A critical review on the vulnerability assessment of natural gas pipelines subjected to seismic wave propagation. Part 1: Fragility relations and implemented seismic intensity measures

Tsinidis, Grigorios; Sarno, Luigi Di; Sextos, Anastasios; Furtner, Peter

doi:10.1016/j.tust.2019.01.025

Cited by 46 publications

(12 citation statements)

References 86 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Denoted respectively by RR leak ðv; θ s Þ and RR break ðv; θ s Þ, the RRs for leaks and breaks are generally functions of the peak ground velocity (PGV), v, and a vector of input pipeline attributes, θ s (e.g., geographic location, pipe diameter, decade of installation). For pipelines subjected to strong ground shaking, researchers have shown that PGV is an important measure to quantify the intensity of ground motion (O'Rourke 2009;O'Rourke et al 1998;Psyrras et al 2019;Tsinidis et al 2020a) partially because of its approximate relationship to longitudinal ground strain (Honegger and Nyman 2004;Newmark 1968;Tsinidis et al 2019).…”

Section: Methodology To Forecast Earthquake Riskmentioning

confidence: 99%

Earthquake Risk of Gas Pipelines in the Conterminous United States and Its Sources of Uncertainty

Kwong

Jaiswal

Baker

et al. 2022

ASCE-ASME J. Risk Uncertainty Eng. Syst., Part A: Civ. Eng.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Relatively little research has been conducted to systematically quantify the nationwide earthquake risk of gas pipelines in the US; simultaneously, national guidance is limited for operators across the country to consistently evaluate the earthquake risk of their assets. Furthermore, many challenges and uncertainties exist in a comprehensive seismic risk assessment of gas pipelines. As a first stage in a systematic nationwide assessment, we quantify the earthquake risk of gas transmission pipelines in the conterminous US due to strong ground shaking, including the associated uncertainties. Specifically, we integrate the US Geological Survey 2018 National Seismic Hazard Model, a logic tree-based exposure model, three different vulnerability models, and a consequence model. The results enable comparison against other risk assessment efforts, encourage more transparent deliberation regarding alternative approaches, and facilitate decisions on potentially assessing localized risks due to ground failures that require site-specific data. Based on the uncertainties approximated herein, the resulting sensitivity analyses suggest that the vulnerability model is the most influential source of uncertainty. Finally, we highlight research needs such as (1) developing more vulnerability models for regional seismic risk assessment of gas pipelines; (2) identifying, prioritizing, and measuring input pipeline attributes that are important for estimating seismic damage; and (3) better quantifying seismic hazards with their uncertainties at the national scale, for both ground failures and ground shaking.

show abstract

Section: Methodology To Forecast Earthquake Riskmentioning

confidence: 99%

Earthquake Risk of Gas Pipelines in the Conterminous United States and Its Sources of Uncertainty

Kwong

Jaiswal

Baker

et al. 2022

ASCE-ASME J. Risk Uncertainty Eng. Syst., Part A: Civ. Eng.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…In the case of vertical loading with variation in soil properties in the soil model, ovalisation of the pipeline cross-section, as well as bending failure of the pipeline are assumed the only potential failure mechanisms, the latter being less realistic due to the high ductility of steel pipelines used for natural gas transportation [8]. Excessive ovalisation of the cross-section can lead to loss of pipeline integrity or serviceability and is limited to 15% by most guidelines [6].…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…A majority of studies on the seismic resilience of buried steel pipelines considers seismic loading in the horizontal plane of the pipeline, be it in lateral or axial directions [8]. The effect of the vertical component of ground motions is not well-studied.…”

Section: The Effect Of Vertical Components Of Ground Motionsmentioning

confidence: 99%

The Seismic Response of Natural Gas Pipelines Buried in Discontinuous Permafrost Under Vertically Propagating Shear Waves: Parametric Analysis

Pohoryles¹,

Sarno²,

Kwon³

et al. 2019

Proceedings of the 7th International Conference on Computational Methods in Structural Dynamics and Earthquake Engineering (COM

