CSR Harmonisation

Direct Strength Analysis

Industry Presentation
September 2012
Philippe Baumans & ge Be
Project Management Team (PMT)

CSR-H Finite element analysis

Contents
Comparison CSR-OT vs CSR-BC
Finite element analysis (FEA) Midship cargo hold region
FEA procedure - Forward and aft cargo regions
FEA procedure - Foremost and aftmost cargo hold
Local fine mesh analysis
Screening

September 2012

Direct Strength Analysis

Definition of a single method

To define a common method applicable for tankers and bulk carriers

CSR-OT

CSR-BC

CSR-H

=>

+
September 2012

Direct Strength Analysis

Cargo hold finite element analysis scope

CSR-BC and CSR-OT
CSR-OT

Common OT/BC

Model Extent

Three cargo lengths

around midship
include 4 BHD with
stool.

Mesh boundary

To follow the
stiffening system

Modeling

Two node co-centric

beam elements.

Three or four node

plate/shell element

Where to cover

Fore/Aft cargo hold

region for
longitudinal hull
girder shear
structural members

Midship cargo hold

region for
longitudinal hull
girder structural
members, PSM and
TBHD

Note:
September 2012

Underlined items => Used in in CSR-H

CSR-BC

Eccentric beams
Alt: Orthotropic
elements

Red items => Not used

Direct Strength Analysis

Cargo hold structural strength assessment

CSR-BC and CSR-OT
CSR-OT

Common OT/BC
Direct method,
with
simultaneously
acting HG Loads
and Local Loads

HG Loads

CSR-BC
Alt: Superimposition
method (for BM analysis
only)

Boundary
conditions

Spring elements

Both ends of model are

simply supported using
Rigidly links

Equilibrium
method / HG
load
application

BM applied to the model ends

to produce the BM target
Vertical distributed loads
applied to each frame position
to produce target VSF

SF and BM controlled at
target location with each
two sets of enforced
moments

Yield criteria

Note:

y yperm
y = vm/ReH for plate elements
y = rod/ReH for rod elements
yperm : for S and S+D. Also
dependent of member type
Underlined items => Used in in CSR-H

September 2012

Allowable stress:
vm ,axial < 235/k
Deflection of PSM:
max< L/150m
Red items => Not used
Direct Strength Analysis

Local fine mesh structural strength analysis

CSR-BC and CSR-OT
CSR-OT
Mandatory Upper hopper knuckle connection
Deck, DB longitudinal and
locations

Common OT/BC

CSR-BC
Not specified

adjoining TBHD vertical stiffener

Corrugated bulkheads

Locations
for
screening

Detailed screening method for

bracket end connection, opening
and heel connection

Modelling

Mesh size: not to be greater than

50x50
Skew angle: between 60 and 120

Yield
criteria

y = kvm/235 < yperm

for plate and rod elements
yperm for S and S+D. Also
dependent on location (weld/base)

Note:
September 2012

Underlined items => Used in in CSR-H

Where stresses exceed

95% of the allowable
stress fine mesh FEA
to be carried out
Element aspect ratio: Mesh size: 0.25 *
stiffener spacing
<3
Skew angle: between
45 and 135
Allowable stress:
280/k

Red items => Not used

Direct Strength Analysis

Harmonised CSR
Scope and objectives

The finite element strength assessment of the hull girder,

primary supporting structural members and bulkheads

Cargo hold strength analysis: mandatory from collision

bulkhead to the forward machinery transverse bulkhead

Area covered by FEA

September 2012

Direct Strength Analysis

Modelling
Model extent:
Longitudinal:
Transverse:
Vertical:

Mesh :
Plates:
Eccentric beam:
Openings:
Face plate of PSM:
Sniped stiffener:

Three cargo lengths

Both sides of the ship
Full depth of the ship

Following the stiffening system

Modelled with shell elements
Stiffeners modelled with beam elements considering their
eccentricity about neutral axis
Modelled similar to CSR-OT
Effective cross sectional area for curved part from CSR-OT
Modelled with reduced cross section (see figure below)
Beam element:: dw

September 2012

Web: de

Direct Strength Analysis

Boundary conditions
Comparison results between whole ship model and cargo hold model
Numerical test for
whole ship model
and cargo hold model
Good results for
oblique sea and roll
condition
Realistic warping
deflections and
torsional stresses
simulated with cargo
hold model

September 2012

Direct Strength Analysis

Boundary conditions &

Equilibrium method / BM application
Cargo holds region except aftmost and foremost cargo holds

Fwd. C/H

Equilibrium method for

bending moment correction

Equilibrium method for

bending moment correction

(Midship cargo holds region)

(Aft/Fwd cargo holds region)

September 2012

Direct Strength Analysis

10

Boundary conditions &

Equilibrium method / BM application
Foremost cargo hold

Foremost C/H

September 2012

Aftmost cargo hold

Equilibrium method for

bending moment correction

Direct Strength Analysis

11

Equilibrium method / SF application

Adjustment of shear force

distribution by applying
vertical forces, similar to
CSR-OT

Vertical forces at each web

frame distributed in
accordance with the HG
shear flow

September 2012

Direct Strength Analysis

12

Load combinations

Oil tankers with two oil-tight bulkheads

September 2012

Direct Strength Analysis

13

Load combinations - Bulk carriers

Ex: Analysis applicable to empty hold in alternate condition of BC-B & BC-C

September 2012

Direct Strength Analysis

14

FE analysis procedure
Outside midship cargo region
Boundary condition

The boundary conditions of midship cargo

region are also applicable outside midship
cargo region

Load combination

The fore and after cargo hold regions excluding

foremost and aftmost regions are using similar
loading patterns, draft, permissible SWBM and
SWSF as midship cargo region.

September 2012

HG load application

Same as the for midship cargo region except

HG bending moment corrections to obtain
target HG bending moment within the full
extent of the model

Applied axial force for correction of BM

Direct Strength Analysis

15

Foremost and aftmost cargo hold

Structural model
Structural model
9 Longitudinal extent:
a) In the foremost cargo hold from the after
BHD of the cargo hold No.2 to the ships
foremost cross section where the reinforce
ring or web frame remains continuous
from the base like to the strength deck;
b) In the aftmost cargo hold - from the after
BHD of the engine room to the forward
BHD of cargo hold N-1.
9 Transverse extent:
Both port and starboard sides.

FE model for the foremost

cargo hold structure of an
oil tanker

FE model for the aftmost

cargo hold structure of a
bulk carriers

9 Vertical extent:
The full depth of the ship is to be modelled
including primary supporting members
above upper deck, trunks and/or cargo
hatch coaming if any. The superstructure
is not required to be included in the model.
September 2012

Direct Strength Analysis

16

Equilibrium/HG load application method

FE load combinations
Adjustment for HG bending moment,
foremost cargo hold

September 2012

Direct Strength Analysis

17

Cargo hold FE analysis

Acceptance criteria
Yield:
y = vm / Ry yperm
y = axial / Ry yperm
where
vm : Von Mises stress in shell el. ,
average membrane stress for sxs
axial : Axial stress in rod/beam el.
average stress at length s
Ry = 235 / k

Buckling of plate and

stiffener:
Allowable utilization
factor: all

September 2012

Direct Strength Analysis

18

Local fine mesh analysis vs. screening

Principles

Fine mesh analysis

Element size: 50x50 mm
Stress: Von Mises membrane stress
Acceptance criteria for fine mesh

Screening
Element size: s x s (cargo hold model)
Stress: sxs . sc
Acceptance criteria for screening

September 2012

Direct Strength Analysis

19

Local fine mesh analysis

vs. Screening
Mandatory areas for fine mesh analysis
Mandatory locations are given, e.g. large openings.
Maximum 50x50 mm mesh size

Screening areas
Areas for screening given, e.g. Hatch corner area (BC), Heels of
transverse bulkhead horizontal stringers (Tankers)

Screening criteria is based on stresses from C/H analysis

If screening criteria fails, fine mesh analysis is required

September 2012

Direct Strength Analysis

20

Local fine mesh analysis

Mandatory details
a) Hopper knuckles
b) Side frame end brackets and lower hopper knuckle for single side bulk carrier
c) Large openings
d) Connections of deck and double bottom longitudinal stiffeners to T/bhd
e) Connections of corrugated bulkhead to adjoining structure

Bulk carrier

September 2012

Oil tanker

Direct Strength Analysis

21

Local fine mesh analysis

Acceptance criteria
vm - av. membrane stress for 50x50 mm
axial - average axial stress for 50 mm

ff = 1.0 in general
ff = 1.2 for details complying with Ch 9 Sec 6,
Table 1 (fatigue)

September 2012

Direct Strength Analysis

22

Screening Mandatory details

a) Openings in way of web of primary supporting members
b) Bracket toes on transverse web frame, horizontal stringer and transv. plane
bulkhead to double bottom connection or buttress structure
c) Heels of transverse bulkhead horizontal stringers
d) Connections of transverse lower stool to double bottom girders and longitudinal
lower stool to double bottom floors
e) Connection of lower hopper to transverse lower stool
f) Connection of topside tank to inner side
g) Connection of corrugation and upper supporting structure to upper stool
h) Hatch corner area, such as the hatch coaming end bracket, hatch corner and hatch
end beam

Oil tanker

September 2012

Bulk carrier

Direct Strength Analysis

23

Screening - Acceptance criteria

September 2012

CSR-H HG & Local prescriptive

Rules

24

Thank you for your attention !