01 COMPLETE Advanced Course Offshore All LectureNotes

Fatigue Analysis Introduction
Luis Borges & Jos Antnio Correia

Advanced Topics on the Design of Offshore Structures Fatigue Analysis Introduction Lecture L1.03 2
Summary
Stages of fatigue damage
Fatigue local approaches
Stress-based method
Strain-based method
Energy-based method
Global S-N approaches
Stress Concentration Factor
Fracture mechanics based approaches
Stress Intensity Factor

http://oilandgasindustrynews.com/about/
Institute for Sustainability and Innovation in Structural Engineering

Stages of fatigue damage

The important point of the fatigue damage stages is that the fatigue life until failure
consists of two periods: the crack initiation period and the crack growth period.
The stress concentration factor, Kt, is the important parameter for predictions on crack
initiation. The stress intensity factor, K, is used for predictions on crack growth.
The S-N fields for the structural details are result from the superposition of the crack
initiation and crack propagation phases. number of cycles to failure is assumed to
follow the relation:

Fatigue local approaches
Fatigue design philosophy has evolved from fatigue limit and infinite life
criteria to approaches based on finite life behaviour.
The local approaches use fatigue damage parameters to correlate fatigue test
results.
The local approaches are generally divided into three categories, i.e., stress-
based, strain-based and energy-based methods, when stress, strain or
energy are respectively used as the fatigue damage parameter.
These approaches are often applied to model fatigue crack initiation.

Stress-based method
The stress-life method uses the alternating stress amplitude to predict the number of
cycles to failure.
The S-N curves are based on empirical formulas derived from experimental data.
The stress-life method is generally only used for high cycle fatigue, because under low
cycle fatigue the stress-strain relationship becomes nonlinear.
Basquin Relation:
Morrow Relation:

Strain-based method
The strain-based method has found wide applications in fatigue analysis, especially for
calculation of fatigue crack initiation.
For engineering materials at room temperature, cyclic hardening or softening usually takes
place rapidly at first and then approaches to a stable condition.
The curve can be determined from several companion specimens cycled at various constant
strain amplitudes or from a single specimen in conformity with the incremental step test
method.
Morrow or Confin-Masion Relation:
Smith-Watson-Topper Relation:

Energy-based method
Energy approaches are based on the assumption that fatigue damage is directly
related to the area under the hysteresis loops resulting during cyclic loading the latter
being related to the plastic deformation taking place during a load cycle, which on its
turn relates to the fatigue damage sustained.
Generic damage power relation:


Global S-N approaches have been proposed for fatigue life prediction taking into
account both fatigue crack initiation and propagation phases.
Fatigue curves, plotted as straight lines when stress range, , and fatigue life, Nf, are
expressed in logarithmic scale.
The treatment of fatigue life in

structural details are described
by rules of several design
codes:
Eurocode 3, Part 1-9

BS 5400
AASHTO
DNV
American Bureau of Shipping (ADS)
China Classification Society (CCS)


Practice design codes adopt the following form for the S-N curve, proposed by
Basquin:
EC3-1-9


ABS - American Bureau of Shipping
GUIDE FOR THE FATIGUE ASSESSMENT OF OFFSHORE STRUCTURES
version 2003, updated in 2014


The stress concentration
factor for the global
geometry must in addition
be accounted for, giving the
relevant local stress equal
to SCFnominal, where SCF
is the stress concentration
factor due to the hole. Thus
the local stress, local, is
derived as

Fracture mechanics based approaches
With the development of the Fracture Mechanics, new opportunities for fatigue
modelling emerged in the literature. The key contribution in this field is attributed to
Paris and his co-authors who first recognized the relation between the stress intensity
factor at an existing crack tip and the crack advance under cyclic loading:
This can be accomplished integrating the crack propagation law, according to the
following expression:

Stress Intensity Factor

A crack in mode I, infinite plate:
The origins of modern fracture mechanics go back to
the work of Griffith in 1920 investigating the strength
of glass. Griffith used the linear elastic stress
analysis solution for the stresses around an elliptical
hole in a plate subject to uniform tension.
(plane stress)
(plane strain)
Modo I Modo II Modo III

Mode I Mode II Mode III
Irwin (1957) showed that the magnitude of the stress

field singularity around the crack tip can be
described by the scalar parameter known as stress
intensity factor, K. That scalar parameter depends
on the geometry of the crack and of the detail and
from the applied load, as denoted by equation

Acknowledgments
This lecture (1.03) was prepared for the Edition 1 of the Advanced Topics on
the Design of Offshore Structures (Nov 2016) by LUIS BORGES
(Structurame & UC) and JOS ANTNIO CORREIA (INEGI & UC).
This powerpoint is part of the materials developed for the 1st Edition of Advanced Topics on the
Design of Offshore Structures and it is covered by copyright. It cannot be used in whole or in
parts for any educational purpose, without special permission from the organization and the
authors.
Where the photos and figures contained in this presentation are reproduced from other
publications their copyright is duly acknowledged. Further information at www.isise.net or
www.cmm.pt.

Fatigue Analysis Design

Advanced Topics on the Design of Offshore Structures Fatigue Analysis Lecture L1.04 2
Summary
Design Codes
EuroCode 3, Part 1-9: Fatigue
Assessment methods
Values for partial factors for strength
Fatigue Strength Curves for direct stress ranges
Fatigue Strength Curves for shear stress ranges
Alternative Strength c for details classified as *c
Size effects in the fatigue strength
Fatigue verification

Summary
DNVGL-RP-0005:2014-06: Fatigue design of offshore steel structures
Fatigue damage accumulation
Fatigue analysis methodology
S-N curves and joint classification
Stress concentration factors
Calculation of hot spot stress by finite element analysis

Design Codes
DNVGL-RP-0005:2014-06: Fatigue design of offshore steel structures.
The document DNVGL-RP-0005:2014-06 supersedes DNV-RP-C203, October 2012.
EuroCode 3 Part 1-9: Design of steel structures, Fatigue

Assessment Methods:
Damage Tolerant method
Safe life Method
Damage Tolerant Method should provide an acceptable reliability that a structure will
perform satisfactorily for its design life, provided that a prescribed inspection and
maintenance regime for detecting and correcting fatigue damage is implemented
throughout the design life of the structure.
Safe Life Method should provide an acceptable level of reliability that a structure will
perform satisfactorily for its design life without the need for regular in-service inspection for
fatigue damage. The safe life method should be applied in cases where local formation of
cracks in one component could rapidly lead to failure of the structural element or structure.


Values for partial factors for strength,
Assessment method Consequence to failure

Low Consequence High Consequence
Damage tolerance 1.00 1.15
Safe life 1.15 1.35
Calculation of stress ranges
The fatigue assessment should be carried out using:
Nominal stress ranges for details Table 8.1 to Table 8.10 (see EC3-1-9)
Modified nominal stress ranges where abrupt change of section occur close to the
initiation site which are not included in Table 8.1 to Table 8.10 (see EC3-1-9) or
Geometric (hot spot) stress ranges where high stress gradients occur close to a
weld toe in joints Table B1 (see EC3-1-9)


Calculation of stress ranges
The design value of stress range to be used for the fatigue assessment should be the
stress ranges ,2 corresponding to = 2 106 cycles.
= 1
Design value of nominal stress range
The design value of nominal stress ranges ,2 and ,2 should be determined

as follows:
,2 = 1 2
,2 = 1 2
where , is the stress range caused by the fatigue loads (see EN1991)
are damage equivalente factors depending on the spectra (see EN1993)


Design value of modified nominal stress range
The design value of modified nominal stress range ,2 and ,2 should be determined as
follows:
,2 = 1 2
,2 = 1 2
where is the stress concentration factor to take account of the local stress magnification in relation to detail
geometry not included in the reference curve.
Design value of stress range for welded joints of hollow sections
The design value of modified nominal stress range ,2 should be determined as follows:

,2 = 1 ,2

where ,2 is the design value of stress range calculated with a simplified truss model with pinned
joints, 1 is magnification factor (see Tables 4.1 and 4.2 of EC3-1-9)
Design value of stress range for geometrical (hot spot) stress
The design value of geometrical (hot spot) stress range ,2 should be determined as follows:

,2 = ,2
where is the stress concentration factor


Fatigue Strength Curves for direct stress ranges
Non-welded Details
Weld attachments
,2
DC 112
DC 80 L50mm
Lattice girder nodes joints
0
2.0

DC 90 m=5


Fatigue Strength Curves for shear stress ranges

,2
Non-welded Details
DC 100
m=5


Alternative Strength for details classified as
DC 36* m=3
DC 45* m=3
Size Effect
The size effect due to thickness or other dimensional effects in the fatigue strength is given by
, =


Fatigue verification
Nominal, modified nominal or geometric stress ranges due to frequent loads 1 (see
EN1990) shall not exceed
1.5 for direct stress ranges
1.5 / 3 for shear stress ranges
It shall be verified that under fatigue loading
,2
1

,2
1

Unless otherwise stated in the fatigue strength categories in Table 8.8 and Table 8.9
(orthotropic decks closed and open stringers), in the case of combined stress ranges ,2
and ,2 it shall be verified that:
3 5
,2 ,2
+ 1



Plated structures using nominal stress S-N curves
Plated structures using hot spot stress S-N curves
Tubular joints
S-N curves in air
S-N curves in seawater with cathodic protection
S-N curves for tubular joints
Stresses at girth welds in seam welded pipes and S-N data
Calculation of hot spot stress by finite element analysis


The fatigue life may be calculated based on the S-N fatigue approach under the
assumption of linear cumulative damage (Palmgren-Miner rule):

1
= =

=1 =1
- accumulated fatigue damage
- intercept of the design S-N curve with the log axis.
- negative inverse slope of the S-N curve
- number of stress blocks
- number of stress cycles in stress block i
- number of cycles to failure at constant stress range D si
- usage factor (1 / Design Fatigue Factor from OS-C101 Section 6 Fatigue Limit States)
Applying a histogram to express the stress distribution, the number of stress blocks,
k, should be large enough to ensure reasonable numerical accuracy, and should not
be less than 20. Due consideration should be given to selection of integration method
as the position of the integration points may have a significant influence on the
calculated fatigue life dependent on integration method.


Plated structures using nominal stress S-N curves

The joint classification and corresponding S-N curves takes into account the local stress concentrations
created by the joints themselves and by the weld profile. Thus the local stress is derived as
=
shall be used together with the relevant S-N curves D through G, dependent on joint classification.
Plated structures using hot spot stress S-N curves

For detailed finite element analysis of welded plate connections other than tubular joints it may also be
convenient to use the alternative hot spot stress for fatigue life assessment, see section 4.3 (DNV-RP-
0005:2014-06). A relation between nominal stress and hot spot stress may be defined as
=
where is the structural stress concentration factor as given in section 4.3.4 (DNV-RP-0005:2014-06).
Tubular joints
For a tubular joint, i. e. brace to chord connection, the stress to be used for design purpose is the range of
idealised hot spot stress defined by: the greatest value of the extrapolation of the maximum principal
stress distribution immediately outside the region effected by the geometry of the weld. The hot spot stress
to be used in combination with the T-curve is calculated as
=
where is the stress concentration factor as given in section 3.3 (DNV-RP-0005:2014-06).


The fatigue design is based on use of S-N curves, which are obtained from fatigue tests. The design S-N
curves which follows are based on the mean-minus-two-standard-deviation curves for relevant
experimental data. The S-N curves are thus associated with a 97.7% probability of survival.
Joint classification
For practical fatigue design, welded joints are divided into several classes, each with a corresponding
design S-N curve. All tubular joints are assumed to be class T. Other types of joint, including tube to plate,
may fall in one of the 14 classes specified in Table 2-1, Table 2-2 and Table 2-3, depending upon:
- the geometrical arrangement of the detail
- the direction of the fluctuating stress relative to the detail
- the method of fabrication and inspection of the detail.
The basic design S-N curve is given as

=
- predicted number of cycles to failure for stress range
- stress range with unit MPa
- negative inverse slope of S-N curve
- intercept of log N-axis by S-N curve: = 2 ; = 0.225 (without effect size)
With effect size see D.5 (DNV-RP-0005:2014-06)


S-N curves in air environment
detailed fatigue assessment detailed fatigue assessment is required

can be omitted




Non-welded details
Detail Category B1 Detail Category B2 - Machine gas cut or sheared material

Detail Category C - Manually gas cut material
Bolted connections
Continuous welds essentially parallel to the direction of applied stress
Detail Category C1
Detail Category E Detail Category F


Transverse butt welds, welded from both sides Transverse butt welds, welded from one side
Detail Category D Detail Category W3
Welded joints with load carrying welds
Detail Category F1


S-N curves in seawater with cathodic protection

S-N curves for tubular joints
S-N curves for tubular joints in air environment and in seawater with cathodic protection
are given by last tables.
Detail Category F1 Detail Category D - Gusseted Detail Category W3

connections made with full
penetration
weldsDetail Category F - Gusseted

connections made with fillet welds.


Stresses at girth welds in seam welded pipes and S-N data (Welding in Pipelines)


Stress concentration factors for butt welds
The eccentricity between welded plates may be

accounted for in the calculation of stress
concentration factor. The following formula applies
for a butt weld in an unstiffened plate or for a pipe
butt weld with a large radius:
The stress concentration for the weld between

plates with different thickness in a plate field may
be derived from the following formula:
is eccentricity (maximum misalignment); is

plate thickness; 0 = 0.1 ; is thickness of
thicker plate; is the thickness of thinner plate;
= 0.5 is the eccentricity due to change
in thickness.

Stress concentration factors for cruciform joints
The stress concentration factor for cruciform joint at plate thickness may be derived from
following formula:
= + , which is the total eccentricity

0 = 0.15
is the thickness of the considered plate ( = 1, 2)
is the length of considered plate ( = 1, 2)


Stress concentration factors for rounded rectangular holes


Stress concentration factors for scallops


Stress concentration factors for tubulars subjected to axial force
Derivation of a stress concentration factor is performed:


CALCULATION OF HOT SPOT STRESS BY FINITE ELEMENT ANALYSIS
Tubular joints


CALCULATION OF HOT SPOT STRESS BY FINITE ELEMENT ANALYSIS
Welded connections other than tubular joints

Acknowledgments
authors.
www.cmm.pt.

Fatigue Analysis
The service load simulation

Advanced Topics on the Design of Offshore Structures Fatigue Analysis - Service load simulation Lecture L1.08 2
Summary
ULTIMATE LIMITE STATE AND FATIGUE LIMIT STATE
SEA LOADS AND LOAD EFFECTS
Environmental conditions
Wave and current forces
Wave spectra
Nonlinear effects
Loads Effects

ULTIMATE LIMITE STATE AND

FATIGUE LIMIT STATE CRITERIA
Ultimate limit state (ULS) criteria for overall stability of bottom-supported structures are
based on overturning forces due to wave, current, wind, and stabilizing forces due to
permanent and variables payloads.
Ultimate limit state (ULS) and fatigue limit state (FLS) criteria for structural components
have been developed for the relevant failure modes dependent upon geometry and
load conditions.
Permanent and variable payloads, fluid pressure loads as well as environmental loads
are considered.
Environmental loads due to waves, current, wind, and possibly ice and earthquakes are
considered.
Load and resistance factor design is commonly used for ULS.


Analysis for design

Fatigue is an important consideration for structures in areas with more or less continuous
storm loadings (such as North Sea) and especially for dynamically sensitive structures.
Fatigue strength is commonly described by S-N curves that have been obtained by
laboratory experiments.
Fracture mechanics analysis of fatigue strength have been adopted to assess more
accurately the different stages of crack growth including calculation of residual fatigue life
beyond through-thickness crack, which is normally defined as fatigue failure (according to
DNV-RP-C203).
Detailed information about crack propagation is also required to plan inspections and repair.
Inspection, maintenance, and repair are important measures for maintaining safety in
connection with fatigue crack growth (according to DNV-RP-C203).


According to DNV-OS-C101 fatigue safety of offshore structures can be assessed with S-N Curves
and/or Fracture Mechanics according to the references of DNV-RP-C203 and Classification Note
30.7.
The fatigue resistance of each individual member subjected to fatigue loading should be assessed
The calculated fatigue life shall be longer than the design fatigue life times the Design Fatigue
Factors (DFF).
The DFF in Table A1 are valid for low consequence of failure and where it
can be demonstrated that the structure satisfies the requirement to damaged condition according
to the ALS with failure in the actual element as the defined damage.
The design fatigue factors shall be based on special considerations where fatigue failure will entail
substantial consequences.


All offshore structures are subjected to permanent loads, and hydrostatic pressures as
well as wave, current, and wind loads.
Seismic loads may be important for bottom-supported platforms in some offshore sites.
In artic and subartic regions, ice loads my be important.
However, the main challenge is associated with sea loads, which are commonly the
dominant load.
o Environmental Conditions
Data about the time and space variation of wave height, period, and direction as well as
current speed and direct are require.
These data are important to describe the frequently occurring loads that cause fatigue.


Typical sea environments in different geographical regions are indicated by the 100-
year wave height, surface current velocity, and wind speed.
100-year value North Sea Gulf of Campos Basin West Africa

Mexico (Brazil) (Nigeria)
Wave height (m) 25-32 20-25 10-15 6-8
Wind speed (m/s) 40-42 45 30-35 30-35
(10min. Mean at 10
m elevation)
Surface current 1.0-2.0 0.5-1.5 2.0-3.0 1.0-1.5
speed (m/s)


o Wave and Current Forces
Surface waves on the sea involves fluid particle velocities, , accelerations, , and dynamic pressure
variations.
A regular wave in deep water may be described by linear (Airy) theory and by the wave height, and
length, . The wave length, , is expressed by the wave period, , or radian frequency = 2 , and
The wave number is = 2 .
In the regular waves the undulating water surface elevation, , is given by:
Where is time, and is a horizontal coordinate pointing in the direction of wave propagation with the
origin at still water level under a wave crest at time zero. Taking as a vertical coordinate pointing
upwards with origin at the mean water level, the pressure at any point the water surface is given by:
Where is the density of water. Horizontal velocity and acceleration are given by:


Ocean wave theory


Wave forces, per unit length of a slender vertical rigid component with diameter, ,
and no motion, may be expressed by the empirical Morisons equation as
Where = + , = , and + 1 = are empirical drag and inertia

coeficients respectively, and is the density of water. If the structural members are
slender, the structure does not affect the kinematics and and obtained from the
incident wave can be used.
- drag coefficient from 0.7 to 1.2.
- water density ~1.025
- particle velocity (current).

o Wave spectra
The main problems with the deterministic method are related first to the fact not all
waves have the same period and second because assuming all waves are regular does
not take into account the stochastic nature of the marine environment. Because of this it
has become common practice to perform spectral fatigue analyses instead of
deterministic ones.
There are basically two wave spectra that are commonly used in the offshore
engineering market: the Pierson Moskovitz, also known in a general form called the
ISSC spectrum and the JONSWAP spectrum, which was developed specifically for the
North Sea in joint industry study.


o Wave spectra
For the sake of completeness the equation that govern these spectra are given below:
The wave data is then provided on

a statistical basis, where the
normal parameters are a significant
wave height (average of the 1/3
highest waves) and a statistical
period, which is either the peak
period (Tp) or zero up-crossing
period (an average value Tz).
The Pierson-Moskovitz spectrum

appears for = 1.


o Nonlinear effects
Sea waves have a period in the range of 2 to 20 s. Linear wave forces and
motions have the same period. Nonlinearities in wave forces may cause
steady state loads with a period that is fraction , 1/3, or a multiple 2, 3,
of the wave period. The nonlinearity in the drag force means that the
force will be a nonlinear function of the wave heigth, . The total force may
be written as
=
For submerged horizontal members, = 2.0, while for surface piercing
members > 2.0. This is because the wetted area subjected to wave
increases with wave heigth.


o Loads Effects
It is not yet feasible in a single load effect analysis to account for the stochastic features
of sea waves and current, interaction between incident waves and structure, possible
nonlinear loads, dynamic behavior, and the structural geometry to the detail required for
fatigue analysis. Load effects are, therefore, determined in a hierarchy of analyses.
In some cases fatigue load effects are influenced by nonlinear effects and time-domain
simulation combined with rain flow counting of stress ranges is necessary. Systematic
studies carried out for offshore structures suggest that the long-term response of the
response variables, can be described by a two-parameter Weibull distribution:
In this way, fatigue loading, at least for initial design and screening to identify the
importance of fatigue, can be readily accomplished.

Acknowledgments
authors.
www.cmm.pt.

Fatigue Analysis
The service load simulation
Lecture L1.08

Advanced Topics on the Design of Offshore Structures Fatigue Analysis Lecture 1.08 2
Summary
ULTIMATE LIMITE STATE AND FATIGUE LIMIT STATE
Environmental conditions
Wave and current forces
Wave spectra
Nonlinear effects
Loads Effects


Ultimate limit state (ULS) criteria for overall stability of bottom-supported structures are
based on overturning forces due to wave, current, wind, and stabilizing forces due to
permanent and variables payloads.
Ultimate limit state (ULS) and fatigue limit state (FLS) criteria for structural components
have been developed for the relevant failure modes dependent upon geometry and
load conditions.
Permanent and variable payloads, fluid pressure loads as well as environmental loads
are considered.
Environmental loads due to waves, current, wind, and possibly ice and earthquakes are
considered.
Load and resistance factor design is commonly used for ULS.


Analysis for design

Fatigue is an important consideration for structures in areas with more or less continuous
storm loadings (such as North Sea) and especially for dynamically sensitive structures.
Fatigue strength is commonly described by S-N curves that have been obtained by
laboratory experiments.
Fracture mechanics analysis of fatigue strength have been adopted to assess more
accurately the different stages of crack growth including calculation of residual fatigue life
beyond through-thickness crack, which is normally defined as fatigue failure (according to
DNV-RP-C203).
Detailed information about crack propagation is also required to plan inspections and repair.
Inspection, maintenance, and repair are important measures for maintaining safety in
connection with fatigue crack growth (according to DNV-RP-C203).


According to DNV-OS-C101 fatigue safety of offshore structures can be assessed with S-N Curves
and/or Fracture Mechanics according to the references of DNV-RP-C203 and Classification Note
30.7.
The fatigue resistance of each individual member subjected to fatigue loading should be assessed
The calculated fatigue life shall be longer than the design fatigue life times the Design Fatigue
Factors (DFF).
The DFF in Table A1 are valid for low consequence of failure and where it
can be demonstrated that the structure satisfies the requirement to damaged condition according
to the ALS with failure in the actual element as the defined damage.
The design fatigue factors shall be based on special considerations where fatigue failure will entail
substantial consequences.


All offshore structures are subjected to permanent loads, and hydrostatic pressures as
well as wave, current, and wind loads.
Seismic loads may be important for bottom-supported platforms in some offshore sites.
In artic and subartic regions, ice loads my be important.
However, the main challenge is associated with sea loads, which are commonly the
dominant load.
Data about the time and space variation of wave height, period, and direction as well as
current speed and direct are require.
These data are important to describe the frequently occurring loads that cause fatigue.


Typical sea environments in different geographical regions are indicated by the 100-
year wave height, surface current velocity, and wind speed.
100-year value North Sea Gulf of Campos Basin West Africa

Mexico (Brazil) (Nigeria)
Wave height (m) 25-32 20-25 10-15 6-8
Wind speed (m/s) 40-42 45 30-35 30-35
(10min. Mean at 10
m elevation)
Surface current 1.0-2.0 0.5-1.5 2.0-3.0 1.0-1.5
speed (m/s)


Ocean wave theory (Wave propagation)


Ocean wave theory (Wave propagation)
Shape of an ocean wave
Usual Wave Theories:

Linear or Airy
Stokes (2nd, 3rd, 5th order)
Trochoidal wave (Boussinesq, Dubreil-Jacotin, Gerstner)
Cnoidal (Korteweg/deVries, Keulegan/Patterson, Laitone)
Solitary (Scott-Russel, Boussinesq)



Types of wave
Irregular Wave Regular Wave

Spectral Analysis Wave Theory


Surface waves on the sea involves fluid particle velocities, , accelerations, , and dynamic pressure
variations.
A regular wave in deep water may be described by linear (Airy) theory and by the wave height, and
length, . The wave length, , is expressed by the wave period, , or radian frequency = 2 , and
The wave number is = 2 .
In the regular waves the undulating water surface elevation, , is given by:
Where is time, and is a horizontal coordinate pointing in the direction of wave propagation with the
origin at still water level under a wave crest at time zero. Taking as a vertical coordinate pointing
upwards with origin at the mean water level, the pressure at any point the water surface is given by:
Where is the density of water. Horizontal velocity and acceleration are given by:


Wave forces, per unit length of a slender vertical rigid component with diameter, ,
and no motion, may be expressed by the empirical Morisons equation as
Where = + , = , and + 1 = are empirical drag and inertia

coefficients respectively, and is the density of water. If the structural members are
slender, the structure does not affect the kinematics and and obtained from the
incident wave can be used.
- inertia coefficient from 1.2 to 2.0.
- water density ~1.025
- particle velocity (current).

o Wave spectra
The main problems with the deterministic method are related first to the fact not all
waves have the same period and second because assuming all waves are regular does
not take into account the stochastic nature of the marine environment. Because of this it
has become common practice to perform spectral fatigue analyses instead of
deterministic ones.
There are basically two wave spectra that are commonly used in the offshore
engineering market: the Pierson Moskovitz, also known in a general form called the
ISSC spectrum and the JONSWAP spectrum, which was developed specifically for the
North Sea in joint industry study.


o Wave spectra
For the sake of completeness the equation that govern these spectra are given below:
The wave data is then provided on

a statistical basis, where the
normal parameters are a significant
wave height (average of the 1/3
highest waves) and a statistical
period, which is either the peak
period (Tp) or zero up-crossing
period (an average value Tz).
The Pierson-Moskovitz spectrum

appears for = 1.

NORSOK STANDARD: N-003, 2007

o Design Wave: Relevant wave height
Design wave height

NORSOK STANDARD: N-003, 2007

o Design Wave: Relevant wave height
API Bulletin 2INT-MET hurricane winds, waves, currents and surge for the central zone of the GOM

References
DNV, Comparison of API, ISO and Norsok offshore structural standards, report n.
EP034373-2011-01.
DNV, Recommended Practice DNV-RP-C205 Environmental Conditions and

Environmental Loads -2010 and 2014.
Handbook of Offshore Engineering, by S. K. Chakrabarti, Elsevier Science, 2005.
Hydrodynamics of Offshore Structures 2001 by S. K. Chakrabarti, WIT Press: Ashurst

Lodge, Ashurst, Southampton, SO40 7AA, UK. Reprinted and bound by Antony Rowe
Ltd, Eastbourne.
NORSOK standard N-003. Actions and action effects, 2007.
Wave Forces on Offshore Structures, by Sarpkaya, T. Cambridge University Press,
2010.
Water Wave Mechanics for Engineers and Scientists 1991, by R. G. Dean and R.A.
Dalrymple, Englewood Cliffs: Prentice-Hall, Inc., ISBN 0-13-946038-1, 1984. Reprinted
Singapore: World Scientific Publishing Co.

Acknowledgments
This powerpoint is part of the materials developed for the Training course on Design of
Offshore Structures and it is covered by copyright. It cannot be used in whole or in parts for
any educational purpose, without special permission from the organization and the authors.
www.cmm.pt

Fatigue Analysis
Fracture Mechanics analysis

Summary
FRACTURE MECHANICS: INTRODUCTION
FATIGUE MODELLING OF STRUCTURAL DETAILS BASED ON

FRACTURE MECHANICS
GUIDELINES RELATED TO FATIGUE ASSESSMENT BASED ON

FRACTURE MECHANICS
FATIGUE ANALYSIS BASED ON FRACTURE MECHANICS (design codes)
EXTENDED FATIGUE LIFE (design codes)
FRACTURE MECHANICS ANALYSIS BASED ON BS7910 STANDARD

Fracture Mechanics - Introduction

With the development of the Fracture Mechanics, new opportunities for fatigue
modelling emerged in the literature. The key contribution in this field is attributed to
Paris and his co-authors who first recognized the relation between the stress intensity
factor at an existing crack tip and the crack advance under cyclic loading:
where / is the fatigue crack growth rate; is the stress intensity factor
range and is a function of the stress intensity factor range to be defined.
A simple power function was proposed by Paris:
where and are material constants.


This crack propagation relation was verified to be valid for a specific fatigue crack propagation
regime, particularly in the fatigue crack propagation regime II, which lies in between the near
threshold fatigue crack propagation regime (regime I) and the near unstable crack propagation
regime (regime III).


The stress ratio effect is an important load parameter influencing the fatigue crack propagation
rate, which is not accounted by the simple Paris model. Walker proposed an alternative
relation to overcome this limitation of the Paris model:
The Walker fatigue crack propagation relation can be rewritten in the following form:
Dinda and Kujawski proposed a variation of the previous equation, excluding the compressive
part of the stress intensity factor range:


Both Paris and Walker models are valid for the crack propagation in regime II whereas Forman
proposed an extension of Walker model to the propagation regime III:
Hartman and Schijve extended Forman equation to cover the three crack propagation regimes:
For generalized elastoplastic conditions, some authors have proposed the use of Elastoplastic
Fracture Mechanics parameters to correlate the fatigue crack growth, as is the case of the J-
Integral, as proposed by Dowling and Begley:
This equation is similar to the Paris relation (fits data in region II), but can be advantageously
applied in situations of large scale yielding. Another extension of the Paris-type crack growth law
was proposed by A. Alves & J.A.F.O. Correia, to account for fatigue crack propagation regime I
with the following expression:


Elber furnished an important contribution in the fatigue crack growth study by introducing the crack
closure concept to explain the crack growth under variable amplitude loading. He introduced the
effective stress intensity ratio, , defined as:
For example, the Paris relation may be rewritten as:
The models proposed by Castillo and Fernndez-Canteli represent a new solution for the fatigue
crack propagation based on the assumption of the crack growth curve:
da*
log K * log K th* log
exp exp dN *
log K up
*
log K th*

The modified CCS crack growth model was proposed by Correia is therefore given by the following
expression:

Fatigue modelling of structural details based on fracture mechanics

The availability of accurate fatigue crack propagation laws is the key for reliable fatigue life
predictions of mechanical components or structural details.
The most common use of the fracture mechanics based on fatigue crack propagation relations,
consists in residual fatigue life assessment of mechanical components or structural details
containing initial known defects acting like cracks.
This can be accomplished integrating the crack propagation law, according to the following
expression:
Besides residual fatigue life calculations, which is the basis of a damage tolerance analysis, the
integration of fatigue crack growth relations can be used to compute the total fatigue life of
components.
The main difficulty implied in this approach is the determination of the initial crack size for the
crack growth analysis. One practical solution in using an empirically assumed crack length, such
as 0.251 mm for metals whereby the assumption of such macro-crack could underestimate the
fatigue life of the component.
Fatigue modelling of structural details based on fracture mechanics

A common approach is to postulate an equivalent initial flaw size (EIFS) in an attempt to
determine the initial crack size for fracture mechanics-based life prediction. The EIFS accounts
for the initial quality, both from manufacturing and bulk material properties of structural details.
Applying numerical integration proposed by Correia on the modified CCS crack growth model
results in the number of cycles to failure of the structural detail:

Guidelines related to fatigue assessment based on

fracture mechanics
DNVGL-RP-0005:2014-06: Fatigue design of offshore steel structures.
BS7910:2005. Guidance on Methods for Assessing the Acceptability of Flaws in

Metallic Structures. BSI, July 2005.

Fatigue analysis based on fracture mechanics - DNVGL-RP-0005:2014-06

Fracture mechanics may be used for fatigue analyses as supplement to S-N data
Fracture mechanics is recommended for use in assessment of acceptable defects, evaluation of

acceptance criteria for fabrication and for planning in-service inspection
The purpose of such analysis is to document, by means of calculations, that fatigue cracks, which
might occur during service life, will not exceed the crack size corresponding to unstable fracture.
The calculations should be performed such that the structural reliability by use of fracture
mechanics will not be less than that achieved by use of S-N data. This can be achieved by
performing the analysis according to the following procedure:
crack growth parameter determined as mean plus 2 standard deviation
a careful evaluation of initial defects that might be present in the structure when taking into
account
the actual NDE inspection method used to detect cracks during fabrication use of geometry
functions that are on the safe side
use of utilization factors or Design Fatigue Factors similar to those used when the fatigue
analysis is based on S-N data.


As crack initiation is not included in the fracture mechanics approach, shorter fatigue life is
normally derived from fracture mechanics than by S-N data.
In a case that the results from fracture mechanics analyses cannot be directly be compared with
S-N data it might be recommended to perform a comparison for a detail where S-N data are
available, in order to verify that the assumptions made for the fracture mechanics analyses are
acceptable.
The initial crack size to be used in the calculation should be considered in each case, taking
account of experienced imperfection or defect sizes for various weldments, geometries, access
and reliability of the inspection method. For surface cracks starting from transitions between
weld/base material, a crack depth of 0.5 mm (e.g. due to undercuts and microcracks at bottom of
the undercuts) may be assumed if other documented information about crack depth is not
available.
It is normally, assumed that compressive stresses do not contribute to crack propagation.

However, for welded connections containing residual stresses, the whole stress range should be
applied. Only stress components normal to the propagation plane need to be considered.

The Paris law may be used to predict the crack propagation or the fatigue life:

=

=
is the number of cycles to failure
is the crack depth. It is here assumed that the crack depth/length ratio is low (less than 1:5).
Otherwise crack growth analysis along two axes is recommended.
and are the material parameters, see BS 7910.
The stress intensity factor may be expressed as:

=
is the nominal stress in the member normal to the crack
is the factor depending on the geometry of the member, the weld and the crack geometry
Stress intensity factor can be obtained using the Wigth functions

Extended fatigue life - DNVGL-RP-0005:2014-06

An extended fatigue life is considered to be acceptable and within normal design criteria if the
calculated fatigue life is longer than the total design life times the Fatigue Design Factor.
Otherwise an extended life may be based on results from performed inspections throughout the
prior service life. Such an evaluation should be based on:
1) Calculated crack growth.
Crack growth characteristics; i. e. crack length/depth as function of time/number of

cycles (this depends on type of joint, type of loading, and possibility for redistribution of
stress).
2) Reliability of inspection method used.
Elapsed time from last inspection performed.
It is recommended to use Eddy Current or Magnetic Particle Inspection for inspection

of surface cracks starting at hot spots.
It should be noted that fatigue cracks growing from the weld root of fillet welds can hardly be
detected by NDT. Also, the fatigue life of such regions can not be improved by grinding of the
surface.

