Professional Documents
Culture Documents
No.14
DETNORSKE VERITAS
Veiitasveien I, N-1322 H0vil<, Norway Tel.: +47 67 57 99 00 Fax: +47 67 57 99 11
FOREWORD
DET NORSKE VERITAS (DNV) is an autonomous and independent Foundation with the object of safeguarding life, property
and the environment at sea and ashore.
DET NORSKE VERITAS AS (DNV AS), a fully owned subsidiary Society of the Foundation, undertakes classification and
certification and ensures the quality of ships, mobile offshore units, fixed offshore strnctures, facilities and systems, and carries
out research in connection with these functions. The Society operates a world-wide network of survey stations and is
authorised by more than 120 national administrations to carry out surveys and, in most cases, issue certificates on their behalf.
Guidelines
Guidelines are publications which give infonnation and advice on technical and formal matters related to the design, building,
operating, maintenance and repair of vessels and other objects, as well as the services rendered by the Society in this
connection. Aspects concerning classification may be included in the publication.
An updated list of Guidelines is available on request. The list is also given in the Latest edition of the Introduction-booklets to
the ''Rules for Classification of Ships", the "Rules for Classification of Mobile Offshore Units" and the "Rules for
Classification of High Speed and Light Craft".
In "Rules for Classification of Fixed Offshore Installations", only those Guidelines which are relevant for this type of structure
have been listed.
For subscription orders or information about subscription terms, please use distribution@dnv.com
Comprehensive information about DNV and the Society's services i:; found at the Web site http://www.dnv.com
In lhis provision "Del Nocske vemas shaO mean the FOUlldation Del Nolske V91i!as as weE as all ils subsidiaries, directors. officers, empk>yees, agenlS and any oUlef acting on behatt cl Del N01Ske
Ventas.
CONTENTS
1. General ..................................................................... 4 S. Hydrodynamic Description .................................. 20
1.1 Introduction ........................ .................................... ... 4 5.1 Flow Regilnes ......................................................... 20
1.2 Scope and Applicability ...... ......................... .............. 4 5.2 Hydrodynamic Parameters .......................... .... ........ 22
1.3 Structure of Guideline ............................................... S 5.3 Sea-bed Proxilnity ................ .. ................................. 22
1.4 Relationship to Other Rules ....................................... 6 6. Environmental conditions..................................... 23
1.5 Safety Philosophy ...... ................................................ 6 6.1 General ................................................ .................... 23
l .6 Definitions ................................................................. 6 6.2 Current Conditions .................................................. 23
2. Free Span Classiftcation .......................................... 9 6.3 Short-tenn Wave Conditions .................. .. ............... 24
2.1 General ...................................................................... 9 6.4 Long-Tenn Statistics .. ...... ............ ....... ............. ..... .. 27
2.2 Morphological Classification .. ............. .... ................. . 9 7. Fatigue Analysis .................................................... 28
2.3 Temporal Classification ........................................... I 1 7.1 General .......................................................... .......... 28
3. Free Span Analysis ................................................ 11 7.2 Fatigue Criteria ....................................................... 28
3.1 General .................... ................................................ 11 7.3 SN-Curves ......... .................... .. .. .............................. 29
3.2 Structural Modelling ....................... ......................... 11 7.4 Safety Factors ........................ .. ................................ 30
3.3 Loads ....................................................................... 12 8. Amplitude Response Models ................................ 31
3.4 Static Analysis .................................. ....................... 12 8.1 General .................................................................... 31
3.5 Eigen-value Analyses ................................ .............. 13 8.2 In-line VIV in Current Dominated Conditions ........ 31
3 .6 Damping .............................. ........................ .......... .. 13 8.3 Cross-Flow VIV from Combined Wave and Current34
3 .7 Approximate Response Quantities ........................ .. . 15 9. Force Models ......................................................... 36
4. Geotechnical Conditions ....................................... 16 9. I General .................................................................... 36
4.1 General ........... .............. ......... ... ......... ........ .............. 16 9.2 In-line Direction .................................................. .. .. 36
4.2 Modelling of Soil Interaction................................... 17 9.3 Cross-Flow Direction ............... ................ ............... 38
4.3 Approximate Soil Stiffness ........................ .............. 18 10. References .............................................................. 38
4.4 Artificial Supports ............................. ...................... 20
June 1998
DETNORSKE VERITAS
Guidelines No. 14 5
June 1998
::---j
-----.....------------
Structural Modtlling FR.1E SPAN ANALYSES Geotechnical Conditions
FORCl!:MODEL
RESPONSE MODEL
TIME DOMAIN v~ FREQUENCY DOMAIN
PIPE RESPONSF:
(STRESS RANGES &. CYCLES)
SN CURVF.S
(Tl!ST DATA, LITERATIJRE, l'MA)
SAFETY FACTORS
(SAFETY CLASS. ADD. DATA)
June 1998
1.4 Relationship to other Rules judgement in order to obtain a safety level equivalent to
modem industry practice.
1.4.1
1.6 Definitions
This Guideline formally supports and complies with the
Rules for Submarine Pipeline Systems, 1996, hereafter called The international system of units (ST system) is applied
the Rules for Pipelines, and is considered.to be a supplement throughout the Guideline. Further, the following definitions
to relevant National Rules and Regulations. apply:
Pipeline design is nonnally to be based on Location Class, 0 pipe outer diameter (including any coating)
Fluid Category and potential failure consequence for each detenninistic (design) fatigue damage
failure mode, and to be classified into one of the following Drat
Safety Classes: outer steel diameter
Low Safety Class, where failure implies no risk of E Young's modulus
human injury and minor environmental and economic
consequences. EI bending stiffuess
Normal Safety Class, classification for temporary
conditions where failure implies risk of human injury, e gap between the pipe bottom and the sea-floor
significant environmental pollution or very high
(e/D) seabed gap ratio
economic or political consequences. Normal
classification for Operation. fo in-line (fo.W or cross-flow (fo,cr) natural
High Safety Class, classification for operating conditions frequency
where failure implies risk of human injury, significant
environmental pollution or very high economic or
political consequences. S1 U is the vortex shedding frequency
D
For a definition of location class and fluid category, see the (Strouhal frequency)
Rules for Pipelines.
