Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Page 2
Prepared by
WS Atkins
On Behalf of
Chevon Engineering Technology Company
COMMERCIAL IN CONFIDENCE
WS Atkins Inc
12121 Wickchester Lane, Suite 550
Houston, TX 77079
USA
Tel.:
+(1) 713 463 6180
Fax.: +(1) 713 589 7381
Page 3
Date
Purpose
Prepared
Checked
07/15/2008
LW
SS, FM
07/18/2008
LW
SS, FM
SS
08/14/2008
Draft Incorporating
Client Initial
Comments
LW
SS, JB
SS
09/25/2008
Final Incorporating
Client Final
Comments
LW
SS, JB
SS
Approved
NOTE:
This document has been specifically produced for the purposes of the VESSEL IMPACT
DESIGN BASIS OF FIXED OFFSHORE PLATFORMS and is only suitable for use in
connection therewith. Any liability arising out of use of this document by Chevron Engineering
Technology Company or a third party for purposes not wholly connected with the above project
shall be the responsibility of the clients, who shall indemnify Atkins against all claims, costs,
damages and losses arising from such use.
Page 4
TABLE OF CONTENTS
1.
INTRODUCTION .......................................................................................................... 6
1.1
1.2
2.
3.
General ......................................................................................................... 24
Condition Assessment .................................................................................. 24
Impact Loads ................................................................................................ 24
Estimation of Damage .................................................................................. 25
Impact Survival Acceptance Criteria............................................................. 25
8.
General ......................................................................................................... 18
Design of Jacket Legs and Braces in Impact Zone ...................................... 18
Design of Barge Bumpers............................................................................. 19
Design of Boat Landings............................................................................... 19
Design of Riser Guards ................................................................................ 20
Good Practice in Detailing of Designs .......................................................... 21
Impact Survival Acceptance Criteria............................................................. 21
7.
General ......................................................................................................... 11
Vessel Impact Absorption Mechanism.......................................................... 11
Design Impact Energy .................................................................................. 12
Calculation of Vessel Impact Loads.............................................................. 12
Impact Load Application ............................................................................... 15
Operational Vessel Impact.............................................................................. 8
6.
5.
DEFINITIONS.............................................................................................................. 8
3.1
3.2
3.3
3.4
4.
Background..................................................................................................... 6
Purpose .......................................................................................................... 6
General ......................................................................................................... 26
Analysis Methods.......................................................................................... 26
Available Software ........................................................................................ 29
Modeling of Structure.................................................................................... 30
Page 5
General ......................................................................................................... 38
Modeling of Damaged Structure ................................................................... 38
Post-impact Survival Loads .......................................................................... 38
Analysis Options ........................................................................................... 39
Post-impact Survival Acceptance Criteria..................................................... 39
REFERENCES ................................................................................................................. 40
APPENDIX A TYPICAL RISER GUARD SKETCHES AND BARGE BUMPERS
1.
Page 6
INTRODUCTION
The principal objective of this document is to define generic design criteria to be used
on Chevron projects to assess fixed steel offshore structures against accidental vessel
impact.
The criteria are a compilation of acceptable industry practices and should be combined
with regional specific criteria for the platforms to be assessed.
1.1
BACKGROUND
During the operational life of a fixed offshore platform, there is the possibility that the
structure could be accidentally impacted by a vessel. Vessel impact is a major hazard
to offshore structures. Due consideration shall be given to the design of substructure to
provide robustness against such events. Vessel impact analysis now forms an
important and essential design case for fixed offshore platforms. The platform should
be designed to survive the initial vessel impact and the post impact criteria.
1.2
PURPOSE
The objective of this document is to explain the standard methods of checking the
integrity of a fixed steel offshore platform subject to vessel impact, and to describe the
design recommendations adopted by Chevron. The design basis has been developed
for general worldwide application. The procedure is applicable to new and existing
platforms.