Extended fatigue life - DNVGL-RP-0005:2014-06

A crack of length ai will grow to acr in some service life, NF. Experiments have shown that several
parameters affect NF; the most important of these are:
initial crack size, ai
loading history and conditions
material properties
structural properties
critical crack size, acr.

Fracture mechanics analysis based on BS7910 standard

The overall life is calculated by integrating the following equation:
and are constants which depend on the material and the applied conditions, including
environment and cyclic frequency. For < 0, / is assumed to be zero.
For situations in which crack growth near the threshold is significant, a less conservative form of
Paris law based on the effective value of , , may be justified. In these circumstances, the
relevant equation is the following:


Recommended fatigue crack growth laws for steels


Recommended fatigue crack growth laws for steels in air
Recommended fatigue crack growth laws for steels in air
Recommended fatigue crack growth laws for steels in a marine environment


Recommended fatigue crack growth laws for steels
Recommended fatigue crack growth threshold, 0 , values for assessing welded joints
Fatigue crack growth and crack growth threshold in non-ferrous metals (aluminium alloys)

Limits to crack propagation
The route should be followed if is determined from one of the following:
o measured linear-elastic plane strain fracture toughness KIc; or
o correlations from Charpy V-notch impact test data; or
o conversion from J using the following equation:

Acknowledgments
authors.
www.cmm.pt.

Fatigue Analysis
Examples and Applications
Lecture L1.09B

Advanced Topics on the Design of Offshore Structures Fatigue Analysis Lecture 1.09B 2
Summary
DAMAGE ACCUMULATION METHOD EXAMPLE OF APPLICATION
General S-N Approach
Rainflow Cycle Counting Method
EC3 Fatigue Calculator User Interface
One sided connection with preloaded high strength bolts
FRACTURE MECHANICS STRESS INTENSITY FACTOR EXAMPLE

OF APPLICATION
FRACTURE MECHANICS - INTEGRATION OF THE PARIS LAW

EXAMPLE OF APPLICATION

Damage Accumulation Method Example of application
The most common practices for the assessment of fatigue strength of Civil
Engineering structures are currently available in the Eurocodes.
Eurocode 3 (EN 1993-1-9) defines 2 different methods for fatigue analysis

steel structures:
(a) the simplified method of equivalent constant amplitude stress

range;
Ff E2 C / Mf
(b) the linear damage accumulation method, based on the Palmgren-

Miner rule.


o General S-N Approach
Load Model Structure Fatigue strength
(Wave) Load Scenario Transient analysis on

Identify the fatigue prone
from real measurement Global Finite Element
structural details
data Model
Adopt Suitable SN curves

(Wave) Load Scenario Stress histories in critical for the selected Structural
from Design Standards structural details Details (EC3-1-9 or DNVGL-
RP-0005:2014-06)
Definition of the Fatigue Analysis Safe-life OR damage-

wave/loading scenario Obtain Stress tolerant Design Approach
Histograms, by using the
cycle counting rainflow
algorithm.
Fatigue damage, by using

the Miner linear damage
rule (D = ni / Ni 1.0).

o Rainflow Cycle Counting Method
Cycle counting is used to summarize variable load-versus-time histories by
providing the number of cycles related to various amplitudes that occur.
There are several methods for cycle counting, but in the practice, one of the
preferred method is the rainflow method, developed by Endo and Matsuishi
(1968) and standardized ASTM E1049-85 (2005), due to facility for computer
programming.
In general terms, rainflow algorithm consists in convert the signal into peaks
and valleys. Then, the signal is rotated to the vertical, and the cycle counting
is carried out on the basis of the flow of a raindrop along the graphic. As a
result, any stress history can be translated into a stress range spectrum.


o EC3 Fatigue Calculator User Interface (5) Damage calculation
(Palmgren-Miner)
(1) Structural
Detail Picture
(2) SN curve
definition.
(3) Stress
history input
(6) Export report (PDF,
DOC, XLS, HTML)
(7) Edit Spectrum
in Excel
(4) Rainflow
cycle couting
G. Alencar; J.A.F.O. Correia A User-friendly Tool for Fatigue Assessment of Steel Structures According to
Eurocode 3; 5th
Institute International
for Sustainability andConference: Integrity
Innovation in Structural - Reliability Failure, 24 - 28 Jule 2016, FEUP, Porto Portugal.
Engineering

o EC3 Fatigue Calculator User Interface
Pictures of Detail Categories available for user selection:
Eurocode 3; 5th
Engineering

Export of the fatigue calculation results for a PDF file:
Eurocode 3; 5th
Engineering

The process of software testing and validation requires a comparison between the software
computed values and those obtained in literature. There are many examples of application of
the Damage Accumulation Method in steel structures, both for assessment of existing
structures or the design of new structures.
Herein, one presents an example from a well-known reference (ESDEP, 1995), in which was
considered a sample stress of variable amplitude applied to a detail category 90 with a partial
strength factor of Mf = 1.0. According to EN 1993-1-9 (2005), this structural detail category
may consist of one sided connection with preloaded high strength bolts (C = 90 MPa).
140
120
100
(N/mm2)
80
60
40
20
0
0 1 2 3 4 5 6
Time (h)
Eurocode 3; 5th
Engineering

The stress history used as input is shown in last figure. The results from the cycle counting algorithm
are 1 cycle at 120 N/mm2, 1 at 100 N/mm2, 4 at 80 N/mm2, 6 at 60 N/mm2 and 10 at 30 N/mm2,
exactly same as the referred work.
In order to calculate the total damage accumulation, the sample event was supposed to occur over 1
year. As a result, the number of cycles of each stress range was multiplied by 29,200 (ESDEP,
1995). Then, the application of Miners rule leads to a total damage of 0.1169, which differs less than
0.5% from the reference value of 0.1174 (ESDEP, 1995).
Eurocode 3; 5th
Engineering

Researchers and students interested in future improvements related to

advanced fatigue assessment approaches in steel structures are invited to
collaborate.
Free download of the tool is available on GitHub. Users interested in

contributing for the software may access the following link:
https://github.com/guilhermealencar/ec3FatigueCalc
G. Alencar; J.A.F.O. Correia A User-friendly Tool for Fatigue Assessment of Steel

Structures According to Eurocode 3; 5th International Conference: Integrity - Reliability
Failure, 24 - 28 Jule 2016, FEUP, Porto Portugal.

Fracture Mechanics (Stress Intensity Factor - K) Example of application

A thick center-cracked plate of a high strength aluminum alloy is 200 mm wide and contains
a crack of length 80 mm. If it fails at an applied stresses of 100 MPa, (a) what is the
fracture toughness (stress intensity factor) of the alluminium alloy? (b) What value of
applied stress would produce fracture for the same length of crack in an infinite plate
(FI(x)=Y=1).



A thick center-cracked plate of a high strength aluminum alloy is 200 mm wide and contains a
crack of length 80 mm. If it fails at an applied stresses of 100 MPa, (a) what is the fracture
toughness (stress intensity factor) of the alluminium alloy? (b) What value of applied stress would
produce fracture for the same length of crack in an infinite plate (FI(x)=Y=1).
(a) Fracture Toughness (b) Applied Stress

(Finite Plate) (Infinite Plate)

Fracture Mechanics (Integration of the Paris Law) Example of application

A plate of S690QL steel is subjected to constant amplitude uni-axial cyclic loads that produce
nominal stresses varying from Smax=200MPa to Smin=-50 MPa. The monotonic properties for this
steel are y=690 MPa, uts=770 MPa, E=210000 Mpa, Kc =104 MPa.m0.5. What fatigue life would be
attained if an initial through-thickness edge crack existed and was 1 mm in depth?
Recommended fatigue crack growth laws for steels in air Y=1.12
(BS7910)
R<0.5
A=C=6.77x10-13; m=2.88 (da/dN in mm/cycle; K in N/mm3/2)
/ .
170 5.67

0.8 0.8 690 552 # $%&!

BS7910 standard
.
5.67

.
1 ( 30 *+ 32

Acknowledgments
www.cmm.pt

Advanced Topics on the Design of
Offshore Structures
Fatigue Design and Analysis

- Examples and Applications

Advanced Topics on the Design of Offshore Structures Fatigue
Fatigue Analysis
Titulo
Analysis
da -apresentao
- Introduction
Introduction Lecture
Lecture 1.9B
1.10
1.02
Summary
Classification of Structural Details
Determination of Hot Spot Stresses for tubular connections
Estimation of crack propagation using deterministic Linear Elastic
Fracture Mechanics

Fatigue Analysis
Titulo
Analysis
da -apresentao
- Introduction
Lecture 1.9B
1.10
1.02
Example 1 Classification of structural details

Classify according to DNVGL-RP-005 the following details:
130
Detail 1 Detail 2 Detail 3
Compare with EN1993-1-9 Classification

Fatigue Analysis
Titulo
Analysis
da -apresentao
- Introduction
Lecture 1.9B
1.10
1.02
Example 2 Hot spot stresses

Compute the hot spot stress range Dshs
Adapted from CIDECT Design guides for circular and

rectangular Hollow section welded joints under fatigue loading

Fatigue Analysis
Titulo
Analysis
da -apresentao
- Introduction
Lecture 1.9B
1.10
1.02

1st step: Parameters


Fatigue Analysis
Titulo
Analysis
da -apresentao
- Introduction
Lecture 1.9B
1.10
1.02

2nd step: Nominal stress ranges in critical members
Critical chord loading is in chord 1 due to a larger

tension force in it.
Brace 2 with a tensile force range will be checked only.
Note: In general, it is presumed that only braces which

have some parts of their load range in tension will be
liable to cause fatigue failure.

Fatigue Analysis
Titulo
Analysis
da -apresentao
- Introduction
Lecture 1.9B
1.10
1.02



Fatigue Analysis
Titulo
Analysis
da -apresentao
- Introduction
Lecture 1.9B
1.10
1.02



Fatigue Analysis
Titulo
Analysis
da -apresentao
- Introduction
Lecture 1.9B
1.10
1.02

3nd step: SCF calculation for load condition 1
(basic balanced axial loading)


Fatigue Analysis
Titulo
Analysis
da -apresentao
- Introduction
Lecture 1.9B
1.10
1.02

3nd step: SCF calculation for load condition 2


Fatigue Analysis
Titulo
Analysis
da -apresentao
- Introduction
Lecture 1.9B
1.10
1.02

3nd step: SCF calculation for load
condition 2 (basic balanced axial loading)


Fatigue Analysis
Titulo
Analysis
da -apresentao
- Introduction
Lecture 1.9B
1.10
1.02

3nd step: SCF calculation for load
Condition 2
4th step: Superposition for load condition 1 + 2


Fatigue Analysis
Titulo
Analysis
da -apresentao
- Introduction
Lecture 1.9B
1.10
1.02
Example 3
A fatigue crack is discovered in service at the toe of a fillet weld in a steel plate
subjected to fluctuating tension.
It is exposed to seawater without cathodic protection. The applied stress range
is 48 N/mm2 . A fracture assessment indicates a risk of failure for a straight-
fronted flaw of in excess of 4 mm depth. Estimate whether repair can be delayed
for a further 200,000 cycles.
BS 7910:2013+A1:2015

Fatigue Analysis
Titulo
Analysis
da -apresentao
- Introduction
Lecture 1.9B
1.10
1.02
Example 4
An undercut is discovered in a tubular butt weld.
Undercut
15 mm
http://www.twi-global.com/

Fatigue Analysis
Titulo
Analysis
da -apresentao
- Introduction
Lecture 1.9B
1.10
1.02
Example 4
An undercut is discovered in a tubular butt weld.

Classify the detail

Compute the minimum so that the crack starts propagating.
(use Kth = 100 Nmm-3/2)
For = 100 N/mm2 and R = smin / smax = 0.2
Compute the number of cycles to reach a crack depth a = 13 mm for:
Y = 1.12 (constant)
Y = f(a) (From BS7910)

Compute the maximum nominal stress (assumed constant) at the
effective section for a crack of a=13mm. Conclusions ?

Subjected to the same conditions compute the critical crack
size acr with KC = 3000 Nmm-3/2, plot acr as a function of max.

Fatigue Analysis
Lecture L1.09C

Advanced Topics on the Design of Offshore Structures Fatigue Analysis Lecture 1.09C 2
Summary
MODELLING OF THE CRACK PROPAGATION
CRACK PROPAGATION MODEL
STRESS INTENSITY FACTOR EVALUATION
PROPAGATION S-N CURVE


CRACK PROPAGATION MODEL
Linear Elastic Fracture Mechanics (LEFM) approach
da
C K m (Paris Law)
dN
An important assumption of a constant depth through thickness crack, initiated on both sides
of the rivet hole in one side member, is carried out regarding the crack propagation modelling.
Thus, the number of cycles to propagate de crack can be derived as:
af Incremental
1 1 1 1
Nf
C a K m da N
C K m
a
i
technique
The af was considered the crack for which the stress intensity approaches the material
toughness.


Constant depth cracks were introduced with different sizes, a, into the finite element model described
previously.
Stress fields in the loading (y) direction

FKN=0.1; Frictionless contact

a F Aresist. resist. K0
2 2 -1.5
[mm] [N] [mm ] [N/mm ] [Nmm ]
0.25 11410 150 76.07 67.412
0.50 11403 150 76.02 95.277
1.25 11516 150 76.77 152.139
2.50 11379 150 75.86 212.597
3.75 11197 150 74.65 256.213
5.00 10980 150 73.20 290.116
6.25 10731 150 71.54 317.003
7.50 10447 150 69.65 338.069
8.75 10121 150 67.47 353.762
10.00 9740 150 64.93 363.951
11.25 9286.5 150 61.91 368.054
12.25 8712.6 150 58.08 360.329
13.75 7895.2 150 52.63 345.938


The analysis of the results reveals that the stress intensities are not uniform across thickness,
suggesting a non-constant depth crack.
Six order polynomials were best fitted to the numerical data resulting K=K(a) functions required to
integrate the Pariss law.
The integration of the crack propagation law was performed assuming crack increments of 0.1mm.
25
Average value through thickness
20 Maximum value through thickness
K/s (mm0.5 )
15
10
0
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14
a (mm)
(K/s)max. = -4E-05a 6 + 0.002a 5 - 0.045a 4 + 0.471a 3 - 2.471a 2 + 6.589a - 0.721
R = 0.998
(K/s) = -2E-05a 6 + 0.001a 5 - 0.031a 4 + 0.34a 3 - 1.844a 2 + 5.157a - 0.570

200
s [MPa] Np 150
200 50082.57
(MPa)
180 78001.62
s (MPa)
100 Exp. data
160 127178.7
Exp. mean S-N curve
140 220394.8 Crack Initiation
120 414896.9 Crack propagation (ai=0.5 mm)
100 875864.9 Crack propagation (ai=0.75 mm)
80 2184641 Crack initiation + crack propagation (ai=0.75 mm) - predictions
Crack initiation + crack propagation (ai=0.75 mm) - regression line

50
1E4 1E5 1E6 1E7
Cycles, N

Acknowledgments
www.cmm.pt

The Great Wave of Kanagawa
Katsushika Hokusai (1760-1849)
Offshore Foundations and

Geotechnical Issues
- Soil investigations offshore and laboratory testing
yvind Blaker
NGI Oslo
Outline
Typical offshore environments, structures and geotech issues
Soil mechanics and soil behaviour
Offshore investigations and in situ testing
Offshore laboratory testing
Description, index shear strength, WC, UW
Onshore laboratory testing
Triaxial testing, DSS testing, CRS testing
Interpretation of results
Sand
Clay
Sample Quality
Typical deepwater development
1. Suction anchors
2. Well heads
3. Seabed frames
4. PLEM
5. Flow lines
6. Pipelines
7. Risers
8. (Geohazards!)
Jackets
Piles
GBS
Offshore developments
Stability PSI /
Stabilisation design / Mooring anchors
Sediment mobility
Subsea structures
Scarp crossing PSI &

Geohazards
Buckling PSI
Conductors
Riser touchdown
Feasibility Concept Design Operation Closure

Purpose of soil investigation
1. Jacket platform
2. Gravity base structure
3 3. Seabed template
4. Pipelines
1 We need soil parameters to
evaluate interaction between
structures and the seabed:
4 Installation
2 Bearing capacity/sliding
resistance
Typical field development, shallow water Short and long term
settlements
Behaviour due to wave
1. Suction anchors loading
2. Well heads
3. Seabed frames Dynamic load due to earth
4. PLEM quake activity
7 5. Flow lines Removal of structure
6. Pipelines
4 7. Risers
2
1
3 5
6
Typical field development, deep water

Planning onshore laboratory testing
Pipelines
Jack up platforms
Jacket pile platform
Subsea structure
Floating structured with anchors
Monopiles for OWF
Geohazard evaluation
Offshore structures
Offshore wind farms
We need soil parameters Foundations
for safe installation and Gravity Base Structures
predicting long term
behaviour CPTU has
proved essential Monopiles
Jackets with piles or

buckets
Others
Pipelines Existing pipelines in North and
Norwegian Seas (2010)
Mainly testing to ~3 m
Classification and index strength
tests most important
For special purposes like design of
gravel support fill etc CAU and DSS
tests
Sometimes thermal properties are
required for infilled trench material
Soil mechanics
Particles (can be any shape) Phase diagram
Air/gas (NB, generally assume
100% water saturation)
voids
Water
solids
Particles
Voids ratio e = Vv / Vs Water content w = Mw / Ms

Typical soil terms and behaviour
4 primary soil types with increasing particle size:

clay silt sand gravel
Clay (and silt) can be very soft to very hard
Sand, gravel (and silt) can be very loose to very dense
Geological processes can make material overconsolidated;
less water and increased density/strength
Increasing strength will increase capacity but also increase
resistance during installation
Typical soil terms and behaviour
Soil behaviour determined by stress conditions applied

Effective stress is the total stress at a given depth minus
the pore pressure, i.e. = u
If the pore pressure can dissipate during loading, the material
behaviour is drained. If the pore pressure cannot drain, the
material behaviour is undrained.
For normal foundation design situations (e.g. onshore):
clays (and silts) act undrained, sands, gravels (and silts) act
drained
For offshore high frequency cyclic loading: sands (and silts)
will also act undrained for the maximum load
Soil parameters
We use a combination of in-situ testing and laboratory

testing on samples to understand soil derive parameters
Offshore site investigations performed to perform in-situ
testing and obtain samples
Samples taken back to onshore laboratory for testing
Following slides show how we do both of these
Offshore investigations
Seafloor based Drillship based
In-situ testing offshore
Testing soil in place push in tool instead of taking sample
Use correlations to determine soil parameters
Relatively quick test to perform (e.g. 20 m in <1 hr)
Most common tool is the cone penetration test CPT
Standard cone penetrometer:
35 mm diameter (10cm2) steel probe with
electronic measurements
60 cone tip: measure cone resistance, qc
135 mm sleeve behind cone: measure sleeve
friction fs
Filter with measurement of pore pressure, u2
CPT with qc, fs and u measurements
Interpretation of CPTU results
CPTU is an essential part of offshore soil
investigations; results can be used to assess:
Stratification across site
Type of soil in each layer; soil classification
Soil design parameters

Sand
Clay
Other soils
Interpretation of CPTU results
Due to its ability to give continuous
measurements vs depth the CPT is by far
the best tool to define layering across a site
Examples measured CPTU parameters
Clay
From North Sea Site
Sand
Clay
Examples measured CPTU parameters
Clay
From North Sea Site
Sand
Clay
qt = qc (1-a)u Rf = fs/qt Bq= (u2-uo)/(qt-vo)

a = cone geometry factor
Derived parameters uo = in situ static pore pressure
vo = total vertical stress
North Sea example: Layering based on CPTU
qt = qc (1-a)u
Soil behaviour classification chart
100 100
9, 10 10
10, 12 11
11 vo qt
Cone resistance, qt (MPa)
Cone resistance, qt (MPa)

or 12 9 uo 9
u2 8
8
u2-uo 7
10 7 10
Bq= q -
6 t vo 6
CR
Dr
O
5
.
4 5
3
4
1 OC 1
R e
3 St St
1
1 2
2
0.1 0.1
-0.2 0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0 1.2 1.4 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
Pore pressure parameter, Bq Friction ratio (%)
Zone: Soil Behaviour Type:
1. Sensitive fine grained 5. Clayey silt to silty clay 9. Sand

2. Organic material 6. Sandy silt to clayey silt 10. Gravelly sand to sand
3.
4.
Clay
Silty clay to clay
7.
8.
Silty sand to sandy silt
Sand to silty sand
11.
12.
Very stiff fine grained*
Sand to clayey sand*
Robertson et al.,1986
* Overconsolidated or cemented.
Soil Behaviour Chart

(Robertson et al, 1986)
Normalized soil behaviour classification chart
1000 1000
7
1
Increasing
8 vo qt
OCR, age 7 uo
cementation
u
9
No
100 100
rm
6
all
6
yc
Qt Qt 5
on
10 10 4
so
5
lid
Increasing
ate
OCR, age
4 3
d
1 1
Increasing
sensitivity 3
1
1 2
2
0.1 1 10 -0.4 0 0.4 0.8 1.2
Robertson,1990
Zone Soil behaviour type Zone Soil behaviour type Zone Soil behaviour type
1. Sensitive, fine grained 4. Silt mixtures clayey silt to silty clay 7. Gravelly sand to sand
2. Organic soils-peats 5. Sand mixtures; silty sand to sand silty 8. Very stiff sand to clayey sand
3. Clays-clay to silty clay 6. Sands; clean sands to silty sands 9. Very stiff fine grained
Interpretation of CPTU: design parameters
Theories exist for modelling penetration of a cone for both drained and
undrained conditions. Several severe simplifications and assumptions
need to be made to use the different theories.
Need to calibrate theories with experimental results from real soil
(e.g to get strength from cone resistance)
Key issue is to obtain realistic reference soil parameters!
Clay: Use laboratory tests on high quality samples. Field CPT/CPTU data
Sand: CPT/CPTU measurements in large calibration chambers. Parallel

laboratory tests on similar samples
Need HQ laboratory tests!

Offshore laboratory pocket
extrusion torvane penetrometer fall cone
Offshore laboratory
Extrusion of clayey soils
For projects where limited number of soil borings can be done, extrude the
complete sample and use f.inst. As follows:
A and G: Partly disturbed: only for classification tests (Ip, GSD) - Bag
B and D and F: Fall cone, water cont., sample description, Photography
C and E: Soil unit weight and wax for sending to onshore lab
For soft to very soft clays it is strongly recommended to keep samples to be used for
advanced offshore testing sealed in tube!
Example of 1 m long sample, 75 mm diameter
A B C D E F G
Offshore investigations
Water and Unit weight, Cone resistance, Undrained shear strength, Sensitivity,
Sample
CPTU
Soil description fines content, % kN/m3 qt , MPa s u , kPa St
0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 12 14 16 18 20 22 0 2 4 6 0 100 200 300 400 500 0 2 4 6 8
0 CPT1a
(
CLAY, very soft, dark greenish grey, with P1
inclusions and traces of organic matter
su =
P2
)
Nkt
- At 7.80 m inclusion of organic clay P3
5 P4
P5
10 - From 10.00 m becoming greyish black P6

- From 11.00 m seams of fine black sand
P7
Silica SILT, sandy, black, with few shell

Depth below seabed, m
fragments, some traces of organic matter W8
- From 13.00 m with seams and laminations of clay W9

15 W10
CLAY, firm, foliated, dark greenish grey, W11
locally low plasticity (high silt content),
with some traces of organic matter W12
- Between 14.40 m - 15.35 m calcareous CLAY, stiff,
dark greenish grey, low plasticity
20 - Between 16.00 m - 16.25 m medium bluish grey, W13
with laminations of silty fine sand W14
- At 16.80 m seam of organic clay
W15
CPT3
- Between 20.25 m - 20.40 m layer of silt
CLAY, firm to stiff, foliated, platy, dark W16 CPT4
25 greenish grey W17

CPT5
W18
- From 25.00 m locally expansive with many seams of silt
W19 CPT6
CPT7
CLAY, stiff to very stiff, foliated, greyish W20
30 black, with partings and inclusions of CPT8
silt, with traces of organic matter W21

CPT9
W22
W23 CPT10
CPT11
35 W24
End of borehole at 35.70 m
40
Undrained shear strength of clays
Very important parameter for bearing capacity, slope stability
calculations and other geotechnical problems
No single undrained shear strength exists.
The in situ undrained shear strength, su, depends on the mode of failure, soil
anisotropy, strain rate and stress history +.
The su value to be used in analysis therefore depends on the design problem.
qt = Nkt*su + o In general Nkt vary with clay type, usually in range 10 - 25
Nkt is best determined by site specific by empirical correlations. Very important to

state how su has been measured in laboratory. Usually consolidated undrained
triaxial test is used (suC). Ref. later presentation
Onshore laboratory testing
Lab testing at NGI centre from early days
Lunch at NGI 1968/70 Visit Lab 1980s

(Queen Elisabeth and King)
NGI laboratory overview
Element testing Triax, DSS, CRS
Triaxial DSS CRS
Introduction to the NGI model
Difficult to develop robust cyclic
constitutive (implicit) models
The NGI model relates the

laboratory observations directly
into design
Based on cyclic test in Triaxial

compression and extension and
DSS; therefore, stress path
dependent
Results from CRS to understand

stress history
Triaxial General principles Basic steps
Basic steps
Mounting: set the specimen into the cell
Consolidation: bring the specimen to a defined stress state
Shearing to failure: shear the specimen to failure
Mounting
Consolidation
Shearing to failure
Triaxial General principles Consolidation
Reconsolidate the specimen to a specified effective
stress state, ac, rc (following any stress path, in
principle)
Isotropic: ac = rc K = 1.0
Anysotropic: ac rc, K > or < 1.0
Norm. cons. (in lab.): ac = amax, rc = rmax
Overcons. (in lab.): ac < amax and/or rc = rmax
In some instances (to find NC in-situ K = rc/ac)

K0 consolidation: ac specified; A = constant; rc output
In practise:
Lab applies a and r and let pore pressure dissipate
Engineer specify ac and rc
Triaxial General principles Application of total stress paths
Shearing to failure static
Shear specimen to failure: find strength

and stiffness
Typical total stress paths static case
Compression loading (TSP4): a up, r const.
Compression unloading (TSP1): a const., r
down
Extension loading (TSP6): a const., r up
Extension unloading (TSP2): a down, r const.
Typical total stress paths

Triaxial Mounting of specimens (clay)
Careful sample preparation and mounting, including filter papers
Lowering of membrane handling minimized Cell top mounting

Triaxial notes on specifications and interpretation
Rate of shearing undrained will change the
measured strength of the sample
From Lunne and Andersen

(2007)
Triaxial what about soils that cannot be sampled
(e.g. sands)?
Make the specimens: Ladd (1977)
Specify: Dr from CPT typically
Know: maximum and minimum void radio
Sand sample reconstitution, moist tamping

Element testing, DSS Equipment development, lab
testing and soil mechanics
Bjerrum and Landva (1966)

Element testing, DSS
DSS General principles 1
Consolidation
Vertical load (axial stresses), a
Horizontal load,
Lateral strains = 0
Shearing
Vertical displacements (axial strain), a
Horizontal load,
Lateral strains = 0
Principal stress directions:
Unknown
DSS General principles 2
Stress conditions and shear deformation
(see figure)
Boundary conditions: zero lateral strain,
imposed by the wired reinforced
membrane (Bjerrum and Landva 1966)
Failure when shear stress on horizontal
plane is at its peak
Radial stress unknown
Constant area consolidation automatically
achieved Dyvik et al 1987
Clay specimen built in
DSS general setup

Specimen, rubber membrane
Dry top and bottom filters
Control swelling
Double drainage
Speed up consolidation (see also later)
In house designed top caps:
Plastic (light, for very soft materials)
Steel (stiff) Chalk specimen
Steel with skirt
Top/bottom caps (inner)
Cyclic soil behaviour
Construction of cyclic contour diagrams
Contour diagrams are based on:
Cyclic shear stress, cy

Cyclic shear strain, cy
Average shear stress, a
Average shear strain, a
Number of cycles, N
Accumulated pore pressure, up
They are established from laboratory tests

Construction of cyclic contour diagrams
3 tests
Constant average
Different cyclic Nf=400 Nf=20 Nf=4
amplitude
Failure is defined Concept simular to S-N
as: curves for steel
av=15% or cy=15%
CRS General principles 1
Used to assess compression and
consolidation properties of the soil
How much will it compress and how
fast will it consolidate
Test execution:
compress the specimen at a constant strain
rate under 1D consolidation with top
drainage (bottom is undrained with pore
pressure measurement), with pore
pressure at bottom less than 10% of total
axial stress
Results:
1D (zero radial strain) axial strain vs
effective axial stress curve
Compression index
Constrained modulus M = a /
a
Virgin loading
Unloading
Reloading
Creep rate during waiting time Kaolin clay
Results: pc=p
Casangrande or Janbu Kaolin clay, pc = 50 kPa
pc=p
pc=p
Janbu method
Casagrande method
Now what?
Soil parameters for foundation design
Sand
In situ density
Drained shear strength
Deformation parameters
Clay
Stress history
Undrained shear strength
Consolidation and flow parameters
Sand
In situ density
Clay
Stress history
SAND - Relative density, Dr
emax e
Dr (I D ) =
emax emin
e = in situ void ratio = volume ov voids/volume of solids
emax = max. void ratio (loosest state)
emin = min. void ratio (denses state)
Can also be expressed in terms of max and min dry unit weights
(d,max, d,min)
In theory:
Dr = 100 % as dense as we can get
Dr = 0% as loose as we can get
qc,vo,Dr relationship for NC sand
Interpretation procedures in sand are
based almost entirely on Calibration
Chamber tests carried out mainly in Italy
All CC sands are fine to medium
predominantly quartz sands
Calibration Chamber (CC)

- D = 1.22 m
- H = 1.5 m
qc,vo,Dr relationship for NC sand
Drammen sand :
vo qc Dr
(kPa) (Mpa) (%)
60 2.1 27
100 3.0 28
200 7.0 43
After Baldi et al.(1986)

Example estimating Dr in sand
McDonalds Farm, Vancouver, Canada

Factors that should be considered when
estimating Dr in situ
Charts valid for fine to medium uniform,moderately
compressible, unaged and uncemented sands
For compressible sands at a given Dr, qc will reduce, hence Dr
may be underestimated
Increase in grain size can increase cone resistance, hence Dr
may be overestimated
Fines content will reduce qc and Dr can be underestimated; if
FC > 5 10 % be careful with using Dr concept
In interbedded sand layers where qc have not reached full
value within a thin layer Dr may be underestimated
Sand
In situ density
Clay
Stress history
Usually expressed in terms of drained internal friction angle, d
Kleven et al., 1986 Andersen and Schjetne, 2013

in sands
EXAMPLE - estimated Dr and then correlation (D/Dr/vm):
Depth = 10 m ; qc = 10 MPa ; vo= 60 kPa; Ko = 0.4; mo = 42 kPa
= f (Dr, mo ) gives = 41-42o
Dr = 80 %
in sands
EXAMPLE CADC triaxial test:
Reconstituted Dr = 80%; vc=60 kPa; Ko = 0.4; mo = 42 kPa
= f (Dr, mo ) gives = 44o
Use the value of that is most

conservative for the design problem at hand:
sin() = tan (q/p)
For bearing capacity use = 40-42o
For pile driving resistance use = 44 o
Doggerbank Sand (Blaker and Andersen, 2015)

m0=145 kPa (OCR=1)
Sand
In situ density
Clay
Stress history
Overconsolidation Ratio, OCR
OCR = pc/ v0
pc=p
pc = preconsolidation stress
v0 = present overburden stress
For many engineering applications OCR is an

important parameter we need to assess
Empirical correlations have been established

between OCR determined based on laboratory
tests on high quality samples Casagrande method
OCR - Example from Norwegian Sea
OCR from CPTU (CLAY)
OCR = k (qt-v0)/v0
k factor = 0.3
Lab data from CRS oedometer tests

OCR = pc/ v0
Representative OCR
profile
Sand
In situ density
Clay
Stress history
su - Example from North Sea
Nkt from CAU triaxial tests Undrained shear strength suC, kPa
5 10 15 20 25 30 0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 200
(0 8 )
0 0
C DSS 20
DSS E C
C
C 5
5
C
DSS C
C
15
10 10
KRK1001
KRK1002
C
CPT01
DSS E CPT04
15 C 15 CAUC KRK1001
CAUC KRK1002
FC KRK1001 , o ffsh ore
FC KRK1001 , onsh ore
FC KRK1002 , o ffsh ore
Depth below seabed, [m]

FC KRK1002 , onsh ore
Depth below seabed, m
C
20 20 MV KRK1001 , onsh ore
MV KRK1002 , onsh ore
PC KRK1001 , o ffsh ore
PC KRK1002 , o ffsh ore
Nkt = (qt - vo)/suC

UU KRK1001
C UU KRK1002
25 25 .
0 28p0'
DSS
C 11
30 30
-
Unit 1 (0 9 m) Nkt = 20
-
35 Unit 2 (9 29 m) Nkt = 15 35
-
Unit 3 (29 50 m) Nkt = 11
DSS
40 40
DSS
C
KRK1001
45 KRK1002 45
DSS C
11
50 50
Labels: Based on triaxial compression test (C)
Based on triaxial extension test (E), corrected for anisotropy
Based on direct simple shear test (DSS) Results from lab and CPTU results
Example of Deep Water Site
undrained shear strength, su (kPa)
651500
0.0 2.0 4.0 6.0 8.0 10.0 12.0 14.0 16.0 18.0 20.0
0.0
1.0 su from Nkt = 10
651000 su from Nu = 7
2.0 su from CAUC
650500
FPSO
3.0
depth below seabed (m)

FPSO
Northing (m)
4.0
650000
5.0
649500 6.0
CPTU Locations
7.0
649000 Anchor clusters Anchor Locations
FPSO Location
Anchor Lines 8.0
648500 9.0
199000 199500 200000 200500 201000 201500 202000 202500

Easting (m) 10.0
Deep water site South China Sea

Methods for assessing sample disturbance
Visual inspection
X-ray
Oedometer test
Triaxial test
Comparison hammer and push sample from
Frigg field, NS
Push sample
Hammer sample
Results of X-raying offshoreTroll Field, NS
X-ray images of sample of London clay
Onsy clay
Pc
Results of CRSC tests
on block and 54 mm samples
Effect of sample
disturbance is to give too
low pc
Results from shearing phase of CAUC test
Effect of sample
disturbance is to give
too low shear strength
Classical example from Troll field
Results of CRSC
oedometer test
Good sample where

structure is still more or
less intact
Structure completely
broken down, completely
disturbed sample
Classical example from Troll field
Change in axial strain when consolidating to in situ

vertical stress is good indicator of sample disturbance
It has been found convenient to express this as change

in void ratio normalized to initial void ratio: e/ei
NGIs Criteria For Sample Disturbance
e/eo
Overcon- Very good to Good to fair* Poor* Very poor*
solidation excellent*
ratio
1-2 <0.04 0.04-0.07 0.07-0.14 >0.14
2-4 <0.03 0.03-0.05 0.05-0.10 >0.10
Based on CAUC and CRSC tests on Sherbrooke block samples and tube samples
in Norwegian soft clays
Valid for mechanical properties
Thank you!
Piled offshore
foundations
Paulo Lopes Pinto

Advanced Topics on the Design of Offshore Structures Piled foundations Lecture L2.06 2
Summary
Introduction
Execution of pile foundations
Drivability analysis
Design methods to predict axial capacity
Axial load-settlement response
Lateral loading
Load testing

Randolph & Gourvenec (2011)
Design considerations
Drivability damage Grout Hydrofracture. Hole cleaning.

and driving stresses. detection. Loss into formation. Hole collapse.
Pile buckling. Thermal effects. Primary pile
Directional stability. drivability.
Grouted
Driven Drilled and
driven
grouted
Inputs: Installation Short and long

API method. considerations pile failure
Interpreted CPT methods. mechanisms.
SI data Progressive Plastic moment
Axial Lateral capacity.
failure?
capacity capacity
Design Cyclic
loading, degradation? Piles
Axial Lateral Subgrade reaction
load and
response response approach.
resistance
factors Elastic continuum
Elastic solutions.
approach.
t-z modelling.
P-y analysis.
Overall structural
Other Group effects.
stiffness.
considerations Cyclic loading,
Group effects.
softening and
Influence on
gapping; influence
capacity? Seismic Seabed Seabed on capacity?
response? scour? landslides?
PILE DRIVING

Pile driving components
Hammer
Driving Cap
Hammer cushion
Helmet
Pile cushion
Pile
Soil

Hammer types
External combustion Internal combustion
Drop Compressed Open Closed end

Hydraulic
Hammer air/steam diesel diesel
hammer
hammer
Offshore pile driving

Most of the offshore hammers are currently
hydraulic and can operate underwater.
Steam and diesel hammers were common,
but limited to operate above water, requiring
followers.
www.menck.com


Vibratory hammers
http://www.cape-holland.com

Piles
Typical offshore driven pipe piles vary in diameter from 30 (0.76 m) to over
4 m for large monopile foundations, with typical wall thickness to diameter
ratios of 25 to 100.
The pile toe can be open ended or closed with a welded plate or a conical
tip.

