Rev.

Rev. Date

Description

Made
By
Checked
By
Appr.
By
Customer PO No.:


PO Title:


DATA REVIEW STATUS CODES

Important Note:

Acceptance of supplier data does not
relieve supplier from compliance with
purchase order requirements.


1 Accepted
2 Accepted with comments
incorporated
3 Not accepted revise and
resubmit
4 For information
Equipment Description

Supplier Document No.

Supplier Revision

Area

System
Tag No(s):



Contractor logo


Supplier logo:


Contractor doc. no.:


Contractor ref.:


Document title



Original Customer
Project Number

Referanse

Total No.
of sheets:



42

Customer Document Number:

Installation:


Proj.code - supl.code - disc.code - SDDR code - Seq.nr

Document title:

Prepaired by::
Laurentiu Gavrila
Approved by:

Document no.:

Date:
20.02.2014
Rev. code:
01
Page:
1

Content
1 Introduction: ........................................................................................................................................2
1.1 Design resume...............................................................................................................................2
2 Document References, Rules and Standards ..................................................................................2
3 Conclusions ........................................................................................................................................3
4 Design Basis .......................................................................................................................................3
4.1 Materials ........................................................................................................................................3
4.2 Stress .............................................................................................................................................4
4.3 Material Factors .............................................................................................................................4
4.4 Deflections .....................................................................................................................................5
4.5 Loads .............................................................................................................................................5
4.5.1 Environmental loads ..............................................................................................................5
4.5.2 Platform motions loads ..........................................................................................................5
4.5.3 Area load ...............................................................................................................................5
4.6 Accidental heel and trim ................................................................................................................5
4.7 Lifting and tranportation operations ...............................................................................................5
5 Design limit states ..............................................................................................................................6
5.1 Design factors ................................................................................................................................6
6 Analysis ...............................................................................................................................................7
6.1 Computer model ............................................................................................................................7
6.2 Load chart ......................................................................................................................................9
6.3 LC Load combinations ............................................................................................................. 10
6.3.1 LC1: ULSa+b ...................................................................................................................... 10
6.3.2 LC2: ULS a+b ..................................................................................................................... 12
6.3.3 LC3: SLS ............................................................................................................................ 13
6.3.4 LC4: SLS ............................................................................................................................ 13
6.4 Reaction forces and moments (ULS) ......................................................................................... 13
6.5 Calculation results ULS .............................................................................................................. 14
6.5.1 Material ............................................................................................................................... 14
6.5.2 Middle Girder design .......................................................................................................... 15
6.5.3 Side girder design ............................................................................................................... 19
6.5.4 Stiffener design L-profile stiffener: ................................................................................... 22
6.5.5 Stiffener design UNP profile stiffener: ............................................................................. 25
6.6 Calculation results, SLS ............................................................................................................. 28
6.6.1 Main girders ........................................................................................................................ 29
6.6.2 Stiffeners ............................................................................................................................. 29
7 Hand calculations acc. to EN 1993-1-1 .......................................................................................... 30



















Document title:

Prepaired by::
Laurentiu Gavrila
Approved by:

Document no.:

Date:
20.02.2014
Rev. code:
01
Page:
2


1 Introduction:
This report verifies the structural integrity of a new deck structure installed inside the existing
ROV hangar onboard TO Barents. The verification is performed by use of computer program
FEM software Autodesk Robot Strutural Analysis and by hand calculations where relevant.
Completed with design brief and analysis of the new structure.
1.1 Design resume

The structural scope includes the following activities covered in this report:

Deck, Elevation 43.500:

A new deck structure inside the hangar will be designed at same level as top of box-girder at
EL.43.500, with 0.5 ton/m2 carrying capacity. The new deck is only to be supported by the
walls/columns of the existing structure without internal columns down to the deck below.
The existing deck at level 2 in ROV hangar will remain as a roof over existing rooms below.
Upper level storage room shall be insulated and heated based on constant temperature (hot
dry storage). The storage room will be trafficked by a fork lift truck, ref type Toyota 8FBEKT18.

Varyable loads are specified by Transocean. Ref /2/.

Adjacent existing structure is controlled for the effects caused by the new deck only. In chapter
6 forces and moments transferred from the new deck to the adjacent structure are listed.

In chapter 6 all new equipment (deck and office container) are listed with dead load.

The design verification is performed for the Servicability limit state (SLS), Ultimate limit state
(ULS) and Accidental limit state (ALS) as specified.

2 Document References, Rules and Standards

/1/ Document H600-AK-Z-FD-0001 H-6e Regulations
/2/ Technical specification for purchase. ROV hangar modified to store
/3/ NORSOK STANDARD N-001 Edition 7, June 2010
/4/ NORSOK STANDARD N-004 Rev.2, October 2004
/5/ NS-EN 1993-1-1/5:2005+NA:2008
/6/ NORSOK STANDARD M-120 Material Data Sheet for structural steel
/7/ Det Norske Veritas
DNV-OSS-101 Rules for Classification of Offshore Drilling and Support Units, October
2012
/8/ Det Norske Veritas
DNV-OS-B101 Metallic Materials, October 2012
/9/ Det Norske Veritas
DNV-OS-C101 Design of Offshore Steel Structures. General (LRFD Method), April 2011
/10/ Det Norske Veritas
DNV-OS-C103 Structural design of Column Stabilised Units (LFRD Method), October
2012
/11/ Det Norske Veritas
DNV OS-C401 Fabrication and Testing of Offshore Structures

