Y.-J.

Chiou
Professor,
Department of Civil Engineering,
National Cheng Kung University,
Tainan, Taiwan 701, R.O.C.
S.-Y. Chi
Engineer,
Geotechnical Research Center,
Sinotech Engineering Consultant, Inc.,
Taipei 105, Taiwan, R.O.C.;
former Graduate Student, National Cheng
Kung University, Taiwan, R.O.C.
Stu.dy on Buckling of Offshore
peltnes
The beam vertical mode of buckling and beam lateral mode of buckling of offshore
pipelines were investigated. The pipeline was modeled as an elasto-plastic, infinitely
long beam with localized imperfection. The seabed was modeled as a fluid-saturated,
layered porous medium. The boundary element method, finite element method, and
finite difference method were applied for the numerical study. The results show that
the buckling behavior of beam vertical mode and beam lateral mode is essentially
influenced by the buried depth, initial imperfection, and incline angle. The pipe tends
to buckle in the beam lateral mode for the pipe with shallower buried depth, larger
imperfection height, and smaller incline angle. The critical buried depth that sepa-
rates beam vertical mode and beam lateral mode is shallower for smaller excess
pore pressure.

Introduction imperfection, buried depth, and incline angle on the buckling

behavior are considered. In addition, the critical buried depth
The transportation of oil in the offshore pipeline frequently that separates beam vertical mode and beam lateral mode is
induces very large temperature difference or high internal pres- examined.
sure. The temperature change or internal pressure causes the
axial compression and results in the buckling of the pipeline.
Because of the expensive cost of construction, most of the off- Problem Formulation
shore pipelines are shallowly buried or directly laid on the The beam vertical mode of buckling (Fig. 1 (a)) and beam
seabed. On the basis of the buried conditions, the offshore pipe- lateral mode of buckling (Fig. 1 (b)) are the major buckling
lines tend to exhibit beam mode of buckling (Yun and Kyria- modes of offshore pipelines. Referring to Fig. 1, the pipeline is
kides, 1990) and buckle in either beam vertical mode or beam modeled as an elasto-plastic, infinitely long beam with localized
lateral mode (Hobbs, 1984). imperfection. The Biot's model (Biot, 1941 ) of fluid saturated
Hobbs (1984) studied the thermal buckling of pipeline in- porous medium is adopted to model the seabed, and the seabed
duced by the transportation of high temperature fluid. He used is assumed to be a fluid saturated, layered porous medium
perfect pipe and the model of small deflection beam-column on (Chiou and Chi, 1994). The effect of temperature change and
rigid foundation to analyze the thermal buckling behaviors of internal pressure is expressed in the equivalent axial force Pe
beam vertical mode and beam lateral mode. He pointed out that (Hobbs, 1984)
the pipe tends to buckle in beam lateral mode unless the pipe
is buried in trench. He also found out that the beam lateral Pe =- EA [ ceAT + P2Et
~D(o.5-u)] (1)
mode 3 (Fig. 4) is the critical buckling mode. Similar studies
were presented by Taylor and Gan (1986), Ju and Kyriakides
(1988), and Pedersen and Michelsen (1988), but they consid- where E is Young's modulus, A is area of pipe cross section,
ered the effect of initial imperfection. They all pointed out that a is the coefficient of thermal expansion, A T is the temperature
the structural imperfection is an influential factor on the buck- change, Pi is internal pressure, D is pipe diameter, t is pipe
ling of offshore pipelines, and the critical temperature is highly thickness, and u is Poisson's ratio.
dependent on the imperfection.
Most of the previous researchers assumed the seabed to be 1 Beam Vertical Mode of Buckling. Referring to Fig. 2,
rigid regardless of the offshore pipelines buckling in beam verti- let (X0, Y0) and (X, Y) be the position, 00 and 0 be the slope,
cal mode or beam lateral mode. However, the modulus of seabed and dS and dS be the length of an element in undeformed and
soil is usually smaller than that of pipe materials. The rigid deformed configurations, dS = ( t + e)dS, where e is the axial
seabed seems to be a justified assumption for the beam lateral strain. The governing equations for detached pipe AB are
mode of buckling. The effect of seabed modulus, especially for
dX
some soft seabed soils, on the beam vertical mode of buckling --=(1 + e ) cosO (2)
seems to be not negligible. The uplifted behavior for the beam dS
vertical mode of buckling is affected by the seabed stiffness, dY
and the interactions of seabed and pipe need further study. - (1 + e) sin 0 (3)
This study concentrates on the investigation of beam vertical dS
mode and beam lateral mode of buckling of offshore pipelines dOt dO
and their interactions. The pipeline is modeled as an elasto- K. . . . . (4)
plastic, infinitely long beam with localized imperfection. The
dS dS
seabed is assumed to be a fluid-saturated, layered porous me- dV
dium (Chiou and Chi, 1994). The interactions of seabed and -- - -(1 + e ) ( m + mo + q. + f u sin O) (5)
dS
beam vertical mode of buckling are studied. The effects of initial
dP~
--= (1 + e ) f , cosO (6)
dS
Contributed by the OMAE Division for publication in the JOURNALoF OFF-
SHOREMECHANICSAND ARCTICENGINEERING.Manuscript received by the OMAE
Division, I994; revised manuscript received October 23, 1995. Associate Techni- dM
cal Editor: M. Henriksen. -- = (1 + e)(Vcos 0 + P~ sin 0) (7)
dS
6 2 / Vol. 118, FEBRUARY 1996 Copyright 1996 by ASME T r a n s a c t i o n s of t h e A S M E
Downloaded 06 Apr 2011 to 140.116.136.193. Redistribution subject to ASME license or copyright; see http://www.asme.org/terms/Terms_Use.cfm
 "x(0) = 0

