Flexible Pipe

Flexible pipe should be designed or selected to prevent failure due to the combined
effects of external pressure, internal pressure, torsional forces, axial forces, and
bending (see API RP 17B).

From: Surface Production Operations, 2016

Related terms:

Pipelines, Floating Production Storage and Offloading, Installation, Steam Engines,

Turbines, Solar energy, Solar Cells, Polymer, Flexible Riser, Mooring System

View full index

Learn more about Flexible Pipe

Flexible Pipe
Qiang Bai, Yong Bai, in Subsea Pipeline Design, Analysis, and Installation, 2014

1 Introduction
The origin of flexible pipes can be traced to pioneering work carried out in the late
1970s. Initially, flexible pipes were used in relatively benign weather environments,
such as offshore Brazil, the Mediterranean, and the Far East. However, the tech-
nology of flexible pipes advanced so rapidly that nowadays they have been used in
various areas in the North Sea and gained popularity among designers in the Gulf
of Mexico. The flexible pipe can be applied in the environments with water depths
down to 8000 ft, high pressure reaching to 10,000 psi, and high temperatures above
150°F, as well as withstanding large vessel motions in adverse weather conditions.
Figure 24.1 illustrates typical flexible risers used in deep water, in which different
configurations are designed for different water depths. This type of dynamic applica-
tion is typically used for floating production systems with high-pressure production
risers, export risers, chemical/water/injection lines, and gas lift lines.

Figure 24.1. Typical flexible riser configurations.Source: Ismail et al. [1].

The applications of flexible pipe result from its composite structure, which combines
helical steel armor layers with high stiffness to provide strength and polymer sealing
layers with low stiffness to provide fluid integrity. As a result, this kind of pipe
has low bending stiffness in comparison to axial tensile stiffness, which allows
a much smaller radius of curvature than the homogenous pipe with the same
antipressure capacity. This particular structure gives the flexible pipe a number of
advantages over other types of pipelines and risers, such as steel catenary risers,
which include reduced transport and installation costs by prefabrication in long
lengths stored on reels and suitability for use with compliant structures, which allow
permanent connection between a floating support vessel with large motions and
subsea installations.

> Read full chapter

Integrity Management of Flexible Pipes

Yong Bai, Qiang Bai, in Subsea Pipeline Integrity and Risk Management, 2014

Abstract
Flexible pipe integrity management aims at managing the risks of failures and
keeping the pipes in normal operating condition during the service life through
risk-consistent inspection, monitoring, repairing and maintenance strategy. The
composite construction of unbonded flexible pipes makes the failure modes com-
plex and the way to mitigate the risks of failures becomes an important aspect in
the system selection. Flexible pipe integrity management programs with definite
methodologies have been established in the industry according to the related JIPs.
This Chapter mainly deals with the risk assessment and integrity management of
flexible pipes. The failure modes and related mechanisms are summarized. Against
these failures, the integrity management strategies in every stage of the flexible
pipe industry are introduced. Then the inspection and monitoring technologies are
discussed as well as the testing and analysis methods.

> Read full chapter

Design Codes for Risers and Subsea Sys-

tems
Yong Bai, Qiang Bai, in Subsea Pipelines and Risers, 2005
1 Flexible Pipe Guidelines
Flexible pipes have been used for decades. The early pipes and hoses were of the
bonded type (vulcanized rubber and armoring). The designs were primarily governed
by the ratio burst to design pressure.

From the early seventies, large resources were put into the development of reli-
able non-bonded flexible pipes. As a result of the product development work, the
confidence in flexible pipes increased, and flexible pipes are considered attractive
for many applications. The use of flexible pipes was, however, still limited partially
because no general industry standard was available. In the middle eighties, Veritec
(1987) developed a general design standard for flexible pipes, based on a JIP. These
guidelines were based on the design methods used by the manufacturers and
the offshore design codes. These design codes represented the state of the art of
flexible pipe design. With the exception of Brazil, the use of flexible pipes was still
moderate during this period. There was, however, a continuous growth in demand
and requirements (temperature, pressure and diameter) to flexible pipes. Many oil
companies developed their own specifications for flexible pipes and the industry
faced the following problems:

– Many operators had their own design standards;

– The manufacturers used their in-house standards for design. To prepare ad-
ditional documentation conforming with the operators' standards was often
cumbersome and expensive;
– The general design standards were not updated and were considered to be
increasingly inadequate.

The design requirements were divided into two categories:

– Mandatory requirements that are auditable should be included in the specif-

ication (API Spec 17J).
– Recommendations with respect to how to satisfy the mandatory requirements,
as well as guidance for the design of flexible riser systems, are included in a
separate Recommended Practice (RP) such as API RP 17B. The RP will include
methodology for the design of risers outside the experience range. Deepwater
will be one such area.

> Read full chapter

Cross-Sectional and Dynamic Analyses

of Flexible Pipes
Qiang Bai, Yong Bai, in Subsea Pipeline Design, Analysis, and Installation, 2014

2 Flexible Pipe Guidelines

Flexible pipes have been used for decades. The early pipes and hoses were of the
bonded type (vulcanized rubber and armoring). The designs were governed primarily
by the ratio of burst to the design pressure.

From the early 1970s, large resources were put into the development of reliable
unbonded flexible pipes. As a result of the product development work, the conf-
idence in flexible pipes increased, and flexible pipes are considered attractive for
many applications. The use of flexible pipes was, however, still limited, partially
because no general industry standard was available. In the middle 1980s, Veritec
[1] developed a general design standard for flexible pipes, based on a JIP. These
guidelines were based on the design methods used by the manufacturers and the
offshore design codes. The design codes represented the state of the art of flexible
pipe design in the 1990s. With the exception of Brazil, the use of flexible pipes
was still moderate during this period. There was, however, a continuous growth in
demand and requirements of temperature, pressure, and diameter to flexible pipes.
Many oil companies developed their own specifications for flexible pipes, and the
industry faced the following problems:

• Many operators had their own design standards.

