Proceedings of OMAE2006 25th International Conference on Offshore Mechanics and Arctic Engineering June 4-9, 2006, Hamburg, Germany

OMAE2006-92250

Effect of Structural Member Uncertainties in the Jacket type Offshore Platform Assessments
B. Asgarian, Assistant Professor, Civil Engineering Department, K.N.Toosi University of Technology, Tehran, Iran.

M. M. Amiri ,Msc. in Offshore Structure Engineering, Civil Engineering Department, K.N.Toosi University of Technology, Tehran, Iran.

asgarian@kntu.ac.ir

m mahdi amiri@yahoo.com

ABSTRACT: In the assessment of an old jacket type offshore platform, the Reserve Strength Ratio (RSR) should be computed and it is used for accepting or rejecting the platform for the future. There are many parameters affecting the Reserve Strength Ratio of such a structure. One of the important parameter is the bias factor (Br) of the structural element ultimate capacity. The bias factor is defined as the ratio of best estimate or true values to the nominal or predicted values. This parameter must be obtained for all structural elements including bracing members (in buckling or tension), joint strength, and piles lateral capacity by considering actual behavior of element material. Most of the recommended bias factors for the structural elements are evaluated from experimental results. In this paper, a review on the parameters affecting Reserve Strength Ratio of the Jacket Type Offshore Platforms subjected to Metocean loading is performed and a method is presented for the obtaining of bias factor related to structural element capacity. The method is applied to evaluate assessment of three sample platforms in the Persian Gulf. The results in terms of RSR are compared

with the analysis results using previous recommended bias factors. MAIN PARAMETERS OF STRUCTURAL MEMBER UNCERTAINITIES The main equation in assessment of platforms for obtaining Reserve Strength Ratio (RSR) is as following [1]:
BS RSR = Fe B R (1) exp[( ln SR ) (2.33 ln S )]

Actually RSR is a criterion for assessing offshore platforms. All of the effective parameters in this equation are in relation with demands and capacities of structural system. BR or bias factor is a parameter in relation with structural elements uncertainties. This factor can be defined as following [2]: R (2) BR = U RD In this equation RU is the actual amount of structure capacity in ultimate strength and RD is the nominal (design) capacity of the structural element. Effective uncertainties in this factor are uncertainties in estimating of yield strength of steel used in platform, uncertainties in braces buckling, uncertainties in ultimate strength of
1 Copyright 2006 by ASME

joints and also uncertainties of lateral strength of piles. By reviewing the amounts of these parameters, it can be seen that if these values become near to unit, there will be less uncertainties. For example if BR=1.0, then actual amount of parameter is equal to nominal amount of it and there will not any uncertainty. Fig. 1 shows load transfer mechanism in a typical jacket type offshore platform. It is shown in this figure that loads applied to platform especially lateral loads are sustained by diagonal braces firstly, and it is transferred to element joints and platform legs and piles and finally it is resisted by piles driven in soil. In designing of a platform, a suitable lateral load resisting system should be considered in order to have a proper performance of platform subjected to lateral loading. In other word, it is perfect to have a platform that by increasing of lateral loads, diagonal braces meet nonlinear deformation firstly and then joints secondly and ultimately piles fail and then platform collapse occur. This is the logical process for platform collapse.

level less than ultimate load estimation. This is due to illogical process of platform collapse. Fig 2.a and 2.b show brace failure occurred in a sample platform located in Persian golf that the amount of its BR will be mentioned later. In this platform the first step of failure occurred in diagonal brace elements, therefore it can be concluded that this platform has a logical process of failure.

Fig 2.a. Failure at the Middle of Brace

Fig.1-Load Transferring Path in Jacket

In the case that a jacket joints fail before diagonal braces, it can be concluded that total capacity of the braces can not be reached and therefore platform collapse occurs in a load
2

Fig 2.b. Failure at Joint can of the Brace

By assuming equal uncertainty in each of these three parameters, the safety factor of pile element should be greater than joint and joint
Copyright 2006 by ASME

should be greater than diagonal braces as follows: FS Pile > FS Jo int > FS Brace (3) In the other word, because of pile collapse has more risk than collapse of braces, therefore safety factor of pile should be greater than diagonal braces. When the problem is the calculation of bias factor and it may be used in design or assessment of a platform, the uncertainty of pile element should be taken greater than uncertainty of joint element and it should be taken greater than uncertainty in brace element in order to have logical collapse process. This is because of if the probability of failure of more important element (i.e. pile) be greater than less important element (i.e. joint), it could not be reached the entire capacity of the platform and this is not desired as noted before.

shows cumulative distribution of joint element Bias Factor based on experimental results. It is reported in the papers that the typical values for the braces Bias factor is between 1.0-1.2. By assuming a value for BR , (i.e. BR factor of braces) that we called Bb equal to 1.2 from Fig.3 probability of failure was computed. As mentioned before, for a logical design, the probability of failure for the joint should be less than probability of failure for the brace and as an upper limit the joint probability of failure can be equal to the braces probability of failure. By considering above probability of failure, Joint Bias factor (Bj) was obtained from Fig.4.

CALCULATION OF MAXIMUN VALUES OF BIAS FACTOR It should be noted that value of BR usually is obtained based of field experiments. The results of the experiments can be matched by a distribution with a median and standard deviation. Fig.3 shows cumulative distribution of brace element Bias Factor based on experimental results.
Fig.4- Cumulative Distribution of Joint Element According to Experiments

Fig.3- Cumulative distribution of brace element BR based on experiments

It should be noted that choosing of BR factor is not the main focus of this paper. Fig.4
3

In the common practice, the Bias factor the structural elements are considered equal to unit. In this case, by using safety factor obtained in structural codes, the capacity of the elements is decreased to have design allowable capacity. In design level of jacket type offshore platforms assessment, guidelines suggest to decrease of metocean loads acted on platform [4]. As an alternative method, an assessment according reliability based method; the capacity of the platform structural elements is increased using suitable bias factor BR. Increasing structural elements bias factor means the capacity of the structure increases and the required RSR (Equation 1) is decreased. For reaching more capacity in assessment of offshore platforms, it is desired to use high values of bias factor. In this paper, maximum values of these factors are obtained considering above mentioned philosophy.

Copyright 2006 by ASME

For a better performance of platform, the logical collapse process is recommended. In the assessment of jacket type offshore platform, the maximum structural system capacity should be calculated. In a logical manner, the less important elements should fail before more important elements. Therefore maximum rate of uncertainty or failure in ultimate state is related to less important element and the uncertainty of other elements is lower than this element. In the structural system of platform there are three major elements that participate in load transferring. Pile, joint and brace are more important elements respectively. Therefore if a field experiment done on one platform and according to its data the bias factor, B ,for brace has a value equal to P= 70% on probability of failure axis, the value of bias factor of joint should has a less probability of failure than 70%. By cumulative distribution of joint element shown in Fig. 5 its bias factor could be obtained.

Fig.5. Obtaining of Joint Element Bias Factor from Cumulative Distribution of Brace Element

In the other hand, if some elements do not have field experiments data, the bias factor equal to one should be considered. In the other word, the design value should be considered and no extra strength is recommended. THE BIAS FACTOR DETERMINED IN ASSESSMENT OF SAMPLE EXISTING PLATFORMS IN PERSIAN GOLF In the assessment performed on 3 sample existing jacket type offshore structures in Persian Golf, the amount of bias factor, BR, are taken into account as above mentioned
4

values. Experimental results on bracing elements show a normal distribution with a median equal to 1.40 and standard deviation equal to 0.42. Reference 3 suggested the amount of 1.20 as bias factor of bracing elements, Bb=1.20. Considering this value in the cumulative normal distribution (Fig. 3), probability of failure, P, found equal to 32%. Also, normal distribution with median equal to 1.30 and standard deviation of 0.49 could be fitted to field experimental data on joint elements [2]. Considering probability of failure equal to 32% for the joints, the relevant Bj is computed equal to 1.07. Considering calculated values (1.20 and 1.07), it is found that the uncertainty of joint element is less than the uncertainty of brace element. As there was not any experimental data on piles, its bias factor considered equal to 1.00. Actually, because of the data did not sufficient, the nominal capacity of pile were considered in assessment analysis. Considering the amount of Bp=1.00 , Bj=1.07 and Bb=1.20, it was found that the importance of pile is greater than joint and braces and this means that logical process of platform collapse could be occur during assessment analysis. Ultimately, the total structural uncertainty of platform obtains from multiplication of each bias factor element. In this multiplication the amount of uncertainty of yield strength of steel is considered. According to some field experiments and references its amount is between 1.00-1.20. In this paper, By equal to 1.00 was considered conservatively. Therefore the total Bias factor was computed as follows: BR =By Bb Bj Bp BR =1.01.201.071.0 = 1.284

(4)

CONCLUSION: The manner proposed for calculating the structural system uncertainty of offshore platforms is based on the behaviors of the platform in collapse state. In this behavior the less important elements fail firstly and then elements with more degree of importance fail until the logical behavior of platform.
Copyright 2006 by ASME

Using high value of bias factors help to consider more from element capacity. In this paper, a method for obtaining maximum value of the Bias Factor for different parts of jacket is presented in order to reach a logical collapse process. REFERENCES [1]. R.G. Bea ,Faustino Perez, Roberto Ortega, Requalification of Platforms Offshore TampicoTuxpan, Mexico: Condition and Criteria, 10th International Offshore and Polar Engineering Conference and Exhibition, Seattle, Washington, USA, May 28- June 2, 2000

[2].R. G .Bea, Load Engineering: Reliability Based Loadings for Design and Requalification of Structures and Foundations, Department of Civil Environmental Engineering, University of California at Berkeley [3]. R.G. Bea ,Criteria for Design and Requalification of Platforms In the Bay of Campeche, Mexico, Journal of waterway, Port, Coastal, and Ocean Engineering, September- October 2000 [4]. American Petroleum Institute (API), Recommended Practice 2A-WSD (RP 2AWSD), Twenty First Edition, December 2000

Copyright 2006 by ASME