dominating vibration frequency
1.5.2 wave frequency
The reliability of the pipeline against fatigue failure is
ensured by use of a safety factor fonnat (also known as a PO distribution function
Load and Resistance Factors Design Format (LRFD)). gravity
g
For the in-line VIV acceptance criterion the set of safety G soil parameter
factors is calibrated to acceptable target reliability levels
using reliability based methods. 0(<0) frequency transfer function
For all other acceptance criteria the recommended safety
factors are based on a "soft calibration" and engineering
June 1998
h water depth, i.e. distance from the mean sea .1pi internal pressure difference relative to laying
level to the pipe
Q deflection load per unit length
le turbulence intensity over 30 minutes
OCR over-consolidation ratio (only clays)
Ip plasticity index, cohesive soils
PE Euler load
k wave number
R. axial soil reaction
kc soil parameter
Re current reduction factor
ks soil parameter
Ro reduction factor from wave direction and
kw nonnalisation constant spreading
Kv vertical dynamic soil stiffness Rio reduction factor from turbulence and flow
direction
(k/D) pipe roughness
Rt reduction factor from damping
KC ~; is the Keulegan Carpenter numper
UD is the Reynolds number
w
Re v
41tme;r s abscissa co-ordinate along the pipe axis or
Ks is the stability parameter
pD2 spreading parameter
span length with vortex shedding loads Suu wave velocity spectra at pipe level
Ls
length of span shoulders Su undrained shear strength, cohesive soils
L sh
effective mass per unit length SA-ID unit amplitude stress (stress induced by a pipe
fie
(vibration mode) deflection equal to an outer
m fatigue exponent diameterD)
m(s) mass per unit length including structural SCF Stress Concentration Factor due to geometrical
mass, added mass and mass of internal fluid imperfections in the welded area not
implemented in the applied SN-curve.
Mn spectral moments of order n
S, Strauhal nwnber
MSL mean (surface) water level
pipe wall thickness or time
nI number of stress cycles
T temperature
N number of cycles to failure
Tn nonnalisation period
N1r true steel wall axial force
T11fe time of exposure to fatigue load effects
Ne soil bearing capacity
T" peak period
Nq soil bearing capacity
Tu mean zero upcrossing period of oscillating
Ny soil bearing capacity flow
June 1998
Wsou submerged wiit weight of soil environmental sea state vector E>=[H., Tv, Sw]T
t band-width parameter
~ reduction factor
r gamma function
DETNORSKE VERITAS
Guidelines No. 14 9
June 1998
< 30 Very little dynamic It is nonnally not required to perfonn comprehensive fatigue
amplification. Not design check. Insignificant dynamic response from envirorunental
considered a free span loads expected and unlikely to experience VIV.
100-200/250 Response dominated by Relevant for free spans at uneven seabed in temporary conditions.
combined beam and Natural frequencies sensitive to boundary conditions, effective
cable behaviour axial force (including initial deflection, geometric stiffness) and
pipe "feed in" for scour induced free spans in operation.
Maximum stress amplitudes at span support or at mid span
> 200/250 Response dominated by Relevant for small diameter pipes in temporary conditions.
cable behaviour Natural frequencies governed by detlected shape and effective
axial force. Maximum stress amplillldes at mid span.
2.2 Morphological classification If detailed information is not available Figure 2-1 or figure
2-2 may be used to classify the spans into isolated or
2.2.l interacting dependent on the soil types and span and support
lengths. The figures are in a narrow sense only valid for the
The objective of the morphological classification is to defme
vertical (in-line) dynamic response but may also be used for
whether the free span is isolated or interacting. The
assessment of the horizontal (cross-flow) response. In this
morphological classification determines the degree of
case the effective lateral soil stiffuess should be used to
complexity required of the free span analysis:
select the appropriate curve.
Two or more consecutive free spans are considered to be
isolated (i.e. single span) if the static and dynamic 2.2.2
behaviour are unaffected by neighbouring spans. The morphological classification should in general be
A sequence of free spans is interacting (i.e. multi- detennined based on detailed static and dynamic analyses.
spanning) if the static and dynamic behaviour is affected The classification may be useful for evaluation of scour
by the presence of neighbouring spans. If the free span is induced free spans or in deriving approximate response
interacting, more than one span must be included in the quantities.
pipe/seabed model.
DETNORSKE VERITAS
10 Guidelines No. 14
June 1998
1.0 c---:----:-:--=:::::;:=~=--:--:---:--:--:----,
lnterac~ng .
0.9 . . . . ... .........:.................;.............. .
. . .
............... i .. .. ... .... .;. ..............;......... .. .. .;....... . .... ..:........... .
. ...
. . ....
0.8 .... :...:-
. . ......
. . . . . .
0.7
0.6 T-.. .: : T: ::;: :::~:.:::.: . . .. . :. :r.:. -r:: :::::: . .......
' o I f
0.4 . .......-roo~ ..
. --- --:- ..
o I o o
0.3
t
--::-:----
..
o
..
o
0.1 L~ ~ I Ls~
hl ~~
: : ( ) ( )(
0.0 -1-~~;._.~~~~__;,_.
: ~~~:~~-!;::====::;=============;=======;:=====(
0.0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1.0
0.8
' .
. .i
. .:............ .:..............~.
0.7
..
.. ....
..
..
. ......
.
. . .+. . +. . . . .
0.6 .
.... : !.. . . t
. . . .
~ 0.5 -jsp~n scen~rio - Cl.ay j..... .J.-........
.J
. . . . . .
.. .... .. .
o o ' I o I
. ~.
0
I
~
o
o
'-~
I
o
I
'
t
o
t
j
I f o I o I "'
0.0
0.0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1.0
June 1998
June 1998
functional loads
3.4.2
environmental loads, comprising The static analysis should normally account for non-linear
effects such as:
direct loads from wave and current
loads induced by hydro-elastic phenomena. large displacements (geometric nonlinearity)
Fatigue loads from trawl impact, cyclic loads during soil nonlinear response
installation or pressure variations are not considered herein non-linear behaviour of the pipe cross-section
but must be considered as a part of the integrated fatigue loading sequence.
damage assessment.
3.4.3
3.3.2 The stiffuess of the pipeline consists of material stiffness
plus geometrical stiffness. The effective axial force, Serf,
The functional loads which shall be considered are:
shall be used to calculate the geometrical stiffness. This force
is the true steel wall axial force, Nir, with corrections for the
weight of the pipe and internal fluid
effect of external and internal pressures:
external and internal fluid pressure
soil pressure if the pipe is locaJJy buried
thennal expansion and contraction
installation forces. Where p; and Pe denotes the internal and external pressure,
respectively and Ai and Ae are the corresponding cross
3.3.3 section areas.
Weight must account for the weight of the pipe considering
coating and all attachments to the pipe, the weight of the For a completely unrestrained (axially) pipe the effective
internal fluid and the buoyancy. axial force becomes:
3.3.4
Soil pressure, if the pipe is locally buried, is normally not For a totally restrained pipe the following effective axial
considered explicitly in the free span analyses but rather force apply:
implicitly by imposing appropriate soil restraints.
