Seismic Response of Pipelines from Multi-Point Shaking Table Tests
Publication: Lifelines 2022
ABSTRACT
Buried pipelines are an essential underground infrastructure of modern societies, which is susceptible to damage during earthquake events. The characteristics of seismic excitation that impact pipelines are affected by the spatial distribution of seismic waves and the large extent of long pipelines. A shaking table testing program was conducted on scaled buried pipeline model to investigate its seismic response under non-uniform ground motion. The pipelines-sand model was enclosed in a suspension continuum soil box excited using three shaking tables that can induce uniform and non-uniform seismic excitations. The soil bed was uniform dry sand and the model pipeline was 6.0 m in length and 150 mm in diameter. The soil was instrumented with accelerometers along the soil profile, while the pipeline was instrumented with strain gauges and accelerometers around the pipeline. The soil-pipeline model was subjected to twenty-four different ground motions. The recorded data from all instrumentation were analyzed to evaluate the influence of non-uniform seismic excitation on the pipeline response. The results demonstrated that the pipeline response to longitudinal acceleration was larger than the response of surrounding soil under non-uniform excitation. In addition, the peak pipeline tensile and compressive strains to non-uniform ground motion was about twice that under uniform ground motion.
Get full access to this article
View all available purchase options and get full access to this chapter.
REFERENCES
Ariman, T., and Muleski, G. E. (1981). “A review of the response of buried pipeline under seismic excitations.” Earthq. Eng. Struct. Dyn., 9, 133-151.
Datta, T. (1999). “Seismic response of buried pipeline: a state-of-the-art review.” Nucl. Eng. Des., 192(2-3), 271-284.
Hajali, M., Alavinasab, A., and Shdid, C. A. (2016). “Structural performance of buried prestressed concrete cylinder pipes with harnessed joints interaction using numerical modeling.” Tunn. Undergr. Space Technol, 51, 11-19.
Han, J. Y., El Naggar, M. H., Li, L. Y., et al. (2020). “Design and Commissioning of Continuous Soil Box Supported on Shake Tables Array for Testing Long Geostructures.” Soil Dyn. Earthq. Eng., 132, 106107.
Hindy, A., and Novak, M. (1979). “Earthquake response of underground pipeline.” Earthq. Eng. Struct. Dyn., 7, 451-476.
Hindy, A., and Novak, M. (1980). “Pipeline response to random ground motion.” J. Eng. Mech. ASCE 106, 339–360.
Housner, G. W., and Jenningst, P. C. (1972). “The San Fernando California earthquake”. Earthq. Eng. Struct. Dyn., 1, 5–31.
Jafarzadeh, F., et al. (2010). “Investigating dynamic response of a buried pipeline in sandy soil layer by 1g shaking table test.” Int. J. Civ. Eng, 8(2), 107-124.
Kokavessis, N. K., and Anagnostidis, G. S. Finite element modeling of buried pipeline subjected to seismic loads: soil structure interaction using contact elements, ASME 2006 Pressure Vessels and Piping/ICPVT-11 Conference. American Society of Mechanical Engineers Digital Collection, 2006: 119-125.
Lee, H. (2010). Finite element analysis of a buried pipeline. MESc. Thesis, School of Mechanical, Aerospace and Civil engineering. The University of Manchester, UK.
Lee, D. H., Kim, B. H., Lee, H., and Kong, J. S. (2009). “Seismic behavior of a buried gas pipeline under earthquake excitations.” Eng. Struct., 31(5), 1011-1023.
Li, H. J., and Wang, J. X. (2017). “Recent research advances in lifeline earthquake engineering.” Earthq. Eng. Eng. Vib., 37(3), 10-26.
Liang, J., and Sun, S. (2000). “Site effects on seismic behavior of pipeline: a review.” J. Press. Vessel. Technol., 122(4), 469-475.
Masso, A. G., and Attalla, I. (1984). “Finite element verses simplified method in the seismic analysis of underground structures.” Earthq. Eng. Struct. Dyn., 12, 347–367.
McCabe, M. W. (2014). Soil Parameters for Assessing Axial and Transverse Behavior of Restrained Pipelines Part 1: Axial Behavior. Underground to the Forefront of Innovation and Sustainability., URS Corporation.
Nelson, I., and Weidlinger, P. (1979). “Dynamic seismic analysis of long segmented lifelines.” Trans. ASME J. Press. Vessel. Technol., 101, 10-20.
Newmark, N. M. (1968). “Problems in wave propagation in soil and rock.” Proc. Int. Symp. wave Propag. Dyn. Prop. earth Mater. Albuquerque: University of New Mexico Press, 7–26.
Psyrras, N. K., and Sextos, A. G. (2018). “Safety of buried steel natural gas pipelines under earthquake-induced ground shaking: A review.” Soil. Dyn. Earthq. Eng. Struct. Dyn., 106, 254-277.
Shah, H. H., and Chu, S. C. (1974). “Seismic analysis of underground structural elements.” J. Power Div., ASCE 100, 53–62.
Wang, L. R. L., and Cheng, K. M. (1979). “Seismic response behavior of buried pipeline.” Trans. ASME J. Press. Vessel. Technol., 101, 21-30.
Wong, F. S., and Weidlinger, P. (1983). “Design of underground protective structures.” J. Struct. Eng., ASCE 109, 1972-1979.
Wong, K. C., Shah, A. H., and Datta, S. K. (1986). “Three dimensional motion of buried pipeline.” J. Eng. Mech. ASCE 112,1319–1348.
Yan, K., et al. (2018). “Seismic responses of deep buried pipeline under non-uniform excitations from large scale shaking table test.” Soil Dyn. Earthq. Eng., 113, 180-192.
Yuan, Y., et al. (2018). “Multi-point shaking table test for long tunnels subjected to non-uniform seismic loadings–Part I: Theory and validation.” Soil Dyn. Earthq. Eng., 108, 177-186.
Information & Authors
Information
Published In
Lifelines 2022
Pages: 727 - 738
History
Published online: Nov 16, 2022
Authors
Metrics & Citations
Metrics
Citations
Download citation
If you have the appropriate software installed, you can download article citation data to the citation manager of your choice. Simply select your manager software from the list below and click Download.