Professional Documents
Culture Documents
DESIGN FOR
ACCIDENTAL LOADS
03 Oct 2012
Dr. S. Nallayarasu
Department of Ocean Engineering
Indian Institute of Technology Madras
Accidental Loads
Theme and Principle
Safety Evaluation and Implementation
Identification of hazard
Storm, Seismic and Fire Hazard
Aim and Design Approach
Event Control
Direct Design
Indirect Design
Design for Fire Load
Sources of fire
Fire ratings
Fire Protection methods
Platform Layout
Steel Properties
Structural Response to fire
Structural Design criteria
Design Methods
Design for Blast Load
Blast over pressure
Ductility ratio
Dynamic Load Factor
Design aspects
Limiting Displacement
03 Oct 2012
Dr. S. Nallayarasu
Department of Ocean Engineering
Indian Institute of Technology Madras
Blast
Blast associated with fire or independent blast
from equipment
Ship Collision
Ship collision with jacket
Dropped Object
Dropped object from crane during offshore lift on
to the deck, subsea pipeline etc.
03 Oct 2012
Dr. S. Nallayarasu
Department of Ocean Engineering
Indian Institute of Technology Madras
THEME
Plan And Implement An Active And Passive
Mitigation Measures Against
Incidents Both From Nature And Manmade
03 Oct 2012
Dr. S. Nallayarasu
Department of Ocean Engineering
Indian Institute of Technology Madras
PRINCIPLE
MINIMIZE RISK
Zero Risk impossible but
Risk Can be minimized
ALARP
As Low As Reasonably Practicable
03 Oct 2012
Dr. S. Nallayarasu
Department of Ocean Engineering
Indian Institute of Technology Madras
Passive Mitigation
Control of risk propagation (Remedial)
Safety of human life
03 Oct 2012
Dr. S. Nallayarasu
Department of Ocean Engineering
Indian Institute of Technology Madras
Identification
NATURAL HAZARDS
Earthquake
Storm
MANMADE HAZARDS
Fire
Blast
Accidental Collision
Dropped Objects
03 Oct 2012
Dr. S. Nallayarasu
Department of Ocean Engineering
Indian Institute of Technology Madras
03 Oct 2012
Dr. S. Nallayarasu
Department of Ocean Engineering
Indian Institute of Technology Madras
03 Oct 2012
Dr. S. Nallayarasu
Department of Ocean Engineering
Indian Institute of Technology Madras
Sources of Fire
Layout of Facility
Safety Studies (QRA, HAZOP)
Mitigation Required
Active Fire Protection
Passive Fire Protection
03 Oct 2012
10
Dr. S. Nallayarasu
Department of Ocean Engineering
Indian Institute of Technology Madras
Design Approach
Event control
Indirect design
Direct design
03 Oct 2012
11
Dr. S. Nallayarasu
Department of Ocean Engineering
Indian Institute of Technology Madras
Equipment
Working procedures
Active protection devices
Arrangement of the platform
Structural configuration
Personnel training
Indicrect Design
03 Oct 2012
12
Dr. S. Nallayarasu
Department of Ocean Engineering
Indian Institute of Technology Madras
13
Dr. S. Nallayarasu
Department of Ocean Engineering
Indian Institute of Technology Madras
03 Oct 2012
14
Dr. S. Nallayarasu
Department of Ocean Engineering
Indian Institute of Technology Madras
03 Oct 2012
15
Dr. S. Nallayarasu
Department of Ocean Engineering
Indian Institute of Technology Madras
SEGREGATION OF ZONES
Identify Zones of different Safety levels
Process Zone areas with hydrocarbon equipment
Living Zone areas where living facilities are located
Utility Zone areas where utility non-hydrocarbon
equipment are located.