• The manufacturers used their in-house standards for design. To prepare ad-
ditional documentation conforming with the operators’ standards was often
cumbersome and expensive.
• The general design standards were not updated and were considered to be
increasingly inadequate.

The design requirements were divided into two categories [2]:

• Mandatory requirements that are auditable should be included in the specif-

ication (API Spec 17J [3]).
• Recommendations with respect to how to satisfy the mandatory requirements,
as well as guidance for the design of flexible pipe systems, are included in a
separate recommended practice (RP). such as API RP 17B [4]. The RP includes
the methodology for the design of flexible risers outside the experience range.
Deep water is one of the such area.

API Specification 17K

The design of flexible pipe is according to API Specification 17J for unbonded pipes
and API Specification 17K for bonded pipes. These documents provide a checklist
of all the essential parameters and guidelines that pipe operators need to verify
when ordering flexible pipes from pipe manufacturers. The rest of this section deals
with API Spec 17J for unbonded pipes, but API Specification 17K contains essentially
identical information and specifications for bonded pipes.

API Specification 17J

API 17J [3] describes the parameters that need to be determined before carrying
out a flexible pipe design. These essential parameters (in addition to the external
environmental conditions) are the internal bore characteristics, such as pressure,
temperature, and fluid composition. These parameters determine much of the pipe
design, such as material selection, and layer thickness.

API 17J lists the flexible pipe system requirements, such as inspection and condition
monitoring, gas venting, and installation. Another section deals with the allowable
loads that can be imposed on the pipe during its lifetime. Once a pipe cross section
is established during design work, calculations are carried out to ensure that all
allowable loads are not exceeded throughout the pipe design life. Any anomalies
in this work require a new pipe cross section to be established. As shown in Table
6, Flexible pipe layer design criteria of API 17J, during normal operational condi-
tions, the tensile armor layer maximum load cannot exceed 0.67 of the ultimate
tensile strength (UTS) of the armor material. The pressure armor layer is allowed a
maximum load of 0.55 of UTS. During abnormal and installation conditions, the
allowable load may be increased to 0.85 of UTS, and during factory acceptance tests,
the load may be increased up to 0.91 of UTS.

Further sections of API 17J describe other conditions and limitations that need to be
considered during design work. One of the most important of these requirements
is the minimum bend radius that the pipe is able to withstand without unlocking
the pressure armor layer. An important aspect of design work is the calculations for
ensuring that the pipe does not exceed its minimum bend radius under extreme
load conditions. The two areas of pipe most susceptible to overbending are the
touchdown zone and the upper region just before the hang-off location. Once the
minimum bend radius is known, ancillary devices, such as bend stiffeners or bend
restrictors, can be designed to ensure that the pipe does not exceed this minimum
bend radius under all possible extreme loading conditions.

API 17J contains useful information for the design of the various layers that make up
the flexible pipe. Details are also available on the design of the end-fitting arrange-
ment, bend stiffeners, and bend restrictors. In addition to the local cross-section
design, the flexible pipe also needs to be verified under a global static and dynamic
analysis. Since unbonded flexible pipes have a large damping factor (due to the
presence of a number of unbonded layers), they do not suffer from fatigue damage
induced by vortex-induced vibration (VIV). Hence, flexible pipes do not need to
be installed with strakes or fairings to limit VIV. This means that fatigue damage
is primarily due to wave motions and installation damage. A detailed fatigue life
analysis is required, and the pipe manufacturer needs to prove that the pipe fatigue
life is 10 times the pipe’s required service life.

Procedures are required for pipe installation, since incorrect installation induces a
greater risk of exceeding the tensile limits of the armor layer material, overbending,
and causing impact damage to the flexible pipes. There are documented cases of
flexible pipe damage during installation, for example, the piercing of the pipe’s outer
sheathing that required expensive mitigation measures to be undertaken to prevent
the replacement of the whole pipe before commencing operations.

API 17J also includes guidelines for the manufacture of the flexible pipe, and the
qualification testing required before the pipe is issued to the operator.

Safety against Collapse

API Spec 17J is based on working stress design. Present standards have been based
on a permissible utilization of 67% of the pipe capacity for external pressure. In
practice, this means that the stresses in the carcass must be less than 67% of the
stresses required to collapse the carcass.

API Spec 17J uses the formulae shown in Table 25.1 to limit stress in the internal
carcass from local buckling.

For water depths less than 300 m, the permissible utilization is as before. Due to the
negligible uncertainty related to hydrostatic pressure in deep water, the permissible
utilization is gradually increased with water depth. The maximum value of 0.85 is
reached at 900 m water depth.

Design Criteria

The design criteria for unbonded flexible pipes are given in the following terms [3],
[4]:

• Strain for polymer sheath.

• Creep for internal pressure sheath.

• Stress for metallic layers and end fitting.

• Hydrostatic collapse due to buckling load.

• Mechanical collapse due to stress induced from armor layers.

• Torsion.
• Crushing collapse and ovalization during installation.

• Compression (axial and effective).

• Service-life factors.

