Application of CFD on Assessment of

Drag Forces Exerted by Subaqueous

Mudflow
Presented by:
Zainul Faizien Haza

Outline
BACKGROUND

LITERATURE REVIEW

PROBLEM IDENTIFICATION

OBJECTIVES

METHODOLOGY

RESULT AND DISCUSSION

CONCLUDING REMARK
Background
Submarine slide is one of the geohazards which has
now become a serious and complex problem in the
marine field because it has detrimental consequences
against offshore installations such as fixed platforms,
submarine pipelines, cables and other seafloor
installations as well as people and infrastructure along
the coastlines.

As consequences of rapid development of oil and gas
industry, which is moving to depth over 1000 m along
or in propinquity of the continental slope, pipelines
installation are subjected to such geologically
hazardous condition.
The Society of Underwater Technology estimates the
cost to repair pipelines damaged by submarine slides
to reach US$ 400 million per year.
Submarine slide was
geohazard
Seafloor pipeline was
threatened by
geologically hazardous
condition
http://gulfofmexico.marinedebris.noaa.gov/photos-video/SideScan/SideScan01.jpg/image_view_fullscreen
Seafloor pipelines (generally overlying the continental slopes) are subjected to
movements of unstable sediments.
Background
Literature Review


Submarine slide involved cohesive fine-grained material, i.e. clays and silts (Hance
2003).

Kaolin was the most predominant clay mineral contained in seafloor sediment (Fallick et
al. 1993; Youn et al. 2006; Martn-Puertas et al. 2007).

Findings revealed that in terrigenous clastic sediment, muddy material dominated the
schematic of sediment deposits (Nichols 1999).

Submarine slide could reach very long run-out distance up to hundreds of kilometers on a
gentle slope (Elverhoi et al. 2000; Hance 2003; Blasio et al. 2004; Bryn et al. 2005).

Field investigation
Numerical modeling
In year 2001, a simulation was performed in 1-D numerical model (Imran et al. 2001).
This study was incorporating the model of the Bingham, HerschelBulkley, and bilinear
rheologies of viscoplastic fluids. The numerical simulation with slope of 2 characterized the
velocity up to 16.18 m/s.

Other computational model that was conducted in 2007 was fitted into hydroplaning
observation and proposed a block model for submarine slide simulation (Wright and Hu
2007).

Computational model of a relatively new is the impact of submarine debris flow on
pipelines which was modeled using computational fluid dynamic that delivered result of drag
coefficient C
D
for design purpose, related to the value of Reynolds number, Re (Zakeri et al.
2009).
Literature Review
Availability of CFD software for quantitative prediction of flow phenomena
including : all desired quantities with high resolution in space and time; the actual
flow domain; and virtually any problem and realistic operating conditions.
Problem Identification
Objectives
With respect to the above circumstances, the current work is aimed to employ
the numerical method of CFD in investigation and elaboration of the model
of submarine slide, which is simulated by laboratory experiment. Commercial
software of ANSYS Fluent 14.0 is utilized to conduct the numerical simulation.
Furthermore, the use of CFD in the current work is also to replicate the conditions
tested in the laboratory experiment in order to obtain the captured visualizations of
the motion attributes of the sub-aqueous mudflow including velocity and exerted
drag force, which are very difficult to be done using conventional camera.
Experimental studies and numerical modeling of sub-aqueous mudflow
Experimental studies
Numerical
modeling
Methodology > scheme of work
determine the magnitude of
the apparent viscosity,
app
.
Brookfield Digital Viscometer DV-I+
Fann Model 35 Viscometer
Fann Model 140 Scale Mud Balance
determine the magnitude of the apparent
viscosity,
app
.
determine the magnitude of the
density (r).
m
app
; r
American
Petroleum
Institute (API)
Standard
ASTM D1092-05
Methodology > measurement devices
Kaolin clay content
(KCC)
(%)
Kaolin Water Mud
(liters)
Weight
(kg)
Volume
(liters)
Weight
(kg)
Volume
(liters)
10

