Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Fatigue Analyses of Structures
Fatigue Analyses of Structures
of
Offshore Fixed and
Floating Structures
January, 2007
Definition
The loss of resistance of some materials due to cyclic stresses.
How it is measured
Based on a large number of cyclic tests it has been found that
the loss of resistance due to fatigue can be roughly approximated by
curves such as the one given below:
This next curve is a typical curve for the steel used on offshore
jackets (tubular structures).
It is less intuitive, however, that these curves vary also with the
environment (there is less fatigue above water than below), with
corrosion and more markedly with thickness (only for thicknesses
above 22mm).
Basically the information given by these curves is the number of
stress cycles that a steel specimen can resist for a given stress
range. So if we have a rod with a known cross-sectional area A
subjected a tensile force varying between 0 and F the S-N curve
gives me the number of cycles N that the rod will resist while
subjected to the stress varying between zero and S = F / A.
Fatigue Damage =
Total Damage =
i =1
Nappliedi
Nresistedi
Stress concentration
Checking the fatigue damage of a uniform rod subjected to an
axial stress range is very simple, but when the structural shape is
complicated it is much more difficult to determine the stress variation,
because there are stress concentrations, especially when the stress
flow changes directions abruptly.
S = S no min al SCF
a) Fixed Platforms
In this case the environmental loads are applied directly to the
structure. Figure 10 presents a jacket type structure with tubular
members loaded directly by wave and current.
Normally, in this case, the components of wave and current
velocity and wave acceleration (horizontal and vertical) can be
determined at any point of the semi-space below the water surface,
based on traditional wave theories (Airy, Stokes, Stream Function,
etc.). The forces on any member can be determined using the
Morison equation.
q=
1
1
C D V 2 D + CM A D 2
2
4
assume that all waves of the same height had the same average
period. This cut the data down to 1440 load cases.
Typical data of this form is shown in figure 12.
Fatigue Life =
1
Total Damage
Typical results present the point of the structural joint that has
the highest stress range and the corresponding fatigue life.
The main problems with the deterministic method are related
first to the fact that 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. During many years the ISSC spectrum
was said to be valid for the entire world, except for the North Sea,
where JONSWAP was used. More recently, however, variations of
the JONSWAP spectrum have been found to suit some other parts of
the world better than the ISSC curve.
For the sake of completeness the equations that govern these
spectra are given below:
5 w
S ( w) = g w exp
4 w
p
w w p
exp 0.5
w p
Where :
w angular wave frequency w =
2
Tw
Tw wave period
TP peak period or significant wave period TZ
w p angular spectral peak frequency w p =
2
Tp
g acceleration of gravity
2
4
5 H s wp
(1 0.287 ln( ))
generalized Philip`s cons tan t =
16 g 2
peakness parameter
Where:
w angular wave frequency w =
2
;
TW
TW wave period;
TP peak period or significant wave period TZ
wP angular spectral peak frequency wP =
2
;
TP
g acceleration of gravity;
2
4
5 H S wP
generalized Philips constant =
2
16 g
(1 0.287 ln( ))
Assuming that this given seastate will occur a fraction m of the entire
Life of the structure, the corresponding number of cycles will be given
by:
N = mLife / Tz
The corresponding damage, assuming a Rayleigh stress distribution
is given by:
D=
2 RMS
s 2
s
exp
ds
N ( s)
2
2
The total damage will be the sum of the damages of each seastate.
The final result given by the analysis is the life of the structure at all
the critical points (joints) where stress concentrations occur.
b) Floating Units
There are four main types of floating production platforms: the
FPSOs, the Semi-Submersibles, the Spars and the TLPs. Figures 17
through 20 show examples.
Obviously everything that was said here for fixed platforms remains
valid for floating units, but the problem is how to apply it, because the
floating units are not only complex structures, but they may also be
changing their positions with respect to the environment.
In general all of these types of platforms are moored, but the FPSOs
have different types of moorings, which actually change their
behavior.
