m

SoOloty
ofPotrolwffl
Efl#laers

SPE 26774
Pipeline Freespan Evaluation: A New Methodology
David Kaye, Andrew Palmer& Assocs. Ltd.; David (3albraith, Mobil North Sea Ltd.;
James Ingram, Andrew Palmer & Assocs. Ltd.; and Russell Davies, Mobil North Sea Ltd.

Cepyrlght 1993, Society of Petroleum Engineers. Inc.

TtIia paper was prepared for preeente!l?n at the Offehore European Conference held In Abardwn,

7-10 September 1993.

This paper waa eelwted for preeen!atlon by an SPE ProQram CommtItee f0110@n9 review 01 lnfOfmaliOn contained m an abanact eubmmed by the author(a). Contents of tha paper,
ae presented. have not been reviawed by the $eciaty of Patrokwm Englnaam and ara aublwf to @Jrrecfion by the author(s). The metarkt as Prassnted, does not necessarily raflect
any pwitlon of lha Seclety of Patroleum Enginaera, ns offlcare, or membere. papre prasanled at SpE meetings are eubject to Publication revlaw by Editorial Committees of the Seclety
ot Patroleum Engineers. Permlaaton 10WPY 15restricted 10an ebstracl of not more than 3W words. Iliusfrationa may not be wM.
The abstract shwdd contain wnsplcuous acknowlsdgmen!
of where and by whom the paper ia preaanted. Write Libreriafr. SPE, P.O. Sox 833836. Rlchardaon, TX 7508S-333S, U.S.A. Talex t 63245 SPEUT.

to loading buoys. All the facilities noted

above are operated by Mobil North Sea
Limited (MNSL) on behalf of the block 9/13
co-venturers, Amerada Hess Ltd, Enterprise
Oil plc, EG North Sea Holdings Ltd and OMV
(UK) Ltd.
In addition, the recently
installed SAGE Gas export line runs 323 km
from Beryl A to St. Fergus, and is operated
by HNSL on behalf of the Beryl and Brae
groups.

BBST- cT
A methodology

for the rigorous assessment

described~
pipeline
freeepans
is
of
its
with
a
together
description
of
application to the Beryl Field network of
pipelines.

The methodology is in two parta, each with

two stages, and comprise preliminary stress
and vibration frequency checks followed by
detailed strain and fatigue life checks
where appropriate. Comprehensive software,
automatically linked to the inspection
databaae,
has been written to allow
efficient use of the methodology.

Annual inspection of all the lines is

undertaken
in
order
to
comply with
regulatory and MNSL requirements and to
ensure continued fitness for purpose. As
with most pipelines, the annual surveys
identify numerous freespans which have to
be assessed and, if necessary, rectified.

The use of a new ROV based freespan

rectification technique is also described.
Both the assessment and rectification
technique
were
successfully used
in
Mobils Beryl field and the SAGE pipeline
in 1992.
YNTRODUCTION
The Beryl A platform waa installed in
block
9/13
in
1973.
Subsequent
developments in the block include the Beryl
B platform, the Nees, BWISS, Linnhe and
NESS II multi-well subsea developments and
4 single subsea wells.
A total of 25
pipelines are laid in the block;
the
majority are 6 diameter flowli.nesfrom the
subsea wells to the platforms, but include
1 No. 16 and 1 No. 20 hydrocarbon
transfer lines between the production
platforms and 2 short 36 oil export lines
References
paper

and

illustrations

at

end

of

MNSL has now implemented a number of

improvements to its methods for collecting
and recording pipeline inspection data, and
for
automatically
assessing
the
significance of freespans in relation to
the service, pressure, temperature and
orientation of pipelines. The methods of
data storage and freespan assessment are
based on user friendly PC-based programs
for use both offshore and onshore.
The basis for recording and displaying the
in~pection results is a database system
(COABIS). Survey data can be entered into
the system in real time on the inspection
vessel as the inspection is performed.
Further checks can be undertaken on the
data in the office including graphical
comparison of all features from one year to
another. The benefits of this include the
ability to correct mismatches in datum
locations between surveys by reference to
fixed features (e.g. flanges, anodes and

