10.57647/Jsm.2025.1704.15

Finite Element Evaluation of Stress Distribution in the Buried Steel Pipelines in Presence of Polyethylene Coating

PDF
  • Soroosh Masoudnia1,
  • Pezhman Taghipour Birgani*1,
  • Saeed Yaghoubi2,
  1. Department of Mechanical Engineering, Ahv.C., Islamic Azad University, Ahvaz, Iran
  2. Department of Mechanical Engineering, Faculty of Engineering, Ilam University, Ilam, Iran

Received: 2025-07-12

Revised: 2025-08-20

Accepted: 2025-08-23

Published in Issue 2025-12-31

Copyright (c) 2025 Soroosh Masoudnia, Pezhman Taghipour Birgani, Saeed Yaghoubi (Author)

Creative Commons License

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.

How to Cite

Masoudnia, S., Taghipour Birgani, P., & Yaghoubi, S. (2025). Finite Element Evaluation of Stress Distribution in the Buried Steel Pipelines in Presence of Polyethylene Coating. Journal of Solid Mechanics, 17(4). https://doi.org/10.57647/Jsm.2025.1704.15
Crossref
Scopus
Google Scholar
Europe PMC

PDF views: 42

Abstract

Stress analysis of buried pipes is essential for safety, longer life, and prevention of structural failures. The present research work is related to the stress analysis in the gas transmission steel pipeline buried in the soil. The steel pipe has a three-layer polyethylene coating with viscoelastic properties. The stresses are caused by traffic loads, including the passage of vehicles on the surface, soil weight and fluid pressure inside the pipe. The stress analysis on the buried pipe for three different states including (I) static loading- pipe without coating, (II) static loading- pipe with viscoelastic coating, and (III) dynamic loading- pipe with viscoelastic coating have been performed using finite element method. The results of numerical modeling in ANSYS for static loading and uncoated pipe have been compared with the theoretical outcomes and the accuracy of the modeling has been confirmed. Based on the obtained observations, the dynamic loading and viscoelastic coating were able to affect the stress distribution created in the buried pipe, in comparison with the static loading without coating. Also, increasing the friction in the pipe-soil interface kept the tensile stress at the top of the pipe crown constant and had a negligible effect on the stress at the bottom of the crown.

Keywords

  • Stress analysis,
  • Buried pipe,
  • ANSYS,
  • Viscoelastic coating,
  • Finite element method
PDF