Some FPSOs are moored, as shown in figure 21, and considered to
be fixed with respect to rotation, but many are pinned to a moored
structure called a turret, wherefore they tend to line up with the
environmental direction of incidence (see figure 22). In this case most
of the waves will come from head seas, but a small percentage will
still come from quartering and even from beam seas.
and yaw around a midship vertical axis). Water damping plays a very
important role in these calculations, because not all motions have
restoring forces.
The vessel motions can be divided into two types: the linear wave
motions and the second order excursions. The linear wave motions
are those produced for each of these 6 degrees of freedom, obtained
for waves of unit amplitude, and they are called RAOs (Response
Amplitude Operators), which is a traditional terminology for naval
architects. Structural engineers would call these curves Transfer
Functions, as we did with the wave forces on the fixed platform.
Typical RAO curves for quartering seas (the wave incidence on the
vessel is 45, 135, 225 or 315 degrees) are given in figure 24.
vessel length and especially in this case, where they are at the bow,
so the fatigue related to overall vessel bending is negligible.
Fatigue due to vortex shedding is a local member vibration problem,
which is normally prevented by using vortex suppressors.
This leaves us with the first two, which are described below.
variations
will
be
twice
these
values,
because
the
12.89XYZ
0.487-102.
0.639-106.
0.936-117.
1.77179.6
0.27 10.1
0.234-70.2
0.026-111.
0.01 -6.3
149.1
120.
0.374 -92.
0.44-92.8
0.508-94.5
0.547-97.1
0.498-103.
.097-166.
0.102 8.6
0.008 -6.1
-160.
114.9
0.221 -1.9
0.248 -2.2
0.268 -2.4
0.258 -2.
0.193 -1.5
0.018 17.9
0.036179.9
0.012 167.
0.003 19.2
0.001167.6
WAVE
WAVE
WAVE
WAVE
END
A109
A127
A145
A163
18
18
18
18
5.64
2.81
1.25
0.70
8.5
6.0
4.0
3.0
135.0
135.0
135.0
135.0
Where V is the wind velocity (10m above sea level), f is the wind
frequency in Hz, k is a roughness coefficient (average about 0.0015)
and X = 1800 f / V.
The wind pressure for an average wind speed V is given by the
Morison equation:
P = 0.5 Cd V2
Assuming that V has an average value Va plus a small variation dV
due to turbulence. This equation becomes:
P = 0.5 Cd (Va+/-dV)2 = 0.5 Cd Va2 +/- Cd Va dV
This equation, where the second order term was neglected, provides
both static and dynamic components of wind. The dynamic
component would be calculated in a dynamic spectral wind analysis
and then added to the static.
A small example is given below just to illustrate the spectral wind
calculations.
It was shown above for fixed platforms that the RMS value RMS of
the stress variation s for a given seastate is given by the following
equation:
1m
M=200kg
Fy = 350
3m
EI = 134 kN m2
( 21/2 std)
The equations given below calculate A, the plate area, K, the stiffness
of the plate column support (wind force required to displace the plate
1m), Pstatic, the static wind pressure, Pdynamic, the dynamic wind
pressure and finally Ysta.dev, the standard deviation of the dynamic
wind displacement. In this equation, Hn is the dynamic amplification
factor.
A=
D 2
= 0.785 m 2
4
kN
3EI 3 134
K= 3 =
= 14.89
m
27
L
V2
kgf
Pstatic =
= 100 2 = 1kPa
16
m
Pdynamic = Cd Vm dV = 0,000125 1 40dV = 0.005dV
Y sta.dev. =
2
Hn =
1
14.89
Hn (0.005 0.785) 2 Sv f
1
1
=
(1 r 2 ) 2 + (2 r ) 2 (1 r 2 ) 2 + 4 10 6 r 2
4X
0,0015 40 2
4 45 f
k V 2
S=
f
f
(2 + X 2 ) 5 / 6
(2 + 45 2 f 2 ) 5 / 6
1800 f 1800 f
=
= 45 f
X=
40
V
432
S=
( 2 + 2025 f 2 ) 5 / 6
250
200
Sv
150
100
50
0
0
0.5
1.5
2.5
f (Hz)
f =
2
= 0.015625
128
f =
1
2
2
Hn =
1 14.89
k
=
= 1,37
2
m 2
1
1
=
2 2
2
(1 r 2 ) 2 + 4 10 6 r 2
f
f
1
+ 4 10 6
1.37
1
.
