See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/361820561

Direct Pipe® in Three Case Histories-Overcoming Challenging Ground and Site

Conditions

Conference Paper · July 2022

CITATIONS READS

0 240

2 authors:

Jonathan L. Robison Urso Campos

GeoEngineers, Inc. GeoEngineers
20 PUBLICATIONS 21 CITATIONS 23 PUBLICATIONS 76 CITATIONS

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

All content following this page was uploaded by Jonathan L. Robison on 07 July 2022.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

 Direct Pipe® in Three Case Histories- Overcoming Challenging
Ground and Site Conditions

Jonathan Robison, PE1 and Urso Campos, PhD, PE2

1
GeoEngineers, Inc., Springfield, Missouri, USA
2
GeoEngineers, Inc., Cary, North Carolina, USA

ABSTRACT

Direct Pipe® (DP) is a relatively new trenchless technology by which a steel pipe is installed in compression through
curves and sometimes tangent sections. The ground in the heading of the pipe is excavated through conventional
microtunneling methods while a Pipe Thruster machine provides the motive force. Once the crossing is completed
and the microtunnel boring machine is recovered, the installed pipe may be subsequently used as a casing for another
pipe or as the product or carrier pipe. From a practical standpoint, DP is most often compared to horizontal directional
drilling (HDD) because the method installs steel pipe in curved geometry and utilizes long sections or strings of
prefabricated pipe. This paper highlights three applications of the method from the authors’ experience with
challenging geotechnical conditions and tight workspace geometry where HDD was considered but deemed infeasible.
Specifically, examples of successful projects are shared for the following applications: (1) short and shallow crossing
(relative to HDD); (2) coarse-grained ground crossing that would be high risk with HDD due to hole collapse and
difficulty of cuttings return; and (3) risk avoidance for sensitive surface features with significant potential impact from
hydraulic fracture and inadvertent returns from HDD. The referenced project examples are used to introduce and
discuss engineering aspects of DP crossings such as geologic risk, methods for the assessment of steel stress, buckling
risk, and hydraulic fracture risk.

1. INTRODUCTION

The Direct Pipe® (DP) equipment and method was developed by Herrenknecht, AG, in Germany in the early 2000s,
and the first DP was completed in Germany in 2007. Subsequently, the method has garnered a significant amount of
acceptance by pipeline owners and engineers worldwide with over 160 installations worldwide as of the end of 2020
(see Figure 1 below).

Page 1 of 10
No-Dig Down Under 2021
Direct Pipe® in Three Case Histories – Overcoming Challenging Ground and Site Conditions
Robison, Campos
 Figure 1 – Direct Pipe Projects Completed as of EOY 2020- Robison, et al 2021

DP utilizes microtunneling technology and the key innovation of the Pipe Thruster machine (see Figure 2, below),
which allows the steel pipe to be prefabricated behind the entry or launch point and thrust into the ground, installing
the pipe in compression.

Figure 2 – Direct Pipe Thruster and Stringing Area – Robison and Chen 2017

From a practical standpoint, DP is most often compared to the longer-established method of horizontal directional
drilling (HDD), as both methods install pre-fabricated steel pipe in curved sections. Because DP uses microtunneling
Page 2 of 10
No-Dig Down Under 2021
Direct Pipe® in Three Case Histories – Overcoming Challenging Ground and Site Conditions
Robison, Campos
technology to excavate the ground in its heading, and the ground is continuously cased during the one pass installation,
the method is capable of handling ground conditions (such as gravels, cobbles, and weathered bedrock) that presents
hole collapse, stuck tooling, and other risks to conventional HDD. Additionally, relative to HDD, the DP method
requires much lower fluid pressure because the excavated ground mixed with drilling fluid is conveyed to the surface
through a dedicated, small-diameter slurry circuit pipe as opposed to an open excavation; these lower pressures allow
DP to mitigate hydraulic fracture and inadvertent drilling fluid surface release risks and be installed at depths shallower
than HDD. Finally, compared to conventional microtunneling which typically requires shored excavations, DP can
launch and exit at or near the ground surface as it is routinely installed in one or more curved sections (see Figure 3,
below for a schematic comparison of the three trenchless construction methods).

