ICPTT 2009 2009 ASCE

1219

Stress and Strain Analysis of Buried Pipeline Subject to Mine Subsidence

Xiao-lin Wang1 and Jian Shuai2

Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by Kungliga Tekniska Hogskola on 03/10/16. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

Faculty of Petroleum Engineering, China University of Petroleum, Changping, Beijing; email:

xl_bj@126.com
2
Faculty of Mechanical and Electronic Engineering, China University of Petroleum, Changping,
Beijing; email: shuaij@cup.edu.cn
ABASTRCT
Pipeline laid across mine area is threatened by potential mining-induced subsidence. To
investigate stress distribution of buried pipeline across subsidence-prone area, an analytical
method is proposed based on the assumption that pipeline bending curve is described with the
ground deformation predicted by Probability Function Integration Method (PFIM). Basic
equation of pipeline physical elongation is derived considering of pipe-soil friction and pipematerial nonlinearity. Based on displacement coordination equation, axial strain of pipeline is
calculated by iterative solving method, while bending strain by geometry method. Furthermore,
two simple equations are derived to evaluate pipeline stress and bending individually. With
proposed method, stress and strain distributions of pipeline laid in subsidence area with different
crossing angle are predicted and analyzed. The results of pipeline stress and strain by proposed
method are close to that of finite element analysis.
INTRODUCTION
Long-distance pipeline laid across mine area is threaten by potential ground subsidence due to
underground mining activities (Gennaro, 2000). Although it is restricted that pipeline should be
designed and laid away from unsteady regions (GB 50251, 2003), in some areas, pipeline is still
subject to potential threats of ground subsidence due to the development of mine gob (stoped out
space of mine) which grows with mining process. Mine subsidence induces ground surface
settlement and soil deformation which could result in pipeline bending and axial deformation,
more seriously, buckling or rupture (Kiefner, 1987).
In order to investigate stress field in buried thin pipelines resulting from ground subsidence due
to long-wall mining, Peng (Peng et al, 1987) developed a method to predict stress distribution of
pipeline on assumptions that ground subsidence can be predicted by PFIM well and no relative
movement between pipeline and ground soil occurs. Hucka (Hucka et al, 1986) determined the
magnitude of pipeline strain and stress by mining-induced subsidence strain and slope. However,
the above two analytical methods both ignored the interaction between pipeline and ground soil
which could result in pipeline deformation in longitudinal direction (Wang et al, 2008).
Additionally, both methods focus upon elastic deformation of pipeline only. So, American
Society of Civil Engineers (ASCE, 2001) recommends to evaluate the effect of mine subsidence
on buried pipeline using estimates of the ground displacement profiles (e.g., Peng) together with
the Finite Element Method (FEM) taking into account pipe-soil interaction in the vertical,
transverse, as well as longitudinal directions.

ICPTT 2009

ICPTT 2009 2009 ASCE

1220

Based on the non-linear FEM, the authors have investigate the effects of mining-induced 3D
ground deformation on pipeline considering pipe-soil interaction, non-linear pipe-material and
pipeline route in subsidence area (Wang et al, 2008). This paper develops an analytical method
to determine the stress and strain distribution of buried pipeline subjected to 3D mine subsidence.

Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by Kungliga Tekniska Hogskola on 03/10/16. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

ANALYSIS MODEL OF BURIED PIPELINE IN SUBSIDENCE AREA

Analysis Model of Pipeline
Underground mining activity induces ground surface 3D deformation. With the development of
mine gob, pipeline could cross subsidence area with any angle (Figure. 1). Ground subsidence
and transverse movement result in pipeline bend in vertical and lateral directions, while ground
longitudinal movement results in pipeline tensile and compressive deformation in different
segments.