API RP 17B
Another useful document for flexible pipe operators is API Recommended Practice
17B [4]. This document is not a specification; hence, it is not binding on any party.
However, many of the recommendations in API 17B are enforced in practice, since
they provide additional measures to maintain the integrity of the flexible pipes and
ensure a more efficient and safe operation. API 17B contains useful information
on integrity management procedures and inspection and monitoring measures
that can be undertaken to manage any risk of damage or failure modes of the
flexible pipes. This document also contains useful information on the design and
analysis methods that can be used to verify the pipe design and service life. Figure
25.1 shows a simplified design and analysis flowchart of unbonded flexible pipes.
More detailed process charts for static flowlines and dynamic risers are illustrated in
Figures 19 and 20 of API 17B. The recommended practice discusses various methods
for carrying out these design calculations and is a useful tool for pipe operators and
manufacturers to ensure an efficient and cost-effective solution for many flexible
pipe applications.

> Read full chapter

Introduction to Flexible Pipelines

Boyun Guo, ... Tian Ran Lin, in Offshore Pipelines (Second Edition), 2014

10.1 Introduction
Flexible pipes have been used in the oil industry since 1972, when Coflexip was
awarded a patent to build a high-pressure, flexible steel pipe. The first application
was used in drilling as a 15,000 psi kill and choke line. Since then, flexible pipe
designs have improved to produce the flowlines and risers that are now used in the
offshore oil industry.

For deepwater, the flexible pipes are used mainly for dynamic risers from a subsea
pipeline end manifold or riser tower to a floating production system (FPS) such as
a floating storage and offloading (FSO) unit or a floating production, storage and
offloading (FPSO) unit and tension-leg platforms (TLPs). The other uses are static ris-
ers, static flowlines, subsea jumpers, topside jumpers, and expansion joints. Flexible
pipes are used for versatile offshore oil and gas applications including production,
gas lift, gas injection, water injection, and various ancillary lines including potable
water and liquid chemical lines.

The main advantages of flexible pipelines are as follows:

• Ease and speed of installation

• No large spans because it follows the contours of the seabed

• Almost no maintenance for life of the project

• Good insulation properties are inherent

• Excellent corrosion properties

• No field joints because the pipe is of continuous manufacture

• No need of expansion loops

• Can be made with enhanced flow characteristics

• Sufficient submerged weight for lateral stability

• Accommodates misalignments during installation and tie-in operations

• Diverless installation is possible—no metrology necessary

• Load-out and installation is safer, faster, and cheaper than any other pipe
application
• Retrievability and reusability for alternative application, thus enhancing the
overall field development economics and preserving the environment
• Fatigue life longer than steel pipe.

The codes that are used for the design of flexible pipe are as follows:

• API SPEC RP 17B—“Recommended Practice for Flexible Pipe”

• API SPEC RP 17J—“Specification for Unbonded Flexible Pipe”

• API SPEC RP 17K—“Specification for Bonded Flexible Pipe”

• ISO 10420—“Flexible Pipe Systems for Subsea and Marine Riser Applications”

• API Spec RP 2RD—“Design of Risers for FPSs and TLPs.”

Since there are only three manufacturers, and the manufacturing of flexible pipe
requires wrapping of many intertwining layers of high-strength stainless steel car-
cass and special polymers, the material price of a flexible line is hundreds of times
more expensive than an equivalent high-strength carbon steel pipe. Consequently,
general use is limited to special applications and in small quantities compared to
the use of high-strength carbon steel pipe.

Ultra-deepwater use of flexible pipe is limited, due to the inability of these pipes
to withstand high external hydrostatic pressure. Presently, the maximum depth at
which flexible pipes have been used is 2000 m.

The main flexible pipe layers are shown in Figure 10.1. The material makeup of each
layer is described below.

Figure 10.1. Flexible pipe layers.

Layer 1 Carcass: The carcass is a spirally wound interlocking structure manufac-

tured from a metallic strip. The carcass prevents collapse of the inner liner and
provides mechanical protection against pigging tools and abrasive particles.
Layer 2 Inner liner: This is an extruded polymer layer that confines the internal
fluid integrity.
Layer 3 Pressure armor: This is made up of a number of structural layers
consisting of helically wound C-shaped metallic wires and/or metallic strips.
The pressure armor layers provide resistance to radial loads.
Layer 4 Tensile armor: The tensile armor layers provide resistance to axial
tension loads. This is made up of a number of structural layers consisting of
helically wound flat metallic wires. The layers are counter wound in pairs.
Layer 5 Outer sheath: The outer sheath is an extruded polymer layer. Its function
is to shield the pipe’s structural elements from the outer environment and to
give mechanical protection.

These are the primary layers. Some of the other layers that are not shown are the
antiwear layers and insulation layers. The antiwear layers are nonmetallic layers that
are inserted between the structural elements to prevent wear and tear. Additional
layers of material with low thermal conductivity can be applied in order to obtain
specific thermal insulation properties of the pipe.

All the flexible pipes have the same fundamental concept. Some variation may
occur in choice of materials in case of special operating environments such as
high pressures, high temperatures, sour service (high H2S and/or CO2 content), and
deepwater.

The end fitting of the flexible pipe is extremely important as it seals the different
layers preventing any water ingress and also allows it to be connected to other
pipeline appurtenances. The common end fittings that are used are as follows:

• Flanges

• Grayloc connectors

• Hydraulic subsea connectors.

Another device that is used at the end of the flexible pipes is the bend restrictor. This
is used to prevent excessive bending because most flexible pipes have a minimum
allowable bend radius. Any bending beyond this would comprise the integrity of the
flexible pipe.