Document title:

Prepaired by::
Laurentiu Gavrila
Approved by:

Document no.:

Date:
20.02.2014
Rev. code:
01
Page:
3

/12/ Det Norske Veritas
DNV RP-C103 Column Stabilised Unit, April 2012
/13/ Det Norske Veritas
DNV-RP-C201 Buckling Strength of Plated Structures, October 2010
/14/ Det Norske Veritas
DNV-RP-C202 Buckling Strength of Shells, January 2013
3 Conclusions

The analysis performed prove that the deck design fulfills the specified requirements.
Maximum utilization for the ULS/ALS limit state is found to be 0,85. (Criterion 1,0)
Maximum deflection for the SLS limit state is found to be 13 mm on a 3110 mm longitudinal
span equals 1/250. (Criterion 1/250)
4 Design Basis

Selection of steel quality and requirements for inspection of welds shall be based on a
systematic classification of welded joints according to the structural significance and complexity
of joints. The main criterion for decision of Design Class of welded joints is the significance with
respect to consequences of failure of the joint. In addition the geometrical complexity of the joint
will influence the DC selection.

From table 5-1 ref. /4/: Design Class: DC4
From table 5-2 ref. /4/, for DC4: Steel quality class: III (I)
Minimum steel quality according to Norsok M-120: S355 Mpa
From table 5-3 ref. /4/, for DC4 with moderate stresess: Inspection category for welds: C

4.1 Materials
Ref. /2/

The following linear structural steel materials were used [SI-units used]:

STEEL
QUALITY
NORSOK
GRADE
APPLICATION

(Min Yield
Stress)

355

S355J2
Outfitting steel profiles, plates, etc.,
specified yield strength 355 MPa.
(Standard EN10025)
355

S355J2H
RHS profiles, if delivered from
stock,specified yield strength 355
MPa.
(Standard EN10210)
Table4-1: Material types





Document title:

Prepaired by::
Laurentiu Gavrila
Approved by:

Document no.:

Date:
20.02.2014
Rev. code:
01
Page:
4

S355 J2 (acc. to NORSOK M-120, ref. /6/)

Yield strength: fy = 355 N/mm
2
Poisson number: = 0.3
Tensile strength: fu = 470N/mm
2
Youngs modulus: E = 2.1 10
5
N/mm
2
Shear modulus: G = E [2 (1 + v)]
-1
= 8.077 10
4
N/mm
2
Steel density: = 7850 kg/m
3

4.2 Stress
In general, according to NORSOK, the equivalent Von Mises design stress shall be less than:
s
j
< f
d
= f
y
/ g
m
where
f
d
= allowable design stress
f
y
= minimum yield stress
g
m
= material factor

The usage factor (U = s
j
/ f
d
) for structural components is calculated in accordance with NS-
EN1993-1-1. The code admits a usage factor equal to 1, see NORSOK. FEM analysis will
complete the manual calculations for the structural elements.

4.3 Material Factors
According to table 6-1 ref./4/ the material factors will be taken:

Material factors
ULS ALS SLS
1

Cross sections1-4, and
buckling

M
= 1.15

M
= 1.0

M
= 1.0

2
Boltedconnection

Mb
=1.3

Mb
=1.0

Mb
=1.0

3
Netsection,bolts holes

M2
=1.3

M2
=1.0

M2
=1.0

4 Filletweld

Mw
=1.3
Mw
=1.0
Mw
=1.0
Table4-2:Material factors









Document title:

Prepaired by::
Laurentiu Gavrila
Approved by:

Document no.:

Date:
20.02.2014
Rev. code:
01
Page:
5

4.4 Deflections
Ref. /9/
For serviceability limit state the following maximum deflections will be considered:
Item Maximum Deflection
Deck plates
L/150
Deck beams supporting plaster or other brittle finish or
non- flexible partitions
L/250
Table4-3:Maximum deflections


4.5 Loads
4.5.1 Environmental loads
N.A.
4.5.2 Platform motions loads
N.A. hence the accidental accelerations due to static heel will be considered, see 4.11, the
platform loads due of the environmental conditions which appear in the 100 years storm will not
be considered.
4.5.3 Area load

Ref. /2/ Live load
Deckload: P
1
= 5.0 kN/m
2

Fork lift truck load Toyota 8FBEKT18: P
2
= 70.3 kN
New office container weight + furniture, weight 11.6 t: P
3
= 116 kN

Ref. /2/ Dead load
Dead load new deck weight 17.0 t P
4
= 170 kN
Overhanging equipment (HVAC, piping, EIT): P
2
= 0.3kN/m
2


4.6 Accidental heel and trim
Loads from accidental heel and trim is considered for a static angle of 17 deg. as specified in
Ref. /10/.

4.7 Lifting and tranportation operations
This report does not contain the lifting operations for the equipment. Separate reports will be
made for lifting and handling when relevant.


