Challenges Related to Pipeline Free Spans in Watercourse Crossings

Mario Caruso, G. Ferris, H. Heggen, B. Delanty
{"title":"Challenges Related to Pipeline Free Spans in Watercourse Crossings","authors":"Mario Caruso, G. Ferris, H. Heggen, B. Delanty","doi":"10.1115/ipg2021-65070","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"\n Free span assessment in watercourse crossings for the on-shore pipeline industry has become a more and more important part of pipeline integrity practice. One reason is that it has become increasingly well known that the dominant cause of pipeline failures in watercourse crossings is fatigue failure due to vortex induced vibrations at pipeline free spans. Recognition of this is now being identified in industry recommended practices and owners are incorporating this type of assessment into their pipeline integrity management practice.\n On shore pipelines are not designed with an allowable free span as is the practice with off-shore pipelines, but are buried. Design codes specify minimum depths of cover when constructed and indicate that pipelines should be maintained so that no excessive loads occur. In the past the no excessive loads requirement has been interpreted that the pipeline must remained buried. As experience from the off-shore environment and increasingly from experience on-shore has shown that most exposed and/or free spans do not fail.\n Due to various river erosion mechanisms; scour, bank erosion or avulsion, previously buried pipelines do develop free spans. Some of the free spans fail and release products directly into the watercourse. Failures, particularly for liquid products, are very expensive due to the economic loss, repair costs and environment clean-up of the watercourse and its banks. Similarly, costs associated with pipeline replacement for free spanning pipelines or repair of pipelines that might develop free spans are relatively high. It is important to develop an understanding of the probability of the pipeline failing due to a free span, or put another way, determine which free span is a threat to integrity.\n This paper discusses some of the challenges with assessing free spans in watercourse crossings as part of integrity programs and highlights experiences in assessing this threat to integrity. The objective of this paper is to discuss some of the key uncertainties related to the management of the threat due to free spans. These uncertainties are due to the reliability of information about the free span, water velocity and condition of the pipelines.","PeriodicalId":138244,"journal":{"name":"ASME-ARPEL 2021 International Pipeline Geotechnical Conference","volume":"1 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2021-06-21","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"ASME-ARPEL 2021 International Pipeline Geotechnical Conference","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1115/ipg2021-65070","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Free span assessment in watercourse crossings for the on-shore pipeline industry has become a more and more important part of pipeline integrity practice. One reason is that it has become increasingly well known that the dominant cause of pipeline failures in watercourse crossings is fatigue failure due to vortex induced vibrations at pipeline free spans. Recognition of this is now being identified in industry recommended practices and owners are incorporating this type of assessment into their pipeline integrity management practice. On shore pipelines are not designed with an allowable free span as is the practice with off-shore pipelines, but are buried. Design codes specify minimum depths of cover when constructed and indicate that pipelines should be maintained so that no excessive loads occur. In the past the no excessive loads requirement has been interpreted that the pipeline must remained buried. As experience from the off-shore environment and increasingly from experience on-shore has shown that most exposed and/or free spans do not fail. Due to various river erosion mechanisms; scour, bank erosion or avulsion, previously buried pipelines do develop free spans. Some of the free spans fail and release products directly into the watercourse. Failures, particularly for liquid products, are very expensive due to the economic loss, repair costs and environment clean-up of the watercourse and its banks. Similarly, costs associated with pipeline replacement for free spanning pipelines or repair of pipelines that might develop free spans are relatively high. It is important to develop an understanding of the probability of the pipeline failing due to a free span, or put another way, determine which free span is a threat to integrity. This paper discusses some of the challenges with assessing free spans in watercourse crossings as part of integrity programs and highlights experiences in assessing this threat to integrity. The objective of this paper is to discuss some of the key uncertainties related to the management of the threat due to free spans. These uncertainties are due to the reliability of information about the free span, water velocity and condition of the pipelines.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
水道渡口管道自由跨的相关挑战
陆上管道行业渡口自由跨距评估已成为管道完整性实践中越来越重要的组成部分。其中一个原因是,人们越来越清楚地认识到,水道渡口管道失效的主要原因是管道自由跨处涡激振动引起的疲劳失效。在行业推荐实践中,已经认识到这一点,业主正在将这种类型的评估纳入他们的管道完整性管理实践中。陆上管道不像海上管道那样设计允许自由跨度,而是埋在地下。设计规范规定了建造时的最小覆盖深度,并指出管道应进行维护,以免发生过大的负荷。在过去,没有过度负荷的要求被解释为管道必须保持埋地。海上环境的经验和越来越多的陆上经验表明,大多数暴露和/或自由跨度都不会失效。由于不同的河流侵蚀机制;冲刷、河岸侵蚀或崩裂,以前埋在地下的管道确实会形成自由跨度。一些自由跨度破坏并将产品直接释放到水道中。由于水道及其堤岸的经济损失、维修费用和环境清理,特别是液体产品的失败代价非常高昂。同样,更换自由跨度管道或修复可能产生自由跨度的管道的成本也相对较高。重要的是要了解管道因自由跨度而失效的概率,或者换句话说,确定哪个自由跨度对完整性构成威胁。本文讨论了作为完整性项目的一部分,评估水道渡口自由跨度所面临的一些挑战,并重点介绍了评估这种威胁完整性的经验。本文的目的是讨论与自由跨度威胁管理有关的一些关键不确定性。这些不确定性是由于自由跨度、水流速度和管道状况信息的可靠性造成的。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Retrofiting Existing Optical Fiber Infrastructure to Mitigate Geohazard Risk: The TGP Case The Contribution of In-Line IMU Inspection to Geohazard and Crack Management Strategies Remote Geotechnical Evaluation of Rights of Way of Hydrocarbon Transmission Lines Towards a Structured Maintenance and Integrity Management Program of Hydrocarbon Transport Systems - Emphasis on Geohazards Real Time Rainfall Monitoring for Pipeline Geohazards
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1