03 Oct 2012
16
Dr. S. Nallayarasu
Department of Ocean Engineering
Indian Institute of Technology Madras
03 Oct 2012
17
Dr. S. Nallayarasu
Department of Ocean Engineering
Indian Institute of Technology Madras
Living
03 Oct 2012
Utility
18
Process
Well Platform
Dr. S. Nallayarasu
Department of Ocean Engineering
Indian Institute of Technology Madras
03 Oct 2012
19
Dr. S. Nallayarasu
Department of Ocean Engineering
Indian Institute of Technology Madras
03 Oct 2012
20
Dr. S. Nallayarasu
Department of Ocean Engineering
Indian Institute of Technology Madras
03 Oct 2012
21
Dr. S. Nallayarasu
Department of Ocean Engineering
Indian Institute of Technology Madras
Fire scenario
22
Dr. S. Nallayarasu
Department of Ocean Engineering
Indian Institute of Technology Madras
Jet Fire
03 Oct 2012
23
Dr. S. Nallayarasu
Department of Ocean Engineering
Indian Institute of Technology Madras
03 Oct 2012
24
Dr. S. Nallayarasu
Department of Ocean Engineering
Indian Institute of Technology Madras
Active Systems
Passive Systems
03 Oct 2012
25
Dr. S. Nallayarasu
Department of Ocean Engineering
Indian Institute of Technology Madras
03 Oct 2012
26
Dr. S. Nallayarasu
Department of Ocean Engineering
Indian Institute of Technology Madras
Maximum
Exposure
Time
Radiation
level kW/m
Continuous in
light winds
1.0
Continuous in
light winds
1.6
1.9 2.5
27
2 minutes
4.7
30 seconds
6.3
Few seconds
only
9.5
Dr. S. Nallayarasu
Department of Ocean Engineering
Indian Institute of Technology Madras
Form
Performed Sections
Prefabricated sections
Enclosures
Water-fill
03 Oct 2012
28
Dr. S. Nallayarasu
Department of Ocean Engineering
Indian Institute of Technology Madras
Type/Foam
Columns
Spray-applied coatings
Bulkheads
Fire walls
Drilling derrick
Spray-applied materials
Pipe supports
Pressure vessels
Blast walls
Penetrations
HVAC
Fire doors
03 Oct 2012
29
Dr. S. Nallayarasu
Department of Ocean Engineering
Indian Institute of Technology Madras
WELL AREA
PROCESS
AREA
SAFE AREA
FOR
LIVING
Fire or
Blast
Wall
03 Oct 2012
30
Dr. S. Nallayarasu
Department of Ocean Engineering
Indian Institute of Technology Madras
Living Facility
Process Area
Airlock
Fire Wall
03 Oct 2012
31
Dr. S. Nallayarasu
Department of Ocean Engineering
Indian Institute of Technology Madras
Structural
Barrier
SAFE AREA
Thermal
Coating
PROCESS AREA
Insulation
03 Oct 2012
32
Dr. S. Nallayarasu
Department of Ocean Engineering
Indian Institute of Technology Madras
03 Oct 2012
33
Dr. S. Nallayarasu
Department of Ocean Engineering
Indian Institute of Technology Madras
03 Oct 2012
Classification
Stability &
Integrity
Insulation
performance
H120
120
120
H60
120
60
H0
120
A60
60
60
A30
60
30
A15
60
15
A0
60
B15
30
15
B0
30
34
Dr. S. Nallayarasu
Department of Ocean Engineering
Indian Institute of Technology Madras
03 Oct 2012
35
Dr. S. Nallayarasu
Department of Ocean Engineering
Indian Institute of Technology Madras
36
Dr. S. Nallayarasu
Department of Ocean Engineering
Indian Institute of Technology Madras
Carbon steel
14 x 10-6
Stainless steel
18 x 10-6
533
Density @20 kg
m3
7850
7850
Thermal
conductivity Watts
metre C
45
20
03 Oct 2012
37
Dr. S. Nallayarasu
Department of Ocean Engineering
Indian Institute of Technology Madras
Extracted from Interim Guidance Notes for the design and protection of topside
structures against explosion and fire
18 Oct 2011
38
Dr. S. Nallayarasu
Department of Ocean Engineering
Indian Institute of Technology Madras
Extracted from Interim Guidance Notes for the design and protection of topside
structures against explosion and fire
18 Oct 2011
39
Dr. S. Nallayarasu
Department of Ocean Engineering
Indian Institute of Technology Madras
Fraction of
Youngs
Modulus
Fraction of
yield stress (0.2%
proof stress)
