Guidelines for the Seismic Design and Assessment of Natural Gas and Liquid Hydrocarbon Pipelines

Abstract

Guidelines for the seismic design of oil and gas pipelines have not been updated in a single reference document since 1984, when the American Society of Civil Engineers released their publication, Guidelines for the Seismic Design of Oil and Gas Pipeline Systems. Since 1984, substantial progress has been made in identifying and quantifying seismic hazards, understanding pipeline response under large, displacement-controlled strain conditions, and analytical methods for assessing pipeline response to permanent ground displacement. In 1998, the Pipeline Research Council International, Inc. (PRCI) initiated a project to update seismic design guidelines for pipelines with the goal of incorporating advances in current engineering practice since the early 1980s and to create a document that can be regularly updated to take advantage of new research findings. The PRCI project to develop the guidelines was undertaken by two investigators heavily involved in the 1984 American Society of Civil Engineers guidelines. Two teams of independent expert reviewers were used during the project to assure the recommended practices were technically consistent with the current state of knowledge of seismic hazard assessment, pipeline behavior, and analysis methods.

Multi-directional force–displacement response of underground pipe in sand

“…Guidelines for the seismic design of oil and gas pipelines recommend that the maximum vertical force associated with downward pipe movement be estimated by conventional bearing capacity formulations (ASCE 1984;Honegger and Nyman 2004). It is of interest therefore to compare the maximum vertical pipe force from conventional bearing capacity theory with the peak pipe force given by the FE simulations.…”

“…It has long been recognized (e.g., Trautmann and O'Rourke 1985;ASCE 1984) that soil pressures associated with relative soil-pipe movement affect pipeline axial strain, curvature, and ovaling, as well as the relative slip and rotation at pipeline joints. Although industry guidelines cover force-displacement relationships for lateral displacement, vertical uplift, and settlement (e.g., ASCE 1984; Honegger et al 2004), a comprehensive methodology supported by large-scale tests and continuum modeling of both the soil mass and embedded pipe is not available for predicting force versus pipe-soil relative displacement in all directions. Continuum models, however, are available that account for stress and deformation throughout soil adjacent to underground pipelines (e.g., Robert et al 2016b;Vazouras et al 2015;Jung et al 2013aJung et al , 2013bXie et al 2013; O'Rourke 2010), thus providing the framework for simulating in a realistic way pipeline performance under externally imposed ground deformation.…”

“…In the figure, bi-linear relationships are shown for force versus longitudinal, lateral, and vertical upward and downward relative displacement between the pipe and soil. Recommendations for modeling pipeline response to ground deformation as depicted in the figure are readily available (e.g., ASCE 1984; Honegger and Nyman 2004;O'Rourke et al 2008).…”

Active faults crossing trunk pipeline routes: some important steps to avoid disaster

“…If, for example, we assume any geodynamically active zone (fault) as being excessively permeable due to "high gradients of movements", where the pipeline could be affected by some corrosive fluids, possible options to protect the pipe from the corrosion could include: (1) use of less corrodible pipe steel, (2) use pipes with thicker wall and with thicker and more resistant pipe isolation, (3) crossing of the zone at a right angle to make the affected pipeline section shorter. If, however, the hazard would be related to mechanical deformation due to surface faulting, then (1) pipe steel should be more ductile, (2) trench should be trapezoid in shape with special backfill material and (3) crossing angle should not be right (dog-leg crossing) to avoid pipe longitudinal compression (Honegger and Nyman, 2004;Mattiozzi and Strom, 2008). One can see that these measures are not only different (No.…”

“…Special studies aimed to provide necessary input data for the designers should be performed in the course of the engineering survey. Their scope is determined by special guidelines and national construction codes (Honegger and Nyman, 2004;American Lifelines Alliance, 2005; Indian Institute of Technology Kanpur, 2007).…”