> Read full chapter

Offshore Installation of RTP

Qiang Bai, Yong Bai, in Subsea Pipeline Design, Analysis, and Installation, 2014

1 Introduction
Flexible pipes, as a technical alternative to the traditional rigid steel pipes, have been
used in oil and gas fields for more than 30 years. The major offshore applications
include risers in floating production systems (FPSs) and transportation lines from
satellites to subsea manifold center. Especially, composite pipelines, which are a kind
of flexible pipeline, are now increasingly being used as transport pipelines in selected
offshore projects. Several materials, such as Kevlar fiber, glass fiber, and carbon
fiber, are available for fiber-reinforced plastic composites (RTP). The application
of composites in marine field for oil and gas industry is encountering big boom
currently.

Unlike steel pipes, flexible pipes are usually lightweight and flexible as well as cor-
rosion resistant. These merits provide fast and low-cost installation of flexible pipe.
Flexible pipe can be manufactured in long lengths, thus it can be supplied by reels on
the vessel. A sufficient top tension by tensioners is needed to avoid overbending of
pipe near the touchdown zone. As shown in Figure 29.1, flexible pipe can be lowered
onto the seabed along a ramp or a wheel. Due to the unique construction of flexible
pipe, special attentions should be paid for a successful installation [1]. In contrast
with rigid steel pipes, flexible RTP pipes do not have a particularly high collapse
resistance, so special precautions must be made to ensure no significant positive
external pressure difference occurs. The external collapse resistance of pipe must be
taken as a primary consideration in selecting subsea pipelines. Flooding the pipeline
with water during installation is often used to mitigate the collapse problem. The
virtue of the light weight mitigates the required top tension, but it may also bring
about problems of submerged weight and stability during laying process. As shown
in Figure 29.2, the RTP pipeline is often filled with water before installation and
additional weight modules are always attached to pipeline to gain its submerged
weight and ensure stability, other methods such as rock bolts or a mattress can also
protect the pipeline.
Figure 29.1. Installation method of flexible pipes.

Figure 29.2. Pulling pipe to minimize local buckling.

Figure 29.3 illustrates the float and sink method for the installation of RTP in shallow
water. The sinking operation basically consists of the controlled addition of water
from the onshore end of the pipe and the release of the entrapped air from the
opposite end. The sinking is conducted so that it starts at the shore, where the pipe
enters the body of water, and gradually progresses into deeper waters. To achieve
this, an air pocket is induced by lifting the floating pipe close to the shore. As the
water is allowed to enter the pipe from the shore side, the added weight causes this
initial air pocket to move outward and the intermediate section of pipe between the
air pocket and the shore end to sink. As additional water is added, this pocket moves
to deeper waters causing the sinking to progress to its terminal point in the body of
water.

Figure 29.3. Float and sink method of RTP.Source: PPI [2].

A potential risk during the submersion operation is that the bending of the pipe
between the water-filled and air-filled portions may be deformed sharply enough
to risk the development of a kink, a form of localized pipe buckling, when the pipe
sinking occurs too quickly. As a pipe is bent, its circumferential cross section at the
point of bending becomes increasingly ovalized. This ovalization reduces the pipe’s
bending moment of inertia. On sufficient ovalization, a kink may form at the
location of the maximum bending and lead to a sudden reduction of the bending
capacity. The risk of local buckling may be minimized by applying a suitable pulling
tension during the installation, as illustrated in Figure 29.2. Therefore, special de-
signs should be used to provide a good grip of RTP as well as to avoid the RTP
crushing at the tensioners. Some measures, such as lubricating the ramp, may be
needed to avoid the abrasion damage of RTP. Figure 29.4 shows an installation of
RTP through a laying wheel to avoid kinks due to overbending in the overbend
segment.

Figure 29.4. Installation of RTP through a laying wheel.(For color version of this

figure, the reader is referred to the online version of this book.)

The offshore installation analysis of pipelines is to obtain the pipeline configuration

and stress and strain distributions along the pipeline to verify the security of instal-
lation. The mechanical properties of a flexible pipeline are much more complicated
than that of a metallic pipeline, the sectional properties of flexible pipeline must be
predetermined before the offshore installation analysis. The following properties are
relevant to installation of RTP:

• Axial loading capacity.

• Bending loading capacity.

• Tensional loading capacity.

• Crushing capacity.

• Hydrostatic resistance.

During the installation phase, the following critical parameters must be constantly
monitored to help control the states of pipeline:

• Top tension at tensioners.

• Departure angle.

• Bending radius near the TDP.

This chapter details an offshore installation analysis of reinforced thermoplastic pipe,

which is a kind of composite flexible pipe. The works of theoretical analysis and
FEA in the section are quoted from Bai et al. “Offshore Installation of Reinforced
Thermoplastic Pipe (RTP)” [3].

> Read full chapter

New developments in pipes and related

network components for district heat-
ing
S.F. Nilsson, in Advanced District Heating and Cooling (DHC) Systems, 2016

9.3.2 Flexible pipes

Flexible pipes have been used for a long time, but the concept was not added to
the family of product standards until 2009. According to the standard series, EN
15632-1 to 4, flexible pipe systems can be categorized in those with metal and
plastics service pipes, respectively. Plastic pipes systems can be further categorized
as bonded and non-bonded systems, i.e. depending on whether or not the pipe
insulation layer adheres to the service and casing pipes and is able to transfer
axial friction forces. Service pipes are usually made from copper, thin-walled steel,
cross-linked polyethylene (PEX) or polybutylene (PB).

