Title:
Finite Element Model Analysis of Pipes Embedded in Controlled Low-Strength Material under Seismic Wave Propagation
Author(s):
Prapon Somboonyanon and Ceki Halmen
Publication:
Structural Journal
Volume:
115
Issue:
6
Appears on pages(s):
1729-1736
Keywords:
buried pipe; controlled low-strength materials; seismic wave propagation; three-dimensional finite element seismic simulation
DOI:
10.14359/51702383
Date:
11/1/2018
Abstract:
The performance of steel pipelines embedded in various backfill materials under seismic wave propagation was evaluated using a three-dimensional (3-D) finite element (FE) model. Four different soils and three selected controlled low-strength material (CLSM) mixtures were evaluated as backfill materials. Effect of various model parameters on calculated pipe stresses were analyzed. Predicted pipe stresses were compared to pipe stresses calculated using the American Society of Civil Engineers (ASCE) guidelines. ASCE guidelines are developed for pipes embedded in soils and are valid only for specific assumptions. After setting the model parameters to match the predicted stresses by the ASCE guidelines for pipes embedded in soils, the developed FE model was used to evaluate the CLSM mixtures under various pipe end conditions. Results indicate that the use of a CLSM mixture instead of compacted soils as a backfill material can significantly reduce the stresses of embedded pipes under seismic wave propagation.
Related References:
1. ASCE, “Guidelines for the Seismic Design of Oil and Gas Pipeline Systems,” American Society of Civil Engineers, 1984, Reston, VA.
2. Newmark, N. M., “Problems in Wave Propagation in Soil and Rock,” Proceedings of the International Symposium on Wave Propagation and Dynamic Properties of Earth Materials, University of New Mexico, Albuquerque, NM, 1967, pp. 7-26.
3. Raghavendra, T., and Udayashankar, B. C., “Flow and Strength Characteristics of CLSM Using Ground Granulated Blast Furnace Slag,” Journal of Materials in Civil Engineering, ASCE, V. 26, No. 9, 2014, pp. 1-6. doi: 10.1061/(ASCE)MT.1943-5533.0000927
4. Halmen, C., and Shah, H., “Controlled Low-Strength Materials Composed Solely of By-Products,” ACI Materials Journal, V. 112, No. 2, Mar.-Apr. 2015, pp. 239-246. doi: 10.14359/51686987
5. Alizadeh, V.; Helwany, S.; Ghorbanpoor, A.; and Oliva, M., “Rapid-Construction Technique for Bridge Abutments Using Controlled Low-Strength Materials,” Journal of Performance of Constructed Facilities, ASCE, V. 28, No. 1, 2014, pp. 149-156. doi: 10.1061/(ASCE)CF.1943-5509.0000412
6. ACI Committee 229, “Report on Controlled Low-Strength Materials (ACI 229R-13),” American Concrete Institute, Farmington Hills, MI, 2013, 22 pp.
7. Ling, T. C.; Kaliyavaradhan, S. K.; and Poon, C. S., “Global Perspective on Application of Controlled Low-Strength Material (CLSM) for Trench Backfilling—An Overview,” Construction and Building Materials, V. 158, Jan. 2018, pp. 535-548. doi: 10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2017.10.050
8. Lee, H., “Finite Element Analysis of a Buried Pipeline,” MS thesis, University of Manchester, Manchester, UK, 2010.
9. Psyrras, N. K., and Sextos, A. G., “Safety of Buried Steel Natural Gas Pipelines under Earthquake-Induced Ground Shaking: A Review,” Soil Dynamics and Earthquake Engineering, V. 106, Mar. 2018, pp. 254-277. doi: 10.1016/j.soildyn.2017.12.020
10. Sahoo, S.; Manna, B.; and Sharma, K. G., “Seismic Behaviour of Buried Pipelines: 3D Finite Element Approach,” Journal of Earthquakes, V. 2014, July 2014, pp. 1-9. doi: 10.1155/2014/818923
11. Alizadeh, V.; Helwany, S.; Ghorbanpoor, A.; Oliva, M.; and Ghaderi, R., “CLSM Bridge Abutments—Finite Element Modeling and Parametric Study,” Computers and Geotechnics, V. 64, Mar. 2015, pp. 61-71. doi: 10.1016/j.compgeo.2014.10.015
12. Lin, M. C., “Seismic Response Analysis of Flexible Pavements Embedded with CLSM Bases Using Finite Element Method,” Proceedings of the 2017 IEEE International Conference on Applied System Innovation, Sapporo, Japan, 2017, pp. 1316-1319.
13. Bellaver, F., “Large Diameter Steel Pipe Field Test Using Controlled Low Strength Material and Staged Construction Modeling Using 3-D Nonlinear Finite Element Analysis,” MS thesis, University of Texas at Arlington, Arlington, TX, 2013.
14. Goodling, E. C., “Buried Piping—An Analysis Procedure Update,” Proceedings of the International Symposium on Lifeline Earthquake Engineering, PVP-77, ASME, Portland, OR, 1983, pp. 225-237.
15. Somboonyanon, P., and Halmen, C., “3D Finite Element Seismic Simulation of Steel Pipelines Embedded in Different Backfills,” Pipelines 2016: Out of Sight, Out of Mind, Not Out of Risk, Kansas City, MO, 2016, pp. 1875-1886.
16. Center for Engineering Strong Motion Data (CESMD), http://www.strongmotioncenter.org
17. Yang, R., and Zhang, S., “Study on Mechanical Behaviors of Buried Pipelines Subjected to Three-Dimensional Earthquake Input Motions,” Proceedings of ICPTT 2011: Sustainable Solutions for Water, Sewer, Gas, and Oil Pipelines, 2011, pp. 1802-1809.
18. Shah, H., “Controlled Low-Strength Material (CLSM) Produced from Limestone Fines and Other Byproducts,” MS thesis, University of Missouri-Kansas City, Kansas City, MO, 2012.