References

  1. Hussain, M., Zhang, T., Chaudhry, M., Jamil, I., Kausar, S., and Hussain, I. 2024. Review of prediction of stress corrosion cracking in gas pipelines using machine learning. Machines 12(1):42. https://doi.org/10.3390/machines1
  2. Kennedy J. L. 1984. Oil and gas pipeline fundamentals. PennWell Publishing Company.
  3. Datta, T. 1999. Seismic response of buried pipelines: a state-of-the-art review. Nuclear engineering and design 192(2-3):271-284.
  4. Abdoun, T. H., Ha, D., O’Rourke, M. J., Symans, M. D., O’Rourke, T. D., Palmer, M. C., and Steward, H. E. 2009. Factors influencing the behavior of buried pipelines subjected to earthquake faulting. Soil Dynamics and Earthquake Engineering 29(3):415-427. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.soildyn.2008.04.006
  5. Abubakar, A., Abisoye, O. A., Alabi, I. O., Solomon, A., and Oyefolahan, I. O. 2025. Systematic literature review and bibliometric analysis of pipeline monitoring and leakage detection techniques. Discover Mechanical Engineering 4(1):17. https://doi.org/10.1007/s44245-025-00102-w
  6. Yaghoubi, S., and Shishesaz, M. 2023. A Novel Approach to Investigate Transient Stress Distribution Caused by Fiber Breakage in Simple and Hybrid Composite Materials. Journal of Failure Analysis and Prevention 23:325-338. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11668-022-01584-6
  7. Shishesaz, M., Gatea, A. H., Moradi, S., and Yaghoubi, S. 2024. Stress analysis in the buried polyethylene pipes with viscoelastic behavior: a finite element study. Discover Applied Sciences 6(11):616. https://doi.org/10.1007/s42452-024-06331-0
  8. Noor, M. A., and Dhar, A. S. 2003. Three-dimensional response of buried pipe under vehicle loads. New Pipeline Technologies, Security, and Safety 87:658-665. https://doi.org/10.1061/40690(2003)87
  9. Zhang, Y., Hou, S., Lin, L., Lou, Y., and Zhou, Y. 2023. Experimental study on the mechanical behavior of buried steel pipeline subjected to the local subsidence. International Journal of Pressure Vessels and Piping 206:105037. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijpvp.2023.105037
  10. Shishesaz, M., Yaghoubi, S., and Hussein, Gatea A. 2024. Numerical analysis of stress distribution in the pressurized composite pipe buried in the soil. Journal of Adhesion Science and Technology 38(20):3825-3841. https://doi.org/10.1080/01694243.2024.2356917
  11. Watkins, R. K., Reeve, R. C., and Goddard, J. B. 1983. Effect of heavy loads on buried corrugated polyethylene pipe.Transportation Research Record 903:99-108.
  12. Brachman, R. W., Moore, I., and Rowe, R. 2000. The design of a laboratory facility for evaluating the structural response of small-diameter buried pipes. Canadian Geotechnical Journal 37(2):281-295. https://doi.org/10.1139/t99-104
  13. Arockiasamy, M., Chaallal, O., and Limpeteeprakarn, T. 2006. Full-scale field tests on flexible pipes under live load application. Journal of performance of constructed facilities 20(1):21-27. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)0887-3828(2006)20:1(21)
  14. Kang, J. S., Han, T. H., Kang, Y. J., and Yoo, C. H. 2009. Short-term and long-term behaviors of buried corrugated high-density polyethylene (HDPE) pipes. Composites Part B: Engineering 40(5):404-412. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compositesb.2009.01.006
  15. Goltabar, A. M., and Shekarchi, M. 2010. Investigation of traffic load on the buried pipeline by using of real scale experiment and Plaxis-3D software. Research Journal of Applied Sciences, Engineering and Technology 2(2):107-113.
  16. Zhou, X., Yang, Z., and Han, P. 2015. Innovation design of long-distance pipelines buried under high-filling planned roads. Natural Gas Industry B 2(2-3):198-202. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ngib.2015.07.011
  17. Zhang, J., Liang, Z., and Zhao, G. 2016. Mechanical behaviour analysis of a buried steel pipeline under ground overload. Engineering Failure Analysis 63:131-145. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.engfailanal.2016.02.008
  18. Deng, J., Liu, Y., Zhang, Z., and Liu, W. 2017. Dynamic behaviors of multi-span viscoelastic functionally graded material pipe conveying fluid. Proceedings of the Institution of Mechanical Engineers, Part C: Journal of Mechanical Engineering Science 231(17):3181-3192. https://doi.org/10.1177/0954406216642483
  19. Jacques, R. C., de Oliveira, H. H., dos Santos, R. W., and Clarke, T. G. 2019. Design and in situ validation of a guided wave system for corrosion monitoring in coated buried steel pipes. Journal of Nondestructive Evaluation 38:1-12. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10921-019-0604-7
  20. Wu, K., Zhang, H., Liu, X., Bolati, D., Liu, G., Chen, P., and Zhao, Y. 2019. Stress and strain analysis of buried PE pipelines subjected to mechanical excavation. Engineering Failure Analysis 106:104171. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.engfailanal.2019.104171
  21. Wu, Y., You, X., Zha, S. 2020. Mechanical behavior analysis of buried polyethylene pipe under land subsidence. Engineering Failure Analysis 108:104351. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.engfailanal.2019.104351
  22. Perić, M., Garašić, I., Gubeljak, N., Tonković, Z., Nižetić, S., and Osman, K. 2022. Numerical Simulation and Experimental Measurement of Residual Stresses in a Thick-Walled Buried-Arc Welded Pipe Structure. Metals 12(7):1102. https://doi.org/10.3390/met12071102
  23. Khan, M. U. A., Shukla, S. K., and Paraskeva, T. S. 2022. Stress distribution around the conduit buried within a soil slope–An experimental investigation. Transportation Geotechnics 32:100687. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.trgeo.2021.100687
  24. Zhao, K., Jiang, N., Zhou, C., Li, H., Cai, Z., and Zhu, B. 2022. Dynamic behavior and failure of buried gas pipeline considering the pipe connection form subjected to blasting seismic waves. Thin-Walled Structures 170:108495. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tws.2021.108495
  25. Zhang, D., Liu, X., Yang, Y., Shi, N., Jiang, J., Chen, P., Wu, X., Gao, H., and Zhang, H. 2022. Field experiment and numerical investigation on the mechanical response of buried pipeline under traffic load. Engineering Failure Analysis 142:106734. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.engfailanal.2022.106734
  26. Wu, T., Jiang, N., Zhou, C., Luo, X., Li, H., and Zhang, Y. 2022. Experimental and numerical investigations on damage assessment of high-density polyethylene pipe subjected to blast loads. Engineering Failure Analysis 131:105856. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.engfailanal.2021.105856
  27. Yang, Y. J., Liu, G. H., Yu, P., Huang, C., and Li, L. 2023. Dynamic response and safety analysis of polyethylene pipeline under rockfall conditions. Quality and Reliability Engineering International 39(5):2044-2068. https://doi.org/10.1002/qre.3383
  28. Zhang, Y., and Wong, R. C. K. 2023. Effect of corrosion on buried pipe responses under external load: Experimental and numerical study. Tunnelling and Underground Space Technology 132:104934. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tust.2022.104934
  29. He, T., Gan, L., Liao, K., Liao, D., Xia, G., Chen, L., Gan, Y., Liao, J., and Tang, X. 2024. Quantitative study on dynamic response of buried natural gas pipeline under vehicle load. Engineering Failure Analysis 162:108454. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.engfailanal.2024.108454
  30. Moser, A. P., and Folkman, S. 2008. Buried pipe design. McGraw-Hill Education.
  31. Marston, A. 1930. The theory of external loads on closed conduits in the light of the latest experiments. Highway research board proceedings.
  32. Minervino, C., Sivakumar, B., Moses, F., Mertz, D., and Edberg, W. 2004. New AASHTO guide manual for load and resistance factor rating of highway bridges. Journal of Bridge Engineering 9(1):43-54. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)1084-0702(2004)9:1(43)
  33. Lakes, R. S. 2009. Viscoelastic materials. Cambridge university press.
  34. Ferry, J. D. 1980. Viscoelastic properties of polymers. John Wiley & Sons.
  35. Institute ANS. 1995. Gas transmission and distribution piping systems. American Society of Mechanical Engineers.
  36. American National Standards Institute. Committee B31 CfPP. 2002. Pipeline Transportation Systems for Liquid Hydrocarbons and Other Liquids: ASME Code for Pressure Piping, B31. American Society of Mechanical Engineers.
  37. Vazouras, P., Karamanos, S. A., and Dakoulas, P. 2012. Mechanical behavior of buried steel pipes crossing active strike-slip faults. Soil Dynamics and Earthquake Engineering 41:164-180. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.soildyn.2012.05.012
  38. Hengprathanee, S. 2000. Evaluation of the geometry effect of the profile of high density polyethylene pipes. Ohio University.