DNV RP F105

RECOMMENDED PRACTICE DNV-RP-F105
FREE SPANNING PIPELINES

MARCH 2002
DET NORSKE VERITAS

--`,`,`````,`````,```,,`,,,`,,`-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---
Document provided by IHS Licensee=Intec Engineering/5937045100, User=, 06/06/2003 02:07:25 MDT Questions or comments about this message: please call the Document Policy Management Group at 1-800-451-1584.
FOREWORD
DET NORSKE VERITAS (DNV) is an autonomous and independent foundation with the objectives of safeguarding life, property and the environment, at sea and onshore. DNV undertakes classification, certification, and other verification and consultancy services relating to quality of ships, offshore units and installations, and onshore industries worldwide, and carries out research in relation to these functions. DNV Offshore Codes consist of a three level hierarchy of documents: Offshore Service Specifications. Provide principles and procedures of DNV classification, certification, verification and consultancy services. Offshore Standards. Provide technical provisions and acceptance criteria for general use by the offshore industry as well as the technical basis for DNV offshore services. Recommended Practices. Provide proven technology and sound engineering practice as well as guidance for the higher level Offshore Service Specifications and Offshore Standards.
DNV Offshore Codes are offered within the following areas: A) Qualification, Quality and Safety Methodology B) Materials Technology C) Structures D) Systems E) Special Facilities F) Pipelines and Risers G) Asset Operation
Comments may be sent by e-mail to rules@dnv.com For subscription orders or information about subscription terms, please use distribution@dnv.com Comprehensive information about DNV services, research and publications can be found at http://www.dnv.com, or can be obtained from DNV, Veritasveien 1, N-1322 Hvik, Norway; Tel +47 67 57 99 00, Fax +47 67 57 99 11. Det Norske Veritas. All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced or transmitted in any form or by any means, including photocopying and recording, without the prior written consent of Det Norske Veritas. Computer Typesetting (FM+SGML) by Det Norske Veritas. Printed in Norway by GCS AS.
--`,`,`````,`````,```,,`,,,`,,`-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---
If any person suffers loss or damage which is proved to have been caused by any negligent act or omission of Det Norske Veritas, then Det Norske Veritas shall pay compensation to such person for his proved direct loss or damage. However, the compensation shall not exceed an amount equal to ten times the fee charged for the service in question, provided that the maximum compensation shall never exceed USD 2 million. In this provision Det Norske Veritas shall mean the Foundation Det Norske Veritas as well as all its subsidiaries, directors, officers, employees, agents and any other acting on behalf of Det Norske Veritas.
Recommended Practice DNV-RP-F105, March 2002 Page 3
CONTENTS
1 General .........................................................................4 1.1 Introduction.......................................................4 1.2 Objective...........................................................4 1.3 Scope and Application ......................................4 1.4 Safety philosophy .............................................5 1.5 Free Span Response Classification ...................6 1.6 Flow regimes.....................................................6 1.7 Relationship to other Rules...............................7 1.8 Definitions ........................................................7 1.9 Abbreviations....................................................7 1.10 Symbols ............................................................7 2 Design Criteria ...........................................................10 2.1 General............................................................10 2.2 Temporal classification...................................10 2.3 Screening Fatigue Criteria ..............................10 2.4 Fatigue Criterion .............................................11 2.5 ULS Criterion .................................................12 2.6 Safety Factors .................................................13 3 Environmental Conditions ........................................15 3.1 General............................................................15 3.2 Current conditions...........................................15 3.3 Short-term wave conditions ............................16 3.4 Reduction functions ........................................18 3.5 Long-term environmental modelling ..............18 3.6 Return Period Values ......................................19 4 Response Models........................................................ 20 4.1 General ........................................................... 20 4.2 Marginal Fatigue Life Capacity...................... 20 4.3 In-line Response Model.................................. 21 4.4 Cross-flow Response Model........................... 22 Force Model ............................................................... 25 5.1 General ........................................................... 25 5.2 FD solution for In-line direction..................... 25 5.3 Simplified Fatigue Assessment ...................... 26 5.4 Force Coefficients .......................................... 26 Structural Analysis.................................................... 29 6.1 General ........................................................... 29 6.2 Morphological classification .......................... 29 6.3 Structural modelling ....................................... 29 6.4 Functional Loads ............................................ 30 6.5 Static analysis ................................................. 30 6.6 Eigen-value analysis....................................... 31 6.7 Added Mass.................................................... 31 6.8 Approximate response quantities.................... 31 Pipe-soil interaction................................................... 34 7.1 General ........................................................... 34 7.2 Modelling of pipe-soil interaction .................. 34 7.3 Approximate Soil Stiffness............................. 35 7.4 Artificial supports........................................... 38 References .................................................................. 39
--`,`,`````,`````,```,,`,,,`,,`-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---
DET NORSKE VERITAS
acceptance criteria.
1
1.1
General
Introduction
1.1.1 The present document considers free spanning pipelines subjected to combined wave and current loading. The premises for the document are based on technical development within pipeline free span technology in recent R&D projects, as well as design experience from recent and ongoing projects, i.e. DNV Guideline 14, see Mrk & Fyrileiv (1998) The sections regarding Geotechnical Conditions and part of the hydrodynamic model are based on the research performed in the GUDESP project, see Tura et al., (1994). The sections regarding Free Span Analysis and in-line Vortex Induced Vibrations (VIV) fatigue analyses are based on the published results from the MULTISPAN project, see Mrk et al., (1997). Numerical study based on CFD simulations for vibrations of a pipeline in the vicinity of a trench, performed by Statoil, DHI & DNV, see Hansen et al, 2001. Further, recent R&D and design experience e.g. from sgard Transport, ZEEPIPE, TOGI and TROLL OIL pipeline projects are implemented, see Fyrileiv & Mrk (1998). The basic principles applied in this document are in agreement with most recognised rules and reflect state-ofthe-art industry practice and latest research. This document includes a brief introduction of the basic hydrodynamic phenomena, principles and parameters. For a thorough introduction see e.g. Sumer & Fredse, (1997) and Blevins (1994).
1.3.2 Free spans can be caused by: seabed unevenness change of seabed topology (e.g. scouring, sand waves) artificial supports/rock berms etc. 1.3.3 The following environmental flow conditions are described in this document: steady flow due to current; oscillatory flow due to waves; and combined flow due to current and waves. The flow regimes are discussed in section 1.6. 1.3.4 There are no limitations to span length and span gap with respect to application of this Recommended Practice. The basic cross-flow VIV Response model is, however, based on single mode response. In case several potential vibration modes can become active at a given flow velocity, the mode associated with the largest contribution to the fatigue damage shall be applied. Unless otherwise documented the damage contribution for any modes should relate to the same critical (weld) location. 1.3.5 The free span analysis may be based on approximate response expressions or a refined FE approach depending on the free span classification, see section 6.2. The following cases are considered: single spans spans interacting with adjacent/side spans. The stress ranges and natural frequencies should normally be obtained from an FE-approach. Requirements to the structural modelling and free span analyses are given in section 6. 1.3.6 The following models are considered: Response Models (RM) Force Models (FM) An amplitude response model is applicable when the vibration of the free span is dominated by vortex induced resonance phenomena. A force model may be used when the free span response can be found through application of calibrated hydrodynamic loads. The selection of an appropriate model may be based on the prevailing flow regimes, see section 1.6. 1.3.7 The fatigue criterion is limited to stress cycles within the elastic range. Low cycle fatigue due to elastoplastic behaviour is considered outside the scope of this document.
1.2
Objective
1.2.1 The objective of this document is to provide rational design criteria and guidance for assessment of pipeline free spans subjected to combined wave and current loading.
1.3
Scope and Application
1.3.1 Detailed design criteria are specified for Ultimate Limit State (ULS) and Fatigue Limit State (FLS) due to inline and cross-flow Vortex Induced Vibrations (VIV) and direct wave loading. The following topics are considered: methodologies for free span analysis; requirements for structural modelling; geotechnical conditions ; environmental conditions & loads; requirements for fatigue analysis; response and direct wave force analysis models; and
--`,`,`````,`````,```,,`,,,`,,`-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---
1.3.8 Fatigue loads due to trawl interaction, cyclic loads during installation or pressure variations are not considered herein but must be considered as a part of the integrated fatigue damage assessment.
Main Components Structural response
ch. 6 & 7
--`,`,`````,`````,```,,`,,,`,,`-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---
1.3.9 The main aspects of a free span assessment together with key parameters and main results are illustrated in the figure below.
Environmental description
ch. 3
Response model Force model

ch. 4 & 5
Acceptance criteria
ch. 2
Project data
Pipe data Seabed & pipe profile Soil data Lay tension Operational conditions
VR KC a Damping Free span parameters
Safety class Safety factors SN curve
Key Parameters
Current statistics Current profile Wave statistics Wave spectrum Directionality Turbulence
Screening Wave & current Return period values
Design Criteria & Main results
Natural Frequency
OK / not OK (span length)
Fatigue Wave & current long-term description Natural Frequency Stress amplitude Stress ranges No of cycles OK / not OK (fatigue life)
ULS Wave & current Return period values Natural Frequency Stress ranges Static Bending OK / not OK (local buckling)
Extreme stresses
Figure 1-1 Overview of main components in a Free Span Assessment
1.4
Safety philosophy
1.4.1 The safety philosophy adopted herein complies with section 2 in DNV-OS-F101. 1.4.2 The reliability of the pipeline against fatigue failure is ensured by use of a Load and Resistance Factors Design Format (LRFD). For the in-line VIV acceptance criterion, the set of safety factors is calibrated to acceptable target reliability levels using reliability-based methods. For all other acceptance criteria, the recommended safety factors are based on engineering judgement in order to obtain a safety level equivalent to modern industry practice.
DET NORSKE VERITAS
--`,`,`````,`````,```,,`,,,`,,`-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---
1.5
Free Span Response Classification

length. The ranges indicated for the normalised free span length in terms of (L/D) are tentative and given for illustration only.
1.5.1 An overview of typical free span characteristics is given in the table below as a function of the free span
Response description Very little dynamic amplification. Normally not required to perform comprehensive fatigue design check. Insignificant dynamic response from environmental loads expected and unlikely to experience VIV. 30<L/D<100 Response dominated by beam behaviour Typical span length for operating conditions. Natural frequencies sensitive to boundary conditions (and effective axial force). 100<L/D<200 Response dominated by combined beam and cable behaviour Relevant for free spans at uneven seabed in temporary conditions. Natural frequencies sensitive to boundary conditions, effective axial force (including initial deflection, geometric stiffness) and pipe feed in. Response dominated by cable behaviour L/D>200 Relevant for small diameter pipes in temporary conditions. Natural frequencies governed by deflected shape and effective axial force. 1) For hot pipelines (response dominated by the effective axial force) or under extreme current conditions (Uc > 1.0-2.0 m/s) this L/D limit may be misleading.
L/D L/D<30 1)
1.6
Flow regimes
is the significant wave induced velocity amplitude normal to the pipe, see section 4) may be applied to classify the flow regimes as follows:
1.6.1 The current flow velocity ratio, a=Uc/(Uc+Uw) (where Uc is the current velocity normal to the pipe and Uw
a < 0.5
0.5< a < 0.8
a > 0.8
wave dominant - wave superimposed by current. In-line direction: in-line loads may be described according to Morisons formulae, see section 5. Inline VIV due to vortex shedding is negligible. Cross-flow direction: cross-flow loads are mainly due to asymmetric vortex shedding. A response model, see section 4, is recommended. wave dominant current superimposed by wave In-line direction: in-line loads may be described according to Morisons formulae, see section 5. Inline VIV due to vortex shedding is mitigated due to the presence of waves. Cross-flow direction: cross-flow loads are mainly due to asymmetric vortex shedding and resemble the current dominated situation. A response model, see section 4, is recommended. current dominant In-line direction: in-line loads comprises the following components : a steady drag dominated component a oscillatory component due to regular vortex shedding For fatigue analyses a response model applies, see section 4. In-line loads according to Morisons formulae are normally negligible. Cross-flow direction: cross-flow loads are cyclic and due to vortex shedding and resembles the pure current situation. A response model, see section 4, is recommended.
Note that a=0 correspond to pure oscillatory flow due to waves and a =1 corresponds to pure (steady) current flow. The flow regimes are illustrated in Figure 1-2.
6 5
current dominated flow Flow Velocity(Uc+Uw)

4
1.8.4 Marginal Fatigue Capacity is defined as the fatigue capacity (life) with respect to one seastate defined by its significant wave height, peak period and direction. 1.8.5 Response Model is a model where the structural response due to VIV is determined by hydrodynamical parameters. 1.8.6 Span Length is defined as the length where a continuous gap exists, i.e. as the visual span length.
time
wave dominated flow