20
1.00
1.00
100
1.00
1.00
200
0.90
0.807
300
0.80
0.613
400
0.70
0.420
500
0.60
0.360
600
0.31
0.180
700
0.13
0.075
800
0.09
0.050
900
0.0675
0.0375
1000
0.0450
0.0250
1100
0.0225
0.0125
1200
0.0000
0.0000
1350
0.0
0.0
03 Oct 2012
40
Dr. S. Nallayarasu
Department of Ocean Engineering
Indian Institute of Technology Madras
03 Oct 2012
41
Dr. S. Nallayarasu
Department of Ocean Engineering
Indian Institute of Technology Madras
03 Oct 2012
Temp. C
0.2%
0.5%
1.5%
2.0%
100
0.940
0.970
1.000
1.000
150
0.898
0.959
1.000
1.000
200
0.847
0.946
1.000
1.000
250
0.769
0.884
1.000
1.000
300
0.653
0.854
1.000
1.000
350
0.626
0.826
0.968
1.000
400
0.600
0.798
0.956
0.971
450
0.531
0.721
0.898
0.934
500
0.467
0.622
0.756
0.776
550
0.368
0.492
0.612
0.627
600
0.265
0.378
0.460
0.474
42
Dr. S. Nallayarasu
Department of Ocean Engineering
Indian Institute of Technology Madras
03 Oct 2012
43
Dr. S. Nallayarasu
Department of Ocean Engineering
Indian Institute of Technology Madras
Yield Strength
Reduction Factor
at
Max. Member
Temperature
Member UR AT 20C
to Give UR = 1.00
at Max. Member
Temperature
Limiting applied
stresses as a
function of
temperature
(fraction of Yield
stress)
400
752
0.60
1.00
0.60
450
842
0.53
0.88
0.53
500
932
0.47
0.78
0.47
550
1022
0.37
0.62
0.37
600
1112
0.27
0.45
0.27
03 Oct 2012
44
UC
f applied
0.6 Fy
Dr. S. Nallayarasu
Department of Ocean Engineering
Indian Institute of Technology Madras
1.0
45
Dr. S. Nallayarasu
Department of Ocean Engineering
Indian Institute of Technology Madras
xt yt zt T T0
Where:
T0
T
Restraint
L = Beam length
dL
46
Dr. S. Nallayarasu
Department of Ocean Engineering
Indian Institute of Technology Madras
y
Angular
rotation
(Thermal Gradient
across beam)
My
Ey
f
I
R
18 Oct 2011
47
Dr. S. Nallayarasu
Department of Ocean Engineering
Indian Institute of Technology Madras
48
Dr. S. Nallayarasu
Department of Ocean Engineering
Indian Institute of Technology Madras
49
Dr. S. Nallayarasu
Department of Ocean Engineering
Indian Institute of Technology Madras
Maximum Allowable
Strain(%) Temperature of Steel
c
0.2
400
752
0.5
508
946
1.5
554
1029
2.0
559
1038
Though it is very simple and easy to use, the method is very approximate.
The stress strain curve is not linearized appropriately at increased temperature and
the Youngs modulus is not reduced. Hence this method shall be used with caution
for increased temperature.
03 Oct 2012
50
Dr. S. Nallayarasu
Department of Ocean Engineering
Indian Institute of Technology Madras
03 Oct 2012
51
Dr. S. Nallayarasu
Department of Ocean Engineering
Indian Institute of Technology Madras
03 Oct 2012
52
Dr. S. Nallayarasu
Department of Ocean Engineering
Indian Institute of Technology Madras
03 Oct 2012
53
Dr. S. Nallayarasu
Department of Ocean Engineering
Indian Institute of Technology Madras
54
Dr. S. Nallayarasu
Department of Ocean Engineering
Indian Institute of Technology Madras
03 Oct 2012
55
Dr. S. Nallayarasu
Department of Ocean Engineering
Indian Institute of Technology Madras
Bar
20
.2
Eardrum Rupture
40
.4
100
1.0
300
3.0
700
7.0
03 Oct 2012
56
Dr. S. Nallayarasu
Department of Ocean Engineering
Indian Institute of Technology Madras
57
FD 0.5C D u 2 A proj
where
FD
Aproj
CD
03 Oct 2012
58
Dr. S. Nallayarasu
Department of Ocean Engineering
Indian Institute of Technology Madras
59
Dr. S. Nallayarasu
Department of Ocean Engineering
Indian Institute of Technology Madras
Impulsive short
/ T < 0.4
Preserving the exact peak value
is not critical
Dynamic Intermediate
Quasi-static long
0.4 < / T < 2.0
/ T > 2.0
Preserve peak value increase or decrease in this quantity will
result in a similar increase or decrease in response except if the
peak is associated with a very short duration spike.
Duration
Impulse
Rise time
Peak value
A tri or tetra linear form can be used to represent the rise and
decay of the load more accurately, thus predicting slightly better
response.
03 Oct 2012
60
Dr. S. Nallayarasu
Department of Ocean Engineering
Indian Institute of Technology Madras
03 Oct 2012
61
Dr. S. Nallayarasu
Department of Ocean Engineering
Indian Institute of Technology Madras
Strength limit
Where strength governs design, failure is defined as occurring when the design load
or load effects exceed the design strength in a manner that is similar to
conventional design.
The criterion may be applied in the elastic as well as plastic regimes. The only
difference for explosion design is that modified factors on loading and/or strength
may be adopted in recognition that it is an extreme event.
03 Oct 2012
62
Dr. S. Nallayarasu
Department of Ocean Engineering
Indian Institute of Technology Madras
Energy method
SDOF or MDOF
Static energy
03 Oct 2012
63
Dr. S. Nallayarasu
Department of Ocean Engineering
Indian Institute of Technology Madras
Proportion of span
Absolute deformation
Member shrinkage limit
Ductility ratios based on strain limits.
Proportion of Span
The deformation limit may be expressed as a proportion of the span of a plate or
beam. This method is easy to apply. It bears no direct relationship to the actual
failure criteria of the structure, although for simple structures an approximate
correlation will exist.
The method may be useful in defining absolute limits for use in conjunction with
other methods. A typical value would be span/40.
03 Oct 2012
64
Dr. S. Nallayarasu
Department of Ocean Engineering
Indian Institute of Technology Madras
03 Oct 2012
65
Dr. S. Nallayarasu
Department of Ocean Engineering
Indian Institute of Technology Madras
Strain limit
Tension member
5%
5%
3%
Other sections
1%
03 Oct 2012
66
Dr. S. Nallayarasu
Department of Ocean Engineering
Indian Institute of Technology Madras
S 2L
1
=
2 S
0.5
where:
03 Oct 2012
67
Dr. S. Nallayarasu
Department of Ocean Engineering
Indian Institute of Technology Madras
D uctilityratio=
The deflection at elastic limit (Yel) is the deflection at which bending behaviour can
be assumed to change from elastic to plastic. In practice, the transition does not
occur at a specific deflection and some assumptions must be made to define Yel
The shape of any plastic hinges will be a function of the following:
Beam fixity
Type of loading
Shape of stress-strain curve
Rate of loading and hence hinge formation
03 Oct 2012
68
Dr. S. Nallayarasu
Department of Ocean Engineering
Indian Institute of Technology Madras
p
y
03 Oct 2012
69
Sx
Zx
= Elastic modulus
= Plastic modulus
Dr. S. Nallayarasu
Department of Ocean Engineering
Indian Institute of Technology Madras
Cantilevered
Pinned ends
Fixed ends
03 Oct 2012
Type of
loading
Plate (2 edge
support in
bending)
Plastic
class 1
Compact
class 2
Other
Point load
5.7
3.8
1.9
1.7
Dist. load
7.5
4.9
2.3
22.5
Point load
5.7
3.8
1.9
15.7
Dist. load
12.5
7.9
3.3
21.4
Point load
5.7
3.8
1.9
15.7
Dist. Load
(end)
4.2
2.9
1.6
11.3
Dist. load
(mid)
14.6
9.1
3.7
24.9
70
Dr. S. Nallayarasu
Department of Ocean Engineering
Indian Institute of Technology Madras
71
Dr. S. Nallayarasu
Department of Ocean Engineering
Indian Institute of Technology Madras
Me
2
Natural Period T
2
k
e
where
Me
ke
0.5
KM is termed the mass factor and KL the load factor. An alternative form of the
equation is
where
Mt
kE
K LM M t
Natural Period 2
k
E
0.5
= actual mass,
KLM
= load mass factor = (KM/KL)
= effective spring constant
= classical elastic stiffness for a bi-linear resistance function
03 Oct 2012
72
Dr. S. Nallayarasu
Department of Ocean Engineering
Indian Institute of Technology Madras
Mi
Mi
where KMi and Mi are the component mass factors and masses
respectively.
A similar procedure should be applied to load factors and load-mass
factors. The next step is to determine the dynamic load factor.
03 Oct 2012
73
Dr. S. Nallayarasu
Department of Ocean Engineering
Indian Institute of Technology Madras
74
Dr. S. Nallayarasu
Department of Ocean Engineering
Indian Institute of Technology Madras
03 Oct 2012
75
Dr. S. Nallayarasu
Department of Ocean Engineering
Indian Institute of Technology Madras
(,t)
2 sin(t )
t
td
2
(,t)
td
(0<t<0.5t d )
1
td
td t 2sin t sin(t )
2
2
(,t)
t d
td
2sin
t
sin(
t
)
sin
(
t
t
)
(0.5t d <t<t d )
(t>t d )
76
Dr. S. Nallayarasu
Department of Ocean Engineering
Indian Institute of Technology Madras
76
0.86
0.52
( t )
0.18
0.16
0.5
0.04
0.08
0.12
0.16
03 Oct 2012
77
Dr. S. Nallayarasu
Department of Ocean Engineering
Indian Institute of Technology Madras
0.2
1 2
1 cos t
t td
....(1)
2 2
td
cos t cos (t td ) 2 cos t
t
td
2
3 2
td
cos t cos t 1
t
td
2
03 Oct 2012
78
...(2)
.(3)
Dr. S. Nallayarasu
Department of Ocean Engineering
Indian Institute of Technology Madras
78
03 Oct 2012
79
Dr. S. Nallayarasu
Department of Ocean Engineering
Indian Institute of Technology Madras
03 Oct 2012
80
Dr. S. Nallayarasu
Department of Ocean Engineering
Indian Institute of Technology Madras
80
Top
Deck
Panel 1
Panel 2
Panel 3
Panel 4
Panel 5
Bottom
Deck
03 Oct 2012
81
Dr. S. Nallayarasu
Department of Ocean Engineering
Indian Institute of Technology Madras
81
Blast wall
BLAST
SIDE
Ymax
03 Oct 2012
01.04.09
82
Dr. S. Nallayarasu
Department of Ocean Engineering
Indian Institute of Technology Madras
B
Depth H and
thickness t
B
Structural
Column
Bending Modulus of a
flat plate
03 Oct 2012
01.04.09
Bt 2
Z xx
6
83
Dr. S. Nallayarasu
Department of Ocean Engineering
Indian Institute of Technology Madras
83
t
x
2
2 B.t 3
H
t
t
H3
B.t.
Z xx .
H 12
2 2 cos( ) 12
03 Oct 2012
84
Dr. S. Nallayarasu
Department of Ocean Engineering
Indian Institute of Technology Madras
84
Formulas and tabulated specific values for Uniform over entire plate.
At Center
max b
Rmax qb
qb 2
t
and ymax
qb 2
Et 3
a/b
1.0
1.2
1.4
1.6
1.8
2.0
3.0
4.0
5.0
0.2874
0.3762
0.4530
0.5172
0.5688
0.6102
0.7134
0.7410
0.7476
0.7500
0.0444
0.0616
0.0770
0.0906
0.1017
0.1110
0.1335
0.1400
0.1417
0.1421
0.420
0.455
0.478
0.491
0.499
0.503
0.505
0.502
0.501
0.500
03 Oct 2012
85
Dr. S. Nallayarasu
Department of Ocean Engineering
Indian Institute of Technology Madras
85
Formulas and tabulated specific values for Uniform over entire plate.
At Center
max
2 qb 2
2
and ymax
t
1qb 2
t2
a/b
1.0
1.2
1.4
1.6
1.8
2.0
0.3078
0.3834
0.4356
0.4680
0.4872
0.4974
0.5000
0.1386
0.1794
0.2094
0.2286
0.2406
0.2472
0.2500
0.0138
0.0188
0.0226
0.0251
0.0267
0.0277
0.0284
03 Oct 2012
86
qb 4
Et 3
Dr. S. Nallayarasu
Department of Ocean Engineering
Indian Institute of Technology Madras
86
E
b
1.9
F
t
y
03 Oct 2012
87
0.5
0.415 E 0.5
1
wlt Fy
Dr. S. Nallayarasu
Department of Ocean Engineering
Indian Institute of Technology Madras
03 Oct 2012
88
Dr. S. Nallayarasu
Department of Ocean Engineering
Indian Institute of Technology Madras
03 Oct 2012
89
90
03 Oct 2012
91
03 Oct 2012
92
03 Oct 2012
93
Force
during
collision
Dent
caused by
ship impact
03 Oct 2012
94
Dent
geometry
according
to Amdahl
03 Oct 2012
95
03 Oct 2012
96
03 Oct 2012
97
Vessel mass =m
03 Oct 2012
98
03 Oct 2012
99
03 Oct 2012
100
SHIP
PLATFORM
COLLISION
ES
03 Oct 2012
EP
INDENTATIONS
101
03 Oct 2012
102
03 Oct 2012
103
03 Oct 2012
104
Post impact
During Impact
structures
Structures
integrity
Vessel
Capacity to sustain
further load
Dent formation
Elastic beam bending
Plastic bending / Hinge formation
Global deformation of structure
03 Oct 2012
105
106
Local Buckling
Denting and Energy absorption capacity
Member strength in bending and axial combined (elastic)
Member strength in bending and axial combined (elasto-plastic)
Global Structural strength against total collapse
Joints capacity against rupture
03 Oct 2012
107
03 Oct 2012
108
03 Oct 2012
109
Stress free
Plastic Compression
-y
/2
+y
Plastic tension
d D(1 cos ) / 2
Dent Depth
110
sin
Z D .t (1 cos / 2)
2
2
D
b
Where
d = the dent depth.
D = the diameter of the tubular.
t = wall thickness.
Mp = the section property of the tube wall, given by:
Mp
03 Oct 2012
111
t 2 .Fy
4
Dr. S. Nallayarasu Department of Ocean
Engineering Indian Institute of
Technology Madras
0.8
Zr i
0.6
0.4
0.2
0.1
0.2
0.3
0.4
0.5
dr i
03 Oct 2012
112
P 150.M p .
E 100.M p . d
1.5
P 21.M p .
-Amdahl
D
t
E 14.M p . d
1.5
03 Oct 2012
113
Pd
Mp
D, R
t
X
03 Oct 2012
=
=
=
=
=
=
.(1)
Ed Pd dx ..(2)
0
..(4)
03 Oct 2012
116
M v 1000tonne
L m 1.5 m
03 Oct 2012
m
sec
D m 914 m m
Av 1.1
Assume
Vv 1.
Dm
2 6 .1 1 4
Tm
T m 35 m m
117
Assume
N
mm 2
D m 4 ( D m 2 T m ) 4
64
N
mm 2
Tm 2
Fy .
4
105.656
1
.kN .m
m
X 228.5 m m
X 0.25. D m
D
Pd 1 5 M p m
Tm
0.5
0
.5
.
D
m
E d 3.54. F y .( X .T m ) 0 .5
03 Oct 2012
E m 2 .1 0 5
Fy 315
118
0.5
Pd 5.727 10 3 kN
E d 873.5 kN .m
48
E
.
I
192
E
.
I
m
m
m
m
E b D ef . Pd
E b 585.78 kN .m
Ea Ed Eb
E a 1.5 10 3 kN .m
D ef m ax 100 m m
Im
D ef 102.3 m m
T 35 m m
D m 4 ( D m 2.T m ) 4
64
L m3
Lm 3
Y 0.3
0.7
48
.
I
192
.
I
E
E
m
m
m
m
Def max
Pdr
Y
03 Oct 2012
Pd r 5.599 103 kN
119
X r 218.393mm
Xr
0.239
Dm
Ed 816.2kN .m
Eb Def .Pdr
Eb 572.678kN .m
Ea Ed Eb
Ea 1.4 103 kN .m
100mm
X d 0.25.D m
2
3
4
0.5
Tmr
.
.
3
3
15. F y
X d 0.3. L m 0.7 L m T m r 34.5 m m
E
E
48.
.
I
192
.
I
m
m
m
m
03 Oct 2012
120
03 Oct 2012
121
a. Moment
b. Curvature
c. Deflection
03 Oct 2012
122
-Fy
Fy
b. My<M<Mp
Fy
-Fy
c. =Mp
03 Oct 2012
123
Fy
Dr. S. Nallayarasu Department of Ocean
Engineering Indian Institute of
Technology Madras
Fy
h
P b
2 2
03 Oct 2012
2
Fy h 2h
bh
M b Fy
6
2 2 3
124
h
Pp Fy b
2
03 Oct 2012
h h
bh
M p Fy b 2 Fy
2 4
4
125
4D
3
Pp Fy
03 Oct 2012
D
8
D3
M z Fy
32
3
D2 4D
D
M p Pa Fy
Fy
8 3
6
126
a tds
ds rd
03 Oct 2012
127
D
d
2
MP 4
0
D
AFy cos
2
D D
M P 4 Fy t d cos
2
2
0
2
M P Fy D t cos d
2
Pp Fy dt
03 Oct 2012
M P =Fy D 2t
128
M Z FY Z
I
I
64
64
D 4 ( D 2 4t 2 4dt )2
64
Z
03 Oct 2012
( D 2t ) 4
129
64
( D 2 4dt ) 2
( D 16 D t 8 D t )
D t
D/2
2 2
D 2t
4
D 3t
8
RECTANGULAR
SECTION
HOLLOW
CIRCULAR
SECTION
03 Oct 2012
Fy
D3
8 1.70
D3
Fy
32
bh 2
Fy
4 1.5
S
bh 2
Fy
6
Fy D 2t
Fy
130
D t
2
1.27
03 Oct 2012
131
132
bh 2
MP
Fy
4
M P,P
bh 2
be 2
Fy Fy
M P,P
4
4
bh 2 e 2
M P,P
Fy 1 2
4
h
PP , M
133
e2
M P 1 2
h
e
beFy bh Fy
h
PP bhFy
PP , M
e
PP
h
and hence
M P,P
MP
PP , M 2
PP
M P ,P
MP
03 Oct 2012
134
PP , M
1
PP
e PP , M
h
PP
M P,P
MP
0.8
M
P
1
Ma
Pa
0.6
M/Mp
PP , M 2
PP
Mr i
Ml i
0.4
0.2
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
Nr i
P/Pp
03 Oct 2012
135
136
Pp Fy Dt
M p Fy D 2t
ds rd
03 Oct 2012
D
d
2
137
O
D
D D
M 4 AFy cos can be written as M 4 Fy t d cos
2
2
2
0
0
M =Fy D 2t sin o
/2
/2
P 4 AFy
can be written as
and we get
03 Oct 2012
/2
P 2 Fy Dt
P 4 Fy
138
D
td
2
P =2Fy Dt o
2
/2
P 4 AFy
can be written as
/2
P 2 Fy Dt
P 4 Fy
D
d
2
P =2Fy Dt o
2
and we get
Pp Fy Dt
M p Fy D 2t
M
sin o
Mp
and
P
2
o
Pp 2
P 2
M
sin
2 P
Mp
p
03 Oct 2012
and
139
P
M
cos
Mp
2 Pp
Dr. S. Nallayarasu Department of Ocean
Engineering Indian Institute of
Technology Madras
P
M
cos
2 P
Mp
p
0.8
M
P
1
Ma
Pa
M/Mp
0.6
Mr i
Ml i
0.4
0.2
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
Nr i
P/Pp
03 Oct 2012
140
A .D.t
2
ZE
.D .t
.D 3 .t
Z P D 2 .t
Using the yield stress (y) the maximum elastic bending moment
and the ultimate, plastic moment of the tubular cross section are:
M el ,max Z E .Fy
03 Oct 2012
M p Z P .Fy
141
03 Oct 2012
142
PL
MC
4
PL3
48 EI
Plastic
PC
4M p
L
L
2
03 Oct 2012
143
L
2
Central displacement
We PC
Wi 2M p
PC L 2M p
2
PC
Collapse Load
03 Oct 2012
144
4M p
L
PL
MC
8
PL3
192 EI
Plastic
PC
8M p
L
L
2
03 Oct 2012
145
L
2
We PC
Wi M p 2M p M p
PC L 4M p
2
Collapse Load
03 Oct 2012
PC
146
8M p
L
Dr. S. Nallayarasu Department of Ocean
Engineering Indian Institute of
Technology Madras
8 PL
MC
27
PL3
0.00366
EI
Plastic
PC
9M p
L
L
1
2
03 Oct 2012
147
Central displacement
We PC
Wi M p1 M p 1 2 M p2
PC L
Since
Collapse Load
03 Oct 2012
1
3
1
2
PC
148
2M p 1 2
9M p
L
9 PL
MC
128
PL3
0.0022
EI
Plastic
PC
03 Oct 2012
149
32 M p
3L
L
1
2
Dr. S. Nallayarasu Department of Ocean
Engineering Indian Institute of
Technology Madras
L
1
4
We PC
Wi M p1 M p 1 2 M p2
PC L
Since
4
1
150
2M p 1 2
PC
Collapse Load
03 Oct 2012
32M p
3L
Supports
Simple Support
Collapse Load
PC
4M p
PC
8M p
At Both Ends
L/2
Fixed Support
At Both Ends
L/3
L/4
03 Oct 2012
Fixed Support
At Both Ends
Fixed Support
At Both Ends
151
PC
PC
9M p
L
10.7 M p
L
03 Oct 2012
152
min
t
122
D
2.5
and
max
t
12800
D
The were based on materials and welding technology during mid 70s and it has
been improved drastically over last few decades. Hence a a proposed log-mean
average of the above two will be representative for the current practice
2.75
min 1250
Appropriate D/t ratio shall be used to exhibit good plastic properties and D/t of 38
is suitable based on API RP 2A LRFD code
D
13000 / Fy
t
03 Oct 2012
153
03 Oct 2012
154
03 Oct 2012
155
03 Oct 2012
156
During the transformation from elastic stresses to the plastic deformation, the
stress at the extreme fibre will reach yield. Since the stress strain relationship
is elastic perfectly plastic, this point will undergo infinite strain while the
neighbouring section increases to higher stress or strain levels.
The plastic hinge shall have a finite strain and will extend over a length and it
is not be a point or plane. Hence, for formation of plastic hinge, stress-strain
relationship shall have a strain hardening or non-perfectly plastic.
03 Oct 2012
157
03 Oct 2012
158
In this model the elastic strain are disregarded. This seems acceptable,
because el<< all. More specifically, el approximately 0.2% and all is
approximately 10%.
03 Oct 2012
159
L
L
L max max
2
2
Deflection calculated
from change in length
L
L
2
L
2
2
Substituting and
expanding, we get
03 Oct 2012
L
L
L L
2
L 2 . L max
4
2
4 2
160
L2
L2 L2 2
L L max
4
4 4
L
4
L 2 max
Strain can be defined as
L
L/2
1 2
max
L/2
2
max 2
03 Oct 2012
161
03 Oct 2012
162
V essel Size (D W T )
M v : 8000 tonne
V elocity
V v : 1.5.
m
sec
Av : 1.1
Energy of Im pact
E I :=0.5 Av .M v .V v 2
Length of M em ber
L m :=15 m
D m :=1000 m m
Assum ed T hickness
Tm := 25 m m
M odulus of Elasticity
E m := 2.10 5.
03 Oct 2012
163
EI 9900kN .m
N
mm 2
Fy := 345.
Im =
M p =8.6 10 3 .kN .m
M p =D m 2 .Tm .Fy
03 Oct 2012
Dm
=40
Tm
D m 4 -(D m -2.Tm ) 4
64
Tm 2
1
m p =Fy .
m p =53.906. kN .m
4
m
M om ent of Inertia
N
mm 2
X 250 m m
X =0.25D m
D
Pd :=15m p . m
Tm
164
0.5
X
.
0.5 D m
0.5
Pd 3.616 10 3 kN
Pd . L m 3
e :=
192E m .I m
E b :=Pd . e
E d =603.5kN .m
d =34.9m m
E b =126.222kN .m
Pc :=
8M
Lm
Pc =4.6 10 3 kN
y := 0.002
p := 20 y
03 Oct 2012
165
y = 0.2%
p = 4%
c =
Lm
.
2
E c :=Pc .( c - e )
=16.206. deg
c 2.121m
E c =9597.5kN .m
E a 10327.2 kN .m
Total energy absorbed is greater than the energy of impact and hence it is
acceptable.
03 Oct 2012
166
03 Oct 2012
167
API RP 2A (1989)
UK GN
03 Oct 2012
Mu
M
M
u
M
M
u
IPB
Mu
Tu
1.0
OPB
1/ 2
M
T
COS
M
2T
u
IPB u OPB
1/ 2
M
T
M
T
IPB u OPB
u
168
1.0
API RP 2A (1989)
API RP 2A (2005)
0.8
M/Mp
0.6
Mr i
Ml i
0.4
0.2
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
Nr i
P/Pp
03 Oct 2012
169
03 Oct 2012
170
03 Oct 2012
171
03 Oct 2012
172
03 Oct 2012
173
X BRACE ARRANGEMENT
03 Oct 2012
174
03 Oct 2012
175
03 Oct 2012
176
03 Oct 2012
177
ACCIDENTAL CASE
Reserve Strength Ratio
For accidental case
03 Oct 2012
FENDERS
03 Oct 2012
SHOCK CELLS
179