Analysis and Design of Buried Steel Water Pipelines in Seismic Areas

Karamanos, Spyros A.; Sarvanis, Gregory C.; Keil, Brent D.; Card, Robert J.

doi:10.1061/(asce)ps.1949-1204.0000280

Cited by 28 publications

(8 citation statements)

References 31 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Furthermore, they are developed empirically from observed damage in past earthquakes. However, such data are almost exclusively from water pipelines, and hence, the resulting models may not be directly applicable to gas pipelines (Honegger and Wijewickreme 2013;Karamanos et al 2017;Tsinidis et al 2019). Additionally, empirical RR models do not directly distinguish between different degrees of seismic damage (e.g., leak versus break) and cannot be used for strainor stress-based design of gas pipelines.…”

Section: Available Informationmentioning

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: Available Informationmentioning

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

“…At the same, it should be noted that the literature on pipeline protection measures is very limited compared to pipeline mechanical behavior studies. Qualitative discussions on protection measures are offered by Nyman et al (2008), O'Rourke and , and Karamanos et al (2017). Quantitative comparisons of measures are presented by Gantes and Melissianos (2016), Melissianos et al (2017c), Gantes (2019), and.…”

Section: Protection Measuresmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…• Wall thickness increase to improve pipe cross-section stiffness (Gantes and Bouckovalas 2013;Karamanos et al 2017).…”

Section: Types Of Protection Measuresmentioning

confidence: 99%

Onshore Buried Steel Fuel Pipelines at Fault Crossings: A Review of Critical Analysis and Design Aspects

Melissianos

2022

J. Pipeline Syst. Eng. Pract.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Onshore buried steel pipeline infrastructure is a critical component of the fuel supply system. Pipeline failure due to seismic actions is socially, environmentally, and economically unacceptable and thus the design of pipelines at geohazard areas, such as fault crossings, remains a hot topic for the pipeline community. There is an intense research effort on the evaluation of the pipeline mechanical behavior and the strength verification at fault crossings. Still, some aspects need in-depth consideration concerning practical applications. A state-of-the-art review is presented on three critical analysis and design aspects, namely the calculation of the design fault displacement via deterministic and probabilistic methods, the effect of numerical modeling parameters such as soil spring properties, and the alternative pipe protection measures in terms of availability, efficiency, and selection process. The critical review offers a thorough insight on what is available and how to employ it in design, assisting engineers and pipe operators in improving pipe safety.

show abstract

“…In damage to buried pipelines due to ground deformation, it has been noted that permanent ground deformation (PGD) has resulted in severe loss of lifeline functions, as in the case of Canterbury in New Zealand [17,18]. In addition to the American Lifeline Alliance (ALA) [19], many engineers commonly use PGD as a major factor in the vulnerability of buried pipeline structures related to ground deformation [20,21,22]. Moreover, most pipelines function as a tunnelling-type structure with joints.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Experimental Evaluation of Water Supply Pipe Joints against Seismic Ground Deformation: A Four-point Bending Test

Kang¹,

Kim²,

Kim³

et al. 2022

Environmental Engineering Research

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Due to permanent ground deformation (PGD) such as earthquakes and liquefaction, water supply pipes and connected joints may experience rotation and deflection through losing its function and complex water contamination. Since the specifications of joints are different in each country, evaluating joints are difficult to manage the functional maintenance of water network system. In this study, two metallic and three non-metallic pipe joints were selected through the joints commonly used in Korea. PGD simulation could be conducted through Four-point bending test which derives the result of deflection angle, moment, and strain value for damaged pipes. Each component showed above M-1 grade which resulted based on the grade of ISO 16134. To compare metallic pipe results, collar joint showed stronger binding force than the mechanical joint, but in deflection angle result mechanical showed higher value. In non-metallic pipe test, since its material contains large flexibility, strain value mainly affected its result. Based on this study, functional evaluation of water supply pipeline regarding the PGD was identified through comparing tendency of each joint characterization. Moreover, these data can be expected to be utilized as the basis of performance evaluation and critical component in piping design.

show abstract

Analysis and Design of Buried Steel Water Pipelines in Seismic Areas

Cited by 28 publications

References 31 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

Onshore Buried Steel Fuel Pipelines at Fault Crossings: A Review of Critical Analysis and Design Aspects

Experimental Evaluation of Water Supply Pipe Joints against Seismic Ground Deformation: A Four-point Bending Test

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About