3 2
a=0.8
a=0.5
1 0 -1 -2
a=0.0
1.9
Abbreviations
concrete stiffness factor force model load and resistance factors design format over-consolidation ratio (only clays) response model (VIV) response domain return period values time domain ulitmate limit state vortex induced vibrations
Figure 1-2 Flow regimes 1.6.2 Oscillatory flow due to waves is stochastic in nature, and a random sequence of wave heights and associated wave periods generates a random sequence of near seabed horizontal oscillations. For VIV analyses, the significant velocity amplitude, Uw, is assumed to represent a single sea-state. This is likely to be a conservative approximation.
CSF FM LRFD OCR RM RD RPV TD ULS VIV
1.7
Relationship to other Rules 1.10 Symbols
1.7.1 This document formally supports and complies with the DNV Offshore Standard Submarine Pipeline Systems, DNV-OS-F101, 2000 and is considered to be a supplement to relevant National Rules and Regulations. 1.7.2 This document is supported by other DNV offshore codes as follows: Recommended Practice DNV-RP-C203 Fatigue Strength Analysis of Offshore Steel Structures Offshore Standard DNV-OS-F201 Dynamic Risers Classification Note No. 30.5 Environmental Conditions and Environmental Loads, 2000. In case of discrepancies between the recommendations, this Document supersedes the Recommended Practice and Classification Notes listed above.
1.10.1 ak a Ae Ai AIL
Latin parameter for rain-flow counting factor characteristic fatigue strength constant
1.8
Definitions
1.8.1 Effective Span Length is the length of an idealised fixed-fixed span having the same structural response in terms of natural frequencies as the real free span supported on soil. 1.8.2 Force Model is in this document a model where the environmental load is based on Morisons force expression. 1.8.3 Gap is defined as the distance between the pipe and the seabed. The gap used in design, as a single representative value, must be characteristic for the free span The gap may be calculated as the average value over the central third of the span.
--`,`,`````,`````,```,,`,,,`,,`-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---
external cross-section area internal cross-section (bore) area inline unit amplitude stress (stress induced by a pipe (vibration mode) deflection equal to an outer diameter D) ACF cross-flow unit amplitude stress As pipe steel cross section area (AY/D) normalised in-line VIV amplitude (AZ/D) normalised cross-flow VIV amplitude B chord corresponding to pipe embedment equal to v or linearisation constant parameter for rainflow counting factor bk Ca added mass coefficient (CM-1) CD drag coefficient CM the inertia coefficient CL coefficient for lateral soil stiffness CV coefficient for vertical soil stiffness CT constant for long-term wave period distribution C1-6 Boundary condition coefficients c(s) soil damping per unit length D pipe outer diameter (including any coating) Dfat deterministic fatigue damage Ds outer steel diameter E Young's modulus EI bending stiffness E seabed gap eprovided void ratio Document by IHS Licensee=Intec Engineering/5937045100, User=, s
06/06/2003 02:07:25 MDT Questions or comments about this message: please call the Document Policy Management Group at 1-800-451-1584.
DET NORSKE VERITAS
(e/D) f0 fsn fs
FL FV fv fw F() g gc gD gI G G(w) Heff HS h I Ic ip k kc kp ks kw K KL KV (k/D) KC KS K0 k1 k2 L La Leff Ls Lsh me m m(s) Mn ni N Ni
seabed gap ratio in-line (f0,in) or cross-flow (f0,cr) natural frequency (determined at no flow around the pipe) concrete construction strength vortex shedding frequency (Strouhal U frequency) = S t D lateral pipe-soil contact force vertical pipe-soil contact force dominating vibration frequency wave frequency distribution function gravity correction function due to steady current drag force term inertia force term shear modulus of soil or incomplete complementary Gamma function frequency transfer function from wave elevation to flow velocity effective lay tension significant wave height water depth, i.e. distance from the mean sea level to the pipe moment of inertia turbulence intensity over 30 minutes plasticity index, cohesive soils Wave number soil parameter or empirical constant for concrete stiffening peak factor soil coefficient normalisation constant soil stiffness lateral (horizontal) dynamic soil stiffness vertical dynamic soil stiffness pipe roughness U Keulegan Carpenter number = w fwD stability parameter =
--`,`,`````,`````,```,,`,,,`,,`-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---
Ntr Nc Nq Ng pe pi Pi q PE Ra Rc RD Rv RIq Rk Re s S Ssw Seff Shh SSS SUU su St t Texposure Tlife Tp Tu Tw U Uc Us Uw v VR w y z zD zm z0 zr
true steel wall axial force soil bearing capacity parameter soil bearing capacity parameter soil bearing capacity parameter external pressure internal pressure probability of occurrence for ith stress cycle deflection load per unit length Euler load = (1+CSF)p2EI/Leff 2 axial soil reaction current reduction factor reduction factor from wave direction and spreading vertical soil reaction reduction factor from turbulence and flow direction reduction factor from damping Reynolds number D=
UD n
4pm e z T rD 2
coefficient of earth pressure at rest soil stiffness soil stiffness free span length, (apparent, visual) length of adjacent span effective span length span length with vortex shedding loads length of span shoulder effective mass per unit length fatigue exponent mass per unit length including structural mass, added mass and mass of internal fluid spectral moments of order n number of stress cycles for stress block i number of independent events in a return period number of cycles to failure for stress block i
spreading parameter stress range, i.e. double stress amplitude stress at intersection between two SN-curves effective axial force wave spectral density stress spectra wave velocity spectra at pipe level undrained shear strength, cohesive soils Strouhal number pipe wall thickness or time load exposure time fatigue design life capacity peak period mean zero up-crossing period of oscillating flow wave period current velocity current velocity normal to the pipe significant wave velocity significant wave induced flow velocity normal to the pipe, corrected for wave direction and spreading vertical soil settlement (pipe embedment) U + Uw reduced velocity = c f0D wave energy spreading function lateral pipe displacement height above seabed or in-line pipe displacement height to the mid pipe macro roughness parameter sea-bottom roughness reference (measurement) height
1.10.2
a ae b D/D Dp i DT
Greek current flow velocity ratio, generalised Phillips constant or Weibull scale parameter temperature expansion coefficient Weibull shape parameter and relative soil stiffness parameter relative trench depth internal pressure difference relative to laying temperature difference relative to laying or storm duration pipe deflection band-width parameter gamma function peak-enhancement factor for JONSWAP spectrum or Weibull location parameter total unit weight of soil submerged unit weight of soil unit weight of water safety factor on stress amplitude safety factor on natural frequency safety factor for cross-flow screening criterion safety factor for in-line screening criterion safety factor on stability parameter safety factor on onset value for VR rainflow counting factor curvature mode shape factor equivalent stress factor usage factor mean value axial friction coefficient lateral friction coefficient Poisson's ratio or kinematic viscosity (1.510-6 [m2/s] mode shape cumulative normal distribution function normal distribution function angle of friction, cohesionless soils correction factor for CM due to pipe roughness correction factor for CM due to effect of pipe in trench reduction factor for CM due to seabed proximity correction factor for CD due to pipe roughness correction factor for CD due to effect of pipe in trench amplification factor for CD due to cross-flow vibrations reduction factor for CD due to seabed proximity correction factor for onset cross-flow due to seabed proximity correction factor for onset cross-flow due to specific mass of the pipe correction factor for onset cross-flow due to waves
ytrench,onset ya,in r rs/r s sc su sdyn sl sN sstat ss qrel q zT zsoil zstr zh w0 w wp tmax
G g
gsoil gsoil gwater gs gf gcr gin gk gon kRFC k l1 lmax h m ma mL f F() j() js yk,CM ytrench,CM yproxi,CM yk,CD ytrench,CD yA,CD yproxi,CD yproxi,onset ymass,onset ya,onset
reduction factor for onset cross-flow due to the effect of a trench correction factor for onset cross-flow due to seabed proximity density of water specific mass ratio between the pipe mass (not including added mass) and the displaced water. stress, spectral width parameter or standard deviation standard deviation of current velocity fluctuations standard deviation of wave induced flow velocity dynamic stress longitudinal stress static axial stress static stress effective soil stress or standard deviation of wave induced stress amplitude relative angle between flow and pipeline direction flow direction total modal damping ratio soil modal damping ratio structural modal damping ratio hydrodynamic modal damping ratio angular natural frequency angular wave frequency angular spectral peak wave frequency soil shear strength
1.10.3 IL CF onset 100year 1year
Subscripts in-line cross-flow onset of VIV 100 year return period value 1 year return period value
--`,`,`````,`````,```,,`,,,`,,`-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---
DET NORSKE VERITAS
2
2.1
Design Criteria
General
2.1.5 Figure 2-1 gives an overview of the required design checks for a free span.
2.2
Temporal classification
2.1.1 For all temporary and permanent free spans a free span assessment addressing the integrity with respect to fatigue and local buckling (ULS) shall be performed. 2.1.2 Vibrations due to vortex shedding and direct wave loads are acceptable provided the fatigue and ULS criteria specified herein is fulfilled. 2.1.3 In case several potential vibration modes can become active at a given flow velocity, the mode associated with the largest contribution to the fatigue damage shall be applied. Unless otherwise documented the damage contribution for any modes should relate to the same critical (weld) location. 2.1.4 The following functional requirements apply: The aim of fatigue design is to ensure an adequate safety against fatigue failure within the design life of the pipeline. The fatigue analysis should cover a period which is representative for the free span exposure period. All stress fluctuations imposed during the entire design life of the pipeline capable of causing fatigue damage shall be accounted for. The local fatigue design checks are to be performed at all free spanning pipe sections accounting for damage contributions from all potential vibration modes related to the actual and neighbouring spans.
Start
2.2.1 The temporal criterion categorises the free span as being caused due to scour or seabed unevenness, i.e. Scour induced free spans are caused by seabed erosion or bed-form activities. The free span scenarios (span length, gap ratio etc.) may change with time. Unevenness induced free spans are caused by an irregular seabed profile. Normally the free span scenario is time invariant unless operational parameters such as pressure and temperature change significantly. 2.2.2 In the case of scour induced spans, where no detailed information is available on the maximum expected span length, gap ratio and exposure time, the following apply: Where uniform conditions exist and no large-scale mobile bed-forms are present the maximum span length may be taken as the length resulting in a statically mid span deflection equal to one external diameter (including any coating). The exposure time may be taken as the remaining operational lifetime or the time duration until possible intervention works will take place. All previous damage accumulation must be included. 2.2.3 Additional information (e.g. free span length, gap ratio, natural frequencies) from surveys combined with an inspection strategy may be used to qualify scour induced free spans. These aspects are not covered in this document. Guidance may be found in Mrk et al., (1999) and Fyrileiv et al., (2000).
2.3
Screening Fatigue Criteria
Free Span Data & Characteristics
Span intervention Detailed analysis
Screening
OK
not OK
Fatigue
OK
not OK
2.3.1 The screening criteria proposed herein apply to fatigue caused by Vortex Induced Vibrations (VIV) and direct wave loading in combined current and wave loading conditions. The screening criteria have been calibrated against full fatigue analyses to provide a fatigue life in excess of 50 years. The criteria apply to spans with a response dominated by the 1st symmetric mode (one half wave) and should preferably be applied for screening analyses only and, if violated, more detailed fatigue analyses should be performed. The ULS criterion in 2.5 must always be checked. 2.3.2 The screening criteria proposed herein are based on the assumption that the current velocity may be represented by a 3-parameter Weibull distribution. If this is not the case, e.g. for bi-modal current distributions, care must be taken and the applicability of these screening criteria checked by full fatigue calculations.
ULS Check
OK
not OK
Stop
Figure 2-1 Flow chart over design checks for a free span.
--`,`,`````,`````,```,,`,,,`,,`-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---
2.3.3
The in-line natural frequency f0,IL must fulfil: f 0, IL gf > U c,100 year L / D g IL 1 IL 250 a VR , onset D
where h is the allowable fatigue damage ratio, Tlife the fatigue design life capacity and Texposure the life or load exposure time. 2.4.2 The fatigue damage assessment is based on the accumulation law by Palmgren-Miner: n D fat = i Ni Where Dfat ni N S Accumulated fatigue damage. Total number of stress cycles corresponding to (mid-wall) stress range Si Number of cycles to failure at stress range Si Implies summation over all stress fluctuations in the design life
Where
gf gIL
--`,`,`````,`````,```,,`,,,`,,`-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---
D L Uc,100year Uw,1year
IL VR ,onset
Safety factor on the natural frequency, see 2.6 Screening factor for inline, see 2.6 Current flow ratio= U c,100 year max ;0.6 U w ,1year + U c,100 year Outer pipe diameter incl. coating Free span length 100 year return period value for the current velocity at the pipe level, see 3 Significant 1 year return period value for the wave induced flow velocity at the pipe level corresponding to the annual significant wave height Hs,1year, see 3 In-line onset value for the reduced velocity, see 4.
2.4.3 The number of cycles to failure at stress range S is defined by the SN curve of the form:
-m a S 1 N = 1 -m 2 a 2 S
S > S sw S S sw
If the above criterion is violated, then a full in-line VIV fatigue analysis is required. 2.3.4 The cross-flow natural frequency f0,CF must fulfil: f 0,CF
gf >
Where m1, m2 Fatigue exponents (the inverse slope of the bilinear S-N curve) Characteristic fatigue strength constant dea1 ,a 2 fined as the mean-minus-two-standarddeviation curve Ssw Stress at intersection of the two SN-curves given by:
S sw
log a1 - log N sw m1 = 10
U c,100 year + U w ,1year