Ff f r(;) = 0
(ddFM}:lJAd JAdE Ide 0(0) = 0
LJA d YA-~h2dAA v(0) = 0
(12)
where K is the curvature of the flexure curve, V and P~ are the M(~) =M*
vertical and horizontal forces, M is the bending moment, and v(;) = v*
m and mo are the weight of pipe and inner content per unit
length along the pipeline. F = - ( P o cos 0 + V sin 0) is the 0(4) = 0*
axial force, de = de + hdK, de, d e , and dt are the increments
P~(~) = P,
of total strain, axial strain, and curvature, and h is the distance
between the point and the central axis of the cross section, f .
is the seabed-pipe friction force where ~ is the uplifted length, Pl is the axial compression acting
at point B, and M*, V*, 0* are the bending moment, shear
l+K0 force, and rotation angle at point B, respectively.
f. = - - rrDHy, tan 6 (9)
2 Following the classical beam-column theory, the governing
equation of contacted pipe BC (Fig. 2) is
where K0 is the coefficient of static earth pressure, H is the
buried depth, y, is the unit weight of seabed soil, and 6 is the
ElyiO(x) - (Pi + f . x ) y " ( x ) - 2f.y'(x)
seabed-pipe friction angle, q. is the uplift resistance of the sea-
bed soil cover (Trautmann et al., 1985) = - ( m + m0 + qs) + Ely~(Xo) + D 6 (13)
[ 500N~T~DY(S), if Y ( S ) <- 0.002H
where y is the deflection of pipe, x is the distance measured
qu = ]N~T~HD, if H >_ Y ( S ) ~ 0.002H (10) from point B, Yo = f ( x o ) is the initial g e o m e t r i c imperfec-
/ tion, qs = T s H D is the weight of c o v e r seabed soil, and tr
L0, if Y(S) >-H
is the interaction traction between the pipe and the seabed
where N~ is a dimensionless seabed soil parameter (Matyas and s0il. The far-field axial c o m p r e s s i o n acting on the pipe (Fig.
Davis, 1983) 2 ( b ) ) is

7rD H
N, = 1 8H + K0tanq~ D (11) P0 = P, + f,(Ls + L~) (14)

4, is the seabed soil friction angle. On the investigation of elastic where Lf is the length of deformed pipe, Ls is the length of
pipe, the incremental elasto-plastic constitutive relations (Eq. straight pipe, and LI + Ls represents the effective length of
(8)) are replaced by K = M / E 1 , e = FLEA. The boundary axial force variation due to seabed-pipe friction resistance. The
conditions of the detached pipe are boundary conditions of the contacted pipe are

Nomenclature

A = area m0 = weight of inner content per Zm~x = displacement at maximum hori-

D = diameter of pipe
E = Young's modulus of pipe ma-
teriai
e = axial strain of pipe
F = axial force
f , = seabed-pipe friction force per
unit length
G = shear modulus of seabed soil
H = buried depth
h = distance between point and
central axis of pipe cross sec-
tion
K = bulk modulus of seabed soil
Ko = static earth pressure coefficient
K U = elements of stiffness matrix
Ks = equivalent Stiffness matrix of
seabed soil under pipe
k ~ coefficient of permeability
/ ~ = length of deformed pipe
L , = length of straight pipe
Ls + L s = effective length of axial force
variation due to seabed-pipe
friction resistance
M = bending moment
m = weight of pipe per unit length
along pipeline
unit length along pipeline
Nh, No = dimensionless seabed soil
parameters
N~ = equivalent force vector of
pore pressure
n = porosity'
P0 = far-field axial force
Pi = axial compression acting at
contacted point
Po = horizontal force
Py = yield axial force, Py = ~oTvDt
p = excess pore pressure
pl = internal pressure
qh lateral resistance of seabed
= K = curvature
soil
qu = uplift resistance of seabed
soil
t = pipe thickness; time
tr = interaction traction between
pipe and seabed soil
ui = component of seabed soil
displacement
V = vertical force; shear force
(X0, Y0),
(X, Y) = position
zontal force
a = coefficient of thermal expansion
/3 = compressibility o f pore fluid
6 = seabed-pipe friction angle
60 = imperfection height
6~ = imperfection height for beam ver-
tical mode, 6, = 60 sin ~0
6h = imperfection height for beam lat-
eral mode, 6h = 6O COS ~0
ekk = volumetric strain
q~ = seabed soil friction angle
Ys = unit weight of seabed soil
Yw = unit weight of pore fluid
v = Poisson's ratio
00, 0 = slope
cro = initial yield stress of pipe mate-
rial
Crvol = total volumetric stress
r = dimensionless time, r = 2 G k t l
"ywD2
~O = incline angle of structural imper-
fection
= uplifted length of pipe

