
reused, than the same TSHD dredging spread as used for the trenching would be able to perform the
backfilling works. When the backfilling process is performed by a TSHD, the sufficiently coarse backfilling
material is dredged by the TSHD from either the disposal area of the indigenous materials or from a
dedicated borrow area and transported to the pipeline trench. The backfill material is discharged from the
hopper through the suction pipe and drag head on to the trench bottom by using the dredge pumps in
reverse mode. Once the TSHD empties its load, it proceeds to the source of the backfill material for another
cycle.
There are a number of equipment setups (or methods) that can be deployed, depending upon site conditions
and requirements of the specified execution schedule and time, for the placement of the engineered backfill
material (rock). Typically these methods are adopted after the completion of the backfilling method.
Use of a Dynamically Positioned Side Stone Dumping Vessel. In this case the engineered backfill
material is loaded into the compartments of the vessel and progressively and continuously discharged by
one or more of the multiple shovels on-board while the vessel slowly moves along the specified pipeline
route.
Use of a Fall Pipe Pontoon. This method is used when high output and high accuracy are to be
achieved. In this case, the engineered backfill material is transported by flat top barge and discharges
the backfill material into a hopper guiding the material into a vertical fall pipe installed on a pontoon,
through which the material falls accurately to cover the pipeline trench. The Fall Pipe Pontoon is
anchored over the pipeline route positioned utilizing a multiple point mooring system. A winch system on
board the pontoon allows for a progressive and continuous movement along the pipeline route while
dumping is simultaneously occurring.
Use of a Dynamically Positioned Fall Pipe Vessel. The procedure of placement of the engineered
backfill material is similar that of the Fall Pipe Pontoon, however, in this case the backfill material is
transported and handled on board the self-propelled Fall Pipe Vessel itself. The placement of the backfill
material is done by progressive and continuous discharge through the fall pipe while the vessel is slowly
sailing along the pipeline route.
5.2. Post lay surveying

The sandwave assessment has concluded that there is little evidence to suggest that the sandwaves are
moving quickly. Bed changes are most likely associated with episodic events such as passing typhoons.
Moreover, the seabed slopes along the pipeline route are small (generally 1V:10H or less). Therefore, there
is no need for a high frequency of post-lay surveys.
However, the quality of the available bathymetric data is poor. Therefore it is necessary to confirm these
findings with high resolution multibeam echsoundings, by three surveys: one post lay, another one after 1
year and the third one after 3 years. The positioning of these surveys should be recorded using a RTK
Differential Global Positioning System. Unless these measurements show different results, from then on a
repeat survey every 5 year would be sufficient to identify any critical free spans developing.
DDR5314-RT001-R00-03
35
Nam Con Son 2

5.3. Cost estimates

HOLD
5.3.1.
Trenching
HOLD
5.3.2.
Jetting
HOLD
6. References
Fugro (2010). Desktop study and metocean design report. Nam con son 2 gas pipeline marine survey.
C50708_6138_R1.
Knaapen, M.A.F. (2005). Sand wave migration predictor based on shape information. Journal of Geophysical
Research, 110.
Sumer, B.M. and Fredse, J. (2002). The mechanics of scour in the marine environment. World Scientific,
Singapore.
Whitehouse, R.J.S. (1998). Scour at Marine Structures. Thomas Telford. 216 pp.
VSP-PTSC (2010). Nam Con Son 2 gas pipeline project. Report on the result for Marine Geophysical and
Geotechnical Investigation for Detail Design. Volume I: Offshore Section. NCS2-VSP-PTSC-DD-5-00-PMRP-001.
DDR5314-RT001-R00-03
36
Nam Con Son 2

Appendix
A. SWAT
A.1. Crest orientation
The first step in the analysis of the bedforms is to determine their orientation, here defined as the direction
perpendicular to the crest line relative to the North, with positive values indicating clockwise rotation. The
orientation is determined based on the gradients in the bathymetry, following the approach of Bazen and
Gerez (2002). They determined orientation of ridges on grey-scale fingerprints, but the same principles are
valid for bedforms in bathymetric data. This approach is based on the principle that in regular rhythmic
patterns the steepest gradient is perpendicular to the direction of the crests. The orientation angle between
the gradient vector and the x-axis is defined as:
2 G xy
c
G
G
xx
yy
12 atan
(1)
in which (x,y) are the coordinates of every measurement point and Gij is the product of the gradient in
direction i and the gradient in direction j:
z
G xx
x
G yy
G xy
z

y
z z
x y
(2)
with z the measured bed levels and c is a correction to make correct for the fact that areas on opposite
sides of the crests have opposing gradient vectors:
c G xx - G yy 0 & G xx - G yy 0
c G xx - G yy 0 & G xx - G yy 0
(3)
c 0 G xx - G yy 0
If one applies this algorithm to the matrix containing the seabed bathymetry, it produces an array of local
estimates of the orientation of the smallest bedform. Therefore, one has to smooth the bathymetric data
removing all bedforms smaller than the bedform of interest. A window size that is about half the wavelength
of the targeted bedform gives reliable and robust results.
The calculation of the orientation using equation (1) seems rather cumbersome compared to the
straightforward estimate with the tangent of the gradients in x and y direction. However, with the tangent of
the gradients, averaging gives the problems that opposing vectors average out to 0 which is avoided when
using equation (1).
DDR5314-RT001-R00-03
Nam Con Son 2