CF VR , onset D
g CF
Where
gCF CF VR , onset
Screening factor for cross-flow, see 2.6 Cross-flow onset value for the reduced velocity, see 4
Where Nsw is the number of cycles for which change in slope appear. LogNsw is typically 6 7.
If the above criterion is violated, then a full in-line and cross-flow VIV fatigue analysis is required.
1000
Stress Range, S
2.3.5 Fatigue analysis due to direct wave action is not required provided: U c,100 year 2 > U w ,1year + U c,100 year 3
and the above screening criteria for in-line VIV is fulfilled. If this criterion is violated, then a full fatigue analyses due to in-line VIV and direct wave action is required
(a1;m1)
100
SSW (a2;m2)
10
2.4
2.4.1
Fatigue Criterion
The fatigue criterion can be formulated as:
h Tlife Texposure
1 1.E+03
NSW
1.E+04 1.E+05 1.E+06 1.E+07 1.E+08 1.E+09 1.E+10
No of cycles, N
Figure 2-2 Typical two-slope SN curve.
DET NORSKE VERITAS
2.4.4 The SN-curves may be determined from: Dedicated laboratory test data, Accepted fracture mechanics theory, or DNV-RP-C203 Fatigue Strength Analysis of Offshore Steel Structures. The SN-curve must be applicable for the material, construction detail, location of the intial defect (crack initiation point) and corrosive environment. The basic principles in DNV-RP-C203 apply. 2.4.5 The fatigue life capacity, Tlife, can be formally expressed as: 1 Tlife = f v S im Pi a
Where PHS ,TP ,q is the probability of occurrence of each individual sea-state, e.g. the probability of occurrence reflected by the cell in a scatter diagram. The in-line fatigue life capacity is conservatively taken as the minimum capacity (i.e., maximum damage) from VIV (RM) or direct wave loads (FM) in each sea state. The fatigue life is the minimum of the in-line and the cross-flow fatigue lives. 2.4.9 The following marginal fatigue life capacities are evaluated for (all) sea states characterised by (Hs, Tp, q) RM, IL Marginal fatigue capacity against inTHs ,Tp ,q line VIV and cross-flow induced inline motion in a single sea-state (Hs, Tp, q) integrated over long term pdf for the current, see section 4.2.2. RM,CF Marginal fatigue capacity against THs,Tp,q cross-flow VIV in a sea-state (Hs, Tp, q) integrated over long term pdf for the current, see section 4.2.1. FM, IL Marginal fatigue capacity against direct THs,Tp,q wave actions in a single sea-state characterised by (Hs, Tp, q) using mean value of current, see section 5.2.2.
Where Pi
Probability of occurrence for the ith stress cycle
2.4.6 The concept adopted for the fatigue analysis applies to both response models and force models. The stress ranges to be used may be determined by: a response model, see section 4 a force model, see section 5. 2.4.7 The following approach is recommended: The fatigue damage is evaluated independently in each sea-state, i.e., the fatigue damage in each cell of a scatter diagram in terms of (Hs, Tp, q) times the probability of occurrence for the individual sea state. In each sea-state (Hs, Tp, q) is transformed into (Uw, Tu, qw) at the pipe level as described in section 3.3. The sea state is represented by a significant short-term flow induced velocity amplitude Uw with mean zero up-crossing period Tu, i.e. by a train of regular wave induced flow velocities with amplitudes equal to Uw and period Tu. The effect of irregularity will reduce the number of large amplitudes. Irregularity may be accounted for provided it is properly documented. Integration over the long-term current velocity distribution for the combined wave and current flow is performed in each sea-state. 2.4.8 The total fatigue life capacity in the in-line and cross-flow direction is established by integrating over all sea-states, i.e.
IL Tlife
CF Tlife
PHs,Tp,q = q H T min T RM,IL ; T FM,IL S P Hs,Tp,q Hs,Tp,q -1 PHs,Tp,q = RM,CF qH T T S P Hs,Tp,q
--`,`,`````,`````,```,,`,,,`,,`-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---
2.4.10 Unless otherwise documented, the following assumptions apply: The current and wave induced flow components at the pipe level are statistically independent. The current and wave-induced flow are assumed colinear. This implies that the directional probability of occurrence data for either waves or current (the most conservative with respect to fatigue damage) must be used for both waves and current.
2.5
ULS Criterion
2.5.1 For the local buckling check reference is made to the combined loading load controlled condition criterion in DNV-OS-F101, section 5, D500. Static and dynamic bending moment, axial force and pressure shall be accounted for. 2.5.2 For extreme wave conditions, which can be assumed to cause large deformations on the shoulders, detailed analyses of the soil stiffness at the shoulders may be required. In lieu of detailed documentation, the boundary conditions for the free span should be assumed as pinnedpinned (only valid for the Force Model calculations). 2.5.3 The maximum dynamic bending moment due to VIV and/or direct wave action may be found from the dynamic stresses: 2I M E = s dyn Ds - t
-1
Where
sdyn I Ds t
Alternatively a regular wave approach using Hmax may be applied. Dynamic stress given below Moment of inertia Outer diameter of steel pipe Wall thickness The dynamic stress, sdyn, is taken as:
s dyn 1 A = max SIL ; 0.5 SCF IL ; SFM, max 2 A CF 1 = SCF 2
2.5.7 A simplified ULS screening may be performed in terms of an equivalent stress check, ref. DNV-OS-F101, section 12, F1200. 2.5.8 The longitudinal stress is given by:
s l = s N s static + s dyn
2.5.4
in - line
cross - flow s dyn
Where
sN sstatic sdyn
Where In-line stress range, see section 4 Cross-flow stress range, see section 4 SFM,max Maximum stress range due to direct wave loading (force model) , see section 5 AIL In-line unit deflection stress amplitude due to VIV, see section 6.8.4 ACF Cross-flow unit deflection stress amplitude due to VIV, see section 6.8.4 The unit deflection stress amplitude AIL and ACF may be evaluated using the following return period environmental flow conditions: SIL SCF
--`,`,`````,`````,```,,`,,,`,,`-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---
Static axial stress from true wall axial force, Ntr given by: sN = Ntr/As Static bending stress from static bending moment, see 6.8.6. Applies to both vertical and lateral directions. Dynamic bending stress, see 2.5.4. Applies to both directions, in-line and cross-flow independently.
2.6
Safety Factors
2.6.1 The safety factors to be used with the screening criteria are listed below.
Table 2-1 Safety factors for screening criteria 1.15 gIL 1.3 gCF
U1year U10 year U100 year
= U c,1year + U w ,1year = max U c,10 year + U w ,1year ; U c,1year + U w ,10 year
= max U c,100 year + U w ,10 year ; U c,10 year + U w ,100 year
2.5.5 For the cross-flow direction, the stress simply stems from the VIV induced amplitude. For the in-line direction, the dynamic stress range is taken as the maximum of: The return period stress range, e.g. 100 year, for inline VIV, Sin, defined in section 4.3. The stress from 50% of the cross-flow induced VIV motion. All parameters are defined in section 4.4. 2.5.6 The maximum dynamic stress sFM,max from direct wave loading may be calculated using a design storm approach using: sFM,max= kp ss where kp is the peak factor given by: k p = 2 ln(f v DT ) + 0.577 2 ln (f v DT )
2.6.2 Pipeline reliability against fatigue uses the safety class concept, which takes account of the failure consequences, see DNV-OS-F101, Section 2. The following safety factor format is used: D fat = Texp osure f v (g s S( g f , g k , g on .) )m P() a
h
gf, gon, gk and gs denote partial safety factors for the natural frequency, onset of VIV, stability parameter and stress range respectively. The set of partial safety factor to be applied are specified in the table below for the individual safety classes. Table 2-2 Safety factors for fatigue Safety Class Safety Factor Low Normal 1.0 0.5 h 1.051) (1.0) gs 1.201) (1.15) gf 1.30 gk 1.10 gon
1)
High 0.25
DT is the storm duration equal to 3 hour and fv is given in section 5.2. kp may conservatively be taken equal to 4. ss is the standard deviation of the stress (amplitude) response calculated from a time domain or frequency domain analysis, see section 5.
This safety factor is intended to be used in design when detailed data about span length, gap etc is not known. If a span is assessed in-service with updated and measured span data, the safety factor in brackets may be used.
DET NORSKE VERITAS
Comments:
h apply to both Response Model and Force Model gs is to be multiplied to the stress (S gS) gf applies to the natural frequency (fo/gf) gon applies to onset values for in-line and cross-flow VIV (VR,on/gon) gk applies to the stability parameter (KS/gk) For ULS, the calculation of load effects is to be performed without safety factors (gS = gf = gk = gon = 1.0), see also section 2.6.3.
2.6.3 The reliability of the pipeline against local buckling (ULS criterion) is ensured by use of the safety class concept as implemented by use of safety factors according to DNV-OS-F101, section 5 D500 alternatively section 12.
--`,`,`````,`````,```,,`,,,`,,`-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---
3
3.1
Environmental Conditions
General
When detailed field measurements are not available, the tidal, wind and storm surge driven current velocity components may be taken from Classification No. 30.5. For water depths greater than 100 m, the ocean 3.2.2 currents can be characterised in terms of the driving and steering agents: the driving agents are tidal forces, pressure gradients due to surface elevation or density changes, wind and storm surge forces. the steering agents are topography and the rotation of the earth. The modelling should account adequately for all agents. 3.2.3 The flow can be divided into two zones: an Outer Zone far from the seabed where the mean current velocity and turbulence vary only slightly in the horizontal direction.
3.1.1 The objective of the present section is to provide guidance on: the long term current velocity distribution, short-term and long-term description of wave induced flow velocity amplitude and period of oscillating flow at the pipe level, and return period values. 3.1.2 The environmental data to be used in the assessment of the long-term distributions shall be representative for the particular geographical location of the pipeline free span. 3.1.3 The flow conditions due to current and wave action at the pipe level govern the response of free spanning pipelines. The principles and methods as described in Classification Note CN 30.5 may be used in addition to this document as a basis when establishing the environmental load conditions. 3.1.4 The environmental data must be collected from periods that are representative for the long-term variation of the wave and current climate, respectively. In case of less reliable or limited number of wave and current data, the statistical uncertainty should be assessed and, if significant, included in the analysis. 3.1.5 Preferably, the environmental load conditions should be established near the pipeline using measurement data of acceptable quality and duration. The wave and current characteristics must be transferred (extrapolated) to the free span level and location using appropriate conservative assumptions. 3.1.6 The following environmental description may be applied: Directional information, i.e., flow characteristic versus sector probability; Omnidirectional statistics may be used if the flow is uniformly distributed. If no such information is available, the flow should be assumed to act perpendicular to the axis of the pipeline at all times.
an Inner Zone where the mean current velocity and turbulence show significant variations in the horizontal direction and the current speed and direction is a function of the local sea bed geometry.
3.2.4 The outer zone is located approximately one local seabed form height above the seabed crest. In case of a flat seabed, the outer zone is located approximately at height (3600 z0) where z0 is the bottom roughness, see Table 3-1. 3.2.5 Current measurements (current meter) should be made in the outer zone outside the boundary layer at a level 1-2 seabed form heights above the crest. For largescale currents, such as wind driven and tidal currents, the choice of measurement positions may be based on the variations in the bottom topography assuming that the current is geo-strophic, i.e., mainly running parallel to the large-scale bottom contours. Over smooth hills, flow separation occurs when the hill slope exceeds about 20o. Current data from measurements in the boundary layer over irregular bed forms are of little practical value when extrapolating current values to other locations. 3.2.6 In the inner zone the current velocity profile is approximately logarithmic in areas where flow separation does not occur: (ln(z ) - ln(z 0 )) U(z) = R c U (z r ) (ln(z r ) - ln(z 0 )) where: Rc z zr z0 reduction factor, see 3.4.1. elevation above the seabed reference measurement height (in the outer zone) bottom roughness parameter to be taken from Table 3-1:
--`,`,`````,`````,```,,`,,,`,,`-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---
3.2
Current conditions
3.2.1 The steady current flow at the free span level may be a compound of: tidal current; wind induced current; storm surge induced current, and density driven current.
DET NORSKE VERITAS
Table 3-1 Seabed roughness

--`,`,`````,`````,```,,`,,,`,,`-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---
Seabed Silt fine sand
Roughness z0 (m)
5 10-6 1 10-5 4 10-5 1 10-4 3 10-4 2 10
-3
3.2.10 For ULS, 1 min average values should be applied. The 1 minute average values may be established from 10 or 30 min average values as follows: (1 + 1.9 I c ) U 10 min U1 min = (1 + 2.3 I c ) U 30 min where Ic is the turbulence intensity defined below. 3.2.11 The turbulence intensity, Ic, is defined by: s Ic = c Uc
Medium sand coarse sand Gravel Pebble Cobble Boulder
1 10-2 4 10-2
3.2.7 If no detailed analyses are performed, the mean current values at the free span location may assume the values at the nearest suitable measurement point. The flow (and macro-roughness) is normally 3D and transformation of current characteristics should account for the local bottom topography e.g. guided by numerical simulations. 3.2.8 For conditions where the mean current is spread over a small sector (e.g. tide-dominated current) and the flow condition can be assumed to be bi-dimensional, the following model may be applied in transforming the mean current locally. It is assumed that the current velocity U(zr) in the outer zone is known, see Figure 3-1. The velocity profile U(z*) at a location near the measuring point (with zr*>zr) may be approximated by:
U(z*) = U (z r )
where sc is the standard deviation of the velocity fluctuations and Uc is the 10 min or 30 min average (mean) velocity (1 Hz sampling rate). 3.2.12 If no other information is available, the turbulence intensity should be taken as 5%. Experience indicates that the turbulence intensity for macro-roughness areas is 20-40% higher than the intensity over a flat seabed with the same small-scale seabed roughness. The turbulence intensities in a rough seabed area to be applied for in-line fatigue assessment may conservatively be taken as typical turbulence intensities over a flat bottom (at the same height) with similar small-scale seabed roughness. 3.2.13 Detailed turbulence measurements, if deemed essential, should be made at 1 m and 3 m above the seabed. High frequency turbulence (with periods lower than 1 minute) and low frequency turbulence must be distinguished.
(ln(z *) - ln(z m ))
(ln(z )- ln(z ))
* r m
The macro-roughness parameter zm is given by:
3.3
Short-term wave conditions
ln(z m ) = ln(z * r)-
(z
* r
- zr +
z* r
(ln(z r ) - ln(z o ))
zr
zm is to be taken less than 0.2.
3.3.1 The wave induced oscillatory flow condition at the free span level may be calculated using numerical or analytical wave theories. The wave theory shall be capable of describing the conditions at the pipe location, including effects due to shallow water, if applicable. For most practical cases, linear wave theory can be applied. Wave boundary layer effects can normally be neglected. 3.3.2 The short-term, stationary, irregular sea states may be described by a wave spectrum Shh(w) i.e. the power spectral density function of the sea surface elevation. Wave spectra may be given in table form, as measured spectra, or in an analytical form. 3.3.3 The JONSWAP or the Pierson-Moskowitz spectrum is often appropriate. The spectral density function is:
Outer Zone Inner Zone
U0 Measuring Point Zr z
z* r z*
Iso-line for horisontal mean velocity
Seabed profile
Figure 3-1 Definitions for 2D model
5 w S hh (w) = ag 2 w -5 exp - ( ) - 4 g 4 wp
where
w T
w- w p exp - 0.5 s wp
3.2.9 It is recommended to perform current measurements with 10 min or 30 min averages for use with FLS.
Document w provided by IHS Licensee=Intec Engineering/5937045100, User=, 06/06/2003 02:07:25 MDT Questions or comments about this message: please call the Document Policy Management Group at 1-800-451-1584.
=2p/Tw is the angular wave frequency. Wave period.
Tp wp g
Peak period. =2p/Tp is the angular spectral peak frequency Acceleration of gravity
Mean zero up-crossing period of oscillating flow at pipe level: Tu =2p M0 M2
The Generalised Phillips constant is given by 5 Hs w p a= (1 - 0.287 ln g ) 16 g2 The spectral width parameter is given by
0.07 if w w p s= else 0.09
2 4
The bandwidth parameter e:
e = 1-
M2 2 M0M 4
The peak-enhancement factor is given by:

j 3. 6 5 Tp g = exp(5.75 - 1.15j) 3.6 < j < 5 ; j = HS j5 1
The velocity process is narrow-banded for e 0 and broad banded for e 1 (in practice the process may be considered broad-banded for e larger than 0.6). US, Tu and e may be taken from Figure 3-2 to Figure 3-4 assuming linear wave theory.
0.50 0.45 0.40 0.35 USTn/Hs 0.30 0.25 0.20 0.15 0.10 0.05 0.00 0.00 0.05
where Hs is to be given in metres and Tp in seconds. The Pierson-Moskowitz spectrum appears for g = 1.0. 3.3.4 Both spectra are describing wind sea conditions that are reasonable for the most severe seastates. However, moderate and low sea states, not dominated by limited fetch, are often composed of both wind-sea and swell. A two peak (bi-modal) spectrum should be considered to account for swell if considered important. Further details may be found in Classification Note No. 30.5. 3.3.5 The wave induced velocity spectrum at the pipe level SUU( w) may be obtained through a spectral transformation of the waves at sea level using a first order wave theory: S UU (w ) = G 2 (w ) S hh (w) G2(w) is a frequency transfer function from sea surface elevation to wave induced flow velocities at pipe level given by:
g=5.0 g=1.0
Tn=(h/g)
0.5
0.10
0.15
0.20
0.25
0.30
0.35
0.40
0.45
0.50
Tn/Tp
Figure 3-2 Significant flow velocity amplitude at pipe level, US