Journal of Offshore Mechanics and Arctic Engineering FEBRUARY 1996, Vol. 118 / 63
Downloaded 06 Apr 2011 to 140.116.136.193. Redistribution subject to ASME license or copyright; see http://www.asme.org/terms/Terms_Use.cfm
 Brentm's method (More and Cosnard, 1980) are used to solve
the equations of uplifted pipe. The equations for contacted
pipe are solved by the finite element method. The boundary
element method for fluid-saturated layered soils (Chiou and
Chi, 1994), which based on the successive stiffness method
(Maier and Novati, 1987) and uncouple boundary element
method (Kuroki et al., 1982), is adopted to analyze the re-
sponse of seabed. The effect of pore pressure dissipation on
the pipe response is investigated through the equivalent nodal
force vector of pore pressure. Using the continuity and compat-
ibility conditions of seabed-pipe interface, the equation of con-
tacted pipe yields
Axial Load
[Kyyq-ClKs Kyo]~y~={Fy+ClSs~
Koy Koo J [ 0 J Fo J (18)

where y and 0 are vectors of nodal displacement and nodal

(a) rotation, Kyy, Kyo, Koy, and K0e are the elements of stiffness
matrix, Ks is the equivalent stiffness matrix of seabed soil under
the pipe, Fy and F0 are the external force vectors, Ns is the
equivalent force vector of pore pressure; and Cl is a constant.
The elements of stiffness matrix and Ca are given in detail in
the Appendix.
2 Beam Lateral Mode of Buckling. The lateral mode 3
(Fig. 4) was found to be the critical buckling mode (Hobbs,
1984). The buckling behavior of lateral mode 3 is investigated
in this study. Similar to beam vertical mode of buckling, the
governing equations for large deflection pipe AC (Fig. 5) are
dX
--= (1 + e) cos 0 (19)
dS
dZ
- (1 + e) sin 0 (20)
dS
dOt dO
K -- (21)
(b) dS dS
Fig. 1 Schematic configuration of buckling of offshore pipeline: (a)
beam vertical mode, (b) beam lateral mode
Y~
k
Deformed pipe
y(0) = 0 Aq y
y(oo) = 0 ~/~---~ea floor

0(0) = - 0 "
(15)
0(_+~) = 0
V(0) = - V * "~=X x
/ / / / / / / ~ ~ .... i/~ " ,
M(0) = M* Trenchbttn~o
The governing equations of seabed soil (Chiou and Chi,
1994) are (a)
G _
G~72ui + - - Ekk,i -- P,i : 0 (16)
1 -- 2U
_ kVzp + 1 + n f i K O p + 1 0avo_______j 0 (17)
Yw K Ot K Ot
where ui is the component of seabed soil displacement, G is
the shear modulus of seabed soil, p is the excess pore pressure
(compression is positive), k is the coefficient of permeability, I.p
7w is the unit weight of pore fluid, n is the porosity, /3 is the x(;) q
compressibility of pore fluid, Ekk is the volumetric strain, K is
the bulk modulus of seabed soil, Crvolis the total volumetric (b)
stress, trvo~= K k k , and t represents time, respectively.
The foregoing equations are solved numerically and the flow Fig. 2 (a) Geometric configuration of pipe deformation for beam vertical
chart is shown in Fig. 3. The finite difference method and mode of buckling; (b) distribution of axial force

6 4 / Vol. 118, F E B R U A R Y 1996 Transactions of the A S M E

Downloaded 06 Apr 2011 to 140.116.136.193. Redistribution subject to ASME license or copyright; see http://www.asme.org/terms/Terms_Use.cfm
 mode 1
/ i

~ ~p= p~ete~ andiiti~~e~ forspooi~od~I

mode 2
Guess effective lengthL~L.,
for small deformation part

mode 3
Guessthe shear force at S=~ and evaluate [
the responsesof smalldeformation of beam
by FEM and BEM

V mode4
[ Evaluateinelasticconstitutiverelationsofpipe (Eq.(8))[
T
I SolvotheODEsfor'argodefo~tion p= [
mode infinite