253

PIPELINE FREESPAN EVALUATION - A NEW METHOD~L~y

SPE 26774

recognise the post-yield strength of a

pipeline freeqan, and does not recogniee
that a pipeline can remain perfectly
serviceable and fit for purpose even though
the part of the pipeline steel may have
exceeded the yield limit.

major debris) and a visual representation

of how freeepans, buried lengths and any
deterioration vary from year to year.
The freespan assessment procedures are
incorporated into a PC-baaed 8uite of
freespan assessment programs. The database
and freespan asseaament software are linked
so that there is no manual transcribing of
data following its entry into the database
on the vessel. This extent of automation
eliminates the previous errors during
manual transcribing of data and also
reduces
the time required for freespan
assessment.

The traditional way of ensurhg that flowinduced vibrations cannot occur is to

define a maximum allowable freespan length
such that the natural frequency of the
freespan is too high to allow any flowinduced vibrations to develop. Again, this
approach has been used extensively in the
North Sea and elsewhere, but is also
conservative.
The approach prevents any
form of freeapan vibration, and does not
recognise that modest freespan vibrations
may not cause fatigue failure.

The freespan assessment procedure consists

of two separate stages. The first 8tage is
deeigned to be undertaken by the MNSL
.Tnspaction Representative on the vessel,
and can be used to identify the more
where
additional
freespans
critical
measurements (e.g. natural frequency) may
be beneficial. This enables fuller data to
be collected on these freespans, optimises
utilisation of the inspection vessel, and
may also minimise the extent of freespan
that
is
subsequently
rectification
recommended, using the techniques described
later.

More sophisticated and less con~ervative

freespan assessment methods have been
introduced over the last few years. Modern
pipeline design codee, such as the recently
issued BS 8010 Part 3 [1], explicitly allow
the more sophisticated approach.
In the
freespan analysis programme described here,
the simple stress and vibration criteria
described above are used for a first pass
anqlysis to identify the more critical
freespans which are then examined in more
detail.
These freespans are reanalyses
using
sophisticated
strain-based
more
criteria, to assess bending deformation,
and fatigue criteria to assess the extent
of fatigue damage induced by freespan
vibration.

Prior to implementation of the system

described i:orthis paper, selection of
was
rectification
by
freespans
reference to a limiting value for each
diameter of pipeline. The calculation of
the limiting value was based on the worst
pmmible combination of conditions for any
The change in
pipeline of that size.
aseeesment
techn@ues
was prompted
by a
belief wLthLn MNSLs engineering department
that the technique was overly conservative
with excessive numbers of freespans being
identified for correction. Indeed, for a
number of years MNSL applied Engineering
for
the
requirements
Judgement
to
rectification.

The overall flow chart for the

assessment is described in Figure
and
detailed
preliminary
assessment methods are described
detail below.

freespan
1. The
freespan
in more

PRELIMINARY ANALYSIS
freeapan
assessment
The
preliminary
consists of checks for overstress in the
freespan and the possibility that vortexinduced vibrations may occur.
These are
described in turn below.

SSESSMENT
INTRODUCTION

Strees Assessment

Pipeline frsespans are at risk from damage

by one of two distinct mechanisms, either
by excessive bending from external applied
hydrodynamic and/or self-weighk loading, or
by long-term fatigue damage from flowinduced vibrations.
The traditional way of ent3Urin9 that
excessive bending deformation cannot occur
is to define an maximum allowable freespan
length such that the maximum equivalent
freespan is below an
mtress in the
acceptable fraction of the pipeline steel
yield stress. Thie approach has been used
extensively for pipelines in the North Sea
elsewhere.
The
approach
is
and
conservative, however, as it does not
254

The preliminary freespan analysis performed

in this study is based on a freespan model
The freespan model
described in [2].
considers the effect of the axial force in
the freespan, tension induced by the sag of
the
freespan, and partial
foundation
support at the freespan ends.
The majority of seabed soils in the North
Sea provide only partial foundation support
at the ends of a freespan. The pipeline
embeds into the soil at each end of the
freespan, and the point at which the
freespan is subject to complete end fixity
is usually some distance along the seabed

