ASIAN PIPELINE

CONFERENCE & EXHIBITION

27th 28th September 2005
Crowne Plaza Mutiara Hotel, Kuala Lumpur
Jointly organized by:

ASCOPE Gas Centre, Malaysian Gas Association and Petromin magazine

DESIGN OF HIGH
TEMPERATURE/HIGH
PRESSURE (HT/HP) PIPELINE
AGAINST LATERAL BUCKLING

Mr Lim Kok Kien

JP Kenny Wood Group SDN BHD

DESIGN OF HIGH TEMPERATURE/HIGH PRESSURE (HT/HP) PIPELINE

AGAINST LATERAL BUCKLING
Lim Kok Kien*, Dr. Lau Siew Ming* and Dr. Emil Maschner
*JP Kenny Wood Group Sdn. Bhd., Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia.

JP Kenny Engineering Ltd, Staines, London, UK.

ABSTRACT

Typical effective force for a 'short' pipeline

0

Recent development in Malaysian waters has involved

several high temperature-high pressure (HT/HP) pipelines.
At high temperature and pressure, significant compressive
forces can develop in the pipeline, due to restricted thermal
expansion. As a consequence, the pipeline tends to release the
compressive forces by undergoing a secondary equilibrium
configuration, i.e. by buckling or snaking. The conditions in
which buckling occurs depends on several factors such as soil
friction, pipe weight, pipe sectional properties and the initial
out-of-straightness (OOS) of the pipe.
As a result, the design methodologies for HP/HT pipelines
differ significantly from traditional pipeline design. This
paper will present a case study on a recently completed
project by JP Kenny Wood Group Sdn. Bhd.. It involves a
28-inch gas pipeline on a flat seabed consisting of soft soil.
The design temperature and pressure is 96C and 157 barg
respectively. A design strategy using strain-base criteria was
adopted, incorporating a pipeline lay over vertical buckle
triggers.
In addition, the behaviour of HP/HT pipelines will be
discussed with reference to general theory of effective force
and thermal expansion. Furthermore, design strategy and
methodology involving various finite element modelling
techniques will also be discussed, in particular, the different
methods used in determining the suitable number of buckle
triggers and its location.

10

12

-500
-1000
-1500
-2000
-2500

virtual anchor point

-3000
-3500

KP distance (km)
Fully constrained axial force

Friction/effective force

Fig 1 Effective axial force of a short pipeline

Typical effective force for a 'long' pipeline

0
0

10

15

20

25

30

35

virtual anchors

-500

effective force

Force (kN)

-1000

PIPELINE UNDER TEMPERATURE & PRESSURE

-1500
friction force

Background
-2000

Pipelines operating at temperatures and pressures above

ambient will tend to expand, due to thermal and pressure loading.
If the pipeline is constrained, either partially or fully, a
compressive axial force will develop in the pipeline. The
magnitude of the compressive force depends on the extent of
constraint applied to oppose the expansion. For an untrenched
subsea pipeline, axial constraint arises in the form of seabed soil
friction and/or the flexibility at the end tie-in.
For a short pipeline, the total axial friction is insufficient to
constrain the pipeline fully. A typical effective force along the
pipeline is as shown in Fig 1.
The two ends of the pipeline will expand, moving in the
opposite direction of each other. Thus, the friction force changes
direction at an equilibrium point where no axial expansion
occurs. This is known as a virtual anchor point.
For a sufficiently long pipeline, the build up in frictional
resistance will exceed the axial force required to fully constrain
the pipeline. In such cases, certain portion of the pipeline will be
fully constrained, while the other sections are free to expand (but
still remain in compression due to resistance from friction). Two
virtual anchors will develop in this case as shown in Fig 2.

fully constrained section

fully constrained axial force

-2500
KP distance (km)

Fig 2 Effective axial force of a long pipeline

Therefore, on a flat seabed, a pipeline under temperature and
pressure loading will always be under compression as a result of
friction limiting its expansion. A positive (tensile) effective force,
however, can develop if the seabed is highly irregular or if there
is seabed subsidence. Pipelines, therefore can be divided into two
groups: Long pipelines which develop the full constrain axial force
Short pipelines that never develop the full constrain force.

Response under compressive load

The global response of pipelines under compression depends
on the level of compression developed under the thermal loading
cycle. If the effective compressive force exceeds a certain
threshold, the pipeline will deform (globally) into a new
equilibrium shape in order reduce the compression. This response

whereby a structure obtain a new equilibrium state by seeking a

large deflection is called buckling and the load necessary to
initiate buckling is the critical buckling load. A buried pipeline
will buckle vertically if the vertical restoring force (pipe and soil
weight) were less than the horizontal (sideways) restoring load.
For an untrenched pipeline on irregular seabed, the tendency is to
initially buckle vertically and subsequently move laterally on the
horizontal plane, as the frictional restoring load in most cases is
less than the weight of the pipeline. The critical buckling load
depends on the pipe properties, weight, friction factor and initial
OSS.
The problem of pipeline buckling had been considered
extensively by Hobbs [Ref. 2] using analytical methods.
Experimental work performed as part of his study has found that
pipeline can buckle into different lateral mode shapes; the most
common of which (Modes 1 to 4) are shown in Fig 3.
Mode 1

Eff. force
KP distance
Slip zones
Post buckle

Buckle

Critical force
Virtual anchors

Fig 5 Post-buckle effective force of a single buckle

Mode 2
Buckle
spacing, L2

Eff. force

Buckle
spacing, L3

Buckle
spacing, L1
Mode 3

Mode 4

Critical force

Fig 3 Possible lateral buckling modes

A buckle region consists of the buckle itself flanked on both
sides by two slipping regions. The slip regions will continue to
expand and feed into the buckle if temperature increases further
after the buckle has developed. The different regions in a buckle
are shown below in Fig 4.
Slip length, LS

Buckle length, Lo

Fig 6 Post-buckle effective force with multiple buckles

Slip length, LS

PIPELINE PARAMETERS

Buckle
amplitude
Slip zone

KP distance

Operating conditions
Temperature profile. The design temperature variation along
the entire pipeline is shown in Fig 7.

Slip zone

Design temperature profile

100
90
80
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0

Fig 4 Different regions in a buckle

The length of the slip zone depends on the available frictional
resistance to oppose the feed in. A virtual anchor is developed at
the point where there is sufficient frictional forces to constrain
the slip completely. Upon formation of the buckle, the effective
force (post-buckle) changes to account for the reduced
compression in the buckle and the feed in from the slip zones.
The post-buckle effective force after the development of a single
isolated buckle is depicted below in Fig 5.
Further increase in temperature in the pipeline after postbuckling will increase the slip length. This causes more pipe
length to feed into the buckle and therefore increases the moment
at the buckle. It is possible that more than one buckle develops
along the pipeline. In this case, depending on the distance
between the buckles, the feed in will be shared among the
buckles. If the buckles are spaced such that the distance between
successive buckles is less than the total buckle length (Lo + 2Ls)
of an isolated buckle, the feed in is shared between the two
buckles. This is illustrated in Fig 6.

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

KP distance (km)

Fig 7: - Design temperature profile

Seabed soil condition. The seabed is flat with soft/very soft clay
type soil. The undrained shear strength ranges from 0.5-6 kPa for
a depth of 0.5m below the mudline. High embedment of the
pipeline is predicted due to the soft nature of the seabed soil,
thus, the main motivation for the lateral buckling design scheme
discussed later in this paper.

Plot of effective axial force

Others. In addition, the following design parameters are also

used in this study: =
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=

727 mm
30 mm
40 80 mm
157 barg
75 m
1025 kg/m3
80 125 kg/m3
19.1 C
API 5L-X65 [Ref. 5]

-2000
Force (kN)

Pipe outside diameter

Pipe wall thickness
Concrete coating
Design pressure
Water depth
Seawater density
Content weight
Ambient temperature
Pipe material

0
10

20

30

40

virtual anchors

-4000
-6000
-8000
-10000
-12000

THERMAL BUCKLING

KP distance (km)

Driving Forces

Fig 8 - Effective axial force of pipeline

The driving force for buckle initiation (either laterally or

vertically) is derived from the compressive forces in the pipeline
as a result of frictional resistance to thermal and end cap
pressure. It is necessary first, to determine the potential
compressive force that can develop in the pipeline based on the
design temperature and pressure.
For a totally restrained pipeline, the effective axial force is
given by [Ref. 1]: -

Having established the effective force characteristics of the

pipeline, it is then necessary to determine the susceptibility of it
to lateral buckling or snaking. Appropriate buckling mitigation
schemes can then be designed and implemented in areas which
are susceptible to buckling.
The resulting global pipeline behaviour can then be used to
define the expected stress/strain level as a framework for
establishing the governing failure modes of the limit state design.

(1)
S = H Dpi Ai(1-2n) As EaDT
where:
S effective axial force (-ve compression, +ve tensile),
H residual lay tension,
DT temperature difference relative to as laid,
Dpi internal pressure difference relative to as laid,
Ai internal cross sectional area of pipe,
As cross sectional area of pipe.
n Poissons ratio of pipe
The frictional resistance provided by the seabed soil can be
calculated based on the operational submerged weight along the
pipeline length. This is given by: -

Susceptibility to lateral buckling

Ffric = m.Ws
where:
Ffric frictional resistance force
m coefficient of friction between pipe and seabed
Ws pipe submerged weight

The condition for global snaking/lateral buckle to occur

depends on and is sensitive to various factors such as: -

pipe weight;
pipe cross sectional property;
pipe-soil interaction/frictional resistance;
initial imperfection introduced during pipe-lay installation;
imperfection caused by undulating/uneven seabed.

Lateral buckling will happen naturally at intervals along the

pipe where the compressive force is sufficient for the pipe to
buckle at some natural or inherent imperfection. Such
imperfections from the idealised straight pipeline results from the
lay process due to vessel motion, wave or current loading, or
seabed variations. This type of uncontrolled lateral buckling
will relieve the axial force locally within a few hundred metres of
the buckle, as pipe feeds into the buckle from each side.
To ascertain the critical compressive force that will initiate
global buckling/snaking, the above factors have to be taken into
consideration in view of providing a realistic assessment of the
susceptibility of the pipeline to buckling. This is done using FE
analysis by considering an initial lateral lay imperfection of
R2000m along the route profile. This magnitude of imperfection
was deemed realistic in view of the lay corridor tolerance and
pipe size. This lay imperfection is assumed to occur over the lay
corridor tolerance of 20m as shown: -

(2)

The totally restrained effective force of the pipeline and the

available frictional resistance, based on the design temperature
profile and pressure, is shown in Fig 8. From the plot, it can be
seen that this 28 pipeline has two virtual anchor points at KP 8
and KP 39, exhibiting the characteristic of a long pipeline.

survey
corridor

Fig 9 Modelling a naturally occurring imperfection

Effective force along pipeline

Based on this, the critical buckling force is then obtained in the

FE analysis using a short model of 1km, by assuming symmetry.
This is done by gradually increasing the temperature of the
pipeline until buckling or instability occurs. No vertical
imperfection was considered as the seabed was generally flat
along the proposed pipeline route. The critical buckling force
obtained here is then used to determine the area that is
susceptible to global buckling. The post buckle shape and the
corresponding critical buckling for is summarised in Fig 10 and
Table 1 respectively.

12000

Effective force

10000

Critical buckling force

Force (kN)

8000
Pcric with initial OOS of R2000
6000

4000
Buckle prone region

Buckle shape of 727x30mm pipe (40mm HDCC) with

R2000m

2000

135

Lateral distance (m)

130

10

20

30

40

KP (km)

125

Fig 11 Regions susceptible to lateral buckling

120

LATERAL BUCKLING MITIGATION SCHEMES

R2000

115
As-laid OOS

110

Design methodology and objectives

Buckle

105

As mentioned earlier, a pipeline can be left on the seabed and

allowed to buckle laterally, naturally. However, if the
compressive force in the pipeline system is sufficiently high
(which in this case, is shown in Fig 11), uncontrolled lateral
buckling can lead to one of the following limit states: -

100
700

750

800

850

900

950

1000

1050

Chainage (m)

Fig 10 Post-buckle of initial imperfection

Pipe size

727 x30

Concrete
thickness (mm)
40

1. Excessive plastic deformation of the pipe, possibly leading to

localised buckling collapse;
Critical force (kN)
2. Cyclic fatigue failure in operation due to continuous heat-up
and cool-down cycles.

6062

25

4693

55

7686

Early analysis, similar to those shown in Fig 10, where the

pipeline is allowed to buckle naturally on the seabed, showed that
the subsequent thermal feed-in would result in high plastic
deformation in excess of that allowed in the stipulated code of
practice [Ref. 1]. This is due to the large potential feed-in lengths
from each side of the buckle, if it were to develop within the
buckle prone region shown in Fig 11. As there is likelihood that
approximately 15-16 km of pipeline is susceptible to buckling,
the resulting feed-in could be of unacceptable magnitude. The
resulting buckle will exceed allowable strain limits from such
high feed-in lengths, unless lateral buckling can be controlled.
Buckling can be controlled by sharing the load between
buckles, formed at regular intervals along the route of the
pipeline. The location of these controlled buckles must be
selected such that the resulting thermal feed-ins into each buckle
does not lead to maximum strains level in excess of the allowable
limit and the cyclic strains experienced during heat-up and cooldown gives an acceptable fatigue life.
Lateral buckles can be triggered at the desired locations by
using buckle initiators. There are several options available in
which these buckle initiators can be designed, constructed and
installed, depending on the seabed soil conditions, practicality
and its effectiveness. These different methods of buckle initiation
are snake-lay, mid-line spools, rock dumping (buckle
prevention), vertical triggers and vertical triggers with lateral
pull. They will be discussed in the following sections.
The following targets/objectives were set in order to qualify
these methods as effective and reliable: -

Table 1 Critical buckling force with imperfection

The critical buckling force from Table 1 includes safety factors
to account for soil friction variations and is used as a limiting
criterion to define the areas that are susceptible to buckling. The
critical areas are those with the effective axial force greater than
the critical buckling force defined by Table 1 and are shown in
Fig 11, which is a plot of Fig 8 with the critical buckling force
superimposed on it.
As can be seen from Fig 11, the buckle prone region extends
from approximately KP 5 to KP 21, resulting in a 16 km length,
which has the potential to buckle. The proposed mitigation
schemes focuses on reducing the critical buckling force in this
region to initiate buckling. This is discussed in the following
sections.

1. The initiators should ensure that buckles are formed at a low

effective axial force, preferably much lower than the critical
buckling force of the coated pipeline (orange line in Fig 11).
This would ensure early initiation of these planned buckles at a
stage where the overall effective force along the pipeline is
still relatively low. Furthermore, this would also ensure that
the effective force between the buckle sites is sufficiently low
so as not to initiate an unwanted buckle.

excessive localised growth of only a few of the buckle sites,

which will in-turn compromise the integrity of the pipeline.

2. Due to the soft seabed, high pipe embedment is anticipated for

the pipe size and submerged weight in this study, generating
high lateral resistance. It is therefore, desirable for the
mitigation scheme to provide a means to reduce the lateral
resistance and allow substantial feed-in without over-straining
the buckle. This can be done either by reducing the pipe
weight at the buckle sites or elevate the pipe from the seafloor,
thereby eliminating contact and any lateral resistance.
3. Practicality, installability and cost effectiveness. The final
selected mitigation scheme, in addition to satisfying the first
two requirements, must be cheap, relatively easy to
manufacture and can be installed with relative ease using
conventional lay-barge.
4. In addition to the buckle initiators, means of increasing the
axial resistance need also to be explored, in an effort to reduce
the thermal feed-in into the planned buckle sites. This can be
achieved by re-distributing the concrete weight coating along
the pipeline using non-uniform concrete thicknesses where
appropriate.

Fig 13 Example of buckled pipe section by snake lay

Two dimensional FE analysis has been performed to model the
behaviours of the snake laid pipeline. A series of curvature radii
and the corresponding breakout force has been considered.
Seabed friction sensitivity based on upper bound and the best
friction estimate is also included. The objective is to establish
minimum radius of curvature for a reasonable breakout force.
The results are presented in Figure 14 for breakout force against
radius of curvature and Figure 15 for the corresponding breakout
temperature.

Snake-lay
The concept of snake lay is to introduce horizontal
imperfections to the pipeline in the form of curves of given radii
of curvature at predetermined locations. The curves are created
by deviating the lay barge from its nominal route corridor to form
a zigzag or snaky pattern. The crown of the snake then behaves
as a large curvature expansion spool while the pitch (i.e. distance
between two successive crowns) dictates the amount of pipe
feed-in at the crown.

727 OD pipe 30mmWall thickness 25 concrete

Snake crown

8000

Best estimate 2400kg/m3 concrete

Upper bound 2400kg/m3 conc

Pipeline

7000

Best estimate 3040kg/m3 concrete

Upper bound 3040kg/m3 conc

Counteracts
Initiation force (kN)

6000

Wavelength

5000

4000

3000

Fig 12 Snake lay configuration

2000

The challenge in snake-lay design is to define a critical buckle

spacing that will prevent the maximum strain and cyclic strain
range from exceeding acceptable levels, and also ensure that
buckle initiate reliably at each planned initiation site. More
importantly, the major uncertainty for snake lay on soft cohesive
soil is the extent of pipeline embedment and the resultant
breakout force. High embedment results in large pipe breakout
force to initiate early buckle (low temperature). Should buckle
initiations be delayed there is an increased likelihood of

1000

0
500

600

700

800

900

1000

1100

1200

1300

1400

1500

1600

1700

1800

Radius of curvature (m)

Fig 14 Buckle initiation force versus lay radius

1900

2000

727ODpipe30mmWall thickness25concrete

some form of pre-installed counteract (clump weights or

similar).
From lateral buckling friction studies undertaken in the high
95C to 55C temperature regions from KP 0 to KP 12 buckle
site spacing will need to be kept at a minimum of 2km to
avoid buckle localisations.
Although the snake-lay method is attractive in view of its
relatively simple execution and no requirement for underwater
activity or specialised equipment, the small radius of 1000m
required for effective buckle initiation is less than the practical
limit of typically 2000-3000m for this pipe size. The high
breakout force due to potentially high embedment could also
results in high post-buckle strain levels in the buckle crown.
Therefore, due to the uncertainty in obtaining the required radius
of 1000m and the high breakout force, an alternative mitigation
scheme is investigated.

60

Best estimate2240kg/m3concrete

55

Upper bound2240kg/m3conc

50

Best estimate3040kg/m3concrete
Upper bound3040kg/m3conc

Initiation temperature (deg C)

45

40

35

30

25

20

Mid-line expansion spools

15

This option investigates the use of mid-line spool to absorb the

pipe expansion. The objectives are to identify the preliminary
size and number of spools required for the present pipeline. For
simplicity and ease of installation, a spool size of 30m has been
assumed as shown in Figure 17 below.

10
500

600

700

800

900

1000

1100

1200

1300

1400

1500

1600

1700

1800

1900

2000

Radiusof curvature (m)

Fig 15 Buckle initiation temperature versus lay radius

~ 30 m

Temperature and snake-lay profile

E8DR-AtoE11P-BTemperatureandsnake-layprofile

100

500

90

400

80

300

~ 30m

2kmbuckle site spacingwith100m

offset fromcentreline

60

100

50

40

-100

30

-200
19degCambient sea temperature

20

-300

10

-400

0
0

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

-500
45

KP(km)

Fig 16 Conceptual snake lay scheme

From the initial assessment, a conceptual snake-lay scheme for
this pipeline is depicted in Figure 16. The following points can be
made based on these plots: The requirement for a confident early buckle initiation
requires the pipeline be laid with a significant bend radius.
Studies presented in Figure 14 show a snake-lay radius of
1000m will be required to achieve confident buckle initiations
between 2200kN and 3800kN effective force levels.

To achieve a tight 1000m-pipelay radius at each apex of the

snake-lay on a soft cohesive seabed will require the use of

Thermal feed

Fig 17 Typical mid-line expansion spool

200
Snake-lay offset (m)

Temperature (deg C)

70

Thermal feed

The spool is modelled in U configuration with thermal

expansion imposed to both ends of the spool. The equivalent
stress is then compared to the maximum allowable of 72%
SMYS and the corresponding end expansion limits noted. The
latter is then used to determine the spacing of the spool to prevent
over-stressing. The maximum allowable thermal feed-in, based
on mean seabed friction, for a typical expansion spool is 2.2m,
which is a considerable amount that can assist in releasing a
significant level of compression.
The required number of expansion spools along the pipeline
route is obtained using standard expansion calculation based on
the temperature profile of Fig 7 and a mean soil friction. The
expansion spool acts as compression relief points, hence
changing the effective axial force along the pipeline to the one as
shown in Fig 18. The resulting effective axial force with the
presence of the thermal expansion spool, is shown by the red line
(zig-zag) line as compression is released through the expansion
spool. The expansion spools are located at KP 6, 12, 18 and 24 at
a spacing of 6km apart, with a feed-in from the 3km pipe section
from each side of the spool.

instead, intermittent dumps at every few km could be feasible.

For this, it is necessary to ensure that if buckle forms between the
intermediate restraints, the feed-in is within the allowable.
A simple hydraulic calculation indicates that gravel size of 50100mm is acceptable for stability. Gravel size generally has little
bearing on cost or installation equipment.
The main disadvantage of trenching is uncertainty in the
natural backfill consolidation. Use of engineered backfill or
direct gravel dump, however, is affected by the availability of the
specialised gravel dump vessel and their high mobilisation cost.
The availability of suitably graded rock and gravel in large
quantity is also a concern. The soft seabed also renders gravel
dump inefficient, i.e. large wastage.

Effective force along pipeline

10
9
8
7

Pcric with initial OOS of R2000

6
5
4
3
2
1

Vertical triggers/sleepers

0
0

10

20

30

40

50

This option considers the use of initial vertical out-ofstraightness (OOS) to initiate a lateral buckle. A sleeper, pre-laid
across the route of the pipeline, would raise and support the
pipeline off the seabed. This creates an out-of-straightness
feature, which will initiate buckling. In addition, pipe at the
buckle crown is elevated above the seabed with the benefit of
reduction in lateral frictional resistance and hence, reduces the
uncertainties about lateral pipe-soil interaction.
Sleepers have the advantage of lowering the critical buckling
force, hence, creating a more benign buckle with lower strain
levels in the buckle apex. This allows higher thermal feed-in
capacity into the buckle sites, therefore increasing the buckle
spacing and as a result, reducing the number of required buckle
initiator. Its simple construction, ease of installation and low
fabrication cost makes the trigger option the most viable among
the above-mentioned methods. Vertical sleepers have been
successfully implemented in the King flowlines project [Ref. 6].
Initial evaluation of the sleeper solution showed that the strain
level were acceptable based on a criteria of maximum total
thermal feed-in of 2m. Hence, vertical sleeper was selected as the
most practical option for detailed design and further analysis.

KP (km)

Fig 18 Modified effective force using mid-line spools

The main disadvantage of mid-line spool is that it introduces
potential weak points into the pipeline system because of the
flange end connection (2 flanges per spool). Hyberbaric welding
will eliminate this concern but has significant cost penalty due to
mobilisation of the specialised equipment. The installation time
for the spool is also relatively high, typically, is about 1 day per
spool at the present water depth.

Trench and burial

This option considers burying or rock dumps the buckle prone
region as a means to avoid pipeline buckling, vertically and
laterally. Burying by trenching normally relies on the natural
backfill process to cover the pipeline. For lateral bucking control,
a consistent consolidated backfill is necessary to prevent
upheaval buckling and natural backfill carries considerate
uncertainty on this consolidation processes. Some forms of
engineered backfill are normally preferred.
To calculate the required minimum backfill to prevent
upheaval buckling, analysis was carried out using PIPECALC, a
JPK developed software to determine the required overburden in
order to prevent pipe break through the cover. Typical rock
parameters used in the analysis is shown in Table 2 below:
Submerged weight
Internal friction angle
Shear mobilisation coefficient

trigger

trigger
pipeline

9 kN/m3
40 degrees
0.6

Fig 19 Vertical sleeper layout

Table 2 Typical rock properties

The minimum required rock cover over the buckle prone
region is shown in Table 3 below. This includes a safety factor of
1.1 calculated using statistical risk analysis approach.
KP start

KP end

4
5.5
12

5.5
12
18

Rock cover to top

of pipe (m)
0.7
0.75
0.65

Table 3 Typical rock properties

Based on an assumed rockberm width of 3m at the top and side
slope of 1:3, the required gravel is about 35,000 MT per km
cover, assuming wastage of 25% on soft seabed. It may not be
necessary to dump the full length between KP 4 and KP 18,

Fig 20 3D visualisation of buckle on vertical trigger

The development of the effective axial force within a buckle

section is modelled using 3D finite element using a combination
of beam and contact elements. The changes in the effective axial
force are depicted in Fig 22.

SLEEPER OPTION: - DESIGN CRITERIA AND

CHALLENGES
This section discusses in detail the various limit state design
checks that was carried out based on the vertical sleeper option.
Also highlighted in this section are some of the challenges
encountered during the design stage.

heavy section

Light section
1m high trigger

Design criteria
Light weight section

The following design checks were made and will be discussed

in the following sections.

Model length in FE

1. Local buckling limit state. This criterion is based on local

wrinkling of the pipe wall as a result of bending/compression.
Initially, formulations based on the moment criterion stipulated
in [Ref. 1] were used. In later stage of the work, it was found
that a strain based criterion (also of [Ref. 1]) was necessary for
the sleeper option to be viable.
2. Fatigue limit state. Fatigue life check was carried out for lowcycle fatigue due to heat-up/shut-down cycle and high cycle
fatigue due to vortex induced vibration (VIV). The former is
based on [Ref. 3], while the latter on [Ref. 4].
3. Axial creep. The susceptibility of local axial creep/rachet into
the buckle sites were also investigated using the transient
temperature profile.
4. On-bottom stability. The stability of the buckle section on the
trigger against wave and current loads was established using
FE based on limitations outlined in [Ref. 1].
5. Trawl gear interaction. The impact of a static trawl load on
the buckle section was also investigated to assess the
magnitude of additional strain/stress on the buckle crown.

Fig 21 Light weight buckle section on trigger

Initially, the pipeline is in tension as a result of the residual
force from installation This is shown by the top red line
corresponding to approximately 450kN. As the pipeline is
subjected to pressure and temperature, the effective force along it
changes to compressive until the critical buckling force is
reached. The critical buckling force in this case is reached at
around at temperature difference of 15C at approximately 3900
kN. As soon as this level of compression force is reached, the
pipeline lifts off the trigger and buckle laterally, releasing a
significant amount of the compressive force. The post-buckle
effective force is shown by the green line at 16C, reaching a
level slightly below 1000 kN. Subsequent increase in temperature
causes further reduction in the effective compressive force as the
compression is being continually released through the buckle,
resulting in growing buckle amplitude, shown in Fig 23.
Effective force along pipe length

Design challenges

1000
500

Minimising the critical buckling force

0
-600 -500 -400 -300 -200 -100
-500 0

As mentioned earlier, one of the main objectives of the

mitigation schemes is to minimise the critical buckling force in
order to initiate an early buckle. The initial target was to reduce
the critical buckling force to at least half the peak effective axial
force shown in Fig 11, which is approximately 9400 kN. This
was dictated by the trigger height. The aim was to use triggers of
sufficient height to ensure buckles initiate preferentially at the
triggers and not at vertical or lateral imperfections along the
route. However, it must be ensured that the free spans on either
side of the triggers are below allowable limits for pipeline design.
Once elevated from the sea floor forming an initial vertical
OOS, lateral buckle is initiated as the compressive force in the
pipe is sufficient to lift-off at the trigger and slide sideways to
form a lateral buckle. This buckling mechanism enables the
critical buckling force to be predicted reasonably well using
analytical upheaval buckling methodology. FE analysis was then
used to confirm the prediction and to investigate post-buckling
behaviour such as feed-in capacity, buckle amplitude and
strain/stress level in the buckle crown.
Initial calculations suggest that a 1m vertical imperfection is
required to significantly reduce the critical buckling force. This,
coupled with a reduced pipe weight section along the buckle will
further reduce the initiation force. It was, therefore, decided to
remove the concrete weight coating for approximately 250m
length of the pipeline, which rests on the vertical sleepers. This
has the effect of reducing the critical buckling force to 3900 kN.
A schematic representation of the light weight pipe section with
the vertical trigger is shown in Fig 21.

100

200

300

400

500

600

200 C

-1000

16 C

-1500
-2000
-2500
-3000

15 C

-3500
-4000
-4500
Chainage (m)

Fig 22 Effective force development

The total feed-in capacity of the buckle is determined by
computing the resultant moment at the buckle crown and
comparing it against allowable moment capacity, as outlined in
the local buckling limit state based on the moment criteria of
[Ref. 1]. The maximum total allowable feed-in into a single
buckle was found to be 2m. Variation of resultant moment with
feed-in is summarised in Fig 24, along with the limit of allowable
moment.

curve was established to cater for the uncertainty in actual soil

behaviour. This is summarised in Table 4 and 5 for lateral and
axial friction respectively.

Lateral displacement along pipe length

4
2

Force

0
-600 -500 -400 -300 -200 -100 -2 0

100

200

300

400

500 600

-4

Curve 1

FP

-6

= friction coefficient

Ws

-8
-10

Ws = submerged weight

-12
-14
-16
-18
-20
Chainage (m)

Slope, KT = tangential
stiffness

Fig 23 Buckle amplitude at increasing temperature

Displacement
Fig 25 Seabed friction model
400

4500

350

Allowable 4619 kNm

4000

Break-out
Sliding

300

3500
3000

250

2500

200

2000

150

1500

Stress (MPa)

Resultant moment (kNm)

Resultant bending moment vs feed-in

5000

Table 4 Lateral pipe-soil friction

100

1000

Break-out
Sliding

50

500
0

Equivalent friction factor

Lower bound
Mean
Upper bound
0.5
1.3
2.5
0.3
0.85
1.25

Equivalent friction factor

Lower bound
Mean
Upper bound
0.8
1.317
1.835
0.2
0.329
0.459

0
0

0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 1.2 1.4 1.6 1.8

Total feed-in (m)

Resultant moment

Allowable moment

2.2 2.4

Table 5 Axial pipe-soil friction

Max Eqv Stress

The various friction coefficient values are used accordingly in

different analysis and sensitivity cases. These are discussed in the
following sections.

Fig 24 Variation in moment against feed-in

The above results using moment based criteria were based on
mean pipe-soil friction, both in the axial and lateral direction.
Further investigation of the pipe-soil interaction behaviour
revealed a more complex friction model. It resulted in the need to
utilise the strain based criteria due to higher lateral friction. This
was one of the main challenges of this work and proved to be a
valuable lesson learned which will be discussed next.

Improving the effectiveness of the vertical trigger option

In view of the relatively large spread of lateral friction
coefficients (mean, lower and upper bound), it was deemed
necessary to add further certainty that buckle will form at the
designated location. The critical buckling force of 3900 kN
establish using a 1m high trigger was still rather large. There
were concerns that due to the high critical force, the buckle
would not form. Worst still, if it were to form elsewhere, the high
lateral resistance would cause the strain levels to exceed local
buckling limit state.
To improve the reliability of the scheme, it was decided that
the vertical trigger option should be combined with a horizontal
imperfection, depicted schematically in Fig 26, which is a plan
view of Fig 21.

The need for strain based criteria pipe-soil interaction

The main governing factor that dictates the curvature of the
buckle crown, hence the strain/stress levels, is the lateral
resistance acting against the direction of the buckle. In the use of
vertical triggers, some portion of the resistance is eliminated.
However, the wavelength of the buckle section will most likely
be longer than the free span, in Fig 23, the wavelength is
approximately 400m. Therefore, inevitably, there is a significant
portion of the buckle which slides laterally on the seabed.
Frictional behaviour of pipe on soft seabed is very complex
and without full scale laboratory testing, a simplified model as
shown in Fig 25 is used.
The frictional behaviour on firm soil can be approximated
using the Coulomb model (Curve 1). On soft soil, however, due
to high embedment, the pipe will need to breakout from the soil
before sliding. Hence, there will be a peak resistance, Fp, beyond
which the frictional resistance resembles the Coulomb model
again. In this work, an upper, mean and lower bound frictional

trigger
pipeline

vertical stopper
Fig 26 Introduction of horizontal imperfection during pipe
installation

10

The horizontal imperfection is created by pulling the lay barge

sideways during installation when the pipe touches down at the
trigger. A vertical stopper is incorporated into the trigger
structure to prevent the pipe from falling off. The side pull
creates a tight curvature around the stopper, hence creating an
OOS and thus reduces the critical buckling force further. To
obtain the optimum lateral pull angle to achieve the desired
critical buckling force whilst maintaining reasonable stress level,
a series of FE analysis were carried out. In view of the certainty
that the critical buckling force can be reduced significantly, it
was decided that the trigger height be reduced to 0.5m. This
improves the free spans on either side of the trigger, allowing for
higher fatigue life capacity. The following sections present
results of the different limit state checks based on the concept of
lateral pull on trigger.

Strain localisation can occur at any point along the pipeline

where there is a mismatch in material properties or pipe geometry
(wall thickness). To account for this possibility, the concept of a
weak link in the chain of pipeline is used. This weak link is
conservatively placed at the buckle crown of the FE model. In
this weak link, the de-rated SMYS is maintained, however,
outside, the SMYS is modelled with a higher value. To account
for corrosion allowance, an equivalent reduced wall thickness is
determined based on the plastic section modulus of the corroded
cross section. This reduced wall thickness is also incorporated
within the weak link section of the FE model.
Based on these considerations, the effective force
development, buckle amplitude and feed-in capacity is shown in
the following plots, based on maximum lateral frictional
resistance.
E f f e c t iv e f o rc e f o r a ngle =5 de gs ,7 2 7 x3 0 m m

Local buckling limit state strain criteria

1000
500

Based on the improved scheme of lateral pull over the vertical

sleepers, similar FE analyses were carried out to determine the
new critical buckling force and the feed-in capacity of the postbuckle crown using the new pipe-soil friction coefficient. In
addition, the sensitivity of the critical buckling force to the lateral
pull angle was also investigated. These checks were carried out in
the strain based criteria.
It was found that the critical buckling force is now reduced
significantly, from 3900 kN previously, to between 1100 to 2000
kN for a 5 degree and 10 degree lateral pull respectively.
Furthermore, it was also noted that the critical buckling force is
relatively insensitive to changes in soil friction. The results based
on a 5 degrees and 10 degrees lateral pull on various soil friction
is summarised in Table 6.
Load
case
1
1a
2
2a
3
3a

Angle
(degs)
5
10
5
10
5
10

Soil
friction

Trigger
friction

0.5
1.3
2.5

0.6

0
0

100

200

300

400

500

600

700

800

900 1000 1100

-500

220 C

pressurised

-1000
-1500

14 C

-2000
-2500
-3000
-3500

C hainag e ( m)

Fig 27 Effective force based on 5 degree lateral pull

Pcrit
(kN)
1971
1107
1977
1325
2052
1429

La t e ra l dis plc e m e nt f o r
a ngle =5 de gs ,7 2 7 x3 0 m m

15

220 C

10
5
0
0

100

200

300

400

500

600

700

800

900 1000 1100

-5
-10

Table 6 Critical buckling force for various friction and pull

angles

-15
-20

To determine the feed-in capacity of the post-buckle crown,

the following considerations have to be taken into account in
view of using the strain based criteria: -

-25
C hainag e ( m)

Fig 28 Buckle amplitude based on 5 degree lateral pull

- carbon steel strain hardening characteristics with temperature

de-rating,
- material strength mismatch at the pipe joints (girth weld),
- end of life wall thickness based on design corrosion allowance.

Axial feed-in for angle=5degs,727x30mm

1.5
220 C

1
0.5

Currently available data from pipe manufacturers have

occasionally shown a plateau in the stress-strain curve of carbon
steel. Although such plateaus are more common in seamless
pipes, they have also been observed in other seam-welded pipes
as well. Therefore, to overcome this uncertainty, it was decided
to assume the worst case of no strain hardening in the carbon
steel. Hence, an elastic-perfectly plastic material stress-strain
curve was used in the FE model. Furthermore, to account for the
variation in SMYS with temperature, the SMYS was de-rated as
per outlined in [Ref. 1] resulting in a de-rated SMYS of 404
MPa.

0
0

100

200

300

400

500

600

700

800

900 1000 1100

-0.5
-1
-1.5
C ha ina ge ( m )

Fig 29 Thermal feed-in at various temperatures

11

The effectiveness of this scheme in reducing the critical

buckling force is evident from Fig 27, in which the compressive
force is released almost immediately upon application of
temperature. Further increase in temperature will continue to
release the compression (effective force gradually becomes less
compressive) at the buckle section. The high temperature of
220C was necessary in this short FE model to generate the
desired level of thermal feed-in.
The feed-in capacity of the post-buckle crown was found to be
slightly more than 2m (Fig 29) with a corresponding total
mechanical strain level of 0.56%. The allowable design
compressive strain based on [Ref. 1] is 1.2%. This completes one
stage of the design checks for which this scheme is viable.

For In-line VIV, the fatigue life of free spans on either side of
the trigger is calculated based on DNV-RP-F105 [Ref. 4]. The
free span lengths and the summary of results are tabulated in
Table 7 and 8.
Axial strain
1.00E-03

Cylic strain variation at 270 degs

max = 5.65e-4

5.00E-04
0.00E+00
0

50

100

150

200

250

300

350

-5.00E-04

Fatigue limit state

-1.00E-03

The potential for fatigue damage of the buckle section arises

from two sources: -

-1.50E-03
min=-1.72e-3

- low cycle fatigue due to continuous start-up and shutdown

operation throughout its design life;
- vortex induced vibration (VIV), both in-line and cross flow,
on spans either side of the trigger. For in-line VIV only the
steady current is considered whereas cross-flow accounts for
both steady and wave induced current velocities per [Ref. 4].

Plastic axial

-2.50E-03
Load steps

Fig 31 Mechanical compressive strain variation

Loading
condition
Empty

Free span length on either side of 0.5m

trigger (m)
72

Content

68
Table 7 Free span lengths

Loading
condition
Empty
Content(1)

In-line VIV fatigue life, years

7.1
40.5

Table 8 In-line VIV fatigue life

For the case of cross-flow VIV, combined wave and current
velocities were used based on the DNV-RP-F105 [Ref. 4]
guideline and the metcoean data. The calculation is performed for
all the wave height and period combination given in the annual
joint frequency distribution table (ie. scatter diagram). The
monthly maximum steady current has been assumed and this is
combined with the wave velocity for the cross-flow VIV/fatigue
calculation.
The result is summarised below: -

Cylic strain variation at 90 degs

max = 1.96e-3
plastic=1.81e-3

2.00E-03

Elastic axial

plastic=-2.04e-3

The 1km model used in the pre- and post-buckling checks is

used to evaluate the cyclic strain. The model is first heated up to
the point where maximum feed-in occurs (220C) and unloaded
to simulate shutdown. It is then re-heated up to 220C again (so
that maximum possible feed-in occurs) and unloaded, and this is
repeated for 12 cycles, to simulate an annual event (assuming one
full start-up/shutdown a month). The maximum lateral friction
and lateral pull angle of 5 degrees was used.
The cyclic tensile and compressive strain is shown in Fig 30
and 31 respectively. The number of cycles to failure is calculated
based on [Ref. 3]. Based on the maximum strain range of
0.2285% from the compressive strain (Fig 31), the buckle has a
fatigue life of 2842 cycles with a damage ratio of 0.13 for a
design life of 30 years. The allowable damage ratio based on
[Ref. 1] is 0.2. More importantly, yielding/plasticity occurs only
during the first heat-up cycle. No further yielding/cyclic plasticity
is observed in the subsequent heat-up cycles.

Axial strain
2.50E-03

range=2.285e-3

-2.00E-03

1.50E-03

Total No. of Wave Per year

Cross-Flow VIV Fatigue Damage Per Year
Pipeline Design Life
Total Fatigue Damage for 30 year
Fatigue Usage Factor (Safety Class Normal)
Total Cross-Flow Fatigue Life

1.00E-03

5.00E-04

8,125,334
1.01338E-6
30 years
3.04015E-5
0.2
197,359 Years

0.00E+00
0

50

100

150

200

min=-1.24e-4

-5.00E-04

range=2.084e-3

250

300

From the above, it is concluded that cross-flow VIV fatigue on

the free span is acceptable.
Fatigue due to direct wave load is assessed by applying a
uniformly distributed load (UDL) on the post-buckle pipeline
model in opposing directions and observing the variation in the
maximum and minimum stress. The metocean data for all year
significant wave height, Hs and peak wave period, Tp was used

350

Elastic axial

Load steps

Plastic axial

Fig 30 Mechanical tensile strain variation

12

should not pose any global axial creep problems, the potential of
local axial creep into the buckle sites (since the formation of
buckle effectively divides the pipeline into various short
sections) was investigated.

to determine the significant wave-induced current. The drag

forces (UDL) for all the possible Hs, Tp combinations were then
determined using Morrisons equation.
The result is summarised below: Total no. of wave per year
8,125,334
Direct wave fatigue damage per year
4.165E-9
Pipeline design life
30 years
Total fatigue damage for 30 year
1.249E-7
Fatigue usage factor (Safety Class Normal)
0.2
Total Fatigue Life
> 1 million years

Axial feed-in with 8triggers

1
0.8
0.6
0.4

From the above, it is concluded that direct wave fatigue is

acceptable.

0.2

Confirmatory analysis & axial creep

T2

T1

0
-2 0
-0.2

T3
6

T4
10

T5
12

14

T6
16

T7
18

T8

20 22 24 26

28

30

-0.4

Based on the allowable feed-in (Fig 29), the number of buckle

triggers and the critical buckle site location/spacing was then
determined using the temperature profile (Fig 7) and analytical
expansion calculations. It resulted in 8 triggers spaced unevenly
for the first 20 km, in which the pipeline is prone to buckling (Fig
11). A full FE confirmatory analysis was then carried out to
verify the total feed-in into each of these planned sites.
The location of theses planned sites and the resulting feed-in
into each site at the design temperature profile is shown in Fig 32
and 33 respectively.
Fig 33 depicts the axial displacements along the pipeline at the
design temperature profile. Positive values indicate movements
to the right and conversely, negative values signify movements to
the left. Points with zero axial displacements are the virtual
anchor points. In between each buckle sites, there exists a virtual
anchor point, from which the pipeline displaces axially in
opposing direction. Near the buckle apex, the total axial
displacement peaks, contributing the maximum feed-in into the
buckle. This is shown in the plot by the various positive and
negative peaks, which occurs approximately 100m either side of
the buckle apex. The results show acceptable feed-in at all the
planned buckle sites with total of less than 2m.
The post-buckle effective force at full design temperature was
also found to be favourable in terms of the safety margin against
unwanted buckle between the planned sites. This is shown in Fig
34 for both the mean and upper bound axial friction.

-0.6
-0.8
-1
KP ( k m )

Fig 33 Feed-in at proposed buckle sites

P ost buckle effective force at design temperature
12000
11000
10000
9000
8000
Pcric with initial OOS of R2000

7000
6000
5000
4000

Safety margin

3000
2000
1000
0
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24 26 28 30 32 34 36 38 40 42 44
KP ( k m )

Fig 34 Post-buckle effective force

Buckle amplitude with 8 triggers

The incremental axial displacement of the buckle apex with

each subsequent heat-up/cool-down cycle was then extracted
from the FE model. The results are plotted in Fig 35.

150
T8-KP 24
100
T4-KP 9.5

T2-KP 4.5

T6-KP 16.5

50

Incremental axial displacements of buckle vs

temperature cycles

0
-2 0
-50

10

12

14

16

0.4

18 20 22 24 26 28 30

T8

KP ( k m )

0.2
Relative displacement (m)

-100
-150
-200

T1-KP 2

T3-KP 7

-250
T5-KP 13

-300
A s-laid

T7-KP 20
Lo aded with design temp

0
0

10

11

12

13

14

15

-0.2

-0.4

-0.6

hot end

Fig 32 Proposed buckle sites

-0.8
Cycle no.

The axial creep behaviour of the pipeline was investigated

using the full FE model by subjecting it to repeated heating and
cooling cycles. Each cycle is model with a set of transient
temperature profile during heat up and cool down. Although this
pipeline is long in terms of its effective force characteristics and

Fig 35 Incremental axial displacement into buckle sites

The plot shows that the peak axial displacement in to the hot
end spool and each buckle sites occur only at the first heat-up

13

cycle. There is no further net increase in axial displacement in the

next subsequent cycles, indicating no local axial creep is
expected.

m=1.25 (max)
Post-buckle

With trawl
load

Increment

Total
(mechanical)
strain, %

-0.3535

-0.3779

0.0244

Lateral
displacement
at apex, m

11.348

11.407

0.059

On-bottom stability
The stability of the light buckle section to wave and current
load was investigated for the empty and operational load case
using the full FE model. The minimum content density of
80kg/m3 and mean lateral sliding friction of 0.85 was used in the
analyses. The drag and lift forces (N/m) used are tabulated in
Table 9.

Item

Operational

Empty

Pipe section
727 buckle section
on seabed
727 spanning
buckle section
Buckle section 727 OD

Lift
force,
FL

Drag
force,
FD

540

734

606

807

The increase in displacement and total strain are small and the
pipeline buckle will survive a trawl load of the above-mentioned
magnitude.

241

322

CONCLUSIONS

Table 11 Increase in strain and lateral displacement at apex

due to trawl load for 1.25 friction

This paper has presented various possible mitigation schemes

for use in HP/HT pipeline as means to manage the thermal
expansions. The choice of the optimum scheme depends largely
on the various factors such as cost, practicality, ease of
manufacture, seabed conditions, etc. One of the main obstacles
remains the uncertainty of the nature of pipe-soil interaction
behaviour. In most cases, the most onerous conditions need to be
employed, specific to certain analysis, in order to ensure a robust
design.
The mitigation scheme using the combination of vertical
triggers and lateral pull provides a solution which is both
manageable and neat. The elevated pipeline eliminates lateral
resistance and pipe-soil friction uncertainties at the buckle crown,
which helps tremendously in lowering the strain levels in the
buckle. In addition, the lateral pull adds confidence to the
certainty of forming a buckle at the intended location by reducing
the critical buckling force significantly. Both this advantages,
together with its simple and cost-effective fabrication, make it a
first-choice option, especially in cases with soft seabed.

Table 9 Hydrodynamic forces for on-bottom stability check

In the operational load case, the combination of 100-year wave
and 10-year current generated a maximum pipeline lateral
displacement of 2.51m at trigger 8. No vertical uplift was
observed. In addition, the uniform lateral hydrodynamic load
tends to reduce the curvature of the post-buckle at the apex (a
greater radius of curvature or more relaxed curvature).
Subsequently, a reduction in the bending stress at the apex was
observed.
In conclusion, the buckle section at the trigger is stable against
hydrodynamic load with acceptable level of displacement and the
bending stress at the apex is reduced as a result of an increase in
the radius of curvature due to the action of wave and current.

Pipeline/trawl board interaction

A study of the vessel size around the vicinity of the project
indicates the following possible trawl loads: -

REFERENCES

Horizontal trawl load, Fp

=
35.22 kN
Vertical trawl load, Fz
=
17.61 kN
(downwards)
The trawl load computed above is used in the post-buckle FE
model as a concentrated point force applied at the apex to
determine the increase in strain at the apex. The analysis was
carried out using the mean and maximum sliding lateral friction.
In both cases, the post-buckle shape (prior to application of trawl
load) corresponds to a total feed-in of 2m.
The results are summarized in Table 10 and 11 below: -

1. DNV-OS-F101,Submarine Pipeline Systems, 2000.

2. Hobbs, R.E. In-service buckling of Heated Pipelines, ASCE
Journal of Transportation Engineering, 110(2), 175-189, 1984.
3. Murphey and Langner, Ultimate Pipe Strength Under
Bending, Collapse and Fatigue, Proc. Of OMAE, 1996.
4. Det Norske Veritas, Free spanning pipelines, Recommended
practice, DNV-RP-F105.
5. API-5L Linepipe Specification, American Petroleum Institute,
1992.
6. Harrison G.E.,Brunner M.S and Bruton D.A.S, King
Flowlines Thermal Expansion Design and Implementation,
Proc. Of OTC, 2003.

m=0.85 (mean)

Total (mechanical)
strain, %
Lateral displacement
at apex, m

Post-buckle

With trawl
load

Increment

-0.2316

-0.2596

0.028

12.97

13.037

0.067

Table 10 Increase in strain and lateral displacement at apex

due to trawl load for 0.85 friction

14