3.3.5
Thennal expansion and contraction loads and possible other where:
changes in pipe behaviour caused by temperature differences
effective lay tension
shall be accounted for.
internal pressure difference relative to laying, see
3.3.6 Rules for Pipelines
Installation forces are to include all forces acting on the pipe
during installation . Typical installation forces are applied pipe steel cross section area
tension during laying and forces from the trenching machine
ti.T temperature difference relative to laying
if trenching is carried out after laying. Pre-stressing such as
pennanent curvature or a permanent elongation introduced
temperature expansion coefficient.
during installation must also be taken into account.
3.4.4
3.3.7
The static environmental loads are in this guideline confined
Response calculations must account for the relevant
to those from on bottom current. The load may be
sequence of load application if important.
disregarded in the analysis if much smaller than the vertical
DETNORSKE VERITAS
Guidelines No. 14 13
June 1998
functional loads. However, for light pipes it should be element modelling. Thus, the element lengths must be short
considered. enough to ensure a sufficient number of elements over the
free spans that are to be assessed.
3.5 Eigen-value analyses
3.6 Damping
3.5.l
The aim of the eigen-value analyses is to calculate the 3.6.l
natural frequencies and corresponding mode shapes. In Response amplitudes are affected by damping. The stability
general the analysis is complex and depends on parameter, Ks, representing the damping for a given modal
shape is given by:
the temporal criterion
the pipeline condition (i.e. as-laid, water-filled, pressure
test and operation)
the pipe and soil properties
the seabed classification, effective free span length and where:
boundary conditions
the effective axial force and the initial deflected shape p water density
after laying
the loading history and axial displacement ("feed-in") of total modal damping ratio at a given vibration
the pipe. mode comprising:
Jn general, it is recommended to assess the response structural damping, (m, see 3.6.4
quantities using non-linear FE-analyses conducted over an soil damping, Ssoih see 3.6.5
appropriate stretch of the pipeline. However, approximate hydrodynamic damping, Sh, see 3.6.6
response quantities may be applied in some cases, see section
3.7. (psfp) specific mass (without added mass)
3.5.4
The stress ranges are derived from the mode shapes. The
accuracy of the stress ranges is strongly affected by the fmite
DETNORSKE VERITAS
14 Guidelines No. 14
June 1998
u
....Q 1.70
. '
................. !' .............: . .'
'
'
................... :11
.'
'
----1.
= .
.
'
' .
. . . ..
-............... .. ......... . ................. ... ....... .... ... ............
' .
'
~ 1.40
'
'
. . . ' .
.
'
~-
'
.
4J
"O l.30 ' ' ' t I ' '
~ !
1.20
1.10 -i- ~
.
. . .....
...
~
..
!
..
'
-~ ---~
1.00
0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.2 l.4 1.6 1.8 2
Gap Ratio (e/D)
2
3.6.4 jU(s)cjl (s)ds ]
Structural damping is due to internal friction forces of the <'.;, pDC 0 C L-L~l
pipe material and depends on the strain level and associated h =\jl 4rrf
0 [
(s-)$-2-(s-)-ds-
- -L=-Jm-
deflections. If no information is available, a structural modal
damping ratio of
where:
Sstr == 0.005
constant to be taken a:> 1.0 for in-line VIV and
can be assumed. If concrete coating is present, the sliding at 0.5 for cross-flow VIV.
the interface between concrete and corrosion coating may
further increase the damping to typically 0.01-0.02. p water density
For screening purposes the following soil (modal) damping Co drag coefficient
ratio can be assumed:
fo natural frequency
~I =0.01
lj>(s) mode shape
For a more detailed analysis, see 4.2.
U(s) mean flow velocity normal to the pipe as a
3.6.6 function of the pipe axis co-ordinate, s.
For VIV the hydrodynamic modal damping ratio ~.,is m(s) mass per Wlit length incl. structural mass,
normally to be taken as zero, i.e. added mass and mass of internal tluid
For VIV the hydrodynamic damping, ~11, is the damping Ls span length with vortex shedding loads.
outside the lock-in region for the pipe. The contribution to
hydrodynamic damping within the lock-in region shall be set ~his not to exceed 0.05.
to zero. Thus, ~h. may be taken from:
June 1998
3.7 Approximate response quantities approximate coefficient related to the deflection (sagging)
tenn. The higher value for C3 typically apply to as-laid
3.7.1 condition and the lower to cases with significant feed-in e.g.
The approximate response quantities specified in this section during operation.
may be applied for free span assessment provided:
If more detailed infonnation is not available the following
conservative assumptions are applied with respect to values are recommended:
boundary conditions, span length, effective axial force,
etc. C1~2.0, C2""0.50, C3,..J.0 104 for as-laid condition.
a sensitivity study is perfonned in order to quantify the
C,,.,2.0, Cr:::0.50, C3,.,5.0 105 for in-service condition.
criticality of the assumptions.
Approximate response quantities are considered relevant in The approximate equation for fo normally predicts
performing efficient screening of FE or survey results in frequencies within+/- 30% of the true natural frequency
order to identify critical spans to be assessed with methods provided (C 2 S.ffl'PE) > -0.5 and (LID) < 200.
that are more accurate, see Fyrileiv & M0rk, (1998).
3.7.4
3.7.2 The ratio between the effective span length, Leff, and
The fundamental natural frequency may be approximated by, apparent (visual) span length, L, depend on the soil and
see Bruschi & Vitali, (1991): support conditions. If more detailed infonnation is not
available it may be taken as:
June 1998
.:..
300 ---, , .....
. :
..: .:..
:
... ...
250 .............. 1
. .. . ..
.
:--~: 1-r
'iO \
nt ame er max mum ress Ampll u e
Cl. 200 ...\ , ..... .. ............... ,............... .
!. \
\
scaled wrt boundary coefficient C1 2
N '\ \
~ \
' .
0 150 .. ,
\..,
__________ _.1 . . . . . . . .- .. .
-.:-----------:. .. -:--r-----.---.--..--'-r-.
.. . .. :
. - - ptnne -ptnn
. -... fixed ..fixed
.. . :: ' ' '' . . '
..
- - - pinned-fixed
..,, ....................... ...'
...
.. ..................................
'
..
--------~~ ---
..
100 ......... : ....... :
:.. : .............
I o, I
~ .
- ... : '11.... .....
4.1.1 4.1.3
The soil is to be classified as cohesive (clays) or cohesion less The parameters defined above should preferably be obtained
(sands). Rocks may be treated as hard clay. As basis for the by means of geotechnica\ tests on undisturbed soil samples,
evaluations of the pipe-soil interaction the following basic and be representative for the particular geographical location
soil parameters are ofrelevance: of the pipeline. In case 110 detailed infonnation is available,
the values given in Table 4-land Table 4-2 may be used.