The main benefit with flexible pipes is that they can potentially reduce installation
costs. They can be coiled and hence delivered in very long lengths, reducing the
number of, and to some extent eliminating the need for, buried joints. Additionally,
they do not require straight trenches, allowing for easier passage of obstacles. On
the other hand, they cannot usually carry as high a pressure as regular steel pipes
and – in particular for plastic pipes – the service temperature must be limited. For
all these reasons, flexible pipes are primarily used in heat-sparse areas. A general
review of flexible pipes can be found in Reidhav (2010).

9.3.2.1 Plastics service pipes

Cross-linked polyethylene (PEX) pipes were already being used in Sweden in the
1970s (Zinko, 2004). At that time, however, it was unknown that oxygen diffuses
from the ambient atmosphere into the service water. Hence, PEX pipes without any
diffusion protection were used, which resulted in corrosion problems in a number
of systems. From the point of view of flexible pipe solutions, this was unfortunate,
as plastic pipes then had a bad reputation in the DH business. At present, plastic
pipes are protected against oxygen diffusion by a barrier material, e.g. EVOH, or an
aluminum layer.

The Swedish GRUDIS5 concept was an effort in the 1980s to adapt to the poten-
tial problem of oxygen diffusion. A GRUDIS network comprises one central heat
exchanger for a district of houses, where the heat is distributed via a plastic pipe
system in the hot tap water circuit. In each house, a heat exchanger was used to
connect the radiator circuit. The service medium would thus influence only compo-
nents originally designed to be in contact with oxygen-rich water, hence no further
corrosion problem would occur due to oxygen diffusion. Zinko (2004) reviewed a
number of GRUDIS systems in service – up to 17 years of age. No abnormal damage
frequency was seen, and in particular, there were no pipe ruptures due to exhausted
long-term strength. There was, however, a slightly higher frequency of damage
related to couplings, in particular to older coupling types.

The gas permeability of a plastic service pipe has another interesting aspect; namely
the transport of water vapour outwards from the service medium. A PEX service pipe
and a PE casing pipe have approximately the same vapour permeability. But in the
case of a heating pipe with hot water, the much higher vapour pressure potential
over the service pipe yields a much higher permeation rate into the insulation foam
than out from it. Hence, vapour will accumulate and condense in the colder parts
of the insulation. The process is, however, slow, and significant effects from water
accumulation on thermal insulation capacity take several decades to materialize. The
phenomenon has been theoretically described by Zinko et al. (2002).

PEX is the standard plastic material of choice for high temperature applications.
One drawback, however, is the fact that it cannot be welded due to its thermoset
properties from the cross-linked molecular structure. Therefore, couplings are re-
quired for PEX systems. PB, on the other hand, is a regular weldable thermoplastic
polyolefin with good temperature resistance. Various PB systems have been analyzed
(see Korsman et al., 2008a,b; De Boer et al., 2008; Engel and Baars, 2010). Another
non-cross-linked material option is the polyethylene variant PE-RT6 (Wang et al.,
2009).

9.3.2.2 Thermal insulation

Insulation of flexible pipes is quite often applied with open-structured materials,
such as PE foams or mineral wool, which are not affected by aging from cell gas
diffusion. There is, however, also a ‘semi-flexible’ PUR foam variant, which is slightly
more flexible than regular PUR foam and thus allows the pipe to be coiled. Reidhav
et al. (2008) studied cell gas diffusion in such foam and concluded that it is much
more rapid than in regular foams and that such pipes should be equipped with a
diffusion barrier.

9.3.2.3 Network designs

There are other, more exotic, pipe designs available. One such example is the EPS
PEX concept, where PEX service pipes are placed in blocks of expanded polystyrene
(EPS) that, in turn, are buried directly in the ground. The main benefits of these
are low price and easy installation. Reportedly, thermal properties are good, due
to large volumes of insulation material. It must be noted, however, that EPS is
completely permeable to liquid water. Hence, groundwater, if present, will enter the
pipe structure and significantly reduce the thermal insulation capacity (Sällberg et
al., 2004).

Another novel design that was tested in Sweden in 2006 is the Finnova concept. It is
based on regular pipes, but with a new philosophy for cost-efficient connections
of heat sparse areas, namely by connecting the grid to a service box with the heat
exchanger outside the customer’s house. Expected benefits were low installation
costs due to uniform and well-structured work, and that the heat supplier would
have access to the connection point at all times for maintenance and service without
disturbing the customer (Gudmundson, 2006). The principle was tested in large-s-
cale, and that test was evaluated a few years later (Larsson et al., 2009). Apart from
failing to reach the low-cost target, it also turned out that the service box philosophy
gave rise to other concerns for example customers feel a need to be able to read their
own energy meters, and maintenance personnel still needs access to the house for
verifying function, filling up radiator circuits, etc.

> Read full chapter

Pipeline Design and Construction

Malcolm J. Brandt BSc, FICE, FCIWEM, MIWater, ... Don D. Ratnayaka BSc, DIC,
MSc, FIChemE, FCIWEM, in Twort's Water Supply (Seventh Edition), 2017

17.10 Buried Flexible Pipes

Flexible pipe design principles apply to steel and plastics but can also be applied to
large diameter DI pipe under large loads. For steel pipes greater than about DN 750
(or D/t about 120–140, depending on conditions) the theoretical pipe thickness for
normal water supply applications may be less than that required to limit deflection
under backfill load. This also applies to high-pressure pipe using high-grade steels
with relatively low wall thickness.