@ ~ C~ge ~iall Fig. 4 Beam lateral modes of buckling (Hobbs, 1984)

foro? P, I
x(0) = 0
z(4 + 4') = 0
0(o) = 0
i
Save current solutions as initial guess v(o) = o
for next loading step (27)
Ph(4 + 4') = P2
Check whetherthe specified M(4 + 4') = M*
No ~ is the max. value or not ?
v ( 4 + 4') = V*
0(4 + 4 ' ) = o*
where 4 and 4' are the length of sections AB and BC, Pc, M*,
Fig. 3 Flow chart for numerical analysis of beam vertical mode of buck- V*, and 0* are the axial force, bending moment, shear force, and
ling rotation at point C, respectively. Because most of the offshore
pipelines are shallowly buried or directly laid on the seabed,

dV
-- - -(1 + e){fu sin 0 z
dS /
+ sign(Z-zo)[(m +mo) tan6+ qh]} (22) Z

~Deformed pipe
dPh
= (1 + e)fu cos 0 (23)
dS
dM
-- = (1 + e)(V cos 0 + Ph sin 0) (24)
dS

' F f d'dA d'hdA ] (

I Ja de .
=) (25) lo "

LfA-~hda yad'--~'h2dA
de
(tO
_
where sign ( ) represents the sign of ( ), Zo is the initial
imperfection, Ph is the horizontal force, and qh is the lateral
resistance of seabed soil (Trautmann and O'Rourke, 1985)

[ CkNhysDZ, if Z ( S ) --< 0.4Zm~x

(26)
qh = L Nh%HD, otherwise Ph(O)

x(D ~'
where Nh is a dimensionless seabed soil parameter, Ck is the
factor of lateral seabed soil stiffness, Zmax is the displacement
(b)
at maximum horizontal force. The values of Ck and Zm~x are
given by Trautmann and O'Rourke (1985). They are summa- Fig. 5 (a) Geometric configuration of pipe deformation for beam lateral
rized in Table 1. The boundary conditions are mode of buckling; (b) distribution of axial force

J o u r n a l of O f f s h o r e M e c h a n i c s and A r c t i c Engineering F E B R U A R Y 1996, Vol. 118 / 65

Downloaded 06 Apr 2011 to 140.116.136.193. Redistribution subject to ASME license or copyright; see http://www.asme.org/terms/Terms_Use.cfm
 Table 1 Parameters of lateral stiffness (Trautmann and 1.5
O'Rourke, 1985)
Linearly elastic
Displacement at maximum ........ Elasto-plastic
Soil density force (Zmax) Factor Ck backfill medium sand
8,z~D=0.2, H=0.4m
Loose 0.13H 20 D / t = 15.3
Medium 0.08H 30 1.0
Dense 0.03H 80 (1)
Po
the effect of seabed stiffness on the pipe response of beam
lateral mode of buckling is negligible. The pipe is assumed to 0.5
be on rigid seabed for this mode. On the basis of the critical
displacement, the governing equations for small deflection pipe
CD (Fig. 5) are derived as
ElziV(x) - (P2 + f , x ) z " ( x ) - f u Z ' ( X ) + khZ(X)
iv
0.0
= - s i g n (z - zo)(m + mo) tan 6 + E1zo(Xo)
.
+ khZo(Xo),
Elzi(x) - (P2 + fuX)Z"(x) - fuZ'(X)
= - s i g n (z - z0)[(m + mo) tan 6 + Nh%HD]
if Z -- Z0 --< 0.4Zmax (28)
(a) =D)t 15.a

iv
+ Elzo (Xo) + khZo(Xo), if Z -- Z0 --> 0.4Zm~x (29) 3.0
Linearly elastic
: ...... : Elasto-plastic
3.0 2.5 Beam Vertical Hode

2.5 backfill medium sand

D/t=15.3, H=0.4m
1 6v/O=O.
2.0 0/t=58_~2~ ~//~
av/D=0.2, H=O.4m /

2.0 2 d~,yD=O.1 Po 1.5

\ {31 d~,XO=0.2
\ (4) d,/D=0.5
P, 1.5 \ _ Linearly elastic 1.0
\ ........ Elasto-plastic

1.0 0.5 / (1) G~.Zeo=lOOOO

2) " / ] (2) GM/.O'o=I.0
(3) G,~/tr0=0.01

0.5 0.0 ' I ' I ' I ' I '

20 40 60 80 1O0
"
0.0
' 20 ' 40 ~ 60 ' 80 ' 1( (b) D / t = 58

(a) D I t = 15.3 Fig. 7 Far-field axial force versus uplifted length of beam vertical mode
of buckling for pipe with different seabed soil foundations
3.0

D/t=58, H=O.4m
2.5 (1) ~,/0=0. where kh : CkNh%D is the lateral stiffness of seabed soil. The
(2) ~,/.0=0.1 far-field axial force (Fig. 5 ( b ) ) is
\ (3) 6,/D=0.2 A
2.0 ,,~lk (4) 6v/D=0"5 / Po = P2 + f , ( L f + L,) (30)