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
DETNORSKE VERITAS
Guidelines No. 14 17
June 1998
4.2.3
Soil type <p. Wsoil v es
3 The axial and lateral frictional coefficients between the pipe
[kN/m ]
and the seabed shall reflect the actual seabed condition, the
Loose 30 9.1 0.35 0.7 roughness, the pipe, and the passive soil resistance.
Medium 35" 9.6 0.35 0.5
4.2.4
Dense 40 10. J 0.35 0.4 The axial and lateral resistance is not always of a pure
Table 4-1 Typical gcotech mcal parameters for sandy
frictional type. Rapid changes in vertical stresses are (in low
permeable soil) reacted by pore water and not by a change in
soils
effective contact shcsses between the soil and the pipe. In
addition, the lateral resistance will have a contribution due to
Soil type Cu Wsoil v es Ip the penetration of the pipe into the soil, which need to be
[kN/m3 ] [kN/m3 ] l%J accounted for.
Very soft 5 4.4 0.45 2.0 60
4.2.5
Soft 17 5.4 0.45 1.8 55 For sands with low content of fines, the frictional component
may be proportional to the vertical force at any time, whereas
Stiff 70 7.4 0.45 J.3 35 for clays the 'frictional' component is more related to the
Hard 280 9.4 0.45 0.8 20 static vertical force for which the clay is consolidated.
The seabed topography along the pipeline route must be Material damping associated with hysteresis taking place
represented. close to the yield zone in contact with the pipe.
The modelling of soil resistance must account for non- Radiation damping associated with propagation of
linear contact forces nonnal to the pipeline and lift off. elastic waves through the yield zone.
The modelling of soil resistance must account for sliding
in the axial direction. For force models this also applies 4.2.9
in the lateral direction. The material damping is dependent on the relative stress
Appropriate (different) short- and long-tenn level in the soil, which again depends on the amplitude of the
characteristics for stiffness and damping shall be pipeline oscillations at the contact points with the soil. The
applied, i.e. static and dynamic stiffiless and damping. contribution of material damping is more important for in-
line VIV than for cross-flow VIV, since in-line sliding
4.2.2 between pipe and soil may give larg~ hysteresis effects.
The seabed topography may be defined by a vertical profile
along the pipeline route. The spacing of the data points 4.2.10
characterising t11e profile should relate to the actual The radiation damping may be evaluated from available
roughness of the seabed. 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.
DETNORSKE VERITAS
18 Guidelines No. l4
June 1998
4.2.11 4.2.12
The modal soil damping ratio, ~oil> due to the soil-pipe It should be emphasised that the determination of
interaction may be determined by: pipeline/soil interaction effects is encumbered with relatively
large uncertainties stemming from the basic soil parameters
and physical models. It is thus important that a sensitivity
study is performed to investigate the effect of above-
mentioned uncertainties.
4.3.2
The bearing capacity factors Ne. N~ and N.1 versus internal
LID Clay Sand
friction angle cp., may be taken from Figure 4-1. For clayey
Soft Medium Hard Loose Medium Dense soils the friction angle is set equal to O", i.e. N,1 = 1.0 and
N0 =-= 5.l4.
< 40 3.0 1.2 0.7 2.0 1.2 1.2
DETNORSKE VERJTAS
Guidelines No. 14 19
June 1998
100 ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
!.. -:-"1 i .. ..;. ....:.. ..:.....
: : i
.............. i t f,.. ...
. .................... j., 1 ............ .... ... .
,. .. ~o ....................
~-
o I 1 I '
rr-r-r . .
---:- ---:----:--..f t!- !' - -;-- ..... - -.
-~ -~--;.-- :---:--:--~-
: : : : : : : : : : :
r - ~;
: . : ; : : :
1 r ..:.....; 1 ! ...\ i ... rr
z. . ..rr~- =r r. ? ...... T-r:--
.. ....
. .. ...
'C . .. .
c
Ill 10 ' .. '
. ..
........ .......
o
..-
o
...._.......
. ..
I
D"
z
0
z
. . . .
. ..
. . . .. .. .
. .. ..
....... . .. . .....,. ........
..,.. .. .
........
.. .. . ..
..
I
... ..
I
.
..... ..
'
..
..
'
.. . .
..
...
1
0 10 20 30 40 50
<p[degreeJ
Figure 4-1 Bearing capacity factors N0 , Nq and N 1 versus the internal friction angle <p1
4.3.3 4.3.4
The ma.'<imum static, axial soil reaction per unit length may The dynamic soil stiffness in the vertical and horizontal
be taken as: (lateral) direction may be taken as:
K = 0.88-G
v 1-v
s~ -(O.S(l -bk,)R: )' is lhe soil shear strenglh effective soil stress in [kN/rn2] to be calculated as:
cr,= 0.75 WsoH b where b is given in section 4.3.1.
OCR over-consolidation ratio
..fOCR(1-~)+(~)
2.61 200 200 void ratio
D ET NORSKE VERITAS
20 Guidelines No. 14
June 1998
05
04
/
_,./
v ""'"' -i--........
/
v
/
0.3 7
~ ,.V
/ "'
02
v -
/ -
,v
1-- 1--
01
v
/
0
v
0 20 60 80 100 120
Plasticity index, ip
DETNORSKE V ERITAS
Guidelines No. 14 21
June 1998
6 - - . .... .
1 - .
time
2 ............. . . ................. ... ............ .............................. ........... .
June 1998
5.2.1 5.2.6
Vortex induced vibrations (VIV) and direct wave actions are
The current flow velocity ratio, a, is defined by:
affected by several parameters, such as:
Reynolds number, Re
Strouhal number, S1
reduced velocity, VR
Keulegan-Carpenter number, KC 5.2.7
current flow velocity ratio, a The pipe roughness influences the boundary layer on the pipe
flow angle relative to the pipe. Herein, only the and thereby the vortex shedding. The effect of pipe
component normal to the pipe axis is to be considered roughness in t11e range 0.005 < (k/D) < 0.02 is..implicit in the
pipe roughness, (k/D) response models.
gap ratio (seabed proximity), (e!D).
Herein a brief introduction of the basic hydrodynamic 5.3 Seabed proximity
parameters is given. For a thorough introduction see e.g.
5.3.l
Sumer & Freds0e, (I 997) and Blevins ( 1994).
The gap is defmed as the distance between the pipe and the
seabed. The gap used in design, as a single representative
5.2.2
value, must be characteristic for the free span
Vortex shedding from pipe is a function of Reynolds
number: For in line VIV the gap may be calculated as the average
value over the central third of the span.