Figure 1. Pipeline across mining subsidence area

(abcd: mine gob underground, a'b'c'd': ground subsidence area, BE: buried pipeline)
As illustrated in Figure 1, analysis model of pipeline across mining subsidence area is built as
follow:
W0 and V0 are the maximum subsidence and transverse displacement of ground
respectively, while B and E are the start and the end of pipeline in subsidence area.
C is the center of subsidence basin, while C1-C-C2 is the plane bottom of the basin
which often occurs in long-wall mine or mine gob with long strike distance.
q and p are the loads of ground settlement and transverse movement on pipeline.
Ground movement along pipeline induces axial friction ( f ), the direction and scope
of which should be determined by relative movement between ground soil and
pipeline.
In the analysis model above, axial friction f can be determined by pipe-soil interaction model
(ASCE, 2001). However, q and p are difficult to be determined because the length of pipeline in
subsidence area is usually very long that makes pipeline be sensitive to ground deformation and
do not have the ability to resist ground subsidence. If pipeline is enough thin or flexible,
pipeline bending deformation can be described with ground deformation in vertical and
transverse directions.

Figure 2. Analysis model of pipeline across mining subsidence area

ICPTT 2009

Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by Kungliga Tekniska Hogskola on 03/10/16. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

ICPTT 2009 2009 ASCE

1221

Prediction of Ground Deformation

PFIM, the widest accepted method in mining engineering, is used to predict ground deformation
in three steps (Zhang et al, 2003):
(1) Ground displacements in vertical ( W0(x) ) and transverse ( U0(x) ) directions in strike profile
of mining gob:
W 0 ( x) = W ( x) W ( x l )
(1a)
0
U ( x) = U ( x) U ( x l )
(1b)

W ( x) =

W0

x) + 1
erf (
2
r

U ( x ) = bW0 e

Where erf (

x) =

x2
r2

(1c)
(1d)

e u du is the probability integration function, W0=Mqcos is the

maximum subsidence value, M is height of coal seamq is the subsidence factor, is coal seam
dip angle, r=H / tan is the radius of major influence, H is mining depth, tan is tangent of major
influence angle, l is the calculation length of mine gob and b is the displacement factor.
(2) Ground displacements in vertical ( W0(y) ) and transverse ( U0(y) ) directions in oblique
profile of mining gob:
W 0 ( y ) = W ( y; t1 ) W ( y L; t 2 )
(2a)
0
U ( y ) = U ( y; t1 ) U ( y L; t 2 )
(2b)
W ( y; t i ) =

W0

y ) + 1
erf (
ri
2

(2c)

y2
2

ri
U ( y; ti ) = bW
+ W ( y; ti )ctg
(2d)
i 0e
Where t1/t2 respectively denotes the parameter of downward/upward mining, r1/r2 is
downward/upward major influence radius, L is the calculation length of oblique face and is
transference angle of major influence.
(3) On the assumption of mine gob being rectangular, ground displacements in vertical ( W (x,
y)), longitudinal ( U (x, y, )) and lateral ( U (x, y, + 2 )) directions at any point along pipeline
can be predicted as follow:
1 0
W ( x, y ) =
W ( x)W 0 ( y )
(3a)
W0

U ( x, y , ) =

1
U 0 ( x)W 0 ( y ) cos + U 0 ( y )W 0 ( x) sin
W0

U ( x, y, + 90) =

1
U 0 ( x)W 0 ( y ) sin + U 0 ( y )W 0 ( x) cos
W0

(3b)
(3c)

Where is anticlockwise angle from strike direction to normal direction of pipeline thus + 2
denotes the axial direction of pipeline.
Whereas experience values being recommend in mine regulation, all parameters of PFIM should
be surveyed and verified according to local condition of mine.

ICPTT 2009

ICPTT 2009 2009 ASCE

1222

Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by Kungliga Tekniska Hogskola on 03/10/16. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

Pipeline Bending Curve

Referring to the method proposed by Peng (Peng et al, 1987), critical external diameter of buried
flexible pipeline can be determined as follow:
r 2 e he + p t
Dt+
(4)

5tEW0

Where D is critical external diameter of pipeline, t is pipeline wall thickness, he is buried depth of
pipeline, e is effective unit weight of overlying soil, p is effective unit weight of pipe material
and E is Yongs modulus of pipe material.
If the actual pipeline diameter is smaller than the calculating critical value (D), the pipeline is
flexible enough and pipeline bending curve can be described with the ground deformation
along it.
According to Figure 1, a point on pipeline in subsidence area can be located as:
x = X + s cos
(5)

y = Y + s sin
Where s is the distance between the point and start point B (X , Y).
Further more, pipeline bending curve can be determined as follow:
u = s

0
0
0
0
(6)
v = U ( x)W ( y ) cos + U ( y )W ( x) sin W0

0
0
w = W ( x)W ( y ) W0
Where v is pipeline lateral bending curve and w is vertical bending curve.
STRAIN AND STRESS CALULATION
Axis Strain and Stress due to Pipe-soil Friction
According to pipeline deformation and axial friction, pipeline is sectioned into three segments:
AB, BD1 and D1C (Figure 2). Being laid out of subsidence area, AB is straight without bending
and suffers from axial friction of ground soil only. Assuming that axial load at point A is zero
and the friction along AB is uniform, the balance equation of axial load is:
f LAB = N B
(7)
Where NB is the axial load of B and f is the equivalent friction of pipe-soil which can be
determined as follow (ASCE, 2001):
f = Dkc + 0.5 Dhe e (1 + K 0 ) tan
(8)
Where k is adhesion factor, c is soil cohesion representative of the soil backfill, K0 is coefficient
of pressure at rest and is interface angle of friction for pipe and soil.
Axis stress of pipeline at any point on AB is:
= ( N B + f s) A
(9)
Where A is the area of pipeline cross-section.
Substituting Ramberg-Osgood constitutive model of stress-strain into Eqn. (9) yields:
n

a
a = 1 +
(10)

E 1+ n s

ICPTT 2009

ICPTT 2009 2009 ASCE

1223

Where a is the axis strain of pipeline, a and n are the parameters of Ramberg-Osgood and is
the yielding stress of pipe-material.
Therefore, physical elongation of AB is:
n
fL2AB 1
fLAB
a
+
e1 =
(11)

EA 2 (1 + n)(2 + n) A s

For pipeline segment of BD1, the balance equation of axial load can be written as:

Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by Kungliga Tekniska Hogskola on 03/10/16. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

N cos v cos w = N B + f cos v cos w ds = f LAB + cos v cos w ds

B

(12)

Where v is the transverse angle of pipeline and w is the subsidence angle.

Generally, the area of subsidence is large and the ground subsidence is relative flat. So v and w
are relative small thus Eqn. (12) can be simplified as follow:
N = f ( LAB + s )
(13)
The physical elongation of BD1 is:
n
D1 N
a N
2
2
1 +
e2 =
(14)

1 + v + w ds
B EA
n
A
(1
)
+

s
Where D1 is the dividing point of the direction of axial friction where physical elongation of
pipeline coordinates with ground displacement in longitudinal direction:
e1 + e2 = U ( D1 )
(15)
Balance equation of axial load of D1C is simplified as:
N = f ( LAB + 2LBD s )
(16)
And the physical elongation of D1C is:
n
C N
a N
2
2
1 +
e3 =
(17)

1 + v + w ds
D1 EA
(1 + n) A s
Pipeline across subsidence area has the coordination relation between pipeline physical
elongation and geometrical elongation. Being the bottom center of ground subsidence, point C is
relative motionless in longitudinal direction. Also, pipeline deformation in longitudinal direction
is quite small. On the assumption that axial displacement of pipeline at point C is zero, the
coordination equation of pipeline is:
p L
(18)
e1 + e2 + e3 = BC
BC
p = C 1 + v2 + w2 ds is the geometrical elongation of pipeline.
Where BC
B

Simultaneous equations above can be iteratively solved to get the length of AB, BD1 and D1C.
Furthermore, axial load, axis strain and stress of pipeline can be calculated conveniently. During
the procedure of iterative solving, if pipeline physical elongation at point B ( e1 ) is smaller than
ground displacement in longitudinal direction, friction of pipe-soil on BD1 is same with that of
D1C (namely: length of BD1 is zero). For the case of plane bottom of subsidence basin, strain and
stress of C1C can be calculated on the assumption that pipe-soil friction of the segment linearly
reduces from f to zero. Workflow of the method is illustrated in Figure 3. Similarly, strain and
stress of C-E-F can be calculated too.

ICPTT 2009

ICPTT 2009 2009 ASCE

1224

soil

Mine
ground/pipeline
deformation

pipeline
axial soil spring

Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by Kungliga Tekniska Hogskola on 03/10/16. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

LAB=LAB+

pipeline
geometric
elongation

NB , N
pipeline physical elongation

Initial LAB

coordinationYES
equation?

NO

coordination NO
equation?
YES

LBD<LBC

LAB , NB

YES

LBD=LBD+

NO

B
physical elongation
<ground movement

LAB=LAB+

NO

Initial LAB

YES
axis strain

Figure 3. Workflow of pipeline stress & strain calculation

Stress due to Temperature and Internal Pressure
Stress due to different temperature should be taken into account:
t = E T
(19)
Where is coefficient of thermal expansion and T is the difference between operation
temperature and installation temperature of pipeline.
Also, stress due to internal pressure is:
pa = ph = PD 2t
(20)

Where is Poissons ratio, ph is the hoop stress due to internal pressure, P is internal pressure
and t is pipe-wall thickness.
If pipeline stiffness due to temperature and pressure can be ignored, two kinds of stresses above
can be simply cumulated on the axis stress of pipeline.
Bending Strain
Bending strain due to pipeline deformation is calculated geometrically as:
b = D /(2 )
(21)
Where is curvature radius of pipeline bending curve, which can be determined by spatial
direction vector method as follow:

(u " v ' v " u ') 2 + (v " w ' w " v ') 2 + ( w " u ' u " w ') 2

( u

+ v2 + w2 )

3/ 2

Where u=s, v and w is relative quite small thus the equation above can be simplified
1
= v "2 + (v " w ' w " v ') 2 + w "2

ICPTT 2009

(22)

(23)

ICPTT 2009 2009 ASCE

1225

Where a is total axis strain due to pipe-soil friction, pipeline deformation, temperature and
internal pressure.
VALIDATION OF THE PROPOSED METHOD

To validate the results of the proposed method, a computer program (PMSA) is developed and
the analytical predictions are compared to the results from FEM (Wang et al, 2008). Four cases of
gas pipelines with different mining parameters and different pipeline geometry are taken into
account (Table. 1). In cases A1 and A2, pipelines are laid just in the strike profile of mine
subsidence above mine gob, while in B1 and B2, pipelines are laid athwart subsidence area (
30in Figure. 1).
Table 1. Cases of pipeline across mine subsidence
cases
A1
A2
B1
B2

H/m
150
150
200
200

M/m
2
2
3
3

mining
L / m L /m
200
40
200
40
300
200
300
200

b
0.25
0.25
0.25
0.25

q
0.78
0.78
0.8
0.8

D / mm t / mm
1024
18
1024
18
660
8
660
8

pipeline
/ MPa n / a he / m P / MPa
550
11 / 24
2
0
550
11 / 24
2
8
480
9 / 30 1.6
4.5
480
9 / 30 1.6
4.5

T /
0
0
0
30

Results of mining-induced ground deformation are illustrated in Figure 4. In cases A1 and A2,
ground deformation includes displacements in vertical and longitudinal directions without
transverse movement. While in cases B1 and B2, obvious transverse movement is found.
Calculated by Eqn. (4), critical pipeline diameters of A1/A2 and B1/B2 are 2197mm (> 1024 mm)
and 4131mm (> 660 mm). So the proposed method is suitable for these cases and bending curves
of pipelines can be described with predicted ground deformation.
1

2
U-trans

U-axial

W-subs
displacement(m)

U-axial
displacement(m)

Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by Kungliga Tekniska Hogskola on 03/10/16. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

Maximum Strain of Pipeline

The interaction between axial bending strains is quantified by determining the exact distribution
of strains and stresses on the pipeline cross-section. The maximum strain on the cross-section is
given by:
= a + b
(24)

-1

U-trans

W-subs

1
0
-1
-2
-3

-2
0

80
160
240
longitudinal distance(m)

320

100
200
300
400
longitudinal distance(m)

500

(a) A1/A2
(b) B1/B2
Figure 4. Prediction results of ground deformation
Compared in Figure 5, maximum axial stresses of four cases predicted by PMSA are close to that
of FEA. For cases A1 and A2, maximum axial stresses locate at the top of pipeline cross-section
because pipeline bending occurs in vertical direction only. While for cases B1 and B2, spatial

ICPTT 2009

ICPTT 2009 2009 ASCE

1226

bending makes maximum axial stresses locates at different points on cross-section that results in
stress distribution jump. Bending combined with tension dominates the main deformation of
pipeline near the boundary of subsidence area, while bending combined with compression is
main for pipeline in bottom of subsidence.
300

150
PMSA-A1
FEA-A1
PMSA-A2
FEA-A2

stress(MPa)

stress(MPa)

50

PMSA-B1
PMSA-B2

200

0
-50

FEA-B1
FEA-B2

100
0
-100
-200

-100
0

80
160
240
longitudinal distance(m)

320

100
200
300
longitudinal distance(m)

400

500

Figure 5. Maximum axial stress distributions of pipelines of four cases

In the proposed method, total strain of pipeline is the resultant of axis strain and bending strain.
So strain components can be calculated and analyzed in detail. As shown in Figure 6 (a), axis
strain of A1 near-linear decreases from the maximum positive (tensile) value to negative
(compressive). The results show that pipe-soil friction in axial direction induces local tension and
compression in pipeline. So the effect of relative displacement between pipeline and ground soil
should not be simply ignored. In order to investigate strain distribution of pipeline in subsidence
with plane bottom (Figure 2, C1-C-C2), case A3 is designed with long strike distance (400m)
based on A1. As shown in Figure 6 (b), bending strain of pipeline in subsidence bottom is zero
and the resultant axial strain is equal to axis strain. In the area of major influence radius (0150m), strain distribution is nearly same to that of A1. The reason is that ground deformation in
major influence area of subsidence is relative unchanged during mining procedure once ground
subsidence is close to the maximum value. So it can be concluded that pipeline strain and stress
are mainly influenced by the ground deformation in major influence area.
0.4

0.4
axis
bending
resultant

axis
bending

0.2
strain()

0.2
strain()

Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by Kungliga Tekniska Hogskola on 03/10/16. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

100

0.0
-0.2

resultant
0.0
-0.2
-0.4

-0.4
0

80
160
240
longitudinal distance(m)

320

80
160
240
320
longitudinal distance(m)

(a) A1

400

(b) A3
Figure 6. Strain distributions of A1 and A3

SIMPLE EVALUATION METHOD

According to the proposed analytical method, pipeline deformation, strain and stress are typically
influenced by the parameters of mine, pipeline and backfill soil. To determine the key influencing

ICPTT 2009

ICPTT 2009 2009 ASCE

1227

Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by Kungliga Tekniska Hogskola on 03/10/16. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

factors, a simple analytical model is proposed on the assumption that 1) pipeline is laid in the
strike profile above mine gob, 2) pipeline in major influence area (BC1 in Figure 2) surfers from
uniform axial pipe-soil friction only and 3) point B and point C1 are relatively fixed. The
analytical model of pipeline in major influence area is illustrated in Figure 7.

Figure 7. Simple analytical model of pipeline in major influence area

Ignoring pipeline bending of BC1, axis stress at B can be calculated by balance equation of axial
load:
f r r
B =
= [ kc + 0.5he e (1 + K0 ) tan ]
(25)
A
t
In order to reduce the effect of pipe-soil friction on pipeline, fine sand can be backfilled before
overlying soil (namely: kc=0). Defining = 0.5 e (1 + K 0 ) tan as backfill factor, Eqn. (25)
becomes:
rh
B = e
(26)
t
By PFIM, the maximum curvature of subsidence is 1 = 1.52W0 r 2 , substituting it into Eqn. (21)
yields the maximum bending strain:
W
b max = 0.76D 20
(27)
r
Eqn. (26) shows that major influence radius, backfill medium buried depth and pipe-wall
thickness are four key factors of pipeline axial stress. By the equation, pipeline stress level can be
easily evaluated. While for Eqn. (27), pipeline diameter, maximum subsidence value and major
influence radius are three key factors to determine pipeline bending strain. According to the two
simple equations, thicker pipe-wall, shallower buried depth and fine sand around pipeline are
recommended for pipeline design and laying in mine area.
CONCLUSION

An analytical method has been developed for the strain and stress prediction and analysis of
buried pipeline across mining-induce subsidence area. In the method, pipeline bending curve is
described with ground deformation predicted by PFIM based on the criterion of flexible
pipeline. Basic equation of physical elongation of pipeline is derived according to pipe-soil
interaction in longitudinal direction, pipeline stress and strain are calculated with iterative solving
method based on displacement coordination equation. And non-linear stress-strain relation of
pipe-material, operating pressure and temperature are considered as well. Pipeline stress
distribution calculated by proposed method is consistent to that of finite element model and the
method is suitable for investigating deformation and stress of pipeline laid athwart mining
subsidence with any angle. Furthermore, two simple equations are proposed to evaluate axil

ICPTT 2009

ICPTT 2009 2009 ASCE

1228

stress and bend strain of pipeline, by which influencing factors of pipeline stress can be analyzed
well. The proposed method provides a new way to investigate pipeline in mine area.

Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by Kungliga Tekniska Hogskola on 03/10/16. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

REFERENCES

American Society of Civil Engineers (ASCE). (2001). Guideline for the design of buried steel
pipeline, 43.
Gennaro, G. M. (2000). Pipelines exposed to coal mine subsidence face risk of serious damage.
J. Pipeline and Gas Journal, 227(11): 37-40.
GB 50251. (2003). Code for design of gas transmission pipeline engineering-National Standard
of the Peoples Republic of China, China Planning Press, Beijing.
Hucka, V. J., and Blair, C. K., and Kimball, E. P. (1986). Mine subsidence effects on a
pressurized natural gas pipeline. J. Mining Engineering, 38(10):980-984.
Kiefner, J. F. (1987). Exposing line reduces strain during subsidence. J. Oil and Gas Journal,
85(26): 66-68.
Peng, S. S., and Luo, Y. (1988). Determination of stress field in buried thin pipelines resulting
from ground subsidence due to longwall mining. J. Mining Science and Technology, 6(2):
205-216.
Wang, X. L., and Shuai, J., and Ye Y. X., and et. al. (2008). Investigating the effects of mining
subsidence on buried pipeline using finite element modeling. 7th International Pipeline
Conference. Calgary, Alberta, Canada: IPC2008-64250.
Zhang, X. C., and Qian, M.G., and et al. (2003). Chinas Coal Mining Science and Technology,
China Coal Industry Publishing House, Beijing.

ICPTT 2009