Provide PDF Format
PRCI PR-310-04402
- Gap Study and Recommendation for the Analysis and Testing of Pipe Response to Buried Explosive Detonations
- Report / Survey by Pipeline Research Council International, 05/20/2005
- Publisher: PRCI
$48.00$95.00
L52260e
Baker Engineering and Risk Consultants, Inc.
Need: Current methods to assess pipeline response to nearby sub-surface blasting are largely empirical or semiempirical and do not consider increasingly important factors such as non-pristine pipelines, blasting in soil with varying soil and terrain characteristics, or mitigative measures. Also, the accuracy and limits to the applicability of these methods is questionable.
Result: A primary task of this project was a literature search to identify all available testing, analysis, and mitigation methods related to blasting near pipelines. Analytical methods to consider cracks and corrosion in non-pristine pipeline are also reviewed in the report. The literature search showed that a significant database of test results of steel pipeline response to blasting in soil is available. A more limited database is available for steel pipeline response to blasting in rock and practically no data is available for non-steel and non-pristine pipeline response to blasting. The available models to predict blasting stresses in pipelines ranged from a semi-empirical method to predict pipeline stress to simple soil peak particle velocity (PPV) limits on ground shock produced at the pipeline location to prevent pipeline damage.
Benefit: The literature review covered four main categories: data from blasting near pipelines and earthquakes, methodologies for predicting or controlling pipeline stresses from blasting, information on mitigative measures to reduce pipeline stresses from blasting, and methods to account for the effects of non-pristine pipeline. Procedures to address combined loadings on typical transmission pipelines are also summarized.
Baker Engineering and Risk Consultants, Inc.
Need: Current methods to assess pipeline response to nearby sub-surface blasting are largely empirical or semiempirical and do not consider increasingly important factors such as non-pristine pipelines, blasting in soil with varying soil and terrain characteristics, or mitigative measures. Also, the accuracy and limits to the applicability of these methods is questionable.
Result: A primary task of this project was a literature search to identify all available testing, analysis, and mitigation methods related to blasting near pipelines. Analytical methods to consider cracks and corrosion in non-pristine pipeline are also reviewed in the report. The literature search showed that a significant database of test results of steel pipeline response to blasting in soil is available. A more limited database is available for steel pipeline response to blasting in rock and practically no data is available for non-steel and non-pristine pipeline response to blasting. The available models to predict blasting stresses in pipelines ranged from a semi-empirical method to predict pipeline stress to simple soil peak particle velocity (PPV) limits on ground shock produced at the pipeline location to prevent pipeline damage.
Benefit: The literature review covered four main categories: data from blasting near pipelines and earthquakes, methodologies for predicting or controlling pipeline stresses from blasting, information on mitigative measures to reduce pipeline stresses from blasting, and methods to account for the effects of non-pristine pipeline. Procedures to address combined loadings on typical transmission pipelines are also summarized.
Related Products
PRCI PR-12-43
Feasibility of Utilizing Microseismic Technjiques for the Evaluation of Underground Gas Storage Rese..
$6.00 $12.00
PRCI PR-172-507
Investigation of Two-Phase Flow in Horizontal and Inclined Pipes at Large Pipe Size and High Gas Den..
$448.00 $895.00