1.4 1.3 1.2
g=5.0 g=1.0
Tu/Tp
1.1 1 0.9 0.8 0.7 0.00
w cosh (k (D + e) ) G (w ) = sinh (k h )
Where h is the water depth and k is the wave number established by iteration from the transcendental equation:
kh = w2 h g coth (k h )
Tn=(h/g)
0.05 0.10 0.15 0.20 0.25 0.30 0.35 0.40 0.45
0.5
0.50
Tn/Tp
Figure 3-3 Mean zero up-crossing period of oscillating flow at pipe level, Tu
3.3.6
The spectral moments of order n is defined as: M n = w n SUU (w )dw

0
The following spectrally derived parameters appear: Significant flow velocity amplitude at pipe level:
--`,`,`````,`````,```,,`,,,`,,`-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---
US = 2 M0
DET NORSKE VERITAS
0.7 0.6 Bandwidth parameter, e 0.5 0.4
g=1.0 g=5.0
G is the gamma function; see 3.5.1 and s is a spreading parameter, typically modelled as a function of the sea state. Normally s is taken as a real number, between 2 and 8; 2 s 8. If no information is available, the most conservative value in the range 2-8 shall be selected.
1
0.3 0.2
0.9 0.8 Reduction factor RD 0.7 0.6 0.5 0.4 0.3 0.2 0.1 0 0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 Relative pipeline-wave direction, qrel
sin(qrel)
0.1 0 0.00
Tn=(h/g)
0.05 0.10 0.15 0.20 0.25 0.30 0.35 0.40 0.45
0.5
0.50
Tn/Tp
s=2 s=4 s=6 s=1000
Figure 3-4 Bandwidth parameter for flow velocity at pipe level, e
3.4
Reduction functions
Figure 3-5 Reduction factor due to wave spreading and directionality
3.4.1 The mean current velocity over a pipe diameter (i.e. taken as current at e+D/2) apply. Introducing the effect of directionality, Rc becomes: R c = sin(q rel ) where qrel is the relative direction between the pipeline direction and the current flow direction. 3.4.2 In case of combined wave and current flow the seabed roughness is increased from the non-linear interaction between wave and current flow. The modified velocity profile and hereby-introduced reduction factor may be taken from DNV-RP-E305. 3.4.3 The effect of wave directionality and wave spreading is introduced in the form of a reduction factor on the significant flow velocity, i.e. projection onto the velocity normal to the pipe and effect of wave spreading. U W = US R D The reduction factor is given by; see Figure 3-5. RD =
p/2
2 w (b) sin (q rel - b)db
--`,`,`````,`````,```,,`,,,`,,`-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---
3.5
Long-term environmental modelling
3.5.1 A 3-parameter Weibull distribution is often appropriate for modelling of the long-term statistics for the current velocity Uc or significant wave height, Hs. The Weibull distribution is given by: x - g b FX ( x ) = 1 - exp - a
where F() is the cumulative distribution function and a is the scale, b is the shape and g is the location parameter. Note that the Rayleigh distribution is obtained for b=2 and an Exponential distribution for b=1. The Weibull distribution parameters are linked to the statistical moments (m: mean value; s: standard deviation; d: skewness) as follows: 1 m = a G +g 1 + b
-p / 2
where qrel is the relative direction between the pipeline direction and wave direction 3.4.4 The wave energy spreading (directional) function given by a frequency independent cosine power function is:
k coss (b) w (b) = w 0 p b < 2 ; kw = else s G1 + 2 1 s G + 2 2
2 1 s = a G 1 + - G 1 + b b 3 3 1 1 2 3 a d = G 1 + b + 2 G 1 + b G 1 + b - 3G 1 + b s G is the Gamma function defined as

G( x ) = t x -1e - t dt
0
1 p
3.5.2 The directional (i.e. versus q) or omni-directional current data can be specified as follows: A Histogram in terms of (Uc, q) versus probability of occurrence
The fatigue analysis is based on the discrete events in the histogram. The corresponding Return Period Values (RPV) are estimated from the corresponding exceedance probability in the histogram or from a fitted pdf, see section 3.6. A long term probability density function (pdf) The corresponding Return Period Values for 1, 10 and 100 year are established from section 3.6. Based on Return Period Values Distribution parameters for an assumed distribution e.g. Weibull, are established using e.g. 3 equations (for 1, 10 and 100 year) with 3 unknowns (a, b and g). This is, in principle, always feasible but engineering judgement applied in defining return period values can lead to an unphysical underlying long-term pdf.
3.6
Return Period Values
3.6.1 Return period values are to be used for ULS conditions. A Return Period Value (RPV) xc is defined as: 1 F( x c ) = 1 N
where N is the number of independent events in the return period (e.g. 100 year). For discrete directions, N may be taken as the total number of independent events times the sector probability. The time between independent events depends on the environmental condition. For currents, this time is often taken as 24 hours, whereas the time between independent seastates (described by Hs) normally may be taken as 3-6 hours. 3.6.2 For a Weibull distributed variable the return period value is given by: x c = a (ln (N ))1 / b + g 3.6.3 In case the statistic is given in terms of a scatter diagram, a long term Weibull distribution (a, b, g) is established from 3.5.1 using statistical moments derived directly from the scatter diagram as follows: m = (H s ) PH S
HS
3.5.3 The wave climate at a given location may be characterised by a series of short-term sea-states. Each short-term sea state may be characterised by Hs, Tp, and the main wave direction q, measured relative to a given reference direction The directional (i.e. versus q) or omni-directional significant wave height may be specified as follows:
A scatter diagram in terms of Hs, Tp, q The fatigue analysis is based on the discrete sea-states reflected in the individual cells in the scatter diagram.
A histogram in terms of (Hs, q) versus probability of occurrence The fatigue analysis is based on the discrete events for Hs in the histogram. The corresponding peak period is assumed on the versatile form
--`,`,`````,`````,```,,`,,,`,,`-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---
s =
3 (H s - m ) PHS
HS
2 (H s - m ) PHS
Tp = C T (H s )a T
HS
s3
Where 6 CT 8 and 0.3 aT 0.5 are location specific
A long term probability density function (pdf) The corresponding Return Period Values (RPV) for 1, 10 and 100 year are established from section 3.6. Based on Return Period Values The corresponding Weibull distribution is established from 3.6.2 using 3 equations (xc for 1, 10 and 100 year) with 3 unknowns (a, b and g). This is, in principle, always feasible but engineering judgement applied in defining return period values can correspond to an unphysical Weibull pdf.
Where PHs is the discrete occurrence probability. The same principle apply for current histograms. 3.6.4 The return period value for to be used for directional data is taken as the maximum projected flow velocity, i.e. max(x c,i R D (q rel,i , s) / R D (q rel = 0, s) )
i =1..n
where RD is a reduction factor defined by 3.4.3, qrel,i is the relative direction between the pipeline direction and the flow direction for direction i. For current flow s>8.0 may be applied.
DET NORSKE VERITAS
4.1.5
The Keulegan-Carpenter number is defined as: KC = Uw fwD
4
4.1
Response Models
General
where fw is the wave frequency. 4.1.1 Amplitude response models are empirical models providing the maximum steady state VIV amplitude response as a function of the basic hydrodynamic and structural parameters. The response models provided herein have been derived based on available experimental laboratory test data and a limited amount of full-scale tests for the following flow conditions: In-line VIV in steady current and current dominated conditions; Cross-flow VIV induced in-line motion; Cross-flow VIV in steady current and combined wave and current conditions; The response models are in agreement with the generally accepted concept of VIV. 4.1.2 In the response models, in-line and cross-flow vibrations are considered separately. Damage contributions from both first and second in-line instability regions in current dominated conditions are implicit in the in-line model. Cross-flow induced additional in-line VIV resulting in possible increased fatigue damage is considered approximately. 4.1.3 The amplitude response depends on a set of hydrodynamic parameters constituting the link between the environmental data and the Response Models: Reduced velocity, VR Keulegan-Carpenter number, KC Current flow velocity ratio, a Turbulence intensity, Ic, see 3.2.11. Flow angle, relative to the pipe, qrel Stability parameter, KS Note that the Reynolds number, Re, is not explicit in the evaluation of response amplitudes. 4.1.4 The reduced velocity, VR, is in the general case with combined current and wave induced flow, defined as: VR = where f0 Uc Uw D Natural frequency for a given vibration mode Mean current velocity normal to the pipe; see section 3.4. Significant wave induced flow velocity; see section 3.4. Outer pipe diameter Uc + Uw f0D
--`,`,`````,`````,```,,`,,,`,,`-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---
4.1.6
The current flow velocity ratio is defined by:

a=
Uc Uc + Uw
4.1.7 The stability parameter, KS, representing the damping for a given modal shape is given by:
KS = 4 p me z T r D2
where: r zT me
Water density Total modal damping ratio Effective mass, see 6.8.3
4.1.8 The total modal damping ratio, zT, comprises structural damping, zstr, see section 6.3.10 soil damping, zsoil, For screening purposes zsoil = 0.01 may be assumed. For details, see 7.2.10. hydrodynamic damping, zh. For VIV within the lockin region, the hydrodynamic modal damping ratio zh is normally to be taken as zero, i.e. zh = 0.00
4.2
Marginal Fatigue Life Capacity
4.2.1 For cross-flow VIV, the marginal fatigue capacity against VIV in a single sea-state characterised by (Hs, Tp, q) is defined by, see section 2.4:
RM ,CF THs ,Tp ,q =
(f
1
v m S CF
)dF
Uc
where SCF fv a m Cross-flow stress range defined in 4.4 Vibration frequency; see 4.2.3. Fatigue constant, depending on the relevant stress range, see 2.4.3 Fatigue exponent, depending on the relevant stress range, see 2.4.3
The integral (...) dFu indicates integration over the longc
term distribution for the current velocity represented by a Weibull distribution, or histogram.
4.2.2 For the in-line direction, the marginal fatigue capacity against VIV in a single sea-state characterised by (Hs, Tp, q) is taken as:
RM , IL THs ,Tp ,q =
1 S A f max SIL ; CF IL v 2 A CF dF Uc a 0
m
4.3.4 (Ay/D) is defined as the maximum in-line VIV response amplitude (normalised with D) as a function of VR and KS, see Figure 4-1 for illustration. The corresponding standard deviation may be obtained as (AY /D)/2.
0.20 0.18 Inline VIV Amplitude (Ay/D) 0.16 0.14 0.12 0.10 0.08 0.06 0.04 0.02 0.00 0.0 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 3.0 3.5 Reduced Velocity VRd (=V R/gf) 4.0 4.5 5.0 Riq,1 = 1.0 Riq,2 = 1.0 gon = 1.0
Ksd=0.00
Ksd=0.25
where SIL AIL ACF In-line stress range defined in 4.3 Stress due to unit diameter in-line mode shape deflection; Stress due to unit diameter cross-flow mode shape deflection
Ksd=0.50 Ksd=0.75 Ksd=1.00 Ksd=1.25 Ksd=1.50
The in-line stress range is taken as the maximum of:

The in-line VIV stress range Sin The in-line stress range corresponding to a figure 8 or half-moon motion, i.e., stress induced by 50% of the cross-flow induced VIV amplitude.
Figure 4-1 Illustration of the in-line VIV Response Amplitude versus VRd and KSd.
4.2.3 The dominating vibration frequency, fv, is to be taken as: fv = f0,IL for in-line VIV fv = f0,CF for cross-flow VIV fv = 2f0,CF for cross-flow induced in-line motion where f0,il and f0,CF are the in-line and cross-flow natural vibration frequencies.
4.3.5 In the evaluation of (AY/D) the design values for the reduced velocity and stability parameter shall be applied: VRd = VR g f K K sd = s gk
where gf and gk are safety factors related to the natural frequency and damping respectively. In addition, an onset safety factor is needed, see section 2.6. 4.3.6 The Response Model can be constructed from the co-ordinates in Figure 4-2: 1.0 for K sd < 0.4 g on 0.6 + K sd IL for 0.4 < K sd < 1.6 = VR ,onset g on 2 .2 for K sd > 1.6 g on A Y ,1 IL IL = 10 VR ,1 D + VR ,onset A Y,2 IL IL = VR VR ,2 ,end - 2 D 4.5 - 0.8 K sd for K sd < 1.0 IL = VR ,end 3 .7 for K sd 1.0 A Y ,1 A Y,2 K sd 1 - 1 .2 R Iq,1 ; D = max 0.18 D A Y,2 K sd 1 - 1.8 R Iq,2 D = 0.13
4.3
In-line Response Model
4.3.1 The in-line response of a pipeline span in current dominated conditions is associated with either alternating or symmetric vortex shedding. Contributions from both the first in-line instability region and the second instability region are included in the model. 4.3.2 The amplitude response depends mainly on the reduced velocity, VR, the stability parameter, KS, the turbulence intensity, Ic, and the flow angle, qrel relative to the pipe. Further, mitigation effects from the seabed proximity, (e/D) is conservatively not included. 4.3.3 The in-line VIV induced stress range SIL is calculated by the Response Model: S IL = 2 A IL (A Y / D) y a ,IL g s Where AIL
ya,IL gs
Unit stress amplitude (stress due to unit diameter in-line mode shape deflection); Correction factor for current flow ratio a Safety factor to be multiplied on the stress range
--`,`,`````,`````,```,,`,,,`,,`-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---
DET NORSKE VERITAS
AY D
Inline VIV Amplitude
IL A Y ,1 VR ,1 ; D
IL A Y, 2 V ; R ,2 D
4.4
Cross-flow Response Model
(V
IL R , onset
;0
)
Reduced Velocity
(V
IL R , end
;0
Figure 4-2 Response Model generation principle.
4.3.7 The reductions RIq,1(Ic,qrel) and RIq,2(Ic) accounts for the effect of the turbulence intensity and angle of attack (in radians) for the flow, see Figure 4-3.
p R Iq,1 = 1 - p 2 - 2 q rel (I c - 0.03) 0 R Iq,1 1 2 (I - 0.03) R Iq,2 = 1.0 - c 0 R Iq, 2 1 0.17
1 0.9 0.8 0.7 0.6 0.5 0.4 0.3 0.2 0.1 0 0 0.02 0.04 0.06 0.08 0.1 0.12 0.14 0.16 0.18 0.2 Turbulence Intensity, Ic Riq,1 qrel=0o Riq,2 all angles Riq,1 qrel=30o Riq,1 qrel=45
o
For steady current dominated flow situations, 4.4.2 onset of cross-flow VIV of significant amplitude occurs typically at a value of VR between 3.0 and 5.0, whereas maximum vibration levels occurs at a value of VR between 5 and 7. For pipes with low specific mass, wave dominated flow situations or span scenarios with a low gap ratio, cross-flow vibration may be initiated for VR between 2 and 3. 4.4.3 The cross-flow VIV induced stress range SCF due to a combined current and wave flow is assessed using the following Response Model: S CF = 2 A CF (A Z / D) R k g s Where
Riq,1 qrel=60
Unit stress amplitude (stress due to unit diameter cross-flow mode shape deflection); Rk Amplitude reduction factor due to damping Safety factor to be multiplied on the stress gs range The cross-flow VIV amplitude (AZ/D) in combined current and wave flow conditions may be taken from Figure 4-4. The figure provides characteristic maximum values. The corresponding standard deviation may be obtained as (AZ /D)/2.
1.5 1.4 1.3 1.2 1.1 1.0 0.9 0.8 0.7 0.6 0.5 0.4 0.3 0.2 0.1 0.0 0 1 2 3
a > 0.8 ; all KC
ACF
Cross-Flow VIVAmplitude (A Z/D)
Figure 4-3 Reduction function wrt turbulence intensity and flow angle
proxi,onset = 1.0 trench,onset = 1.0 mass,onset = 1.0
a < 0.8 ; KC > 30 a < 0.8 ; KC < 10
,onset = 1.0 on = 1.0
4.3.8 ya,IL is a reduction function to account for reduced in-line VIV in wave dominated conditions: 0.0 for a < 0.5 y a ,IL = (a - 0.5) / 0.3 for 0.5 < a < 0.8 1.0 for a > 0.8
cr VR , onset
Hence, in case of a < 0.5 in-line VIV may be ignored.
Reduced Velocity VR,d (=V R/gf)
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
Figure 4-4 Basic Cross-Flow Response Model
--`,`,`````,`````,```,,`,,,`,,`-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---
4.4.1 Cross-flow VIV are affected by several parameters, such as the reduced velocity VR, the KeuleganCarpenter number, KC, the current flow velocity ratio, a, the stability parameter, KS, the seabed gap ratio, (e/D), the Strouhal number, St and the pipe roughness, (k/D), among others. Note that Reynolds number, Re, is not explicit in the model.
4.4.4 The amplitude response (AZ/D) as a function of a and KC can be constructed from:
CF VR , onset CF VR ,1 CF VR ,2 CF VR , end
3 y proxi,onset y mass,onset ya,onset y trench,onset g on
=5 9 A Z,1 CF = VR , end - 1.3 D = 16 1.3 all KC a f 0.8 0.7 KC p 10 = 0.7 + 0.01 (KC - 10) a 0.8 10 KC 30 0.9 KC f 30 A Z,1 = D
4.4.8 ya,onset is a correction factor accounting for the current wave ratio: a 1+ for a < 0.5 y a ,onset = 3 else 1.167 4.4.9 ytrench,onset is a correction factor accounting for the effect of a pipe located in/over a trench:
A Z,1 D A Z,2 D
y trench,onset = 1 + 0.5
D D
where D/D denotes a relative trench depth given by:

D 1.25d - e = D D D where 0 1 D
Cross-Flow VIVAmplitude
CF A Z,1 VR ,1 ; D
CF A Z, 2 VR , 2 ; D
The trench depth d is to be taken at a width equal to 3 outer diameters. D/D = 0 corresponds to a flat seabed or a pipe located in excess of D/4 above the trench, i.e. the pipe is not affected by the presence of the trench, see Figure 4-6. The restriction D/D < 1.0 is applied in order to limit the relative trench depth
3D
(V
(2.0;0.0)
CF R , onset
;0.1
)
Reduced Velocity
(V
CF R , end
;0
D e d
Figure 4-5 Response Model generation principle
4.4.5 The reduced onset velocity for cross-flow VIV, CF VR ,onset depends on the seabed proximity, trench geometry and current flow ratio a, whereas the maximum amplitude is a function of a and KC. 4.4.6 yproxi,onset is a correction factor accounting for the seabed proximity: e e 1 (3 + 1.25 ) for < 0.8 y proxi,onset = 4 D D 1 else 4.4.7 ymass,onset is a correction factor accounting for the specific mass (gravity) of the pipe:
1 1 rs + y mass,onset = 2 3 r 1 where rs/r is the specific mass. for rs < 1 .5 r else
--`,`,`````,`````,```,,`,,,`,,`-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---
Figure 4-6 Definition of Trench Factor
4.4.10 The characteristic amplitude response for crossflow VIV may be reduced due to the effect of damping. The reduction factor, Rk is given by:
1 - 0.15K sd Rk = -1.5 3.2K sd
for K sd 4 for K sd f 4
4.4.11 The normalised amplitude curves in Figure 4-4 to a large degree embody all available test result. In addition, the following comments apply: The response for small gap ratio (e/D<< 1) is associated with one-sided vortex shedding and may not be characterised by VIV parameters as VR and KC. However, the indicated response curve is considered conservative in general. The response for low KC numbers in the cross-flow response model are not in a narrow sense related to the VIV phenomena but rather linked to wave induced water particle motions. Typical maximum response at
DET NORSKE VERITAS
VR between 2.5 and 3.0 occur at Tu/T0 2. Tu is the wave induced flow period at pipe level and T0 is the natural period. 4.4.12 Potential vibrations at low KC numbers must be accounted for and care should be observed in case: KC VR > and 3 < KC < 9 3 (1 - a ) This corresponds to rare cases where Tu < 3T0. If violated, the criticality should be evaluated using an appropriate force model.
--`,`,`````,`````,```,,`,,,`,,`-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---
5
5.1
Force Model
General
5.2.2 The short term fatigue capacity against direct wave actions in a single sea-state characterised by (Hs, Tp, q) is given in the following form:
FM TH S , TP , q
5.1.1 In principle, force models may be used for both vortex induced and direct wave and current dominated loads if appropriate formulations of force models exist and reliable and consistent data are available for calibration. For cross-flow VIV, generally applicable force models do not exist and empirical response models presented in 4.4 reflecting observed pipeline response in a variety of flow conditions is at present superior. 5.1.2 A force model based on the well-known Morisons equation for direct in-line loading is considered herein. Both time domain (TD) and frequency domain (FD) solutions are allowed. A time domain solution may account for all significant non-linearities but is in general very time consuming if a large number of sea-states are to be analysed. For fatigue analyses, a frequency domain solution (if thoroughly verified) is more tractable since it facilitates analyses of a very large number of sea-states at a small fraction of the time required for a time domain solution. 5.1.3 In this document, a complete FD approach for short-term fatigue analyses is presented. Recommended procedures for state-of-the-art Time Domain (TD) shortterm damage calculation may be found in DNV-OS-F201. A simplified assessment method is given in 5.3.
--`,`,`````,`````,```,,`,,,`,,`-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---
a 1 S- m 1 f v k RFC ( m1 )
c S
2 2 m S m S G1 1 + 1 , sw + c G 2 1 + 2 , sw 2 S 2 S k RFC ( m 2 ) a1 ( m 2 - m1 ) = S k RFC (m1 ) a 2
-1
= 2 2 ss g s
Where sS fv a1, a 2 m1 , m2 Ssw
Standard deviation of stress amplitude Vibration frequency Fatigue constant; see 2.4.3 Fatigue exponent; see 2.4.3 Stress range, for which change in slope occurs; see 2.4.3
x
- t j -1 dt is the G 1 (j, x ) = e t
Complementary incomplete Gamma function

- t j -1 dt is the G 2 (j, x ) = e t 0 x
gs
Incomplete Gamma function Safety factor on stress range, see 2.6
5.2.3 The standard deviation of the wave induced stress amplitude sS is given by the square root of the spectral moment of the 0th order defined by 5.2.6.
sS = M 0
5.2
FD solution for In-line direction
5.2.1 The recommended FD solution for the short termfatigue damage due to combined current and direct wave actions in a single sea-state is based on: Palmgren-Miner approach using SN-curves; linearisation scheme for drag term in the Morison equation based on conservation of damage; effect of co-linear mean current included in linearisation term; narrow banded fatigue damage with semi-empirical correction to account for wide-band characteristic; The formulation presented in this document has been successfully verified against comprehensive time domain simulations using Rain flow Counting techniques, see e.g. Mrk &Fyrileiv, 1998. The formulation is based on the following assumptions:

5.2.4 The characteristic vibration frequency of considered pipe stress response, fv, is taken equal to the mean upcrossing frequency defined by: fv 1 2p M2 M0
M0 and M2 is defined by 5.2.6. 5.2.5 The rain flow counting correction factor, kRFC, accounts for the exact wide-banded damage, i.e. correcting the implicit narrow-banded Rayleigh assumption for the stress amplitudes to provide results similar to those arising from a state-of-the-art rain flow counting technique. The Rain Flow Counting factor kRFC is given by:
k RFC (m) = a k + (1 - a k )(1 - e)b k
the main damage contribution comes from lowest natural mode, i.e. the excitation frequency is far from the natural frequency for the higher order modes; the effective mass, me, and standard deviation of the flow velocity sU is invariant over the free span length, i.e. for span length less than the dominant wavelength.
where a k = 0.926 - 0.033m b k = 1.587 m - 2.323

DET NORSKE VERITAS
The bandwidth parameter e is defined by:

e = 1-
M2 2 M0M 4
In lieu of more detailed data, lmax may be taken as: A l max = IL l1 D
where AIL is given by 6.8.4. 5.2.8 The linearisation constant b is given by: b = 2.11 s u g c ( Uc ) su
The process (spectrum) is narrow-banded for e 0 and broad banded for e 1 (in practice the process may be considered broad-banded for e larger than 0.6). 5.2.6 The nth response spectral moment is given by: M n = w n S SS (w)dw
0
Where SSS( w) is the one-sided stress response spectral density function given by:
2 2 2 2 2 SSS (w) = R 2 D b g D + w g I G (w) S hh (w) 2 me
where Uc is the mean current and su=Uw/2 is the standard deviation of the wave induced flow velocity. gc() is a correction function accounting for the effect of a steady current given by: g c (x ) = j(x ) F( x ) = =
1 2p j(x ) + x F (x )- ; 2 1 2p x j( x ) dx - 1 - x2 e 2
l2 max
2 2
2 (w 0
- w ) + (2z T w 0 w)
Where RD
j(x) is the Gaussian probability density function and F(x) is the corresponding distribution function.
Factor accounting for the wave spreading and direction; see 3.4.3. b Linearisation constant; see 5.2.8. gD Drag force term; see 5.4.1. Inertia force term; see 5.4.1. gI Frequency transfer function; see 3.3 G(w) Single-sided wave elevation spectrum; see 3.3 Shh w0 = 2pf0/gf is the angular natural frequency Total damping ratio from zT structural damping; see 6.3.10 soil damping; see 7.2.10. hydrodynamic damping; see 5.2.9. me Effective mass per unit length incl. added mass; see 6.8.3
lmax is an equivalent stress factor given by:
5.2.9 The (linearized) hydrodynamic damping ratio zh is given by: 1 s u g D UC zh = g c l1 sU 2p m e f 0
5.3
Simplified Fatigue Assessment
5.3.1 In situations where quasi-static stress response can be assumed (when the wave period is far larger than the natural vibration period of the span), a simplified fatigue assessment may be tractable rather than a complete TD or FD approach. In such cases, the short term fatigue capacity against direct wave actions in a single sea-state characterised by (Hs, Tp, q) may be estimated as follows: (cf. 2.4.5)
--`,`,`````,`````,```,,`,,,`,,`-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---
5.2.7
l max = (1 + CSF )
f1(x)) E CSF Ds t L l1
(D s - t )E
2
2 f1 l 1 max 2 L x
1st mode shape Youngs modulus Concrete stiffness factor; see 6.3.5 Outer steel pipe diameter Pipe wall thickness Length of mode shape Mode shape weighting factor given by:
L
FM TH = a S - m Tu S , TP , q
where S is the quasi-static stress range response from a direct regular wave load at pipe level using Morisons equation. Tu is the mean zero upcrossing period in 3.3.6.
5.4
Force Coefficients
l1 =
0 L 0
f1 ( x )dx
2 f1 ( x )dx
5.4.1 The force P(x,t) per unit length of a pipe free span is represented by the Morisons equation. Assuming that the velocity of the structure is not negligible compared with the water particle velocity Morisons equation reads: & -C & )U - y & +g I U P ( x, t ) = g D (U - y a p & rD 2 & y 4
l1 is typically in the order of 1.3
where
r D U
y gD gI
5.4.2
Water density Outer pipe diameter Instantaneous (time dependent) flow velocity Pipe lateral displacement = 0.5rDCD is the drag force term =
p 4
The drag load is often of small practical importance for small KC values and CD,0 may be interpolated for completeness for KC < 5, see Figure 5-1.
yproxi,CD is a correction factor accounting for the 5.4.6 seabed proximity: 0.5 for e/D < 0.8 0.9 + y proxi,CD = (1 + 5 (e / D)) 1 else
rD 2 C M is the inertia force term
The added mass term in the Morison equation
p & is assumed implicit in the effective mass me, see Ca rD 2& z 4
5.4.7 ness.
y k , CD is a correction factor for the pipe rough-
6.7.1. 5.4.3 The drag coefficient CD and inertia coefficient CM to be used in Morisons equation is a function of : the Keulegan Carpenter number, KC; the current flow ratio, a; the gap ratio, (e/D); the trench depth, (D/D); Reynolds number, Re; the pipe roughness, (k/D); In addition also the cross-flow vibration level, (Az/D) influences the drag coefficient. Note that the dependency of the Reynolds number is embedded in the cylinder roughness effect. 5.4.4 The drag coefficient CD is to be taken as
k y k ,CD = 1.25 + 0.05 ln D In lieu of detailed documentation of the surface roughness the following values may be applied:
Pipe surface Steel, painted Steel, un-coated (not rusted) Concrete Marine growth k [metres] 10-6 10-5 1/300 1/200 1/20
5.4.8 ytrench,CD is a correction factor accounting for the effect of a pipe in a trench: 2D y trench,CD = 1 - 3 D
D/D is the relative trench depth given by 4.4.9.
C D = C D,0 y k ,CD y proxi,CD y trench ,CD y A ,CD 5.4.5 CD,0 is the basic drag coefficient in oscillatory flow for a free concrete coated pipe (KC>5):
5 0.9 (1 - a ) + KC C D ,0 = 5 0.45 + KC a 0 .5 a f 0 .5
yA,CD is an amplification factor due to cross-flow 5.4.9 vibrations, i.e., proportional to increased projected area to mean flow. Ay y A ,CD = 1 + 2 D
For pure current CD,0 = 0.45 (i.e., for KC).

5.4.10
2.0 1.8 1.6 Drag Coefficient CD 1.4 1.2 1.0 0.8 0.6 0.4 0.2 0.0 0 5 10 15 20 KC
--`,`,`````,`````,```,,`,,,`,,`-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---
The inertia coefficient CM is to be taken as: C M = C M ,0 y k ,CM y proxi,CM y trench ,CM
yk ,CD = 1.0 yproxi,CD = 1.0 ytrench,CD = 1.0 yA,CD = 1.0

25 30 35
0.0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5
5.4.11 CM,0 is the basic inertia coefficient for a free concrete coated pipe taken as, see Figure 5-2: 5 (2 - f (a ) ) (KC + 5) 1.6 - 2 a a 0.5 f (a ) = a f 0.5 0.6 C M , 0 = f (a ) +
40
Figure 5-1 Drag coefficient CD versus KC and a

DET NORSKE VERITAS
2.0 1.8 1.6 Inertia Coefficient CM 1.4 1.2 1.0 0.8 0.6 0.4 0.2 0.0 0
k,CM = 1.0 proxi,CM = 1.0 trench, CM = 1.0
--`,`,`````,`````,```,,`,,,`,,`-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---
a 0.0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5
5.4.12
y k , CM is a correction factor accounting for the y k , CM = 2 - y k , CD
pipe roughness.
5.4.13 yproxi,M is a correction factor accounting for the seabed proximity: 0 .8 for e/D < 0.8 0.84 + y proxi,M = (1 + 5 (e / D)) 1 else 5.4.14 ytrench,M is a correction factor accounting for the effect of a pipe in a trench: 1 D y trench,M = 1 - 3 D
D/D is the relative trench depth given by 4.4.9
10
15
20 KC
25
30
35
40
Figure 5-2 Inertia coefficient CM versus KC and a
6
6.1
Structural Analysis
General
The curves are, in strict terms, only valid for the vertical (cross-flow) dynamic response but may also be used for assessment of the horizontal (in-line) response.
6.3
Structural modelling
6.1.1 The following tasks are normally required for assessment of free spans: structural modelling modelling of pipe-soil interaction load modelling a static analysis to obtain the static configuration of the pipeline an eigenvalue analysis which provides natural frequencies and corresponding modal shapes for the inline and cross-flow vibrations of the free spans a response analysis using a response model or a force model in order to obtain the stress ranges from environmental actions.
6.3.1 The structural behaviour of the pipeline shall be evaluated by modelling the pipeline, seabed and relevant artificial supports and performing static and dynamic analyses. This section presents requirements for the structural modelling. Soil-pipe interactions are treated in section 7. 6.3.2 A realistic characterisation of the cross-sectional behaviour of a pipeline can be based on the following assumptions: the pipe cross-sections remain circular and plane; the stresses may be assumed constant across the pipewall thickness; load effect calculation is normally to be performed using nominal un-corroded cross section values; the application of this document is limited to elastic response, hence plasticity models and effects of twodimensional state of stress (axial and hoop) on bending stiffness need not be considered. The effect of coating is generally limited to in6.3.3 creasing submerged weight, drag forces, added mass or buoyancy. The positive effect on the stiffness and strength, see 6.3.5, is normally to be disregarded. If the contribution of the coating to the structural response is considered significant, appropriate models shall be used. Non-homogeneity of the bending stiffness along 6.3.4 the pipe, due to discontinuities of the coating across field joints or other effects, may imply strain concentrations that shall be taken into account. The stiffening effect of concrete coating may be 6.3.5 accounted for by:
EI conc CSF = k c EI steel
0.75
--`,`,`````,`````,```,,`,,,`,,`-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---
6.2
Morphological classification
6.2.1 The objective of the morphological classification is to define whether the free span is isolated or interacting. The morphological classification determines the degree of complexity required of the free span analysis: two or more consecutive free spans are considered to be isolated (i.e. single span) if the static and dynamic behaviour are unaffected by neighbouring spans; a sequence of free spans is interacting (i.e. multispanning) if the static and dynamic behaviour is affected by the presence of neighbouring spans. If the free span is interacting, more than one span must be included in the pipe/seabed model. 6.2.2 The morphological classification should in general be determined based on detailed static and dynamic analyses. The classification may be useful for evaluation of scour induced free spans and in application of approximate response quantities. In lieu of detailed data, Figure 6-1 may be used to classify the spans into isolated or interacting dependent on the soil types and span and support lengths.
1.1 Relative length of adjaent span, La/L 1.0 0.9 0.8 0.7 0.6 0.5 0.4 0.3 0.2 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 Relative span shoulder length, Lsh/L 0.8 0.9 1.0
La Lsh L Isolated very soft clay soft/firm clay Interacting sand stiff clay
where CSF denotes the stiffness of concrete coating relative to the steel pipe stiffness and (1+CSF) is the stress concentration factor due to the concrete coating and localised bending. The parameter kc is an empirical constant accounting for the deformation/slippage in the corrosion coating and the cracking of the concrete coating. The value of kc may be taken as 0.33 for asphalt and 0.25 for PP/PE coating. In case the increased stiffness effect is utilised, the increased bending stresses due to field joints must also be accounted for. The CSF given above is assumed valid for all relevant pipe diameters, D/t-ratios and concrete strengths, fcn, provided that that the pipe joint length exceeds 12m, the field joint
Figure 6-1 Classification of free spans
DET NORSKE VERITAS
length is 0.5-1.0m and the concrete coating thickness does not exceed 150mm. In lieu of detailed data, it is conservative to as6.3.6 sume that a girth weld is present in the most heavily loaded cross-section. This is also a basis for the concrete stiffening effect given above. 6.3.7 The cross-sectional bending stiffness of the concrete coating, EIconc, is the initial, uncracked stiffness. Youngs modulus for concrete may be taken as:
E conc = 10000 f cn 0.3
6.3.12 ULS conditions may require a more refined pipesoil modelling than the linearized eigen-value analysis due to sliding at the span supports.
6.4
Functional Loads
6.4.1 The functional loads which shall be considered are: weight of the pipe and internal fluid; external and internal fluid pressure; thermal expansion and contraction, and residual installation forces. 6.4.2 Response calculations must account for the relevant sequence of load application, if important.
where fcn is the construction strength of the concrete. Both Econc and fcn are to be in N/mm2. 6.3.8 The boundary conditions applied at the ends of the pipeline section modelled shall be able to simulate the pipe-soil interaction and the continuity of the pipeline. Sufficient lengths of the pipeline at both sides of the span must be included in the model to account for the effects of side spans, if relevant. The element length to be used in a finite element 6.3.9 model is dictated by the accuracy required. If the stress ranges are to be derived from the mode shapes, see 6.8.4, the accuracy of the stress ranges becomes strongly affected by the element length, especially at the span shoulders. Ideally the maximum element length should be found by reducing the length until the results (natural frequencies and stresses) converge towards constant values. In practice this may be difficult to perform and, as guidance, the element length should be in the order of the outer diameter of the pipeline (1D). However, higher order modes and/or short spans (L/Ds < 30) may require shorter elements. 6.3.10 Structural damping is due to internal friction forces of the pipe material and depends on the strain level and associated deflections. If no information is available, a structural modal damping ratio of
zstr = 0.005
6.5
Static analysis
6.5.1 The static configuration is to be determined for the following conditions if relevant: as-laid condition; flooded condition; pressure test condition, and operating condition. 6.5.2 The static analysis should normally account for non-linear effects such as: large displacements (geometric non-linearity); soil non-linear response, and loading sequence. 6.5.3 The stiffness of the pipeline consists of material stiffness and geometrical stiffness. The geometrical stiffness is governed by the effective axial force, Seff. This force is equal to the true steel wall axial force, Ntr, with corrections for the effect of external and internal pressures: S eff = N tr - p i A i + p e A e Where Ntr pi pe Ai Ae True steel wall axial force Internal pressure External pressure Internal pipe (bore) cross section area External pipe (incl. Coating) cross section area
can be assumed. If concrete coating is present, the sliding at the interface between concrete and corrosion coating may further increase the damping to typically 0.01-0.02. 6.3.11 It is recommended to verify the finite element modelling and the post-processing by comparing the results from the finite element analysis with the approximate response quantities of section 6.8 for a single span with zero effective axial force and L/Ds = 60. The in-line and cross-flow natural frequencies and stress ranges shall show similar values within 5%.
The effective axial force in a span is difficult to estimate due to uncertainties in operational temperature and pressure, residual lay tension and axial force relaxation by sagging, axial sliding (feed-in), lateral buckling, multispanning and significant seabed unevenness. All these effects should be considered and taken into account if relevant. Then the most reliable method to estimate the effective axial force is use of non-linear FE analysis. As boundary values, the effective axial force for a completely unrestrained (axially) pipe becomes: S eff = 0
--`,`,`````,`````,```,,`,,,`,,`-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---
while for a totally restrained pipe the following effective axial force apply (if pipe considered thin-walled): S eff = H eff - Dp i A i (1 - 2n) - A s EDTa e Where Heff Dp i As DT ae
--`,`,`````,`````,```,,`,,,`,,`-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---
approximate response quantities may be applied under certain limitations, see section 6.8. Using an FE-approach, the following comments 6.6.2 apply: the eigenvalue analysis shall account for the static equilibrium configuration; in the eigenvalue analysis, a consistent linearisation of the problem must be made; the pipe-soil linearisation should be validated; the effect of geometric non-linearity on the dynamic response should be assessed; the span support may be assumed invariant during Vortex-Induced Vibrations (VIV) and motions from direct wave loading. 6.6.3 For analysis of a pipeline stretch with several spans and especially with interacting spans, special care must be paid to the determination of the eigenvalues and associated eigenvectors. This is due to the potential occurrence of very close eigenvalues, especially with respect to the identification of correct eigenvectors.
Effective lay tension Internal pressure difference relative to laying, see DNV-OS-F101 Pipe steel cross section area Temperature difference relative to laying Temperature expansion coefficient, may be temperature dependent
6.5.4 In this document, the static environmental loads are confined to those from near bottom current. If the load is much smaller than the vertical functional loads, then it may be disregarded in the analysis. However, for light pipes or long span lengths it should be considered if relevant. 6.5.5 Load history effects such as the lay tension and submerged weight during installation will influence the static deflection and stresses which are mainly determined by the submerged weight and effective axial force in the phase considered. Furthermore, the span geometry such as inclination of the span shoulders will have a significant influence on the static stresses and deflection. For this reason, the static response should be based on survey results (measured deflections) and/or FE analysis if considered as critical for the span assessment. 6.5.6 In addition to the static penetration due to the submerged weight of the pipeline, the penetration may increase due to effects from laying, erosional processes and self-burial.
6.7
6.7.1
Added Mass
The added mass may be considered as C a (e / D) = C M a = 0; KC 0; e / D - 1
The symbolise KC approaching 0. Note that the effect of pipe roughness and trench is not accounted for. According to section 5.4.10, Ca becomes: 1.6 0.68 + Ca = (1 + 5 (e / D) ) 1 for for e/D < 0.8 e/D 0.8
where e/D is the span gap ratio. This expression applies for both smooth and rough pipe surfaces.
6.6
Eigen-value analysis 6.8 Approximate response quantities
6.6.1 The aim of eigen-value analyses is to calculate the natural frequencies and corresponding stress due to associated mode shapes. The analysis is normally complex and depends on: the temporal classification (scour or uneveness induced free span); the morphological classification (single or multispan); the pipeline condition (i.e. as-laid, water-filled, pressure test and operation); the pipe and soil properties; the effective axial force and the initial deflected shape after laying; the loading history and axial displacement (feed-in) of the pipe. In general, it is recommended that the response quantities be assessed using non-linear FE-analyses conducted over an appropriate stretch of the pipeline. However,
6.8.1 The approximate response quantities specified in this section may be applied for free span assessment provided: Conservative assumptions are applied with respect to span lengths, soil stiffness and effective axial force.; The span is a single span on a relatively flat seabed, i.e. the span shoulders are almost horizontal and at the same level; The symmetrical mode shape dominates the dynamic response (normally relevant for the vertical, crossflow response only). Here the following limits apply: L/Ds < 140 d/D < 2.5 Note that these are not absolute limits; the shift in cross-flow response from the symmetrical to the unsymmetrical mode will depend on the sagging and the Document provided by IHS Licensee=Intec Engineering/5937045100, User=,
DET NORSKE VERITAS
levelling/inclination of the span shoulders. In cases where a shift in the cross-flow response is considered as likely, the structural response of the span should be assessed by using FE analysis including all important aspects; Bar buckling is not influencing on the response, i.e. C2Seff/PE > -0.5; A sensitivity study is performed in order to quantify the criticality of the assumptions.
2 2 f 1 + k( x ) = f x x 2
-3 / 2
6.8.5 In lieu of detailed information, the (unit diameter) stress amplitude AIL/CF may be estimated by:
A IL / CF
Approximate response quantities are considered relevant in performing efficient screening of FE or survey results in order to identify critical spans to be assessed with methods that are more accurate, see Fyrileiv & Mrk, (1998). 6.8.2 The fundamental natural frequency may be approximated by:
EI m eL4 eff
2 S d 1 + C2 eff + C3 PE D
D (D s - t ) E 2 f 2 x 2 D (D s - t ) E = C 4 (1 + CSF ) L2 eff = (1 + CSF )
max
where t is the steel pipe wall thickness and C4 is a boundary condition coefficient. 6.8.6 The static bending moment may be estimated by: M static = C5 q L2 eff
Seff 1 + C 2 P E
f0 C1 1 + CSF
where C1 C3 E I CSF Leff me D PE

d
Seff 6.8.3
Boundary condition coefficients Youngs modulus for steel Moment of inertia for steel Concrete stiffness enhancement factor Effective span length, see 6.8.9 Effective mass, see below Outer diameter of pipe Euler buckling load = (1+CSF)p2EI/Leff 2 (positive sign) Static deflection, normally ignored for inline direction). Shall be limited to 4D. Effective axial force (negative in compression) , see section 6.5
where q represents the loading, i.e. the submerged weight of the pipe in the vertical (cross-flow) direction and/or the drag loading in the horizontal (in-line) direction, see 5.4.1. Note that Leff shall be calculated using the static soil stiffness in the Leff/L calculation. Note that, due to historical effects and the local seabed geometry, there is a large uncertainty associated with this simplified expression, see 6.5.5. Note that the term Seff/PE becomes negative when the effective axial force is in compression since PE is defined as positive. 6.8.7 In case the static deflection is not given by direct measurement (survey) or estimated by accurate analytical tools, it may be estimated by:
d = C6 q L4 1 eff EI (1 + CSF) S eff 1 + C 2 P E
--`,`,`````,`````,```,,`,,,`,,`-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---
The effective mass, me, is defined by m(s)f2 (s)ds me = L 2 f (s)ds L
where f(s) is the assumed mode shape satisfying the boundary conditions and m(s) is the mass per unit length including structural mass, added mass and mass of internal fluid. 6.8.4 The unit diameter stress amplitude (stress due to unit outer diameter mode shape deflection) may be calculated by: kEI D s = 1 D E D k A IL / CF =D s I 2 2 where Ds is the steel pipe diameter and D is the outer pipe diameter (including any coating). k is the curvature of the assumed mode shape satisfying the boundary conditions mode shape:
where C6 is a boundary condition coefficient. Note that Leff shall be calculated using the static soil stiffness in the Leff/L calculation. Note that, due to historical effects and the local seabed geometry, there is a large uncertainty associated with this simplified expression, see 6.5.5. 6.8.8 The coefficients C1 to C6 are given in the table below for different boundary conditions. For multispanning scenarios the choice of coefficient should be supported by dedicated FE-analyses.
Table 6-1 Boundary conditions coefficients Pinned- FixedSingle span on seabed Pinned 2) Fixed 3) C1 1.57 3.56 3.56 C2 1.00 0.25 0.25 C3 0.8 1) 0.2 1) 0.4 1) C4 4.39 14.1 Shoulder: 14.1(L/Leff)2 Mid-span: 8.6 C5 1/8 1/12 1 Shoulder: 18(L eff / L) 2 - 6 Mid-span: 1/24 C6 5/384 1/384 1/384 1) Note that C3=0 is normally assumed for in-line if the steady current is not accounted for. 2) For pinned-pinned boundary condition Leff is to be replaced by L in the above expressions also for PE. 3) For fixed-fixed boundary conditions, Leff/L=1 per definition. 4) C5 shall be calculated using the static soil stiffness in the Leff/L calculation.
6.8.9 The Leff/L term used above accounts for the effective span length in order to consider the span as fully fixed. This ratio decreases as the L/Ds ratio and soil stiffness increase. The Leff/L term is given by (for reference see Hobbs, 1986):
4.73 2 L eff - 0.066b + 1.02b + 0.63 = L 4.73 2 0.036b + 0.61b + 1.0
for b 2.7 for b < 2.7
K L4 b = log10 (1 + CSF)EI
where K is the relevant soil stiffness (vertical or horizontal, static or dynamic).
--`,`,`````,`````,```,,`,,,`,,`-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---
6.8.10 The boundary coefficients in Table 6-1 based on the effective span length are found appropriate for fatigue assessment (FLS) under the assumption of small displacements. For the check of maximum bending moments (ULS) due to direct wave loading, the pinned-pinned boundary condition may be applied in combination with the apparent span length (not the effective span length).
DET NORSKE VERITAS
7
7.1
Pipe-soil interaction
General
7.1.1 The soil is to be classified as cohesive (clays) or cohesionless (sands). As basis for the evaluations of the pipe-soil interaction the following basic soil parameters are relevant: type of soil; in-situ stress conditions; shear strength parameters for drained or undrained condition including remoulded shear strength for clays; soil moduli and damping coefficients as function of cyclic shear strain; soil settlement parameters; general soil data as submerged unit weight, void ratio, water content and plasticity limits. 7.1.2 If the approximate soil stiffness expressions in 7.3 are to be used, then the following specific parameters are relevant: submerged unit weight of soil, gsoil Poissons ratio, n void ratio, es angle of friction, cohesionless soils, js undrained shear strength, cohesive soils, su over-consolidation ratio, OCR plasticity index, cohesive soils, ip The plasticity index ip is a standard geotechnical parameter whose value is usually specified in the soil reports for the pipeline route. The plasticity index influences the dynamic spring stiffness given in Section 7.3 only for clay and only when the over-consolidation ratio of the clay is greater than one, OCR > 1. Note that OCR > 1 is rarely assumed. 7.1.3 The parameters listed above should preferably be obtained by means of geotechnical tests on undisturbed soil samples and be representative for the particular geographical location of the pipeline. In lieu of detailed information, the values given in Table 7-1 and Table 7-2 may be used.
Table 7-1 Typical geotechnical parameters for sand Soil type es js gsoil n [kN/m3] Loose 28-30o 8.5-11.0 0.35 0.7-0.9 o Medium 30-36 9.0-12.5 0.35 0.5-0.8 Dense 36-41o 10.0-13.5 0.35 0.4-0.6
Table 7-2 Typical geotechnical parameters for clay Soil type su es gsoil n [kN/m2] [kN/m3] Very soft <12.5 4-7 0.45 1.0-3.0 Soft 12.5-25 5-8 0.45 0.8-2.5 Firm 25-50 6-11 0.45 0.5-2.0 Stiff 50-100 7-12 0.45 0.4-1.7 Very stiff 100-200 10-13 0.45 0.3-0.9 Hard >200 10-13 0.45 0.3-0.9
7.1.4 Uncertainties in the soil data should be considered, e.g. by sensitivity analysis. These uncertainties may arise from variations in the soil conditions along the pipeline route and difficulties in determining reliable in-situ soil characteristics of the upper soil layer, which is the soil of most importance for the pipeline. Soil data down to a depth equal to about 0.5-1.0 times the pipe diameter are most important to consider in this context.
7.2
Modelling of pipe-soil interaction
7.2.1 The pipe-soil interaction is important in the evaluation of the static equilibrium configuration and the dynamic response of a free spanning pipeline. The following functional requirements apply for the modelling of soil resistance: the seabed topography along the pipeline route must be represented; the modelling of soil resistance must account for nonlinear contact forces normal to the pipeline and lift off; the modelling of soil resistance must account for sliding in the axial direction. For force models this also applies in the lateral direction; appropriate (different) short- and long-term characteristics for stiffness and damping shall be applied, i.e. static and dynamic stiffness and damping. 7.2.2 The seabed topography may be defined by a vertical profile along the pipeline route. The spacing of the data points characterising the profile should relate to the actual roughness of the seabed. 7.2.3 The axial and lateral frictional coefficients between the pipe and the seabed shall reflect the actual seabed condition, the roughness, the pipe, and the passive soil resistance. 7.2.4 The axial and lateral resistance is not always of a pure frictional type. Rapid changes in vertical stresses are (in low-permeable soil) reacted by pore water and not by a change in effective contact stresses between the soil and the pipe. In addition, the lateral resistance will have a contribution due to the penetration of the pipe into the soil, which needs be accounted for.
--`,`,`````,`````,```,,`,,,`,,`-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---
7.2.5 For sands with low content of fines, the frictional component of the axial and lateral resistance is proportional with the vertical force at any time. For clays, the frictional component is proportional with the undrained shear strength. 7.2.6 Where linear soil stiffness has to be defined for the eigenvalue analysis, the soil stiffness should be selected considering the actual soil resistance and the amplitude of the oscillations. 7.2.7 The soil stiffness for vertical loading should be evaluated differently for static and dynamic analyses. The static soil response will be governed mainly by the maximum reaction, including some cyclic effects. Dynamic stiffness will be characterised mainly by the unloading/reloading situation. The soil damping is generally dependent on the 7.2.8 dynamic loads acting on the soil. Two different types of soil damping mechanisms can be distinguished: Material damping associated with hysteresis taking place close to the yield zone in contact with the pipe. Radiation damping associated with propagation of elastic waves through the yield zone. 7.2.9 The radiation damping may be evaluated from available solutions for elastic soils using relevant soil modulus reflecting the soil stress (or strain) levels. The radiation damping depends highly on the frequency of the oscillations, and is more important for high frequency oscillations. 7.2.10 The modal soil damping ratio, zsoil, due to the soil-pipe interaction may be determined by: c(s)f2 (s)ds 1 L z soil = 2 4pf 0 m(s)f (s)ds L where the soil damping per unit length, c(s), may be defined on the basis of an energy balance between the maximum elastic energy stored by the soil during an oscillation cycle and the energy dissipated by a viscous damper in the same cycle. Alternatively, the modal soil damping ratio, zsoil, may be taken from Table 7-3 or Table 7-4, in which L denotes the length of the free span and D is the outer diameter of the pipeline. Interpolation is allowed.
Table 7-3 Modal soil damping ratios (in %) for sand. Horizontal (in-line) Vertical (cross-flow) direction direction Sand type L/D L/D <40 100 >160 <40 100 >160
Note that the sand type is identified by the value of the friction angle js (Table 7-1), and the clay type is identified by the value of the undrained shear strength su (Table 7-2). For pipes supported by rock, values for the modal soil damping ratios may be taken as for dense sand.
Table 7-4 Modal soil damping ratios (in %) for clay. Horizontal (inVertical (crossline) direction flow) direction Clay type L/D L/D <40 100 >160 <40 100 >160
Very soft - Soft Firm Stiff Very stiff - Hard
3.0 2.0 1.4
2.0 1.4 1.0
1.0 0.8 0.6
3.0 1.2 0.7
2.0 1.0 0.6
1.0 0.8 0.5
7.3
Approximate Soil Stiffness
7.3.1 The following expressions may be used for the static vertical soil reaction per unit length as a function of the penetration, v: Rv = gsoilb(Nqv+0.5Ngb) - sandy soils Rv = b(gsoilNqv+Ncsu) - clayey soils Where b Load distribution width: 2 ( D - v) v for v 0.5D = D for v > 0.5D Outer pipe diameter (including any coating) Submerged unit weight of soil. Undrained shear strength
D
gsoil su
The expressions for RV are based on bearing capacity formulas for ideal 2-D strip foundations. Note that if these formulas are used to predict the expected penetration v for a given contact pressure RV, they may lead to underestimation of the true penetration due to effects of the pipelay process and erosion as well as possible 3-D effects on the shoulder near the free span. 7.3.2 The bearing capacity factors Nc, Nq and Ng versus the internal friction angle js may be calculated from the following formulas: j N q = exp(p tan j s ) tan 2 (45 + s ) 2 N c = ( N q - 1) cot j s N g = 1.5( N q - 1) tan j s For clayey soils the friction angle is set equal to 0, i.e. Nq = 1.0 and Nc = 5.14.
Loose Medium Dense
3.0 1.5 1.5
2.0 1.5 1.5
1.0 1.5 1.5
2.0 1.2 1.2
1.4 1.0 1.0
0.8 0.8 0.8
DET NORSKE VERITAS
--`,`,`````,`````,```,,`,,,`,,`-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---
100
the associated incremental vertical displacement of the pipe. 7.3.6 The lateral (horizontal) dynamic stiffness KL is defined as KL=DFL/DdL, where DFL is the incremental horizontal force between pipe and soil per unit length of pipe, and DdL is the associated incremental horizontal displacement of the pipe. 7.3.7 For a detailed determination of KV, the following expression may be applied: 0.88 G Kv = 1- n
which is based on elastic halfspace theory for a rectangular foundation under assumption of a pipe length that equals 10 times the contact width between pipe and soil. Poissons ratio n is given in Table 7-1 and Table 7-2. 7.3.8 For a detailed determination of KL, the following expression may be applied: K L = 0.76 G (1 + n) which is based on elastic halfspace theory for a rectangular foundation under assumption of a pipe length that equals 10 times the contact width between pipe and soil. Poissons ratio n is given in Table 7-1 and Table 7-2. 7.3.9 For conditions with small-amplitude deformations, the shear modulus for the soil can be taken as:
2000 (3 - es )2 ss 1 + es G= 2 1300 (3 - es ) s (OCR ) k s s 1 + es for sand for clay
Nc
Nc, Nq and Ng
10 Nq
Ng
1 0 10 20 30 40 50
j[degree]
Figure 7-1 Bearing capacity factors Nc, Nq and Ng versus the internal friction angle js
7.3.3 The maximum static, axial soil reaction per unit length may be taken as: Ra = Rvma Ra = min{Rvma, btmax} Where Rv ma b kc Vertical static soil reaction given by 7.3.1 Axial friction coefficient Given in 7.3.1 i 1.3i p OCR 1 - p + = ip in % 2.61 200 200 Soil shear strength:
- sandy soils - clayey soils
[kN/m2]
tmax
2 0.5(1 - k c ) R v = su b
7.3.4 The static vertical stiffness is a secant stiffness representative for penetration conditions such as during installation and erosion and during development of free spans. The static vertical stiffness KV,S is defined as KV,S=RV/v, where RV is the static vertical soil reaction per unit length of pipe and v is the vertical penetration of the pipe required to mobilise this reaction. Unless effects of pipelay and erosion and 3-D shoulder effects are significant, the 2D approach outlined in 7.3.1 can be used to predict v. Otherwise, or when no detailed information is available, the static stiffness value may be taken according to Table 7-7 for sand and Table 7-8 for clay. 7.3.5 The vertical dynamic stiffness KV is defined as KV=DFV/DdV, where DFV is the incremental vertical force between pipe and soil per unit length of pipe, and DdV is
ks
--`,`,`````,`````,```,,`,,,`,,`-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---
where
ss
OCR es ks
Effective mean stress (in units of kPa), see 7.3.10. Over-consolidation ratio Void ratio Coefficient, taken from Figure 7-2
0.5 0.4 0.3 0.2 0.1 0 0 20 40 60 80 Plasticity index, ip 100 120 140
Figure 7-2 ks versus plasticity index, ip

This expression for G, which gives lower-bound values for the initial shear modulus, has been calibrated to measurements from free pipeline spans. It is based on an expression for the initial shear modulus, formulated by Hardin and Drnevich (1970) and based on experimental results for a broad range of soil types. For extreme conditions, which can be assumed to cause large deformations, considerably lower G values apply. 7.3.10 The effective mean stress, ss, in the soil at the span supports may be calculated from the stress conditions at a representative depth below the pipe. The representative depth may be assumed equal to the contact width b, which is given in Section 7.3.1. The following formula may then be applied:
--`,`,`````,`````,```,,`,,,`,,`-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---
7.3.11 The procedure in Sections 7.3.7-7.3.10 leads to values of the dynamic stiffness KV and KL, which can be considered as lower-bound values for initial small-strain stiffness at either end of the free span, but which are not adjusted for possible non-linear soil behaviour at larger strains. If there are indications that the values for KV and KL should be different from those produced by this procedure, then the ratio between the assumed pipe length on the shoulder and the contact width may be adjusted from the adopted value of 10. Calculation of the effective mean stress ss from the stress conditions at a different representative depth below the pipe than b may also be considered. Note that, in this context, it is acceptable to distinguish between representative depths for calculation of KV and for calculation of KL. 7.3.12 When normal conditions prevail and when no detailed analysis is carried out for determination of KV and KL for small-strain conditions, the values of these stiffnesses in units of kN/m/m may be calculated in simplified manner as (D is in units of metre): 2 rs 1 K V = CV ( + ) D 3 r 3 K L = CL ( 2 rs 1 + ) D 3 r 3
sS =
in which K0
gsoil q
1 q L (1 + K 0 )bg soil '+ (1 + ) 2 3b 2Lsh
Lsh L
Coefficient of earth pressure at rest, usually K0=0.5 Submerged unit weight soil (kN/m3) Submerged weight of pipe per unit length of pipe (kN/m) Span support length on one shoulder (for transfer of one-half the weight of the free span) Span length
Note that for pipes on clay, the clay will not be consolidated for the weight of the pipe in the temporary phase immediately after pipelay. For calculations for a pipe on clay in this phase, the formula for ss reduces to 1 sS = (1 + K 0 )bg soil ' 2 When detailed information does not exist and the topographical conditions are not complex, the support length ratio Lsh/L may be taken according to Table 7-5 for sand and according to Table 7-6 for clay.
Table 7-5 Support length ratio Lsh/L for sand Sand type Lsh/L Loose 0.3 Medium 0.2 Dense 0.1 Table 7-6 Support length ratio Lsh /L for clay Clay type Lsh/L Very soft 0.5 Soft 0.4 Firm 0.3 Stiff 0.2 Very stiff 0.1 Hard 0.07
in which the coefficients CV and CL are taken according to Table 7-7 and Table 7-8. The soil type, which is used as entry to these tables, is identified by the value of the friction angle js for sand (Table 7-1) and by the value of the undrained shear strength su for clay (Table 7-2).
Table 7-7 Dynamic stiffness factor and static stiffness for pipe-soil interaction in sand. CL KV,S Sand type CV (kN/m5/2) (kN/m5/2) (kN/m/m) Loose 16000 12000 250 Medium 22000 16500 530 Dense 32000 24000 1350 Table 7-8 Dynamic stiffness factor and static stiffness for pipe-soil interaction in clay with OCR=1. CL KV,S Clay type CV (kN/m5/2) (kN/m5/2) (kN/m/m) Very soft 1200 800 50-100 Soft 2700 1800 160-260 Firm 6000 4000 500-800 Stiff 9000 6000 1000-1600 Very stiff 21000 14000 2000-3000 Hard 24000 16000 2600-4200
7.3.13 The simplified expressions are based on the procedure in Sections 7.3.7-7.3.10 for average properties of the considered soil type in conjunction Document provided by IHS Licensee=Intec Engineering/5937045100, User=, with an assumed
DET NORSKE VERITAS
penetration of 20-40% of the diameter and Lsh/L as given in Table 7-7 and Table 7-8. The simplified expressions for KV and KL, with values of CV and CL given in Table 7-7 and Table 7-8, are valid for dynamic conditions with small-amplitude deformations. 7.3.14 For free spans supported by sand, the lateral dynamic stiffness KL should be calculated under an assumption of loose sand properties in order to properly account for effects of erosion. 7.3.15 For extreme conditions, which can be assumed to cause large deformations on the shoulders, a smaller spring stiffness than that associated with small-strain conditions apply. For vertical loading, this smaller spring stiffness is typically of the same order of magnitude as the static vertical stiffness KV,S. For lateral loading, reference is made to Section 7.3.16. 7.3.16 In case of lateral loads large enough to cause sliding at the span supports, the following bilinear forcedisplacement curve, which covers both small-strain conditions and extreme displacement conditions, may be applied at span supports on sand and clay:
Table 7-9 Equivalent stiffness, k2, for span supports on sand v/D k2 (kN/m/m) 0.00 0 0.25 19 0.35 28 0.50 44 1.00 105
For span supports on clay, the equivalent stiffness k2 can be calculated as
su k 2 = 8.26 s u Dg soil
in which gsoil gsoil gwater v
-0.4
v D
1.3
Total unit weight of soil (=gsoil+gwater) Submerged unit weight of water Unit weight of water (=10 kN/m3) Vertical pipe penetration at span shoulder
For span supports on sand, the maximum lateral resistance per unit length of pipe is
k1 y m F FL = m L FV + k 2 ( y - L V ) k1
in which y FL FL,max FV
mL k1
for FL < m L FV for m L FV FL < FL,max
v FL, max = m L FV + 5.0 g soil 'D 2 D
1.25
--`,`,`````,`````,```,,`,,,`,,`-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---
For span supports on clay, the maximum lateral resistance per unit length of pipe is
su FL, max = m L FV + 4.13 D s u Dg soil
-0.4
v D
1.3
k2
Lateral displacement of pipe on shoulder Lateral force per unit length of pipe at displacement y Maximum lateral resistance per unit length of pipe Vertical contact force per unit length of pipe on shoulder Lateral friction coefficient Initial stiffness up to mobilisation of full friction Equivalent stiffness for deformations past mobilisation of full friction
7.3.17 The axial dynamic soil stiffness is usually not important. However, when long free spans are considered, it is important to include an axial soil-support model with friction and stiffness. If no information is available about the axial dynamic soil stiffness, it may be taken as equal to the lateral dynamic soil stiffness KL as described above.
7.4
Artificial supports
Unless data indicate otherwise, mL=0.6 may be applied for span supports on sand and mL=0.2 for span supports on clay. For supports on sand, the initial stiffness k1 may be taken as equal to the lateral dynamic stiffness KL for loose sand. For supports on clay, the initial stiffness k1 may be taken as equal to the lateral dynamic stiffness KL for the clay type in question. The equivalent stiffness k2 depends on the vertical penetration, v, of the pipe on the shoulder. For span supports on sand, values for k2 are given in Table 7-9.
7.4.1 Gravel sleepers can be modelled by modifying the seabed profile, considering the rock dump support shape and applying appropriate stiffness and damping characteristics. 7.4.2 The purpose of mechanical supports is generally to impose locally a pipeline configuration in the vertical and/or transverse directions. Such supports can be modelled by concentrated springs having a defined stiffness, taking into account the soil deformation beneath the support and disregarding the damping effect.
References
Blevins, R.D., Flow-Induced Vibrations, Krieger Publishing Company, Florida, 1994 Bruschi, R. & Vitali, L., Large-Amplitude Oscillations of Geometrically Non-linear Elastic Beams Subjected to Hydrodynamic Excitation, JOMAE, Vol. 113, May, 1991. DNV Offshore Standard OS-F101, Submarine Pipeline Systems. DNV Offshore Standard OS-F201, Dynamic Risers. DNV Recommended Practice RP-C203, Fatigue Strength Analysis of Offshore Steel Structures. DNV Classification Note CN 30.5, Environmental Conditions and Environmental Loads. DNV Recommended Practice RP-E305, On-bottom Stability Design of Submarine Pipelines. Fyrileiv, O. & Mrk, K.J., Assessment of Free Spanning Pipelines using the DNV Guideline, ISOPE98, Montreal, Canada, May 24-29, 1998. Fyrileiv, O., Mrk, K.J. & Rongved, K. TOGI Pipeline Assessment of Non-stationary Free Spans, OMAE00, New Orleans, USA, February 14-17, 2000. Hansen, E.A., Bryndum, M., Mrk, K.J., Verley, R., Sortland, L. & Nes, H.,Vibrations of Free Spanning Pipeline Located in the Vicinity of a Trench", OMAE'014016, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil, June 3-8, 2001.
Hardin, B.O., and V.P. Drnevich, Shear Modulus and Damping in Soils: I. Measurements and Parameters Effects, II. Design Equations and Curves, Technical Reports UKY 27-70-CE 2 and 3, College of Engineering, University of Kentucky, Lexington, Kentucky, July 1970. Hobbs, R.E:, Influence of Structural Boundary Conditions on pipeline Free Span Dynamics, OMAE86, 1986. Mrk, K.J., Vitali, L. & Verley, R., The MULTISPAN Project: Design Guideline for Free Spanning Pipelines, Proc. of OMAE97 conf., Yokohama, Japan, April 13-17, 1997. Mrk, K.J. & Fyrileiv, O. Fatigue Design According to the DNV Guideline for Free Spanning Pipelines, OPT98, Oslo, Norway, February 23-24, 1998. Mrk K.J., Fyrileiv, O., Verley, R., Bryndum, M. & Bruschi, R. Introduction to the DNV Guideline for Free Spanning Pipelines, OMAE98, Lisboa, July 6-9, 1998. Mrk, K.J., Fyrileiv, O., Nes, H. & Sortland, L. A Strategy for Assessment of Non-Stationary Free Spans, ISOPE-99, Brest, France, May 30-June 4, 1999. Sumer B.M. & Fredse, J. Hydrodynamics around Cylindrical Structures, Advanced Series on Ocean Engineering Volume 12, World Scientific, London, 1997. Tura, F., Dumitrescu, A., Bryndum, M. B. & Smeed, P.F. Guidelines for Free Spanning Pipelines: The GUDESP Project, OMAE94, Volume V, pp 247-256, Houston, 1994.
--`,`,`````,`````,```,,`,,,`,,`-`-`,,`,,`,`,,`---
DET NORSKE VERITAS

DNV RP F105

Uploaded by

Document Information

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

DNV RP F105

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

RECOMMENDED PRACTICE DNV-RP-F105

FREE SPANNING PIPELINES

DET NORSKE VERITAS

Recommended Practice DNV-RP-F105, March 2002 Page 3

DET NORSKE VERITAS

Recommended Practice DNV-RP-F105, March 2002 Page 4

Scope and Application

Recommended Practice DNV-RP-F105, March 2002 Page 5

Response model Force model

VR KC a Damping Free span parameters

Safety class Safety factors SN curve

Screening Wave & current Return period values

Design Criteria & Main results

OK / not OK (span length)

Figure 1-1 Overview of main components in a Free Span Assessment

DET NORSKE VERITAS

Recommended Practice DNV-RP-F105, March 2002 Page 6

Free Span Response Classification

0.5< a < 0.8

Recommended Practice DNV-RP-F105, March 2002 Page 7

current dominated flow Flow Velocity(Uc+Uw)

wave dominated flow

CSF FM LRFD OCR RM RD RPV TD ULS VIV

Relationship to other Rules 1.10 Symbols

DET NORSKE VERITAS

Recommended Practice DNV-RP-F105, March 2002 Page 8

FL FV fv fw F() g gc gD gI G G(w) Heff HS h I Ic ip k kc kp ks kw K KL KV (k/D) KC KS K0 k1 k2 L La Leff Ls Lsh me m m(s) Mn ni N Ni

Ntr Nc Nq Ng pe pi Pi q PE Ra Rc RD Rv RIq Rk Re s S Ssw Seff Shh SSS SUU su St t Texposure Tlife Tp Tu Tw U Uc Us Uw v VR w y z zD zm z0 zr

Recommended Practice DNV-RP-F105, March 2002 Page 9

ytrench,onset ya,in r rs/r s sc su sdyn sl sN sstat ss qrel q zT zsoil zstr zh w0 w wp tmax

1.10.3 IL CF onset 100year 1year

DET NORSKE VERITAS

Recommended Practice DNV-RP-F105, March 2002 Page 10

Screening Fatigue Criteria

Free Span Data & Characteristics

Span intervention Detailed analysis

Recommended Practice DNV-RP-F105, March 2002 Page 11

U c,100 year + U w ,1year

Figure 2-2 Typical two-slope SN curve.

DET NORSKE VERITAS

Recommended Practice DNV-RP-F105, March 2002 Page 12

Probability of occurrence for the ith stress cycle

PHs,Tp,q = q H T min T RM,IL ; T FM,IL S P Hs,Tp,q Hs,Tp,q -1 PHs,Tp,q = RM,CF qH T T S P Hs,Tp,q

Recommended Practice DNV-RP-F105, March 2002 Page 13

cross - flow s dyn

U1year U10 year U100 year

= U c,1year + U w ,1year = max U c,10 year + U w ,1year ; U c,1year + U w ,10 year

= max U c,100 year + U w ,10 year ; U c,10 year + U w ,100 year

DET NORSKE VERITAS

Recommended Practice DNV-RP-F105, March 2002 Page 14

Recommended Practice DNV-RP-F105, March 2002 Page 15

DET NORSKE VERITAS

Recommended Practice DNV-RP-F105, March 2002 Page 16

Table 3-1 Seabed roughness

Seabed Silt fine sand

Medium sand coarse sand Gravel Pebble Cobble Boulder

The macro-roughness parameter zm is given by:

Short-term wave conditions

ln(z m ) = ln(z * r)-

zm is to be taken less than 0.2.

Outer Zone Inner Zone

Iso-line for horisontal mean velocity

Figure 3-1 Definitions for 2D model

=2p/Tw is the angular wave frequency. Wave period.