Open ended pipe plugging

Unplugged faillure Plugged faillure
load, Vult-u load, Vult-p
External shaft External shaft

resistance, Rs-e resistance, Rs-e
Plug weight, Wp
Internal shaft Plug length, hp
resistance, Rs-i
Base resistance on
pile wall, Rb-w
Base resistance on
pile wall, Rb-w
Base resistance on
Unplugged Plugged soil plug, Rb-p

Pipe plugging
Plugging will occur if:
>
During driving, the piles are often unplugged. Under static loading they
behave usually as plugged.

Pile freeze and relaxation

When the piles are driven in clay, the capacity usually increases with time.
(FHWA, 2006)

Drivability analysis - GRLWEAP


DESIGN METHODS TO
PREDICT AXIAL CAPACITY

Compressive resistance
Rc Rb Rs ( W p )
Rc compressive resistance
Rb base resistance
Rs Rs shaft resistance
Wp pile self-weight
Wp
V applied axial (vertical) load
Rb

Tensile resistance
V
Rt Rs ( West )
Rt tensile resistance
Rs Rs shaft resistance
Wp pile self-weight
West V applied axial (vertical) load
Rb = 0

Pile resistance
=

= = ; ;

qb unit base resistance

qs;i unit shaft resistance in layer i
Ab pile base area
As;i pile shaft surface area in layer i

Ultimate shaft resistance in clay qs ca cu

API (2005) Method - Cohesive soils

Skin friction:
=
For cu < sv0:

.
= . .

For cu > sv0:

.
= . .

End bearing:
=

API (2005) Method - Cohesionless soils
Skin friction: = = ,
End bearing: = ,
For open ended piles driven unplugged: K0.80

For plugged and close ended piles: K1.00

API (2005) Method - Cohesionless soils
Design Parameters for Cohensionless Siliceous Soil, API (2005)

Soil relative Soil-Pile friction Shaft friction End bearing End bearing
density Soil type angle, d limit, qs,lim factor, Nq limit, qb,lim
() (kPa) (MPa)
Very loose Sand
Loose Sand-Silt 15 48 8 2
Medium dense Silt
Loose Sand
Medium dense Sand-silt 20 67 12 3
Dense Silt
Medium dense Sand
25 81 20 5
Dense Sand-silt
Dense Sand
30 96 40 10
Very dense Sand-silt
Dense Gravel
35 115 50 12
Very dense Sand

Methods based on CPT correlations

LCPC Method
This method was develped by Bustamante & Gianeselli (1981) and has
had several evolutions (DTU 13.2 (1992), MELT (1993) e AFNOR (2012)).
The latest version is in agreement with Eurocode 7.
Unit end bearing:

qb kc qce
kc is the penetrometric capacity factor

qce is the equivalent resistance to penetration. Is an weighted
average at a depth of zb-B to zb+3B
Unit shaft resistance:

qs z pile soil f soil qc z

LCPC Method
Pile Type Definition
Pile type Group Class

1 - Dry drilling ## G1 1
2 - Drilling with bentonite ## G1 1
3 - Drilling with permanent casing G1 1
4 - Drilling with temporary casing G1 1
5 - Dry drilling or with drilling fluid, with groving, poos G1 1
6 - CFA simple or with double rotation G1 2
7 - Screwed, concreted in-situ G1 3
8 - Screwed with permanent tube G1 3
9 - Driven, precast concrete or pre-stressed G1 4
10 - Driven with casing (concrete, mortar, grout) G2 4
11 - Driven with concrete (Franki) G1 4
12 - Driven steel pipe, close ended G1 4
13 - Driven steel pipe, open ended G1 5
14 - Driven, H G1 6
15 - Driven, H, grouted IGU or IRS G2 6
16 - Driven sheet-piles G1 7
17 - Micropiles type I G2 1
18 - Micropiles type II G2 1
19 - Piles or Micropiles type III G2 8
20 - Piles or Micropiles type IV G2 8

LCPC Method CPT

D 3a
q z dz
1
Unit end bearing qce
b 3a
cc
D b
qb kc qce D
q z dz
1
Def c
qce D hD
Penetrometric capacity coefficient kc for a relative bearing depth Def/B<5

Soil
Clays and silts / = 0,3 + 0,3 / /5
Intermediate soils / = 0,2 + 0,2 / /5
Sands and gravels / = 0,1 + 0,1 / /5
Chalk, marl and weathered or / = 0,15 + 0,15 / /5
fragmented rock
Penetrometric capacity coefficient kcmax for a relative bearing depth Def/B>5

Weathered
Clay Marl and
Intermediate or
Pile class (%CaCO3<30 Sand Chalk Marly
Soil fragmented
%), Silt Limestone
rock
1 0,40 0,30 0,20 0,30 0,30 0,30
2 0,45 0,30 0,25 0,30 0,30 0,30
3 0,50 0,50 0,50 0,40 0,35 0,35
4 0,45 0,40 0,40 0,40 0,40 0,40
5 0,35 0,30 0,25 0,15 0,15 0,15
6 0,40 0,40 0,40 0,35 0,20 0,20
7 0,35 0,25 0,15 0,15 0,15 0,15
8 0,45 0,30 0,20 0,30 0,30 0,25
LCPC Method CPT

Unit shaft resistance
qs z pile soil f soil qc z qs max
Values of pile-soil
Clay Weathered or
Pile type (%CaCO3<30%) Intermediate Sand, Marl and Marly fragmented
, Silt soil Gravel Chalk Limestone Rock
1 - Dry drilling ## 0.55 0.65 0.70 0.80 1.40 1.50

2 - Drilling with bentonite ## 0.65 0.80 1.00 0.80 1.40 1.50
3 - Drilling with permanent casing 0.35 0.40 0.40 0.25 0.85 -
4 - Drilling with temporary casing 0.65 0.80 1.00 0.75 0.13 -
5 - Dry drilling or with drilling fluid, with grooving, poos 0.70 0.85 - - - -
6 - CFA simple or with double rotation 0.75 0.90 1.25 0.95 1.50 1.50
7 - Screwed, concreted in-situ 0.95 1.15 1.45 0.75 1.60 -
8 - Screwed with permanent tube 0.30 0.35 0.40 0.45 0.65 -
9 - Driven, precast concrete or pre-stressed 0.55 0.65 1.00 0.45 0.85 -
10 - Driven with casing (concrete, mortar, grout) 1.00 1.20 1.45 0.85 1.50 -
11 - Driven with concrete (Franki) 0.60 0.70 1.00 0.95 0.95 -
12 - Driven steel pipe, close ended 0.40 0.50 0.85 0.20 0.85 -
13 - Driven steel pipe, open ended 0.60 0.70 0.50 0.25 0.95 0.95
14 - Driven, H 0.55 0.65 0.70 0.20 0.95 0.85
15 - Driven, H, grouted IGU or IRS 1.35 1.60 2.00 1.10 2.25 2.25
16 - Driven sheet-piles 0.45 0.55 0.55 0.20 1.25 1.15
17 - Micropiles type I - - - - - -
18 - Micropiles type II - - - - - -
19 - Piles or Micropiles type III 1.35 1.60 2.00 1.10 2.25 2.25
20 - Piles or Micropiles type IV 1.70 2.05 2.65 1.40 2.90 2.90

LCPC Method CPT

Unit shaft resistance
0.160
0.140
0.120
0.100
fsolo (MPa)
0.080
Q1
0.060
Q2
0.040
Q3
0.020
0.000
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20
qc (MPa)

f soil qc aqc b 1 e cqc
Clay Marl and Weathered or
Soil (%CaCO3<30%), Intermediate Marly fragmented
Silt soil Sand Chalk Limestone Rock
Curve Q1 Q2 Q3 Q2 Q2 Q2
a 0.0018 0.0015 0.0012 0.0015 0.0015 0.0015
b 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1
c 0.4 0.25 0.15 0.25 0.25 0.25

LCPC Method - CPT
Unit shaft friction

Limit unit shaft friction, qs;max (kPa)
Clay Weathered or
(%CaCO3<30% Intermediate Sand, Marl and Marly fragmented
), Silt soil Gravel Chalk Limestone Rock
Pile type qs,max (kPa)
1 - Dry drilling ## 90 90 90 200 170 200
2 - Drilling with bentonite ## 90 90 90 200 170 200
3 - Drilling with permanent casing 50 50 50 50 90 -
4 - Drilling with temporary casing 90 90 90 170 170 -
5 - Dry drilling or with drilling fluid, with grooving, poos 90 90 - - - -
6 - CFA simple or with double rotation 90 90 170 200 200 200
7 - Screwed, concreted in-situ 130 130 200 170 170 -
8 - Screwed with permanent tube 50 50 90 90 90 -
9 - Driven, precast concrete or pre-stressed 130 130 130 90 90 -
10 - Driven with casing (concrete, mortar, grout) 170 170 260 200 200 -
11 - Driven with concrete (Franki) 90 90 130 260 200 -
12 - Driven steel pipe, close ended 90 90 90 50 90 -
13 - Driven steel pipe, open ended 90 90 50 50 90 90
14 - Driven, H 90 90 130 50 90 90
15 - Driven, H, grouted IGU or IRS 200 200 380 320 320 320
16 - Driven sheet-piles 90 90 50 50 90 90
17 - Micropiles type I - - - - - -
18 - Micropiles type II - - - - - -
19 - Piles or Micropiles type III 200 200 380 320 320 320
20 - Piles or Micropiles type IV 200 200 440 440 440 500

Driving formulas
Formulas that relate the bearing capacity of a pile with the driving energy
and the penetration per blow (s).
W h H Ru s
Wh H
Ru
Sanders (1851) s
1 e f Wh H
Engineering News Record (1893) Rcd
FS sC

Rcd
1
e f E Wh e r W p
2

Hiley
FS cc c p c q
Wh W p
s
2
Gates
R cd
1
FS

7 Er log 10 N b 550

Driving formulas
1 e f Wh H
ENR(Engineering News Record) Rcd
FS sC
Rcd design value of the compressive resistance (kN)

ef hammer efficiency (0,7< ef < 0,9)
Wh hammer weight
H drop height
s penetration per blow
C hammer dependent coefficient
FS Factor of safety (> 4,0)

Driving formulas

Hiley Rcd
1
e f E Wh e r W p
2

FS cc c p c q
Wh W p
s
2
Rcd design value of the compressive resistance

ef hammer efficiency (0,7< ef < 0,9)
E hammer rated energy
Wh hammer weight
er coeficient of restitution
Wp Weight of pile and helmet
s set (penetration per blow)
cc temporary compression of pile top and helmet
cp+ cq temporary compression of pile and soil
FS factor of safety (> 2,5)

Driving formulas
Gates
R cd
1
FS

7 Er log 10 N b 550
Rcd design value of the compressive resistance (kN)

Er hammer energy (Joules) with ef= 80%
Nb number of blows per 25 mm penetration, at the end of driving
FS factor of safety (> 3,5)

Piled foundations
LOAD-SETTLEMENT
BEHAVIOR

Elastic settlement components
se s1 s2 s3

Pile elastic deformation
s1
Fb Fl L
EA
Fb
Fl
L
A
E


Settlement caused by the load transferred along the pile
s2
Fl B
Es Al
1 s
2

2 0,35
L
B


Soil settlement caused by load transferred at pile tip
s3
Fb B
Es A
1 s 0,88
2

Vesic proposed for piles in sand:
Fb
s3
1 I D 2 q b
qb
-


Pile-soil interaction (axial)

Shaft resistance
qs qs qs
1 qs max qs max
s s s
End bearing
qb qb qb
n qb max
qb max
s s s

r
z
Gi
f

sz

s + /r dr
s r+ sr/rdr

dz
sr

s

d
r dr

sz+ sz / z dz



Driven piles:
0 r0 rm rm r0 r0 0 R f
Skin friction: z ln
Gi r0 rm r0 f
ro pile radius
rm radius to where the strain integration is extended
o mobilized shear stress along the shaft (=qs)
G shear modulus of the soil
Rb 1
End bearing: z 2
R R
4r0 Gi 1 b t
Rbf
Rb mobilized end bearing
Rbf ultimate base capacity
Gi low strain shear modulus
Rt failure ratio

API (2005) t-z curves

Load-settlement behavior
Issues requiring consideration:

Group iteration
Cyclic response
Pipe Plugging

Piled foundations
LATERAL LOADS

Lateral loaded piles

H
s1 Z0
O
s2
s4 s3
Short (rigid piles) Long (flexible piles)

Pile with lateral load: soil reaction
Real Winkler beam on springs model

Structural model with pile-soil lateral interaction
Beam
elements
Nodes Soil springs

Pile-soil interaction
dy( x)
y (x ) y ' ( x) M ( x) y ' ' ( x) EI V ( x) y ' ' ' ( x) EI p( x) y IV ( x) EI
dx
Deflection Curvature Bending Shear Soil
moment reaction

Elastic solution
where q(x) is the external force
EI y ( x) q ( x) k h B y ( x)
IV
per unit length applied to the pile
EI y IV ( x) k h B y ( x) q ( x)
q(x)
kh B y(x)
On a section where q(x)=0:
EI y IV ( x) k h B y ( x) 0
kh B 1
4 le is the elastic length
y IV x 44 y x 0 4 EI le
Solution:
y ( x ) C1e x sin x C2 e x cos x C3e x sin x C4 e x cos x
y ' ( x ) ...

Particular cases with analytical solution

Semi-infinite beam with concentrated load and null rotation at the end
Semi-infinite beam with concentrated load
Semi-infinite beam with concentrated load at the free end
Semi-infinite beam with concentrated moment at the free end
Semi-infinite beam with concentrated load at the mid point

Definitions
Horizontal subgrade modulus: k FL '

h 2

P
y
Horizontal subgrade coefficient kh:

(Winkler coefficient)
k h FL 3
k h'

P q
B By y

Soil with modulus increasing z

k h nh
linearly with depth: B
k h' nh z
L
Spring stiffness:

K h FL 1
k '
h L k h B L
P = soil reaction per unit length; y = horizontal displacement;

z = depth; B = pile diameter or width

Pile-soil interaction: Near Field
y
LATERAL
z
sr sr
r P=0 r P
Y=0 Y=10 mm

P FL s r r d 0
1
2
0

P FL 1

0
2
s r r d
Pu
Sand &
P Soft Clay
Stiff clay Pr
Y
Limit value (pu):

sand (surface)
Bowman (1958):

Loose sand
3 2
Dense sand

45
2
K 0 z tg sen tg
pu z
B z tg tg K 0 z tg tg sen tg K a B
tg cos tg

Limit value (pu):

sand (depth)

pu B z K a tg 8 1 K 0tg tg 4

Limit value (pu)
1 = 1 + 2
2 = 3
(API, 2005)

P-y curves: Sand (Reese)
z = z4
Soil resistance, P (FL-1)
z = z3
z = z2
pu u
z = z1
m m
pm
k
pk
yk
nh z = kh z=0
ym=b/60 yu=3b/80
Horizontal displacement, y

P-y curves: Sand (ONeill, 1984)
Soil resistance, P (FL-1)

Pu
n z
p A pu tanh h y

A pu
kh = nh z
pu min pu1 , pu 2
Horizontal displacement, y
Wedge failure:
= 1,0 for square or circular piles

pu1 z BK p K a z K p tg tg A = 0,9 for cyclic loads
Flow failure:

pu 2 z B K 3p 2 K 0 K p2 tg tg K a = 3-0,8(z/B) > 0,9 for mononic loads

Limit value (pu): clay (surface)
= 2 + + 2.83

Limit value (pu): clay (depth)
= 11

P-y curves: Integrated Model for Clay (ONeill, 1984)

Static Load
P PU for X X Cr
1.0
Soil resistance ratio, P/ PU
0.387
P y
0.5
Pu yc
0.5
FS 1 FS
P x
Pu xcr
0.0
1 6 20
y
Displacement ratio,
yc

P-y curves: Integrated Model for Clay (ONeill, 1984)

Cyclic Load
1.0
Soil resistance ratio, P/ PU
P
0.5 Pu para X Xcr
PU
0.5
0.387
P y P
0 .5 F C X
0.5 PU X r
Pu yc
0.0
1 10
Y
Displacement ratio, YC

Near Field: Lateral Parameters

Sand:
Shear strength angle,
Unit weight,
Horizontal subgrade reaction modulus, kh
Clay or Soft Rock:

Undrained shear strength, cu
Unit weight,
Axial Strain at 50% of Failure stress in a UU triaxial test, e50

NSPT vs Angle of shearing resistance (sand)
Sand NC
s
0.5
'
CN vo 1

s
'
vo
Sand OC
s
0.5
'
CN oct 1

s
'
oct

nh vs Dr 28 29 30 36 41 45
VERY VERY
LOOSE MEDIUM DENSE DENSE
LOOSE DENSE
300 82
250
SAND
nh ( MN/m3 )
nh ( lb / inch3 )
ABOVE
200 GWT
150
100 SAND BELOW

GWT
50 1 lb/in3 0,272 MN/m3
0 0
0 20 40 60 80 100
Note: Initial tangent values, Reese (1974)
Dr (%)

Pile groups with lateral loads

Pile-soil interaction (near field) + pile-soil-pile
Group effect is considered by p-y curves modified by p-y multipliers.

p (F/L)
Estaca isolada
p1
p2 = p1 * f m Estaca num grupo
y (L)

ID=36%
Average Shear Force per Pile (kN) 350
300
250
200
150
100
50
0
1st row 2
3 4 5 6
y=76 mm
7
Row

ID =55%
Average Shear Force per Pile (kN) 350
300
250
200
150
100
50
0
1st row 2
3 4 5 6
Row 7
y=76 mm
P-y multipliers for 3D spacing
3x3 4x3 5x3 6x3 7x3

Lead row 0.8 0.8 0.8 0.8 0.8
2 0.4 0.4 0.4 0.4 0.4
3 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.3
4 0.3 0.2 0.2 0.2
5 0.3 0.2 0.2
6 0.3 0.2
7 0.3

Prototype test 4x4


Loading system

Prototype test 4x4

5.0
Teste
4.0 FLPier
Carga horizontal (MN)
3.0
2.0
1.0
0.0
0 20 40 60 80 100
Deslocamento horizontal (mm)
Prototype test 4x4
Lead row row 2 row 3 row 4

% load/row 28% 27% 23% 22%
fm 0,8 0,7 0,3 0,3

PILE LOAD TESTING

High Strain Dynamic Test
Instrumentation:
-Strain gages (ea(t))
- acelerometers (v(t))

Dynamic test Wave propagation

Without resistance to wave
EA
propagation, force and particle F (t ) v(t )
velocity are related by pile impedance c
E c is the speed of propagation of the pressure wave

c
(3000 a 4500 m/s in concrete, 5100 m/s in steel)
E is the pile Youngs modulus
A is the pile cross section
u (t )
v(t ) Is the particle velocity
t

P waves
Compression Tension
+s -s
Part.
Particle Disp.
displacement s
dx A dx A
s du
du
Wave
Wave
propagation
propagation

P waves
+s Compression wave
s dx = vp.t1
s
time
t1
dx E
c vp
dt

P waves vp Rigid base:

displacement restricted.
du s u=0
+ = 2s
s
2s s du
The velocity v(t) inverts

vp sign!

P waves
+s Compression wave
s dx = vp.t1
s
time
t1
dx E
vp
2s 0,5 vp.t1 dt

P waves
tension
Velocity + vp Free base:
compression Null stress
du s s = 0
+ = s0
s
s
s0 s du The velocity v(t)
keeps the sign!
E0
vp



Dynamic test
6,500 3.25
t1 t2=t1+2L/ F (kN)
5,500 2.75
c v (m/s)
4,500 2.25
Particle Velocity (m/s)

3,500 1.75
Force (kN)
2,500 1.25
1,500 0.75
500 0.25
-500 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 110-0.25
-1,500 -0.75
Time (ms)

Dynamic test
Case Method
Total dynamic resistance:
RTL
1
F (t1 ) F (t 2 ) 1 v(t1 ) v(t 2 ) EA
2 2 c
Static resistance (CASE method):
EA
RSP RTL J c v (t1 ) F (t1 ) RTL
c
t1 = time at maximum force

t2 =time of arrival of the reflected wave = t1+2L/c
c = speed of wave propagation = (Ec/)0.5
Jc = Damping coefficient (nondimensional)

Case Method
This method considers that all damping occurs at the pile tip.
Suggested values for Jc

Jc Soil type (pile tip)
0.10 0.15 Clean sand
0.15 0.25 Silty sand
0.25 0.40 Silt
0.40 0.70 Silty clay
0.70 1.00 Clay

CAPWAP Method
(CAse Pile Wave Analysis Program)
Fm(t) Fm(t) Fcal(t)
vm(t) vm(t)
1 Static
resistance
Ru
q Displacement
i Dynamic
Resistance
Velocity

Rapid Load Test (STATNAMIC)
Fstn

STATIC
100%
Load
Settlement
STATNAMIC
DYNAMIC
5-10%
1-2%
Strain Load
Acceleration Settlement

Instrumentation: Load cell, laser

displacement measurement,
accelerometer

Statnamic test Data

Statnamic test Interpretation
Fstn(t)=Fa(t)+Fu(t)+Fv(t)

Bibliography / Additional Resources
Berminghammer (Statnamic Test) - http://www.berminghammer.com/

Profound (Statnamic Test) - http://www.profound.nl/statnamic.php
GRL/PDI (dynamic and integrity tests) - http://www.pile.com/
Randolph, M. & Gouvernec, S. (2011), Offshore Geotechnical Engineering, Spon
Press.
API (2005) Recommended Practice for Planning, Designing and Constructing
Fixed Offshore PlatformsWorking Stress Design, API RP-2A. American
Petroleum Institute, Washington.

Acknowledgments
This lecture was prepared for the Edition 1 of the Training course on
Advanced Topics in the Design of Offshore Structures (November 2016) by
PAULO LOPES PINTO (UC).
This powerpoint is part of the materials developed for the Training course on Advanced
Topics in the Design of Offshore Structures and it is covered by copyright. It cannot be used
in whole or in parts for any educational purpose, without special permission from the
organization and the authors.
www.cmm.pt

The Great Wave of Kanagawa
Katsushika Hokusai (1760-1849)
Offshore Foundations and

Geotechnical Issues
- Design of other types of foundations
yvind Blaker
NGI Oslo
Outline
NGI model and cyclic soil behaviour

Gravity Based Structures (GBS)
Suction Anchors
Torpedo Anchors
Drag Anchors
Offshore foundation design
Offshore foundations generally governed by cyclic loading
Requires understanding of soil behaviour (see presentation from
yesterday)
So-called NGI model is widely used in industry to capture the
cyclic response and can be applied to practically all foundation
design problems
Effectively a combination of fatigue, drainage and rate effects,
where the different factors provide different results depending
on soil type, loading conditions and geometry
Foundation and anchor design
Foundations used for fixed structures (jacket, GBS etc.)
Anchors used for floating structures (FPSOs, semi-subs, TLP)

Soil-Structure-Load interaction
ULS load and Cyclic history
Assume foundation dimensions

Without a holistic
Determine cyclic soil properties
model, an iterative
procedure is needed Calculate foundation capacity
Check installation
Check serviceability
Calculate foundation stiffness

Developed in the seventies for the large gravity-
based structures (GBS) in the North Sea
Ekofisk 1973
First developed for clay
Drammen clay JIP 74/75
Later extended for sand
Verified by a series of model, field-scale and in
situ observations
Difficult to develop robust cyclic
constitutive (implicit) models
The NGI model relates the

laboratory observations directly
into design
Based on cyclic test in Traixial

compression and extension and
DSS; therefore, stress path
dependent
and results from CRS

Effect of loading rate
Cyclic capacity > Monotonic
The model accounts for cyclic
Load
degradation, i.e. the stiffness and Cyclic capacity < Monotonic
shear strength decrease with Monotonic capacety
increasing number of undrained
Cyclic capacety
cycles due to accumulated pore
pressure
It decouples the cyclic and average Increasing number of cycles
loads
The pore pressure accumulation Displacements
depends on the degree of drainage
(BVP)
f(a ,cy ,N)

Cyclic shear strength
The cyclic shear strength of the
soil is the key parameter for
geotechnical design
The maximum wave load is
considered in the bearing
capacity calculations
The storm consists of several
smaller waves
Cyclic loading may reduce the Time
bearing capacity of the soil
Cyclic soil behaviour
DSS
Cyclic laboratory tests

cy
0 a
0
time
Contour diagrams is a convenient way to present the cyclic data

DSS strain contour diagram DSS pore pressure contour diagram
Cyclic Shear Strain (%) Permanent pore pressure / Vertical consolidation stress
0.30
0.30
Cyclic shear stress / Vertical consolidation stress
Cyclic shear stress / Vertical consolidation stress

0.25 0.25
15%
0.20 0.20 1.00
11
0.5%
3
7
19
34
.0
19
48
01
0.
0.
40
0.5
0.
0.
1.
0.2% 0.25
24
2
2
13
14
19
.7
04
20
36
02
0.
0.
0.
12
0.
0.
0.
1.
0.15 0.15
0.1
0.1%
4
19 9
9
2
07
08
10
.8
07
07
07
04
06
07
11
23
44
94
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.05
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.10 0.10
0.075%
0.025
0.05 0.05
0.00 0.00
1 10 100 1000 1 10 100 1000
Number of Cycles Number of Cycles

NC Drammen clay (Andersen 2006)

NC Drammen clay (Andersen 2006)

Input to the NGI model Contour diagrams
TRIAX
TRIAX
TRIAX
Input to the NGI model Load history
Load history for offshore Load parcels
structures
Idealized Hcy,max
history
= cy + av
cy / av=1
Gravity Based Structures (GBS)
GBS on undrained soil subjected to cyclic loading
Geotechnical design topics
Generally governing for overall
dimensions and weight
Geotechnical design topics
Complex loading conditions typically V
combined vertical, horizontal and M
moment (and/or torsional) loading H
Drained or undrained soil behaviour
Bearing capacity verification
Soil strength
Installation verification
Long term settlement
Removal
Depth
Calculation example of a GBS on
undrained soil subjected to cyclic
loading
For most GBS structures on SAND the critical failure mechanism is
a horizontal type of failure and we can therefore used only the
contour diagram for DSS
We need to design for horizontal sliding, by choosing correct
combination of vertical weight and foundation area.
A=/4.202=314m2
W=20 MN =20 000 kN
v= 20000/314 =64 kPa W
The horizontal load H is given by the design load history. The soil
behaviour is defined in the contour diagram.
H
N Hcy/Hmax cy/v
582 0.28 0.042
339 0.38 0.057 H = Hcy + Hav Hcy=3 MN
176 0.48 0.071 Hav=0 Hcy,max=3MN
87 0.56 0.085
35 0.70 0.105
5 0.84 0.125
= cy + av
2 0.92 0.139
av=0
1 0.98 0.146
1 1 0.15
The horizontal force is divided with foundation

area to define cyclic shear stress =Hmax/A
N Hcy/Hm cy/v cy/v cy/v
582 0.14 0.028 0.042 0.07
339 0.19 0.038 0.057 0.10
176 0.24 0.048 0.071 0.12
87 0.28 0.057 0.085 0.14
35 0.35 0.070 0.105 0.18
5 0.42 0.083 0.125 0.21
2 0.46 0.093 0.139 0.23
1 0.49 0.098 0.146 0.24
1 0.5 0.1 0.15 0.25
Pore pressure accumulation - undrained

N Hcy/Hm cy/v cy/v cy/v

582 0.14 0.028 0.042 0.07
339 0.19 0.038 0.057 0.10
176 0.24 0.048 0.071 0.12
87 0.28 0.057 0.085 0.14
35 0.35 0.070 0.105 0.18
5 0.42 0.083 0.125 0.21
2 0.46 0.093 0.139 0.23
1 0.49 0.098 0.146 0.24
1 0.5 0.1 0.15 0.25
Pore pressure accumulation and Neq undrained

Determination of cyclic strength, f,cy/v=0.18 & Number of equivalent cycles Neq=25

Cyclic strength, f,cy/v=0.18

Number of equivalent cycles Neq=25
Cyclic capacity:
Hcy,cap= f,cy*A=0.18*64*314=3.6 MN
= cy + av
Factor of safety, 3.6/3=1.2 = cy +0
GBS on partially drained soil subjected to cyclic
loading
N Hcy/Hm cy/v
582 0.14 0.056
339 0.19 0.076
176 0.24 0.095
87 0.28 0.113
35 0.35 0.140
5 0.42 0.177
2 0.46 0.185
1 0.49 0.195
1 0.5 0.200
Suction anchors
Caisson
Typical components and
geometry
Installation by self
weight and suction 12 m
Transfers environmental Padeye
loads acting on the
structure to the soil
Designed and produced
based on geotechnical
parameters and loads
Mooring line
Suction caissons
Suction anchors history
Nkossa Visund Curlew P-18
1995 1997 1997 1998
Gullfaks Condeep
Platform
22 m
concrete
skirts
Snorre TLP
Concrete skirted anchors
Applications floating structures
Typically the most visible element in a deepwater project

e.g. FPSO (traditional or round), semi-sub, SPAR
Permanent mooring system, may not be unhooked during a storm
Large cyclic environmental loads (for instance 15 MN)
Generally use piled anchors, suction anchors or torpedo anchors.
Drag anchors are uncommon for permanent systems
Anchor type depends on soil type and therefore often location
Suction anchors are often preferred due to lower overall steel cost
and smaller installation spread
Should be based on location-specific data
Note that foundations for a TLP are a special case
Applications floating structures
Semi-sub, SPAR
FPSO
Suction anchors
Applications small seabed structures
Seabed infrastructure can be complex and extensive

Manifolds, PLEMs, PLETs, Templates
Significant downwards vertical component
Also combination of horizontal loads and moments
Cyclic environmental component generally not governing
Seismic loading can be an issue
Generally use mudmats, buckets or caissons to give overall capacity
Foundations also need to account for settlements
Foundation type will vary with soil type (and location)
May not be based on site-specific data
Applications small seabed structures
Skirted shallow foundations
Caisson foundations
Applications pipelines and risers
Less visible, but often numerous and long!