To save adding thickness to stiffen the pipe against backfill load, the pipe may be laid
under ‘controlled backfill’ conditions on a thin layer of uncompacted sand or on a
preformed circular invert (60° width) in sand or fine gravel and with selected and
carefully compacted sidefill to achieve a required soil stiffness. At large diameters,
temporary jacks may be inserted (in steel pipes) to maintain circularity or to pre-de-
flect the pipe upwards but care must be taken to spread jack loads to avoid damage
to the lining. As the sidefill progresses the jacks may be removed depending on the
degree of pre-deflection. Deflection is measured during embedment construction
and, if it exceeds the permissible value, the backfill should be removed and replaced
to obtain the necessary circularity. Measurements should be continued periodically
after installation and checked at critical sections before the pipe is filled for testing.

Deflection limits vary according to pipe material. Limits quoted in AWWA M11 for
steel pipe are as follows:

▪ mortar lined and coated      2% of diameter

▪ mortar lined and flexible coated  3% of diameter

▪ flexible lined and coated     5% of diameter

If steel pipes are lined with cement mortar after installation or for flexible linings,
deflections can be allowed to exceed the limit of 2% frequently quoted. However, if
large deflections are to be permitted for steel pipes, analysis of buckling and ring
bending should be carried out, allowing a design factor greater than 0.5 and taking
into account the stress–strain characteristics of the material. Note that ASME B31.1
limits deflection to 5% for non-metallic piping while the water industry allows up to
6% for PE and PVC pipes.

Deflection of flexible pipes is usually calculated using the Spangler (Spangler, 1951)
formula:

where:
Δ=pipe deflection (assuming horizontal and vertical deflections are equal);
D=mean diameter of the pipe;
k=a constant, dependent on the angle, between contact points, over which the
trench bed supports the pipe (typically 0.1 for 65°, 0.083 for 180°);
Pe=soil load per unit area (kN/m2);
Ps=surcharge or traffic load per unit area (kN/m2);
Dl=deflection lag factor, dependent on soil type and compaction;
S=diametrical ring bending stiffness=1000E (t/D)3/12 (kN/m2);
E=modulus of elasticity of the pipe wall (N/mm2);
E =soil stiffness (kN/m2); and 0.061 is derived from assumed (parabolic) load-
ing over a 100° lateral support angle.

For granular soils Dl is unity; long term, in clay, the value may be 3 or more. Where
the cover is less than 2.5 m and where the pipeline will be under sustained pressure
within a year of installation, long-term deflection may be reduced by a re-rounding
factor:

where Pi is the internal pressure in bar.

Diurnal variations in pressure in distribution mains should be taken into account in

deciding the re-rounding factor.

Embedment soil stiffness depends on the nature of the soil, the degree of com-
paction, the amount of overburden and degree of saturation. Values for granular
soils are given in BS EN 1295-1 for different degrees of compaction. These values
may be considered to be suitable for the least favourable situations – soil fully
saturated and with little cover. Stiffness values quoted by AWWA and AASHTO tend
to be rather higher and some sources show variation with soil cover and groundwater
level (Little, 2004). Compaction is quoted either as percent Proctor (modified Proctor
density (Mp) – which corresponds to the heavy compaction test to BS 1377 or ASTM
D1557) or, for granular materials, to relative density to ASTM D6938. Soil stiffness
can also be derived from laboratory tests. Native soil stiffness (Little, 2004) may be
estimated from SPT or other test results with correction for depth or from undrained
shear strength. AWWA M11 quotes the accuracy of predicted deflections for different
degrees of soil compaction; it does not cover native soil modulus.

Ring bending stress is not addressed in thin wall steel pipe design but is included in
design of PVC and PE (thermoplastics) pipe; bending strain is considered for design
of GRP (thermosetting) pipe. Wall thickness for plastic pipe is usually expressed as a
minimum but thickness tolerance is not covered. Bending stress is given by:

where E is the flexural modulus of elasticity of the pipe material and Df is a strain
factor, dependent on pipe and soil stiffness, and is given in BS EN 1295-1 and
other references. For PVC and PE pipe the sum of bending stress and hoop stress is
required to be less than the design value. The approach is similar for GRP but uses
a criterion of strain. Designs for plastics pipes need to take into account both the
initial short-term and the long-term characteristics.

> Read full chapter

FAILURE OF A FLEXIBLE PIPE WITH

A CONCRETE LINER
MARK TALESNICK, RAFAEL BAKER, in Failure Analysis Case Studies II, 2001

4 GENERAL DESIGN PERSPECTIVE AND PURPOSE OF IN-

VESTIGATION
It is common to define two major categories of soil-pipe systems:

Flexible pipes. In this case the pipe is prevented from collapsing through the
mobilization of soil reaction. In order to mobilize the soil reaction the pipe must
deform. A successful design in this case depends on the ability of the pipe to retain
its functional and structural integrity under the deformation required to mobilize
soil resistance. This case represents a typical soil structure interaction problem.

Rigid pipes. The common design assumption for this category of pipe is that their
load carrying capacity is independent of the reaction of the surrounding soil, and
pipe deformation is neglected.

It is not obvious to which of the above categories the present pipe belongs. On one
hand, being basically a thin-walled steel pipe its unrestrained load carrying capacity
is rather low, making it a natural member of the flexible pipe category. On the other
hand, the brittle inner concrete liner may be damaged (cracked) at deformations
below those required to mobilize sufficient soil reaction.

It appears, therefore, that the pipe under consideration represents a borderline case
which does not obviously belong to either one of the common design categories.
Proper pipe design requires analysis of the soil pipe system, rather than use of
standard design methodologies.

The objective of the present investigation was to determine the cause(s) of damage
and the areas responsible. For this purpose it was necessary to determine mechanical
properties of the pipe section, and soil conditions in the field. A secondary objective
of the investigation was to study the suitability of the pipe as a structural shell for
a more flexible insert which would act as a barrier between the flowing corrosive
sewage and the steel pipe. For this purpose it was necessary to evaluate the structural
integrity of the pipe in its present, damaged, condition.

5 EXPERIMENTAL PROGRAM
The experimental program consisted of two components. The first was laboratory
testing of pipe sections in order to determine their stiffness (stiffness factor = EI),
vertical deflection or strain, which induces cracking in the inner pipe liner and
collapse loads. The second was a field investigation which included opening of test
pits at several sections along the pipeline. Excavation of the test pits allowed for
visual description of the soil-trench cross section, and performance of dynamic
cone penetration (DCP) tests within the sand backfill alongside the pipe. The field
investigation was limited to a 330 m pipeline segment.

5.1 Results of tests on pipe sections

Ring compression (bending) tests were carried out on three sections of pipe. Each
section was placed in a hydraulic press and loaded across its vertical diameter by a
line load along the full segment length. Throughout loading of each test section,
vertical and horizontal deflections were monitored. Visual physical damage to the
inner pipe lining (cracking) was also recorded. Figure 3(a) presents the experimental
load deformation curve of one of the pipe sections together with observations with
respect to crack development throughout the test. Figure 3(b) shows that the results
for the three sections are fairly similar.

Fig. 3. Pipe load–deformation tests: (a) including damage observations, (b) compar-
ison of results for three sections tested.

Based on the data presented in Fig. 3 it is possible to obtain the following informa-
tion:

(1) The collapse load of the pipe section is between 50 and 55 kN/m. Collapse
occurred at vertical deflections of 63–87 mm which correspond to diametrical
strains of 5–7%. It is noted that these values characterize the unsupported
behavior of pipe sections.
(2) The maximum moment acting in the pipe section at the collapse load may be
determined by eqn (1), after Timoshenko and Gere [1]. For the pipes tested the
maximum moments at collapse varied between 5.6–6.0 kN m/m,(1)where P is
the collapse load per unit length as noted above, and R is the pipe radius.
(3) The stiffness factor of the pipe (EI) can be determined based on the linear
section of the force deflection curve using eqn (2) [1].(2)where Δy is the vertical
pipe deflection under load per unit length P.The calculated stiffness of the
three pipe sections was found to be approximately 13.5 kN m. It is noted
that the EI is an inherent property of the pipe section which is independent (4)
of lateral support conditions. This experimentally determined pipe stiffness
is representative of the composite pipe cross section, which includes both
concrete layers and the steel core.
Severe cracking of the inner liner wall (defined as a crack opening of 0.3 mm
[2]) occurred at a vertical diametric strain of approximately 1.2%. The working
assumption used throughout the investigation has been that cracking occurs
at the same strain value irrespective of the support conditions. Obviously the
load required to impose this strain level is dependent upon lateral support
conditions.

5.2 Results of field investigation

Dynamic cone penetration testing was performed at several stations along the
investigated portion of the pipeline. Technical details of the testing procedure and
interpretation of results may be found in [3]. The testing was performed following
excavation of the fill material down to the pipe crown. Two or three DCP soundings
were performed within each excavation to a depth of approximately 1.6–1.8 m. The
end point of the sounding was located at a depth of approximately 0.5 m below
the pipe invert. The plots shown in Fig. 4 are typical results found at six stations.
It is noted that, in general, flatter portions of depth–blow count curves represent
material more resistant to penetration. The slope of the depth–blow count curve is
called the DCP number (mm/blow) which characterizes the stiffness of the material
at a particular depth. In general a lower DCP number would indicate stiffer material.
In homogeneous soils low DCP numbers infer dense materials. Figure 5 shows the
distribution with depth of the DCP numbers as inferred from the results shown in
Fig. 4.

Fig. 4. DCP sounding data.

Fig. 5. DCP number versus depth profiles.

At three locations along the pipeline segment considered, test excavations were
opened to depths of 0.5–0.6 m below the pipe invert. The excavations were made
at locations where DCP soundings had been performed. Groundwater was encoun-
tered in each of the excavations. In order to enable visual examination, water in
the excavations was pumped out. The examination revealed the following qualitative
features in each of the test pits (see Fig. 6).

Fig. 6. Schematic of visual observations in test excavation: (a) cross-section, (b)

longitudinal section.

(1) Sand backfill of thickness between 10–35 cm was found below the pipe invert.
It is noted that the design called for the pipe to be placed directly on the
gravel layer. The best available information indicates that the pipe was laid out(2)
according to the design specifications.
Below the sand backfill a layer of natural clay subgrade approximately 5–25 cm(3)
in thickness was found. The thickness of this intermediate layer increases from
the invert of the pipe towards the trench wall (see Fig. 6(a)).
Below the intermediate clay layer the gravel base was found, and below it, the
natural clay subgrade.

The sand backfill in the zone of the pipe haunches was found to be very loose,
significantly less dense than the sand fill in the upper part of the trench. The
gravel layer was seen to be completely impregnated by a mixture of the natural clay
subgrade and the sand backfill.

Figure 7 shows very good correlation between the actual soil profile revealed by
the visual examination (Fig. 6) and the results of the corresponding DCP sounding
shown in Fig 4. The location of the discontinuities in the distribution of DCP
numbers shown in Fig. 5 are generally consistent with the layer boundaries in the
lower portion of the trench profile. Breakpoint A shown in Fig. 7 implies that the
sand below mid pipe elevation (haunch zone) is considerably looser than the sand
above this level. Breakpoint A is a common feature of all the plots shown in Fig. 4
and Fig. 5.

Fig. 7. DCP sounding profile, excavation profile composite.

Despite variations in the absolute value of the DCP numbers, each of the sounding
profiles shown in Fig. 5 have the following common features:

(1) There is a marked increase in DCP number at depths between 75–145 cm

below the pipe crown which corresponds to the bottom part (haunches) of the
pipe section.
(2) There is a marked decrease in DCP number at elevations corresponding to the
visually observed gravel layer below the pipe invert, followed by an increase in
DCP numbers as the sounding entered the natural clay subgrade.

> Read full chapter

Pipeline Design and Construction

Don D. Ratnayaka, ... K. Michael Johnson, in Water Supply (Sixth Edition), 2009

15.6 Flexible Pipe Design

Flexible pipe design principles apply to steel and plastics but can also be applied
to large diameter ductile iron pipe under large loads. For steel pipes greater than
about DN 750 (or D/t about 120 to 140, depending on conditions) the theoretical
pipe thickness to meet usual internal pressures is frequently less than the thickness
required to limit deflection under backfill load. To save adding extra steel thickness
for stiffening the pipe against backfill load, the pipe may be laid under ‘controlled
backfill’ conditions with the pipe being laid on a thin layer of uncompacted sand or
on a preformed circular invert (60° width) in sand or fine gravel and selecting and
carefully compacting the sidefill in shallow equal layers either side of the pipe to
achieve a required soil stiffness.

At large diameters, temporary jacks may be inserted (in steel pipes) to maintain
circularity or to predeflect the pipe upwards but care must be taken to spread jack
loads to avoid damage to the lining. As the sidefill progresses the jacks may be
removed depending on the degree of predeflection. Deflection is measured during
embedment construction and, if it exceeds the permissible value, the backfill should
be removed and replaced to obtain the necessary circularity. Measurements should
be continued periodically after installation and checked at critical sections before the
pipe is filled for testing.

Deflection of flexible pipes is usually calculated using the Spangler formula:

where:

Δ = pipe deflection (assuming horizontal and vertical deflections are equal);

D = mean diameter of the pipe;
k = a constant, dependent on the angle, between contact points, over which
the trench bed supports the pipe (typically 0.1 for 65°, 0.083 for 180°);
Pe = soil load per unit area (kN/m2);
Ps = surcharge or traffic load per unit area (kN/m2);
D1 = deflection lag factor, dependent on soil type and compaction
S = diametrical ring bending stiffness = 1000. E (t/D)3/12 (kN/m2);
E = modulus of elasticity of the pipe wall (N/mm2);
E´ = soil stiffness (kN/m2); and

0.061 is derived from assumed (parabolic) loading over a 100° lateral support angle.

For granular soils D1 is unity. Long term, in clay, the value may be 3 or more.
Where the cover is less than 2.5 m and where the pipeline will be under sustained
pressure within a year of installation, long term deflection may be reduced by a
re-rounding factor DR = 1 − (Pi/40), where Pi is the internal pressure in bar. Diurnal
variations in pressure in distribution mains should be taken into account in deciding
the re-rounding factor.
Embedment soil stiffness E´2 depends on the nature of the soil, the degree of
compaction, the amount of overburden and degree of saturation. Values for granular
soils are given in BS EN 1295-1 for different degrees of compaction. These values
may be considered to be suitable for the least favourable situations—soil fully
saturated and with little cover. Stiffness values quoted by AWWA and AASHTO tend
to be rather higher and some sources show variation with soil cover and ground
water level (Little, 2004). Compaction is quoted either as per cent Proctor (modified
Proctor density, Mp—which corresponds to the heavy compaction test to BS 1377)
or, for granular materials, to relative density. Soil stiffness can also be derived from
laboratory tests. The overall soil modulus is modified to take account of the trench
side soil if the native soil modulus is less than 5 MN/m2 and if the trench width
is less than 4.3 times the pipe diameter. Native soil stiffness (Little, 2004) may be
estimated from SPT or other test results with correction for depth or to undrained
shear strength. AWWA M11 quotes accuracy of predicted deflections for different
soil compaction; it does not cover native soil modulus.

Ring bending stress is traditionally not addressed in steel pipe design but is included
in design of PVC and PE (thermoplastics) pipe; bending strain is considered for de-
sign of GRP (thermosetting) pipe. Pipe thickness for plastic pipe is usually expressed
as a minimum but thickness tolerance is not covered. Bending stress is given by bs
= E Df (Δ/D) (t/D), where E is the flexural modulus of elasticity of the pipe material
and Df is a strain factor, dependent on pipe and soil stiffness and is given in BS
EN 1295-1 and other references. For PVC and PE pipe the sum of bending stress
and hoop stress is required to be less than the design value. The approach is similar
for GRP but uses a criterion of strain. Designs for plastics pipes need to take into
account both the initial short term and the long term characteristics.

Deflection limits vary according to pipe material. Deflection limits quoted in AWWA
M11 for steel pipe are as follows:

mortar lined and coated 2% of diameter

mortar lined and flexible coated 3% of diameter

flexible lined and coated 5% of diameter

Deflections can be allowed to exceed the limit of 2% frequently quoted where pipes
are lined with cement mortar after installation or for flexible linings. However, if
large deflections are to be permitted then for steel pipes it would seem consistent
to carry out a more detailed analysis, including ring bending stress, but adopting a
design factor greater than the traditional value of 0.5 and taking into account the
stress strain characteristics which differ from those applying to plastics.

> Read full chapter

ScienceDirect is Elsevier’s leading information solution for researchers.
Copyright © 2018 Elsevier B.V. or its licensors or contributors. ScienceDirect ® is a registered trademark of Elsevier B.V. Terms and conditions apply.