R = UD For cross-flow VIV, the gap may be taken as the
e v maximum modal pipe deflection (vertical) allowed by
the presence of the sea-bottom.
where U is the flow velocity, Dis the outer pipe diameter of
the pipe (including any coating) and v is the kinematic 5.3.2
viscosity ("'='l.5106 [m2/s] ).
The presence of a fixed boundary near the pipe (proximity
effect) has a pronounced effect on the response, e.g.:
5.2.3
The vortex shedding frequency in steady cunent or regular The physics of pipe vibrations close to a boundary (i.e.
wave flow with KC numbers greater than 30 is approximated the seabed) is different from the physics of a vibrating
by: free pipe.
The alternating vortex shedding is suppressed for small
gap ratio (typically for (e/D) < 0.3); however self-
excited vibrations (cross-flow) still take place initiated
by fluctuations in the hydrodynamic lift force.
where fs is the vortex shedding frequency, Uc is the current Significant vertical oscillations exist for (e/D) < l at
velocity and Uw the wave induced velocity amplitude normal oscillatory flow conditions (i.e. a < 0.5) with a vibration
to the pipe. The Strouhal number, S" is a function of Reynolds frequency twice the wave frequency.
number and other parameters. The drag coefficient C 0 and inertia coefficient CM
increase in the proximity of the boundary.
5.2.4
The reduced velocity, YR, is in the general case with
5.3.3
combined current and wave induced flow, defined as: Details on seabed proximity effect may be found in the
literature, (see Sumer & Freds0e, 1997). Herein, the effect of
V _ Uc+Uw the sea-bed proximity is treated conservatively, i.e.:
R - foD
For in-line VIV, any mitigation effect is ignored.
where f0 is a natural frequency for a given vibration mode. For cross-flow VIV the sea-bed effects (for e/D < 0.5) is
introduced conservatively in t~e Response Model using
a simplified approach.
5.2.5
The Keulegan-Carpenter number, KC, is defined as:
June 1998
6.1.3 6.2.4
The fl.ow conditions at the pipe level due to current and wave The distribution type for the long-term current velocity
action gov em the response behaviour of free spanning distribution should be selected based on the physics and
pipelines. The principles and methods as described in experience. Normally a 3-parameter Weibull distribution is
Classification Note No. 30.5 may be used in addition to this considered representative:
Guideline as a basis when establishing the environmental
load conditions.
6.1.4
Preferably, the environmental load conditions should be
where F( ) is the cumulative distribution function. a.c, Pc and
established near the pipeline using measurement data of
Ye are Weibull distribution parameters and U0 is the current
acceptable quality and duration. The envirorunental data
velocity.
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, 6.2.5
wave and current data the statistical uncertainty should be Directional infonnation of the current velocity may be used
assessed and included in the analysis if significant. in the analysis. If no such infonnation is available, the
current should be assumed to act perpendicular to the axis of
6.1.5 the pipeline.
The wave and current characteristics must be transferred
(extrapolated) to the free span level and location using 6.2.6
appropriate conservative assumptions. The level of the free The current velocity profile in the boundary layer in areas
span is defined relative to the mean water (surface) level where flow separation does not occur may be taken as:
(MSL) by the distance from the top of the pipe to the MSL.
In case of large free span deflection, the top of the pipe
should be taken as the average over the pipe span.
DET NO RS KE VERIT AS
24 Guidelines No. 14
June 1998
6.2.7
r(-) is the gamma function ands is a spreading parameter,
The mean current velocity over a pipe diameter (i.e. averaged typically modelled as a function of the sea state. Normally s
over the external pipe diameter, D) should be applied in the is lakcn as a real number, SE [2;8]. For larges, the energy is
analyses. It may be assessed assuming a logarithmic mean concentrated around the main wave direction.
velocity profile:
6.3.4
e+D
Uc(z 0 ) = J U(z)dz = U(zr) Re The vclocily spcchUm at the pipe level may be obtained
through a spectral transfonnation of the waves at sea level
e using a first order wave theory, i.e.
Re =a reduction factor for the current
=
1 {(..:.+1)1n((e + D)!z0 }-(..:.)1n(e/ zo}-1} ' - 2
Suu(co,0) = G ((l))S'1 11 (<o,0)
-
ln(zr I z0 ) D D
where:
where e is the gap and z 0 is the height to the mid pipe.
Suu (co,6) the wave induced t1ow velocity spet:trum at
6.3 Short-term wave conditions pipe level, and
DETNORSKE VERITAS
Guidelines No. 14 25
June 1998
6.3.5
The spectral moments of order n is defined as:
Significant flow velocity amplitude at pipe level: The process (spectrum) is narrow-banded fore~ 0 and
broad banded fore ~ l (in practice the process may be
considered broad-banded fore larger than 0.6). Us, Tu and e
may be taken fromFigure 6-1, Figure 6-2 and Figure 6-3
Mean zero upcrossing period of oscillating flow at pipe assuming linear wave theory. In the figures, Tn is a
level: normalisation period and y is the JON SWAP spectrum
peakedness parameter.
-- --- - i : ~-:. . . :
0.5 .--~--~
-~~ ; j i i
~:i... : : : : :
": : : : :
0 .4 .........................\..l~----- l -~= =
! ~ l : j !
;; ' ,,- : . :: '
~ 1 ~ '. I = :
~ : "\, : : . .
p 0.2
......................... , : r=l.0; 3.3; 5.0 rT~-~-----------l . . . . . . .-. -y---.......................,
i ~ : i .i
. ...
.................... -------,..-------- ------------- --,---------
.
. -... -.- ....... -... -............... ..................... .
0.1
... .... ~-
.
-~...... -~
.
. .
o.o L ___j__ _ __J_____i__=::::::l:::::::::::===d 0.5
0.0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4
DETNORSKE VERrTAS
26 Guidelines No. 14
June 1998
1.3 ---1---r 1
: : - ~~~~~~~~
~
1.2
.
...................... : . .......... I
.......:
. .
... ............ ........... -~ ..... ...................... . -r.... --
..,..,. ..-".
11-r 1
o I
,,.,,, : : : : :
0.8 ..1.....- -r- - i- .. -:-...:.r..;,;c'hi;;)o:s ..--1
:o ;o :
0
n ~ :
I
' + o I
0.7+-~~~~~~+ ~~~~~~-+-
~~~~~~~,__~~~~~--+~~~~~~-i
0.8
0.7
.. . :... : ': . : ...:.: _] _ : _ : : :I : ... . ..L. _ : _ . ...
1
...
\; l
.
I
....
I
.I 0
0.2
~--=---- ,.~
........... ... ................ ~--- :- --- - - --:- - - -------:
-.. . . . ........ ........_.......
