Pang Xinfeng, Tong Lei, Song Zhipeng, Sun Xiao, Li Zengcai, Zhang Lisong
Engineering Technology Innovation Co., Ltd., PipeChina, Tianjin, China.
College of Pipeline and Civil Engineering, China University of Petroleum, Qingdao, China.
PLoS One. 2025 Jul 1;20(7):e0325123. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0325123. eCollection 2025.
During buried pipelines, two construction modes are used, namely, sinking and lowering pipeline into being-dug trench by self-weight, lifting and lowering pipeline into pre-dug trench by hoist. For pipeline sinking and lowering-in, the analytical model was derived especially considering the soil displacement at the end boundary of being-dug trench. For pipeline lifting and lowering-in, the control condition to calculate the lifting force was firstly given based on the extreme displacement of the pipeline. Then, finite difference on the pipeline deflection at each lifting point was performed to obtain the bending moment of the pipeline, and then the lifting point force was derived. Furthermore, the analytical model was established for lifting and lowering-in. By the finite element model and on-site experiment, the analytical models were validated. Results indicated that: (1) taking the length of arched segment, the length of suspended segment, the maximum stress and the bending moment as comparison variables, the maximum errors were 5.56%, 5.96%, 5.35%, 7.36% between the sinking and lowering-in model and the finite element model, while were 8.79%, 4.27%, 8.68%, 8.72% between the sinking and lowering-in model and the on-site experiment; (2) the maximum errors between the lifting and lowering model and finite element model were 7.63%, 8.59%, 3.74%, 6.44%, 9.51% and 8.13%, considering the lifting force and pipeline stress in the vertical plane, the lifting force and pipeline stress in the horizontal plane, and the combined lifting force and combined stress as comparison parameters, and meanwhile the analytical results showed the overall agreement to numerical model at the trench-touched point and the ground-departed point, with the relative errors of 8.59% and 3.68% (in the vertical plane), 5.73% and 4.39% (in the horizontal plane), 6.85% and 4.12% (combined stress), respectively.
在埋地管道施工过程中,采用了两种施工方式,即管道自沉就位和用吊车吊入预先挖好的沟槽。对于管道自沉就位,推导了分析模型,特别考虑了开挖沟槽端部边界处的土体位移。对于管道吊入,首先根据管道的极限位移给出了计算起吊力的控制条件。然后,对各起吊点处管道的挠度进行有限差分,得到管道的弯矩,进而推导出起吊点力。此外,还建立了管道吊入的分析模型。通过有限元模型和现场试验对分析模型进行了验证。结果表明:(1)以拱段长度、悬垂段长度、最大应力和弯矩作为比较变量,自沉就位模型与有限元模型之间的最大误差分别为5.56%、5.96%、5.35%、7.36%,自沉就位模型与现场试验之间的最大误差分别为8.79%、4.27%、8.68%、8.72%;(2)以垂直面内的起吊力和管道应力、水平面内的起吊力和管道应力以及组合起吊力和组合应力作为比较参数,吊入模型与有限元模型之间的最大误差分别为7.63%、8.59%、3.74%、6.44%、9.51%和8.13%,同时分析结果表明在沟槽接触点和地面离开点处与数值模型总体吻合,垂直面内的相对误差分别为8.59%和3.68%,水平面内的相对误差分别为5.73%和4.39%,组合应力的相对误差分别为6.85%和4.12%。