37
300000
250000
150000
Hn
200000
100000
50000
0
0
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
1.2
1.4
1.6
1.8
1.6
1.8
f (Hz)
1000
900
800
700
Hn
600
500
400
300
200
100
0
0
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
1.2
1.4
f (Hz)
1.984375 ; 0.015625
1
2
2
f 2
+ 2 10 6 f
1
1.37
1.37
f =0
3.96875 ; 0.03125
154 10
432
2 + 2025 f 2
0,000104
2
2 2
f
6 f
+ 2 10
2 + 2025 f 2
1
1.37
1.37
f =0
0.015625
5/6
5/6
Y sta.dev =
1
0.0305 = 0.0117m
14.89
est =
1 0.785
= 5.27cm
14.89
P[A > ] =
A 2 / 2 2
dA
for which the final total deflection is given by 5.27 + 3 x 1.17 = 8.79cm
The corresponding dynamic magnification factor is:
DMF =
8.79
= 1.67
5.27
S
FS ( S ) = exp
S >0
Where:
Fs(S) is the probability that the value S will be exceeded
S is the random variable representing the stress range;
is the Weibull shape factor;
is the Weibull scale factor;
SR
(LnN R )1 /
Shape Parameter:
The shape parameter can be obtained from a full spectral analysis,
used to calibrate the simplified method. After years of experience,
however, there is sufficient knowledge of the problem to allow the
value to be established for given types of structures. For FPSO
modules, for instance, a value of about 0.85 is acceptable.
Fatigue Damage
It can be shown that the closed solution for the fatigue damage
considering a two segment S-N curve is as given below:
D=
NT m m
N
r
+ 1, z + T
o + 1, z
A
C
Where:
NT is the total number of cycles during the design life;
A, m parameters obtained from first segment of the S-N curve;
C, r parameters obtained from second segment of the S-N curve;
the Weibull shape factor;
the Weibull scale factor;
+ 1, z
o + 1, z
and
are incomplete gamma functions.
(a, z ) = t a 1 e t dt = (a ) o (a, z )
0
o (a, z ) = t a 1 e t dt
0
Where:
SQ
z =
These curves have all been established assuming a life safety factor
of 1.0 and a fatigue life of 20 years. This has led to 100 million cycles.
In case the life is different or a different safety factor is desired,
correction factors have been provided for each curve, one again both
in the air and under water with cathodic protection.
The safety and the life are not the same as those for which the tables
were established, so first this must be corrected. This correction is
linear and related to the number of cycles:
Factor = 20 x 1 / (25 x 2 ) = 0.40.
This value could also have been obtained form table 5.8 given on the
previous page.
This value should be used in table 5.5, two pages above, to obtain
the stress reduction factor for the weld type and in air environment
established. Based on linear interpolation between 0.8 and 0.9 that
table yields a value of (0.733 + 0.741)/2 = 0.737.
Linear interpolation is also used in table 5.3 to obtain (208 + 174.6)/2
= 191.3MPa.
The final value is then obtained by multiplying this value by 0.737,
which yields 191.3 x 0.737 = 141MPa.
Attention is drawn to the fact that this value is only limited for
thicknesses up to 25mm. A further reduction based on the equation
given below is applicable for plate thicknesses exceeding that value.
Corrected Stress = Original Value x (25mm / greater thickness)0.25
For a 30mm plate, for instance the corrected value would be:
Corrected Stress = 141 x (25/30)0.25 = 134.7MPa