Peter Tuft - As2885 Pipe Wall Thickness

AS 2885.
1-2007
PIPE WALL THICKNESS
Peter Tuft
AS 2885.1 Launch, February 2007
1
Definition: Nominal WT, tN
• The “actual” thickness

• As nominated on purchase order (design)
• As per mill certificates (operation)
• Not less than:
• Required WT plus allowances & tolerances
• WT for constructability (including rounding to
standard sizes)
• WT for hydrotest
• From Clause 5.4.1

Peter Tuft - Wall Thickness AS 2885.1 Launch, February 2007 2
Definition: Required WT, tW
• Minimum WT required for pipe in service

• Greatest of WT necessary for:
• Penetration resistance
• Minimum critical defect length
• Stress & strain (including vehicle loads)
• Fracture control
• Special construction
• Maintainability (eg. hot tapping)
• SCC mitigation
• Fatigue life
• External pressure
• Internal pressure • From Clause 5.4.2

WT for Internal Pressure, tP
PD D
• Barlow’s rule, unchanged: tP 
• Design factor FD ≤ 0.8 2FD Y
• Lower values of FD at some locations:
• Road & rail crossings 0.72
• Pipeline assemblies 0.67
•
•
Bridges etc
Telescoped lines
 0.67
0.60
• From Clause 5.4.3 & Table 5.4.3

Design Factor
• Design factor applies ONLY to WT for internal

pressure
• Meaningless to talk about design factor in any
other context

Allowances, G
• Allowances make provision for loss of

thickness
• Corrosion or erosion
• Threading, grooving or machining
• Not commonly required, except corrosion
allowance for lines carrying raw well fluids

Manufacturing Tolerance, H
• Does NOT need to be added to Required WT for pipe

made from strip or plate (almost all linepipe)
• Manufacturing tolerances for strip or plate are very small
• May need to be added for seamless pipe
• Hole may not be concentric (up to 12.5% WT)
• Still need to specify tolerance in pipe order
• Covered by API 5L for almost all cases
• Special limits on manufacturing tolerance for design factors
greater than 0.72 (Clause 3.2.2 (a)(v))

Putting them all together
• Figure 5.4
Don’t …
• Calculate WT based on design factor only

• Order pipe based on design pressure and
worry about the rest later
• Add manufacturing tolerance (unless pipe is
seamless)
• Be over-precise about penetration resistance,
critical defect size, etc
• Calculations for decision support, not hard
deterministic outcomes

The Design Problem
• Roma - Brisbane duplication

• DN 400, 450 km
• Land use ranging from rural to suburban
• 15.3 & 10.2 MPa
• Assume X80 pipe
• Select wall thickness for:
• Remote rural areas
• Pipeline parallel to rural roads & highways
• Road crossings
• Suburban areas
• Stations
Elements of Nominal WT
• Internal pressure
• SCC mitigation
• Fatigue life
• Allowances
• Manufacturing tolerance
• Constructability
• Hydrotest
Internal pressure
Design WT, WT,

Location
Factor 15.3 MPa 10.2 MPa
General (R1 to T2) 0.8 7.1 4.7
Road & rail crossings 0.72 7.8 5.2

Pipeline assemblies
(MLVs etc)
0.67 8.4 5.6

Penetration Resistance - Rural
• Identified threat
• 20 t excavator with general purpose teeth
• Min tP = 7.1 mm
• Previously showed even 4.8 mm WT is OK for the
identified threat
• No need to increase WT above tP

Penetration Resistance - Urban
• Identified threat
• 30 t excavator with tiger teeth
• Min tP = 4.7 mm
• Backhoe with tiger teeth could penetrate
• To resist penetration:
• Require 8.4 mm for reasonable assurance
• Require 11.0 mm for complete assurance

No Rupture
(Critical Defect Length)
• Require “No Rupture” in high consequence

areas (urban etc) (Clause 4.7.2)
• Hoop stress ≤ 30% SMYS, or
• Critical defect length (CDL) ≥ 150% max hole
• Hole size from identified threat
• Data in Table M3
• 95 mm hole size for both points of a tiger tooth on
30 t excavator
• Required CDL ≥ 150% of maximum hole
• Must select WT so that CDL ≥ 145 mm
WT for No Rupture - 10.2 MPa
• CDL varies with WT, steel grade and MAOP