Once the orientation of the bedforms is known, it is possible to determine the other shape characteristics
along crest-normal profiles.
A.2. Determining the crest and trough positions

Based on the orientation of the bedforms, the bathymetric data is interpolated to a regular orthogonal grid
with the main axis perpendicular to the mean crest direction (parallel to the mean orientation of the
bedforms. Taking the profiles in the direction of the bedform orientation, which is normal to the crests, the
crest and trough positions in bedforms are identified following an improved approach to the one proposed by
Knaapen (2005).
In that approach, the bathymetry is smoothed using weighted averaging in which the weight reduces linearly
with distance (Bartlett window). The size of this window depends on the typical wavelength of the targeted
bedform. It should be considerably less than this wavelength but larger than the typical size smaller
bedforms. A window size that is about half the wavelength of the targeted bedform gives reliable and robust
results.
The crests and troughs are then defined as the highest and lowest points in the smoothed profiles. The
weighted averaged smoothing leads to an underestimation of the crest position, especially in the case of
sharp crested sand waves. In the new approach, a fourth order polynomial is fitted through the original
measurements that are in the neighbourhood of the extreme points in the smoothed profile. Once the crest
and trough positions are known, they are analysed to retrieve information on the wavelength, height and
asymmetry. Although the definition of these characteristics is straightforward, to calculate them from the
measured crests and troughs one has to make a few assumptions.
A.2.1.
Wavelength
The distance between the trough positions on both sides of the crest (x1, x2) determines the length of the
bedform:
L | x 2 - x1 | cos( )
(4)
With being the angle between the mean crest orientation and the direction of the profiles.
A.2.2.
Height
The height is defined as the difference between the crest levels
z c at location xc and the line through the
neighbouring trough levels (x1, z1) and (x2,z2).
H zc
z1 ( xc x2 ) z 2 ( xc x1 )
cos( )
L
(5)
The height of the pattern is here defined as the height of the envelope resulting from a linear interpolation of
the crest to trough levels. This results in heights that are equal to the difference between a crest level and
the mean level of the neighbouring troughs weighted by the distance between those troughs and the crest.
Using this weighted value, the method is valid for bedforms on arbitrary sloping surfaces, whereas more
straightforward averaging of the two trough levels will cause errors for asymmetric waves on a sloping mean
surface. For superimposed bedforms it is important to avoid such errors.
DDR5314-RT001-R00-03
Nam Con Son 2

A.2.3.
East-west asymmetry
The east-west asymmetry is defined as the difference of the distance between the trough south of the crest
and the distance between the crest and the trough north of the crest divided by the wavelength:
L2 L1
L
(6)
Following this definition, a perfect symmetric wave has an asymmetry value A=0. A positive asymmetry value
denotes a wave with the steepest side facing North and a negative value implies the steeper side is South
facing.
A.2.4.
Volume ratio
The volume ratio is defined as the area of the bedform above the line through both neighbouring trough
positions divided by the volume of a triangle with the same length and height:
x2
x1
( z 2 z1 )dx
2
z z1
( x 2 x1 ) z c 2
(7)
in which z is the local bed level. This measure for volume ratio gives a value of 0.5 for any sand wave
without crest-trough asymmetry and has limits of 0 and 1 for asymmetric waves with infinite narrow crests
and troughs, respectively. A sand wave with a high and narrow crest, will give a volume ratio between 0
and 0.5.
DDR5314-RT001-R00-03
Nam Con Son 2

HR Wallingford is an independent engineering and environmental hydraulics

organisation. We deliver practical solutions to the complex water-related challenges
faced by our international clients. A dynamic research programme underpins all that we
do and keeps us at the leading edge. Our unique mix of know-how, assets and facilities
includes state of the art physical modelling laboratories, a full range of numerical
modelling tools and, above all, enthusiastic people with world-renowned skills and
expertise.
HR Wallingford, Howbery Park, Wallingford, Oxfordshire OX10 8BA, United Kingdom

tel +44 (0)1491 835381 fax +44 (0)1491 832233 email info@hrwallingford.com
www.hrwallingford.com
HR Wallingford
DDR5314-RT001-R00-03

Free Span Versus Trenching in Sandwave Report

Încărcat de

Informații document

Drepturi de autor

Formate disponibile

Partajați acest document

Partajați sau inserați document

Opțiuni de partajare

Vi se pare util acest document?

Este necorespunzător acest conținut?

Drepturi de autor:

Formate disponibile

Free Span Versus Trenching in Sandwave Report

Încărcat de

Drepturi de autor:

Formate disponibile

PETROVIETNAM GAS CORPORATION

PETROVIETNAM SOUTH-EAST GAS PROJECT

NAM CON SON 2 GAS PIPELINE PROJECT PHASE 1