Document title:

Prepaired by::
Laurentiu Gavrila
Approved by:

Document no.:

Date:
20.02.2014
Rev. code:
01
Page:
6

5 Design limit states

5.1 Design factors


Load Factors
Condition P(ermanent) L(ive) E(nvironm.) A(ccident.)
ULS-a 1.3 1.3 0.7
ULS-b 1.0 1.0 1.3
ULS-a+b * 1.3 1.3 1.3
SLS 1.0 1.0 1.0
ALS 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0
Table 5-1: Design load and material factors according to NORSOK / DNV
*ULS a+b is simplified concervative.


Document title:

Prepaired by::
Laurentiu Gavrila
Approved by:

Document no.:

Date:
20.02.2014
Rev. code:
01
Page:
7

6 Analysis
6.1 Computer model
Figure 1: FEM Model From Inventor New deck structure


ROV Hangar - existing HEB 300 columns

UPN 300 Side Girders Steel plate t=8 mm



Figure 2:Top view of deck girders and plates

IPE 400 Middle Girders


Document title:

Prepaired by::
Laurentiu Gavrila
Approved by:

Document no.:

Date:
20.02.2014
Rev. code:
01
Page:
8

UPN 180 Stiffeners

Figure 3:Bottom view of deck stiffeners

L150x100x12 Stiffeners


Figure 4: Geometry of the deck supports (plan view) Support nodes are defined A1 to F4

A1 B1 C1 D1 E1 F1
A2 B2 C2 D2 E2 F2
A3 F3
A4 F4

Document title:

Prepaired by::
Laurentiu Gavrila
Approved by:

Document no.:

Date:
20.02.2014
Rev. code:
01
Page:
9

Deck girders will be fixed to the existing HEB columns of the ROV at one end and to the box
girder at the other. Supports for the deck structure are showed in Figure 4.
6.2 Load chart
Table 6-1: Load chart used in analysis
Location Description Load
P/L/E
Loads / weights Unit ULS
factor
Design load /
weights for ULS
foranalyses
Ref.
New deck
(EL.43.500)

Structural elements
(self weight)
P

17000 Kg 1,3 22100


Overhanging
equipment
P

3360 Kg 1,3 4368

Totalmass
deck ext.
P

20360

Kg 1,3 26468

Office
container

L

11600 kg 1,3 15080

Fork lift truck

L

7030 Kg 1,3 9140


Deck live load

L

5,0 kN/m2 1,3 7,5



Table 6-2: Deck loadings in FEA Software Reference is given to each load combination below.
Note:
In the calculations, the following assumptions and simplifications, are done:
1. Masses are applied as net weight.
3. Live loads and environmental loads are applied as forces or pressure as shown in plots.
4. Utilization is based on maximum allowed stress: 355 N/mm2 / 1,15 =308,5 N/mm2
5. Utilization factor of 1.0 is allowed.

Document title:

Prepaired by::
Laurentiu Gavrila
Approved by:

Document no.:

Date:
20.02.2014
Rev. code:
01
Page:
10

6.3 LC Load combinations
In the analysis 16 ULS and 16 SLS load cases were taken into consideration in accordance with
the NORSOK standard. The structural elements were globaly and localy checked for buckling.
The most unfavorable load combinations are presented in this report:

LC1

ULS Dead
loads
(OW)
Live
loads
(LL1)
Container
load (CL)
Fork lift load 1
(FLL1)
Local buckling
analysis
Global
buckling
analysis
LC2 ULS Dead
loads
(OW)
Live
loads
(LL1)
Container
load (CL)
Fork lift load 2
(FLL2)
Local buckling
analysis
Global
buckling
analysis
LC3

SLS Dead
loads
(OW)
Live
loads
(LL1)
Container
load (CL)
Fork lift load 1
(FLL1)
Deflection check
LC4

SLS Dead
loads
(OW)
Live
loads
(LL1)
Container
load (CL)
Fork lift load 2
(FLL2)
Deflection check

Table6-3: Load combinations table
For the ULS limit state, the conservative, simplified ULS a+b has been used.

As specified in /2/ the ALS limit state should be controlled in accordance with DNV OS-C103.
This standard specifies an ALS check for a static accidental heel of 17 degrees. As the ALS
does not include any additional loads or load impacts, the ULS calculations cover the ALS
calculations and thus, ALS calculations are not required.

6.3.1 LC1: ULSa+b
The loads used in LC1 are the following:
















Figure 5:LC1 combination


Document title:

Prepaired by::
Laurentiu Gavrila
Approved by:

Document no.:

Date:
20.02.2014
Rev. code:
01
Page:
11


Self weight (OW) Container load (CL)

Fork lift load 1 (FLL1) Live load 1 (LL1)



The fork lift load (FLL1) was considered acting on the front wheels of the fork lift. The most
unfovarable situation is achieved when 70% of the weight is unloading on one wheel (Fz=-44
kN) while 30% of the weight is unloading on the other wheel (Fz=-19 kN).
FLL1 is applied on the L-stiffener at equal distances from the supporting ends.

A 12.00 t container load (CL) was considered in the analysis to be positioned between A1-C1
and A2-C2 supports. The total weight was modeled as 4 point loads (Fz= -30kN).

The above loads are without load factors. In the analysis material factors from table 4-1 and
load factors from table 5-1 are used.