Figure 3 – Schematic Comparison of Direct Pipe, HDD, and Microtunneling – Robison, et al 2021

The three case studies presented below are intended to show some of the primary advantages of the DP method:
1. Short and shallow crossing (relative to HDD).
2. Coarse-grained ground crossing that would be high risk with HDD due to hole collapse and difficulty of
downhole soil cuttings removal.
3. Risk avoidance for sensitive surface features with significant potential impact from hydraulic fracture
and inadvertent drilling fluid surface release from HDD.

2. SHORT AND SHALLOW – INTERSTATE HIGHWAY CROSSING

Short and/or shallow crossings (relative to conventional HDD) are sometimes required to accommodate project goals.
An example of this is the Interstate 84 and US Highway 6 crossing located near Matamoras, Pennsylvania. The project
owner is the Kinder Morgan Company, and the work was completed as part of the Northeast Upgrade Project (NEUP)
in 2013. Due to environmental and cultural resource areas and other constraints, the crossing had to be made where
it was located despite challenging trenchless and geotechnical engineering issues posed by the location.

The 470-foot-long crossing (143 m) consisted of 42-inch-diameter (1,067 mm) casing pipe in which the
concrete-coated, 30-inch-diameter (762 mm) high pressure steel gas pipeline was later installed. As shown below in
Figure 4, the crossing geotechnical conditions were complex, with a dipping bedrock layer and glacial soils;
additionally, the ground surface continues to rise steeply beyond the receiving pit to the left of the diagram. HDD
was initially considered but discounted due to risks associated with excavating the gravelly glacial soils, transitioning
in and out of the dipping bedrock, and the considerable elevation differential that would have been required.

Page 3 of 10
No-Dig Down Under 2021
Direct Pipe® in Three Case Histories – Overcoming Challenging Ground and Site Conditions
Robison, Campos
 Figure 4 – Interstate 84 Crossing, Robison and Elmore 2014

The project design team and owner opted for a directional microtunnel (DMT) approach which was subsequently
installed using DP equipment and techniques. The benefits of the DP approach include ease of excavation of the
gravelly glacial soils, and a shallow profile that avoids the bedrock contact while maintaining adequate separation
between the installation and overlying critical infrastructure (Interstate highway 84 and US state highway 6). The
shallow profile would have been overly risky with HDD due to hole collapse and inadvertent drilling fluid surface
release risks. However, with its continuously cased hole and relatively low annular fluid pressures, DP technology
was able to safely install the 42-inch (1,067 mm) crossing. Figure 5 below shows the Pipe Thruster and launch pit of
the I-84 DMT.

Figure 5 – I-84 DMT Launch Pit

Page 4 of 10
No-Dig Down Under 2021
Direct Pipe® in Three Case Histories – Overcoming Challenging Ground and Site Conditions
Robison, Campos
3. COARSE GROUND – GRAVELLY ALLUVIUM RIVER CROSSING

As previously described, one of DP’s advantages over HDD is its ability to safely excavate coarse grained soils – such
as gravels, cobbles, and weathered rock – that present risk of hole collapse, difficulty in cuttings removal, formational
fluid loss, and other construction risks associated with HDD.

Net Mexico needed to install a steel gas pipeline across the Rio Grande River from Texas into Mexico in 2014. The
project was originally conceived as an HDD with a design diameter of 48 inches (1,067 mm) and a length of
approximately 2,350 feet (716 m). However, geotechnical borings performed on the USA side of the crossing
indicated significant gravelly zones in the river terrace alluvial soils; the geotechnical risks presented on the USA side
of the crossing were complicated by the inability of the project design team to drill borings on the Mexico side of the
crossing. Accordingly, to mitigate the risks associated with the gravelly alluvium, the project team opted to install the
crossing with the DP method. Figure 6 below shows the plan and profile of the Rio Grande DP crossing.

Figure 6 – Rio Grande Crossing DP Plan and Profile

4. HYDRAULIC FRACTURE RISK REDUCTION – LEVEE CROSSING

In 2015, the City of Port Arthur, Texas desired to cross the Sabine Neches waterway and Hurricane Flood Protection
Levee in Port Arthur, Texas. The project was originally conceived as a roughly 3,500-foot-long (1,067 m) HDD.
However, the project team was unable to show that HDD could meet the US Army Corps of Engineers (USACE)
requirements for limiting hydraulic fracture risk beneath the Sabine Neches Hurricane Flood Protection Levee. At
that time, the USACE required a factor of safety (FOS) of 2.0 against hydraulic fracture (i.e. the pressures applied to
the formation at depth had to be less than or equal to one-half of the formation limit pressure). Due to the geotechnical
conditions at the site, this FOS was not achievable with HDD. Recognizing the low-pressure benefits of DP, the
project team opted to change the crossing method to DP. This change resulted in the first DP crossing permitted by
the USACE for a levee crossing. The launch and reception sides of the Sabine Neches DP are shown below in
Figures 7 and 8.

Page 5 of 10
No-Dig Down Under 2021
Direct Pipe® in Three Case Histories – Overcoming Challenging Ground and Site Conditions
Robison, Campos
 Figure 7 – Sabine Neches DP Crossing Launch Side, Robison and Wilson (2016)

Figure 8 – Sabine Neches Crossing Reception Side

The anticipated annular fluid pressures generated by the DP equipment were calculated in accordance with the
procedures outlined in Robison and Spark (2016) and plotted for comparison on the graph below (Figure 9).

Page 6 of 10
No-Dig Down Under 2021
Direct Pipe® in Three Case Histories – Overcoming Challenging Ground and Site Conditions
Robison, Campos
 Figure 9 – Sabine Neches DP Annular Pressure and Formation Limit Pressure

The FOS against hydraulic fracture was then calculated and plotted on the following graph (Figure 10).

Figure 10 – Sabine Neches DP FOS Against Hydraulic Fracture

Page 7 of 10
No-Dig Down Under 2021
Direct Pipe® in Three Case Histories – Overcoming Challenging Ground and Site Conditions
Robison, Campos
The Sabine Neches DP installation was closely scrutinized by the USACE and others, it was successfully installed
within the allowable, permitted pressure conditions. The photographs below (Figures 11 and 12) show Sabine
Neches DP launch and reception workspaces, respectively.

Figure 11 – Sabine Neches DP Launch Workspace

Page 8 of 10
No-Dig Down Under 2021
Direct Pipe® in Three Case Histories – Overcoming Challenging Ground and Site Conditions
Robison, Campos
Figure 12 – Sabine Neches DP Reception Workspace

5. CONCLUSION

DP has emerged in the last decade as an excellent tool for completing crossings that are challenging to HDD.
Specifically, in the authors experience, DP has been used to accomplish crossings with challenging geometry and
geotechnical conditions including short and/or shallow desired geometry, coarse-grained soils, and sites with
heightened hydraulic fracture and inadvertent drilling fluid surface release risk.

6. REFERENCES (in alphabetical order)

Robison, J. and Chen, C. (2017) “Considering Buckling- Direct Pipe® Engineering Design” Proceedings of the 2017
North American Society of Trenchless Technology No-Dig Show, Washington, D.C., USA

Robison, J. and Elmore J. (2014) “Innovative Directional Microtunnel Garners Success for Crucial Trenchless
Crossing” Proceedings of the 2014 American Society of Civil Engineers Pipelines Conference, Portland, Oregon, USA

Robison, J., Engelhardt, J., and Shepherd, J. (2021) “Direct Pipe® Feasibility and Planning- Industry Trends”,
Proceedings of the 2021 North American Society for Trenchless Technology No-Dig Show, Orlando, Florida, USA

Page 9 of 10
No-Dig Down Under 2021
Direct Pipe® in Three Case Histories – Overcoming Challenging Ground and Site Conditions
Robison, Campos
 Robison, J. and Sparks, A. (2015) “Direct Pipe® Levee Crossing Design – Mitigating Hydraulic Fracture Risk”,
Proceedings of the 2015 North American Society for Trenchless Technology No-Dig Show, Denver, Colorado, USA

Robison, J., and Wilson, J. (2016) “Sabine Neches Levee Crossing Direct Pipe® Engineering and Permitting”,
Proceedings of the 2016 North American Society of Trenchless Technology No-Dig Show, Dallas, Texas, USA

Page 10 of 10
No-Dig Down Under 2021
Direct Pipe® in Three Case Histories – Overcoming Challenging Ground and Site Conditions
Robison, Campos

View publication stats