- ~- -
.
...... . ;-..;,:
I
. .. .' ..
0+-~~~~~~~~~~~~~-+~~~~~~-+-
' ~~~~~~-t-~~~~~---1
0.0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5
DETNORSKE VERITAS
Guidelines No. 14 27
June 1998
where:
6.3.6
The effect of wave directionality and wave spreading may be mean (main) wave direction
introduced in the form of a reduction factor on the significant
flow velocity amplitude, i.e.: direction perpendicular to the pipeline
l.O r-"-------_.._.._
-r ---------- -- --.l----.. -..r. ..- .... !. --- -
_::.:::.:.:-_::+ .... : : :
.. - .. - .. - .. _ - ..::- - ~ ., : : : .
0.8 --------- - .. ......... -~ ..: . :. _., . ..-::;.-t; . . . .. ~-------- ............... -~ .............. ------ ;.......... ---... -- -......... :
...... --:, ~ '
"'' t
.
'
~
o
....
~ ~..... .. I '
::; 0.6
~ -- ........................ :---- :---" .......
: :
.... . :.
~ ~~ - .:.: :
-~--- .......... .
C'-1 : ,~..... , .................. '
~ : I , .... , : s=2
= : '
.... ,
~ 0.4
1
.................... -: ............ )
: :
....................... f.........>.~.::;-: .~:~- ~:: .":" . -:-., . ~ .~~
. "":..._
.....::
i:z::
...; .:-s=8
. ....; .
0.2 ... -- ~
.. - .. . . . ... -~--
... - - -------i--
. - -- - -- .f ............................:
.. ...
. .
s = 100 :
0.0 - 1 - - - - -- - 1 - - - - - -- 1 - -- - - - -1 - - - - - - - l - - - -4.-- - - 4
0 20 40 60 80 100
6.4.2
6.4 Long-term statistics
e
The long-tenn variation of are normally described in terms
6.4.1 of a scatter diagram. The data sets of wave observations may
The wave climate at a given location may be characterised be sorted with respect to the main wave directions if
by a series of short-term sea-states. Each short-term sea state directional buoy or hindcast data are available with statistics
June 1998
7.1.2 where:
The following functional requirements apply: m fatigue exponent (the inverse slope of the SN curve)
The aim of fatigue design is to ensure an adequate safety C characteristic fatigue strength constant.
against fatigue failure within the design life of the
pipeline. 7.2.3
The fatigue analysis should cover a period which is
ni is the number of cycles corresponding to the stress range S;
representative for the free span exposure period.
given by:
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 where:
all free spanning pipe sections accowiting for damage
contributions from all potential vibration modes related
to the actual and neighbouring spans.
DETNORSKE VERITAS
Guidelines No. 14 29
June 1998
probability of a given flow condition dFuc long-term distribution function for the current
velocity.
dominating vibration frequency of the considered
pipe response In the analyses, the reduced velocity, VR, the Keulegan-
Carpenter number, KC, and the current flow velocity ratio,
time of exposure to fatigue load effects (i.e. , are replaced by "significant" substitutes defined as:
design life).
Uc+ U~v
7.2.4 v; foD
When several potential vibration modes may become active
KC*
u
~
simultaneously at a given current velocity the mode fwD
associated with the largest contribution to the fatigue damage
must be applied. Formally, the fatigue damage criteria may a
. Uc
be assessed numerically as: Uc+ u:v
An asterisk * indicate that the wave induced flow velocity
Uw is represented by the significant flow velocity. Thus,
Kc is assumed constant in each sea-state while Vi and
where: will vary due to the variability in the current velocity. The
following comments apply:
A vector of environmental parameters. In the
response model approach it comprises the The fatigue damage may be evaluated independently in
non-dimensional hydrodynamic parameters: each sea-state, i.e., the fatigue damage in each cell in a
A=(VR, KC, o:) scatter diagram in tenns of Hs, Tp and 9w times the
probability of occurrence for the individual sea state.
S(A) stress range for a given outcome of A
In each sea-state (Hs, TP 6w) is transformed into (Uw *,
F,.. (A) long tenn probability distribution (vector-) T 0 , 9w) at the pipe level as described in section 6.3.
function for A, e.g. derived from section 6.2 The sea state is represented by a significant short-tenn
and 6.4. flow induced velocity amplitude Uw * with mean zero
upcrossing period Tu, i.e. by a train ofregular wave
induced flow velocities with amplitudes equal to Uw *
7.2.5 and period T0 The effect of irregularity will reduce the
For practical applications the following approximate fatigue number of large amplitudes. It may be accounted for if
damage criterion applicable to both in-line and cross-flow properly docwnented.
VIV is recommended: Integration over the long-term current velocity
distribution is perfonned in each sea-state.
00
June J998
N number of cycles to failure at stress range S For girth welds that are symmetric with respect to the
weld root the F2 curve, with C=4.3-10 11, m=3.0 and
s stress range, i.e. the double stress amplitude S SCF= l .O is recommended.
= (Smax - Smin) SCF
C characteristic fatigue strength constant defined For girth welds that are not symmetric with respect to
as the mean-minus-two-standard-deviation the weld root the F2 curve with SCF accounting for
curve. (eccentricity) fabrication tolerances is recommended.
The transition of the weld to base material on the outside
7.3.2 of the pipe can normally be classified as E, with
C= l.010 12 , m: 3.0 with SCF accounting for
If not implicit in the applied SN-curve, a Stress
(eccentricity) fabrication tolerances.
Concentration Factor (SCF) due to potential geometrical
imperfections in the welded area must be applied. Stress 7.4 Safety factors
concentrations may be due to eccentricities resulting from
different sources: 7.4.1
The reliability of the pipeline against fatigue loads is ensured
concentricity i.e., difference in diameters of joined pipes
by use of tl1e safety class concept. The safety class concept
difference in thickness of joined pipes
accounts for the failure consequences, see the Rules for
pipe out of roundness or centre eccentricity.
Pipelines.
The resulting eccentricity &may conservatively be evaluated
by a direct summation of the contribution from the different The following safety factor format are used:
sources. If no detailed information is available, the following
conservative fonnula may be applied:
t 7.4.2
Yr, Yt and Ys denote partial safety factors for the natural
7.3.3 frequency, stability parameter and stress range respectively.
A cut-off (threshold) stress range below which no significant The set of partial safety factor to be applied are specified in
fatigue damage occurs is normally not to be used in the the table below for the individual safety classes:
fatigue analyses.
Safety Class
Safety Factor
7.3.4
The SN-curves may be determined from:
Low l Normal
I High
11 0.6
dedicated laboratory test data,
fracture mechanics theory, or "ff 1.3
accepted literature references, see e.g. NORSOK, (1998)
Yk 1.3
and Classification Note No. 30.2.