• Calculate from Clause 4.8.5
• CDL for 10.2 MPa urban line:
• 4.7 mm WT CDL = 55 mm
• 8.4 mm WT CDL = 150 mm
• 11.0 mm WT CDL = 210 mm
• 8.4 mm WT adequate for “No Rupture”
• CDL ≥ 145 mm as required

WT for No Rupture - 15.3 MPa
• CDL for 15.3 MPa rural line:

• 7.1 mm WT CDL = 65 mm
• 8.4 mm WT CDL = 95 mm
• 11.0 mm WT CDL = 145 mm
• Require 11.0 mm WT for “No Rupture”
• CDL ≥ 145 mm as required
• Only needed if line upstream of city gate passes
through T1 or sensitive locations

Stress & Strain
• Combined stress due to thermal & pressure

effects at bends, stations, etc
• Not relevant to this design problem
• Covered later in the seminar
• External loads at road and rail crossings
• Use API RP 1102 to calculate stresses due to
vehicle loads

Road & Rail Crossings
• Maximum design factor for API 1102

• Includes internal pressure plus vehicle stress
• 0.72 at designated crossings
• 0.9 elsewhere (eg. farm vehicles in paddocks)
• More information on load sources and
calculations in Appendix V
• For the sample design problem:
• Pipe with tP based on 0.72 design factor adequate

Fracture Control
• WT affects fracture initiation

• Critical defect length
• Also affects toughness required for fracture
arrest
• Details covered later in this seminar
• Assume no special requirements
• But check after fracture control presentation

Special Construction
• Covers almost anything where there may be

special requirements, such as
• Above ground or reduced cover
• Road, rail & water crossings
• HDDs
• Tunnels
• Bridges
• etc
• No special requirements

Maintainability
• Usual example is provision for future hot

tapping

Stress Corrosion Cracking
• SCC influenced by hoop stress

• Increased WT reduces hoop stress, may reduce
susceptibility to SCC
• Hence heavy wall pipe sometimes specified
downstream of compressor stations where
elevated temperature also promotes SCC

Fatigue
• Fatigue influenced by stress range

• Discussed in Appendix N
• Increased WT reduces hoop stress, hence also
reduces absolute range of stress due to pressure
cycling
• Fatigue life is long for most ordinary pipelines
(>> 100 years)

External Pressure
• May be an issue for certain deep water

crossings or deep HDDs
• Formulae provided in Clause 5.4.5

Allowances
• Clean dry sales gas

• No internal corrosion
• No erosion
• Good quality external coating plus cathodic
protection
• No external corrosion allowance required

Manufacturing Tolerance
• ERW pipe, manufactured from strip

• No manufacturing tolerance required
• No special requirements for WT
• But note, X80 pipe and 0.8 DF will require tighter
than standard tolerance in linepipe specification

Constructability
• May consider extra WT for HDDs etc

• Outside scope of design problem scenarios
• No need to round linepipe WT to “standard”
sizes
• ERW pipe ordered in project quantities can be
rolled to any desired thickness
• Station piping ordered in small quantities may
need to be rounded up to next standard size
• No special requirements (except at stations)

Hydrostatic Test
• May reduce number of test sections by

adding short length of heavy wall at bottom of
long steep descent

Elements of Nominal WT
• Internal pressure
• SCC mitigation
• Fatigue life
• Allowances
• Manufacturing tolerance
• Constructability
• Hydrotest

Design Problem: Rural
Scenario Remote Rural Parallel Road Road Crossing
Pressure: tP 7.1 7.1 7.8
Other req’d
Nil None > 7.1 None > 7.8
components
Required: tW 7.1 7.1 7.8
Allowances &
Nil Nil Nil
tolerance
Nominal: tN 7.1 7.1 7.8

Design Problem: Suburban
Scenario T1 General T1 Sensitive Road Crossing
Pressure: tP 4.7 4.7 5.2
Other req’d Penetration: 8.4 11.0

Penetration: Penetration: 8.4
components No rupture: 8.4 No rupture: 8.4 No rupture: 8.4
Required: tW 8.4 11.0 8.4
Allowances &
Nil Nil Nil
tolerance
Nominal: tN 8.4 11.0 8.4