Document title:

Prepaired by::
Laurentiu Gavrila
Approved by:

Document no.:

Date:
20.02.2014
Rev. code:
01
Page:
12

6.3.2 LC2: ULS a+b









Figure 6:LC2 combination
Self weight (OW) Container load (CL)

Fork lift load 1 (FLL2) Live load 1 (LL1)

The fork lift load was considered acting on the front wheels of the fork lift. The most unfovarable
situation is achieved when 70% of the weight is unloading on one wheel (Fz=-44 kN) while 30%
of the weight is unloading on the other wheel (Fz=-19 kN).
In LC2 the load is applied on the UPN-stiffener at equal distances from the supporting ends.

A 12.00 t container load (CL) was considered in the analysis to be positioned between A1-C1
and A2-C2 supports. The total weight was modeled as 4 point loads (Fz= -30kN).

Document title:

Prepaired by::
Laurentiu Gavrila
Approved by:

Document no.:

Date:
20.02.2014
Rev. code:
01
Page:
13

The above loads are without load factors. In the analysis material factors from table 4-1 and
load factors from table 5-1 are used.
6.3.3 LC3: SLS

LC3 is the equivalent of LC1 with SLS material and load factors given in tables 4-1 and 5-1.

6.3.4 LC4: SLS

LC3 is the equivalent of LC2 with SLS material and load factors given in tables 4-1 and 5-1.

6.4 Reaction forces and moments (ULS)
Load
case
Node Fx [kN] Fy [kN] Fz [kN] Mx [kNm] My [kNm] Mz [kNm]
LC1+LC2 A1 22.16 - 22.47 - 19.71 -
A2 21.99 - 20.27 - 14.16 -
A3 21.16 - 22.72 - 18.30 -
A4 22.66 - 30.03 - 15.08 -
B1 25.97 - 156.66 - 215.16 -
B2 21.61 - 141.41 - 151.27 -
C1 30.90 - 142.31 - 209.82 -
C2 25.68 - 122.88 - 150.97 -
D1 45.07 - 163.74 - 246.97 -
D2 50.60 - 188.08 - 192.08 -
E1 50.31 - 190.44 - 292.00 -
E2 55.31 - 191.03 - 199.87 -
F1 20.05 - 22.20 - 23.59 -
F2 17.97 - 74.41 - 18.59 -
F3 14.38 - 92.30 - 25.69 -
F4 17.97 - 78.64 - 24.55 -
Table 4: Reaction Table







Document title:

Prepaired by::
Laurentiu Gavrila
Approved by:

Document no.:

Date:
20.02.2014
Rev. code:
01
Page:
14

6.5 Calculation results ULS
The main structural elements in the design are as shown above defined as:
- Middle girders
- Side girders
- Stiffeners (L - stiffeners incl. effective flange)
- Stiffeners (UPN180 - stiffeners)
The highest utilized elements, all load cases, are described below:

Structural
Element
Governing
Load comb.
M
ed
[kNm]
V
ed
[kN]

N
ed
[kN]

Middle girder LC1 292.00 191.03 55.31
Side girder LC1 27.96 92.30 22.58
Stiffener L LC1 42.46 44.09 31.35
Stiffener UPN LC2 37.43 53.64 29.10
Table 6-5: Design efforts for highest utilized structural members

6.5.1 Material









Table 6-6: Material S355J2 all steel elements.








Document title:

Prepaired by::
Laurentiu Gavrila
Approved by:

Document no.:

Date:
20.02.2014
Rev. code:
01
Page:
15

6.5.2 Middle Girder design
The girders are considered to be fixed at both ends (see figure 4), transferring bending, shear
and axial efforts to the existing structures. IPE 400 profiles are chosen.

IPE 400 section properties


Figure 7: Girder section properties

Figure 8: Bending moment diagrams for all girders (only girders are shown)

Document title:

Prepaired by::
Laurentiu Gavrila
Approved by:

Document no.:

Date:
20.02.2014
Rev. code:
01
Page:
16





Figure 9: Shear force diagrams for all girders (only girders are shown)


From figures 7 & 8, we find out the most stressed girder (girder no 4 supported between E1 and
E2) from the deck structure, mainly the one which overstakes half of the biggest plate span on
which the office container will be placed (3100 mm x 4400 mm).



Figure 10: Effort diagrams for the most stressed girder







Document title:

Prepaired by::
Laurentiu Gavrila
Approved by:

Document no.:

Date:
20.02.2014
Rev. code:
01
Page:
17

STRESS ANALYSIS IN THE IPE 400 BAR Middle Girder

Section : IPE 400
Element No. : 4
Length : 8225 mm

CROSS SECTION


Figure 11: von Mises equivalent stresses cross section
Load case : "LC1"
Stress analysis type (hypothesis) : von Mises



Internal forces taken into account : Fx Fy Fz Mx My Mz

Extreme stresses in the beam
s
X
max s
X
min | t | max s
i
max
Stresses 261.35 MPa -248.40 MPa 66.69 MPa 261.35 MPa
Relative position 0.00 0.00 0.03 0.81
Absolute position 0.0 mm 0.0 mm 8200.0 mm 0.0 mm

Forces applied
Fx = 54.67 kN Mx = 0.00 kN*m
Fy = 2.75 kN My = -292.00 kN*m
Fz = 190.44 kN Mz = 0.35 kN*m





Document title:

Prepaired by::
Laurentiu Gavrila
Approved by:

Document no.:

Date:
20.02.2014
Rev. code:
01
Page:
18


Figure 12: von Mises equivalent stresses XZ plane view

Figure 13: von Mises equivalent stresses XZ plane view






Figure 14: von Mises equivalent stresses 3D view

U = s
j
/ f
d
= 261,35 Mpa / 308,0 Mpa = 0,85 < 1 OK !