SPE 26774

D.KAYE

D. N. GALBRAITH

J. INGRAM

R. DAVIES

beyond the end of the freespan. ThiB end

fixity controls the rotational and vertical
stiffnem
of the f?eespan supports and
affectm the bending moments within the
For bending moment
freeepan itt3e~;
this study, the end
calculations
supports were aasumed to be completely
fixed i.e. clamped-clamped end conditions.
This assumption provides a conservative
estimate of end moments over a wide range
of typical soil conditions in the North
Sea.

a critical VE which must not be exceeded in

design storm conditions. The selection of
the critical reduced velocity and the
appropriate storm velocity is open to
engineering judgement, however, and the
application of this approach is often
In the analysis described
inconsistent.
here, the critical reduced velocity has
been taken as equal to 3.5, where the
incident velocity V is taken as the sum of
the maximum wave-induced velocity and the
maximum current velocity.

The maximum bending mcment in the freespan,

due to both the pipelines self-weight and
loading,
is
hydrodynamic
external
calculated using beam-column theory and
taking into account the effective axial
force in the freespan. The effective axial
force in the freespan includes both the
force in the wall of the pipeline and also
the force due to the pressure of the
In addition, the
pipeline contents [3].
effect of tension generated by the sag of
into
taken
also
the
freespan
is
be
can
this
effect
consi.derat
ion;
significant for long freespans, and has an
important effect on both the axial stresses
in the freespan and the freespan natural
vibration frequency. Hydrodynamic forces
are calculated using Morisons equation
with appropriate force coefficients.

In order to aasesa whether vortex-induced

oscillations will occur~ it is necessary to
calculate the freespan natural frequency fN.
In this analysis the natural frequency is
calculated by mcdelling the freespan as a
clamped-clamped beam under an axial force,
which gives:-

axial and hoop

The maximum bending,
stresses in the wall of the pipeline are
then calculated, and the greatest von Mises
equivalent stress in the freespan is
evaluated. This stress is compared against
the yield etress of the pipeline steel; if
the ratio of the maximum equivalent stress
to the specified minimum yield stress is
less than 0.96 then the freespan is
If the ratio is
concluded to be safe.
greater than 0.96 then the freespan is
unacceptable on the preliminary stress
criteria, and re~uires further analysis.
Peduced Velocitv Assessment
pipeline freespan can be subject to flowLndueed vibration due to vortex shedding
Vortex-induced
the
freespan.
from
vibration is predominantly controlled by a
dimensionless
parameter
called the reduced
velocity~ which is written as:-

. . ...(1)

amplitude
small
relatively
Generally,
vibrations of the freespan in-line with the
flow direction occur at values of VR above
1 and peak at VR between 2 and 3, while
larger amplitude vibrations across the flow
direction begin at V~ around 3 and peak at
v~ of about 5.
The traditional deeign approach is to adopt

~=w%l== (2)
In order to model the finite foundation
stiffness at each end of the freespan, L~ in
equation (2) above is taken as 1.1 times
the observed length of the freespan.
The freespan frequency can be a difficult
quantity to predict accurately.
investigate this further, during the 19~
survey program the natural frequency of
longer freespans was measured using an ROV
Figure 2
mounted accelerometer package.
shows the calculated natural frequency for
various freespans in the 30 SAGE gas
plotted
against
the
export
pipeline
measured frequency. The figure shows the
isolated
frequencies
for
calculated
freespans only; the general agreement ia
clearly good, although there are some
inconsistencies in the data. The agreement
for multiple freespans is noticeably worse,
however. Although not shown in Figure 2,
freespans
the comparison for multiple
suggests that predicted frequencies for
multiple freespans are strongly dependent
on the extent of support provided by
intermediate touchdown points.
DETAILED ANALYSIS
The detailed freespan assessment consists
of a check for excessive strain in the
freespan and the calculation of the fatigue
life of the freespan. These are described
in turn below.
Strain Assessment
The serviceability of a pipeline which
fails the overstress check above will not
be affected provided that the post-yield
freespan are not
deflection
of the
The BS 8010 design code [1],
excessive.

PIPELINE FREESPAN EVALUATION - A NEW METHODOLOGY

SPE 26774

The effect of wave-induced oscillations is

also included in the analysis.
In this
case the wave-induced displacement was
estimated from the oscillatory hydrodynamic
force on the freeBpan, and making allowance
for any resonance of the freespan.

for
example, allows yield due to large
bending stresses provided that certain
requirements cm the plastic etrains~ weld
ductility and diameter/wall ratio are
aati,afied.

These conditions can often be met by aubaea

9eabed
where
the
freespans
pipeline
which
prevents
boundary
provides
excessive ~eformation of the freespan.
Once the freespan touches down it becomes
essentially two freespans separated by a
The central touchdown
single Support.
limits the bending deformation of the
original freespant and provides a support
stresses
in
the
the
reduces
which
subsequent double freespan.
/
The greatest poseible bending strain which
could occur can be calculated from the gap
below the freespan and the length of the
freespan. This maximum possible strain is
then compared against two limits, based on
(i) the maximum allowable strain governed
by weld ductility and steel properties, and
(ii) the buckling strain on the compressive
side of the pipeline~ which is a function
of the pipe diameter/wall thicknese ratio.
If either of these limits is exceeded then
there ia a risk of excessive pipeline
deformation and the freeapan must be
rectified.

For each wave/current combination, the

oscillatory atressee induced by the applied
vortex displacement or wave loading can be
The
predicted from beam-column theory.
corresponding fatigue damage at that stress
range is calculated from S-N curve fatigue
data. If the number of cycles to failure
for a particular wave/current combination
(i) h given by N,, then the total fatigue
damage for that combination is:Di =

pi fAT
N,

.....(3]

fatigue
The
total
damage
for
all
wave/current combinations can be calculated
using Xiners rule, as the sum of all
particular combinations:tJ

DTOmL

F=1 Di

.....(4)

where y is a safety factor, given as 10 in

DnV 1981 [5] and BS 8010 [1].
If the total fatigue damage is greater than
one then the freespan is deemed to be
unacceptable and rectification should be
conai.dered. If this is less than one then
the freespan does not require correction,
but it would be prudent to monitor the
freespan during subsequent surveys to
It
determine if it will grow with time.
should be noted that spans can reduce with
time and the rate of fatigue damage may
decline.

A detailed and accurate assessment of the

consequences of flow-induced vibration of
the freespan can be performed by predicting
the amplitude of freespan vibrations over
the freespan life and evaluating the
subsequent fatigue damage.
The fatigue calculation is performed by
first generating a probability distribution
of the incident wave and current velocities
over the design life of the free~pan. For
waves ~ this is usually provided by a
For currents, the data
scatter diagram.
are often much more difficult to obtain,
but can often be estimated from the
statistical distributions of the tidal and
storm current components.
For a given freeapan the incident reduced
velocity can then be calculated for each
in the
and current combination
wave
environmental data set. The amplitude of
freempan vibration can be predicted by
interpolation of experimental measurement
of freespan vibrations [4]. The prediction
of the expected amplitude is complicated by
the presence of the oscillatory wave
component superimposed on a steady current;
this can be resolved by reference to more
extensive data, or (as followed in this
study) more detailed modelling of freespan
vibrations with steady and oscillatory
flow.

256

Figures 3, 4 and 5 show the results of the

inspection and analysis programme for the
SAGE gas export pipeline and the Beryl B to
a 16 gas and 20 oil transfer lines. Each
figure shows the total number of freespans
observed during the survey, the number of
freespans that failed the preliminary
analysis and the number of freespans that
detailed
The
analysis.
failed the
freespans have been grouped into 10 m
lengths to help identify which freespans
have failed. The results are summarized in
Table 1.
The fraction of freespans within each
length group which failed the preliminary
with
analyses
increase
and
detailed
increasing freespan length. A large number
of ehort freeepans were observed during the
survey, but of these freespans, none failed

SP1226774

D.KAYE

J. INGRAM

D. N. GALBRAITH

R. DAVIES

either
the
de<:ailed
preliminary
or
analysis. M the freespan length increases
the total number of freespans observed
decreases; of the observed free8pan8# an
increasing
failed
the
proportion
preliminary analy~is, and an increasing
proportion of these freespans failed the
detailed analysiH. None of the freespans
in the 6 flowlinea failed the detailed
analysi.aor required rectification.

these types of vessel but also new

techniques such as ROV systems. The cost
of running an ROV based vessel capable of
remote
maintenance
operation
is
approximately one third to one quarter of
that for a diving vessel. In addition, it
has been an NNSL initiative over the past
few years to remove the diver from as many
subsea applications as possible in order to
minimise hazards and reduce costs.

The cost Baving that resulte from using the

i13 clearly
revised
freeapan analysis
demonstrated by Figures 3 to 5, and by
Table 1. For example~ Figure 3 shows the
results for the 30 SAGE pipeline. If the
freea+panfailure criteria were based on the
worst case limiting freespan length from
the preliminary analysis, which is typical
of the previous MNSL approachl then all
freespans greater than 30 m would require
rectification. This gives a total of 166
freespans; clearly not all these freespans
would be stabilised, but the selection of
appropriate freespans for stabilisation
would then be based largely on intuitive
judgement
rather
than
engineering
Xf the freespan
engineering calculation.
were
the
based
on
failure
criteria
preliminary analysis but applied to each
individual freespan, then the total number
of freespans requiring rectification would
be reduced significantly to 20. Of these
freespans, only 11 failed the detailed
analysis described above. The total number
some
of
freespans requiring
form of
stabilisation is therefore reduced from 166
down to only 11. Many of these freespans
failed assessment by fatigue only, where
the remaining life extends over several
years, rectification could be delayed and
advantage taken of any natural backfilling
of the line.

A technical and cost comparison waa made of

the
options
three
above
and
remote
maintenance using ROV systems.
The costs
are shown in Table 2.
The costs are
indicative and are based on a NNSL eoet
estimate of critical freespans on both the
SAGE and Beryl B to Beryl A pipelines. It
was assumed that a total of 12 freespans
required support, split equally into two
lo~ations approximately 200 km apart. On
the basis of the cost comparison, the ROV
based techniques were eventually chosen and
used successfully in 1992.

Similar conclusions can be made for the

E!erylB to A oil and gas transfer pipelines
in Figures 4 and 5. The trends are rather
less clear because of the lower total
number of freeepans in these two pipelines#
but the revised asse~sment procedure again
provides a better and less conservative
bash
for the selection of freeapans
requiring some form of rectification.
E
?IpLINR

STAB~LISATION

STABILISATION TECHNIQUES
The normal techniques for stabilhing
are
rock
spanning pipelines
dumping,
grouted support, or graveljcement bag
These techniques are normally
supporte.
installed and deployed by either a custom
built vessel, such as rock dump vessels, or
Both types are
diving support vessels.
extremely costly with associated high
mobilisation costs.

STABILXSATION PROCEDURE
The
freespans
critical
requiring
rectification in the 1992 program varied
greatly in length and height off the
seabed.
In particular the height of
freespans ranged from 75 mm to 250 mm off
the seabed. The system of deploying and
installing the grouted support had to deal
with both extremes of freespan height.
The chosen method of rectification was to
deploy a grout bag and position it below
the pipeline.
The bag was then inflated
with grout which, when cured, provides a
rigid support to the line.
The
for
the
vessel
used
freespan
rectification programme was the Kommandor
Subsea, operated by SubSea Offshore Limited
(SSOL).
This vessel had already been
charted for the SAGE pipelins inspection
programme and was ideally suited for ROV
operations. The only additional equipment
required was a grouting spread and launch
and recovery system for the ROV installed
grout bags.
A standard grouting ~pread was employed to
mix and pump a grout mixture specified by
The grout design was based on
NNSL.
achieving a minimum compressive strength
within a 28 day period.
The grout bag
support was designed to ensure that it is
inflated in the correct manner while
enOuring ease of use for the ROV and
deployment frame system.
The bag itself
was built from industry standard fabric.
The method of operation was carried out in
five operations

The decision was made to consider not only

257

6
1.

PIPELINE FREESPAN EVALUATION - A NEW METHODOLOGY

SPE 26774

Grout Support Location

The ROV was deployed to survey the

freespan and mark the location on the
pipeline where the proposed grouted
support should be placed. This marking
was made by use of a white marker chain
which was visible by ROV sonar and
cameras.

a~sesaing
A
new
procedure
for
and
rectifying subsea pipeline freespans has
been de6cribed. The procedure was adopted
by MNSL in the 1992 survey programme and
provided significant cost and time savings.

2. Grout Bag Deployment

The grout bag was deployed on a circular
swivel deployment frame, launched from
an A frame OVS= the side of the
The grout bag
Komnandcw Subsea.
and
grout
hose
frame
deployment
umbilical were then lowered to the
seabed surface~ landing approximately 5
m to 10 m from the pipeline support
location.
3. Grout Bag Installation
The deployment frame was turned on its
swivel baae by ROV to eneure that the
grout bag leading edge was facing
towards the pipeline. The ROV was used
to push a needle attached to the grout
bag under the freespan, and thento pull
the bag through on the other side of the
pipeline and pull the bag away from its
This operation was
deployment frame.
slowly to ensure the
carried out
accurate placement of the grout bag
under the pipeline.
4* Grout Bag Inflation
Grout was pumped through a 58 mm bore
grout hose which was attached to the
grout bag via a guick release connector.
Once the desired support shape was
achieved and grout was seen venting from
the top the bag, grouting was stopped
and the quick release connection broken
by the ROV.
5. Deployment Frame Recovery
Initailation Survey

and

Post

The deployment frame was pulled away

from the location to allow flushing of
the grout hose, and the deployment frame
was then recovered back to the vessel.
The ROV then made its final post
installation survey of the freespan and
the newly installed support, recording
positional and visual data.
total
these
five
duration
for
The
operations, based on a grout bag volume of
1.5 cubic metres, was approximately three
hours depending on weather. Approximately
four grout bags could be placed in close
proximity within a twelve hour shift.

258

LUSIO S

The procedure
for freespan assessment
conaista of a P&based suite of progrsms
which is linked up to read in freespan data
directly from the MNSL survey database
system.
The assessment can be performed
rapidly without
any need
for manual
transcription of data.
All freespans observed during the pipeline
survey were assessed using a simplified
first pass analysis based on traditional
overstrees and reduced velocity criteria,
and a more detailed analysis based on
strain-based and fatigue criteria.
The
first pass analysis can be performed
offshore on the survey vessel and gives a
quick
assessment
of each freespan and
identifies the critical freespans which
merit more detailed measurement.
The
second pass analyeie is performed onshore
and provides an accurate and realistic
identificat~on of the freeepans which
require rectification.
assessment
Results
the
freeapan
from
indicate that the assessment procedure, and
in particular the strain-based and fatigue
analysess gave significant savings in terms
freespans
of
reduced
number
of
for
rectification.
Critical freeepans were stabilised by grout
bags positioned by an ROV. The ROV-based
system enabled both risks and costs to be
reduced in a normally hazardous and costly
technology
environment,
utilised
and
already on board a pipeline inspection
vessel.
assessment
and
The
overall
freespan
rectification
programme
represent
a
significant step forward for MNSL in terms
of reducing costs, while simultaneously
improving the speed and simplicity of
The system provides
freeapan assessment.
that
freespan
the possibility
future
rectification works may be performed in a
single offshore programme, which includes
pipeline inspection, survey, assessment,
engineering and repair of all freespana
from a single survey vessel.

to acknowledge the
The authora wish
assistance of Stephen Booth and Andrew
Palmer for advice on the work described,
and to Subsea Offshore Limited who carried
out the FreeSpan Rectification Programme.

v
b

SPE 26774

D .KAYE

D. N. GALBRAITH

_C!LATU~
D
D,
DWXL

E
F

f
f~
1
LE
N,
m&
PI
AT
v
v~
Y

Pipeline eukside diameter

Fatigue damage due to particular
wave/current combination
Total fatigue damage
Youngs modulus
Effective axial force
Oscillation frequency
Natural frequency of freespan
2nd Moment of area of croae section
Effective length of freespan
Number of cycles to fatigue failure
wave/current
particular
due
to
combination
Effective mass
partic-lar
Probability
of
wave/current combination
Overall design life
F1OW V@IOCity

Reduced velocity
Safety factor

&XERENCES
1. British Standards Institution, BS 8010
**Codeof practice for Pipelinest part 3
Pipelines subsea: Design C0n6trUCtiOn
and Installation, February 1993.
Rational
and
D.Kaye,
2. A.C.Palmer
Asset$smentCriteria for Pipeline Spans,
Pipeline
seminar Offshore
European
Technology, 1991.
3. A.C.Palmer and J.A.S.Baldry, Lateral
Compressed
kxially
Buckling
of
Petroleum
Journal
of
Pipelines,
Technology, No.26, PP1283-1284, 1974.
4.

Vibration of Pipeline Spans, Report

1268, Dec.1984, Hydraulics
no. EX
Research, Wallingford.

5. Rules for Submarine Pipeline Systems~

Det norske Veritas, DnV 1981.

J. INGRAM

R. DAVIES

PIPELINE FREESPAN EVALUATION - A NEW METHODOLOGY

TABLE 1

SPE 26774

RESULTS OF FREESPAN SURVEY AND ANALYSIS

Total number of freespans

Pipeline

Found during
survey

Greater than
woret case
pr=enlai~;~4ry
Y

Failed
preliminary
analyOis

Failed
detailed
analysis

2138

166

20

11

Beryl B - A gas
transfer

174

85

27

17

Bqryl El- A Oil

transfer

228

21

16

272

63

30

SAGE

TOTAL

2540

TABLE 2
STABILISATION
TYPE

PIPELINE FREESPAN INDICATIVE STABILISATION COSTS

VESSEL TYPE

COST PER SUPPORT

LUMP SUM COST

Rock Dumping

Rock Dump Vessel

E80,000

E960,000

Grouted Support

Diving Support
Vessel

E40,000

f480,000

Grouted Support

ROV Support
Ves5el

E20,000

E240,000

Gravel Bag
supportB

Diving Support
Vessel

E50,000

.E600,000

260

m
Datallad
~A~w_mant

Prallmlnary
Assessment
~.

_
7

II
Ralwsod
VOloctty

FII1

AUm4mMt
I
I
Pass
I
I
Q:l
I
I
I
I
I
1-

Plgure

Dst#Il#d
F8tlQue

Fall I

Asuwrmn

Ii
II

I
I
I

ass
+,

Span AssessmentProcsdura
w

belated spans

SAQE30PIPSUM

SOS@
9= exm

w St.

Fwaus {SAW

sw.,d

Span

Length
(m)

f.yd
Pr@knkwYAmdwIs%bnal,w,

Measured frequency (Hz)

Figure3

Figure2

Maasur&Jand CalculatedSpan Frequencies

SAGE PipellrreSpans

B@

B to Bar@ A 0!1transfer

SPE26

ElilnLFJj

10-19 20-29 30-39 40-49 50.59 80-89 70-79 80-89

0-9

Span Length (m)

ZI

Fallad

Suweyed

i%elimina~Analysis E

Figure 4

Failed
Detailed Anaiyais

Beryi B to A (Xl Pipeline Spans

Ehyl B to Bwyl A gas transfer

3 ~~

Span Length (m)

Suweyod

Failad
R

Figure 5

Faiiad

preliminary
Andyds EEl DetailedAnalysis

Be@ B to A Gas Pipeilne Spans