I
where LI is the length of deformed pipe, Ls is the length of
P. 1.5 straight pipe. The behavior of beam lateral mode of buckling
is also analyzed numerically, and the procedures are similar to
those of beam vertical mode of buckling, except the effect of
1.0 deformation of seabed is neglected.
f backfill medium sand I
0.5

/
k
........ Elasto-plastic
c
I Results and Discussion
The circular steel pipes with Young's modulus E = 206 GPa
0.0 and Poisson's ratio ~ = 0.3 are adopted in this study. The
2'0 4'0 : 6'0'' 8'0 ' 160
initial yielding stress or0 is 247 MPa (X52). The dimensionless
diameters (ratios of pipe diameter to thickness D / t ) are chosen
(b) D I t = 58 to be 15.3 and 58.0, respectively. The unit weight of pipe 7 is
Fig. 6 Far-field axial force versus uplifted length for beam vertical mode 78 k N / m 3. The power law constitutive relations (Tvergaard,
of buckling 1983) are used for the pipe material.

66 / Vol. 118, FEBRUARY 1996 T r a n s a c t i o n s of the A S M E

Downloaded 06 Apr 2011 to 140.116.136.193. Redistribution subject to ASME license or copyright; see http://www.asme.org/terms/Terms_Use.cfm
 3.0 sen to be 50, and the dimensionless imperfection heights 5 * are
chosen to be 0.1, 0.2, and 0.5, respectively. The same imperfec-
Lineady elastic
........ Elasto-plastic tion form is chosen for beam lateral mode of buckling, but the
2.5 variables Yo and 6~ are changed to z0 and 6h.
Beam Lateral Mode
D/t=15.3, O'o=247MPa The seabed soil foundation is chosen to be a three-layer foun-
Content=Water, H=O.4m dation. The layer thicknesses are ha = h2 = h3 = 4m, and the
2.0
dimensionless shear moduli ( G = G/oo) are G1 = 1.663, Gz =
1 6~D=O. 1.0, G3 -- 0.367. The layers are numbered from the bottom
Po 1.5 1) 2 6~D=0.1 up. Poisson's ratio us is 0.3, and the permeability k is
2 3 ,~.D=O.~ 10 -4 m/s.
The far-field axial force (P0 = Po/croTrDt) versus uplifted
1.0 length ( ~ * = ~ / D) for beam vertical mode of buckling in steady
state is shown in Fig. 6. The buried depth H is 0.4 m. It is
found that the behavior of beam vertical mode of buckling is
0.5 apparently influenced by the initial structural imperfection. The
limit loads are larger for pipe with smaller imperfection height
and larger dimensionless diameter. In addition, the beam verti-
0.0 cal mode of buckling characterizes snap through buckling for
4'0. 6b 8'0 1110
pipe with smaller imperfection heights (for example, 5* = 0.1,
0.2). However, the elastic pipe essentially behaves as stable
(a) D I t = 15.3 equilibrium with larger imperfection heights (for example, 6*
3.0

2.5
2.5 1',z0=o
2} 6h~D--O. 1
/
2.0
\ I4{ ~hyD= 2.0
Lineody elastic
....... Elasto-plastic
lJI~l 6j~D=0.1
1 8~D=0.2
1) 8~/D=0.5

P 1.5
1.5 (1/

1.0
.._.o.
Linearly elastic
........ Elasto-plostic
/./,)
,.o
Beam Lateral Mode /" //
0.5 D / t = 5 8 , ao=247MPa
Content=Wuter,H=O.4m

0.0 0.5 ~'J/'y Beam Lateral Mode

!.~ 6'0 ' 8'0 ~/"/ D/t=15.3, o'o=247MPa
Content=water

(b) O l t = 58 O - O 0 . o ' ~ " T " ~ ~ ' ~ . 0

Buried depth ( m )
Fig. 8 Far-field axial force versus uplifted length for beam lateral mode
of buckling
(a) D / t = 15.3
3.0
Y
~ 0"<:=(7 0 __ Linearly elastic
2.5 ....... Elasto-plostic "
E = (31) Beam Lateral Mode
D/t=58, eo=247MPe
E n Content=Water
2.0

where n is the material constant, n is 9.05 for material X52.