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Buried natural gas pipelines are important infrastructure to connect areas of gas exploration to areas of use. In many parts of the world, pipelines cross seismic regions and varieties of soil strata, including regions of discontinuous permafrost in the Northern hemisphere. Initial studies find that the seismic response of soils can be strongly influenced by changes in underlying soil strata, hence potentially leading to greater seismic demands on buried infrastructure such as pipelines. Frozen soil deposits, in particular, can lead to a significant change in dynamic soil response to seismic excitation. To study the effect of crossing discontinuous permafrost zones on the seismic behaviour of buried natural gas pipelines, a combined modelling approach is proposed: (1) dynamic site response analysis to determine the load conditions and (2) quasi-static finite-element analysis on the pipeline and surrounding soil. In this paper, results from one-dimensional equivalent linear soil response analyses for a site of discontinuous permafrost is presented. Despite the frozen soil stratum lying at a depth of 40 m, the response of the soil at the depth of the buried pipeline is found to be significantly affected. A parametric numerical validation study on a finite element model of a typical buried natural gas pipeline is then presented to assess the influence of geometrical and mechanical parameters on the response of pipeline and surrounding soil by means of a series of incremental dynamic analyses. Outcomes of this study highlights the strong effect of the soil properties on the strain in buried pipelines.

show abstract

“…Despite the direct correlation of longitudinal ground strain with pipeline axial response, its rigorous computation or even its evaluation in a simplified fashion via PGV and wave propagation velocity C of the site (i.e. ε g = PGV/C) may be cumbersome [61], particularly in the presence of strong soil heterogeneities along the pipeline axis, like in the cases examined herein. The selected seismic IMs refer to either outcrop conditions or ground surface conditions.…”

Section: Seismic Ground Motionsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Optimal intensity measures for the structural assessment of buried steel natural gas pipelines due to seismically-induced axial compression at geotechnical discontinuities

Tsinidis

Sarno

Sextos

et al. 2020

Soil Dynamics and Earthquake Engineering

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This paper investigates the efficiency and sufficiency of various seismic intensity measures for the structural assessment of buried steel natural gas (NG) pipelines subjected to axial compression caused by transient seismic ground deformations. The study focuses on buried NG pipelines crossing perpendicularly a vertical geotechnical discontinuity with an abrupt change on the soil properties, where the potential of high compression strain is expected to be increased under seismic wave propagation. A detailed analytical framework is developed for this purpose, which includes a 3D finite element model of the pipe-trench system, to evaluate rigorously the pipe-soil interaction phenomena, and 1D soil response analyses that are employed to determine critical ground deformation patterns at the geotechnical discontinuity, caused by seismic wave propagation. A comprehensive numerical parametric study is conducted by employing the analytical methodology in a number of soil-pipeline configurations, considering salient parameters that control the axial response of buried steel NG pipelines, i.e. diameter, wall thickness and internal pressure of the pipeline, wall imperfections of the pipeline, soil properties and backfill compaction level and friction characteristics of the backfill-pipe interface. Using the peak compression strain of the pipeline as engineering demand parameter and a number of regression analyses relative to the examined seismic intensity measures, it is shown that the peak ground velocity PGV at ground surface constitutes the optimum intensity measure for the structural assessment of the examined infrastructure.

show abstract

A critical review on the vulnerability assessment of natural gas pipelines subjected to seismic wave propagation. Part 1: Fragility relations and implemented seismic intensity measures

Abstract: A critical review on the vulnerability assessment of natural gas pipelines subjected to seismic wave propagation. Part 1: Fragility relations and implemented seismic intensity measures. Tunnelling and

Cited by 46 publications

References 86 publications

Earthquake Risk of Gas Pipelines in the Conterminous United States and Its Sources of Uncertainty

Earthquake Risk of Gas Pipelines in the Conterminous United States and Its Sources of Uncertainty

The Seismic Response of Natural Gas Pipelines Buried in Discontinuous Permafrost Under Vertically Propagating Shear Waves: Parametric Analysis

Optimal intensity measures for the structural assessment of buried steel natural gas pipelines due to seismically-induced axial compression at geotechnical discontinuities

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About