This document was prepared for consideration to be included as part of the Chevron
Engineering Standards (CES) developed and maintained by the Floating and Fixed
Systems Unit of the Facility Engineering Department.
2.
Page 7
REFERENCE DOCUMENTS
The following documents form a part of this Design Basis. Unless otherwise specified
herein, use the latest edition.
2.1
2.2
CHEVRON SPECIFICATIONS
CIV-SU-1.19A
CIV-EN-100
2.3
PUBLICATIONS
UK Health Safety Executive, Loads, OTR 13/2001, 2002
DNV Technical Note, Impact Loads from Boats, TNA202, 1981
Veritec, Design Against Accidental Loads, Report No. 88-3127, 1988
Health and Safety Executive, Technical Policy Relating to Structural Response to Ship
Impact, December 2006.
3.
DEFINITIONS
3.1
Page 8
Design Impact Event represents an event selected from impact scenarios that require
explicit design considerations. Design impact events are primarily based on accident
scenarios involving vessels that are expected to operate in the vicinity of the platform.
Vessel impact scenarios should be developed by a risk assessment process, involving
a multi-discipline team of experienced engineers. The most likely impact scenarios are
the broadside impact of one of the legs of the platform and the bow/stern impact of one
of the braces in the splash zone [11]. Practices that account for accidental scenarios
are provided in Section 18 of API RP 2A [1].
For purpose of a rigorous impact analysis, design impact events shall be established
representing bow, stern, and broadside impacts on exposed platform elements. Vessel
orientation and velocity shall further define the impact event. Operational restrictions on
vessel approach sectors may limit the exposure to impacts in some areas of the
structure.
Design impact events shall consider two energy levels of vessel impacts, i.e. accidental
vessel impact, representing a rare condition with high energy level, and operational
vessel impact, representing a frequent condition with low energy level.
3.2
3.3
3.4
IMPACT ZONE
The impact zone is defined by the portion of a platform vulnerable to impact by supply
vessel. The impact zone is a function of the vessel freeboard, tidal range and operating
sea states. The following conditions should be considered in determining the range of
possible impact zones:
Page 9
The greatest frequency of impact will be near the mean still water level. All exposed
elements at risk in the impact zone should be assessed for vessel impact during normal
operations.
3.5
ATTENDANT VESSELS
It is not practical or economical to design a platform for a major collision, hence the
structure should be designed to absorb the impact energy from vessels regularly visiting
the platform, i.e., the supply vessels. These vessels vary in size from 2,000 to 5,000
tons. The vessel size in specific region should be confirmed prior to assessment. By
way of example, for the northern North Sea, a vessel can be 5,000 ton, whereas in the
southern North Sea a mass of around 2,500 ton is more normal. For Gulf of Mexico
structures in mild environments and reasonably close to their base of supply, a 1,000
ton vessel represents a typical 55 m to 60 m supply vessel. For deeper and more
remote locations in the Gulf of Mexico the vessel mass can be different.
The attendant vessel details should include vessel velocity, displacement, added mass,
flexibility, maximum and minimum draft and vessel shape.
3.6
OTHERS
Accident scenario Accidents result from the occurrence of a series of one or more
events that combine to cause an undesirable and unplanned outcome. Such a series of
events constitutes an accident scenario. The events may result from mechanical fault
or human and organizational error.
Ductility Ductility is a generic term that characterizes the ability of a component or
system to deform without experiencing collapse due to brittle fracture or buckling. A
ductile component or system may experience some diminishing strength as it deforms
and still be considered ductile.
Linear analysis Linear analysis assumes all components and system respond
linearly to loading.
Non-linear analysis Non-linear analysis takes into consideration the non-linear
effects of individual component behaviour, including non-linear material behaviour as
well as the non-linear deflection of the structural components and system.
Page 10
4.
4.1
GENERAL
Page 11
4.2
Page 12
data is available. It is noted that these curves were developed based on North Sea
supply vessel with a displacement of 5,000 tons.
For vessel impacts on jacket braces, it is typically assumed that all energy is dissipated
by braces.
4.3
4.4
E=
1
amv 2
2
where
E =
m=
(4.1)
v =
Page 13
The key factors in determining the vessel kinetic energy are mass and velocity.
4.4.1
v=
1
Hs
2
(4.2)
Where
v =
Hs =
KE =
1 Hs
am
/ 3500
2 2
(4.3)
where KE = design impact energy to be absorbed by the platform structure only (MJ).
Page 14
For a broadside impact of a vessel of 5,000 tonne operating in a sea state with
significant wave height of approximately 4 m, Equation (4.3) produces design impact
energy of 4 MJ, which is to be absorbed by structure alone.
This formula takes no account explicitly of current velocity and may therefore be seen
as appropriate for non-tidal or open water operational conditions where diurnal
velocities are low. Where current velocities are significant (typically in littoral and
estuarine areas), it is proposed that the formula is adapted as follows:
2
1 1
KE = am H s + U c / 3500
2 2
(4.4)
Page 15
for six different geographical regions including Gulf of Mexico (GOM), northern North
Sea (NNS), southern North Sea (SNS), offshore east coast Trinidad, offshore northern
Angola and shallow water offshore Nigeria. For preliminary engineering, or in areas
where a risk assessment is not carried out, these values can be used to estimate
design impact energy prior to obtaining operations input for site-specific analysis.
It should be noted that the values in Table 4-2 represent the impact energy criteria
required to be dissipated by the structure alone, and these values may not be
conservative and should be used with caution.
4.5
Page 16
Region
Criteria
GOM
NNS
SNS
Trinidad
Northern
Angola
Nigeria
(shallow
water)
1500
5000
2500
2500
2500
2500
1.4
1.4
1.4
1.4
1.4
1.4
1.87
4.0
2.0
2.0
2.0
2.0
0.261
0.332
0.682
0.443
0.203
0.253
0.4
5.4
1.4
1.0
0.7
0.8
0.3
4.0
0.5
0.5
0.5
0.5
Impact energy
KE (MJ) 4
1
Page 17
Region
Criteria
1
2
GOM
NNS
SNS
Trinidad
Northern
Angola
Nigeria
(shallow
water)
1500
5000
2500
2500
2500
2500
0.5
0.5
0.5
0.5
0.5
0.5
0.3
0.9
0.4
0.4
0.4
0.4
Page 18
5.
5.1
GENERAL
The adequacy of the structure design shall be verified by demonstrating adequate
strength and ductility against accidental vessel impact events that represent vessel
impact scenarios.
Most structural framing systems that meet the general design practices as stated in
Chevron Design of Platform Structures Application: Fixed Offshore Platforms
(CIV-SU-1.19A) are capable of resisting supply vessel bumping without causing an
immediate threat to the structural system integrity.
Conductors and risers should be located within the main structural framing, if
possible. Additional local protection may be required to prevent supply vessels
from penetrating the main framing perimeter and impacting conductors and risers.
If located outside the framing (installed after platform installation), risers should be
protected from damage by riser guards or by operational procedures preventing
supply vessel access.
5.2
5.3
Page 19
5.4
The accidental vessel impact design energy criteria calculated based on the
methodology within Section 4.4 should be used for the design of barge
bumpers. If from a risk evaluation perspective the likelihood of the design
accidental vessel impact to the barge bumpers is acceptable low, the barge
bumpers might be required to withstand the operational vessel impact
design energy also calculated based on the methodology within Section
4.4.
The barge bumper should extend a certain distance beyond the bottom
support to prevent supply vessel from hooking underneath the bumper.
Barge bumper assemblies shall be designed such that the bumper face is
at the minimum practical distance from the jacket leg. However, the
bumper face shall extend beyond the face of the boat landings and riser
guards.
The bumper shall fail under extreme loads in a manner that the platform leg
connections are not damaged.
Load shall be applied halfway between the post supports for sizing the
supporting shock cells.
Load shall be applied at one-third points for sizing the supporting shock
cells.
Shock cells shall be checked assuming that the applied load is applied in
the plane of the barge bumper and at an angle of 30 degrees to the plane of
the barge bumper.
Design of barge bumpers shall provide for a field elevation adjustment of +/0.91 m (3 ft).
The accidental vessel impact design energy criteria calculated based on the
methodology within Section 4.4 should be used for the design of boat
Page 20
5.5
The boat landing design shall consider provision for a field elevation
adjustment of 1.2 m (4 ft).
The accidental vessel impact design energy criteria calculated based on the
methodology within Section 4.4 should be used for the design of riser
guards. If from a risk evaluation perspective the likelihood of the design
accidental vessel impact to the riser guards is acceptable low, the riser
guards might be required to withstand the operational vessel impact design
energy also calculated based on the methodology within Section 4.4.
Riser guard layout shall consider not only initial installation but future
removal and reinstallation of the riser guard for future riser installation.
Small riser guards with plan for future riser installation shall be designed to
swing from one end to enhance the installation of future riser. Large riser
guard should be designed with stabbing guides so that it can be removed
and reinstalled or replaced if necessary.
Impact area on riser guard shall be assumed at MLW (mean low water) plus
or minus 1 m.
Mild grade steel should ordinarily be used for riser guard fabrication,
although connection details and king posts are likely candidates for high
strength steel.
5.6
Page 21
5.7
5.7.1
Page 22
Strain Harding
Parameter, H
EN
ASTM Equivalent
S235
A 36
20%
0.0022
S355
A 572 Gr 50
A 992 Gr 50
A 913 Gr 50
15%
0.0034
S460
A 913 Gr 65
10%
0.0034
Page 23
Page 24
6.
6.1
GENERAL
A fixed offshore platform is subject to possible damage from vessel impact during
normal operations. If assessment process identifies a significant risk from vessel
impact loading, the effect on structural integrity of the existing platform should be
assessed. The purpose of assessment is to determine the capacity of an existing
structure to withstand an accidental vessel impact and to identify and optimize the
extent of any required strengthening, repair or other mitigation and the associated
urgency.
In contrast with design, assessment is concerned with the platform in-place
condition. The assessment process may involve detailed review, analysis, testing,
or calculation of the aspects of the design that are non-complinat with the standard.
State-of-art scientific and technical knowledge and the best available data may be
used in this process.
6.2
CONDITION ASSESSMENT
The structural input data for assessment can be gathered over the structures
lifetime and used to better represent its state and condition at the time of
assessment. For assessment it is therefore important that a reliable and up-to-date
database is assembled.
The input data should be both accurate and representative of actual conditions at
the time of the assessment. Any changes in use, modifications to deck payload,
platform design drawings, repairs, inspection history and other pertinent
information should be obtainable from the platform inspection records.
Any damage, repairs and modifications outlined in the routine annual inspection or
special inspection reports should be modeled to best represent the as-is condition
of the platform.
Where drawings are not available, or are inaccurate, additional inspection of the
structure and facilities may be required to collect the necessary information. In
some instances additional detailed inspection, using appropriate techniques, to
verify suspected damage or deterioration or major modifications might be
necessary.
6.3
IMPACT LOADS
The process of assessment is intended to determine the best estimate of both the
loading and response of the structure. This will require a high degree of familiarity
with relevant in-service performance data. The design impact loads for existing
platforms should be developed taking into account site specific data concerning:
Vessel sizes
Page 25
6.4
ESTIMATION OF DAMAGE
6.4.1
Damaged Members
One of the major difficulties of assessing existing platforms with damaged or
corroded members is to accurately model their load carrying capacity, and
especially their ductility, after such capacity is reached. If alternative load paths
are available to bypass a damaged member, the member may be removed from
the model.
The severity of the damage should be reviewed on a case-by-case basis to
determine if the damaged member has lost its load carrying capacity and whether
the member should be removed from the model, if necessary.
Less severe dents, caused by vessel impacts or dropped objects, should be
checked individually in accordance with the procedures given in ISO Draft [2]. If
damaged members are found by the procedure to be stressed to an acceptable
level, the post-damage stiffness properties should be specified and included in the
global structural model to represent the damaged members. Damaged member
properties may be determined by reference to published data (e.g. Smith et al [22]
and Moan et al [23]), or through finite element analysis or experimentation.
6.4.2
Damaged Joints
Cracked joints should be modeled in sufficient detail to assess the impact of the
damage on the global behavior of the structure. A lower bound estimate of the
structure's strength will be obtained by removing the affected joint(s)/member(s)
from the model. If the structure cannot maintain integrity with the member removed
a less conservative estimate will be obtained by reducing the strength of the
affected joint by some factor.
6.5
7.
7.1
GENERAL
Page 26
7.2
ANALYSIS METHODS
7.2.1
7.2.2
Page 27
The calculated dent depths and energies are reasonable and compare well
with expected values.
The pile head loads do not exceed calculated capacities. Piles should be
checked for vertical slippage not exceeding a limiting value.
Page 28
relevant phases of the collision. Typically, the direct impact due to the collision
attains its maximum value early during the collision, while the effects of inertia
reach their maximum values later during the collision. Energy is absorbed in both
the structure and the vessel, but additional absorption sources such as energy
imparted to platform vibration and energy dissipating from radiating waves
generated as a result of the collision can also be represented.
Initially, the functional loads (dead and live loads) are statically applied to the
structure. A mass representing the vessel and associated added mass is given an
initial velocity corresponding to the design vessel velocity, and hence the mass has
the required total kinetic energy of the vessel. The flexibility of the vessel is
normally represented by a spring between the mass and the structure at the point
of impact. The vessel impact analysis is then performed in the time domain, with
the transfer of momentum from the vessel to the structure solved at each time step.
If the program is unable to include local member denting within dynamic analyses,
a dent has to be explicitly modeled.
The following quality assurance should be performed during dynamic analysis:
7.2.3
Mode shapes are generated and checked for the first 3 natural periods.
The impact force time-history should be checked against the vessel denting
curve.
Analysis Cases
Jacket Legs and Braces
Potential impact from vessel to jacket legs and braces in the impact zone shall be
considered. Analysis cases depend on the project specifications, but should
preferably include as a minimum:
Impact at nodes, which will tend to maximize the impact load and the loads
on the piles.
Impact between framing levels, which will tend to maximize local denting
and member bending.
Page 29
7.3
AVAILABLE SOFTWARE
There are several software programs that perform vessel impact analysis for
offshore fixed steel platforms. Those currently available and the organizations that
developed them include but not limited to:
USFOS
SINTEF (http://www.usfos.no)
SACS
EDI (http://www.sacs-edi.com)
ASAS
In almost all cases, the user needs to carefully develop the associated computer
models, apply the impact load, and interpret results in order to ensure an accurate
answer.
Page 30
Other software can perform vessel impact analyses that are not listed here;
however, they may not have the special features of the software listed here. If
using another code, be sure that it uses a documented approach to perform the
vessel impact. The code should be tested or calibrated to perform the specific type
of vessel impact analysis for fixed platforms as described in this document. The
user should ask if there has been prior vessel impact work that can be reviewed or
whether there are any benchmark problems to demonstrate the softwares vessel
impact analysis capability.
7.4
MODELING OF STRUCTURE
7.4.1
Data Requirements
7.4.1.1 Drawings
The primary structural framing drawings, including main jacket framing, deck
framing and pile drawings, and the drawings for the appurtenances which are part
of analysis focus (e.g. conductors, risers, boat landings, conductor/riser guards,
barge bumpers) should be made available.
For existing platforms, as built drawings should be used, if possible. The drawings
should also reflect the current configuration of the platform, since structural
changes may have occurred since the platform was installed.
7.4.1.2 Weight Report
Jacket weight, and topsides dead and operating loads should be made available
for the vessel impact analysis.
7.4.1.3 Geotechnical Report
Site specific data, including shear strength profile and pile axial compression and
tension capacity curves, should be developed based on modern API
recommendations. Pile driving records may be available to determine actual pile
penetration.
7.4.1.4 Appurtenance Schedule
The actual number and location of conductors, risers, boat landings,
conductor/riser guards, bumpers, and other appurtenances are usually found on
the drawings but are best confirmed via the inspection reports and photos. The
number of conductors actually installed on the platform tends to routinely vary from
the number of slots and should be independently verified.
7.4.1.5 Inspection Data
Inspection reports provide information about the current state of the platform,
including damage, if any, such as dents, cracks, holes, or corrosion. The
inspection report should also be used to establish actual marine growth (versus
code based marine growth that may be used for new design). In most cases, but
Page 31
not all, the inspection report also contains information, such as the number and
location of risers and caissons, location of boat landings, platform orientation,
verification of the platform underwater elevations, and other useful information.
Above-water photos of the platform are critical for the engineer to provide a feel
for the platform, such as overall configuration and size, but they also provide visual
confirmation of the amount of deck equipment, orientation, number of boat
landings, number of risers and conductors, and deck elevation and overall platform
condition such as corrosion. These and other items that can be seen in the photos
should match what is in the drawings. If there is no match, these items need to be
field verified.
7.4.1.6 Metocean Data
The contents of metocean data should contain the following:
7.4.2
Tidal data;
Water depth.
Modeling Requirements
The structural model should include the three dimensional distribution of platform
stiffness. Reference should be made to the structural drawings for the definition of
geometry, member sizes and steel grades, etc. For the as-is condition of an
existing structure reference should be made to the inspection records and repair
records, if available.
Page 32
Page 33
overstressing of the mudline braces, and modeling may not accurately capture the
transfer of loads to the legs.
Conductor Connectivity
The sliding action of straight conductors within their guide frames should be
modeled with the appropriate constraint conditions, which allow unrestrained
differential axial/vertical displacement but couple the lateral displacements of
conductors and guide frames. Annular gap effects should be considered.
Conductor Guide Framing
It is essential to correctly model the stiffness of the mudline conductor guide frame
such that the overall simulation accurately represents the behavior and hence
shear is correctly proportioned between conductors and piles. The use of nonlinear gap elements at the conductor/conductor frame interface is particularly
valuable. This attention to correct simulation is particularly important when the
conductors are idealized, i.e. when say, twelve conductors are simulated by four.
This generally requires some plane frame analysis studies to determine a realistic
model. It is however recommended conductors are modeled individually to better
represent global stiffness and load distribution to jacket.
Leg Stubs
If there are centralizers at the level of the bottom bay framing, leg stubs should not
be modeled. If there are no centralizers, the pile will contact at the bottom of the
stub causing moments in the leg and hence the stub should be modeled.
Corrosion Allowance
Allowance for corrosion by reducing as-built wall thickness will only be included for
assessment purposes if the annual inspection survey indicates that there is actual
corrosion loss.
Grouted Members
Grouting is a simple repair method used to eliminate inelastic buckling and provide
additional stiffness and strength for members with bows, dents and holes. Any
additional stiffness as a result of grouting should be included in the model since
additional stiffness attracts additional forces. The grouted member should be
included in the model either as a composite member or as a steel member with
thickness adjusted to give equivalent member properties.
Strengthened Elements
Friction, grouted and long-bolted clamps may have all been used for strengthening
deficient jacket members in the Chevron fleet. If sufficient detail is available of the
strengthening, appropriate techniques should be used to accurately represent
these strengthened elements within the structural model. Where insufficient
Page 34
Page 35
Laterally Load Pile Groups in Soft Clay [24]. The application procedures are
clearly described, but they require reference to the paper, Correlation for Design of
Laterally Load Piles in Soft Clay [25].
Structural/Soil Interaction
The foundation should be modeled and analyzed as a fully integrated part of the
structure using non-linear p-y and t-z curves representing the soil stiffness and
capacity. Particular care should be taken when modeling thin layers near the mudline, where p-y curves change rapidly, and to accurately model the soil layers in the
depth which the piles are expected to terminate.
To properly assess the pile penetrations Chevron pile driving records will be
reviewed to determine actual penetrations. If it is apparent that the platforms have
sustained seafloor scouring, it is necessary to account for any loss of soil-pile
contact in the models.
The non-linear response curves for lateral resistance (p-y), skin friction (t-z) and
end bearing (q-z), should be modeled into the analysis and the soil structure
interaction automatically solved by an iterative technique. In this way individual
piles never carry more than their ultimate load because excess load is
automatically shed to other piles, and the effects of the redistribution of the
foundation loads on the structure is also automatically determined.
For platforms with pile groups, the non-linear soil p-y and t-z curves of individual
piles should be adjusted to account for pile group effects. The influence of a pile
group on global structural behavior may be modeled by simpler means, such as the
use of an equivalent single member with the equivalent structural and foundation
properties.
Pile/Structure Interaction
The modeling of the pile/leg connection can significantly affect the distribution of
shears and moments into the jacket and can significantly alter the stresses in the
piles. The use of gap elements is particularly valuable. However, each case
should be treated on its merits as the cost of introducing a non-linear (NL) link to
model the gap between leg and pile can increase the computing cost for a typical
analysis by 100%. But where there are bottom bay extensions, or when pile head
moments are high, and bottom bay shear is critical the introduction of NL links, by
softening the jacket/pile connection and hence reducing pile head moments, can
give stress reductions of the order of 10% and more to the jacket. Equally, if the
pile maximum stresses, which occur 20 - 30 below mudline are critical, NL links,
which should lead to increased maximum bending stresses, should be used to give
an upper bound on pile stresses.
P-Y Modifiers for Conductors
Where the conductors as capable of carrying a proportion of the base shear,
consideration should be given to including load deflection (p-y) curves in the
structural model. Since such curves are specific to the diameter of the conductors,
Page 36
separate p-y curves will be required for assessing the lateral load bearing capacity
of conductors. Typically the conductors may take a 10% to 20% proportion of the
base shear when there is a mudline conductor guide frame present.
To correctly model the p-y characteristics, allowance should be made for the group
effect of the conductors and this is achieved by modifying the simple conductor p-y
curve. The procedure for obtaining the modification factor (y-modifier) is described
in the report Platform Assessment Analyses - Conductor/Soil Interaction Significance of Group y-Modifiers [26]. This information is best obtained from soil
consultants. However, the Group y-modifier in soft clay may be obtained by the
method described in, Procedures for Analysis of Laterally Loaded Pile Groups in
Soft Clay [24].
Pile Failure Simulation
Where pile failure is expected, the global pile group safety factor should be
obtained by factoring the t-z and q-z curves by the desired global safety factor.
This also automatically allows for the effects of pile load redistribution on the jacket
structure to be accounted for.
All loads to be applied to the deck/topside and jacket for vessel impact analysis
shall include the following.
7.4.3
Design Loads
Page 37
8.
8.1
GENERAL
Page 38
The platform should be designed to meet the post-impact criteria. The damaged
platform should retain sufficient residual strength after vessel impact to safely resist
platform normal operating loads and environmental loads with a specified return
period. This will ensure that there will be adequate time for carrying out offshore
repairs.
Post-impact assessment shall be performed, taking into account the extent of likely
damage estimated from vessel impact analysis. Component distortion, loss of
stiffness and induced eccentric loading caused by dented geometries shall be
accounted for in the analyses.
The post-impact assessment may be achieved using either linear strength analysis
or non-linear pushover analysis. Criteria for post-impact assessment require a
good knowledge of the mechanical properties of the structural steel, including
critical strain at rupture, dynamic yield stress, and strain hardening characteristics.
8.2
8.3
Page 39
return period of at least 1 year. In the post-impact condition the platform normal
operating loads and environmental loads are to be combined.
8.3.1
8.3.2
Environmental Loads
Environmental loads to be considered in the post-impact analysis include wave,
current and wind loads. Wave directions shall be chosen to maximize the loads in
the damaged components.
8.4
ANALYSIS OPTIONS
A lower bound of the system residual strength may be developed using linear
analysis methods, where all component resistance factor of safety are set equal to
1.0. The resistance should be characterized by the environmental load that will
cause the first component to exceed its capacity. This bound will be conservative.
If the lower bound resistance is insufficient to demonstrate adequate strength, then
either a non-linear pushover analysis should be performed or remedial actions
should be undertaken.
A best estimate of the system residual strength can be developed using non-linear
pushover analysis methods, where post-yield, non-linear component behavior is
accounted for explicitly in the analysis. Non-linear pushover analysis is performed
by incrementally increasing the environmental loading until the global structural
system becomes unstable, i.e., an incremental increase in the load cannot be
resisted. A non-linear pushover analysis will identify a mechanism of failure
corresponding to the residual strength level achieved. Non-linear pushover
analysis should follow the approach and procedure provided in Chevron Ultimate
Limit Strength (ULS) of Fixed Offshore Platforms (CIV-EN-100).
8.5
Criticality of components
Exposure to damage
Critical components that support quarters or facilities, such as knee braces, shall
have sufficient residual strength to survive possible damage without causing
subsystem collapse.
Page 40
REFERENCES
1.
API RP2A WSD, Recommended Practice for the Planning, Designing and
Construction of Fixed Offshore Platforms Working Stress Design, 21st
Edition, Errata and Supplement, October 2005.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
Visser, V., Ship Collision and Capacity of Brace Members of Fixed Steel
Offshore Platforms, Health Safety Executive RR 220, 2004.
12.
13.
MSL, Joint Industry Project Report: Effect of Vessel Impact on Intact and
Damaged Structures, DOC REF C209R007 Rev 1, July 1999.
14.
15.
16.
Ronalds, B. F., Vessel Impact Design for Steel Jackets, OTC 6384, 1990.
17.
Page 41
18.
19.
20.
21.
Allan, J. D. and Marshall, J., The Effect of Ship Impact on the Load Carrying
Capacity of Steel Tubes, Health Safety Executive OTH 90 317, 1992.
22.
23.
Moan, T., and Taby, T., Collapse and Residual Strength of Damaged
Tubular Members, Proceedings of the Fourth International Conference on
Behavior of Offshore Structures, Delft, July 1985.
24.
Bogard, D. and Matlock, H., Procedures for Analysis of Laterally Loaded Pile
Groups in Soft Clay, Proceedings of the Conference on Geotechnical
Practice in Offshore Engineering Practice, ASCE, 499-535, 1983.
25.
Matlock, H., Correlation for Design of Laterally Loaded Piles in Soft Clay,
Offshore Technology Conference, OTC 1204, Houston, Texas, May 1970.
26.
27.
Kallaby, J., and O'Connor, P., "An Integrated Approach for Underwater
Survey and Damage Assessment of Offshore Platforms, OTC 7487, Offshore
Technology Conference Proceedings, May 1994.
28.
Page 42
Page 43
Page 44
Page 45
6 Golden Square
Aberdeen
AB10 1RD
Scotland
23 Taylor Street
Woodbrook
Port of Spain
Trinidad, West Indies
Euston Tower
286 Euston Road
London
NW1 3AT
England
Telephone +44 (0)207 121 2000
Fax +44 (0)207 121 2200
Haleworth House
Tite Hill
Egham
Surrey
TW20 0LT
Telephone +61(0)892782747
Fax +61(0)892782727