Design Problem: Stations (rural)
Linepipe
Scenario Station Pipe
(eg. S-bend)
8.4 19.2
Pressure: tP
(DF = 0.67) (Grade B, DF = 0.67)
Other req’d
Penetration: 8.4 None > 19.2
components
Required: tW 8.4 19.2
Allowances & 21.4

Nil
tolerance (round up to Sch 80)
Nominal: tN 8.4 21.4

Questions?
Peter Tuft
AS 2885.1 Launch, February 2007
34

Peter Tuft - As2885 Pipe Wall Thickness

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Peter Tuft - As2885 Pipe Wall Thickness

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Peter Tuft - As2885 Pipe Wall Thickness

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

AS 2885.

PIPE WALL THICKNESS

• The “actual” thickness

• From Clause 5.4.1

• Minimum WT required for pipe in service

Peter Tuft - Wall Thickness AS 2885.1 Launch, February 2007 3

• From Clause 5.4.3 & Table 5.4.3

Peter Tuft - Wall Thickness AS 2885.1 Launch, February 2007 4

• Design factor applies ONLY to WT for internal

Peter Tuft - Wall Thickness AS 2885.1 Launch, February 2007 5

• Allowances make provision for loss of

• From Clause 5.4.6

Peter Tuft - Wall Thickness AS 2885.1 Launch, February 2007 6

• Does NOT need to be added to Required WT for pipe

• From Clause 5.4.7

Peter Tuft - Wall Thickness AS 2885.1 Launch, February 2007 7

• Calculate WT based on design factor only

Peter Tuft - Wall Thickness AS 2885.1 Launch, February 2007 9

• Roma - Brisbane duplication

Design WT, WT,

General (R1 to T2) 0.8 7.1 4.7

Road & rail crossings 0.72 7.8 5.2

Peter Tuft - Wall Thickness AS 2885.1 Launch, February 2007 12

Peter Tuft - Wall Thickness AS 2885.1 Launch, February 2007 13

Peter Tuft - Wall Thickness AS 2885.1 Launch, February 2007 14

• Require “No Rupture” in high consequence

• CDL varies with WT, steel grade and MAOP

Peter Tuft - Wall Thickness AS 2885.1 Launch, February 2007 16

• CDL for 15.3 MPa rural line:

Peter Tuft - Wall Thickness AS 2885.1 Launch, February 2007 17

• Combined stress due to thermal & pressure

Peter Tuft - Wall Thickness AS 2885.1 Launch, February 2007 18

• Maximum design factor for API 1102

Peter Tuft - Wall Thickness AS 2885.1 Launch, February 2007 19

• WT affects fracture initiation

Peter Tuft - Wall Thickness AS 2885.1 Launch, February 2007 20

• Covers almost anything where there may be

Peter Tuft - Wall Thickness AS 2885.1 Launch, February 2007 21

• Usual example is provision for future hot

Peter Tuft - Wall Thickness AS 2885.1 Launch, February 2007 22

• SCC influenced by hoop stress

Peter Tuft - Wall Thickness AS 2885.1 Launch, February 2007 23

• Fatigue influenced by stress range

Peter Tuft - Wall Thickness AS 2885.1 Launch, February 2007 24

• May be an issue for certain deep water

Peter Tuft - Wall Thickness AS 2885.1 Launch, February 2007 25

• Clean dry sales gas

Peter Tuft - Wall Thickness AS 2885.1 Launch, February 2007 26

• ERW pipe, manufactured from strip

Peter Tuft - Wall Thickness AS 2885.1 Launch, February 2007 27

• May consider extra WT for HDDs etc

Peter Tuft - Wall Thickness AS 2885.1 Launch, February 2007 28

• May reduce number of test sections by

Peter Tuft - Wall Thickness AS 2885.1 Launch, February 2007 29

Peter Tuft - Wall Thickness AS 2885.1 Launch, February 2007 30

Scenario Remote Rural Parallel Road Road Crossing

Pressure: tP 7.1 7.1 7.8

Required: tW 7.1 7.1 7.8

Nominal: tN 7.1 7.1 7.8