menu

Analysis of the creep behavior of the polymer

barrier layer in unbonded flexible pipes under
different fluid temperatures
BY TERRY SHELDRAKE, YIJUN SHEN, JIAN ZHAO, ZHIMIN TAN / SUBSEA SYSTEMS,
GE OIL & GAS
Proceedings of the ASME 2012 31st International Conference on Ocean, Offshore and Arctic Engineering
OMAE2012 June 10-15, 2012, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil

Abstract
Different fluid temperatures influence the creep behavior of the polymer barrier inside unbonded
flexible pipes. The creep behavior of the polymer material is generally time-dependent and
associated with larger, nonlinear deformation. Excessive creep deformation may lead to structural
failure due to the over-reduction of the barrier layer thickness, and is therefore an important design
consideration in ensuring the structural integrity of this layer.

Download a pdf of this article

Creep behavior in polymer material is complex, as it is governed by a number of variables, such as

the stress/strain state, temperature, and pressure, for example. This paper deals with the influence
of different fluid temperatures on the creep behavior of the polymer barrier layer under pipe design
pressures, particularly in high temperature fluid transportation pipelines for deep or ultra-deep sea
applications.

The analysis model was established using commercial finite element software ANSYS, where an
implicit time hardening creep model, based on the Maxwell viscoelastic model, was selected to represent the creep behavior of the polymer materials. The coefficients of the implemented polymer
material gap span creep model are calibrated to represent the worst case of the small-scale sample gap span creep tests performed in-house.
A comparison is made between the simulation results of the calibrated gap span creep model and the corresponding small-scale creep test measurements. The experimental test results and the
finite element modeling results show good correlation. This demonstrates that the creep model predictions are conservative for the polymer material of the barrier layer inside an unbonded flexible
pipe.

Introduction
Creep behavior of the polymer material is in general time-dependent and associated with larger nonlinear deformation. Excessive creep deformation of the barrier layer
may result in structural failure due to over-reduction in barrier layer thickness, which should be eliminated at the design stage. Creep behavior is complicated as it is
governed by a number of variables such as the stress/strain state and temperature. Due to its complexity, an implicit time-hardening creep model [1] based on the Maxwell
viscoelastic model [2] was selected to represent the creep behavior of the polymer materials. The coefficients of the selected creep model were initially calibrated according
to standard creep tests on the polymer materials [3, 4]. This calibrated material creep model was then implemented into the gap span model, which is an in-house ANSYSbased finite element model [5]. The coefficients of the implemented material creep model were then further calibrated in the finite element environment to represent the
worst case of the small-scale sample gap span creep tests performed in-house. The analysis methodology and the corresponding model validation procedures are
presented based on the PVDF test data in this paper. However, the same approach is applicable to other polymer materials used in barrier layer construction, such as PA-11,
PA-12 and HDPE. Figure 1 shows a typical flexible pipe construction.

Figure 1

A typical unbonded flexible pipe

Generally, an unbonded flexible pipe consists of several different layers, one of which is the polymer barrier layer that is designed to seal the fluid flow. The Flexlok layer
over the polymer barrier layer is designed to withstand bore pressure. Due to the characteristics of the polymer material, it is possible for the barrier material to extrude
into the gaps between the Flexlok strips when bore pressure is applied to the pipe, which may result in an over-reduction in the thickness of the polymer barrier layer. This
condition will deteriorate further when the pipe operating conditions include high pressure, high temperature, and long service periods.

Construction of creep model

As described earlier, the creep behavior of the barrier material is time-dependent and is rather complex. It is subjected to many parameters such as temperature, internal
pressure, Flexlok gap size and service time history. ANSYS has implemented many standard creep models with different emphases, and customized creep models with
user-defined creep behavior. The modified time-hardening creep analysis method was selected, where the time-hardening rule for the creep strain-stress curve was
employed. The general expression for the time-hardening creep model is as follows:
str = c 1 * c 2 * t(1+c 3 ) * e -c 4 /T /(1+c 3) (1)
where:

 str is creep strain

is applied stress
t is time, and
T is absolute temperature.
c 1 , c 2 , c 3 and c 4 are coefficients of the creep model [6,7].
It is difficult to determine all four coefficients (c 1 , c 2 , c 3 and c 4 ) simultaneously, according to the test data. It is therefore necessary to analyze these four coefficients before
undertaking the creep property match. It is clear that c 4 is related to temperature. The bore temperature does not change significantly during operation; in addition, the
Flexbarrier layer is a thin layer and it is reasonable to assume, with sufficient accuracy, that the temperature is constant. c 4 can then be taken as 0 to eliminate temperature
from the expression. With c 4 being zero the material test curve must therefore correspond to under operational temperature.
Figure 2 shows the effect of the coefficient c 3 on the strain rate [8]. c 3 represents the effect of the strain rate with respect to time, and indicates the tendency of the strain
rate. It can be seen that the strain rate must decrease over time or the strain will be infinite with long-term constant loading. Therefore, the c 3 must be less than 0. A lower
c 3 corresponds to the smaller strain rate in contrast to a greater c 3 which represents the larger strain rate. Based on the test curve, an approximate determination of the
coefficient c 3 can be established by trying different values. At this stage the matching curve may not be close to the test curve; however, this is less important than the
tendency, which must be similar to that of the test curves.
c 2 is the coefficient related to the applied stress. If c 2 equals 1, the relationship of strain and stress becomes linear. The creep strain is the function of stress and time. If we
assume k is a constant, it is easy to formulate: str (k,t) = k str (,t). Understanding linear creep material is more complicated than other materials. When the creep material
is linear, it means that the relationship of strain and stress is linear with the same linear coefficient at all times. Therefore, even though a constant stress is applied to a
linear creep material, the corresponding strain curve of a typical linear creep material is not a constant value and the strain will increase with time.
Figure 3 shows the strain curves of a typical linear creep material for the stresses of 290 psi, 580 psi and 870 psi respectively [8]. These stresses are constant with respect to
time, however it is clear that the strains are not constant and increase with time.
Figure 4 shows the strain curves of non-linear creep material with the same stress increments of 290 psi, 580 psi, and 870 psi respectively [8]. If the coefficient c 2 is not
equal to 1, the relationship of strain and stress becomes non-linear. For a non-linear creep material, even though the increments of the stress are constant, the increments
between the corresponding strain curves are not equal. In addition, for a non-linear material when the increments between strain curves increase, the coefficient c 2 must be
larger than 1, otherwise c 2 is less than 1. Therefore, c 2 can be used to indicate the relative position of the strain curves.

Figure 2

Creep strain at different c3 coefficient

Figure 3

Strain curves of a linear creep material

Figure 4

Strain curve of a non-linear creep material

The coefficient c 1 will determine the global position of the strain curves. As c 1 increases, the strain curves will move up. Additionally, the increase of the c 1 will increase the
distance between the strain curves.
next: Page 2/

This paper was prepared for presentation at ASME 31st International Conference on Ocean, Offshore and Arctic Engineering (OMAE 2012) held in Rio de Janeiro, Brazil, June 10-15 2012.

menu
Analysis of the creep behavior of the polymer barrier layer in unbonded flexible pipes under different fluid temperatures

Download

/previous: Page 1

Calibration of creep model

Since the PVDF material has been widely used to transport high temperature oil and gas for example, this PVDF
material was used to calibrate the polymer barrier creep model in unbonded flexible pipes. However, the same
procedure is applicable to other polymer materials used in barrier layer construction, such as PA-11, PA-12 and
HDPE.
The PVDF material standard creep tests were initially carried out with constant tensile stresses combined with a
range of temperatures expected during the service [9]. Furthermore, considering that there is a difference between
the standard material creep test specimens and actual polymer barriers used in unbonded flexible pipes, several
small-scale PVDF barriers from the real pipe samples were performed in the gap span tri-axial creep tests at
different pressures and temperatures. Based on these test data, the corresponding creep coefficients have been
calibrated. The PVDF barrier samples were taken from two different pipe samples with an inner diameter of 9.5
inches and 4.0 inches respectively. For each barrier sample, three creep tests were performed with different gap
sizes, operating pressures and temperatures. For each test, the ingress of the barrier material was measured
simultaneously at three positions along the rig circumference. For conservatism, the largest ingress measured
during the tests was used for model calibration and validation.

Figure 5

Gap span finite element model

The gap span creep FE model consists of half of the Zeta

Flexlok profile with the corresponding sections of barrier and wear layers if applicable. Gap span creep analysis of
the barrier layer is performed by implementing the creep model into the 2D axisymmetric gap span model,
established in the general finite element program ANSYS. The pressure is applied on the inside face of the
barrier/wear layer. The eight-node plane element is used for Flexlok and the four-node plane element for the
barrier layer. The gap span model is shown in Figure 5.
Based on the greatest ingresses measured during each small-scale sample gap span creep test, the PVDF barrier
gap span creep model was calibrated against the corresponding sample test by adjusting the values of the
coefficients c 1 , c 2 and c 3 in the creep equation, so that the modeled ingress results were conservative against the
sample test data. In doing so, it was possible to determine the final coefficients c 1 , c 2 and c 3.

Figure 6

Comparison between small-scale gap span creep test

and creep model

Figure 6 shows the small-scale PVDF barrier gap span creep test data and the corresponding calibrated gap span
creep model simulation results for a 4.0-inch pipe at a high pressure loading condition and 90C fluid temperature
respectively. It is shown that the calibrated gap span creep model is conservative in terms of over-predicting the

ingress measured in the small-scale tests.

Barrier gap span creep analysis of a dynamic riser

As an example, the gap span creep model is used to analyze the 6 mm PVDF barrier in a 3.0-inch dynamic riser assumed in an operating condition with 5000 psi pressure at
different fluid temperatures and at 1,500 m water depth.
The PVDF barrier layer gap span analysis, excluding creep influence in the riser with 90C fluid temperature is performed, and the gap span creep model is then used to
predict the barrier gap span creep performance after 20 years of field service. Figure 7 is a simulation of the gap span analysis without creep effects in the dynamic riser
with 90C fluid temperature.
Figure 8 shows the simulation results for this dynamic riser gap span with creep analysis based on 20 years of field service life at a 90C fluid temperature.

Figure 7

Simulation of dynamic riser gap span analysis without

creep

Figure 8

Simulation of dynamic riser gap span with creep analysis

next: Page 3/

menu
Analysis of the creep behavior of the polymer barrier layer in unbonded flexible pipes under different fluid temperatures

Download

/previous: Page 2
Comparison between the dynamic riser gap span without creep simulation results and the gap span with creep simulation results shows that due to the 20-year creep effect
of the PVDF material at 90C fluid temperature, the corresponding percentage of the remaining barrier thickness has decreased from 97.0% to 95.87%. However, the APIs
criterion of an allowable minimum 70% of the barrier wall thickness is still satisfied.
Figures 9a, 9b and 9c show the creep analysis for this production riser at different fluid temperatures. In the analysis, the risers service time is 20 years with an operating
pressure of 5000 psi, and three different fluid temperatures of 70C, 90C and 110C are applied respectively to this riser.

Figures 9a

Gap span creep analysis at 70C fluid temperature

Figure 9b

Gap span creep analysis at 90C fluid temperature

Figure 9c

Gap span creep analysis at 110C fluid temperature

Figures 9(a) to 9(c) show the simulation results of the barrier gap span creep performance after 20 years
of service. It can be seen that when the higher fluid temperature is applied to the riser, the barrier gap
span creep ingress will be greater.
Figure 10 shows the normalized maximum ingresses versus the 20-year service period for the PVDF
barrier gap span creep analysis. By assuming that the normalized maximum ingress for the PVDF barrier
is equal to 100% at the 110C fluid temperature, the corresponding normalized maximum ingresses at
the fluid temperature of 90C and 70C are 87.69% and 79.63% respectively. The corresponding
minimum percentages of the remaining barrier thickness at 110C, 90C and 70C fluid temperatures are
equal to 95.14%, 95.87% and 96.43% respectively.

Figure 10

Normalized maximum ingresses at different fluid temperatures

Conclusions
This paper presents the methodology for gap span creep analysis of the polymer barrier material. The gap span model implemented with the polymer creep model is
referred to as the gap span creep model, which was calibrated and validated against small-scale creep tests with barrier samples extracted from actual pipe samples.
Comparisons between the simulation results of the calibrated gap span creep model and the corresponding small-scale creep tests show that the model predictions are
overly conservative for PVDF material over a fluid temperature range of up to 110C at high pressure loading conditions. This conservative model is designed to include
additional conservatism due to the limitation of the available test data at present, which may affect the polymer barrier gap span creep prediction results in real pipes. As
more gap span creep sample test data becomes available, the gap span creep model will be further improved to effectively predict the polymer barrier gap span creep
behavior.

Acknowledgements
The authors would like to thank the testing technicians of Wellstream Flexibles for their contribution to the small-scale gap span creep tests on the PVDF polymer materials
and Wellstream Flexibles for its continuous support of this program.

References
[1] ANSYS v11 Help Documentation, 2.5 Data Tables- Implicit Analysis, 2.5.8 Creep Equations
[2] Findley W.N., Lai J.S., and Onaran K., Creep and Relaxation of Nonlinear Viscoelastic Materials with an Introduction to Linear Visco-elasticity, Dover Publications Inc.,
New York, 1989
[3] ANSYS v11 Help Documentation, 9.3 Creep Material Curve Fitting
[4] Wellstream International Ltd., 06 Wellstream Creep Analysis, 2006
[5] Wellstream International Ltd., Gap Span Analysis v2.1 Theory Manual, Rev 1, 8 August 2009. (NPR-T-0016)
[6] ANSYS v11 Help Documentation, 8.4 Modelling Material Nonlinearities
[7] Qiu L., and Zhang J, Creep Analysis for an Unbonded Flexible Pipe Barrier, Proceedings of OMAE 2006, Hamburg, Germany, June 4-9, 2006
[8] Wellstream International Ltd., Gap Span Creep Analysis Methodology for the Barrier Layer in an Unbonded Flexible Pipe, R046E028, Rev 3, June 2011
[9] Shen Y., Zhao J., Tan Z., and Sheldrake T., Influence of Bore Pressure on the Creep Behaviour of Polymer Barrier Layer Inside an Unbonded Flexible Pipe, Proceedings of
OMAE 2011, Rotterdam, The Netherlands, June 19-24, 2011