13

15

18

20

23

25

28

30

35
5.0

6.5

8.0

9.5

11.0

12.5

14.0

15.5

17.0

21.0
1.9

2.5

3.0

3.6

4.2

4.8

5.3

5.9

6.5

8.0
45.0

43.5

45.3

43.3

44.0

41.8

42.0

39.9

39.7

39.0
45.0

43.5

45.3

43.3

44.0

41.8

42.0

39.9

39.7

39.0
46.9

46.0

48.4

46.9

48.2

46.6

47.3

45.8

46.1

47.0
Methodology > mud mix design
Methodology > kaolin and water composition
Methodology > rectangular channel (flume)
Methodology > rectangular channel (flume)
Methodology > pipe model
Methodology > CFD simulation >pre-processing
Fluid area
x-axis y-axis
Minimum
(m)
Maximum
(m)
Minimum
(m)
Maximum
(m)
Mud 0 1.009 0.394 0.60
Water 0.999 8.55 0 0.60
The 18,871 nodes and 18,425 elements
were created by using size function of on
proximity and curvature with proximity
minimum size of 1.2512e-003 m and
maximum face size of 2e-002 m.
Experiment Results > rheological properties
Kaolin clay content
(KCC)
(%)
Density (r
f
)
GS
Viscosity
(lbs/gal) (kg/m
3
)
(Pas)
*Pascal second
Lowest
Highest
10 8.79 1054 1.07 0.105 2.201
13 8.93 1071 1.09 0.187 4.882
15 9.10 1092 1.10
0.238 6.170
18 9.21 1105 1.12
0.493 12.204
20 9.45 1134 1.13
0.696 15.096
23 9.57 1148 1.18
1.029 21.881
25 9.60 1152 1.20
2.120 28.642
28 10.19 1223 1.22 2.274 30.198
30 10.30 1236 1.23
2.386 33.636
35 10.55 1266 1.27
4.778 51.543
n
c
K =
Herschel-Bulkley model
shear strength (t)
yield strength (t
c
)
shear rate ( )

Solver of least squares approach

is employed to generate the
fitting curve equation with
approximation error:

N
i
n
i i ci i
K err
1
2
)) ( ( t t
R
2
in range 0.996 to 0.999
Kaolin clay
content (KCC)
(%)
t
c
K n
R
2

(%)
10 0.60 0.73 0.25 97.09
13 0.69 1.59 0.25 98.99
15 1.71 1.63 0.27 99.43
18 2.69 3.05 0.30 98.94
20 3.40 4.73 0.32 99.99
23 3.47 7.11 0.32 99.92
25 3.57 8.88 0.40 99.79
28 4.96 10.25 0.40 99.90
30 5.70 12.68 0.42 99.99
35 9.00 20.36 0.50 99.99
Experiment Results > rheological model
Experiment Results > rheological model
Experiment Results > laboratory experiments
Experiment Results > CFD simulation
In order to observe the dynamics of nose position, Euclidean method is applied to
determine the distance reached by mudflow between two consecutive captured
images.
2
1 2
2
1 2
2
) ( ) ( z z l l l
ij

Experiment Results > velocity measurements
Experiment Results > velocity measurements
Mudflow Velocity in Laboratory Experiment
Experiment Results > velocity measurements

u
= Re
2
f

m
r
Experiment Results > the collisions
Lab.
Experiment
CFD
Simulation
Experiment Results > laboratory experiment >drag forces
2
2
1
u A
F
C
f
d
d

r
Signal processing is
implemented to get a precise
read of data logger output. Tool
of Fast Fourier Transform (FFT)
was employed to analyze the
data logger output.
Experiment Results > CFD simulation >coeff. of drag forces
Coefficient of Drag Forces (C
d
) in CFD Simulation
Experiment Results > coeff. of drag forces
Mud
model
(%KCC)
r u Re Fd
max
Cd
(kg/m
3
) (m/s) (N)
Laboratory Experiment
10 1054 0.29 92.6 0.267 0.74
15 1092 0.25 25.3 0.336 1.19
20 1134 0.27 15.3 0.515 1.44
25 1152 0.26 7.89 0.694 2.14
30 1236 0.25 7.95 1.038 3.17
CFD Simulation
10 1054 0.28 65.54 0.5227 1.61
15 1092 0.31 20.85 0.8823 2.14
20 1134 0.33 10.42 1.7029 3.51
25 1152 0.35 4.20 2.4726 4.46
30 1236 0.38 1.53 5.4901 7.83
Summary of laboratory experiment and CFD simulation
Experiment Results > coeff. of drag forces
) 15 . 1 (
7 . 22 82 . 0

e d
R C
1 . 1
Re
19
2 . 1
Newtonian non
D C

To express the C
d
as relative to Reynolds number (R
e
), which is representing the C
d

values propagation of the two types of experiment, laboratory and CFD. The
formulation of C
d
- R
e
relationship is expressed as follow.

According to the solver of least square approach, the current formulation provided
the R
2
= 92.1%.