Anchors may be used for pipeline initiation during installation
Suction/gravity anchors also used along pipeline route to provide
restraint, for instance around corners
Anchors used for riser hold-down and hold-back
MWA anchors
Typically smaller anchors or skirted mudmats, with smaller
environmental loads (500 2000 kN)
Typically based on non location-specific data
Pipelines and risers themselves also need geotechnical design!
Applications pipelines and risers
Many different applications for suction anchors!
Applications - Jacket with buckets for
offshore wind
Jacket structure:
Height of 50 to 60 m
Footprint about 25x25x25
Buckets:
D = 8 to 10 m
H = 6 to 7 m
T = 3
Key issues:
Foundation capacities
Damping and over all stiffness
Suction anchors/caissons
Suction anchors are well suited to a range of soil types from soft clay to dense
sand, but design and installation process is more complicated in layered soils
Typical design process
Evaluation of soil parameters for design
Cyclic soil strength
Configuration of embedded chain to give loads on padeye
Evaluation of overall capacity for governing padeye load
Installation resistance and required underpressure
Design methods well documented in DNV-RP-E303
Approach is based on theory validated with model tests
Suction anchors soil parameters
A complete design requires a full range of soil input data,

including:
Anchor-specific CPTUs and boreholes across site to get sufficient
samples for testing
Classification tests in all layers
CAUC and CAUE triaxial tests
Direct Simple Shear (DSS) tests
Cyclic CAU triaxial and DSS tests
Tests on remoulded interface material (thixotropy, CRS, DSS)
All parameters feed directly into design and give an optimised result
and lowest possible foundation cost
Suction anchors cyclic strength
Cyclic soil strength especially important for anchor design

Suite of cyclic tests generally used for a new site in order to
evaluate contours for design, often with reference to tests in NGIs
database
Use of contours requires representative storm load history,
typically over several hours
Strain accumulation generally applied in undrained clay soils to
provide the equivalent number of cycles to failure and therefore
the cyclic undrained strength for compression, extension and DSS
Pore pressure accumulation used for sand in cases where
dissipation may occur during the load history (partial drainage)
Most soils will be undrained during one load cycle for offshore
anchors
Suction anchors cyclic strength
Failure mechanism and cyclic
loading of suction anchor
Anchors chain configuration
Loads supplied at seabed

Need to derive load on anchor at padeye
Account for soil variability with low and high estimate
(high estimate will give larger vertical component,
low estimate will give larger horizontal component)
Key decision on where to apply load and material
factors
NGI uses in-house software ChainConfig
For clays, approach based on Vivatrat et al (1982)
For sands, NGI has developed own approach based
on model test results at Fredrikshavn in Denmark
Suction anchors holding capacity
Holding capacity will determine the overall anchor geometry (note

that installation needs to be feasible!)
Accurate prediction of capacity is key to a successful design
Earlier, many designs used relatively simple methods based on
upper bound formulations, based on an assumed failure
mechanism
However, FEA remains the benchmark for detailed design
NGI has developed an FE code called Bifurc which is designed
specifically for suction anchor design
Pseudo-3D plane strain model calibrated against a full 3D model
Results have been benchmarked in a JIP and published in 2005
Allows efficient and accurate assessment of anchor capacity
Many variables useful to
perform parametric study
Current industry practice
FEA for suction anchor design
15 MN
But can be time-consuming and expensive to

perform 3D analyses for all possible cases
Fast analysis and built in post-processor
Calibrated against 3D model,
validated in JIP
Suction anchors verification
Model testing at Lysaker, near Oslo
Calculated Measured
Suction anchors installation
Penetration resistance determines required underpressure

and wall thickness
<100 kPa to >1000 kPa depending on soil
For clay soils, main input to calculation is remoulded strength
of soil. More difficult to assess in stiff low plasticity soils (e.g.
North Sea)
Generally easier to assess in softer high plasticity soils
typically found at many deepwater site
Will be affected by ring stiffeners and bulkhead stiffeners
Required Allowable
suction suction
Required suction is
value needed to
penetrate anchor
Allowed suction is
maximum to prevent
failure of soil plug
inside anchor
Suction anchors may also be installed in sand

For sand sites, resistance is typically based on CPTU
formulations
Resistance is reduced due to passive water flow and
corresponding reduction in effective stresses
More of a challenge in layered soils especially clay over
sand
Water flow is reduced and resistance in sand can be very high
NGI has developed project specific water-supply systems in
order to mitigate the barrier effect caused by overlying clay
Shelley suction anchors in layered soil,
NGI designed water-flow system
System reduced resistance in sand layers
Similar approach used for
Huntington anchors
Torpedo anchors
Before test
Torpedo-shaped steel structures
Gravity installed (free-fall under
water)
W = 80 150 tons; L = 10 20 m
Generally used in soft soils
After penetration / retrieval
Capacity typically 5 10 W
Cost efficient and easy to handle
Used for floating O&G platforms
Drop test performed at Troll Field
Torpedo anchors - installation
Back-calculation of Troll tests
Torpedo anchors - installation
Good predictions
Drag Anchors
Vryhof anchor manual

http://www.vryhof.com/anchor_manual.pdf
Drag Anchors
The holding capacity of the anchor can then be described as a
combination of the following parameters: Chain mooring line
Anchor weight (A)
The weight of the soil in the failure wedge (B).
The friction of the soil in the failure wedge along fracture
lines (C).
Friction between fluke surface and soil (fluke area) (D).
The bearing capacity of shank and mooring line (E).
The friction of the mooring line in and on the soil (E). Wire rope mooring line
Vryhof anchor manual

http://www.vryhof.com/anchor_manual.pdf
Methods for predicting anchor trajectory and
capacity (in clay)
Capacity of a drag anchor relates to its orientation and depth below
the seabed after installation, therefore prediction of the anchor
trajectory is paramount.
Methods for predicting trajectory fall into:
- Empirical (NCEL, 1987, Vryhof Anchors, 1999)
- Limit equilibrium (Stewart Technology Associates 1995;
Neubecker & Randolph, 1996b; Dahlberg, 1998).
- Plastic limit analysis (Bransby & ONeill, 1999).
- Advanced numerical methods large effort to track trajectory,
but rather used to check estimates at discrete points in the
trajectory (Rowe & Davies, 1982).
Overall, there are many established methods of assessing the anchor
trajectory and capacity
Thank you!
New engineering technologies
& dedicated employees
for better solutions!
Welcome to FORCE
Visit us at forcetechnology.com
General about Regulations
The design of Jackets is normally done according to

international or national regulations imposed by the
national authorities.
Most used standards in Offshore Industry
NORSOK
ISO
API
European standards: CEN/EN
DNV
IMO
The main aim of the regulation is focus on
Risk Reduction
Achieve minimum levels for health, safety and environment risk regardless of cost.
The risk shall be reduced to the extend possible if it can be done without
unreasonable cost or inconvenience (disproportion between involved resource and
achieved reduction of risk).
To help in this evaluation two principles are applied:
ALARP (As Low As Reasonably Possible) principle
BAT (Best Available Technology) principle

As Low As Reasonably Possible illustration:

To meet those requirements the parties (Operator, engineering companies, contractors)

shall:
Identify necessary information for planning

Plan the activities in accordance to stipulated objectives and requirements
Integrate HSE plan in all activities
Identified and made available all resources necessary to carry out the activities:
Ensure sufficient manning
Ensure and document competence
Identify recognized method and ability to perform the task
In all situation documentation is required.
Risk Reduction = Technical Safety
The Accidental Limit State address load cases with low probability.
Therefore no good statistical data are available and large
uncertainties characterize those events.
Structures shall be designed to reduce the risk of collapse: the
design shall be robust.
ISO 19902 (Definition)

robustness
ability of a structure to withstand events with a reasonable
likelihood of occurring without being damaged to an extent
disproportionate to the cause.
Risk Reduction = Technical Safety
ISO 19902 Robustness

A structure shall incorporate robustness through consideration of the effects of
all hazards and their probabilities of occurrence, to ensure that consequent
damage is not disproportionate to the cause.
In such cases, the structural integrity in the damaged state shall be sufficient
to allow a process system close down and a safe evacuation
Robustness is achieved by either
a) designing the structure in such a way that any single load bearing component
exposed to hazard can become incapable of carrying its normal design actions
without causing collapse of the structure or any significant part of it,
or
b) ensuring (by design or by protective measures) that no critical component
exposed to hazard can be made ineffective,
or
c) a combination of a) and b), above.
Risk Reduction / Technical Safety
NORSOK N-001: Integrity of offshore structures

4.7 Robustness assessment
Load bearing structures shall have sufficient robustness to prevent

that local damage or failure gives unacceptable consequences.
Checking robustness covers an evaluation of the vulnerability of a structure or
a maritime system in addition to the ALS check for accidental loads as described
in a risk analysis. It should include an evaluation of the vulnerability of the
structure or the maritime system for:
Local errors in design, fabrication and operation,
Damages or human errors in installation and operation.
It is normally assumed that such errors and damages are restricted to a local
area, or to a single event. This check is not intended to cover fundamental or
systematic failures in the design, fabrication or operation.
Basis for check of local damage and failure of structures shall be based on the
ALS principle as stated in 6.2. All maritime systems shall be categorized with
regards to safety criticality, redundancy and robustness.
Risk Reduction / Technical Safety
General recommendations to achieve robustness:
Avoid weak elements in the structure in particular the joints
Choose material with sufficient toughness
Avoid brittle behavior of structurally critical components
Locate critical components in a not vulnerable positions
Those recommendations have to be evaluated in relation with the actual hazard

Classification of hazards
When a hazard is identified it shall be evaluated and the consequences calculated.

1. Definition of a hazard
2. Is it possible to avoid by operational means ?
3. Is it possible to minimize the effect by additional constrain or barriers?
4. If no=> Design the structure to resist
5. Calculation of probability (Ph)
6. Ph10-2 => Ultimate Limit State
7. 10-2 > Ph 10-4 => Accidental Limit State
8. 10-4 > Ph => Hazard may be ignored for the design
9. Resistance calculation for the hazard
10. If no damage => OK
11. If damaged => check Post Damage Condition.
Comment on point 8: Probability less than 10-4

Hazard may be ignored but:
When a hazardous event occurs the structure shall not be damaged
disproportionally to the original cause
Example:
A 300 000 T tanker hit a jacket => full collapse. Considered acceptable
A small submarine hit a brace => Jacket shall remain.
(A German submarine hit the jacket Oseberg on March 6th 1988 with only local
damage of the brace)
Typical Hazards:
Accidental and Abnormal (ALS)
Accidental:
1. Vessel Impact
2. Dropped objects
3. Swinging loads
4. Fire (jet fire & pool fire)
5. Explosion
Vessel Impact simulation
Accidental pool fire
Fire simulation
Typical Hazards:
Accidental and Abnormal (ALS)
Abnormal Environmental Condition:

1. Wave, wind, current with 10.000, years return
period
2. Earthquake with 10.000, years return period
3. Wave in Deck
4. Sudden Drop
Abnormal wave event
Design Criteria
During the hazard event:

Structure may be deformed
No progressive collapse
After the event the requirement for damage tolerance:

1. Remain intact for a period sufficient to evacuate and close the installation
2. Remain intact until repair
3. Remain fit for purpose
The used code and the Operator decide which tolerance level and the conditions the
structure shall sustain after the incident.
F. E.:
ISO 19902 specifies a minimum sea state corresponding to 1 year return period
for a duration of 2 times the time necessary for repair.
NORSOK specifies 100 year return period environmental condition regardless of
the duration.
The Operator may have its own more stringent requirement.
Design Criteria
The method of analysis is generally based on non-linear theory.
Local plasticity is accepted.
The maximum strain is given in the code and depends on
1. Material
2. Model (f.e. mesh size)

Required Information
How is the process to design for ALS?
1. The national authorities eventually imposes a code (ISO, API, NORSOK, )

2. Operator defines overall design specifications for the platform.
3. Operator perform a Quantitative Risk Assessment (QRA)
4. Design Contractor extract the Design Accidental Loads (DAL)
5. Structure calculations are based on: Loads from DAL
Quantitative Risk Assessment (QRA)
The QRA is a general document which presents the major risk for the specific platform.
It is based on the actual platform lay-out, the intended production rate, the operational
conditions, the export and import systems, the access philosophy.
Design Accidental Loads (DAL)
The DAL is a document where the design accidental loads are described. It is extracted
from the QRA.
It defines the hazards the platform shall be designed for: f.e. vessel size, energy, blast
pressure etc.
This is the document the structural engineer will use as input for his assessment.
Example Vessel Impact
DAL input gives
Structural Engineer define impact

locations
Methodology
The method used in the assessment of ALS loading cases depends on the
event and the input provided in the DAL.
Most common input
1. Vessel Impact: vessel displacement + velocity energy
2. Dropped objects: object mass + height energy
3. Swinging loads: object mass + velocity energy
4. Fire (jet fire & pool fire): intensity (Watt/m2) + duration
5. Explosion: Static pressure or function pressure versus time
6. Environmental10.000, years return period: Wave height and period
7. Earthquake 10.000, years return period: Response spectrum or ground
acceleration versus time
8. Wave in Deck: wave data + deck inundation level
9. Sudden Drop: height of the drop
Methodology
Calculation based on energy absorption:

1. Local deformation
2. Global deformation
3. Damping
4. Distribution between different objects
The energy absorption is based on relatively coarse model

Based on nominal or characteristic values (depending of code)
Therefore the estimate shall be evaluate with care and include robustness:
The material may have lower properties
The incident may not be as the ideal one used in the calculation
The calculations may not cover all possible incident, locations etc.
Example from Boat Impact
Boat impact Survival from 35/30MJ

legs and 28/22MJ brace
Survival 100-yr environmental

condition
Dimensioning of legs and braces above

in the splash zone
Methodology
Case Fire: the calculations include 2 steps

1. Calculation of radiation effect on the structure: steel temperature
2. Structural calculation: including the reduction of the material properties for
the given temperature (normally only dead weight is accounted for).
Methodology
Case Explosion: 2 possibilities

1. Static analysis: conservative
2. Dynamic analysis: less demanding for the structure but need more detailed
input data.
Methodology
Case 10.000, year return period environmental wave

Same procedure as for ULS. Load factor is lower.
Methodology
Methodology
Case Wave in deck:

For the given wave and inundation level the load on the deck and jacket shall be
determined:
1. Closed formulas may be found in API or DNV. May be conservative, cover not all
cases, give only global load for global jacket check
2. CFD analysis: account for geometry, give local and global loads
When the loads are defined, a non linear dynamic analysis is performed in time domain.
Methodology
Case Sudden Drop (special case of earthquake: only in vertical direction):

Impose vertical fall of X mm
Dynamic analysis.
0
Vertical Displacment
-50
-100
Node
(mm)
-150 10007590
Node
-200 10005770
-250 Node
10003770
-300
0 5 10 15
Time (sec)
Accidental actions
Fire design
Aldina Santiago
Advanced Topics on the Design of Offshore Structures Acidental actions: Fire L3.13 2
SUMMARY
Requirements of fire safety on offshore structures
Fire curves in offshore environmental
Structural fire design
Material properties at elevated temperatures
Strategies to establish the fire resistance - Simple calculation methods
Mechanical loading and loading combinations
Classification of the cross section
Degree of utilization / critical temperature
Increase o temperature in protected/unprotected steel cross sections
Use SCM without the concept of critical temperature
Fire resistance of tubular steel members
Fire resistance of tubular joints
http://www.euractiv.com/section/energy/news/bp-to-pay-record-fine-for-deepwater-horizon-oil-spill/
SEQUENCE OF FIRE DESIGN
loading
Carregamento
Carregamento
Carregamento
Carregamento
Carregamento
Carregamento

PilaresPilaresPilares
Pilares
Steel
Pilares Pilares
metlicos columns
metlicos
metlicos
metlicos
tempo time
tempo tempo
tempo metlicos metlicos
1.
1:Ignition
Ignio 1: Ignio
1: 2: 2.
Ignio
1: Ignio tempo
Thermal
Aces
2: 2: actions
tempo
trmicas
2: Aces
Aces
Aces trmicas
trmicas
trmicas 3.3:
3: Aces Mechanical
mecnicas
3: Aces
Aces
3: Aces loadings
mecnicas
mecnicas
mecnicas
1: Ignio 2: Aces
1: Ignio trmicas
(thermal
2: Aces 3: Aces
loadings)
trmicas mecnicas
3: Aces mecnicas
R R R
R
R R
tempo tempo
tempo
tempo
4: Comportamento
4: Comportamento
4: Comportamento
4: Comportamento tempo
5: 5: tempo
5: Comportamento
5: Comportamento
Comportamento
Comportamento 6: Colapso6: Colapso
6: Colapso
6: Colapso
4.4:Thermal response 5:5.Comportamento
Comportamento Mechanical response 6. Possibility of collapse
4:trmico
Comportamento
trmico
trmico
trmico 5:
mecnico mecnico6: Colapso
Comportamento
mecnico
mecnico 6: Colapso
eventual eventual
eventual
eventual
trmicotrmico mecnico
mecnico eventual
eventual

SUMMARY
REQUIREMENTS OF FIRE SAFETY

Fire classification: The fire resistance of construction components are
classified in different fire resistance classes (or combinations of those). The
different fire resistance classes specify different performance criteria:
R Load bearing capacity
E Integrity
I Insulation
Insulation (I)
Load bearing capacity (R)
ex.: fire doors
ex.: beams, columns
Integrity (E)
ex.: walls, doors

REQUIREMENTS OF FIRE SAFETY
Fire classification
Normally the fire resistance classification is followed by as a time limit in
minutes 15, 30, 45, 60, 90, 120, 180, 240, or 360 which shows the time the
performance criteria is fulfilled during a standardized fire test ISO 834.
With the hydrocarbon fire exposure curve the same criteria should apply,
however the reference to this specific curve should be identified by the
letters "HC or H instead of R.
Load bearing capacity (R)

ex.: beams, columns

SUMMARY
Sequence of fire events
Institute
for Sustainability and Innovation in Structural Engineering
FIRE CURVES Physically based thermal actions. They

are used in performance based design
Nominal curves: analytical functions that provide the evolution of the gas temperature as a
function of time. They are considered as conventional and arbitrary. Theses curves are a
poor representation of reality as they are completely independent from conditions that will
govern a real fire. They are used in a prescriptive regulatory environmental.

FIRE CURVES
Standard fire curve (ISO 834 fire curve): Gas Temperature (C)
1200 Hydrocarbon fire
is used to represent a fully developed fire in
a compartment. It is based on the burning 1000
ISO 834
rate of the materials that are found in 800
general building materials and contents 600
(timber, cellulosic material). In offshore 400
platform it could be considered for the 200
Time (sec)
accommodations:
0 1200 2400 3600
g 20 345 log 8t 1
Hidrocarbon fire curve: The burning rates for certain materials e.g. petrol gas,
chemicals etc, are much higher than the rate at which for instance, timber would
burn. The hydrocarbon curve is applied where petroleum fires might occur, i.e.
car fuel tanks, petrol or oil tankers, certain chemical tankers, offshore platforms, etc:
20 1080(1 0,3250,167 t 0,675e 2,5t )

SUMMARY
Institute
STRUCTURAL FIRE DESIGN
Recommended Practice DNV-RP-C204

(Chapter 5): Assessment of the fire load effect
and mechanical response should be based
upon the provisions given in Eurocode 3 Part
1.2.
Assessment of ultimate strength resistance is not

needed if the maximum steel temperature is below
400C, but deformation criteria may have to be
checked for impairment of main safety functions.

Project design
Prescritive rules Performance based design

(Thermal actions given by nominal fire) (Physically based thermal actions)
Selection of simple or advanced fire

Member Analysis of part Analysis of
development models
Analysis of the structure entire structure
Calculation of Calculation of Selection of Member Analysis of part Analysis of

mechanical mechanical mechanical analysis of the structure entire structure
actions at actions at actions.
boundaries boundaries Calculation of Calculation of Selection
. mechanical mechanical of
actions at actions at mechanical
Advanced boundaries boundaries actions
Tabulated Simple calculation calculation .
values models (if available) models
Simple calculation Advanced calculation

models (if available) models
Simple calculation
models

SIMPLE CALCULATION MODELS vs ADVANCED CALCULATION

MODELS
Simple calculation models: Simple thermal and mechanical models are based on
simplifying assumptions. For example: i) nominal fire curve are used; ii) temperature is
assumed to be uniform uniform throughout the cross-section; iii) stability of whole structure is
base on the behaviour of individual members; iv) indirect fire actions are not accounted,
Advanced calculation models: DNV and EC3-1-2 allow the use of advanced calculation
models. These models are related to the calculation of the behaviour of the structure.
Generalities Thermal analysis

(heat transfer
analysis)
Mechanical analysis
(behaviour of the Validation
structure)
Computer programs are available with different features of the advanced calculation models.

ADVANCED CALCULATION MODELS

Generalities:
Modeling of the behavior of elements, part of the

structure or the entire structure in a fire situation
Any thermal loading Advanced calculation models based on

Finite element methods
Real
properties of
the material


Models for mechanical analysis Structural analysis
Based on the principles
Mechanical analysis Thermal stress and strains
of the theory of the
mechanics of structures Increase of temperature and gradient
of temperature
Material non-linearities
Deformation at SLS
Properties dependent on temperature;
For the stress-strain relationship of EC3-1-2,
creep does not have to be explicitly considered.
Geometrical non-linearities

geometrical imperfections;
For single columns ex.:


Validation
Advanced calculation
Experimental results
models
Temperature;
Deformations;
Fire resistance time;
Forces;
Critical parameters Strain
Material properties as much rigorous as possible;

Sensitivity analysis;
Selection of the best finite element for the studied problem;
Selection of the dimension of finite element mesh, establishing an adequate balance
between accuracy of results and computational effort;
Determination of adequate values of initial geometric imperfections.

SUMMARY
Institute
MATERIAL PROPERTIES
Mechanical properties
Characteristic value at ambient temperature
, = /, Partial factor for the relevant material property, for the fire
situation (=1.0)
Reduction factor for a mechanical property dependent of the temperature
Thermal properties
Material properties at elevated temperature
, /,
, =
, ,

MATERIAL PROPERTIES
Thermal properties of carbon steels
Thermal condutivity(W/mK)
Specific heat (J/kgK)
60 5000
50
4000
40
Carbon steel 3000
30
2000 Carbon steel
20
10 1000
Temp. (C) Temp. (C)
0 200 400 600 800 1000 1200 0 200 400 600 800 1000 1200

MATERIAL PROPERTIES
Thermal expansion DL/L:
Coefficient of thermal expansion to 4,5 Coeff. of expansion /C (x 10-6)

introduce in FE program: 4,0
3,5

= 3,0

2,5
2,0
Steel thermal expansion stops during
crystal structure change in the range of 1,5
700-800C. 1,0
0,5
Temp. (C)
0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 900
MATERIAL PROPERTIES Mechanical properties of carbon steels

MATERIAL PROPERTIES
stress-strain relationship of carbon steel at elevated temperatures
Stress (N/mm2)
300
20C
250 200C Steel softens progressively from
300C 100-200C up.
200 400C
Only 23% of ambient-temperature
500C
strength remains at 700C.
150
600C At 800C strength reduced to 11%
100 and at 900C to 6%.
700C Melts at about 1500C.

50
800C
0
0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0

DEGRADATION OF STEEL STRENGTH AND STIFFNESS

% of normal value
Strength and stiffness
100 Effective yield strength reductions very similar for
mild structural steels
(at 2% strain)
80
60
40
20 Elastic modulus
Temperature (C)
0 300 600 900 1200

MATERIAL PROPERTIES
Reduction factors for stress-

strain relationship of carbon
steel at elevated temperature

MATERIAL PROPERTIES
Stress-strain model of carbon steel at elevated temperatures to introduce
in FE program:
= (1 +
True stress - logarithmic strains are needed:

= ln 1 +

5.0E+08
20C 100C 200C 300C 400C
500C 600C 700C 800C
4.0E+08
true [N/m2]
3.0E+08
2.0E+08
1.0E+08
0.0E+00
0.000 0.010 0.020 0.030 0.040
lnpl

SUMMARY
Institute
STRATEGIES TO ESTABLISH THE FIRE RESISTANCE

Using prescritive rules (nominal curves):
R, E
Eurocodes allow fire resistance to be
established in any of 3 domains:
Time: tfi.d > tfi.requ Rfi,d
2 Efi,d
Load resistance: Rfi.d.t > Efi.d.t
1
Temperature: cr.d > d
t fi,requ t fi,d t
Calculate design time and compare with
required time (H30, H45, ). Usually used
with advanced calculation models. d
Feasible by hand calculation. Find reduced cr,d

resistance at design temperature.
3
Most usual simple method. Find critical
temperature for loading, compare with design t
temperature.

STRATEGIES TO ESTABLISH THE FIRE RESISTANCE

Using performance based design (heating-cooling curves):
R, E
Rfi,d
Efi,d
Eurocodes allow fire resistance to be
established in any of 2 domains:
Load resistance: Rfi.d.t > Efi.d.t t
Temperature: cr.d > d

cr,d

ESTABLISHING THE FIRE RESISTANCE

Simple calculation methods:
FIRE RESISTANCE STEEL TEMPERATURE
Action in fire limit state Efi.d.t Section Factor Am/V
Classify member
Iterate temp./time until
d > cr.d at tfi.d
Resistance at 20C by fire rules
Rfi.d.20
Fire resistance
(H30, H60, )
Degree of utilisation, m0
tfi.requ
Critical temperature, cr.d
(developed based on the standard fire curve)

SUMMARY
Institute
MECHANICAL LOADING AND LOADING COMBINATION

Accidental loading combination, EN 1990:
.. = . + + + . . + . .

. - characteristic value of variable action 1;

. - characteristic value of variable action i;
. characteristic value of permanente action j;
design value of a pre-stressing loading (if available);
- design value of indirect actions;
. - factors for frequent values of variable actions;
. - factors for quasi-static values of variable actions.
EC3-1-2 indicates that for analysis of standard fire resistance, an analysis by elements is
sufficient - indirect actions are not considered.

Recommended values to coefficient of combination EC0 :


Load reduction factor in fire:
Either .. E fi.d .t
fi Relative to ambient-temperature
design resistance
Rd
Or more E fi.d .t
fi
Relative to ambient-temperature
usefully.. design load (more conservative)
Ed
GAGk 1.1Qk .1
fi
G Gk Q .1Qk .1

MECHANICAL LOADING AND LOADING COMBINATIONS

Partial factors:
Ambient temperature strength design
G = 1,35 Permanent loads;

Q.1 = 1,5 Combination factor; variable loads
In Fire limit state
GA = 1,0 Permanent loads; accidental design situations

0,2 < 1.1 < 0.9 Combination factor; variable loads, offices
Qk.1/Gk 1 2 3 4
fi 0,53 0,46 0,43 0,41

(assuming 1.1 = 0.5)
Simplificao =0.65, except para a sobrecarga com categoria de carga E

(EN 1991-1-1) para a qual se usa 0.7.

SUMMARY
Institute
CLASSIFICATION OF CROSS-SECTION
The tendency for the plates of the cross section

profiles for bending can limit the resistance to
compression and / or bending due to premature local
buckling.
DNV (also EC3) Cross sections of beams are

divided into different types dependent of their ability
to develop plastic
Classes depends on the cross

section of the slenderness of each
plate (c / t) of the material class
and applied loads (stress
distribution)

At ambient temperature (DNV and EC3):
Class I Cross sections that can form a plastic
M Moment-rotation curves
fy hinge with the rotation capacity required for
Mpl plastic analysis;
Mel I Class II Cross sections that can develop their
II fy plastic moment resistance, but have limited
III rotation capacity;
fy
Class III Cross sections where the calculated
IV stress in the extreme compression fibre of the
f < fy steel member can reach its yield strength, but
f/fpl local buckling is liable to prevent development
of the plastic moment resistance;
Class IV Cross sections where it is necessary
to make explicit allowances for the effects of
local buckling when determining their moment
resistance or compression resistance .

At ambient temperature (DNV):
Element Class I Class II Class III
Flange in compression c/tf=10e c/tf=11e c/tf=15e

(rolled)
Flange in compression c/tf=9e c/tf=10e c/tf=14e
(welded)
Compressed web d/tw=72e d/tw=83e d/tw=124e
Web in bending d/tw=33e d/tw=38e d/tw=42e
Circular hollow d - external diameter

d/tp=50e2 d/tp=70e2 d/tp=90e2
sections tp - thickness
235 NV steel grade NV-NS NV-27 NV-32 NV-36 NV-40 NV-420 NV-460 NV-500 NV-550
e
fy
1 0.94 0.86 0.81 0.78 0.75 0.72 0.69 0.65
NOTE: Valid for rectangular hollow sections (RHS) where h is the height of the profile

At elevated temperatures (DNV):
Cross-sections subjected to plastic deformations shall satisfy compactness
requirements, so Class I and Class II should be considered.
If previous criterion is not complied (Class III or Class IV), the load bearing capacity
will be reduced significantly after the onset of buckling. A conservative approach is to
remove the member from further analysis.
Compactness requirements for Class I and Class II could be disregarded if advanced

calculation methods are used.

At elevated temperatures (EC3): Element Class 1 Class 2 Class 3
Flange c/tf=10e c/tf=11e c/tf=15e

Classified using e modified for high
temperature material properties.
Compressed web d/tw=72e d/tw=83e d/tw=124e
Flange & web proportions

compared with [e x factor from 5.3.1
in EC3 Part 1-1], where: Web in bending d/tw=33e d/tw=38e d/tw=42e
, , ,
= = = = .
, , , ,
EN 1993-1-2 suggests that , , be replaced by 0.85.

SUMMARY
Institute
DEGREE OF UTILIZATION
is the design loading of a member in fire,

E fi.d
as a proportion of its resistance at ambient temperature m0
(t=0) but with material safety factors for the fire limit state. R fi.d .0
M . fi can be used when no chance of overall or lateral-torsional

m0 fi buckling
conservative if fi calculated as proportion of design loading
M1 at ambient temperature.
For steel, material partial safety factors M1=1,0 M.fi=1,0
0.013.

CRITICAL TEMPERATURE, cr
800
Critical Temperature (C)
700 Class 1, 2, 3
600 sections
500
Class 4 sections
400
300
1
cr 39 ,19 ln 1 482
200
0 ,9674 m 3 ,833
0
100
Degree of Utilisation m0
0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1
Non-slender sections (Classes 1, 2, 3) treated the same.
Based on Standard Fire Test. Simple members only.
Slender (Class 4) sections treated conservatively (350C).

SUMMARY
Institute
TEMPERATURE INCREASE OF UNPROTECTED STEEL

Temperature after 30 min. of ISO 834 fire: steel vs concrete:
STEEL (IPE 300) CONCRETE (30x30 cm2)
DT = 22 C DT = 794 C


Temperature increase in time step Dt:
Fire
Steel
temperature
1 Am temperature
D a.t ksh hnet .d Dt
ca a V
Steel
Heat flux hnet.d has 2 parts:
Radiation:

hnet .r 0 ,567 * 10 8e res r 273 m 273
4 4

Convection: Gas temperature obtained from hydrocarbon
hnet ,c c g m
fire curve
= 50 W/m2K


Section factor Am/V unprotected steel members:
Am V
D a.t k sh hnet .d Dt
ca a
Am exposed area P l P exposed perimeter
= = = =
V Volum of element Al A area s/r
P-high
P-low
A -low
A -high
Am
-high Am
V -low
V
Fast heating
Fire Fire Slow heating


Section factor Am/V unprotected steel members:
b
perimeter exposed perimeter 2(b+h)

c/s area c/s area c/s area
Note: for commercial profiles, tables with section factor are available


Section factor Am/V inherently protected steel members:
exposed perimeter exposed plate exposed flange

Total c/s area Total c/s area Total c/s area

TEMPERATURE INCREASE OF PROTECTED STEEL

Correction factor for the shadow effect
- I - section: ksh = 0.9 [Am/V]b / [Am/V]
- other cases: ksh = [Am/V]b / [Am/V]
- convex shape (circular and rectangular sections): ksh = 1
being [Am/V]b - box value of the section factor


Fire
Some heat stored in protection layer.
temperature
Steel
Heat stored in protection layer relative temperature
to heat stored in steel
cp p Ap
f dp
ca a V Steel
Protection
Temperature rise of steel in time increment Dt dp
p / d p Ap
g .t a .t Dt ef / 10 1D g .t
1
D a .t
ca a V 1 f / 3


Section factor Ap/V protected steel members:
b
Steel perimeter inner perimeter of board 2(b+h)

steel c/s area steel c/s area c/s area

TEMPERATURE INCREASE OF STEEL PROFILES

Example 1: Consider a fire resistance of 60 min. Calculate the
corresponding temperature of a circular hollow section CHS 508 x 16
under two different fire curves: ISO 834 and hydrocarbon
16 mm
1 Am
D a.t ksh hnet .d Dt
ca a V
508 mm
ksh = 1 (circular section)
Am 1
62.5 / m
V t
- thermal conductivity of steel = time dependent;

- unit mass of steel = 7850 kg/m3
- specific heat of steel: time dependent


1200
1100
1000
900
800
(C)
700
600
500
400 Hydrocarbon Fire Curve
300 Unprotected CHS 50816_Hydrocarbon Fire Curve
200 ISO 834
100
Unprotected CHS 50816_ISO 834
0
0 20 40 60 80 100 120
t (min)
After 60 min., the cross-section exposed to a hidrocarb. fire curve has a

temperature = 1100C

Protecting with cement with vermiculite with the following properties:
- thermal conductivity of the fire protection = 0.12 W/mK;
- unit mass of the fire protection = 350 kg/m3
- specific heat of the fire protection = 1200 J/kGK
- 10 mm of fire
protection is needed
to reach H60!