If the SN-curves are detennined by a fracture mechanics
approach an accepted crack growth model with a
'Ys l.05
l 1.3
I 1.55
June 1998
7.4.4 8.1.2
\llR is a reduction factor normally to be set to 1.0. It may be In the response models, in-line and cross-flow vibration are
set to 0.9 if the free span is well defined. A well defined free considered separately. Damage contributions from both first
span may be defined as: and second in-line instability regions in current dominated
conditions are included. Cross-flow induced additional in-
A free span scenario with well defined boundary line VIV resulting in possible increased fatigue damage is
conditions, i.e. where the free span length (or sequence considered approximately, see 8.2.2.
of free span lengths) and consequently the natural
frequency is insensitive to changes in the functional 8.2 In-line VIV in current dominated conditions
loads.
A free span scenario with high precision artificial 8.2.1
supports. The fatigue criterion specified in this section applies to
A free span where a reduced variability (increased current dominated situations. In case of a <0.8 or
knowledge) can be documented through pre-intervention equivalently a<o.5 (see 7.2.5) in-line VIV may be ignored.
(post-operation) frequency measurements.
7.4.5 8.2.2
Comments: The in-line response of a pipeline span in current dominated
conditions is associated with either alternating or symmetric
Recent industry practice implies TJorr0.1 in case of no access vortex shedding. Contributions from both the first in-line
and llotd=0.3 in case 9faccess combined with 'YF'Yk=rs=l.O instability region (1.0<VR<2.5) and the second instability
using somewhat different response models e.g. as reflected in region (2.5<V R<4.5) are included in this section. ff no other
(DNV, 1981). Usually the case TJord=0.3 is not allowed for information is available the cross-flow induced in-line VIV
submarine pipelines in practice. Note that the present format should be accounted for approximately by taking the
does not explicitly distinguish between access and no access maximum of the in-line VIV amplitude or 50% of the cross-
but rather implicitly using a safety class philosophy. flow VIV amplitude for the given VR The cross-flow VIV
amplitude may be taken from section 9.
Detailed studies have revealed that existing practice,
although acceptable on average, provides design with very 8.2.3
varying reliability levels dependent on the stability The amplitude response depends mainly on the reduced
p arameter, natural frequency, stress amplitudes, etc. velocity, VR, the stability parameter, Ks, the turbulence
intensity, I" and the flow angle, 0 relative to the pipe. The
The design format specified herein applies a set of 4 safety
Reynolds number, Re. is not explicit in the evaluation of
factors in order to control these dominant uncertainty sources
response amplitudes. Further, mitigation effects from the
rather than one usage factor, TJ. Due to this, the proposed
seabed proximity, (e/D) is conservatively not included.
design fonnat is more flexible and provides design with a
more uniform reliability levels compared to industry The stress range S is calculated by the In-line VlV
practice. On average the difference in the resulting safety Response Model:
level is minor when applying appropriate response models
for the "old" industry practice and the approach proposed S = 2 SA~ID R l6 (Ay I D) A.rnax 'I' mod Ys ljlR
herein.
where:
June 1998
. - {I
)..
max -
in case of a constant amplitude response
r(I + m /2)11m in case of a narrow banded Gaussian process
8.2.S
(Av/D) is the in-line VIV response amplitude as a function
of VRand Ks, see Figure 8- l . ln the evaluation of (Av/D) the
design values for the reduced velocity and stability parameter
where m is the fatigue exponent. shall be applied:
vR,d = VR 'Yr
8.2.4
Ks,d =Ks l'Yk
The mode-shape parameter, !fmod, accounting for the
flexibility of the span is defined as: where Yr and yk are safety factors related to the natural
frequency and damping respectively, see section 7.4.
1/2
f~ 2 (s)ds Interpolation for different values of the stability parameter is
lj/mod =~max L.J 4
allowed. The figure provides maximum values. The
[ ~ (s)ds ] corresponding standard deviation may be obtained as
L. (Av !D)/-f2.
0.20
==T il1 r1r
. ... ...
-...... 1 ......... ....... --.. ...... -..... :' ...........
'
-~ ~
'
'
.
'
.'.
..' ''
'
~=1.s
l
8.2.6 1.0 for Ks,d < 0.4
The characteristic vibration amplitude curves in Figure 8 l VR,oosct = 0. 6 + K s,d for 0.4 < K s.,d < 1.6
can be constructed as follows: 2.2 for Ks,d > 1.6
The onset value for the reduced velocity in the 151 The end value of the 2"d instability region is given by:
instability region is given by:
-{4.5-0.8Ks,d for Ks,d < 0.4
VR,eod - 3.7 for Ks,d;:::: 1.0
DETNORSKE VERITAS
Guidelines No. 14 33
June 1998
A slope equal to (l /10) at the start of the 1st instability The amplitude in the lst instability region for given Ks,d
region and a slope equal to (- L/2) at the end of the 2nd is not to be taken less than the amplitude in the 2nd
instability region applies. instability region, see Figure 8-2.
The maximum in-line vibration amplitude (AY,ntaxJD) as a
function of the stability parameter is given by (see
Figure 8-2):
.
o
.. o
o
..
I
t
.
o
....I
I
..' 0
.
..
....................:................ i--~---------~
...................................;............ . .................
-8,. .
0.1
.... ... ..
... ..
s 0.08 ... -:;t 1 .... ; .... :
o o I o o '
~-.. . ~
~
$ . . ; , Instability Region . .
0.06 ............ -:-~-~., ...... : ............ :
: . :
. ' :
~
:
:
:
:
0.04 ............1:................ ::................::. ................. ~'-:., ......... [... ..... ..,..........................t.: ........................;:
.. .. :'
'
'
"
' '
:' .
:
' . .
0.02 .
.
.
. . '
-~ -\-
' ~
; '
.
........................................................... - ...... ----- -----..... ,, ___ ...... -... ... .
' '
:
.
:
' .:
' I '
' '
:
' 'II '
:
'
0
0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.2 l.4 1.6 1.8 2
Stability Parameter K s,d
l
1.0 for 0=90
for le >20%
R19(Ic ,6) = 1.0 - ( 36~ 0 )(45 -0.7 -0}1c for 30 < 0 <60
0.0 for e = 0 The reduction functions are illustrated in Figure 8-3 .
June 1998
. .
.... ) .. -- .....~ .........;........... ~..... . . i 9==90 v '
0.7
i..
.s 0.6
t>
r:
0.5 .
'
l=0.4
~
0.3
0.2
0.1
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20
Turbulence Intensity (%]
Figure 8-3 Reduction function wrt turbulence intensity and flow angle
8.3.2 where:
Cross-flow VlV are affected by several parameters, such as S A ID unit stress amplitude (stress due to unit
the reduced velocity V R> the Keulegan-Carpenter number, diameter cross-flow mode shape deflection)
KC, the current flow velocity ratio, a , the stability
parameter, Ks, the seabed gap ratio, (e/D). the Strouhal ~ amplitude reduction factor due to damping
number, Si. and the pipe roughness, (k/D), among others.
Note that Reynolds number, R.,, is not explicit in the model. (A2 /D) cross-flow VIV amplitude
For steady current dominated fl ow situations, onset of cross- Ys safety factor to be multiplied on the stress
flow VIV of significant amplitude occurs typically at a value range, see section 7 .4
of VRbetween 3.0 and 5.0, whereas maximum vibration
levels occurs at a value between 5 and 7. For wave factor depending on the free span scenario,
dominated flow situations or span scenarios with a low gap see section 7.4
ratio, cross-flow vibration may be initiated for VR between 2
transformation factor, see section 8.2.3.
and 3 and are in this region apparently linked to the in-line
motions. For high values of VR the motion are again de- The cross-flow VIV amplitude (Az/D) in combined current
coupled. and wave flow conditions may be taken from Figure 8-4. The
figure provides characteristic maximum values. The
corresponding standard deviation may be obtained as
(Az /D)/../2.
June 1998
1.2
l.I
,......
e 0.9
~
'-'
G>
0.8
"'.<::::= 0.7
-a.
~
-
0.6
;;... 0.5
~
~ 0.4
J,
..."' 0.3
~
u
0.2
0. 1
2 4 6 8 IO 12 14 16
Reduced Velocity VR.d
8.3.4 forKs,d ~ 4
Th e characteristic amplitude response for cross-flow VIV for Ks,d >- 4
may be reduced due to the effect of damping. The reduction
factor, Rk is given by, see Figure 8-5.
:e=0.6
0
.
.... ......................
'
.I
>
.
o
.
o
o
.
..
t
o
. o
.
o
.
o
. -- ........................................................................................................
I
'
I
.. o
. .
~c:
I t o o o '
0 I 0 0 I
'
: : :
. - -- -:- -- -- ---:- --. --:
l : : i :
~
~
~ ................. ...... -----------
. .
0.2 _________
.... . ... -- -.. ------- -
..
.................
. ..
..... .
I o o o 0
.. . ..
... ...
0 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
Stability Parameter ~,d
DETNORSKE VERITAS
36 Guidelines No. 14
June 1998
9.1.2 9.2.2
The well-known Morison's equation is presented herein In general, the drag and inertia coefficient is given by:
while functional requirements are provided for general force
models for combined flow conditions. Co= Cn(Rc,KC,o.,(c/D),(k/D),(Az ID))
Several analytical force models for cross-flow have been CM= CM(Rc,KC,a,(e/D), (klf)))
proposed and calibrated using experimental data, see e.g.
Sumer & Freds0e, (1997) and Blevins, (1994) for a detailed where Re is the Reynolds number, KC is the Keulegan
introduction. However, generally applicable force models do Carpenter number, a is the current velocity ratio, (e/D) is the
not exist and an empirical response model reflecting gap ratio, (k/D) is the pipe roughness and (Az/D) is the cross-
observed pipeline response in a variety of flow conditions is flow vibration amplitude. Definitions are given in section 5.
at present superior.
9.2.3
9.1.3 In Figure 9-1 and Figure 9-2 drag and inertia coefficients are
The stress range to be applied in section 7.2 may be given as function of KC and ex., i.e. CL>(KC,a.) and CM(KC,cx.).
calculated explicitly introducing the force model as a loading Corrections due to the influence of the seabed may be taken
term in the equation of motion for the free span scenario. The from Figure 5-1. Fuither, the effect of the pipe roughness and
solution may apply time domain solutions or frequency increase oft11e drag coefficient due to cross-flow vibration
domain solution using linearization techniques. may be taken from Classification Note No. 30.5.
June 1998
1.8 .:
i
...................... ., ..... -1 ....... .
:
l.6
.
-r!-
.
1.4 t-.:
Q
u f ;
c
~
1.2 ... fi
. .
....a ............
o 0.0
e
~
1.0
Q
uOil 0.8
<I'S
N
. ..............................................
~ 0.6 . .. . ....................... ...... ............. ................. . ... ........ .................. .............
. ..... .... ......... .
:
gap ratio .e > .
! i. : i
.
<0.5
0.4 roughness (k/D)=l/200 .. i.....................f...................T" ................. T .................
. t
. t
. . I o
..
0.2 ........................................................
o
.
t
o
. .
t
..........
0
.
----~--.- -
I
--- -----.................................. .
0
I
I
0 10 20 30 40 50 60
KC
2.0 i-----=
--~----------~-------------------:------ -- ----;-- --------: -- --,
... . ....
.
1.8 ;.. ------ ---------- ~-- ---------------r ------------------- --~--- -~- ------------1
. . . ~o .
;:oo,.........,..._......._ _ _ _~---.-;:.. !:P.... ........1
~ 0.2
1.4 ................ .. ................ . .>
. ............... .....P---"" ----' -- -- -- ....... ...
....................................
: : 0.3 :
~ 1.2 ..............
'
---~ ....
. .
. ...... ... ~... ......... ....... ~ .. ...................:... ...................;..................
. j.
u
e : : o.4
~ t.o -1----~-- ....:~ ................ - ~ - .. - ---~~~:~~~~~~~~____..:
......... ---:-- ...................................... T.............. ----j
u . .
'f
~
0.8 ~
..................... .....................f.................... T.<o:s-- ........ j
~
I j
=
... 0.6
.
--- .....................................................
'
'
. .
.
o
................ - ..................................
~
o
'
I
.
'
.
_.............................................
'
I I
'
--
'
.
.............. .
o
; ; : ! :
o.2 .................... T ....................r--1-------........ f.................... 1--~
..
+
' ..
'
..
o
.
o
..
I
0.0 -1------+'-----+------1------i-------'1------~
0 10 20 30 40 50 60
KC
DETNORSKE VERITAS
38 Guidelines No. 14
June 1998
Bearman, P. W., Graham, J.M. R, Obasaju, E. D., "A Model Verley, R., "A Simple Method of Vortex-Induced Forces in
Equation for the Transverse Forces on Cylinders in Waves and Oscillating Currents'', Applied Ocean Research,
Oscillatory Flows", Applied Ocean Research, Vol. 6, No. 3, Volume 4, No. 2, 1982.
pp. 166-172, 1984.
DETNORSKE VERITAS