Similarly, in 2009, Zakeri et al. had proposed a correlation between C
d
and R
e
,
which was expressed as

Experiment Results > coeff. of drag forces
Consider a 100 m section of a 0.15 m diameter pipeline that is subjected to impact by a
submarine debris flow approaching at 3 m/s having a density of 1200 kg/m3 and its flow
properties defined by the following rheological model: t = 500 + 15
0.45
where, t is the shear stress in Pascal. The drag force exerted by the impact per unit length of
the pipe for the cases of suspended seafloor pipeline installations is obtained through the
following calculations:
= u /d = 3 / 0.15 = 20
s-1
.
R
e
= (r x u
2
) / (m x ) ; where m x = t t = 500 + 15 x 20
0.45
= 557.75 Pa.

= (1200 x 32) / 557.75
= 19.4

Using proposed equation,
C
d
= 0.82 + 22.7 R
e
(-1.15)
= 1.57
F
d
= r C
d
A u
2
= 199.7 kN

Experiment Results > application example
The application of commercial software of ANSYS Fluent to create the back
calculation of laboratory experiment was presented. Simulation setup was
implemented as the pressure-based Navier-Stokes (pbns) with absolute velocity
formulation and mixture-model for multiphase model with two phases of Eulerian
phase.

It produced the simulation model, which has similar collision event (between
mudflow and pipeline) with laboratory work in term of sequential views images of
head flow impaction and the propagation trend line of the drag force coefficient
values.
Concluding Remark
Furthermore, Re-Cd relationship was suitably expressed as
C
d
= 0.82 + 22.7 R
e
(-1.15)
. The current experiment generated a high similarity of
trend line of Re-Cd relationship with the previous study (Zakeris equation (Zakeri
et al. 2008)). It indicated that the content of clay material (i.e. kaolin) play a major
role in mudflow movement and collision, whereas granular materials (used in
previous study) provide an extra density.
F. Nadim, "Challenges to geo-scientists in risk assessment for sub-marine slides," Norwegian Journal of
Geology, vol. 86, pp. 351-362, 2006.
S.-K. Hsu, et al., "Turbidity Currents, Submarine Landslides and the 2006 Pingtung Earthquake off
SWTaiwan," Terr. Atmos. Ocean. Sci., vol. 19, pp. 767-772, 2008.
R. Bruschi, et al., "Impact of debris flows and turbidity currents on seafloor structures," Norwegian Journal
of Geology, vol. 86, pp. 317-337, 2006.
D. C. Mosher, et al., "Submarine Mass Movements and Their Consequences," in Submarine Mass
Movements and Their Consequences, Advances in Natural and Technological Hazards Research. vol. 28,
D. C. Mosher, et al., Eds., ed New York: Spinger, 2010, pp. 1-8.
J. Locat and H. J. Lee, "Submarine Landslides: Advances and Challenges," presented at the The 8th
International Symposium on Landslides, Cardiff, U.K, 2000.
J. O. Shin, et al., "Gravity currents produced by lock exchange," Journal of Fluid Mechanics, vol. 521, pp. 1-
34, 2004.
R. J. Lowe, et al., "The non-Boussinesq lock-exchange problem. Part 1. Theory and experiments," Journal
of Fluid Mechanics, vol. 537, pp. 101-124, 2005.
V. K. Birman, et al., "Lock-exchange flows in sloping channels," Journal of Fluid Mechanics, vol. 577, pp.
53-77, 2007.
Standards, "ASTM D2196-05 Standard Test Methods for Rheological Properties of Non-Newtonian
Materials by Rotational (Brookfield type) Viscometer," ed: ASTM International, United States, 2005.
Z. F. Haza, et al., "Experimental studies of the flow-front and drag forces exerted by subaqueous mudflow
on inclined base," (In Press) Natural Hazards, 2013.
P. Coussot, Mudflow Rheology and Dynamics. Rotterdam: AA Balkema, 1997.
H. Pazwash and M. Robertson, "Forces on Bodies in Bingham fluids," Journal of Hydrulic Research vol. 13,
pp. 35-55, 1975.
P. A. Sleigh and I. M. Goodwill, The St Venant Equations: School of Civil Engineering, University of Leeds,
England, 2000.
A. Zakeri, et al., "Submarine debris flow impact on pipelines Part II: Numerical analysis," Coastal
Engineering, vol. 56, pp. 1-10, 2009.
A. Zakeri, et al., "Submarine debris flow impact on pipelines Part I: Experimental investigation," Coastal
Engineering, vol. 55, pp. 1209 - 1218, 2008.
References
--- thank you ---
Q & A