Research Papers: Pipeline Systems

Finite-Element Evaluation of Burst Pressure Models for Corroded Pipelines

[+] Author and Article Information
Bipul Chandra Mondal

Department of Civil Engineering,
Memorial University of Newfoundland,
St. John's, NL A1B 3X5, Canada
e-mail: bm6080@mun.ca

Ashutosh Sutra Dhar

Assistant Professor
Department of Civil Engineering,
Memorial University of Newfoundland,
St. John's, NL A1B 3X5, Canada
e-mail: asdhar@mun.ca

1Corresponding author.

Contributed by the Pressure Vessel and Piping Division of ASME for publication in the JOURNAL OF PRESSURE VESSEL TECHNOLOGY. Manuscript received January 4, 2016; final manuscript received July 21, 2016; published online September 28, 2016. Assoc. Editor: Hardayal S. Mehta.

J. Pressure Vessel Technol 139(2), 021702 (Sep 28, 2016) (8 pages) Paper No: PVT-16-1001; doi: 10.1115/1.4034408 History: Received January 04, 2016; Revised July 21, 2016

Codes/standards have been developed to calculate accurately the burst pressure for corroded pipelines. Five burst pressure models are evaluated in this paper using three-dimensional finite-element (FE) analysis. The finite-element models are validated using burst test results available in the literature. The design codes/standards are found to calculate variable burst pressures with respect to the finite-element calculations and the laboratory test results. The variability in the calculated burst pressures is attributed to the use of different flow stresses for the material and different burst pressure reduction factors for the corroded geometry. The Folias factor is considered as the major parameter contributing to the burst pressure reduction factor. Three different equations are currently used to calculate the Folias factor in the design codes that are expressed in terms of l2/(Dt). However, the finite-element evaluation presented here reveals that the Folias factor also depends on other parameters such as the defect depth.

Copyright © 2017 by ASME
Your Session has timed out. Please sign back in to continue.


Mohitpour, M. , Golshan, H. , and Murray, A. , 2003, Pipeline Design and Construction: A Practical Approach, ASME Press, New York.
Zhu, X. , and Leis, B. N. , 2012, “ Evaluation of Burst Pressure Prediction Models for Line Pipes,” Int. J. Pressure Vessels Piping, 89, pp. 85–97. [CrossRef]
ASME, 2012, “ Manual for Determining the Remaining Strength of Corroded Pipelines,” Supplement to the ASME B31 Code for Pressure Piping, American Society of Mechanical Engineers, New York, Standard No. ASME B31G-2012.
CSA, 2011, “ Oil and Gas Pipeline Systems,” Canadian Standard Association, Mississauga, ON, Canada, Standard No. Z662-11.
DNV, 2010, “ Corroded Pipeline,” Det Norske Veritas, Høvik, Norway, Standard No. DNV RP-F101.
Swankie, T. , Owen, R. , Bood, R. , Chauhan, V. , and Gilbert, G. , 2012, “ Assessment of the Remaining Strength of Corroded Small Diameter (Below 6″) Pipelines and Pipework,” ASME Paper No. IPC2012-90401.
Zhou, W. , and Huang, G. X. , 2012, “ Model Error Assessments of Burst Capacity Models for Corroded Pipelines,” Int. J. Pressure Vessels Piping, 99–100, pp. 1–8. [CrossRef]
Hasan, M. , Khan, F. , and Kenny, S. , 2011, “ Identification of the Cause of Variability of Probability of Failure for Burst Models Recommended by Codes/Standards,” ASME J. Pressure Vessel Technol., 133(4), p. 041101. [CrossRef]
Chen, Y. , Zhang, H. , Zhang, J. , Li, X. , and Zhou, J. , 2015, “ Failure Analysis of High Strength Pipeline With Single and Multiple Corrosions,” J. Mater. Des., 67, pp. 552–557. [CrossRef]
Mondal, B. C. , and Dhar, A. S. , 2015, “ Corrosion Effects on the Strength of Steel Pipes Using FEA,” ASME Paper No. OMAE2015-42003.
Dhar, A. S. , and Mondal, B. C. , 2015, “ FE Modelling of Corroded Pipelines Under Internal Pressure,” IBC Energy 6th Annual Conference, Arctic Oil and Gas, North America, St. John's, NL, Apr. 14–15.
Fekete, G. , and Varga, L. , 2012, “ The Effect of the Width to Length Ratios of Corrosion Defects on the Burst Pressures of Transmission Pipelines,” Eng. Failure Anal., 21, pp. 21–30. [CrossRef]
Diniz, J. L. C. , Vieira, R. D. , Castro, J. T. , Benjamin, A. C. , and Freire, J. L. F. , 2006, “ Stress and Strain Analysis of Pipelines With Localized Metal Loss,” Exp. Mech., 46(6), pp. 765–775. [CrossRef]
Oh, C. K. , Kim, Y. J. , Baek, J. H. , Kim, Y. P. , and Kim, W. S. , 2007, “ Ductile Failure Analysis of API X65 Pipes With Notch-Type Defects Using a Local Fracture Criterion,” J. Pressure Vessels Piping, 84(8), pp. 5512–5525.


Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 1

Idealization of corrosion: (a) corrosion on pipe surface, (b) cross section across the center of corrosion, and (c) longitudinal section (X–X)

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 2

Finite-element mesh: (a) full pipe and (b) zone around corroded area

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 3

Stress–strain relations for pipe materials (pipe A, C, and D): (a) pipe A, D (API 5L X60) and (b) pipe C (API 5L X65)

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 4

Burst pressure calculation using FEM (pipe A1)

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 5

Effect of the edge shape of corrosion (D = 324 mm, d/t = 0.40, and l = 528 mm)

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 6

Deformation of cross section at the midsection of corroded area (deformation is exaggerated by 50 times)

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 7

Contours of von Mises stress and principal plastic strain (D = 324 mm, d/t = 0.70, l/D = 1.63, and internal pressure = 0.66Pburst): (a) von Mises stress (N/m2) and (b) maximum principal plastic strain

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 8

Comparison of burst pressures

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 9

Comparison of burst pressure reduction factors



Some tools below are only available to our subscribers or users with an online account.

Related Content

Customize your page view by dragging and repositioning the boxes below.

Related Journal Articles
Related eBook Content
Topic Collections

Sorry! You do not have access to this content. For assistance or to subscribe, please contact us:

  • TELEPHONE: 1-800-843-2763 (Toll-free in the USA)
  • EMAIL: asmedigitalcollection@asme.org
Sign In