The torsional buckling is neglected. The structural imperfec-
tion height components for vertical imperfection 6~ and lateral 1.5

imperfection 6h are thus

a~ 1.0
6~ = 60 sin ~0
6h = 6O COS ~0 (32) /~hXD=0.2
0.5 ~dD=0.5
where 6o is the initial imperfection height, and ~0 is the incline
angle. The initial geometric imperfection for beam vertical
mode of buckling is assumed to be 0.0
o,o o.~ o,~ o,~ o,'8 1.0
= f ~ r o ) = 6" exp[(lx01/l*) 2 In (0.01)] (33) Buried depth ( m )

where l* = lo/D is the dimensionless half-length of initial im- (b) D I t = 58

perfection, 6" = 6 J D is the dimensionless imperfection height. Fig. 9 Far-field limit load for beam lateral mode of buckling versus bur-
The dimensionless half-length of initial imperfection l* is cho- ied depth

Journal of Offshore Mechanics and Arctic Engineering FEBRUARY 1996, Vol. 118 / 67
Downloaded 06 Apr 2011 to 140.116.136.193. Redistribution subject to ASME license or copyright; see http://www.asme.org/terms/Terms_Use.cfm
 = 0.5). Referring to Fig. 6, the effect of imperfection heights
on the behavior of beam vertical mode of buckling is dominant
for the pre-buckling behavior and limit loads. This effect be- 41.3
comes less important for post-buckling behavior as the uplifted
length increases. ~36.3 o.o6
The steady-state far-field axial force versus uplifted length
of beam vertical mode of buckling for pipe in single seabed O.OB
soil layer with different stiffness is shown in Fig. 7. The layer .R 31.3
thickness h is 12 m, and the pipe conditions are the same as E
.0.10 _______.____---------0.10
those in Fig. 6. The dimensionless shear modulus G = 10000
E 26.3 .'0.12 0.12
is used to represent the rigid foundation. It is observed that the o

pipe in single seabed soil layer with different stiffness behaves

essentially as snap-through buckling. It is interesting to find, as 21.3 .'0.14. ~ 0.14
expected, the character of pipe response and its limit load are q~ 16
apparently influenced by the seabed soil stiffness. The limit
load is larger for stiffer foundation. The effect of foundation 16.3 _036 ~ 0 . 1 8
stiffness increases as the dimensionless diameter enlarges.
The far-field axial force versus uplifted length for beam lat- 11.3
eral mode of buckling in steady state is shown in Fig. 8. One 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4
can see that the beam lateral mode also behaves as snap-through ~o/D
buckling, and the characteristics of buckling behavior are simi-
Fig. 11 Distribution of critical buried depth (DIt = 15.3)

2.5 lar to beam vertical mode. The limit loads are larger for pipe
with smaller imperfection and larger dimensionless diameter.
Elasto-Plastic Pipe The relation of far-field limit load versus buried depth for beam
D/t=15.3, cro=247MPo lateral mode of buckling in steady state is shown in Fig. 9. The
2.0 Content=Water
properties of pipe are the same as those in Fig. 8. It is found
~.XD=0.2 that, as expected, the limit loads are larger for deeper buried
~./D=0.5 depth:
1.5 The interactions of beam vertical mode and beam lateral
mode are studied by investigating the relations of far-field limit
02 loads versus buried depth. The steady-state far-field limit loads
for both beam vertical mode and beam lateral mode versus
1.0 Lotero, / / 1 2 / J /
D_ buried depth are presented in Fig. 10. The critical buried depth
that separates the beam vertical mode and beam lateral mode
is determined by the intersection of curves corresponding to
0.5 vertical mode and lateral mode. The pipe tends to beam lateral
mode if the buried depth is smaller than the critical depth.
// i: . =11.3o>o, Referring to Fig. 10, one can see that the critical buried depth
is deeper for larger dimensionless diameter. The distribution of
0.0 i I i i
o.o o.'2 0.4 o.'6 o.'8 ~ .o steady-state critical buried depth is presented in Fig. 11. It is
Buried depth (m) found that the critical buried depth is deeper for smaller incline
angle and higher imperfection height. This finding indicates that
(a) DIt = 15.3 the pipe tends to beam lateral mode of buckling for pipe with
smaller incline angle and higher imperfection height.
4.0
The variation of far field limit load of beam vertical mode
for different pore pressure dissipation times is presented in Fig.
Elqsto-Plastic Pipe
D/t=58, ~o=247MPa 12. The dimensionless imperfection heights for both beam verti-
Content=Water cal mode and beam lateral mode are 6u/D = ~ h / D = 0.2. The
3.0 ( )1 8~D=0.1 dimensionless times ~- = 2Gkt/'ywD 2 are chosen to be 0.04,
(2) di~D=0.2 Vertical / 0.14, 0.4, and 2.0, respectively. It is found that the limit loads
(3) 8~/D=0.5 Mode/. of beam vertical mode are larger for smaller pore pressure dissi-

a~2.0
/ ado=o.1 pation time. Thus, the critical buried depth is shallower for
smaller excess pore pressure.
Lateral/ / /
Mode,,,," / / /
Conclusions
The beam vertical mode and beam lateral mode of buckling
1.0 of offshore pipelines and their interactions were investigated
numerically. The pipeline was modeled as an elasto-plastic,
infinitely long beam with localized imperfection. The seabed
~13) H,(~0=0.5099, * =11.3") soil foundation was modeled as a fluid-saturated layered porous
g
0.0 medium. The interactions of seabed and beam vertical mode of
0.0 o.~' o.'4 o.'6 ' o.t~ 1 buckling were studied. The boundary element method for fluid
Buried depth (m) saturated layered soils (Chiou and Chi, 1994) was adopted to
analyze the response of seabed. The effect of pore pressure
(b) D I t = 58 dissipation on the pipe response is investigated through the
Fig. 10 Far-field limit loads for both beam vertical mode and beam equivalent nodal force vector of pore pressure. The effects of
lateral mode versus buried depth buried depth, initial imperfection, and incline angle on the be-

68 / Vol. 118, F E B R U A R Y 1996 T r a n s a c t i o n s of the A S M E

Downloaded 06 Apr 2011 to 140.116.136.193. Redistribution subject to ASME license or copyright; see http://www.asme.org/terms/Terms_Use.cfm
 Chiou, Y. J., Chi, S. Y., and Lin, Y. S., 1993, " A Stability Analysis of Shal-
lowly Buried Pipelines in a Layered Medium," Journal of the Chinese Institute
of Civil and Hydraulic Engineering, Vol. 5, No. 3, pp. 259-267.
Elasto-Plastic Pipe Hobbs, R. E., 1984, "In-Service Buckling of Heated Pipelines," Journal of
3.0 D/t=15.3, ro=247MPa Transportation Engineering, ASCE, Vol. 110, No. 2, pp. 175-189.
Content=Water Ju, G. T., and Kyriakides, S., 1988, "'Thermal Buckling of Offshore Pipelines,"
6h/D=Sv/D=0.2 ASME JOURNALOF OFFSHORE MECHANICSAND ARCTIC ENGINEERING,Vol. 110,
pp. 355-364.
=2Okt/7,.D= Kuroki, T., Ito, T., and Onishi, K., 1982, "Boundary Element Method in Biot's
2.0 Linear Consolidation," Applied Mathematical Modelling, Vol. 6, No. 2, pp. 105-
112.
Maler, G., and Novati, G., 1987, "Boundary Element Elastic Analysis of Lay-
ered Soils by a Successive Stiffnes Method," International Journal for Numeri-
Ir-0.14 cal and Analytical Method in Geomechanics, Vol. 11, No. 5, pp. 435-447.
"r=0.4 Matyas, E. L., and Davis, J. B., 1983, "Prediction of Vertical Earth Loads on
:=2.0 Rigid Pipes," Journal of Geotechnical Engineering, ASCE, Vol. 109, No. 2, pp.
1.0 Lateral 190-201.
More, J. J., and Cosnard, M. Y., 1980, "LOGARITHM 554, BRENTM, A
Fortran Subroutine for The Numerical Solution of Systems of Nonlinear Equa-
~- Mode
J tions," ACM Transaction on Mathematical Sofeware, Vol. 6, No. 2, pp. 240-
251.
Pedersen, P. T., and Michelsen, J., 1988, "Large Deflection Upheaval Buckling
0.0 of Marine Pipelines," Proceedings Behaviour of Offshore Structures (BOSS),
0.0 0/2 o.~ 0'8 o.~ 1.0 Trondheim, Norway, Vol. 3, pp. 965-980.
Buried depth (m) Taylor, N., and Gan, A. B., 1986, "Submarine Pipeline Buckling--Imperfec-
tion Studies," Thin-Walled Structures, Vol. 4, pp. 295-323.
(a) D I t = 15.3 Trautmann, C. H., O'Rourke, T. D., and Kulhawy, F. H., 1985, "Uplift Force-
Displacement Response of Buried Pipe," Journal of Geotechnical Engineering,
ASCE, Vol. 111, No. 9, pp. 1061-1076.
Trautmann, C. H., and O'Rourke, T. D., 1985, "Lateral Force-Displacement
Elosto-Plastic Pipe Response of Buried Pipe," Journal of Geotechnical Engineering, ASCE, Vol.
3.0 D/t=58, ~0=2471vlPo 111, No. 9, pp. 1077-1092.
Content=Water Tvergaard, V., 1983, "Plastic Buckling of Axially Compressed Circular Cylin-
6h/D=6,/D=0.2 drical Shells," Thin-Walled Structures, Vol. 1, pp. 139-163.
x=0.04/ Yun, H. D., and Kyriakldes, S., 1990, "On the Beam and Shell Modes of
//lr=0.14 Buckling of Buried Pipelines," Soil Dynamics and Earthquake Engineering, Vol.
9, No. 4, pp. 179-193.
2.0
APPENDIX
=E
Q_ The E l e m e n t s of Stiffness Matrix and Coefficients of
Mode re.m,
Mode
Eq. ( 1 8 )
1.0
The elements of stiffness matrix K u are given in detail as
follows:
r = 2 G k t / 7 . D 2
Kyy
0.0 e e
o.o o.'2 o.'4 o.'6 o.h i.o -- ? --
Buried depth (m) - 8eof,Aby~by]d" (34)

(b) D I t = 58 Kyo [ ~ y q~o + 8Co(P1 + fu )~by q ~

e,,a e
Fig. 12 Far-field limit loads versus buried depth at different excess pore
pressure dissipation times
- 8cof.,b;~0]dx- (35)

= " " + f.x)~odpy

havior of offshore pipe buckling were fully studied. The critical e e
buried depth that separates the beam vertical mode of buckling
and beam lateral mode of buckling was also examined. - 8eof.~b;~byldx- (36)
The results show that the buckling behavior of beam vertical
mode and beam lateral mode is essentially influenced by the
Koo = ~ f_ [4,;'4,;' + 8,o(P, + Zx)4,~4,~
buried depth, inftial imperfection, and incline angle. The pipe i e
tends to buckle in the beam lateral mode for the pipe with
shallower buried depth, larger imperfection height, and smaller - 8e0f.~b~th0]dx- (37)
incline angle. The critical buried depth is shallower for smaller
excess pore pressure. where (~)y and th0 are the shape functions, e0 is the yield strain
of pipe material, P1 = Pt/troTrDt, f . = f . / a o T r t , and ~ = x l D
are the dimensionless variables of Pt, f., and x, respectively.
Acknowledgments a0 is the yield stress of pipe material, D is diameter of pipe,
This study is supported by the National Science Council of and t is pipe thickness. The external force vectors are
Republic of China under grant No. NSC82-0115-E006-426.
F y "~ ~ _f~ [ - - 8 + 0 ( r n "J" m'O "I" q s ) "I- ?0(X'0)](~)ydX-- (38)
e e
References
Blot, M. A., 1941, "General Theory of Three-Dimensional Consolidation,"
Journal of Applied Physics, Vol. 12, No. 2, pp. 155-164. Fo = ~., [ [-8e0(r~ + '~o + if+)+ y~'(X-o)]~bodx- (39)
Chiou, Y. J., and Chi, S. Y., 1994, "Boundary Element Analysis of Biot's e e
Consolidation in Layered Elastic Soils," International Journal for Numerical and
Analytical Methods in Geomechanics, VoL 18, No. 6, pp. 377-396. where {, ~o, ~ } = ( 1 / a o T r t ) . { m , rno, q s } . T h e constant C~ is

Journal of Offshore Mechanics and Arctic Engineering FEBRUARY 1996, Vol. 118 / 69
Downloaded 06 Apr 2011 to 140.116.136.193. Redistribution subject to ASME license or copyright; see http://www.asme.org/terms/Terms_Use.cfm
 8Deo] ~ydE (40)
g = K~ + R,y + f ~ (44)
C, = fa, k 7rt J
N = lq, + N~ + Iq~ (45)

The equivalent stiffness matrix of seabed soil under the pipe, where
K,, and the equivalent force vector of pore pressure, N, are K~ = Kyx(Kxx - KxzK~zlKzx)-l(KxzK~lgzy - Kxy) (46)
K s = K ee -- Kef(Kff)-lK fe (41) g zy = Kyz(gzz - g ~ , g L ~g x z ) - ~ ( g = g L t g~y - gay) (47)
Ms = ~e __ Kef(Kff)--l~f (42) ]%Ixy : Kyx(gxx - g x z g ~ z l g z x ) - l ( g x z g ; l I ~ z - I~x) (48)
where the superscript e represents the seabed-pipe contact re- l~ = Kyz(gzz -- gz, x g . ~ ' gxz)-l(gzxg~xl ]~Tx-- Nz ) (49)
gion, and the superscript f represents the free traction region.
K is the partition matrix of K. Kjj is the partition matrix of K, and K is the equivalent stiffness
matrix of upper layer of seabed (Chiou et al., 1993).
{t~ ~
t~j=LK/e
r K ee K e f ] f U ~ 1
Kffj[uf j -
{~e}
NI (43)

K and N are defined as following:

Urn INIYN (50)

The American Society of

Mechanical Engineers

800-TH E-AS M E
At ASME Information Central, you are our top priority. We make every effort to answer
your questions and expedite your orders. Our representatives are always ready to assist
you with most any ASME product or service. And now, reaching us is easier than e v e r . . .

eeeoeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee

TELEPHONE FAX MAIL

Toll Free in US & Canada 201-882-1717 ASME
800-THE-ASME or201-882-5155 22 Law Drive
(800-843-2763) p.o. Box 2900
Toll Free in Mexico E-MAIL Fairfield, New Jersey
95-800-843-2763 infocentral@asme.org 07007-2900

Outside North America

201-882-1167

70 / Vol. 118, FEBRUARY 1996 Transactions of the A S M E

Downloaded 06 Apr 2011 to 140.116.136.193. Redistribution subject to ASME license or copyright; see http://www.asme.org/terms/Terms_Use.cfm