Document title:

Prepaired by::
Laurentiu Gavrila
Approved by:

Document no.:

Date:
20.02.2014
Rev. code:
01
Page:
19

6.5.3 Side girder design

The exterior girders were considered to be fixed on the ROV hangar HEB columns, respectively
in points A1 to A4 and F1 to F4. UPN 300 sections are chosen.

UPN 300 section properties






















Figure 15: Exterior girder section properties


Figure 16: von Mises equivalent stresses cross section

STRESS ANALYSIS IN THE UPN300 BAR EXTERIOR GIRDER

Section : UPN 300
Element No. : 12
Length : 8350 mm

Document title:

Prepaired by::
Laurentiu Gavrila
Approved by:

Document no.:

Date:
20.02.2014
Rev. code:
01
Page:
20


CROSS SECTION












Figure 17: von Mises equivalent stresses cross section


Load case : "LC1"
Stress analysis type (hypothesis) : von Mises



Internal forces taken into account : Fx Fy Fz Mx My Mz

Extreme stresses in the beam
s
X
max s
X
min | t | max s
i
max
Stresses 207.99 MPa -129.40 MPa 93.17 MPa 208.62 MPa
Relative position 0.06 0.06 0.56 0.76
Absolute position 150.0 mm 150.0 mm 0.0 mm 700.0 mm


Forces applied to the section
Fx = -13.44 kN Mx = 0.58 kN*m
Fy = -37.20 kN My = -27.96 kN*m
Fz = -92.30 kN Mz = 3.43 kN*m










Document title:

Prepaired by::
Laurentiu Gavrila
Approved by:

Document no.:

Date:
20.02.2014
Rev. code:
01
Page:
21


Figure 18:von Mises equivalent stresses XZ plane view


Figure 19:von Mises equivalent stresses XY plane view


















Figure 20: von Mises equivalent stresses 3D view


U = s
j
/ f
d
= 208,62Mpa / 308,0 Mpa = 0,68 < 1 OK !








Document title:

Prepaired by::
Laurentiu Gavrila
Approved by:

Document no.:

Date:
20.02.2014
Rev. code:
01
Page:
22

6.5.4 Stiffener design L-profile stiffener:

In the model, stiffeners are defined as specially designed element consicting of the L-profile
itself and an effective flange as shown in figure 23.

Effective flange calculation ref. /5/, /13/:



Figure 21: Effective length Le of plate for stiffeners acc. to EN1993-1-5, ref. /5/







Figure 22: Effective width principle for stiffeners acc. to DNV-RP-C201, ref./13/

L
e1
= L
e2
= 600 mm - spacing between the stiffeners

The condition in EN 1993-1-1-5 is more restrictive that the one in DNV-RP-C201, thus the
effective flange width for the middle stiffeners will be :

S=1/2 (L
e1
+ L
e2
) = 300 mm


Document title:

Prepaired by::
Laurentiu Gavrila
Approved by:

Document no.:

Date:
20.02.2014
Rev. code:
01
Page:
23

Resulting the following composed cross section:



Figure 23:Stiffener + plate section properties




Figure 24: Bending moment and shear force diagrams for stiffener


STRESS ANALYSIS IN THE BAR

Section : UPLL 300x150x100
Element No. : 75
Length : 3110 mm






Document title:

Prepaired by::
Laurentiu Gavrila
Approved by:

Document no.:

Date:
20.02.2014
Rev. code:
01
Page:
24

CROSS SECTION

Figure 25: von Mises equivalent stresses cross section
Load case : "LC1"
Stress analysis type (hypothesis) : von Mises


Internal forces takenintoaccount: Fx Fy Fz Mx My Mz

Extreme stresses in the beam
s
X
max s
X
min | t | max s
i
max
Stresses 230.89 MPa -269.07 MPa 32.65 MPa 269.12 MPa
Relative position 0.31 0.31 0.31 1.00
Absolute position 962.4 mm 962.4 mm 0.0 mm 962.4 mm

Forces applied to the section
Fx = 51.76 kN Mx = 0.01 kN*m
Fy = -8.43 kN My = 42,46 kN*m
Fz = -44.09 kN Mz = -51.76 kN*m





Figure 26: von Mises equivalent stresses XZ plane view

Document title:

Prepaired by::
Laurentiu Gavrila
Approved by:

Document no.:

Date:
20.02.2014
Rev. code:
01
Page:
25


Figure 27: von Mises equivalent stresses XY plane view


As we see both in top and bottom flange the equivalent stresses are under the yield strength of
the material:


Figure 28: von Mises equivalent stresses 3D view

U = s
j
/ f
d
= 269,12Mpa / 308,0 Mpa = 0,874< 1 OK !