Acknowledgments
This lecture was prepared for the Edition 1 of the Advanced Topics on the
Design of Offshore Structures (November 2016) by ALDINA SANTIAGO
and HELDER CRAVEIRO (UC).
This powerpoint is part of the materials developed for the Advanced Topics on the Design of
www.cmm.pt

Accidental actions
Fire design
Aldina Santiago
SUMMARY
Institute

Classify member
Calculate temp.qd at tfi.requ
(without the concept of qcr)
Calculate resistance at qt.fi,requ
Fire resistance
Iterate Rq.fi until Efi.d.t = Rq.fi (H30, H60, )
tfi.requ

SUMMARY
FIRE RESISTANCE
Tension members
The design resistance of a tension member with uniform temperature qa is:

% of normal value
Nfi,q,Rd = ky,q A fy / gM,fi 100 Effective yield strength
80
or: 60
Nfi,q,Rd = ky,q NRd / [gM0 / gM,fi] 40
20
Being: 0 300 600 900 1200

gM0 - (=1.0) the partial factor for the relevant material property. Temperature (C)
gM,fi (=1.0) the partial factor for the relevant material property, for the fire situation.

FIRE RESISTANCE
Compression members with class 1, 2 or 3 cross-sections (EC3)
The design resistance of a compression member with uniform temperature qa is:
1
N b. fi.t .Rd fi Ak y.q . max f y
g M . fi
being:
q .max k y .q .max / k E .q .max
q
1
2

1 q q2
Imperfection parameter (EC3): 0,65 235 / fy (curves a, b, c, d, a0)
(DNV): 0,5
Non-dimensional slenderness: q LT k y.q / k E .q

FIRE RESISTANCE
Compression members with class 1, 2 or 3 cross-sections (DNV)
The design resistance of a compression member with uniform temperature qa is:
fi 1
N b. fi.t .Rd Ak y.q . max f y
g
1,2 M . fi
Empirical correction factor of 1.2 is used to allow for uncertainties.

FIRE RESISTANCE
Laterally restrained beams with class 1, 2 or 3 cross-sections
The design moment resistance of a cross-section with a uniform temperature q:
Bending Resistance
fy
M fi.q .Rd W pl k y.q
g M . fi
(for class 3, Wel should be used instead of Wpl)
Shear Resistance
Av fy
V fi.t .Rd k y.q
g M . fi
3

FIRE RESISTANCE
Laterally restrained beams with class 1, 2 or 3 cross-sections
The design moment resistance of a cross-section with a non-uniform temperature:
Bending Resistance
g 1
M fi.t .Rd M Rd k y.q M .0
g M . fi 1 2

Shear Resistance
g 1
V fi.t .Rd VRd k y.q .web M .0
g M . fi 1 2

Adaptation factors - beam with concrete slab on top flange:

k1=1,0 for uniform c/s temperature, 0,7 for slab on top flange.
Temp
k2=0,85 at supports of statically indeterminate beam, 1,0 for all
other cases (temperature distribution along beam).
FIRE RESISTANCE
Laterally unrestrained beams with class 1, 2 or 3 cross-sections (EC3)
Design lateral torsional buckling resistance moment of a laterally unrestrained beam at

a max. temperature in the compression flange qa,com is:

... = , ..
.
being:
LT.fi the reduction factor for lateral-torsional
buckling in the fire design situation:
Imperfection parameter (EC3): 0,65 235 / fy (curves a, b, c, d, a0)
(DNV): 0,5
Non-dimensional slenderness:
FIRE RESISTANCE
Laterally unrestrained beams (DNV)
In the Load Resistance domain lateral-torsional buckling capacity at compression

flange maximum temperature qa.com is:
LT . fi 1
M b . fi.t .Rd W pl . y k y .q .com f y
1,2 g M . fi
Empirical correction factor of 1.2 is used to allow for uncertainties

FIRE RESISTANCE
Design buckling resistance Rfi,t,d at time t of a member subject to combined
bending and axial compression should be verified by satisfying following
expressions (class 1 or 2 cross-section):
Without lateral-torsional buckling:
N fi. Ed k y M y . fi. Ed k z M z . fi. Ed

1
k y .q f y k y .q f y k y .q f y
min . fi A W pl , y W pl , z
g M . fi g M . fi g M . fi
With lateral-torsional buckling:
N fi. Ed k LT M y . fi. Ed k z M z . fi. Ed

1
k y .q f y k y .q f y k y .q f y
z . fi A LT . fiW pl , y W pl , z
For class 3 cross-section, plastic cross-section properties should be replaced by

elastic cross-section
Institute properties.
FIRE RESISTANCE
y N fi. Ed
ky 1 3
k y .q f y
y. fi A y 1,2 M , y 3 y ,q 0,44 M , y 0,29 0,8
g M . fi
z N fi. Ed
kz 1 3
k y .q f y
z . fi A z 1,2 M , z 5 y ,q 0,44 M , z 0,29 0,8.......
g M . fi
LT N fi. Ed
k LT 1 1
k y .q f y
z . fi A LT 0,15 y ,q M , LT 0,15 0,9.......
g M . fi

FIRE RESISTANCE
Degree of utilization 0:
k y .q
fy f f
min . fi A W pl , y y W pl , z y
At the limit, when the collapse occurs, the design value of actions are equal to the
design values of the resistance of the member:
E fi.d R fi , d ,t k y ,q R fi , d ,0

0
E fi , d
k y.q 0
and fy fy fy
R fi , d ,0 min . fi A W pl , y W pl , z


Classify member
Calculate temp.qd at tfi.requ
(without the concept of qcr)
Calculate resistance at qt.fi,requ
Fire resistance
Iterate Rq.fi until Efi.d.t = Rq.fi (H30, H60, )
tfi.requ

FIRE RESISTANCE OF A TUBULAR COLUMN

Example 2: Consider a column CHS 508 x 16 profile in S355 steel grade
that was designed at normal temperature for an axial compression load
NEd = 6000 kN. The unprotected member is heated on all four sides and is
part of a offshore platform with a required fire resistance time to the
hydrocarbon fire curve of qrequ = 60 minutes (H60).
NEd
Dimensions and cross-section properties:
Outside diameter, d=508 mm;
Thickness, t=16 mm;
Mass per metre=194 kg/m;
Area=247 cm2
8m
Ratio for local buckling, d/t=31.8;
Second moment of area, I=74900 cm4
Elastic modulus, Wel=2950 cm3;
Plastic modulus, Wpl=3870 cm3;
Torsional constants: It=150000 cm4 ; Wt=5900 cm4


Design at ambient temperature:
Cross-section classification:
= 235 355 = 0.81

= 508 16 = 31.75
Limit for Class 1 section = 50 2 = 32.805, so 32.805 > 31.75
The cross section of the CHS 508 x 16 is Class 1 at ambient temperature.
Cross-section compression resistance:
24700 355
. = = = .
0 1



Member buckling resistance in compression: . =
1
Elastic critical force :

2 2 210000 749000000
= 2 = = 97024379.7
40002
The non-dimensional slenderness at ambient temperature is given by:

27400 355
= = = 0.316
97024379.7
Selection of the buckling curve and imperfection factor . For hot-rolled use
buckling curve a; = 0.21 (for cold-formed use buckling curve c; = 0.49).
= 0.5 1 + . 0.316 0.2 + 0.3162 = 0.562



1
= 0.5 1 + . 0.316 0.2 + 0.3162 = 0.562
1
= = 0.974
0.562+ 0.5622 0.3162
0.97424700355
. = = = . < NEd
1 1


Design under fire:
Cross-section classification at elevated temperatures (EC3)
= 0.85 235 = 0.691

= 31.75
Limit for Class 1 = 50 2 = 23.874
Limit for Class 2=70 2 = 33.42 CHS 50816 is Class 2
The cross section of the CHS 508 x 16 is Class 2 at elevated temperature.
(NOTE: According DNV is not calculated, the cross-section classification is the same as
presented at ambient temperature)


Design under fire (using the concept of critical temperature):

1
Assuming a load reduction factor in fire = 0,65 (suggested the EC3-1-2):
. = 0.65 6000 = 3900
and the column at the intermediate level of the platform:
= 0.5 = 0.5 8 = 4
This is temperature dependent and an iterative procedure is needed to

calculate the critical temperature (qcr).


The non-dimensional slenderness at elevated temperature is given by:
,
= (At 20C the reduction factors are equal to 1)
,
400 17.4
= = = = = 0.3009
1 93.9 235 355 93.9 235 355
The reduction factor for flexural buckling, is evaluated:

= 0.65 235 355 = 0.528
= 0.5 1 + 0.528 0.3009 + 0.30092 = 0.6247
1
= = 0.853
0.6247 + 0.62472 0.30092


The design value of the buckling resistance, ... at t = 0 sec.
0.853 24700 355

..=0. = . = = 7479.53
1
The degree of utilisation:

. 3900
= = = 0.5214
.0. 7479.53
Critical temperature:
1
= 39.19 1 + 482 = 577.86
0.9674 3.833
And the correspondent reduction factors are: , = 0.539; , = 0.374


Iterative procedure:
20 1.0 0.3009 0.853 7479.53 0.5214 577.82
577.82 1.2 0.3792 0.815 7146.33 0.5457 570.3
Time vs temperature is then

calculated using the hydrocarbon
fire curve:
Note that the reduction value of 1.2
is reached (in accordance what is . = []
,
sugested by DNV)


1200
1100
1000
900
800
(C)
700
500
400 Unprotected CHS 50816_Hydrocarbon Fire
300 Curve
200
100
0
0 20 40 60 80 100 120
t (min)
Critical temperature (qcr = 570.3C) is reached after 7 min. aproximately.

H60 is notforreached
Institute and
Sustainability and firein Structural
Innovation protection Engineeringis needed.

Design under fire (without the concept of critical temperature):
Calculate the steel temperature at t = 60 min. using the hydrocarbon fire

curve:

. = []
,
qsteel at t = 60 min. = 1100C
Calculate the resistance at qsteel = 1100C: Nfi,1100C,Rd 0 < . = 3900

Iterative procedure:
1100 . . . 0

577.82 1.2 0.3792 0.815 = Nfi,Ed

SUMMARY
Institute
FIRE RESISTANCE OF THE JOINTS (DNV)
The capacity of connections can be taken as:
Rq = ky,q R0
where:
R0 - the capacity of connection at ambient temperature. For tubular joint, DNV-Os-C10,

chapter 7 of EC3 or Norsok N-004 should be used(*).
ky,q - temperature reduction of effective yield stress for maximum temperature in connection.
According Norsok, 3 types of tubular joints are considered: K, Y and X.
(*) detailed information about the design of tubular joint on offshore structures was presented
on the Couse
Institute of Design
for Sustainability of Offshore
and Innovation in StructuralStructures
Engineering (Ed. 3)
FIRE RESISTANCE OF THE JOINTS (DNV)
DNV is not explicit about the computation the temperature in the joint:
According EC3, the temperature in the joint can be calculated using:
Advanced calculation method Thermal analysis

A/V value of the parts forming the joint
Maximum value of A/V ratios of the connected steel members adjacent
to the joint

FIRE RESISTANCE OF A TUBULAR JOINT

Example 3: Consider the example used during the Couse of Design of
Offshore Structures (Ed. 3) to illustrate the design of tubular joints.
Calculate the resistance of a K-joint under fire.
Cross-section properties and material properties:
fy=345MPa (yield strength of the chord);

fy,b=345MPa (yield strength of the brace)
=45;
g = 500mm (gap between braces);
T=53.3mm (thickness of the chord);
tA = tB =22.2mm (thickness of the brace);
dA = dB =853mm (brace diameter);
D=2560 (chord diameter) under NEd= 8000kN


Resistance at ambient temperature (Obtained from the Course of Design of
Offshore Structures (Ed. 3))
Basic resistance
Nt,Rd= 10763.968 kN
Nc,Rd= 10763.968 kN
MRd (ipb)= 4914.964 kNm
MRd (opb)= 2556.474 kNm

Assuming a load reduction factor in fire = 0,65 (suggested the EC3-1-2):
. = 0.65 8000 = 5200
5200 = Nfi,Ed < Nfi,q,Rd = ky,q NRd / [gM0 / gM,fi] = ky,q x 10763.968 / [1/1]
% of normal value
ky,q = 0.483
100 Effective yield strength
80
60
40
20
qa 600C
0 300 600 900 1200
Temperature (C)


Maximum temperature in the joint
Calculated based on the A/V value of the parts forming the joint.
D=2560 (chord diameter) and T = 53.3mm (thickness of the chord);

dA = dB =853mm (brace diameter) and tA = tB =22.2mm (thickness of the brace);
1 Am Am 1
q a.t ksh hnet .d t 18.76 / m Section factor of the chord
ca a V V T
ksh = 1 Am 1
45.05 / m Section factor of the brace
V tA


Maximum temperature in the joint
1200
1100
1000
900
(C)
800
700
600
400 Brace t=22.2 mm
300
200 Chord t=53.3 mm
100
t (min)
0
0 20 40 60 80 100 120
qsteel = 600C is reached after 8 min, approximately.

Acknowledgments
This lecture was prepared for the Edition 1 of the Advanced Topics on the
Design of Offshore Structures (November 2016) by ALDINA SANTIAGO
and HELDER CRAVEIRO (UC).
This powerpoint is part of the materials developed for the Advanced Topics on the Design of
www.cmm.pt

Accidental actions
on offshore
structures Ship
Collisions
Constana Rigueiro
Advanced Topics on the Design of Offshore Structures Accidental Actions Lecture L3.15 2
Scope of Presentation
1. Accidental Actions
1.1 Collisions with jacket platforms


Accidental actions are actions caused by abnormal operation or technical failure.
They include for instance:
Fires;
Explosions;
Impacts from ships;
Dropped objects, helicopter crash among others.

The requirements to design

structures exposed to accidental
actions, here presented, are given in
Norsok N003 Actions and Actions
Effects, Norsok N004 Design of
steel structures accidental loads.

The overall goal is to prevent an incident to develop into an accident

disproportional to the original cause.
This may be done by:

- direct calculation of the effects imposed on the structure,
- indirectly, by design of the structure as tolerable to
accidents


Impact actions may for instance be caused by:
Vessels in service to and from the installation (including supply vessels);
Tankers loading at the field;
Ships and fishing vessels passing the installation;
Floating installations;
Aircraft on service to and from the field;
Falling or sliding objects;
Icebergs or ice.
Impact actions are characterized by kinetic energy, impact geometry and the
relationship between action and Indentation.


West Venture offshore platform
A study of the collision incident between West Venture and Far Symphony - Mossmaritime (2004)

1.1.1 General
Ship collisions with offshore

structures may be critical with
respect to the ship, installation or
both. Ship collision load
Accurate analyses are therefore

important to ensure that the
installation can withstand a high-
energy ship impact.
It is required that the platform

survives to initial impact but
progressive collapse shall not occur.

1.1.1 General
Kinetic energy Ship collision load
- the mass of the ship (including

hydrodynamic added mass)
- impact geometry: Stern or
Bow;
- the speed of the ship at the
instant of impact.

1.1.2 Design principles

i) Design values by Norsok-N003
Supply vessel impact on an offshore installation:
The ship mass should normally not be considered less than 5000 tons.
Ship speed should not be considered below 2 m/s for the ALS design check.
Hydrodynamic (added) mass can be assumed to be 40% of the ship mass for
sideways impacts and 10% for bow/stern impacts.


ii) Design principles by Norsok-N004
The ship collision impact scenario is characterized by the available kinetic energy.
The kinetic energy is governed by the mass, including hydrodynamic added mass,
and speed of the ship and installation at the moment of impact.
Generally this involves large plastic strains and significant structural damage to
the installation, the ship or both. The strain energy dissipation is estimated from
force-deformation relationships for the installation and the ship, where the
deformations in the installation shall comply with ductility and stability
requirements.


The structural effects from ship collision may either be determined by:
Non-linear dynamic finite element analyses;

By energy considerations combined with
simple elastic-plastic methods.
Be aware Norsok N-004 does not take into account:

i) The deformation behaviour of the ship;
ii) The tube is assumed to have a single wall thickness over its full length;
iii) The elastic characteristics of the platform.

The Norsok-N004 distinguishes between three different design categories for strain
energy dissipation:
Strength design: The

installation is strong enough to
resist the collision-force with
Ship
minor deformation. This means
Structure
that the ship is forced to deform
and dissipate most of the
collision energy.
DNV_RP_C204 (2010)


Strength design
Ship
Structure
Structure
Ship
DNV_RP_C204 (2010)


Ductility design: The installation undergoes large plastic deformations and absorbs
most of the collision energy. In this case, the striking ship will be strong and undergo
minor deformations.
Structure
Ship
DNV_RP_C204 (2010)


Shared-energy design: This implies that both the installation and ship contribute
significantly to the energy dissipation.
Ship
Structure
DNV_RP_C204 (2010)


Strength design:
The installation shape governs the deformation field of the ship. This deformation
field is used to calculate total and local concentrations of contact force due to
crushing of ship. The installation is then designed to resist total and local forces.
Analogy with ULS

Ductility design:
The vessel shape governs the deformation field of the installation. This deformation
field is used to calculate force evolution and energy dissipation of the deforming
installation.
The installation is not designed to resist forces, but is designed to dissipate the
required energy without collapse and to comply with residual strength criteria.
DNV_RP_C204 (2010)

Shared-energy design:
The contact area the contact force are mutually dependent on the deformations
of the installation and the ship.
An integrated, incremental approach is required where the relative strength of
ship and installation has to be checked at each step as a basis for determination of
incremental deformations.
The analysis is complex compared to strength or ductility design and a nonlinear
analysis with finite element is necessary.
DNV_RP_C204 (2010)


External collision mechanics: The collision energy to be dissipated as strain energy.
2
vi
1
E s m s a s v s2
1 vs
For compliant installations:
2 m as
1 s
mi a i
Floating platforms (semi-submersibles, TLPs, production vessels) can normally be

considered as compliant. (If the duration of impact is small compared to the fundamental
period of vibration of the installation, it can be assumed as compliant)
Where: ms is the ship mass; as is the ship added mass (40% of the ship mass for
sideways impacts and 10% for bow and stern impacts); vs is the impact speed; mi
is the mass of installation; ai is the added mass of installation; vi is the velocity of
installation;
DNV_RP_C204 (2010)


External collision mechanics: The collision energy to be dissipated as strain energy.
For fixed installations: Es

1
m s a s v s2
2
Where: ms is the ship mass; as is the ship added mass; vs is the impact speed.
Jack-ups may be classified as fixed or compliant.

Jacket structures can normally be considered as fixed. (If the duration of impact is
comparatively long, compared to the fundamental period of vibration of the installation, the
installation can be assumed fixed)
DNV_RP_C204 (2010)

1.1.3 Dissipation of strain energy
w s , max w i , max
E s E s,s E s,i R dw
0
s s R dw
0
i i
These curves express the impact force as a function of the structural

deformation. The strain energy dissipated by the ship and installation is equal to
the total area under the load-deformation curves.
DNV_RP_C204 (2010)

1.1.3 Dissipation of strain energy

Example
Column Vessel
t=30 mm
Contact force versus deformation for element with

D=1.5 m

1.1.4 Ship collisions forces Recommended force-deformation

relationships
Force deformations curves

derived from simplified
methods;
For supply vessel with

displacement of 5000 ton;
The basis for the curves is

strength design;
No valid for bulbous bow;
DNV_RP_C204 (2010)

1.1.4 Ship collisions forces Recommended force-deformation

relationships
Valid for with and without

bulbous bow;
Merchant vessels with 2-

5000 tons displacement;
impacts against jacket

legs with diameter 1.5 m
to 2.5 m;
DNV_RP_C204 (2010)

1.1.4 Ship collisions forces Energy dissipation
Merchant vessels with 2-5000 tons displacement;

2
The brace cross section must satisfy: f y t 1 .5 D 0 .5 R0
3
(R0 Collapse resistance in bending for the brace)
DNV_RP_C204 (2010)

1.1.5 Force-Deformation relationships for denting of tubular

members
Overall deformation of
Plastic
behaviour
the platform;
Global deformation of
bracing and leg element;
Elastic
behaviour
Local deformation of
bracing/leg at impact
point (local denting);
Plastic
behaviour
Qvale K. H., (2012)


members
Local deformation of bracing/leg in a collision

described as a dent;
The dented region is modelled by an

idealized yield-line model.
Qvale K. H., (2012)


members
Resistance curve for local denting of unstiffened tubular members.
R is the resistance to the denting process;

RC is the characteristic strength factor;
wd, is defined as the original diameter
minus the effective diameter after denting,
D-Deff.
B is width of contact area.
wd
DNV_RP_C204 (2010) /Qvale K. H., (2012)


members
Approximate expression including

effect of axial force
c2
c1

1.925

t 2
D N sd
22 1,2 b wd

3 .5
b
R fy 1 2
N 0 , 2

t
D
4 rd D D
DNV_RP_C204 (2010)
Rc k
1.1.5 Force-Deformation relationships for denting of

tubular members
To avoid excessive local denting prior

to forming a collapse mechanism, the
brace must fulfil the compactness
criteria:
Include local denting 2
f y t 1 .5 D 0 .5
R0
3
c2
R0 wd
Neglect local denting
Or c1 k 6
Rc D
For k=0, b/D= 0 and Wd/D=0.1 (conservative

calculations);
R0 Collapse resistance in bending for the brace:

DNV_RP_C204 (2010)

1.1.6 Force-Deformation relationships for beams
Response of a beam subjected to a collision load:

Initially governed by bending (affected by and interacts
with local denting).
deformation
The bending capacity is reduced if local buckling takes

place on the compression side.
The load carrying capacity may increase considerably due to
the development of membrane tension forces (depends of
adjacent structure).
The energy dissipation capacity is either limited by tension
failure of the member or rupture of the connection.
Simple plastic methods of analysis are generally applicable.

Small axial displacements have a

significant influence on the development
of tensile forces in members undergoing
large lateral deformations.
An equivalent elastic axial stiffness at ends of elements may be defined as:
Where Knode is axial stiffness of the node with the

1 1
considered member removed. This parameter
k k node 2EA may be determined by introducing unit loads in
member axis direction at the end nodes with the
member removed.
DNV_RP_C204 (2010)


Plastic force-deformation relationship for a central collision may be obtained from:
Non-dimensional
Non-dimensional
spring stiffness
spring stiffness
D2
42k
c 2
fy A
Non-dimensional
deformation
DNV_RP_C204 (2010)

1.1.7 Bending capacity of dented tubular members

The reduction in plastic moment capacity due to local denting shall be considered for
members in compression or moderate tension.
M red 1
cos sin
Mp 2 2
2w d
sin ar cos1
D
Conservatively, the flat part of the dented section according to the model shown in Figure may be
assumed non-effective.
DNV_RP_C204 (2010)

1.1.8 Ductility limits Local buckling

For circular cross-section:
Buckling does not need to be considered for a beam with axial restraints if the
following condition is fulfilled:
1
14c f k
2 3
c
2

Dt
f y
where cf
c d 235 f y 1 c
1 c
dc is the characteristic dimension= D for circular cross-section;

c1 =2 for clamped ends; c1 =1 for pinned ends;
c, is the non-dimensional spring stiffness, where
k 0.5 the smaller distance from location of collision load to adjacent joint.

1.1.8 Ductility limits Local buckling

For circular cross-section:
1
2 3
w 1 14c f f y k
Local buckling may be assumed to occur 1 1
d c 2c f c1 3 d
when the lateral deformation exceeds: c

2
w 3.5f y k
For small axial restraint (c < 0.05)
c1 3 d
dc c
2
c
cf Axial flexibility factor
1 c


1.1.9 Ductility limits Tensile fracture in yield hinges

The degree of plastic deformation or critical strain at fracture will show a significant
scatter and depends upon the following factors:
material toughness;
presence of defects;
strain rate;
presence of strain concentrations.
stress gradients;
dimensions of the cross section;
material yield to tensile strength ratio;
material ductility.

Critical average strain in axially loaded plate material for use in conjunction with
nonlinear finite element analysis or simple plastic analysis:
t
cr 0.02 0.65 , 5t

t= plate thickness;
= length of plastic zone;

Non-dimensional plastic stiffness
Steel grade cr H
S235 20% 0,0022
Proposed values for cr and H for different steel S355 15% 0,0034
grades S460 10% 0,0034
DNV_RP_C204 (2010)


Rupture may be assumed to occur when the deformation exceeds a value given
by:

w c
1 1 4c w c f cr 1
d c 2c f c1

Displacement factor
Plastic zone length factor
w
For small axial restraint (c < 0.05) c w cr
dc

Accidental actions on
offshore structures Ship
Collisions - Design
Examples
Constana Rigueiro
Summary
Structure
Impact Loads Collisions with jacket platforms
Example #1: Jacket brace subjected to supply

vessel impact
Example #2: Jacket leg subjected to supply vessel

impact

Summary
Structure

vessel impact

impact

Design Example
Example #1: Jacket brace subjected to supply vessel impact
Consider the location of contact is at

brace mid-span and the force acts
parallel to global x-axis.
The cylindrical brace has: D= 762
mm; t= 28.6 mm and L=23.3 m.
Determine:
i) The ultimate deformation of the
brace.
ii) The collapse load.
DNV_RP_C204 (2010)

Design Example
From linear elastic analysis it is found that

the stiffness of nodes 508 and 628, against
displacement in the brace direction when
the brace is removed, is 736 MN/m and 51
MN/m respectively.
DNV_RP_C204 (2010)

Design Example
Determine:
i) Stiffness of the nodes knode;
ii) The effective stiffness of the element;
iii) Non-dimensional spring stiffness of the
element;
iv) The collapse resistance in bending;
v) The deformation of the element in
tensile fracture;
vi) The collapse load.
DNV_RP_C204 (2010)

Design Example
i) The unequal stiffness may be represented by

two equal springs, each with stiffness:
1
1 1
k node 2 95 MN/m
736 51
ii) The effective stiffness:
1 1 1 23.3
88 MN/m
k k node 2 EA 95 2 210 E 3 0.762 28.6 E 03
DNV_RP_C204 (2010)

Design Example
iii) Assuming clamped ends (c1 = 2) the non-dimensional spring stiffness comes
out to be:
4c1 kwc2 2kd 2 88 0.762 (The resulting end restraint
c 0.18 is quite flexible. This is
f y A f y t 355 0.0286 23.3
particularly due to low
stiffness in node 628)
iv) The collapse resistance in bending is calculated assuming clamped conditions

at both ends:
4 c1 w p f y 4 2 (d 2 t ) f y 4 2 0.762 0.0286 28.6 E 03 355

2
4c1 M p
R0 1.9 MN
23.3
DNV_RP_C204 (2010)

Design Example
v) The deformation of the brace considered in tensile fracture can be estimated:

For steel grade S355 a strain hardening coefficient of H = 0.0034 is used;
c1=2 (clamped ends are assumed) and w/wp /4 ;
Collision occurs at mid span
k 0 .5 and k d c 15.3
2
c
=0.1899
f
c 8.87 E 02

1 c
=21.912
DNV_RP_C204 (2010)

Design Example
v) Continuation - Rupture may be assumed to occur when the deformation exceeds

1 4c w c f cr 1
a value given by:
w c1

d c 2c f c1

w
2.829 w =2.2 m
dc
(The characteristic dimension, dc = D = Rupture may be
0.762 m) assumed to occur
when the
deformation
exceeds
DNV_RP_C204 (2010)

Design Example
m
vi) The
3251E-05 m/MNcollapse load 4c1 kwc2
de_eq 95390,089 kN/m c 0.18
knode_left 7,36E+05 kN/m
f y A
knode_right 5,10E+04 kN/m
23,3 m
210 GPa
0,0658957 m^2 R
D 3 .2
0,762 m
t
R
0,0286 m
0
2
463,81881 kNm
0,015391 m^3
D R 6.0 MN
0,762 m
t 0,0286 m
355 collapse
MPa load
23,3 m
w
w 2.829 DNV_RP_C204 (2010)
2,16 m dc
Tubular beams
0,381 Stiffened plate
0,762 m
Summary
Structure

vessel impact

impact

3D numerical model of the jacket platform

Design Example
Structure Geometry
The structure is
designed to operate at
an average depth of
130 m.
The deck consists in

three levels with a total
area of 1915 m2.

Design Example
Example #2: Jacket leg subjected to supply vessel impact
Heliport
+19.74 m Drilling area Residential Quarters
+14.33 m Storage area complete
+9.75 m

Design Example
FE Modeling:
The calculation procedure for ship

collision was implemented in the
ABAQUS software
The mesh size is maintained within 5

10 times the member thickness to obtain
sufficiently accurate predictions of the
strain;
L=46 m
D= 1676 mm
t=32 mm

Design Example
FE Modeling: (Cont.)
A rigid vessel model was constructed since,
by definition, the rigid model would not
experience any structural deformation;
Only the side of the hull was included in the

model for the sake of saving computation
time.
The ship mass= 5000 tons (more 10% for

the added mass);
Ship speed: 2 m/s (for the ALS design

check);

Design Example
FE Modeling: (Cont.) Non linear dynamic analysis
Moderate Dissipation Application

Uses Hilber-Hughes-Taylor (HHT) integration procedure
Implicit \ Dynamic = 0.41421;
= 0.5 and
= 0.91421
Tempo 0 Therefore unconditionally stable with respect to the time-increment
Tempo t Corpo 1
S12 (Superfcie Contactor)

Corpo 1 Contact algorithm: Penalty hard
contact - to model the contact between
A
S12 c t
B the ship and the platform. No static
f12
S 21
c t
f 21 Sct do Corpo 1
friction coefficient is used in this
Sct do Corpo 1 e
e Corpo 2
contact formulation.
Corpo 2 D
C
Superfcie
Corpo 2 Corpo 2
Tempo t Target S21
Tempo 0

Design Example
FE Modeling: (Cont.)
Steel grade cr H
S235 20% 0,0022
S355 15% 0,0034
S460 10% 0,0034
Material Modeling:
Steel with fy= 355 Mpa;
Strain rate effects were neglected.

Design Example
Resistance of jacket leg
4c1 M p 4 2 (0,0865 355)

R0 5,34 MN
L 46
To avoid excessive local denting
prior to forming a collapse
mechanism, the brace must fulfil
the compactness criteria:
The leg will dissipate all the
2 strain energy
f y t 1 .5 D 0 .5
R0
3 False
c2
R0 wd Ductile Design
Or c1 k 6
Rc D

Design Example
Resistance of jacket leg
c2
Recall if: R0 w
c1 d k 6
Rc D
t 2
D R0

Rc c f y 0 . 658 5.34 8.11
4 t Rc 0.658

The cross sections doesnt remains

Local
circular!! denting
Include local denting!!!

Design Example
vi) The collapse load 4c1kwc2
51E-05 m/MN c 0.286
eq 95390,089 kN/m fy A
knode_left 7,36E+05 kN/m
knode_right 5,10E+04 kN/m
23,3 m
210 GPa
0,0658957 m^2
D
R m
0,762
t 0,0286 2m.40
R0
2
,81881 kNm
0,015391 m^3
D 0,762 m
t 0,0286 m
355 MPa R 12.82 MN
23,3 m w
collapse load w 2.30
dc DNV_RP_C204 (2010)
2,16 m
Tubular beams
0,381 Stiffened plate
0,762 m
Design Example
Numerical analysis of leg impact

Contact force vs. deformation
14
12
10
Contact Force [MN]
8
6
Navio
4
LEG
2
0
-2500 -1500 -500 500 1500 2500
Displacement [mm]
The calculations with DNV-RP-C204 gives for the plastic resistance of the leg
R=12,82 MN and w3,85 m (admit k140 MN/m)

Design Example
Normalized collision force R/Rc vs. the local denting of the leg for the impact
25
20
15
R/Rc [-]
10
FEA
Local DNV-RP-C204-B/D=0
5
denting DNV-RP-C204-B/D=1
DNV-RP-C204-B/D=2
0
0 0,1 0,2 0,3 0,4 0,5 0,6
Wd/D [-]
BD= 1676 mm

Design Example
Normalized collision force R/Rc vs. the local denting of the leg for the impact
25
20
If the compactness is not met, the
denting resistance should be on the
15
minimum curve for the resistance to

R/Rc [-]
10
FEA
DNV-RP-C204-B/D=0
local denting with a concentrated
5 DNV-RP-C204-B/D=1
DNV-RP-C204-B/D=2 collision force (B=0)
0
0 0,1 0,2 0,3 0,4 0,5 0,6
Wd/D [-]
Conservative Calculations!!

Final Notes:
Current design guidelines for ship collisions with offshore structures were
developed thirty years ago for supply vessels of 5000-ton displacements;
The guidelines need to be revised in view of significant increases in the supply
vessel sizes and a wide variety of bow configurations;
The numerical analyses tools (non-linear FE) available today for advanced
strength assessments of ship and offshore structures has reached a level of
robustness and efficiency making them attractive for evaluating the structural
integrity and validating the existing Rules and Standards;
Detailed model of the structure can be analysed under a given scenario in order
to simulate the response, the failure mechanism, the damage levels and the
residual strength.

Acknowledgments
This lecture was prepared for the Edition 2 of the Training course on Design of
Offshore Structures (May 2015) by Constana Rigueiro (UC).
It was improved for the Edition 1 of Advanced Topics on the Design of Offshore
Structures (November 2016) by Constana Rigueiro (UC).
authors.
www.cmm.pt.

Bibliography

1. Norsok N-003 (2007), Norsok standard for Actions and actions effects, Norwegian, Oil
Industry Association and The Federation of Norwegian Industry.
2. Norsok N-004 (2004), Norsok standard for Design of steel structures, Norwegian, Oil
Industry Association and The Federation of Norwegian Industry.
3. ISO (2013), ISO/DIS 19901-1:2013, Petroleum and natural gas industries Specific
requirements for offshore structures Part 1: Metocean design and operating
considerations; International Organization Standard.
5. ISO (2007), ISO 19902:2007, Petroleum and natural gas industries Fixed steel offshore
structures; International Organization Standard.
6. Chakrabarti, S. K. (2005), Handbook of Offshore Engineering. Elsevier, Oxford, UK.
7. Qvale K. H., (2012), Analysis and Design of Columns in Offshore Structures subjected to
Supply Vessel Beam Collisions, Norwegian University of Science and Technology,
Department of Marine Technology, Master Thesis.

8. DNV-RP-C204 (2010), Recommended practice, Det Norske Veritas, Design Against

Accidental Loads.
https://exchange.dnv.com/publishing/Codes/ToC_edition.asp#Offshore_Standards.
9. DNV (2011), DNV-OS-C101, Design of Offshore Steel Structures, General (LFRD

Method). Det Norske Veritas.
10. DNV (2012), DNV-OS-C201, Structural Design of Offshore Units (WSD Method). Det
Norske Veritas.
11. Gerwick, Jr. B.C. (2007), Construction of Marine and offshore Structures, Taylor and
Francis Group.
12. El-Reddy, M.A. (2012), Offshore Structures - Design, Construction, and Maintenance,
Elsevier.
13. Storheim M., Amdahl J., (2014), Design of offshore structures against accidental ship
collisions, Marine structures, 37, pp.: 135-172.

New engineering technologies
& dedicated employees
for better solutions!
Welcome to FORCE
Visit us at forcetechnology.com
Case studies:
1. Vessel Impact
2. Fire: PFP optimization
3. Wave on Deck
Vessel Impact
Information required:
From Design Accidental Loads specification (or equivalent)
Size of Vessels: Displacement, width, height, etc.
Speed at impact
Operational sea state
Tide
From Code
Energy to be absorbed by Jacket alone, or may be shared with vessel
Protection of critical items (Risers, Conductors)
Acceptance criteria
From Operator
Eventual more stringent requirements than form code.
Vessel Impact
Vessel Impact
Vessel Impact
Definition of impact zone

NORSOK specify from 10 m below minimum tide to +13 m above maximum tide
Analysis may be performed
Maximum tide + maximum crest for the operating sea state + maximum height of
bow
Minimum tide + maximum through for the operating sea state + deepest draft of
the vessel
Vessel Impact
Protection of critical components

Code and Operator require that critical components shall not be exposed to vessel
impact
Critical components: equipment containing inflammable liquid or gas; risers and
conductors.
Based on the actual vessel geometry a clash check shall be performed.

Vessel Impact
Protection of critical components

Old layout
Exposed
Risers
Modified
Layout
Protected
Risers
Vessel Impact
Definition of impact location

For each member in the defined impact zone the worst location is chosen even if
this location is outside the defined zone.
Node that in this row braces have been added compared to this one for conductor
protection
Vessel Impact
Vessel Impact
Vessel Impact
Effect of the dent

For a certain value of the impact force the member will locally by deformed. At this
location the bending moment is reduced. The absorbed energy at the plastic hinge is
reduced and also the compression capacity. This last is important for a leg (especially for 3
or 4 legs jacket).
Normally the dent shall not exceed 0,5D.

At this indentation the tubular is assumed
to have no bending capacity
(but still tension capacity).
Note that the dent is dependent on ForceNversusindentation

axial force in the member: increase compression 25,00
Increase the indentation. 20,00

N/Ncri<0,2
15,00
10,00 0,2<N/Ncri<0,6
5,00 0,6<N/Ncri
0,00
0 0,2 0,4 0,6 0,8 1
Vessel Impact
Perform the vessel impact analysis

Software: f.e. USFOS
Step1: Impose dead weight load factor 1
Step 2: increase the horizontal force at the impacted location until strain limit according
the code is obtain or energy level obtained.
Step 3: on the deformed structure applied a combination dead load and environmental
loads associated with relevant load factors.
ISO specifies that the duration shall be 2 times the time necessary for repair and minimum
sea state corresponding to 1 year return period with ULS load factor
NORSOK specify 100 year return period environmental condition with ALS load factor.
Vessel Impact
Case of a bridge support 3 legged

jacket transformed to a wellhead
jacket.
Due to new functionality the jacket have

to be reinforced to achieve an as high
as possible resistance to vessel impact.
1. All leg reinforced with concrete

inside from top pile to underside
deck
2. Additional diagonals in splash zone:
welded at the upend and clamped
at lower end
Vessel Impact
Analyses performed with USFOS.

The maximum energy absorbed was about
8 MJ, below target (14 MJ).
As shown in figure the diagonals at this
level buckles just before the legs
Operator modified the operational

conditions to satisfy the jacket strength.
Vessel Impact
However some members could not

be reinforced:
Braces supporting the bridge landings
on both side of the jacket.
And on June 2009 the

vessel came:
6000 t at 8-10 knots
Energy ~ 60 MJ
Vessel Impact
Vessel Impact
Boat Impact
FIRE: PFP optimization
Fire from sea Steel properties as function of

temperature
As a consequence the carrying

capacity of the structure is
weakened and the structure may
collapse.
21
Purpose of PFP
Slow down the heating of the structure.
Contain fires.
Slow the spreading of fires.
Ensure global structural integrity until evacuation is completed.
PFP type Chartex 7 commonly used offshore
Intumescent material.
Swells when exposed to heat.
22
As long as the temperature remains

Conventional methods for PFP design below 400C the reduction of material
properties is balanced by ULS factors.
Capacity
reduction at Capacity Inherent
400C reduction robustness
at 400C from ULS
design
Conventional methods for PFP design

Required amount/thickness of PFP is found in Type
Approval Certificates issued by the manufacturer.
Protection rating T/XF/t
T Critical temperature
XF Type of fire
T Duration of fire
Based on data from manufacturer PFP thickness is found
PFP is applied to all primary structure.
Very conservative.
Unnecessarily redundant PFP design.
Increased weight.
Increased cost.
24
Optimization may be performed to reduce cost and weight
The presented process is based on a simplified methodology where temperature and

structural behavior is decoupled.
Step 1:Thermal analysis

Modelling of the insulating properties of the PFP material.
Calculation of temperature in steel
Step 2: Structural non linear analysis

Focus on the actual performance of the structure.
Capacity calculation
The optimization of PFP is performed through an iteration of thermal and

structural analyses.
Software: FAHTS and USFOS
25
Step 1 Thermal analysis - FAHTS
Purpose: to generate temperature loads for the structural

response analysis.
The structural beam model is re-meshed to obtain a 3-D

representation with quadrilateral heat transfer elements.
Calculates the time dependent temperature distributions on the

structural members caused by fire.
A conservative linearization technique is used to generate

temperature loads for the structural response analysis.
26
Step 2: Structural response analysis - USFOS
Purpose: to calculate the non-linear structural response to the applied fire loads.
The temperature distributions from the thermal analysis are used as input
together with Permanent and Live Loads.
PushDown method
Reduction of material properties according to maximum temperature during
fire.
Neglects thermal expansion.
27
28
Type Approval Certificates give PFP thickness versus massivity (Hp/A) depending
temperature and time
30
Specific fire scenarios defined through CFD

analyses.
Temperature/heat flux is a function of space
and time.
Accounts for surrounding structure,
ventilation, etc.
Temperature curves representing a typical fire
development.
Hydro carbon fire, Eurocode 1
Cellulose fire, ISO-834
Specified by client in terms of intensity

(temperature/heat flux), duration and area of
exposure.
31
Optimization process
32
Process module
Initial PFP layout based on
conventional methods.
Potential for reducing:
Amount of PFP
Total weight of structure
Cost
33
Local Fire event impinging a limited number of structural

members at the same time.
Peak heat load: 350 kW/m2 for the most impinged member/node.
Backgroud heat: 100 kW/m2 on directly adjacent/connected members in all
directions within the compartment.
Duration: 9 minutes
34
Global Fire event engulfing the area/compartment with a lower

heat flux but longer duration. The case represents an impinging
jet fire on equipment/piping or a pool fire in the exposed area.
Peak = Background heat load: 150 kW/m2 for all exposed members.
Duration: 60 minutes.
The Global Fire Event was found to be the dimensioning load.
35
36
Thermal analysis
Temperature distribution of a
compartment after 60
minutes.
The fire is inside the
compartment:
All deck girders comprising the
floor are exposed from above,
i.e. only the upper side of the
top flange is exposed.
All deck girders comprising the
roof are exposed from below,
i.e. all faces are exposed except
the upper side of the top flange.
All columns are are exposed
from 4 sides.
37
Structural analysis
High plastic utilizations.
Sufficient capacity for redistribution of loads.
Maximum beam strain: 4.8%
38
Results and comparison

Compared to the original PFP layout, the PFP optimization resulted in a
weight reduction of 35%.
39
Wave on Deck
Wave on Deck
Some time the wave may hit the topside deck.

Several reasons for this event:
1. Subsidence: the sea bottom collapse slowly leading to an increase water depth
and a reduction of the air gap.
2. Increased wave height due to new wave data measurement
3. Wave enhancement due to local geometry of the structure
4. For floating structure special relationship between wave frequency and platform
response.
An incident in the North Sea last spring where a wave hit the leaving quarter of a
floating platform lead to 1 fatal casualty and 2 minor ones.
It was due to a combination of 3 and 4.
Wave on Deck
The analysis is performed in two steps:
Step 1: CFD analysis to calculate the interaction between the fluid and the structure.
The results is a set of pressure on the structure depending on time.
Step 2: Structural response. The pressure time series are applied on a structural
model and the non linear behavior is calculated.
The softwares used are: ConFlow for the CFD analysis and USFOS or LS-DYNA for
structural.
The two steps may be combined if deformation are expected to be significant and
influence the flow around the structure.
Other software: Star+CCM, Ansys

Wave on Deck
Wave in Deck
Due to increased 10000 year wave height the possibility of

wave in deck was evaluate for this platform.
The mesh of the CFD analysis and the domain are shown
below.
Wave in Deck
CFD analysis:
Define inundation: distance of the wave crest above cellar deck of the topside
Define wave theory to be used: Stockes 5th (standard)
Model the geometry of the deck: shall include all relevant obstacles and all elements
where the wave pressure/force shall be applied.
The meshing shall be sufficient to capture the flow effect but limited to avoid too large
run time.
Model the water domain: one wave length, down to sea bed.
Calibration of the wave parameters to achieve correct inundation
Define if the wave action shall be given as force or pressure. Define the locations.
Run
Wave in Deck
CFD analysis:
After analysis performed establish the pressure or force time history to be compatible
with the FEM of the structural analysis.
In this case the wave action was applied as points loads.
Wave in Deck
Results of CFD analysis: 3 inundation levels

Wave in Deck
Non-linear structural analysis: Software USFOS

Loads from ComFlow as time series is applied
Wave loads on jacket are generated: the two sets shall be correctly correlated in time. The
maximum load on deck occur usually 2-3 sec before maximum load on jacket.
Wave in Deck
Results:
All external secondary platform are collapsed
Some main beam in cellar deck overstressd
Yielding and buckling in one leg
Wave in Deck
Verification by test in basin:
A model of the platform was build to scale in the wave basin of Marine (NL).
Two waves were simulated: one normal, one so called freak wave.
The topside was monitored to register the forces

Wave in Deck
Results for normal wave:

Comflow reproduces the wave profile closely
enough
Vertical and horizontal forces time series are
concordant
Wave in deck
Results of freak wave:

Comflow did not represent the wave profile well
General behavior of force time series is similar
But overestimation of peak vertical force and
underestimation of the horizontal force
THANK YOU FOR YOUR ATTENTION
Epoxy
Intumescent
Passive Fire
Protection for
Off Shore
Structures
Rick Perkins
Advanced Topics on the Design of Offshore Structures Epoxy Intumescent Fire Protection Lecture L3.17 2
Summary
What is an intumescent coating? How do they work?
Testing of fire protection
Certification
Durability
Application
Using intumescent fire protection
Cryogenic spill protection
Worked example

WHAT IS AN INTUMESCENT
COATING?

What is an intumescent coating?

Over the last 30 years epoxy intumescent coatings have become the
preferred PFP solution for off shore facilities
Weight reduction
Durability
Application flexibility
But what is an intumescent coating?
Coatings that react in a fire to swell / expand

Chemical reactions absorb energy
Forms carbon based char
Low thermal conductivity, reduces rate of heat transfer
Extends time to reach critical failure temperature of steel item

What is an intumescent coating?
Youtube.com

How do intumescent coatings work?

Acid Catalyst, e.g. Ammonium Polyphosphate
decomposes to yield mineral acid
Carbonific, e.g. Pentaerythritol

acid reacts with Carbonific to produce a carbon char
Spumific, e.g. Melamine

decomposes to evolve gas and expand the char
Organic Binder, e.g. Epoxy Resin


Epoxy binder system
Epoxy resin
Polyamide curing agent
Produces a highly durable cross-linked 3D structure


That covers basics, but more complex interactions occur
Spumific reacts with acid source,
Resin binder plays a major part in terms of softening / charring
Filler particles incorporated to act as nucleating agents or Bubble growth
sites
Boron compounds produce reinforcing borosilicate glass
Reinforcing mesh supports the char


Section Factor
Which group will heat up more quickly?
A.
B.

Section Factor

Section Factor

Section Factor
Heated
Surface

Section Factor
Heated
Surface
Heat
Sink

Section Factor
Ratio of surface exposed to fire and heat sink
Hp/A (m-1) A/V (m-1)

Heated perimeter Surface Area
Cross section Area Volume
Perimeter in m Surface Area in m2
Cross sectional area in m2 Volume in m3
(per linear metre)

TESTING OF FIRE
PROTECTION

Hydrocarbon pool fire testing

Testing looks at individual elements
Matrix approach section factor & material thickness
Open profile I-section steelwork
Closed profile hollow section steelwork
Divisions bulkheads and decks
Furnace testing using the hydrocarbon heating regime

Steel temperature measured/recorded

Types of fire
Comparison of Standard Fire Test Heating Regimes
1200
1000
800
Temp (C)
600
400 BS476/ISO834 Cellulosic Fire Heating Regime

ASTM E119/UL263 Cellulosic Fire Heating Regime
BS476/ISO834 Hydrocarbon Fire Heating Regime
200
UL1709 Hydrocarbon Fire Heating Regime
0
0 20 40 60 80 100 120
Time (mins)

Sherwin-Williams

PFP Protected Steel
Sherwin-Williams

Types of fire
Hydrocarbon pool fire Hydrocarbon jet fire

BS 476/ISO 834/ASTM ISO 22899-1
E119
Fuel at atmospheric Fuel under high pressure
pressure
Defined by time- Defined by fuel delivery
temperature relationship requirements
Heat flux ~120kW/m2 Heat flux ~220kW/m2
Not erosive Highly erosive

Large scale jet fire test
Sherwin-Williams

Hydrocarbon jet fire testing ISO 22899-1

0.3kg/s delivery rate of propane
17.8mm diameter orifice, 1.0m from the test piece
Sherwin-Williams

Hose stream testing NFPA 290/58 App H

Flat plate test piece
Exposed to heat from a gas fired burner
After 20 minutes a fire hose is directed onto the test piece for 10 minutes
concurrent with the burner
Burner is continued to at least 50 minutes
Test panel must not exceed 427C (800F)

Hose stream testing NFPA 290/58 App H
Sherwin-Williams

Blast testing
Accident scenario
Leak of inventory
Evaporation of volatile components
Ignition source
Explosion followed by combustion of leaked inventory
To protect against the fire PFP must be able to withstand an explosion

Blast testing
Sherwin-Williams

CERTIFICATION

Certification
Testing of PFP materials performed by independent organisations
Typical testing costs $1-2m
Substantial body of data generated
Not possible to test every substrate size/configuration
Test data assessed by competent organisations
Industry standard assessment methods
Mathematical model of performance created
Model adjusted if necessary to ensure predictions are safe
Raw test data and assessment taken to Classification Societies for Type
Approval
Each CS will satisfy themselves that the assessment is acceptable
May adjust the assessment if required
Publish Type Approval certification

Certification
Company name &

address
Type of certification
Product or system
Relevant standards
Sherwin-Williams

Certification
Separate
certificates for I-
sections, hollow
sections, decks and
bulkheads
Sherwin-Williams

Certification
Jet fire scenarios
Typically a period of jet fire followed by a period of pool fire, e.g. 30 mins
jet fire followed by 30 mins pool fire
Above example typically written as H60/J30
ISO 22899-1 test data is assessed to determine a jet fire erosion factor for
each time period and substrate type
Protection requirement for H60/J30 will be:
60 minutes pool fire protection thickness

+
30 minutes jet fire erosion factor

DURABILITY

Durability
Offshore facilities are exposed to some of the most hostile atmospheric
conditions of any man-made structures
Service life expectation typically >20 years, possibly >>20 years
Epoxy PFP materials may be key component for:
Passive fire protection
Corrosion protection
Durability of epoxy PFP materials is essential

Resistant to a hostile environment for 20+ years

Durability
Active fire protection systems are comparatively easy to test
Fire detection
Deluge systems
Fire fighters
Passive fire protection is difficult to test

Remove a sample
Return to a laboratory
Interpret the results
Durability is essential

Durability
PFP product market life cycle typically less than required service life
Products with 20 years track record have been superseded
If such products are still available they are uncompetitive in todays
market
Higher loadings higher weight
Durability assessments made on the basis of accelerated weathering tests,

typically:
UL1709
NORSOK M-501/ISO 20340

Durability
UL1709 Fire protection standard for onshore structures?
Hydrocarbon fire test standard
Durability test
Follow up service
Hydrocarbon fire test for structural steelwork

Limited scope of test
Durability test
Several aspects to the testing
Exposed test pieces subjected to hydrocarbon fire test
Follow up service
3rd party verification scheme

Durability
UL1709
Short sections exposed to environments and then fire tested:

Ageing 70C (158F) for 270 days
Humidity 100%RH @ 35C (95F) for 180 days
Industrial Atmosphere SO2/CO2, 35C (95F) for 30 days
Salt Fog ASTM B117 for 90 days
Cycle test Wet for 72 hrs; Freeze @ -40C (-40F) for 24 hrs; Dry 60C
(140F) for 72 hrs, repeated 12 times
Fire protection period achieved must be at least 75% of non-exposed control

May have top coat

Durability
NORSOK M-501/ISO 20340
Cycle testing (25 cycles)

72 hours UV/Condensation (60C/50C) (140F/122F)
72 hours Salt Fog
24 hours drying @ -20C (-4F)
Fire Testing exposed panel against non-exposed control.
Fire protection period achieved must be at least 90% of the non-exposed

control
No top coat allowed

Durability
Resistance to weathering is essential but mechanical durability is also
important
Epoxy intumescent coatings range in their physical characteristics, a few
examples would be:
Property Test Method Units Value
Compression ASTM D695 Modulus GPa 2.03

Strength MPa 42.5
Elongation @ Failure % 3.1
Tension ISO 527 Modulus GPa 3.28
Strength MPa 15.5
Flexure ASTM D790 Modulus GPa 3.42
Strength MPa 28.5
Surface ASTM D2240 Shore D 73
Hardness
Sherwin-Williams

Durability
Experience shows us that epoxy intumescent coatings can be durable for the
long term in offshore service
Several products have 20+ years offshore service
The accelerated testing used appears to give good correlation with real
service

APPLICATION

Application
Epoxy intumescent coatings for hydrocarbon fire
2-component product, mixed during the application process
Typically reinforced at mid thickness using steel, glass or carbon fibre
mesh
Ultra high solids or solvent free
Highly viscous, usually need to be warm or hot to flow
Typically applied at 3-25mm in single or multiple coats
Must be applied by a competent applicator

For anything other than small projects specialist equipment is needed
Product manufacturer can usually suggest experienced application
contractors
Product manufacturer will offer training for new applicators

Application
Typically applied using a plural component pump
May be hand applied where appropriate, e.g. small areas or repairs
Graco Sherwin-Williams

Application

Application
Sherwin-Williams

Application

Application

Application
Application conditions similar to other epoxy coatings:
Relative humidity <85%

Substrate temperature >3C above dew point
Ambient temperature >5C (preferably >10C)
Curing and overcoating times are temperature dependent but normally

4-24 hours

Removal of epoxy PFP

This is a challenge!
Manufacturers spend substantial development time to ensure

Excellent substrate adhesion
Excellent intercoat adhesion
Great abrasion resistance
Fantastic resistance to mechanical damage
Epoxy PFP materials are not designed to come off!
Accepting the above, the coatings can of course be removed

Removal
For small areas
Grinding
Abrasive blasting
Cut a perimeter and use chisel
For larger areas

UHP water jetting (2,500 bar)
Induction disbondment

Repair
Epoxy coatings have great adhesion
Fresh material will stick effectively to aged coatings providing they are
clean
Key consideration for repair is reinforcing mesh, where used

Mesh will be overlapped at joints, as set out in the certification
Repairs where the mesh has been damaged must reinstate this overlap

Repair
1. Partial thickness damage, not affecting mesh reinforcement
Remove damaged material, usually by grinding
Chamfer the edges of the repair
Ensure the surface is free of contamination
Re-apply PFP material
Re-apply top coat
Top coat
Existing PFP
Primer
Substrate

Repair
2. Full thickness damage
Remove damaged material, usually by grinding
Expose the mesh for the overlap distance
Chamfer the edges
Prepare surface and re-apply primer
Re-apply the PFP and scrim
Re-apply the top coat
Top coat
Existing PFP
including mesh
Primer
Substrate

Repairs - Caution
Many epoxy intumescent products are similar in composition
They work by the same chemical mechanisms
They often require similar thickness for the same fire rating
The materials are not however interchangeable

The originally applied product should also be used for any repairs
If the original material cant be used for some reason advice should be sought
from
Product manufacturer
Classification society

Inspection and maintenance

Damage to any fire protection system will reduce its effectiveness
Offshore facilities are usually heavy working environments
Damage to epoxy PFP systems will occur
Research has shown that damage removing part of the PFP thickness
will reduce its effectiveness, creating hot spots in the event of a fire
If damage exposes the steel substrate corrosion will also occur
Inspection of passive fire protection should be included in a facilitys regular

inspection and maintenance programme
Damage to the PFP should be repaired at the earliest opportunity

USING INTUMESCENT FIRE

PROTECTION

PFP systems
Some epoxy intumescent coatings can be used without primer or top coat
For a variety of reasons however, primer and top coat are normally applied
Prepared steel can be primed to hold the preparation
Epoxy coatings when exposed to UV will chalk, discolour and suffer dirt
retention
A typical passive fire protection system would be:
Chemically cured primer, e.g. epoxy

Epoxy intumescent coating including reinforcement where required
Chemically cured top coat, e.g. polyurethane

PFP systems primer selection

Primer material and application thickness must be approved by PFP
manufacturer
Manufacturers will have a range of suitable products in an approved list
Most appropriate primer will depend on specific project requirements

Method of surface preparation
Time of exposure before PFP application must be considered
Expected exposure before PFP application should be considered

PFP systems top coat selection

PFP manufacturer must approve the top coat material and thickness
Manufacturers will have a range of suitable materials
For atmospheric exposure UV protection is a key property

Other considerations which may influence top coat selection:
Chemical resistant coating where contamination is envisaged
Non-skid coating if personnel access is needed
Abrasion resistant coating if wear of the surface is possible
High performance system if PFP is needed in the splash zone

PFP systems high temperature service

Epoxy intumescent coatings are necessarily thermally active
Exposed to temperatures above ~80C they may begin to react
Many PFP manufacturers also have an epoxy insulation material for use in
conjunction with their PFP
Applied under the PFP for substrates up to ~150C
Applied over the PFP to protect against flare radiation
For resistance to temperatures above ~150C other forms of insulation can

be used, e.g. cellular glass
Epoxy insulation/PFP prevent CUI

Service conditions
As part of a well composed specification they can be used in almost any
environment to provide passive fire protection
They are formulated to be highly durable alone

Durability can be further enhanced using top coats for:
Chemical resistance
Heat resistance
Impact/abrasion resistance
Immersion
One limitation of epoxy PFP systems is that they are based on organic
chemistry
In a fire they will give off smoke and potentially harmful fumes
Not used in normally populated areas

CRYOGENIC SPILL
PROTECTION

Cryogenic spill protection

The growth of trade in liquefied natural gas in recent years has led to more
focus on protection against accidental release
The LNG industry has not been helped by the lack of recognised test
protocols for CSP systems
No 2 systems tested in the same way
Some project specific testing
Standardised test protocols needed

CSP test standard

ISO 20088 was established to produce standards for the testing and
evaluation of materials designed to provide cryogenic spill protection
Three distinct exposure scenarios were identified
Part 1: Liquid
Part 2: Vapour Phase
Part 3: High Pressure Jet
Part 1 was published July 2016

This test is designed to give an indication of how cryogenic spillage protection
materials will perform in a sudden exposure to pooling cryogenic liquid.
Parts 2 and 3 are ongoing, these will evaluate performance on structural

steelwork as well as decks

ISO 20088-1, the test
Cryogenic
Liquid Holder
Cover
ISO 20088: Part 1 Test Sample

Pooling cryogenic liquid testing

40
Panel A
Panel B
20 Panel C
Panel D
Panel E
0
Temperature /C
-20
-40
-60
-80
-100
0 30 60 90 120
Time /minutes

ISO 20088-1, the Test

Measure temperature drop over time
Example rating:
CL/Deck/-40/60
CL Cryogenic Liquid
Deck Structure tested
-40 Limiting temperature
60 Period of protection

PFP WORKED EXAMPLE

Worked example
Fire wall/bulkhead
Including a structural beam
Non-structural element welded to the web
of the structural beam
Fire
Fire rating
Structural stability 400C critical temp
Hydrocarbon pool fire 60 minutes
Hydrocarbon jet fire 30 minutes
Fire
H60/J30-400

Worked example
Hydrocarbon fire bulkhead ratings:
Rating Insulation Integrity

H0 N/A Back face temp
below 400C at
120 minutes Fire
H60 Back face temp rise Back face temp
<140C (average), below 400C at
<180C (highest 120 minutes
reading) at 60 minutes
H120 Back face temp rise N/A
<140C (average),
<180C (highest Fire
reading) at 120
minutes

Worked example
Look up PFP thickness from product type
approval certification
H0 5.0mm
But we also have 30 minutes jet fire Fire

protection requirement
J30 jet fire erosion factor 1.0mm
Required thickness for the bulkhead

6.0mm Fire

Worked example
Open profile/I-section beam, IPE550
Section factor, partially exposed
Cross sectional area 0.0134m2
Partial heated perimeter 0.85m
Hp/A, 0.85/0.0134 = 64m-1 Fire
Look up PFP thickness from product type

approval certification
60 minutes, 400C, Hp/A 64m-1
5.5mm
Fire
Jet fire erosion factor for 30 minutes
1.5mm
Required thickness for the exposed part
of the beam
7.0mm

Worked example
So, we have
6.0mm PFP applied to the bulkhead
7.0mm PFP applied to the exposed part of
the beam
Fire
But
We must consider the non-structural
element welded to the web of the beam
This will conduct heat into the beam if not
protected
Fire
Current industry standard practice is to

apply coat back

Worked example
Coat back is the practice of extending the PFP system applied to a
component of the main (1) structure onto attached elements which
themselves do not require fire protection (2)
Normally applied when the area of the connection is >3000mm2
Usually extended 450mm from the point of contact with the 1 element

Worked example
For coat back on the 2 member we would
apply 7.0mm, the same as the 1 beam for
450mm from the point of connection
EPC contractors, asset owners and PFP Fire

manufacturers have researched the issue
of coat back and may be able to offer
alternative advice but 450mm coat back is
still current industry practice
Fire

Worked example
Larger PFP manufacturers employ engineers to do this kind of work for you
Consulting manufacturers at an early stage in a project allows optimisation of
the fire protected steel structure
Minimum steel weight might not result in minimum module weight
Manufacturers will also often suggest fire engineered solutions which can
offer further weight and/or cost savings

Acknowledgments
This lecture was prepared for the Edition 1 of the Training course on
Advanced Topics in the Design of Offshore Structures (November 2016) by
Rick Perkins (SHERWIN-WILLIAMS - Protective & Marine Coatings).
This powerpoint is part of the materials developed for the Training course on Advanced
Topics in the Design of Offshore Structures and it is covered by copyright. It cannot be used
in whole or in parts for any educational purpose, without special permission from the
www.cmm.pt

Offshore Structures

- Introduction

Advanced Topics on the Design of Offshore Structures Fatigue Analysis - Introduction Lecture 1.02
Summary
Fatigue of Offshore Structures
1.02 Introduction
1.03 Fatigue Analysis - Stresses
1.04 Fatigue Analysis and Design
1.08 Service Load Simulation
1.09 Fracture Mechanics Analysis
1.10 Inspection Planning of Fatigue Cracks in Offshore Structures

1.1 Introduction
1.1.1 Introduction and background - Fatigue behaviour
1.1.2 Stress analysis of tubular joints
Definition of stresses in welded connections
Definition of hot-spot stress
Methods of stress analysis
1.1.3 Fatigue design

Introduction
Fatigue: damage of a structural part by gradual

crack growth caused by repeated stresses.
DNV-RP-C203:
The aim of fatigue design is to ensure that the
structure has an adequate fatigue life.
Calculated fatigue lives also form the basis for
efficient inspection programmes during fabrication
and the operational life of the structure.



Fatigue of steel structures (2)

Fatigue of steel structures (3)

Liberty Ship 1943


Examples of fatigue collapses

Offshore platform A. Kielland (1980)
QuickTime et un
dcompresseur
sont requis pour visionnerThe
cette
The image. presented
Committee
Committee presented their
their report
report one
one year
year
later in March
later in March 1981.
1981. The
The report
report concluded
concluded that
that
the cause
the cause of
of the
the disaster
disaster was
was aa
fatigue
fatigue crack
crack inin one
one ofof the
the six
six
bracings
bracings (bracing
(bracing D-6)
D-6) connecting
connecting the
the
broken
broken away
away D-leg
D-leg to
to the
the rest
rest of
of the
the platform.
platform.

Fatigue
Ekofisk field in the Norwegian sector of the North Sea on March 27 1980.
corrosion
123 people died


Columns of the oil rig Alexander L. Kielland - drawing shows fractures by fatigue and stormwaves.
Original drawing: The "Alexander L. Kielland"-accident: From a Commission Appointed by Royal

Decree of 28th March, 1980 : Report Presented to Ministry of Justice and Police, March 1981 (NOU
1981:11):
Photo: Norwegian Petroleum Museum

Fatigue corrosion


Examples of fatigue collapses
Alexander L. Kielland, Column D in the water, Details of fracture at the hydrophone Photo: Norwegian Petroleum Museum

In Fatigue Design of Marine Structures Inge Lotsberg





Lessons learned from previous disasters
All temporary plates should be subjected to the

same requirements for welding procedures and
testing as the material of the member to which
they are affixed.
This seems conservative, remember the case of
the Alexander Kielland floating hotel, which
capsized due to a fatigue crack initiated at the
attachment of a minor sonar device to a principal
structural member.

Fatigue process
Small Cracks Crack growth and Crack growth Final cracking

emanating from coalition
weld toe

The aim of fatigue design is to ensure that

the structure has an adequate fatigue life.
Calculated fatigue lives also form the basis
for efficient inspection programmes during
fabrication and the operational life of the
structure.
In DNVGL-RP-C203 Fatigue design of offshore steel structures

Overall Approach to Fatigue Assessment

1) NORSOK Standard. Design of Steel Structures. N-004. Rev 1, December 1998.
2) HSE 4th Edition Guidance Notes. Offshore Installations: Guidance on Design, Construction and
Certification. 1993 Consolidated Edition with Amendment 3 (1995).
3) Eurocode 3: Design of Steel Structures - Part 1.9 - Fatigue
4) ISO. Petroleum and Natural Gas Industries - Offshore Structures - Part 2: Fixed Steel Structures.
ISO/CD 13819-2.
5) API. Recommended Practice for Planning, Designing and Constructing Fixed Offshore
Platforms. API RP2A WSD (20th Edition, July 1993) & LRFD (1st Edition, July 1993).
6) IIW. Fatigue Design of Welded Joints and Components. A Hobbacher (ed.) Recommendations of
IIW Joint Working Group XIII-XV. XIII-1539-96 / XV-845-96. Abington Publishing, 1996.
7) BSI - BS 7608: 2014. Code of practice for fatigue design and assessment of steel structures. .
8) DNV-OS-C101: Design of Offshore Steel Structures
9) DNVGL-RP-0005:2014-06 RP-C203: Fatigue design of offshore steel structures

Standards: NORSOK N-004
Limit state document dealing with the design of steel offshore

structures.
a partial safety factor approach
Chapter 8 deals with fatigue, and is very short, extensive detail
being provided in Annex C.
Annex C covers fatigue strength analysis
3 Appendices dealing with
classification of structural details,
stress concentration factors (SCFs)
for tubular joints
for cutouts.

Fatigue assessment
standard combination of appropriately factored
nominal stress ranges,
S-N curves,
the Palmgren-Miner linear cumulative damage
rule,

Fatigue assessment
Design fatigue factors (DFFs) are applied as
multipliers on the number of load cycles before
computation of cumulative damage, and the
result compared with unity to assess
acceptability.
The DFFs are set according to accessibility for
inspection and repair, and damage
consequence.

Fatigue assessment
Design S-N curves are provided for a variety of classified structural
details as well as tubular joints. These curves are either bi-linear, or
linear, on log-log plots of stress range versus number of cycles to failure
(endurance).
Separate sets of curves are given for
Joints in air,
Joints in seawater with cathodic protection,
Joints in seawater with free corrosion.
No endurance limits are specified on these curves, but conditions are
given of situations where a detailed fatigue analysis can be omitted.

Standards Fatigue Assessment of welded

details
Design S-N Curves

S-N Curves
Average results
Stress range
2 sd
N C m
Results statistical distribution
95% survival
Test CAFLimit
C results

No cycles to collapse
2.106
Low Cycle Fatigue High Cycle Fatigue

Damage accumulation ni, i

Linear damage accumulation 1
di
Ni
ni
Di n i di 1,0
Ni
Dtot Di 1,0
CAFLimit

Acknowledgments
This lecture (1.02) was prepared for the 1st Edition of Advanced Topics on the
Design of Offshore Structures (Nov 2016) by LUIS BORGES (Structurame
& UC) and JOS ANTNIO CORREIA (INEGI & UC).
authors.
www.cmm.pt

Offshore Structures

- Stress analysis of tubular joints

1.1 Introduction
1.1.1 Introduction and background - Fatigue behaviour





http://oilandgasprocessing.blogsp http://www.offshore-technology.com/projects/hutton-
ot.pt/2009_02_01_archive.html field/hutton-field4.html

Standards Fatigue Assessment of welded

details
Design S-N Curves
with:
Nominal stress

Nominal stress vs. Hot-spot stress
nom
T
[Gurney 1979]

Nominal stress vs. Hot-spot stress

nom, br2
nom, br1
nom, ch
hs
nom, ch

Stress analysis of tubular joints

In DNVGL-RP-0005:2014-06

SCF = hs / nom

Design S-N Curves

with:
Hot-spot stress (Stress Concentration Factor)

In DNVGL-RP-0005:2014-06

Definition - Tubular K-Joint geometry
g H/2
t
T
D
e
Lch

1. Introduction
Geometrical parameters:
= 2 Lch/D
ber
e
=d/D
Brac
mem
= D / 2T
t =t/T
=g/D
T rd
Cho ber Lch
m
me
er
me ce
mb
Bra
d g
D e Chord
member

Definition - Tubular K-Joint geometry

1. Introduction
Hot-spot S-N curve
In DNVGL-RP-0005:2014-06

1. Introduction
d
g
me race
er
t
mb
B
T
D
e
Chord member

Acknowledgments
This lecture (1.03A) was prepared for the 1st Edition of Advanced Topics on
authors.
www.cmm.pt

Offshore Structures

Planning of inspection for fatigue
cracks in offshore structures

1.10 Planning of inspection for fatigue cracks in

offshore structures
Background and motivation

Safety principles
Uncertainty modelling
Reliability
Planning of inspection for fatigue cracks
in offshore structures
Repair and strengthening methods

The number of offshore structures reaching its intended

design life is increasing (and in many cases there is still
oil left on the field)
Extension of life of offshore platforms is requested
Probabilistic methods to check the reliability of structures
have been used for years
The oil companies have asked for a common rule that is
accepted by the authorities
A Joint industry project was launched in 2011 to develop a
standard on probabilistic inspection planning for fatigue

The number of offshore structures reaching its intended design life

is increasing (and in many cases there is still oil left on the field)
Extension of life of offshore platforms is requested.
Probabilistic methods to check the reliability of structures have
been used for years
DNVGL-RP-C210
There were no standards providingProbabilistic
advise on how to use
probabilistic methods to assess the life extension of structures.
methods
The oil companiesforhave
planning of inspection
asked for a common rule that are
for fatigue
accepted cracks in offshore
by the authorities.
A Joint industry project was launched in 2011 to develop a
structures

standard on probabilistic inspection planning for fatigue

Planning of inspection for fatigue cracks

in offshore structures
In ECCS Eurocode Design Manuals : Fatigue Design of Steel and Composite Structures: Eurocode 3 part 1-9 Fatigue

Planning of inspection for fatigue cracks in

offshore structures
DNV-RP-C210 : 2015 (1st international
guidance on in-service inspection planning
for fatigue cracks in offshore structures.)
Inspection planning for fatigue cracks
(assuming NORSOK N-003 Action and action
effects).
Degradations of offshore structure are caused
by corrosion and fatigue crack growth.

Safety principles
Design for adequate fatigue life including

design fatigue factors (DFFs) and a sound
corrosion protection system
Design for robustness in relation to
member failure
Plan inspection of the structure during
fabrication as well as during the service
life.

Safety principles
Inspections after fabrication onshore can

be performed at less cost and with
higher reliability than during operation
offshore

Challenges due to the nature of the

fatigue phenomena
Minor changes in basic assumptions can have significant
influence on the predicted crack growth rates.
Calculated fatigue lives are sensitive to input parameters
using standard design analysis procedures.
Calculated probabilities of fatigue failure using
probabilistic methods are even more sensitive to the
methodology and to the input parameters to the analyses.
It is thus important to provide as accurate fatigue
analysis of the considered structures as possible
before the probabilistic analyses are performed.

Challenges due to the nature of the

fatigue phenomena
For design purpose it is appropriate to use
conservative values for parameters required for the
analyses.
However, for planning inspection for fatigue cracks in
offshore structures it is important to use relevant
(expected or best estimate) values and associated
uncertainties in order to predict accurate results that
allow the inspections to be directed to hot spot areas
where the fatigue cracks are most likely to occur first.

Strategies
Different inspection strategies may be

relevant for different types of offshore
structures. This is because:
the existing structures possess different
robustness with respect to fatigue cracking
inspection, repair and failure costs vary
significantly.

Strategies
When planning inspection, it is important to

assess the consequence of a potential
fatigue crack at a considered hot spot.
One may select different activities to
achieve an optimal inspection plan.
Engineering assessment of the different
methods and suitability of method for each
hot spot should be assessed.

Strategies - Example
Jackets with four (4) or more legs are rather redundant structures
when X-type bracing is used.
The consequence of a fatigue crack will still be dependent on:
position of crack
type of loading
possibility for redistribution of stresses during crack growth.
For most hot spots there is a significant crack growth period

before the integrity of the structure becomes a major concern.
FMD (flooded member detection) can be used at these hot spots
where potential fatigue cracks are likely to grow into air filled
members.

Strategies
It may occur that cracks have been

detected during former inspections, but
have been assessed to not require a repair
before another inspection is performed.
If there are such cracks in the structure,
one would start out with this information as
basis for another inspection planning.

In DNVGL-RP-C210

Analysis
In fatigue assessment of an existing

structure one will use the best available
data and information about its fatigue
condition as derived from the fatigue
analyses described in in DNVGL-RP-C210 :
App.A (jacket structures),
App.B (semisubmersibles) and
App.C (FPSOs) .

Analysis
It is not practical to assess all details by

probabilistic analysis.
The consequence of a fatigue crack
growing in a specific detail should be
considered

Analysis
Due to the nature of fatigue and number of

uncertain parameters involved, there will be
uncertainty as to when and where fatigue
cracks will occur in a structure subjected to
significant dynamic loading.
The more the information that is available,
the better it is for predicting future
behaviour with respect to fatigue cracking.

Analysis Tools
When a defect or a crack is detected in a

structure, the reason for this is
asked: Why???
main reason for the crack is

a poor fatigue detail!

Analysis Tools
The reason for defects and cracks can be

poor fabrication quality or it has simply
not been analysed properly.
If cracks are detected, more information
about the detail and the surrounding
structure is collected.
This information can be used for further
inspection planning.

Analysis Tools
A similar assessment for details that have been inspected without
finding of any fatigue crack.

long calculated fatigue life??? However, hot spots with very long
fatigue lives would normally not be inspected.

If the calculated fatigue life is short and fatigue crack might be
expected, but is not detected, one may ask if the reason for not
detecting a crack is:
a better detailed design with a lower stress concentration for the
considered detail than estimated,
a higher S-N class than assumed,
a dynamic loading lower than assumed at design stage
one simply has to wait for another inspection period for more
information.

Overview of analysis steps for planning

inspection for fatigue cracks
1) Assess the need for new fatigue analysis for calculation of
revised fatigue damages in order to direct the inspection to
hot spots where fatigue cracks are most likely to occur.
2) Perform new fatigue analysis as described in
App.A for jacket structures,
App.B for semisubmersibles and
App.C for floating production ships (FPSOs).
3) Assess if more than one analysis model is required
depending on operation area, subsidence and modifications
performed.

Overview of analysis steps
4) The mean stress or effect of compressive part of the stress range is

recommended to be considered for calculation of fatigue damage in
FPSOs when the calculated damage is used for planning in-service
inspection for fatigue cracks.
5) The calculated fatigue damage can be considered to be derived
from an equivalent long term stress range distribution described by a
two parameter Weibull distribution. Reference is made to DNVGL-RP- 0005
for description of Weibull distribution. This distribution is described by a
shape parameter h and a scale parameter q. In the following it is assumed
that the shape parameter h is a constant and that the scale parameter q is
calculated to correspond to the calculated fatigue damage at the
considered hot spot. For this calculation it can be assumed that h = 0.8 for
jacket structures and that h = 1.0 for semisubmersibles and FPSOs.

6) Assess the consequence of a fatigue

failure at the considered hot spot. This is
required for assessment of target reliability
level and for selection of inspection method; i.e.
is it acceptable to rely on leakage detection or
another NDT method.
7) Target reliability level to be decided based on
consequence of failure and guidance in Sec.8.

8) Mk functions from App.D

can directly be used for
details shown in Figure a, b,
c, e and f. Mk functions for a
fillet weld as shown in Figure
4-1 d are not provided. In-
service inspection of fillet
welds is normally not
meaningful before a
potential fatigue crack has
grown to the surface.

More complex
structural details may
be analysed using the
hot spot method
described in
DNVGL-RP-0005.

Analysis Tools
fracture mechanics making it possible to

establish crack growth curves
probabilistic analysis to include uncertainties
in parameters used for calculation of fatigue
damage and making it possible to link the
probability of detecting fatigue cracks by a
specified inspection to that of estimating
probability of a fatigue failure.

Why specific analysis for inspection

planning?
Some typical differences between a fatigue analysis intended to be basis
for inspection planning and a fatigue analysis used for design are:
1) Not all areas are analysed in detail at the design stage. A screening
analysis of fatigue utilisation is sometimes performed such that further
assessment is concentrated on details that require further analysis before
they can be concluded to fulfill the fatigue design criteria. This does not
mean that other details will not necessarily need in-service inspection.
2) Conservative assumption regarding SCF of complex details are
often made to avoid time consuming FE analysis which could
provide a lower hot spot stress and document longer calculated
fatigue life. The reason for this is also that inspection and maintenance
of a structure is handled by another part of the owner organisation during
operational life than that involved in design.


planning?
3) Information collected during fabrication and installation that can provide useful data
for fatigue analysis to be used as basis for inspection planning. This can be
information related to repair welds that were difficult to perform or due to fabrication
tolerances that were in the outer region of what could be found acceptable
according to fabrication specifications. Such information may provide useful input for
selection of hot spots to be further investigated for in-service inspection. This is
information that was not available when the design analysis was performed.
4) The as built structure can often be somewhat different from that on design drawings
used for design analyses. This can typically involve non-structural elements that
have been welded to primary parts of the structures and which may have significant
consequences with respect to fatigue (Ref. e.g. hydrophone holder in brace in
Alexander L. Kielland which was the main cause of accident). For this reason it is
also important that a review of the structure is performed to establish an as-is
structure before a new fatigue analysis is performed for the purpose of inspection
planning as described in App.A, App.B and App.C.


planning?
5) The operation of the platform may be different from that
assumed during design especially for floating structures. This
may be due to different ballasting or due to other operation than
originally planned. This can also be due to another deck weight
and associated draught than designed for. Other parameters such
as marine growth or information on environmental data may be
changed and different from that assumed at an early design stage.
6) Some structures are relatively old and it is realized that
fatigue analysis methods have been improved the last 10 to
20 years as reflected in App.A, App.B and App.C. This regards
also computer programs and computer efficiency which makes it
easier to aim for more reliable fatigue analysis today than at the
time when some of the existing structures were designed.

Assessment of probability of fatigue

failure
In DNVGL-RP-C210

Assessment of probability of fatigue

failure
In DNVGL-RP-C210

Target reliability
In DNVGL-RP-C210

Inspection updating and inspection

planning
Inspection updating is use of information that has become available
through inspections, and inspection planning is planning of the
future inspection programme and how different possible future
outcomes from these inspections should be assessed such as repair
philosophy.
Inspection updating is based on the utilisation of information
that becomes available at discrete time intervals over the service life
when the structure is being inspected for fatigue cracks. This
information is applied both in the assessment of the present condition
and in the prediction of the future behaviour.
Inspection updating then determines the calculated updated future
failure probability of the structure accounting for this additional
information.
In DNVGL-RP-C210

Inspection updating
When an inspection for fatigue cracks has been carried

out, there are three different levels of information
that may become available from the inspection:
No detection: This implies that potential fatigue cracks are
smaller than the detection ability of the inspection equipment
being applied.
Detection: This implies that fatigue cracks have been
observed.
Detection with sizing measurement: This implies that
fatigue cracks have been observed and that the size of the
cracks has also been quantified through measurements.
In DNVGL-RP-C210

Inspection updating
In DNVGL-RP-C210

Target reliability

Target reliability

Physical uncertainty
Statistical uncertainty
Measurement uncertainty
Model uncertainty
Bias
uncertainties related to human errors also denoted
as gross errors are normally not covered within
the framework of structural reliability

Physical uncertainty
Probability distribution must be assigned
based

on engineering
Statistical uncertainty judgement and
experience
Measurement from similar types of problems,
uncertainty
physical

knowledge,
Model uncertainty
analytical results or
distribution fit to available observations of
Bias
the uncertain quantity
uncertainties related to human errors also denoted
as gross errors are normally not covered within
the framework of structural reliability

In DNVGL-RP-C210

Probability of detection
flooded member detection (FMD) PoD is

good, 0.95 can be assumed
eddy current (EC)
magnetic particle inspection (MPI)
alternating current field measurement
(ACFM).

eddy current (EC)

magnetic particle
inspection (MPI)
alternating current
field measurement
(ACFM).

Flaw detection capability





Suppose a fatigue crack is found !


Specifying repairs to fatigue cracks is a specialised
process requiring a case by case analysis

A badly designed or poorly executed weld repair is
unlikely to survive as long as the original joint.

Careful excavation of the cracking, followed by weld repair
and application of a weld improvement technique, such as
weld toe burr machining, has been shown to give a significant
increase in the remaining fatigue life.

Improvement techniques available include weld toe burr
machining, shot or needle peening, high frequency impact
treatment and TIG dressing.


A satisfactory repair may be made by welding BUT :

It is important that the cracked material is gouged or machined away to:
permit a full penetration repair weld to be made,
with no traces of crack left behind and
no new significant defects introduced.

In theory, a good welded repair should last as long as the original joint under
the same loading spectrum.

In practice it is often found that the repair does not last as long, usually because:
the quality of the repair, made under conditions less favourable than those for the original
fabrication, does not match the quality of the original joint.

If the cracking was premature due to the presence of significant defects in the
original joint, a good quality repair has the potential to exceed the life of the
original joint.

Drill holes at crack tips to

Deviate stresses
Reduce stress concentrations
Manual for Repair and Retrofit of Fatigue Cracks in Steel Bridges

https://www.teachengineering.org/lessons/view/uoh_carbonfiber_lesson01 FHWA Publication No. FHWA-IF-13-020

Bolted doubler plate

repair to
Increase the cross-
-sectional area
Reduce stresses
Manual for Repair and Retrofit of Fatigue Cracks in Steel Bridges

FHWA Publication No. FHWA-IF-13-020

Patches of composite material, steel or

other structural materials bonded to an
existing steel structure
DNV-RP-C301 Design, Fabrication, Operation and Qualification of Bonded Repair of Steel Structures

ESDEP LECTURE NOTE [WG12]

Examples of inspection planning for

fatigue cracks

Fatigue Analysis
Titulo
Analysis
da -apresentao
- Introduction
Lecture 1.9B
1.10
1.02
Example List and characterize uncertainties affecting

fatigue life of the detail
Tubular butt weld.
Undercut
15mm
http://www.twi-global.com/

Examples of inspection planning for

fatigue cracks
SECTION 15

Acknowledgments
This lecture (1.10) was prepared for the 1st Edition of Advanced Topics on the
Design of Offshore Structures (Nov 2016) by LUIS BORGES (Structurame
& UC) and JOS ANTNIO CORREIA (INEGI & UC).
authors.
www.cmm.pt

Advanced Topics on
the Design of
Offshore Structures
Accidental Actions
FIRE
Hlder David Craveiro

Advanced Topics on the Design of Offshore Structures Accidental Actions Fire L3.12 2
Summary
Introduction Accidental actions - Fire
Case study Deepwater Horizon, Gulf of Mexico
Hydrocarbon Leakage and Dispersion
Ignition Mechanisms
Types of Fires
Pool fires
Jet fires
Influence of Heat Radiation on Humans and Materials
Field Models
Simulation of a Pool Fire
Adiabatic Surface Temperature

Introduction
Exploration of offshore oil and gas involves high number of risks:
Loss of human lives;
Pollution; The hazards are well known risk of major
Loss of material assets. accident will always be present
Main contributor to the existent risk uncontrolled

release of pressurized hydrocarbons and
subsequent ignitions leading to explosions and fires
Fires and explosions are the most relevant and common

extreme accidents in offshore oil and gas exploration
platforms. Fire is one of the most dangerous events that
threaten the safety of an ocean structure.

Introduction
Liquid
Initiating event
Hydrocarbons are hydrocarbons leakage of hydrocarbon
calorific
fire hazards values of about
Operational hazards 45 MJkg-1
Pollution
Ignition
http://www.solarnavigator.net/oil_rigs_deepwater_horizon_bri A small spark

tish_petroleum.htm can originate
a fire or
explosion
Escalation with the potential to
lead to destruction of the platform

Introduction
Safety Evaluation and Implementation
Hazard QRA Active mitigation Passive mitigation

identification
Quantitative Risk Hazard control Control risk
Assessment and structural propagation,
strength and safety of human
stability life
To identify, quatify and assess the risk from oil
and gas facilities;
To identify, quantify and assess the risk to Design for Accidental
nearby facilities/installations;
To suggest recommendations to reduce risks Loads
to human life, assets and environment
Minimize risks
ALARP as low as reasonably practicable
Plan and implement active and passive mitigation measures

Introduction
Plan and implement active and passive mitigation measures
Multiple measures may be implemented in the design of offshore structures
One of the most relevant measures may be related with the overall compartmentation
and separation of the spaces where the probability of the occurrence of hydrocarbon
fire is higher.

Introduction
Offshore hydrocarbon releases 1992 2015
HSE report containing data on offshore hydrocarbon release incidents
400 MAJOR Potential to quickly impact
NON-PROCESS
SIGNIFICANT outwith the local area, e.g. affect the
350 AWAITING CLASSIFICATION temporary refuge, escape routes,
MINOR escalate to other areas of the
300 MAJOR installation, causing serious injury or
fatalities. A major leak if ignited,
250
would be likely to cause a major
200 accident.
Significant Potential to cause
150 serious injury or fatality to personnel
within the local area and to escalate
100 within the local area, e.g. causing
structural damage, secondary leaks,
50 etc.
0 Minor Potential to cause serious
1993
1992
1994
1995
1996
1997
1998
1999
2000
2001
2002
2003
2004
2005
2006
2007
2008
2009
2010
2011
2012
2013
2014
2015 injury to personnel in the immediate
vicinity, but no potential to escalate or
227 ignitions in 4655 hydrocarbon release incidents cause multiple fatalities.

Case Study
Deepwater Horizon Macondo Well Blowout
On the evening of April 2010 hydrocarbons escaped from the Macondo Well onto
Transoceans Deepwater Horizon, resulting in explosions and fire on the rig.
11 people lost their lives
and 17 other were
injured;
The fire continued for 36
hours until the rig sank;
Hydrocarbons continued
to flow from the reservoir
through the wellbore and
the Blow Out Preventer
(BOP) for 87 days,
causing a very large spill
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deepwater_Horizon_explosion (pollution).

Case Study
Deepwater Horizon
https://www.awesomestories.com/asset/view/LIFE-and-DEATH-at-the-OIL-RIG-Deepwater-Horizon-Disaster-in-the-Gulf


Most fires in oil and gas facilities result from the uncontrolled escape of a combustible fluid,
followed by ignition, due to component failure and maloperation.
Leak from piping based on the largest non-propagating crack of the pipe, the leak area
may conservatively be assessed
= 0.475 Eq. 1
where
A is the leak area (m2);
R is the pipe radius (m);
T is the pipe wall thickness (m).
Continuous liquid release leak from vessel or storage tank liquid velocity inside the tank
and friction may be neglected. Using the general Bernoulli equation:
12 22
1 + 1 2 + 1 1 = 2 + 2 2 + 2 2 Eq. 2
p = pressure (N/m2); V = flow velocity (m/s);

= density (kg/m3); Z = static head (m)


Continuous liquid release leak from vessel or storage tank liquid velocity and friction
may be neglected. Simplification:
22
1 + 1 1 = 2 + 2 + 2 2 Eq. 3
2
The liquid discharge rate is (1 = 2 = ):
1 2
= 2 2 = 2 + 2 ( ) Eq. 4

where is the discharge coefficient usually ranges from 0.62 - 0.65.

The fluid composition, its state, the release rate, duration of the release and surroundings
will significantly influence the resulting fire scenario. Moreover, depending on whether the
release is gaseous or liquid or significant flashing (sudden change of phase from liquid to
vapor) occurs will also influence the probability of ignition and consequently the risk of
vapor explosion in case of ignition.
For further details see Methods for the calculation of Physical Effects. TNO Yellow
Book.

Behaviour of Released Fluid - Dispersion
The behaviour of fluids after release from the container and prior to eventual ignition
is very important and may influence the type and shape of the resulting fire.
Gases Liquids
Mostly influenced Mostly influenced

by meteorological by topographic
conditions conditions
Meteorological data is very important for dispersion evaluation
Wind Wind Humidity Temperature Atmosferic

speed direction stability

Ignition Mechanisms
Ignition only occurs if the necessary conditions exists
Flammability characteristics
Flammability limits Auto ignition temperature Flash point Minimum ignition energy
Auto Ignition Temperature minimum temperature at which

Minimum Ignition Energy is the
the substance will selfignite and sustain a combustion
energy required igniting a flammable
process.
mixture.
Flash Point is the temperature at which the vapour pressure in air, at

equilibrium conditions, equals the lower flammability limit for that substance.
Lower Flammable Limit lowest concentration of a gas or a vapor in air capable of producing a flash
of fire in presence of an ignition source;
Upper Flammable Limit highest concentration of a gas or vapor in air capable of producing a flash of
fire in presence of an ignition source.

Ignition Mechanisms
Flammability limits
Saturation vapor Not Flammable

pressure curve
Concentration of
flammable vapor
Autoignition
Mists region
Flammable
Not Flammable
Flashpoint Autoignition Temperature

temperature temperature

Types of Fire
Fire is a oxidation-reduction chemical process of combustion involving
rapid oxidation of a fuel source at an elevated temperature, accompanied
by the release of energy and the production of heat, light and gaseous by-
products exothermic reaction.
Chemical equations:
Stoichiometric combustion of a hydrocarbon in oxygen

+ 2 2 + 2
2
Stoichiometric combustion of a hydrocarbon in air

+ 2 + 3.712 2 + 2 + 3.712
2
Incomplete combustion of a hydrocarbon in oxygen

+ 2 2 + + 2 + 2

Types of Fire
Flammable liquids Liquid Fires
Ignition
Flammable gases Gas Fires Pool fire in
open air;
Flash fire; Pool fire in
Jet fire; sea surface;
Heat transfer from a fire causes a heat flux Cloud of Pool fire in
to objects in the surroundings which may flammable enclosed rea;
cause severe damage to those objects. gases. Fireball.
Depending on the type of outflow:
Outflow is in the liquid state, then a pool of flammable substance is formed and a
pool fire may occur;
Outflow is a high pressure flammable gas and ignites immediately, a jet fire occurs. If
the outflow is very sudden a flash fire may result;
Outflow is a low-presure flammable gas and it does not ignite immediately, a cloud of
flammable gases may be created.

Types of Fire
Basics on heat transfer phenomena from a fire
The Surface Emissive Power, [W/m2] is the heat flux due to heat radiation at the
surface area of the flame.
The Stefan-Boltzmann equation heat rate from a radiating surface of a flame:
= 4 4 Eq. 5
Where
[-] grey body emissivity [K] temperature of the flame surface
= 5.670310-8 Wm-2K-4 [K] ambient temperature
Theoretically, , is the maximum heat flux. However, this expression over predicts
the actual heat flux since the temperature differs all over the flame, the flame does not
radiate from its all surface (part of the flame may be covered by soot) ;
There are several models in the literature to estimate the heat flux and its effects.

Types of Fire
Point-Source Models
Assume that the heat flux, [W/m2] originates from a point source, however the
analogy of the heat flux with the square of the distance has not been observed in
experiments:
1
= Eq. 6
4 2
Where
[kg/s] burning rate combustion efficiency
[J/kg] heat of combustion [m] distance from the center of the fire
Solid-Flame Models
It is assumed that the flame has a solid shape and that the flame radiates heat only
from its surface. The heat flux is calculated as a function of the Surface Emitting
Power, the Shape Factor and the Atmospheric Transmissivity. Relatively simple models
and provide relatively good results. Most widely used and can be applied in most cases
to be further detailed.

Types of Fire
Field Models
Computational Fluid Dynamics (CFDs) based on solutions of the time-averaged
Navier-Stokes equations of fluid flow. These equations describe, in partial differential
form, the conservation of mass, momentum and scalar quantities in the flowing fluid.
Field models are very good in predicting fluid flow when no combustion is involved.
Additional problems arise when trying to model combustion. Field models are very
complex describe physical and chemical processes, mathematically complex and
require large computational resources.
Integral Models
Somewhere between semi-empirical and CFD models.
Zone Models
Simple computer models that divide the considered fire compartment into separate
zones, where the condition in each zone is assumed to be uniform. Based on the
conservation of mass and energy in fire compartments.

Types of Fire Pool Fire

Pool Fire - may occur when there is an ignition of a liquid spill. The fire burns
over a horizontal pool of vaporising flammable material. The burning rate is
constant until fuel is close to being depleted.
Main characteristics:
Fire characteristics depend on the
metereological conditions;
Duration depends on the quantity
of the flammable material that
evaporates;
The burning rate of the flammable
material is equal to its vaporisation
rate from the pool.
http://www.tnp.sg/news/singapore-news/firefighters-recount-
tackling-jurong-island-oil-tank-fire


Maximum Surface Actual Surface
Burning Rate
Pool Fire Calculation Emiting Power Emiting Power
Procedure
Heat Flux View Factor
Burning Rate - m [kg/m2s] rate with which the material burns. In a pool fire the
temperature of the surface of the pool is close to the boiling point of the liquid fuel. Burning
rate equal to the liquid mass lost over a unit surface (Hottel, 1958):
+ = + Eq. 7
Very small and
Where: may be neglected
[J/kg] heat of vaporization [W/m2] radiative heat flux absorbed by the pool
[J/kgK] specific heat capacity [W/m2] heat transfer to the pool by convection
[K] boiling temperature of the fuel [W/m2] heat flux that radiates back from the pool
[K] ambient temperature of the fuel [W/m2] heat flux lost to enclosure walls


Burning Rate calculation methods:
Zabetakis-Burgess Method (1961) modification to Eq. 7 in combination with the
Stefan-Boltzmann equation:
Stefan-Boltzmann equation
4 1 approximation for the calculation of
= Eq. 8 the heat flux, [W/m2], in the flame
+ surface:
Where = 4 4
Stefan-Boltzmann constant = 5.670310-8 W.m-2K-4 Where:
[--] grey body emissivity;
- flame temperature (K) (which is not known) = 5.670310-8 Wm-2K-4;
[K] - temperature of the flame
mean-beam-length corrector (--)
surface;
(1/m) absorption coefficient of the flame [K] - ambient temperature
Replaced by empirical expression: =

1 Eq. 9

Where [kg/m2s] equivalent burning rate of an infinite-diameter pool.
Typical values for equivalent burning rate of an infinite-diameter pool, as well as for the parameters
and are given in: Babrauskas, Estimating large pool fire burning rates, V. Fire Technol (1983)
19:251. doi:10.1007/BF02380810.


Burning Rate calculation methods:
Mundan Method expression to describe the burning rate of liquified gases:
1
= Eq. 10
+
where
[J/kg] heat of vaporization

[J/kgK] specific heat capacity
[K] boiling temperature of the fuel
[K] ambient temperature of the fuel
[J/kg] Heat of combustion
1 = 0.001 kg2


Maximum Surface Emiting Power SEPmax [kW/m2] emiting power from the surface of
the flame if no soot is present heat flux due to heat radiation at the surface of the flame:
1
= Eq. 11
1+4
Where:
[kg/m2s] burning rate [kJ/kg] heat of combustion [m] pool diameter
[--] radiation fraction [m] length of the flame
Radiation fraction - - fraction of the combustion energy radiated from the flame
temperature. See Burgess, D.S. and Hertzberg, M., 1974. Pool fires. In: Heat Transfer
in Flames, Afgan, N. H. and Beer, J.M. (Ed), J. Wiley, London, Chap. 27.
The mean flame length, L [m], can be calculated using two emprirical models:
Thomas Method (Thomas, 1963);
Pritchard-Binding Method (Pritchard and Binding, 1992) improved form of the
Thomas Method.


Maximum Surface Emiting Power mean flame lenght, L [m]
Thomas Method:
0.61

= 42 Eq. 12

where
[kg/m3] density of air at ambient conditions [m/s2] acceleration due to gravity
[kg/m2s] burning rate
Pritchard-Binding Method (Pritchard and Binding, 1992) improved form of the

Thomas Method:
0.305

= 10.615 0.03
Eq. 13

1 3

= , if < 1 then = 1 Eq. 14

Where:
[m/s] wind velocity at a 10 m height [--] dimensionless wind velocity


Actual Surface Emitting Power
Soot may signifficantly reduce the radiation from the flames surface. The actual surface
emitting power, [ 2 ]:
= 1 + Eq. 15
Where:
[kW/m2] surface emitting power of soot. =20 kW/m2 (Hagglund and Person, 1976)
[--] surface fraction that is covered by soot. For oil products, equals 80%.
For fires with small diameter and not much smoke - =
Mundan-Croce Method for Hydrocarbon Fuels Fires calculated as a function of the pool
diameter D [m] empirical expression:
= 140 0.12 + 20(1 0.12 ) Eq. 16
The emitting power of soot is equal to 20 kW/m2 and is valid for large pool fires.


View Factor
The view factor, [--] is the fraction of the emitted radiation that reaches the receptor
per unit area worst case scenario wind blows towards the receptor.
angle of tilt due to the wind;
= 2 + 2 = ; =
Where:
1
2 + + 1 2
2 1 + sin
= tan +

cos 2 sin sin
tan1 + tan1 + tan1 Eq. 17.a)

1
1 sin 1
2 sin sin
= tan + tan + tan1

2 + +1 2 2 +1+ sin
tan1 Eq. 17.b)



View Factor
And:
= 2 + + 1 2 2 + 1 sin ; = 1 +1 Eq. 17.c)
= 2 + 1 2 2 1 sin ; = cos sin Eq. 17.d)
= 1 + 2 1 2 ; = 2 1 Eq. 13.e)
The angle of tilt is obtained from the following expression (Pritchard and Binding,
1992):
tan cos = 0.666 0.333 0.117 Eq. 18
Where:
2

= ; = Eq. 19



View Factor
In a situation without wind (Mundan, 1987): = 2 + 2
1
2 + 2 + 1
= tan + tan1 +

1
tan1 Eq. 20.a)
2 1
1 1 2 + 2 1
= tan tan1 Eq. 20.b)

= ;=
Where:
= 2 + + 1 2 ;= 2 + 1 2 ;= 1 +1 Eq. 20.c)


Heat Flux, [kW/m2] at a certain distance from the center of the fire depends on
the actual surface emitting power, [kW/m2], the view factor, [--], and the
atmospheric transmissivity, [--]:
= Eq. 21
Atmospheric transmissivity, , can be determined using the empirical expression

(Bagster and Pittblado, 1989):
0.09
= 4 Eq. 22
Where:
[Pa] partial water vapor pressure in air [m] fire radius
[m] distance of the receptor from the center of the fire radius 4 = 2.02 [Pa0.09m0.09]
The partial water vapor pressure in air is calculated from the saturated vapor pressure,
0 [Pa], in air and the relative humidity, (fraction 0-1) as follows:
= 0


Example: Determine the heat flux on the surface of the flame and at a distance of 20 m
from the surface of the flame. The pool was 0.02 m thick and the volume of petrol spilled
was 28.3 m3.
a) The Burning rate can be determined using
Boiling temperature, 423 K the Mudan method:
Heat of combustion, 45000 kJ/kg 1
=
Heat of vaporization, 370 kJ/kg +
0.001 45000
Specific heat capacity, 2.21 kJ/kgK = = 0.069 /2
370 + 2.21 423 298
Ambient temperature, 298 K
b) Maximum Surface Emitting Power:
Soot surface emitting power, 20 kW/m2 Diameter of the pool
Wind velocity, 5 m/s 30 4
2 = = 42.4
Density of air, 1.21 kg/m3 0.02
Viscosity of air, 16.7 Pa.s Using the Tritchard-Binding expression:
Saturation water vapor pressure, 0 2320 Pa

0.305

= 10.615 0.03
where

Relative humidity, 0.7 [-] 1 3

=
= 1.74 and = 74


was 28.3 m3.
Assuming = 0.2 the maximum surface emitting power is determined as follows:

= = 78.6 2
1+4
Actual surface emitting power, considering equals to 80% and = 20 2 :
= 1 + = 31.7 2
Determination of the view factor
2

= = = where in [2 ]

tan cos = 0.666 0.333 0.117 = 49.6

On the surface of the flame: = 0.938 ( = 0.324 ; = 0.881);
20 m from the surface of the flame: = 0.629 ( = 0.331 ; = 0.535).


was 28.3 m3.
Determination of the heat flux:
0.09
= 4 where = 0
20 = 0.79 and 0 = 1
= = 31.7 0.938 1 = 29.7 2 at the surface of the flame
= 31.7 0.629 0.79 = 15.8 2 at 20 m from the surface of the flame

Types of Fire Fire Ball

Fire Ball can occur due to a very rapid outflow and ignition of pressurized
flammable gases. It is worth noting that even today the necessary conditions under
which a fire ball can occur are not fully understood.
A fire ball results from a rapid ignition that follows na event known as BLEVE (Boiling
Liquid Expanding Vapor Explosion)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sl-
Tianjin, China, 12 August

JgyQA7u0
2015
The fire ball is controlled by high pressure conditions;
https://www.youtube.com/w
The duration is very small or almost instataneous; atch?v=RC-pRGBLsSQ
Fire balls radiate very large amounts of heat causing severe damages.


Dimensions Maximum Surface
Burning Rate
Fire Ball Calculation and Duration Emitting Power
Procedure
Actual Surface
Emitting Power
Dimensions and Duration mostly emprirical expressions

Determination of the mass, [kg] of the flammable substance:
= Eq. 23
Where
[--] fraction of the volume which is filled [m3] initial volume of the [kg/m3] density
with pressurized gas in the liquid phase vessel
Guidelines:
Up to 1 3 of the fire ball its diameter, , increases up to its maximum, ;
The shape of the fire ball is assumed to be spherical. The maximum height that the
center of the sphere rises is approximately equal to its diameter.


Dimensions and Duration mostly emprirical expressions
Diameter of the fire ball, , for the first 1
3 [s] Hardee, Lee and Benedict,
1978:
= 1 1 4 1 3
Eq. 24
Where
1 =8.664 mkg-1/4s-1/3 [kg] mass of the flammable substance [s] time
Maximum diameter, [m] and the total time duration, [s] according to the TNO
Method, 2005:
= 4 0.325 Eq. 25
= 5 0.26 Eq. 26
Where
4 =6.48 mkg-0.325 5 =0.852 skg-0.26
Height of the fire ball from the ground, [m]:

= Eq. 27


Burning Rate, [kg/m2s]:

= 2 Eq. 28
0.888
2
Where 0.888 is the time-average surface of the fire ball sphere.
Maximum Surface Emitting Power, [kW/m2]
= Eq. 29
Where
[--] radiation fraction fraction of the [kg/m2s] burning [kJ/kg] heat of
combustion energy radiated from the flame surface rate combustion
Determination of radiation fraction, [--], according to TNO, 2005:
0.32
= 6 Eq. 30
Where
6 = 0.00325 Pa-0.32 [Pa] vapor pressure inside the vessel
Traditionally, , ranges from 0.2 to 0.4.


Actual Surface Emitting Power due to the very small duration of fire, it may be
assumed that not enough soot is formed to significantly influence the radiative heat
flux, hence:
= Eq. 31
View Factor, [--] fraction of the emitted radiation that reaches the receptor.
Total heat emitted from a sphere of radius R is equal
to 4 2 [kW];
At a certain distance of the receptor the emitted heat
per unit rea is equal to 4 2 4 2
[kW/m2];
The View Factor, :
2
= Eq. 32
Where:
= 2 + 2 Eq. 33


Heat Flux, [kW/m2]:
Typical values:
= Eq. 34
150 < < 300 2
Where
[kW/m2] actual surface emitting power [-] The view factor
[-] atmospheric transmissivity
The atmospheric transmissivity, , can be determined as follows (empirical expression,

Bagster and Pittblado, 1989):
0.09
= 7 Eq. 35
Where
[Pa] partial water vapor pressure in air [m] distance of the receptor from the center of
the fire of radius R [m]
[-] atmospheric transmissivity
7 =2.02 Pa0.09m0.09
Partial water vapor is calculated using the saturation vapor pressure, [Pa] and
relative humidity, (fraction 0-1) as = 0 .

Types of Fire Jet Fire

Jet Fire fire of turbulent dispersion due to the combustion of flammable
substances released continuously with considerable momentum in a specified
direction.
Due to the high pressure with which

the gas is released metereological
conditions do not influence the
formation of jet fires;
The duration depends on the quantity
of fuel released;
Burning rate is equal to the outflow
rate;
To determine the heat flux, the
assumed shape of the jet is conical.


Exit Equivalent Flame Maximum Surface
Velocity Diameter Dimensions Emitting Power
Jet Fire Calculation
Procedure
Actual Surface
Emitting Power
Exit Velocity of the Expanding Jet, [m/s], is expressed as a function of the Mach
number, = , where [m/s] is the velocity of sound. Exit velocity of a
flammable gas:

= Eq. 36

=
Where
[-] - Mach number = 8.3141 J/molK universal gas constant

[-] ratio of the specific heat capacity at constant pressure [J/kgK], to the specific heat capacity at
constant volume [J/kgK]
[K] gas temperature [kg/mol] molecular weight of the gas


Exit Velocity of the Expanding Jet, [m/s]
The Mach number, [-], of the jet can be calculated as follows:
Sonic-Supersonic 1
+1 0 1 2
= Eq. 37
1
Where
[Pa] ambient pressure 0 [Pa] pressure at the point of the exit of the jet from the hole
0 4 0
0 = = Eq. 38
02
Where
[kg/s] mass flow rate of the fuel gas in the jet 0 [m] diameter of the hole
0 [kg/m3] density of the gas at the exit point from the hole 0 [K] temperature at the same point


Sonic-Supersonic 1
Temperature, 0 , considering the energy balance between inside the vessel and the
hole:
2 02
+ = 0 + Eq. 39
2 2
Assuming = 0, = 1 1 , and 0 for = 1:

2
0 = Eq. 40
1+
Where is the temperature inside the vessel.
In case of adiabatic flow ( - jet temperature) overall heat transfer across the
boundary between the thermodynamimc system and the surroundings is absent:
1
2 1
0 = ; = Eq. 41
+1


Subsonic flow < 1.
1+2 1 02 1
= Eq. 42
1
Where 0 [m/s] is the velocity of the fuel at the exit point from the hole:
4 1
0 = Eq. 43
02
Source Equivalent Diameter, [m]

Expresses the diameter of a hypothetical nozzle through which flows air of density,
[kg/m3], with a flow rate [kg/s] and exit velocity [m/s]:
4
= Eq. 44



Flame Dimensions
Empirical expressions were defined to determine the length, [m], of the flame
(Kalghatgi, 1983, 1984):
= 0 0.51 0.4 + 0.49 1 0.00607 90 , where 0 = Eq. 45
And is the root of the equation:
1
3
5 3 2 3 2.85 2 3
0.024 + 0.2 =0 Eq. 45.a)
2
And

= Eq. 45.b)
15.816 +0.0395
Where
[m] equivalent source diameter [] angle between of the hole and the
[m/s] velocity of the fuel in the jet horizontal axis in the direction of the wind
[kg/mol] molecular weight of the fuel


Flame Dimensions
The angle between the axis of the hole and the axis of the flame, [] can be calculated
as follows:

= Eq. 46

[m/s] wind velocity [m/s] fuel velocity in the jet
For 0.05 the conditions of the jet prevail; for high

values of , the angle is more influenced by air:
0.05 0 = 8.000 + 0 90 (1


Flame Dimensions - The lift-off, [m], based on the figure is determined as follows
(Chamberlain, 1987):
sin sin
= = and = 0.187 20 +
sin sin
0.015 Eq. 47
The length of the frustum, [m], is determined as
follows:
= 2 2 2 cos Eq. 48
The width, 1 [m]:
1
1 = 13.5 6 + 1.5 1 70
1 Eq. 49
15
Where:
1 3
= 1000 100 + 0.8 and Eq. 50
2 2
The frustum tip width, 2 [m] (Chamberlain, 1987):

2 = 0.18 1.5 + 0.31 1 0.47 25 Eq. 51


Flame Dimensions Surface area of the frustum including end discs:
2 1 2
= 12 + 22 + 1 + 2 2 + Eq. 52
4 2 2
Maximum Surface Emitting Power, [kW/m2]

= Eq. 53

Where:
[m2] total surface area of frustum including discs
The fraction of the combustion energy radiated from the flame temperature Radiation
fraction, [-]. Empirical expression (Chamberlain, 1987):
= 0.21 0.00323 + 0.11 Eq. 54
Where [m/s] is the exit velocity of gases in the jet (see Eq. 36).


Actual Surface Emitting Power, [kW/m2]
= 1 + Eq. 55
Specifically, in the case of jet fires the fraction of the surface covered by soot is small,
hence, = .
View Factor, [-] represents the fraction of the radiative heat that reaches the
receptor.
Assume the flame as a tilted cylinder with a diameter equal to the average of the
diameters of the two end discs of the frustum.
2 2
= sin + cos Eq. 56.a)
sin
= 90 + Eq. 56.b)
cos
1 +2
= Eq. 56.c)
4


Heat Flux, [kW/m2]
= Eq. 57
The atmospheric transmissivity, [-], is determined using the empirical expression
(Bagster and Pittblado, 1989):
0.09
= 4 Eq. 58
Where
[Pa] partial water vapor pressure in air [m] distance of the receptor to the center of the fire
[m] radius of the fire 4 =2.02 Pa0.09m0.09
The partial water vapor pressure is determined as follows:

= 0 Eq. 59
Where
0 [Pa] saturation vapor pressure in air relative humidity (0-1)


The heat radiation generated by the combustion of the flammable substances may
cause severe injuries to people and severe damages to surrounding structures. The
effects on people and structures depends on the distance between them and the fire.
Thermal Radiation Intensity Limits:
To mitigate the effects of the heat flux, thermal radiation intensity limits were defined.
The limits prescribed by the American Petroleum Institute (API) are as follows:
Heat Flux Effects on materials Effects on humans
[kW.m-2]
37.5 Equipments damage 100% lethality in 1 min. 1% lethatlity in 10 S.
25 Minimum intensity for ignition of 100& lethality in 1 min. Serious injuries in 10 s
wood in prolonged exposure
12.5 Minimum intensity for ignition and 1% lethality in 1 min. 1st degreee burns in 10 s
melting of plastic tubes
4 No lethality. 2nd degree burns probable
Pain after exposure of 20 s
1.6 Acceptable limit for prolonged exposure


Effects on Materials:
1st degree damages: total destruction or complete material failure;

2nd degree damages: superficial, visual decay and materials.
To analyse the damage degree the surface temperature of the material is examined and
used to establish the damage criterion.
1st degree damages 2nd degree damages
[kW/m2] [K] [kW/m2] [K]
Stainless steel 1400 480
Steel 150-200 770 20-80 470
Wood 15 680 2 370
Aluminum 520 - -
Glass 4 390 - -
Synthetic materials 15 - 2 370
The critical heat flux indicates the minimum heat flux required so that the surface material
reaches its critical temperature


Determination of the surface temperature, [K], in order to assess if the critical value,
[K] is reached for 1st and 2nd degree damages, using na energy balance in the
material.

4 + =0 Eq. 60

Where
[-] absorption coefficient [W/m2] incident heat flux [m] surface that receives the heat
flux
=5.670310-8 Wm-2K-4 [K] surface temperature [m] surface from which heat is
emitted
[-] grey body emissivity [K] ambient temperature [Wm-2K-1] heat transfer by
convection coefficient
1st degree damages 2nd degree damages
Absorption coefficent 1 0.7
Grey-body emissivity 1
Heat transfer by convection coefficient 2-3 (293 K) / 7 (373-473 K)


Example on the surface ratio calculation:
b
2(+) 2 +2
= =4 = =6

h=2b
h=b
b
Example: Assess the material damage in a warehouse 50 m from the surface of the
flames. Assume that the heat flux is equal to 50000 W/m2.
4 + =0
For 1st degree damages: = 1; = 1; = 7 2 1 and = 5.6703 108 2 4
For steel, = 6 = 523
According to the Table in slide 51 the steel structure only suffer 2nd degree damages.

Field Models
Performanced Based Approach
The performance based approach involves the assessment of three basic components,
namely the fire modelling, the thermal analysis and finally the structural response.
CFD/Field Models Advanced Methods Fire

provide complete temperature-time Modelling
relationships. The temperature distribution
is time and space dependent. Very detailed Thermal Structural
input in order to solve fundamental Analysis Analysis
equations of the fluid flow
Advanced Models heat transfer phenomena Advanced Finite Element Models

Convection, Radiation and Conduction. Provide Detailed temperature distribution; Full
accurate solution for any fire conditions. Input material stress-strain temperature
parameters: heat flux or fire curves, boundary ralationship; Thermal expansion
conditions, member geometry and material thermal properties; Applied loading; Boundary
properties. Solution: 1 to 3D time and space conditions. Solution: strains, stresses,
dependente temperature profile. Usinf Finite displacements, rotations throughout the
Element software packages fire duration.

Field Models
Computational Fluid Dynamics CFD Most advanced and sophisticated fire
modelling technique applied extensively to assess fire behaviour.
How to setup a CFD simulation:
Pre-Processor
Geometry creation;
Mesh generation;
Transport Equations: Material properties defintion; Physical models:
Continuity equation; Boundary conditions definition. Turbulence;
Momentum equation; Combustion;
Mass transfer equation; Radiation;
Heat energy transfer equation Solver Settings: Soot formation;
Initialization (solver, time step, Particles-fluid interaction, etc
etc;
Solution control;
Monitoring;
Convergence criteria
Post-Processor:
Plot;
Contout, vector, tracer and maps of key parameters, such as concentration,
pressure, temperature, heat flux, velocity, energy, etc.

Field Models
Fire Dynamics Simulator NIST National Institute of Standards and Technology
FDS is a CFD model designed to model combustion and fire driven flows. FDS
numerically solves the low Mach formulation ( < 0.3) of the Navier Stokes equations
that describe the flow of the fire, heat transfer and smoke transport;
The partial derivatives of the conservation equations of mass, momentum and energy
are approximated as finite differences, and the solution is updated continuously in time
on a 3D rectilinear grid;
Thermal radiation is computed using a finite volume technique on the same grid as the
flow solver;
Smokeview is the software used to produce animations and final results;
Aplications in Fire Safety Engineering:
Fire investigations and research;
Design of smoke control systems (also jet fan ventilation);
Assessment of evacuation.

Field Models
Basic principle FDS calculations are performed within a domain that is made up of
rectilinear volumes called meshes and each mesh is divided into rectangular cells;
Limitations:
only valid for low speed flow (low speed Mach numbers less than 0.3) with an emphasis on
smoke and heat transport from fires not abble to model fire scenarios involving flow speeds
approaching the speed of sound, such as explosions, choque flows at nozzles and detonations;
The rectilinear geometry since in some situations the geometric features do not conform to the
rectangular grid;
The uncertainty of the model is higher when the heat release rate is predicted instead of
specified due to the availability of the properties of the real material (sometimes unknown or
difficult to find) and the actual physical processes of combustion, radiation and solid phase heat
transfer are more complicated than their mathematical formulation implemented in FDS;
Users need to be experienced fire engineers, competent in both fire science and numerical
methods. Rubish in = Rubish out.

Field Models
. FDS Features
Hydrodynamic Model FDS Combustion Model Radiation Transport

solves numerically a from of the FDS uses a single step, Model Radiative heat
Navier Stokes equations mixing controlled chemical transfer is included in the
appropriate for low speed, reaction which uses three model via the solution of the
thermally driven flow with an lumpred species (a radiation transport equation
emphasis on smoke and heat species representing a for a gray gas. Equation
transport from fires. Turbulence is group of species) solved using the Finite
treated by means of Large Eddy Volume Method.
Simulation (LES)
Parallel processing
employs OpenMP in order
Radiation Transport
Geometry and multiple to exploit multiple
Model to all solid surfaces
meshes FDS approximates the processing units on a
thermal boundary conditions
governing equations on a single computer.
are assigned as well as
rectangular mesh. Several information about the burning
reactangular meshes may be behaviour of the material.
assigned to the computational
domain.

Field Models
Basic Principles:
Pyrolysis decomposition of a compound caused by heat that produce the gaseous
fuel. Solid phase pyrolysis is the generation of fuel vapor at a solid or liquid surface;
Gas phase combustion is the exothermic chemical reaction between gaseous fuel
and oxygen followed by the production of heat and flames.
How to define a fire
Specify an Heat Release Rate on a surface;
Specify thermophysical properties of fuel materials and to let them pyrolyze.
Modeling gas phase combustion REAC:
Ignition in every grid cell there a virtual spark that initiates combustion when
temperature and local ratio of fuel gas and oxygen are appropriate;
Burning Mixture fraction model
2 2 + 2 2 + 2 2 + 2 2 +


Basics on how to write an Input File (FDS_User_Guide)
FDS runs from a command prompt line (without graphical interface) FDS is based on a
single American Standard for Code Information Interchange text file containing
parameters organized into namelist groups;
Alternatively, some graphical interfaces, specifically developed, can be used:
Pyrosim (Thunderhead Engineering); ASPIRE Smoke Detection Simulation (Xtralis); Blender FDS
(Emanuele Gissi); CYPE-Building Services (CYPE).
Script for simulating a pool fire Hydrocarbon fire:
&HEAD CHID='PoolFire', TITLE='PoolFire'/ Naming the input file and definition of the simulation time
&TIME T_END=100.0/
&MESH ID='Mesh', IJK=16,16,64, XB=-1.0,1.0,-1.0,1.0,0.0,8.0/ Computational Mesh or Meshes domain made up

of rectilinear volumes.
The mesh is subdivided into uniform cells via the parameter IJK. Mesh is divided into 0.125 m cubes. This leads to
16384 cells for the mesh.
Mesh resolution in order to assess if the flow field is accurately resolved the non-dimensional expression ,
where is a characteristic fire diameter.


Script for simulating a pool fire Hydrocarbon fire:
&MESH ID='Mesh', IJK=8,8,32, XB=-1,1,-1,1,0.0,8.0/
is a characteristic fire diameter:

2
5
= where is the nominal size of a mesh cell; [kW] is the total heat release rate of the fire;

= 1.2 [kg/m3] is the density; =1 [kJ/kgK] is the specific heat and [K] is the ambient temperature (293 K].
Note: a grid sensitivity analysis should always be performed in order to verify the grid resolution.
The computational domain can consist of many connected meshes.
&REAC ID='Reaction1',
FYI='Heptane, C_7 H_16', By default, the reaction of fuel and oxygen is infinitely fast and controlled only by
FUEL='N-HEPTANE', mixing simple chemistry approach.
SOOT_YIELD=0.037/ + 2 2 2 2 + 2 2 + + + 2 2
It is necessary to specify the chemical formula of the fuel along with the yields of CO and soot. FDS will determine the
stoichiometric coefficients. See Table 11.1 in FDS_User_Guide. For example, SOOT_YIELD is the fraction of fuel
mass converted into smoke.


Script for simulating a pool fire in an offshore platform Hydrocarbon fire:
&MATL ID='STEEL',
Definition of the material properties to be used in OBST (obstructions). Obstructions
SPECIFIC_HEAT=0.46,
CONDUCTIVITY=45.8, may be columns, beams, slabs, etc.
DENSITY=7850.0, Several materials can be defined and then assigned to different obstructions.
EMISSIVITY=0.7/
&MATL ID='HEPTANE LIQUID',

SPECIFIC_HEAT=2.2464,
Solids and liquid fuels can be modeled by specifying their relevant
CONDUCTIVITY=0.14,
DENSITY=684.0, properties vis the MATL namelist group.
ABSORPTION_COEFFICIENT=1000.0, The accuracy of the simulations depend largely on the availability of
EMISSIVITY=1.0, the material properties to be used.
HEAT_OF_REACTION=364.9, Alternatively, it is possible to specify a fire of a given heat release rate
SPEC_ID(1,1)='N-HEPTANE',
(HRR). In this case it is not necessary specify the material properties.
NU_SPEC(1,1)=1.0,
BOILING_TEMPERATURE=98.5/
&SURF ID='STEEL SHEET', Specifying the geometry may be very time consuming. The geometry is
COLOR='BLACK', described in terms of rectangular obstructions that can heat up, burn,
MATL_ID(1,1)='STEEL',
conduct heat, etc; and vents from which air or fuel can be injected to
MATL_MASS_FRACTION(1,1)=1.0,
THICKNESS(1)=0.003/ the flow domain.


&SURF ID='HEPTANE POOL', SURF defines the structure of all solid surfaces or opening within ou
COLOR='YELLOW', bounding the flow domain. On each OBST and VENT line defined the
MATL_ID(1,1)='HEPTANE LIQUID',
character string SURF_ID= indicates de ID of the SURF line
MATL_MASS_FRACTION(1,1)=1.0,
THICKNESS(1)=0.02/ containing the defined boundary conditions parameters.
&OBST ID='Obstruction #1', XB=-0.5,0.5,-0.5,0.5,0.0,0.05, SURF_IDS='HEPTANE POOL','STEEL SHEET','STEEL

SHEET'/ OBST contains the
&OBST ID='Obstruction #2', XB=-0.5,-0.5,-0.5,0.5,0.0,0.1, SURF_ID='STEEL SHEET'/
parameters used to
&OBST ID='Obstruction #3', XB=0.5,0.5,-0.5,0.5,0.0,0.1, SURF_ID='STEEL SHEET'/
&OBST ID='Obstruction #4', XB=-0.5,0.5,-0.5,-0.5,0.0,0.1, SURF_ID='STEEL SHEET'/ define obstructions.
&OBST ID='Obstruction #5', XB=-0.5,0.5,0.5,0.5,0.0,0.1, SURF_ID='STEEL SHEET'/ Geometry is made of
rectangular solids.
&VENT ID='Mesh Vent: Mesh [XMAX]', SURF_ID='OPEN', XB=1.0,1.0,-1.0,1.0,0.0,8.0/ OBST describe

&VENT ID='Mesh Vent: Mesh [XMIN]', SURF_ID='OPEN', XB=-1.0,-1.0,-1.0,1.0,0.0,8.0/ planes adjacent to
&VENT ID='Mesh Vent: Mesh [YMAX]', SURF_ID='OPEN', XB=-1.0,1.0,1.0,1.0,0.0,8.0/
obstructions. Used to
&VENT ID='Mesh Vent: Mesh [YMIN]', SURF_ID='OPEN', XB=-1.0,1.0,-1.0,-1.0,0.0,8.0/
&VENT ID='Mesh Vent: Mesh [ZMAX]', SURF_ID='OPEN', XB=-1.0,1.0,-1.0,1.0,8.0,8.0/ model ventilation
&VENT ID='Mesh Vent: Mesh [ZMIN]', SURF_ID='OPEN', XB=-1.0,1.0,-1.0,1.0,0.0,0.0/ system, etc.


&SLCF QUANTITY='VELOCITY', VECTOR=.TRUE., PBY=0.0/
&SLCF QUANTITY='TEMPERATURE', PBY=0.0/ SLCF (slice file) allows the user
&SLCF QUANTITY='TEMPERATURE', PBZ=0.25/ to record various gas phase
&SLCF QUANTITY='MASS FRACTION', SPEC_ID='N-HEPTANE', PBZ=0.25/ quantities at more than a single
&SLCF QUANTITY='HRRPUV', PBZ=0.25/ point. The final animated vectors
&SLCF QUANTITY='VELOCITY', VECTOR=.TRUE., PBZ=1.0/
can be visualized Smokeview.
&SLCF QUANTITY='TEMPERATURE', PBZ=1.0/
&SLCF QUANTITY='MASS FRACTION', SPEC_ID='N-HEPTANE', PBZ=1.0/
()
&DEVC ID='THCP', QUANTITY='THERMOCOUPLE', XYZ=0.0,0.0,1.0/

&DEVC ID='THCP01', QUANTITY='THERMOCOUPLE', XYZ=0.0,0.0,2.0/ To every device DEVC a specified
&DEVC ID='THCP02', QUANTITY='THERMOCOUPLE', XYZ=0.0,0.0,3.0/
quantity, that it monitors and
&DEVC ID='THCP04', QUANTITY='THERMOCOUPLE', XYZ=0.0,0.0,6.0/ records, is assigned.
&TAIL /


Frequently used output quantities:
Quantity Description Unit Namelist
Net Heat Flux Sum of radiative heat flux an convective heat flux at a solid boundary kW/m2 B, D
Radiative Heat Flux Radiative heat flux at a solid boundary kW/m2 B, D
Convective Heat Flux Convective heat flux at a solid boundary kW/m2 B, D
Mass Fraction Mass fraction of the specified specie kg/kg B, D
Visibility Visibility length through smoke m D, I, S
Temperature Gas temperature C D, I, S
Thermocouple Temperature of a thermocouple, usually close to the gas temperature C D
Wall Temperature Solid interface temperature C B, D
Adiabatic Surface
See Slide 71- 75 C B, D
Temperature
Velocity Gas phase velocity m/s D, I, S
Normal Velocity Gas phase Wall normal velocity m/s D, B
Mass Flow Calculate integrated mass flow through a planar area Kg/s D
Heat flow Calculate integrated heat flow through a plana area kJ/s D


How to run a simulation:
Create a new folder (e.g.:
Run FDS) in the desktop
and copy the script file
(PoolFire1.fds) into the new
folder;
In the start menu type CMD
and open the window;
Type FDS and press
ENTER and then type
Smokeview and press
ENTER (check if the
software was installed
corectly).


Command cd is used to change directory. Ex.: Type cd Desktop
Now you are in your

Desktop folder
Command dir is used to see a directory listing in the folder
All your files in that

folder are listed


Command cd is used to change directory. Ex.: Type cd Run FDS
Type dir and you will see the PoolFire1.fds file (script file)
To run the simulation type: fds PoolFire1.fds


Using the Fire Dynamics Simulator several pool fires, considering heptane as the
flammable fuel, were simulated. Different pool sizes as well as different thicknesses
of liquid fuel were tested (Based on the previously presented script):
Heptane pool fire with 1m2. The thickness of the flammable liquid is 1 mm.
t=0 s t=0.36 s t=1.7 s T=5.45 s t=6.35 s t=12 s


t=0 s t=0.36 s t=1.7 s T=5.45 s t=6.35 s t=12 s


t=0 s t=0.36 s t=1.7 s T=5.45 s t=6.35 s t=12 s


t=0 s t=1 s t=5 s T=24 s t=34.8 s t=100 s


t=0 s t=1 s t=5 s T=24 s t=34.8 s t=100 s


t=0 s t=1 s t=5 s T=24 s t=34.8 s t=100 s


Heat Fluxes in Fire Dynamics Simulator
Different quantities may be used to output the heat flux to walls and surfaces:

Radiative Heat Flux the net radiative heat flux, is the sum of the absorbed

. and reflected . radiation:

= . . where . = . 4
Convective Heat Flux:

=
Net Heat Flux is the sum of the radiative heat flux and convective heat flux:

= +
Incident Heat Flux is the sum of the incoming radiation and convection. It does not
include outgoing radiation

= . + 4 +

resulting in = .
+
Gauge Heat Flux for comparing experimentally measured heat fluxes for a gauge
at a fixed temperature.

=
+ + 4 4 +

Adiabatic Surface Temperature (AST)

Temperature calculations in fire exposed structures using the Adiabatic Surface
Temperature (U. Wickstrom, et al., 2007)
Improvements in fire safety engineering, in areas related to the structural fire behaviour
of steel elements, depend on clear understanding of heat transfer to solids. Predicting
the steel temperature is critical to assess the load bearing capacity of structural
elements. Hence, a new concept was introduced ADIABATIC SURFACE
TEMPERATURE expresses the thermal exposure of a surface.
Interfacing fire models with structural models (Chao Zhang, et al, 2015):
FDS/FEM interface
Thermo-Structure
Fire modeling:
Gas phase, CFD
Thermal Analysis: Structural Analysis:
interface
Navier-Stokes equations, Solid phase, CFD/FEM Solid phase, FEM
radiation transport Heat equations, steel Kinematics equations,
equation, gas temperature, 3D/2D/1D constitutive equations, Force,
temperature, heat flux, etc element. Displacement, Stress.
One-way coupling


Temperature
Adiabatic Surface Temperature Transfer from the fire model to a thermal/structural
model, via a single quantity, a detailed description of the gas phase. It represents the
complex boundary condition at the solid surfaces exposed to fire.
AST is the surface temperature for which the net

heat flux is zero:

= . 4 +
The Plate Thermometer (PT) yields

approximately the AST under standard fire test
conditions according to ISO 834 and EN 1363.
Hence, the temperature of the structural members may be predicted using PT
measurements.


Temperature
Basic theory heat is transferred to solid surfaces via radiation and convection; net total

heat flux, :

= + Eq. 61
The net heat received by the surface is as follows:

= 4 Eq. 62
Where

- incident radiation Stefan-Boltzmann constant
- surface temperature emissivity of the material (e.g. 0.8 for steel)

The incident radiation, , is the sum of the contributions of all radiating sources
(flames, hot gases and hot surfaces):
4
= Eq. 63
where
- View factor of the ith flame


Temperature

Basic theory convective heat flux, , depends on the difference between the
surrounding gas temperature and the surface temperature:

= Eq. 64
Where
- heat transfer coefficient - gas temperature adjacent to the exposed surface
Adiabatic Surface Temperature: total net heat flux to a surface is as follows

= 4 + Eq. 65

Where - incident radiation heat flux
Considering a surface of a perfect insulator exposed to the same heating conditions as
the real surface. Its temperature is the AST. The total net heat flux of the ideal surface
is zero:
4
+ = 0 Eq. 66


Temperature
Basic theory The AST can be obtained as an output from a fire model (FM) and used
as intermediary between fire and structural model (SM).
4
. + . = 0 Eq. 67
For the structural model (SM) the heat flux is computed based on the fire conditions
computed by the fire model and the surface temperature computed by the structural
model:
4
. = . . + . . Eq. 68
Subtracting Eq. 68 from Eq. 67 the total net heat flux to the surface is as follows:
4 4
. = . + .


As previously mentioned to conduct a Performance Based Analysis it is necessary
to assess three basic components Fire Modeling; Thermal Analysis and Structural
Analysis.
Fire Modeling Hypothetical fire scenario in a substructure of an offshore platform. Large
Heptane Pool Fire 16 m2 and a thickness of 0.1 m. Total spilled volume equal to 1.6 m3


Fire Modeling Hypothetical fire scenario in a substructure of an offshore platform.
Large Heptane Pool Fire
t=1 s t=100.5 s t=300.2 s
t=400 s t=500.5 s t=550.4 s


Boundary Quantities Adiabatic Surface Temperature Boundary conditions to be
used in heat transfer analysis using the Finite Element Method.
t=2 s t=250.5 s t=496.6 s


Results for the simulation:
Integrated energy gains and losses, all in [kW]
The left graph represents the Total Heat Release Rate, and the right graph represents the radiative
heat loss to all boundaries (Q_RADI), the convective and radiative heat loss to all boundaries
(Q_CONV) and finally the energy conducted into solid surfaces, Q_COND).


Device results for the simulation:
Thermocouple measurements Adiabatic Surface Temperature measurements
Note: the results must be carefully analised. A small difference in a specific parameter
or a different mesh density may lead to significantly different results.


Inferfacing with structural models Adiabatic Surface Temperature the objective is
to transfer information to a more detailed model in order to obtain a better prediction
of the solid temperature and consequently its mechanical performance.
Representative example in order to detail the workflow
Determination
of the Adiabatic
Surface
Structural
Temperature in model
the CFD model
Heat transfer
analysis using
the FEM and
FEM software Temperatures are used
Abaqus as predifined fields.
Temperatures are used

as input in the heat
transfer model

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/john-j-berger/the-great-invisible-a-new_b_7532262.html http://www.canadian-
wellsite.com/images/Photo%20Gallery/BFM/bp3.jpg
THANK YOU FOR YOUR

ATTENTION
http://www.canadian-
wellsite.com/images/Photo%20Gallery/BFM/bp1.jpg https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deepwater_Horizon_explosion

Acknowledgments
This lecture was prepared for the Edition 1 of the training course on Advanced
Topics on the Design of Offshore Structures 1st edition (November 2016)
by Hlder David da Silva Craveiro (UC).
This powerpoint is part of the materials developed for the training course on Advanced Topics
on the Design of Offshore Structures 1st edition and it is covered by copyright. It cannot be
used in whole or in parts for any educational purpose, without special permission from the
www.cmm.pt

01 COMPLETE Advanced Course Offshore All LectureNotes

Uploaded by

Document Information

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

01 COMPLETE Advanced Course Offshore All LectureNotes

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Fatigue Analysis Introduction

Luis Borges & Jos Antnio Correia

Stages of fatigue damage

Fatigue local approaches

Global S-N approaches

Stress Concentration Factor

Fracture mechanics based approaches

Stress Intensity Factor

Institute for Sustainability and Innovation in Structural Engineering

Stages of fatigue damage

Institute for Sustainability and Innovation in Structural Engineering

Fatigue local approaches

These approaches are often applied to model fatigue crack initiation.

Institute for Sustainability and Innovation in Structural Engineering

Institute for Sustainability and Innovation in Structural Engineering

Morrow or Confin-Masion Relation:

Institute for Sustainability and Innovation in Structural Engineering

Generic damage power relation:

Institute for Sustainability and Innovation in Structural Engineering

Global S-N approaches

The treatment of fatigue life in

Eurocode 3, Part 1-9

Institute for Sustainability and Innovation in Structural Engineering

Global S-N approaches

Institute for Sustainability and Innovation in Structural Engineering

Global S-N approaches

GUIDE FOR THE FATIGUE ASSESSMENT OF OFFSHORE STRUCTURES

version 2003, updated in 2014

Institute for Sustainability and Innovation in Structural Engineering

Stress Concentration Factor

Institute for Sustainability and Innovation in Structural Engineering

Fracture mechanics based approaches

Institute for Sustainability and Innovation in Structural Engineering

Stress Intensity Factor

Modo I Modo II Modo III

Irwin (1957) showed that the magnitude of the stress

Institute for Sustainability and Innovation in Structural Engineering

Institute for Sustainability and Innovation in Structural Engineering

Luis Borges & Jos Antnio Correia

EuroCode 3, Part 1-9: Fatigue

Values for partial factors for strength

Fatigue Strength Curves for direct stress ranges

Fatigue Strength Curves for shear stress ranges

Alternative Strength c for details classified as *c

Size effects in the fatigue strength

Institute for Sustainability and Innovation in Structural Engineering

DNVGL-RP-0005:2014-06: Fatigue design of offshore steel structures

Fatigue damage accumulation

Fatigue analysis methodology

S-N curves and joint classification

Stress concentration factors

Calculation of hot spot stress by finite element analysis

Institute for Sustainability and Innovation in Structural Engineering

The document DNVGL-RP-0005:2014-06 supersedes DNV-RP-C203, October 2012.

EuroCode 3 Part 1-9: Design of steel structures, Fatigue

Institute for Sustainability and Innovation in Structural Engineering

EuroCode 3, Part 1-9: Fatigue

Damage Tolerant method

Safe life Method

Institute for Sustainability and Innovation in Structural Engineering

EuroCode 3, Part 1-9: Fatigue

Assessment method Consequence to failure

Calculation of stress ranges

The fatigue assessment should be carried out using: