Proceeding of Ocean, Mechanical and Aerospace October 21, 2015

-Science and Engineering-, Vol.2

Ultra Deep Water Subsea Pipeline Design and Assessment

J.Koto,a,b,c,*, Abdul Khair.J,a,band Ali Selamat,b

a)
Department of Aeronautics, Automotive and Ocean Engineering, Mechanical Engineering, UniversitiTeknologi Malaysia, Malaysia
b)
High Performance Computing, Centre for Information and Communication Technology, UniversitiTeknologi Malaysia, Malaysia
c)
Ocean and Aerospace Research Institute, Indonesia

*Corresponding author:[email protected]& [email protected]

Paper History depths the technical challenges of the subsea system become
increasingly severe and the need for optimizing of production
Received: operations become more important in the industry.
Received in revised form: The ultra-deep water is a severe condition that leads to a
Accepted: challenge to the subsea pipeline during installation and operation.
In the installation, the subsea pipeline is subjected to external
pressure that may cause to collapse the pipeline structure. When
the pipeline is operated at high pressure and high temperature
ABSTRACT (HP/HT), the pipeline generate stresses axially and longitudinally,
which comes from internal pressure that may lead to be burst in
The ultra-deep water is a severe condition that leads to a the pipeline. The difference of internal pressure and external
challenge to the subsea pipeline during installation and operation. pressure could have influenced the stresses along with the subsea
Subsea pipeline is subjected to extreme internal and external pipeline that impact on the wall thickness of the subsea pipeline.
pressures. The difference of internal and external pressures in Therefore, an evaluation of the pipeline behavior should be
ultra-deep water is a critical issue in selection of wall thickness of performed in order to ensure the pipeline structural integrity are
subsea pipeline to be safe during installation and operation. In this safe during installation and operation and comply with the
paper, design and assessment of subsea pipeline in ultra-deep lifetime period of operation.
water is presented using Subsea Pro Simulation based on safety On the other side, buckling is inevitable for subsea pipeline
zone. In the software, the safety zone is determined based on because of the pipeline will attempt to expand and contract during
internal and external loads acting on subsea pipeline.Results of extreme pressure and temperature of internal pipeline, moreover
simulation agree with current operating wall thickness. the line is not free to move due to friction effect between pipe and
soil consequently compressive forces are axially distributed along
the pipe. Buckling is considered as instability of pipeline leading
KEY WORDS:Safety Zone; Wall Thickness; Subsea Pipeline; to potential hazards for severe operation of the pipeline. A
Ultra-Deep Wate. number of failures have experienced in pipeline such as upheaval
buckling on buried pipeline, lateral buckling on the seabed and
the like. It is important to study and predict the possible buckling
NOMENCLATURE of subsea pipeline at designated location. Many researchers have
investigated the catastrophes of pipeline and the associated
Thickness of subsea pipeline
literatures.
Diameter of Subsea pipeline
Offshore pipelines are installed and operated in the harsh
environments which have to withstand to the subsea
environmental load coming from hydrostatic pressure, sea current
1.0 INTRODUCTION and sea water temperature and soil friction at the seabed. The
level of water depth is unequal in the seabed following the seabed
In the subsea oil and gas development continue into deep water contour. In this circumstance, subsea pipeline is subjected to
and remote region, meanwhile offshore oil and gas companies are internal and external pressure in the different of water depth, such
now being planned in water depths 2000 m and greater. At these

38 Published by International Society of Ocean, Mechanical and Aerospace -scientists and engineers- “Marine Engineering”
 Proceeding of Ocean, Mechanical and Aerospace October 21, 2015
-Science and Engineering-, Vol.2

as shallow water, deep water and ultra-deep water. The for pressure containment which is called Load Resistance Factor
differences of internal and external pressures cause the selections Design (LRFD). The LRFD principle is the design load is not
of wall thicknesses are to be critical during installation and exceed the design resistance of the pipeline.
operation. In addition, the internal pressure causes the pipelines to Andrew Palmer (1998) reported that the conventional pipeline
be buckled, as well as the external pressure causes to collapse the design in deep water must withstand to external hydrostatic
pipeline structure. pressure. The pipeline is laid with air-filled during installation to
resist collapse and buckle propagation. The wall thickness of pipe
will be high and other difficulties with welding, possible repair
2.0 DESIGN AND CHALLENGE CONSIDERATION and corresponding to high cost. The need of medium-filled to
OF SUBSEA PIPELINE pipeline will be a question for engineering, meanwhile the inside
pipeline will not be permitted to be empty to prevent a collapse.
M.BabsOyeneyin (2012) reported that the International Energy When the water is used to fill in the pipeline, it will affect to
Foundation forecasts the increasing demand of oil consumption submerge weight of pipeline induce high tension on the topside.
will be a shortfall of the petroleum industry, whereas the oil field Alternative lighter liquids might have advantages to reduce
of exploration will continue from deep water to ultra-deep water. submerge weight such as pentane which it has a density of 626.2
The subsea production system will operate at severe internal and kg/m3 and boils at 36.1°C. The density of liquid will influence
environmental condition have a need of advance technology to the top tension of pipeline with the result that the thickness of
flow the crude oil. The major challenges for the companies are pipeline is selected to withstand the load.
how to optimize production, minimize operational cost and lndu K. Mahendran et al (1997) studied The API and ASME
guarantee multiphase flow in order to enhance the production and restrict the selection of pipe wall thickness for the application of
safety construction. Transportation of crude oil is one of High Pressure and Temperature by mean of Burst Limit State
challenge for subsea production system, there are some critical Design principles to design subsea pipeline. The burst pressure
issue, especially in subsea pipelines which are need to be limit state is a model to predict the strength of pipeline against the
reviewed to guarantee flow assurance. internal load and to acquire the reliable structure of subsea
Maryam Maddahi et al (2011) stated that the prominent task in pipeline. The objective of limit state design is to estimate the
order to sustain the oil and gas production are the Selection of strength of the pipeline structure respect to internal loads
offshore facilities and flow assurance type. The offshore concepts
offer the feature and advantage of offshore production facilities
and introduces common component of the subsea completion 3.0 BASIC THEORIES ON SUBSEA PIPELINE
system. The remoteness of production area with the harsh
environment becomes a great challenge in the design of oil and This section provides the description of subsea pipeline theory
gas production. The feasibility study will necessitate the related to the design of subsea pipeline by considering internal
development and implementation of technological solution to and external pressure. The internal pressure induces an expansion
achieve the oil production. Different Area of oil production will and lead to buckle during operation. The external pressure causes
cause different way to build the offshore production furthermore the pipeline to be collapse during installation and operation.
the right selection of facilities and subsea component are needed
to avoid failure and high expenditure. 3.1 Hoop Stress
Ragnar T et al (2000) reported a pilot study for a DEEPPIPE The primary requirement of the pipe wall-thickness selection is to
project that the deep water has a great challenge to transport oil sustain the stresses for pressure containment. The tensile hoop
and gas production. This challenge imposes to high cost stress is due to the difference between internal and external
construction and operation. In consequence, the pipeline design pressure, and is not to exceed the permissible value as given by
must meet the tight requirement. The objective of the design was the following hoop stress criterion (DNV - 2000):
to provide more effective cost of installation and operation with
regard to acceptance criteria for material selection, welded joint, ή – . (3.1)
service and testing for pipelines. Tension and fatigue test were
carried out for the material to assure the mechanical properties. Where: the usage factor for pressure containment is expressed as
Allowable stress and strain refer to the DNV OS F101, whereas
the global bending was considered as high strain and stress .
intensification occurred. For installation, The S-Lay method is ή (3.2)
√ . . .
effective cost to be applied where the pipelines are jointed at
welding station. where; = Strength of material, = Resistance factor of
Hermann Moshagen (1998) said that the design of subsea material, = safety class factor and = incidental of design
pipeline must comply with the pipeline design codes such as pressure ratio
ANSI/ASME B31.4, API RP 1111, DNV F 101 Design
Guidelines. The pipeline standard gives the strict requirements for The allowable hoop-stress the criterion of ABS (2000) to be
design, materials, construction, operation and maintenance to expressed by the following equation:
assure that the pipelines are safe to be operated during a lifetime
period without any failures or structure instabilities occurred, . . (3.3)
such as buckling, fatigue, out of roundness and excessive free
spans and etc. The DNV OS F101 gives the design requirement The hoop stress in a pipe can be formulated as below:

39 Published by International Society of Ocean, Mechanical and Aerospace -scientists and engineers- “Marine Engineering”
 Proceedin ng of Ocean n, Mechaniical and Aeerospace October 21, 20015
-Science an ng-, Vol.2
nd Engineerin

44.0 FIELD DE
ESCRIPTION
N
(3.4)
TThis research uses Medgazz Gas Transm mission Projecct by
3.2 Burst Presssure Design completion of subsea
s pipelinee linking Algerria and Spain across
a
The pipeline is i filled with ppressurized liqquid or gas whhich is thhe Mediterraneean Sea as shoown in figure.1, to overcom me the
called the intternal pressuree. The internaal pressure gennerates challenges of 2,,155 meters waater depth. Thee pipelines are made
stresses in the pipeline. If the stresses exceeed the limit strrength, oof X70 API Grade
G Steel. Thhe Medgaz suubsea pipeline route
then the pipeliine will be bursst. Burst pressuure can be form
mulated trraverses variouus contours of sea bottom ass shown in figuure.1.
as follows: TThe route startss from Algeriann Coastline to Spanish continental.
TThe route has some area witth sandy sedim ments and a clayey
c
(3.55) seection betweenn the shore approach and the outer shelf. Bu uckles
ppotentially occuurred from KP-222 to KP-37. Th he pipeline has been
Where; , , = buurst design facctor of ddesigned for 50 5 years life time period and a using diffferent
internal pressuure 0.90 for piipeline and 0.7
75 for riser, = joint thhickness of conncrete coating (445mm and 80 mm).
m
factor of weld,, = Temperatuure derating facctor, 1.0 for tem
mp less
than 1210C, =Specified Miinimum Burst Pressure,
P =Pipeline
Design pressurre, and = Hyddrostatic test preessure

(3.6)

Where: D= outtside diameter for D/t >15

Substituting the pressure tesst:

(3.7)

(3.8)

3.3. Collapse Pressure

P Desiggn Figure 1: Route
R Map of M
Medgaz Pipeline (OTC20770)
API RP 1111 1 provides a formula
f to dettermine the coollapse
pressure as folllows:

(3.9)

Where
(3.10)

(3.11)

Timoshenko anda Gere (19661), propose the

t following design
equation collappse pressure
Figure2: Seabed
S profile along
a the route (OTC20770).
(3.12) 44.1Design Paraameters
TThis section presents the desiign parameterss which includde the
ddata related to pipeline geomeetry, mechaniccal properties of
o the
3.4 External Pressure
P
mmaterial and opeeration and environmental load
ds.
External pressure is an impoortant factor whhich should bee taken
into considerattion in the desiggn of subsea piipeline. The Exxternal
Table1: Parrameter Designn
pressure of suubsea pipeline comes from hydrostatic pressure,
which varies too every water ddepth level. Thee hydrostatic prressure Parameter Unitt Valuee
is critical in the
t deep and ultra-deep watter that may lead l to O
Outside Diameteer mmm 609.66
collapse of pip
peline structure. In order to deetermine a hydrrostatic C
Current Wall thiickness mmm 29.9
pressure for a certain
c water deepth could be caalculated as follows: P
Pipe Material Grrade - X70
Y
Young’s Moduluus (E) GPaa 207
(
(3.13) T
Thermal Expanssion Coef.(α) C-1 1.17x10EE-05
C
Content density (Gas) Kg/m m3 0.6688
D
Design Pressuree MPaa 22

40 P
Published by Internaational Society of Ocean,
O Mechanical and
a Aerospace -scienntists and engineers- “Marine Engineeering”
 Proceeding of Ocean, Mechanical and Aerospace October 21, 2015
-Science and Engineering-, Vol.2

0
Operating Temperature C 60
Seawater Density Kg/m3 1027
Water Depth of Ultra-Deep Water m 2155
External Pressure MPa 3.5
Target Project Life Year 50
0
Ambient Temperature C 15

5.0 RESULT AND DISCUSSION (a) (b)

Figure 4: Subsea Pro Simulation Software.
Results of simulation using the Subsea Pro Simulation are shown
in Figures 3 ~ 9. Subsea pipeline wall thickness is crucial
parameter when it interfaces with internal and external pressures
in deep and ultra- deep waters. Figure.3 demonstrates wall
thickness of subsea pipeline versus burst and collapse pressures.
External pressure was calculated using hydrostatic equation (light
green line for shallow, yellow line for deep and red for ultra-
deep) and collapse and burst pressures were calculated using API
rules.
Based on burst pressure results, the accepted minimum wall
thickness of subsea pipeline is 14 mm for all water depths, which
is shown by the crossing line between operating pressure and
burst pressure as shown by a dash line in figure.3. In shallow
water, it is indicated that burst pressure becomes dominant to be Figure 5:Dimension of subsea pipeline.
considered in the selection of wall thickness, when compared to
collapse pressure. For deep water and ultra-deep water, collapse
pressure becomes dominant, which is important to be considered
in the selection of wall thickness. On the other hand, based on
collapse pressure analysis, the minimum wall thickness differs for
various water depths, as shown in the figure.3 an example: 12 mm
for shallow, 18 mm for deep and 24 mm for ultra-deep. For deep
water and ultra-deep water, collapse pressure is dominant to be
considered to determine wall thickness of subsea pipeline.
Figures.4.a shows front page of Subsea Pro Simulation
Software. This software was developed under Joint International
Research Centre which can be download website as shown in
Figure.4.b. Figures.5 and 6 show predicted wall thickness of
subsea pipeline at shallow and ultra-deep waters using Subsea Pro Figure 6:Operational properties of subsea pipeline.
Simulation Software. The predicted wall thickness showed good
agreement with current operation wall thickness which is 23.4
mm and 31.8 mm.

Figure 7:Static, stress and collapse analysis of subsea pipeline

Figure 3:Safety Zone based on burst and collapse pressures

analysis.

41 Published by International Society of Ocean, Mechanical and Aerospace -scientists and engineers- “Marine Engineering”
 Proceeding of Ocean, Mechanical and Aerospace October 21, 2015
-Science and Engineering-, Vol.2

Conference.
2. Amitabh Kumar, B. M. M. (Texas May 2009). "Global
Buckling and Axial Stability for HPHT." Offshore
Technology Conference (OTC) 20126.
3. Andrew Palmer, U. E. D., Cambridge, England
(Houston,1998). "A Radical Alternative Approach to Design
and Construction of Pipelines in Deep Water." Offshore
Technology Conference (OTC)-8670.
4. Ballard, R. J. a. J. C. (Houston, USA May 2011.). "Axial
pipe soil interaction a suggested frame work." Offshore
Technology Conference (OTC) 22010.
5. Bakhtiary, A. Y., A. Ghaheri, et al. (2007). "Analysis of
Figure 8: Selected wall thickness at ultra-deep water using Subsea Offshore Pipeline Allowable Free Span Length."
Pro Simulation software. International Journal Of Civil Engineering
6. BAI, Y. and Q. BAI (2010). ‘’Subsea Engineering
Handbook.’’ USA, ELSEVIER.
7. Collberg, O. F. a. L. (2005). "Influence of Pressure in
Pipeline Design – Effective Axial Force." 24th International
Conference on Offshore Mechanics and Arctic Engineering
(OMAE 2005).
8. Det Norske Veritas. DNV 2007. Offshore standard DNV-
OS-F101: submarine pipeline systems. Hovik, Norway: Det
Norske Veritas, DNV.
9. Elsayed, T., M. Fahmy, et al. (2012). "A Finite Element
Model for Subsea Pipeline Stability and Free Span
Screening." Canadian Journal on Mechanical Sciences &
Engineering 3(1): 13.
Figure 9:Design of selected wall thickness at ultra-deep water 10. Frazer, D. P. a. I. (USA, 2006). "Mitigation Methods for
using Subsea Pro Simulation software Deepwater Pipeline Instability Induced by Pressure and
Temperature Variations." Offshore Technology
Conference(OTC), OTC-17815.
6.0 CONCLUSION 11. Fyrileiv, O. and L. Collberg (2005). "Influence of Pressure
in Pipeline Design – Effective Axial." 24th International
In conclusion, this research determines and evaluates safety zone Conference on Offshore Mechanics and Arctic Engineering,
of wall thickness in design of subsea pipeline using Subsea Pro OMAE2005(67502): 8.
Simulation. As a case study, Medgaz project was applied. In the 12. Guarracino, F., M. Fraldi and A. Giordano (2008). "Analysis
method, internal and external pressures are two parameters which of testing methods of pipelines for limit state design."
are needed to be considered in selection of wall thickness. In Applied Ocean Research 30(4): 297-304.
shallow, burst pressure becomes dominant instead of collapse 13. Hermann Moshagen, E. G., Sverre Lund and Richard Verley
pressure. Safety zone of wall thickness is determined based on (1998). "New International Standards for Offshore
burst pressure. For deep and ultra-deep water, collapse pressure Pipelines." International Offshore and Polar Engineering
becomes dominant instead of burst pressure, hence safety zone of Conference (May 24-29,1998).
wall thickness based on burst pressure. This configuration 14. Han S. Ghoi, Hudson Engineering Corporation. (1995).
provides a safety zone of wall thickness for every water depth. "Expansion Analysis of Offshore Pipelines Close to
Predicted wall thickness using Results of simulation shows Restraints." International Offshore and Polar
Engineering Conference. (Vol-II)
15. Hauch, S. and Y. Bai (1999). "BENDING MOMENT
CAPACITY OF PIPES." Offshore Mechanical and Arctic
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS Engineering PL-99(5033).
The authors would like to convey a great appreciation to
16. lndu K. Mahendran, A. M. A.-S., INTEC Engineering Inc.;
Mechanical Engineering and Centre for Information and
Charles D. Young, Conoco, Inc.; Carl C. Langner, Shell
Communication Technology, UniversitiTeknologi Malaysia and
Development Co (1997). "Limit State Design of Subsea
Ocean and Aerospace Research Institute, Indonesia for supporting
Flowlines for Pressure Containment." Offshore Technology
this research.
Conference (OTC 8526).
17. J. Guijt, A. S. N. S. (Houston USA 1990). "Upheaval
Buckling of Offshore Pipelines: Overview and Introduction."
REFERENCE Offshore Technology Conference (OTC) 6487.
18. James Wang, R. B. (2010). "An Efficient Global, Local and
1. A Fathi, J. R. C. (2011). "Effect of Cross sectional Strain Solid Finite Element Modeling Approach for Pipeline
Distribution on the Critical Buckling Strain of Energy Expansion Loops" International Offshore and Polar
Pipeline" International Offshore and Polar Engineering

42 Published by International Society of Ocean, Mechanical and Aerospace -scientists and engineers- “Marine Engineering”
 Proceeding of Ocean, Mechanical and Aerospace October 21, 2015
-Science and Engineering-, Vol.2

Engineering Conference.
19. Jiong Guan, P. R. N. (2008). "Design Loads Uncertainties
Study - Thermal Buckling of Subsea Pipelines." The
International Society of Offshore and Polar Engineers
(ISOPE).
20. Levold, S. S. a. E. (Norway 1995). "High Temperature
Snaking Behaviour of Pipelines." The International Society
of Offshore and Polar Engineers (ISOPE).
21. Liming Liu, T. Z., Xiaonggang Yang (Portugal, July 2007.).
"Design of HT Subsea Pipeline against upheaval buckling by
Pre-heating before Trenched." The International Society of
Offshore and Polar Engineers (ISOPE).
22. Liu, Y. X. (2011). "Control Method of Subsea Pipeline
Lateral Buckling." Applied Mechanics and Materials 71-78:
5030-5033.
23. Maddahi, M. (2011). "A review on Offshore Concepts and
feasibility study consideration." Society of Petroleum
Engineer (SPE).
24. Maconochie, J. O. a. A. (London, UK 2007). "The Axial
Resistance of Buried and Unburied Pipelines." International
Offshore Site Investigation and Geotechnics Conference.
25. J. Chaudhuri, P. L. M. P., Saipem Energy Services and M.
Pulici, SaipemS.p.A (Houston-USA 2010). "The MEDGAZ
Project Ultra deep water pipeline" Offshore Technology
Conference,OTC 20770.
26. Novák, P., et al. (2013). "High-Pressure Pipelines Repaired
by Steel Sleeve and Epoxy Composition." Applied
Mechanics and Materials 486: 181-188.
27. N.I Thusyantan, S. M., D.J Robert, KW Ltd,
J.Wang&S.K.Haigh, (USA 2011). "Upheaval buckling
Assessment Based on Pipeline Features." Offshore
Technology Conference (OTC) 21802.
28. Nourpanah, N. (2008/2009). Subsea Pipelines,
DALHOUSIE UNIVERSITY: 80.
29. Olav Fyrileiv, O. A. a. A. V. and N. Det Norske Veritas
H0Vik (1996). "Analysis of Expansion Curves for
Subsea Pipelines." lntemalional Offshore and Polar
Engineering Conference.
30. Oyeneyin, B. M. (2011). "Challenges of Deepwater
Developments." Advanced Materials Research 367: 367-
373.
31. Palmer, A. C. and R. A. King (2008). Subsea Pipeline
Engineering, Pennwell Corporation.
32. Palmer, A. C. and M. T. S. Ling (1981). "Movements of
Submarine Pipelines Close to Platforms." Offshore
Technology Conference (OTC 4067): 8.

43 Published by International Society of Ocean, Mechanical and Aerospace -scientists and engineers- “Marine Engineering”