NB !
The plate between stiffeners will normally be checked implicitly by the stiffener check since plate
buckling is accounted for by the effective width method.







6.5.5 Stiffener design UNP profile stiffener:
Due to the decks erection method, some deck stiffeners are chosen UNP 180 profiles. These
profiles are checked without the contribution of an effective flange (conservative).

Document title:

Prepaired by::
Laurentiu Gavrila
Approved by:

Document no.:

Date:
20.02.2014
Rev. code:
01
Page:
26


UPN 180 section properties


Figure 29: Channel stiffener section properties

Figure 30:Bending moment and shear force diagrams for stiffener


STRESS ANALYSIS IN THE BAR

Section : UNP 180
Element No. : 76
Length : 3110 mm









CROSS SECTION


Document title:

Prepaired by::
Laurentiu Gavrila
Approved by:

Document no.:

Date:
20.02.2014
Rev. code:
01
Page:
27




Load case : "LC2"
Stress analysis type (hypothesis) : von Mises



Internal forces takenintoaccount: Fx Fy Fz Mx My Mz


Extreme stresses in the beam
s
X
max s
X
min | t | max s
i
max
Stresses 256.92 MPa -238.62 MPa 35.36 MPa 256.92 MPa
Relative position 0.31 0.31 0.00 0.86
Absolute position 962.4 mm 962.4 mm 0.0 mm 962.4 mm

Forces applied to the section
Fx = 26.26 kN Mx = 0.00 kN*m
Fy = 0.02 kN My = 37.43 kN*m
Fz = -42,49 kN Mz = 0.02 kN*m





Figure 31: von Mises equivalent stresses XZ plane view

Document title:

Prepaired by::
Laurentiu Gavrila
Approved by:

Document no.:

Date:
20.02.2014
Rev. code:
01
Page:
28



Figure 32: von Mises equivalent stresses XY plane view




Figure 33: von Mises equivalent stresses 3D view

U = s
j
/ f
d
= 256,92 Mpa / 308,0 Mpa = 0,834 < 1 OK !



6.6 Calculation results, SLS

Acc. to ref. /9/ Serviceability limit states for offshore steel structures are associated with:
deflections which may prevent the intended operation of equipment;
deflections which may be detrimental to finishes or non-structural elements;
vibrations which may cause discomfort to personnel;
deformations and deflections which may spoil the aesthetic appearance of the structure.

For calculations in the serviceability limit states y
m
= 1.0

For serviceability limit state the following maximum deflections will be considered Ref. /9/:

Document title:

Prepaired by::
Laurentiu Gavrila
Approved by:

Document no.:

Date:
20.02.2014
Rev. code:
01
Page:
29

Item Maximum Deflection
Deck plates
L/150
Deck beams supporting plaster or other brittle finish or
non- flexible partitions
L/250
Table6-7:Maximum deflections
6.6.1 Main girders

The main girders are fixed to the box girder in one end and to the existing ROV HEB300
columns in the other end. Based on survey meassurements, maximum span of the girders are
8225 mm.


Figure 34: IPE girders deflections for LC3 and LC4

Figure 35: Maximum displacement for girder
no. 4










u
z
= 11 mm < 8225 mm / 250 = 32,9 mm OK !
6.6.2 Stiffeners


Document title:

Prepaired by::
Laurentiu Gavrila
Approved by:

Document no.:

Date:
20.02.2014
Rev. code:
01
Page:
30




Figure 36: Stiffener deflections for LC3 and LC4

Figure 37: Maximum stiffener deflections for LC3 and LC4

u
z
= 13 mm < 3110 mm / 250 = 12,42 mm = 13 mm OK !

Considering that the upper flange of the stiffeners is the plate, the admissible deformation for
the plate will be :

u
z
= 13 mm < 3110 mm / 150 = 20,73 mm OK !













7 Hand calculations acc. to EN 1993-1-1
In order to verify the results from the computer model, hand calculations are performed to the
most critical elements and sections.

Document title:

Prepaired by::
Laurentiu Gavrila
Approved by:

Document no.:

Date:
20.02.2014
Rev. code:
01
Page:
31

I
y
b h
3
b t
w

( )
h 2 t
f

( )
3

12
0.03r
4
+ 0.2146r
2
h 2 t
f
0.4468r
( )
2
+ 2.313 10
4
cm
4
= :=
I
z
2 t
f
b
3
h 2 t
f

( )
t
w
3
+
12
0.03r
4
+ 0.2146r
2
t
w
0.4468r +
( )
2
+ 1.318 10
3
cm
4
= :=
V
Ed
191.02kN :=
M
yEd
292kNm :=








1. Efforts:





2. Geometry:

3. Safety factors:



4. Geometric characteristics:
IPE 400





Height of web:
Section Area
Maximum inertia moment y-y

Minimum inertia moment z-z
L 8225mm :=

M0
1.15 :=

M1
1.15 :=
h 400mm :=
b 180mm :=
t
f
13.5mm :=
r 21mm :=
t
w
8.6mm :=
h
w
h 2 t
f
2 r 331mm = :=
A
a
2 t
f
b h 2 t
f

( )
t
w
+ 4 t ( ) r
2
+ 84.464cm
2
= :=

Document title:

Prepaired by::
Laurentiu Gavrila
Approved by:

Document no.:

Date:
20.02.2014
Rev. code:
01
Page:
32

G E 2 1 v + ( ) [ ]
1
:=
G 8.077 10
4

N
mm
2
=


Torsional moment

Sectorial moment
Elastic strength modulus y-y
Elastic strengt modulus z-z
Plastic strength modulus y-y

Plastic strength modulus z-z
Giration radius y-y

Giration radius z-z

5. Material properties

Elastic modulus

Poisson coefficient
Shear modulus

I
t
2 b 0.63t
f

( )
t
f
3

3
h 2 t
f

( )
3
t
w
3
+ 2
t
w
t
f
0.145 0.1
r
t
f
+
|

\
|
|
.

r
t
w
2
+
|

\
|
|
.
2
r t
f
+
( )
2
+ r
2

2 r t
f
+

(
(
(
(

4
+ 51.075cm
4
= :=
I
w
t
f
b
3

24
h t
f

( )
2
4.9 10
5
cm
6
= :=
W
ely
2I
y
h
1.156 10
3
cm
3
= :=
W
elz
2I
z
b
146.425cm
3
= :=
W
ply
t
w
h
2

4
b t
w

( )
h t
f

( )
t
f
+
4 t
2
r
2
h 2 t
f

( )
+
3 t 10 ( ) r
3

3
+ 1.307 10
3
cm
3
= :=
W
plz
b
2
t
f

2
h 2 t
f

4
t
w
2
+ r
3 10
3
t
|

\
|
|
.
+ 2
t
2

\
|
|
.
t
w
r
2
+ 229 cm
3
= :=
i
y
I
y
A
15.208
m
A
0.5
mm = :=
i
z
I
z
A
3.63
m
A
0.5
mm = :=
f
yk
355MPa := f
y
f
yk

M0
308.696MPa = :=
E 210000
N
mm
2
:=
v 0.3 :=

Document title:

Prepaired by::
Laurentiu Gavrila
Approved by:

Document no.:

Date:
20.02.2014
Rev. code:
01
Page:
33



6. Section classification EN 1993-1-1, tab. 5.2
Compression on the top flange acc. to EN 1993-1-1 Tabel 5.2




Web sujected to bending acc. to EN 1993-1-1 Tabel 5.2




c
f
b t
w
2 r
2
64.7mm = :=
c
f
t
f
4.793 =
c
235N mm
2

f
y
0.873 = :=
flangeclass 1
c
f
t
f
9 c s if
2 9 c
c
f
t
f
< 10 c s if
3 10 c
c
f
t
f
< 14 c s if
4 14 c
c
f
t
f
< if
"not good" otherwise
:=
flangeclass 1 =
c
w
h t
f
2 r 344.5mm = :=
c
w
t
w
40.058 =
webclass 1
c
w
t
w
72 c s if
2 72 c
c
w
t
w
< 83 c s if
3 83 c
c
w
t
w
< 124 c s if
4 124 c
c
w
t
w
< if
"not good " otherwise
:=
webclass 1 =
sectionclass maxflangeclass webclass , ( ) 1 = :=

Document title:

Prepaired by::
Laurentiu Gavrila
Approved by:

Document no.:

Date:
20.02.2014
Rev. code:
01
Page:
34


7. Bending verification acc. to EN 1993-1-1 (6.13)




Moment resistance check:


EN 1993-1-1 6.3.2.1
8. Shear resistance acc. to EN 1993-1-1, 6.2.6
The plastic shear resistance not taking into account the torsion depends on the shear area which is
calculated: :




For the strenth of beams which do not have transversal stiffeners local shear buckling check is not
necessary if the condition above is fullfilled:
M
plRd
W
ply
f
y

M0
350.879kNm = :=
M
elRd
W
ely
f
y

M0
310.418kNm = := M
cRd
M
plRd
sectionclass 2 s if
M
elRd
2 sectionclass < 3 s if
M
effRd
3 sectionclass < 4 s if
:=
M
effRd
M
effRd
W
effy
f
y

M0
= :=
W
effy
M
cRd
M
plRd
350.879kNm = :=
u
fM
M
yEd
M
cRd
0.832 = :=
Moment_resistance "OK" u
fM
1 s if
"Choose another section" u
fM
1 > if
:=
Moment_resistance "OK" =
A
v
A
a
2 b t
f
t
f
t
w
2 r +
( )
+ 42.695cm
2
= :=
V
plRd
A
v
f
y

M0
3
661.675kN = := uf
V
V
Ed
V
plRd
0.289 = :=
Shear_resistance "OK" uf
V
1 s if
"Choose another section" uf
V
1 > if
:=
Shear_resistance "OK" =

Document title:

Prepaired by::
Laurentiu Gavrila
Approved by:

Document no.:

Date:
20.02.2014
Rev. code:
01
Page:
35

f
I
fc
I
ft

I
fc
I
ft
+
:=
I
fc




9. Lateral torsional buckling strenth
Elastoc critical moment for lateral torsional buckling:


for double simmetrical sections

Th coeff. C1, C2, C3 depend of the loading scheme and of the suporting conditions at
the ends of the bar. The values are determined below:
q 1 :=
strength "compulsory"
h
w
t
w
72
c
q
> if
"not compulsory"
h
w
t
w
72
c
q
s if
:=
strength "not compulsory" =
M
cr
C
1
t
2
E I
z

k
z
L
( )
2
k
z
k
w
|

\
|
|
.
2
I
w
I
z

k
z
L
( )
2
G I
t

t
2
E I
z

+ C
2
z
g
C
3
Z
j

( )
2
+ C
2
z
g
C
3
z
j

( )

(
(
(
(

:=
C
1
z
j
z
s
A
A
A z y
2
z
2
+
( )

(
(
]
d
2 I
y

z
i
:= z
s
z
j
0 :=
M
cr
C
1
t
2
E I
z

k
z
L
( )
2
k
z
k
w
|

\
|
|
.
2
I
w
I
z

k
z
L
( )
2
G I
t

t
2
E I
z

+ C
2
z
g
C
3
Z
j

( )
2
+ C
2
z
g

(
(
(
(

:=
C
1

Document title:

Prepaired by::
Laurentiu Gavrila
Approved by:

Document no.:

Date:
20.02.2014
Rev. code:
01
Page:
36



I
fc
si I
ft
are the inertial moments of the compressed and the tensioned flenge calculated with
respect to the minimum inertia axis z. Tables 4.1 and 4.2 can be used only if the condition
below is fulfiled:


0.9
f
s 0.9 s

Document title:

Prepaired by::
Laurentiu Gavrila
Approved by:

Document no.:

Date:
20.02.2014
Rev. code:
01
Page:
37

M
cr
C
1
t
2
E I
z

k
z
L
( )
2
k
z
k
w
|

\
|
|
.
2
I
w
I
z

k
z
L
( )
2
G I
t

t
2
E I
z

+ C
2
z
g

( )
2
+ C
2
z
g

(
(
(
(

14.74 10
3
kNm = :=


z
a
si z
s
are the coordinates where the loading is applied with respect to C, the center of gravity
of the section. Values are positive when the application point and C are both in the
compressed area, and negative when they are in the tensioned area of the transversal cross
section of the bar.

Factor z
j
from M
cr
formula takes into account the unsimetry of the cross section with respect to the
maximum inertia axis y:



distance form the loading plane to C
Tabel 4.2


z
g
z
a
z
s

( )
:= z
a
z
j
z
s
0.5 A y
2
z
2
+
( )
z
I
y
|

\
|
|
.
(
(
(
(
]
d

(
(
(
(

:= z
s
k
z
1 :=
k
w
1 :=
z
g
h
2
200 mm = :=
C
1
1 :=
L 0.6m :=
C
2
0 :=

Document title:

Prepaired by::
Laurentiu Gavrila
Approved by:

Document no.:

Date:
20.02.2014
Rev. code:
01
Page:
38




Reducted slenderness for lateral tosional buckling:
EN 1993-1-1 6.3.2.2 (1)
For laminated profiles:

bLT
W
ply
f
y

M
cr
0.165 = :=

LT0
0.4 :=
"the lateral torsional buckling effects can not be neglected"
bLT

LT0
> if
"the lateral torsional buckling effects can be neglected" otherwise

Document title:

Prepaired by::
Laurentiu Gavrila
Approved by:

Document no.:

Date:
20.02.2014
Rev. code:
01
Page:
39

c_flamb "b" section 1
h
b
2 s . if
"c" section 1
h
b
2 > . if
"c" section 0
h
b
2 s . if
"d" section 0
h
b
2 > . if
:=

Reduction Factor:


(1 for laminated, 0 for welded) section 1 :=

Document title:

Prepaired by::
Laurentiu Gavrila
Approved by:

Document no.:

Date:
20.02.2014
Rev. code:
01
Page:
40

o
LT
0.21 c_flamb "a" if
0.34 c_flamb "b" if
0.49 c_flamb "c" if
0.76 c_flamb "d" if
:=

LT0
0.4 =
| 0.75 :=
|
LT
0.5 1 o
LT

bLT

LT0

( )
+ |
bLT
2
+

0.453 = :=
_
LT
min
1
|
LT
|
LT
2
|
bLT
2
+
1

bLT
2
, 1 ,
|

\
|
|
|
.
1 = :=


EN 1993-1-1 Tabel 6.5, Tabel 6.3

Recommended values for
LT0
, acc. to EN 1993-1-1 6.3.2.3(1)





o
LT
0.49 =

Document title:

Prepaired by::
Laurentiu Gavrila
Approved by:

Document no.:

Date:
20.02.2014
Rev. code:
01
Page:
41

BeamLTB "OK" =
BeamLTB "OK"
M
yEd
M
b.Rd
1 s if
"Girder not OK" otherwise
:=
M
yEd
M
b.Rd
0.832 =
f' 1 0.5 1 k
c

( )
1 2
bLT
0.8
( )
2

1 = :=
f minf' 1 , ( ) 1 = :=
_
LT.mod
_
LT
f
1 = :=
M
b.Rd
_
LT.mod
W
ply
f
y

M1
350.879kNm = :=

k
c
1 :=




10. Design buckling resistance moment :

11. Lateral torsional buckling verification: