Proceedings of the ASME 2022 41st International

Conference on Ocean, Offshore and Arctic Engineering

OMAE2022
June 5-10, 2022, Hamburg, Germany

OMAE2022-79445

Downloaded from http://asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/OMAE/proceedings-pdf/OMAE2022/85857/V001T01A014/6928386/v001t01a014-omae2022-79445.pdf by Shanghai University user on 26 October 2022

DEVELOPMENT OF DESIGN PROCEDURE FOR LNG CARRIERS WITH IMO TYPE-B
INDEPENDENT TANK

Beom-il Kim1 MD Shafiqul Islam2*

Korean Register Korean Register
Busan, Korea Busan, Korea

ABSTRACT 𝐾𝐼 𝑃 Stress intensity factor due to primary stress

There is a growing interest in applying the technology to
small and medium-sized Liquefied Natural Gas (LNG) carriers
to meet the recent increase in demand for LNG as an ecofriendly
fuel and for expanding LNG bunkering infrastructure. The
purpose of this study is to apply the IMO Type B tank to small
and medium-sized LNG carriers and verify the safety and
suitability of the design. One of the key technical issues of Type
B LNG tank is heat transfer analysis and selection of hull steel
grade. In this study, a heat transfer analysis was performed for
hull temperature calculation and steel grade selection. Also, the
stress levels and the thermal movements of the tank were checked
through thermal stress analysis applying thermal and
mechanical loads. Another key technical issue of a Type B tank
is to determine the size of a partial secondary barrier based on
fracture mechanics. For the accurate analysis, a procedure was
developed and verified based on direct analysis and
international regulations. Finally, the related safety and
suitability of the IMO Type B for LNG cargo tanks required by
International Gas Carrier (IGC) code were verified. Two key
technical issues with applied examples are thoroughly analyzed
in this study, could be applied in the design of independent Type
B LNG carrier.
Keywords: IMO Type B tank, heat transfer analysis, steel
grade selection, crack propagation analysis, partial 2nd barrier
design
NOMENCLATURE
a Crack length (mm)
B Thickness (mm)
𝑓𝑤 Finite width correction factor
M Blunging correction factor
𝑀𝑏 , 𝑀𝑚 Stress intensity magnification factors
𝐾𝐼 𝑆 Stress intensity factor due to secondary stress
𝐾𝑚 Stress intensity factor due to misalignment
𝐾𝑚𝑎𝑥 The maximum stress intensity factor
𝐾𝑚𝑖𝑛 The minimum stress intensity factor
N Number of cycles
𝑃𝑏 Primary bending stress (MPa)
𝑃𝑚 Primary membrane stress (MPa)
𝑃0 Design pressure (bar)
z Distance of thickness direction (mm)
Δ𝐾𝐼 Applied tensile (mode I) Stress intensity
factor range
Δ𝐾0 Threshold stress intensity factor range below
which fatigue crack growth does not occur
ρ Density
𝜎𝑌 Yield stress (MPa)
𝜎1 , 𝜎2 The maximum and minimum stress at surface
1. INTRODUCTION
The IMO type B tank has the advantage of being
structurally safe against the impact load generated by the motion
of the liquid cargo inside the cargo tank because the hull and the
cargo tank are designed independently. However, in preparation
for LNG leakage, it is necessary to install a Partial 2nd barrier in
form of a Drip Tray in the internal structure of the hull by
calculating the amount of LNG leakage for a certain period of
time. The independent tanks specified by the International
Maritime Organization (IMO) are classified as Type A, B and C
as shown in TABLE 1. Type A tank follows the general liquid
tank regulations, and if it is assumed that there is a possibility of
liquid cargo leakage, a complete 2nd barrier is required in case of
a large amount of leakage and is mainly applied to LPG carriers.

2*
Contact author: sislam@krs.co.kr

V001T01A014-1 Copyright © 2022 by ASME

 TABLE 1: IMO CLASSIFICATION OF LNG CONTAINMENT SYSTEM
IMO Classification of LNG Containment system
Tank Type Independent tank Hull integrated tank
IMO tank type A B C Membrane

Downloaded from http://asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/OMAE/proceedings-pdf/OMAE2022/85857/V001T01A014/6928386/v001t01a014-omae2022-79445.pdf by Shanghai University user on 26 October 2022

Pressurized at ambient
Fully refrigerated at atmosphere pressure
Characteristic or lower temperature For large vessels
For LPG carriers For LNG carriers For small vessels
Partial secondary
Secondary barrier Full secondary barrier No secondary barrier Full secondary barrier
barrier
Design pressure 𝑃0 < 0.7 𝑃0 < 0.7 𝑃0 > 2.0 𝑃0 < 0.7
Spherical Cylinders Mark III
Structure Prismatic
Prismatic Bilobe NO96

For type B tank, structural safety of the tank must be confirmed
by structural analysis, and the amount of leakage is calculated
through fatigue crack propagation analysis based on fracture
mechanics assuming crack occurrence, and a partial 2nd barrier is
required. Type C tank is applied to pressure vessels, and safety
and integrity of structure are ensured and there is no risk of
leakage, so, the 2nd barrier is unnecessary.
The type B tank, well known as the Moss type, has
excellent structural safety in the existing circular structure, but it
is disadvantageous to space utilization and to secure visibility of
the ship due to the protrusion above the upper deck. Although
the cargo tank was completely installed inside the hull, this
problem was overcome, but verification is required to prevent
brittle fracture from occurring in the cargo hold through fatigue
analysis, crack propagation analysis and thermal stress analysis,
etc. In addition, the partial 2nd barrier that can store the leaked
LNG must be installed [1]. However, there are very few existing
research cases on heat transfer analysis for steel grade selection
and fatigue crack propagation analysis for the partial 2nd barrier
design of Type B tank. Kim [2] briefly introduced the conceptual
procedure for crack propagation analysis for the Moss type and
the calculation process for partial secondary barriers. Park et al.
[3] performed a fatigue analysis in the time domain for the anti-
rolling chock at the top of the type B tank. Relatively recently,
Wen Dong et al. [4] evaluated the fatigue strength of the tank
support structure by the sloshing load, and Kim et al. [5]
attempted to design a fuel tank for a container ship with Type B
tank using the FEM and international guidance of the Type B
tank, limited to strength and fatigue evaluations.
In this study, the analytical method developed by Islam et
al. [6] for membrane type tank had been further extended for
Type B tank and applied to select the appropriate hull steel grade.
Based on the estimated temperature profiles and heat transfer
coefficients in void spaces, the detailed temperature distribution
of an independent SPB tank including the tank’s internal
structures were calculated using steady-state thermal FE
analysis. Also, stress analysis applying thermal and mechanical
loads was performed to check high local stress concentrations
which occurs at welds around and adjacent to the connection
among the tank wall and stringers/girders as well as stiffeners,
due to the thermal gradient around the liquid line inside the tank
[7-8].
Next, a fatigue crack propagation analysis procedure based
on the fracture mechanics specifically applied to Type B tanks
has been developed, except for strength and fatigue evaluations
that are generally performed at the ship design stage. In addition,
the stress intensity factor, which is a key variable in fatigue crack
propagation analysis, was compared and analyzed by applying
the solution of BS-7910 based on load control and ASME BPVC
based on displacement control. Finally, instead of the
deterministic method for calculating the initial crack for
calculating the cargo leakage, a method to apply the FAD
(Failure Assessment Diagram) method was presented, and its
validity was verified by applying it to the actual ship design.
2. DEVELOPMENT OF DESIGN PROCEDURE FOR
TYPE B TANKS
FIGURE 1 shows the design procedure for Type B tank
design. In the first step for structural design, the temperature of
the hull and tank must be accurately estimated. A steel that can
withstand the temperature load should be applied and evaluated
to ensure sufficient structural safety. After defining the cargo
tank, thermal design condition is selected.
The IMO thermal design condition is applicable for all hull
structures in cargo area while USCG is applied for inner hull
structures and members connected to inner hull. Thermal
material properties of steel hull, insulation, sea water and air are
defined. Heat transfer analysis is performed either by analytical
method or FE method. In case of analytical method, iterative
procedure is applied due to interdependence of compartments
and temperature dependence of heat transfer coefficients. In
order to reduce the number of iterations, recommended initial
value of structural temperature is the air temperature or seawater
temperature, depending on the surrounding medium. Overall
heat transfer coefficient representing conduction, convection and
radiation process are calculated and applied in hull temperature
calculation. The steel grade is determined according to IGC code
[1] after the calculation of hull temperature. Once the steel grade
is selected through heat transfer analysis, the strength evaluation
of hull and cargo tank is performed by applying the hull girder,
internal and external loads onto the FE model to evaluate the
structural design. This process is typical in LNG ship design.
However, the current study estimated only the structural strength
of cargo tank subjected to thermal loads and thus the structural

V001T01A014-2 Copyright © 2022 by ASME

strength against the hull girder, external and internal loads are After the stress evaluation, high cycle fatigue evaluation by
excluded in this study. loads and low cycle fatigue due to thermal loads caused by
cryogenic temperature of cargo are evaluated, but the process is

Downloaded from http://asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/OMAE/proceedings-pdf/OMAE2022/85857/V001T01A014/6928386/v001t01a014-omae2022-79445.pdf by Shanghai University user on 26 October 2022

Design for TYPE B TANK

Hull girder, internal &

external loads
Thermal design condition
(IMO/USCG)
Design
change Stress analysis
Define thermal material
properties No Allowable
 Steel hull criteria
 Insulation
 Sea water
Yes
 Air
Crack propagation
: Using fracture analysis

Selection of temperature High cycle fatigue Low cycle fatigue Stress distribution for
calculation method damage due to damage due to design life
wave loads thermal loads
Assuming initial
crack size
Analytical Finite Element Material property for
method Method Cumulative
No crack propagation
damage characteristic
coefficient
Cw < 0.5
Yes Crack propagation
: Crack length & depth calculation
Assume initial temperature of
using Stress Intensity Factor
structural member and
compartment void
No Stability of
crack
Calculation of overall heat propagation
transfer coefficient
Yes
Calculation of
Calculation of structural Design for partial drip tray
film
temperature (LNG gas leakage detection)
temperature

No Stress Distribution for 15 days

(after LNG gas leakage detection
< Criteria

Yes Determination of crack length at leakage detection

Final results of LNGC hull

temperature calculation Crack Propagation Analysis for 15 days

Determination of hull steel No Stability of

grades crack
propagation

Yes
Calculation of Maximum leakage rate

Determination of Partial drip tray size

FIGURE 1: PROCEDURE FOR TYPE B TANK DESIGN

V001T01A014-3 Copyright © 2022 by ASME
excluded in this study. The next step is crack propagation state had been utilized to determine the nominal temperature of
analysis for the design of the partial 2nd barrier. An initial crack steel plates and void space. The temperature calculations were
is assumed in the structural member for which fatigue failure is performed for both IMO and USCG thermal conditions. The
expected, and the stress distribution in the crack field should be material of cargo tank is 9% Nickel and the insulation installed

Downloaded from http://asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/OMAE/proceedings-pdf/OMAE2022/85857/V001T01A014/6928386/v001t01a014-omae2022-79445.pdf by Shanghai University user on 26 October 2022

calculated. From the viewpoint of fatigue crack growth, the main outside the cargo tank is polyurethane foam (PUF). The LNG
load is repeated wave loads during ship design life, and these are temperature of -163oC was applied at the cargo tank.
also main loads for the independent tank. The long-term stress
distribution by wave loads is directly related to fatigue failure. In TABLE 2: THERMAL DESIGN CONDITIONS FOR HULL
general, long-term stress distribution is estimated through direct TEMPERATURE CALCULATION
load analysis and stochastic analysis to accurately consider the Air Seawater
actual environmental load at the design stage. Design
Temperature Velocity Temperature Velocity
In this study, for the simplification of this process, the condition
[oC] [knots] [oC] [knots]
maximum stress that can occur during the design life of the ship
IMO 5 0 0 0
was calculated, and the simplified stress distribution based on the
Weibull function was applied. And then, it should be confirmed USCG -18 5 0 0
that cracks in the thickness direction do not penetrate in the
structurally weak members of the cargo tank during the design -18.0
-18.37
-18.01
life of the ship. In addition, to verify the stress intensity factor, -22.09 -19.99

which is a key variable in crack propagation analysis, the most

-18.91
-21.59
-18.0

-18.04
-18.01
widely used solution of BS7910 [9] and the solution of ASME

-19.88
USCG condition: USCG condition:
-15.61
BVC [10] were applied and the results were compared and Air temp. -18oC
Sea water temp. 0oC
Air temp. -18oC
Sea water temp. 0oC
Wind speed 5 knots Wind speed 5 knots
verified. -16.47
-18.0

-13.38
-14.46
Although stability against crack propagation is primarily

-17.51

-15.70
evaluated at this step, IMO requires a more stringent analysis -0.30 -7.78
LNG (-163oC) LNG (-163oC)

procedure. That is, a process required to prove that brittle

fracture of the material will not occur. This design concept was

-2.71
-4.25

0.0

-6.06
-7.79

-0.09
mainly applied to aviation and nuclear reactors, and the concepts
-5.42 -5.86 -5.91 -4.23
of ‘damage tolerance design’ and ‘leakage before failure theory’ -1.75 -2.41
-1.0 -1.27
-2.66 -2.73
-1.37
-2.68
-1.38 -1.20 -1.36 -1.38
-0.03
were reflected in the design of the LNG tank with IMO Type B -0.05 -0.05 -0.05 -0.05
0.0
0.0
[11-12]. Therefore, although it was shown that the crack did not Steel member temp. (oC) Compartment (space) temp. (oC)

penetrate in the previous step, calculations for the partial 2 nd FIGURE 2: TEMPERATURE CALCULATION RESULTS FOR
barrier design should be performed in preparation for the LNG USCG CONDITION
leakage due to the unexpected penetration crack.
At this time, it is essential to determine the crack size when 3.20
5.0
3.82
detecting LNG leaks, and the capacity of the partial 2nd barrier is -0.48 1.54

determined by estimating the amount of leakage for 15 days

-1.45
1.53

5.0
3.79 2.69
required by international conventions [1]. In this study, the 0.26
IMO condition: IMO condition:
1.84
Air temp. 5o C Air temp. 5o C
assumption of the initial through thickness crack was presented Sea water temp. 0oC
Wind speed 0 knots
Sea water temp. 0oC
Wind speed 0 knots
as a method of applying the FAD in BS 7910. Next, through 2.90
5.0
1.02
-0.39

thickness crack propagation analysis was performed during the

-3.81

-2.00

LNG (-163oC) LNG (-163oC)

time to back to the port (15 days). At this time, it is possible to 0.03 0.07

numerically calculate the amount of LNG leakage, determine the

-0.85
-1.93

capacity of the partial 2nd barrier, and apply it to structural 0.0

-3.19
-4.92

-0.03

design. -4.52 -5.72 -5.87 -4.08

-0.61 -1.84 -2.57 -2.71 -2.67
From the following chapters, detailed descriptions of each -0.02
-0.66 -1.11 -1.33 -1.37 -0.92 -1.30 -1.36
0.0
developed procedure are described. -0.04 -0.05 -0.05 -0.05 0.0

Steel member temp. (oC) Compartment (space) temp. (oC)

3. THERMAL-STRUCTURAL ANALYSIS FIGURE 3: TEMPERATURE CALCULATION RESULTS FOR

3.1 Thermal Analysis for Steel Grade Selection
The temperature calculation was carried out for the ordinary
section of a typical Type B Tank LNG carrier using Analytical
method. The ordinary section consists of multi-compartments
including double hull compartments and surrounding medium
such as air and sea water. The heat transfer analysis assuming
heat equilibrium of each multi-compartments of hull at steady
IMO CONDITION
The IGC code presents the maximum thickness for steel
grade at each specified temperature range of hull structures.
After the temperature calculation is completed, the steel grade
for hull is selected based on the table 6.5 of IGC code.

V001T01A014-4 Copyright © 2022 by ASME

 Grade D Nitrogen (15 oC)
Grade E 1*

Grade E 1*
Grade D

Downloaded from http://asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/OMAE/proceedings-pdf/OMAE2022/85857/V001T01A014/6928386/v001t01a014-omae2022-79445.pdf by Shanghai University user on 26 October 2022

9% Nickel (Cargo tank) Initial tank temperature = -130 oC
Grade A Nitrogen (15 oC)

LNG filling line 2nd stringer

LNG (-163 oC)

PUF (Insulation) Nitrogen (15 oC)

Grade A

Nitrogen (15 oC)

Grade D

FIGURE 5: BOUNDARY CONDITIONS FOR THERMAL

ANALYSIS

The results of thermal analysis are presented in FIGURE 6.

1*The steel grades for bilge strake, sheer strake and These calculated temperatures were used in thermal stress
deck stringer are especially selected based on USCG
requirements analysis.
Grade A

Grade A

(K)
(K)

Grade A Grade A Grade A

Grade D/E 1*

Grade A Grade A Grade A

Min. temp. = -163.0 oC
Max. temp. = -127.9 oC

FIGURE 4: STEEL GRADE SELECTION ACCORDING TO (K)

IGC CODE

3.2 Thermal Stress Analysis

The thermal contraction and expansion of an independent
cargo tank caused by the loading of liquid cargo can produce
local high stresses. Due to thermal gradient around the liquid line
as per different partial filling condition, high local stress FIGURE 6: TEMPERATURE RESULTS OF THERMAL
concentrations occur at welds around and adjacent to the ANALYSIS
connection among the tank wall and stringers/girders as well as
stiffeners. In this study, a partial filling condition (i.e. cargo level In thermal stress analysis, only the cargo tank was analyzed.
up to second stringer of tank) was considered as an example case. Insulation at tank’s outer side and the wood located between the
Thermal loads due to temperature gradients should be combined support and cargo tank were omitted from the stress analysis.
with mechanical loads such as internal pressure for FE thermal Table 3 shows the material properties of cargo tank material.
stress analysis and strength evaluation [8]. The thermal stress
analysis was performed in two steps; TABLE 3: MATERIAL PROPERTIES OF CARGO TANK

Step 1: Thermal analysis to calculate the member Property 9% Nickel

temperature Poisson ratio [-] 0.3
Step 2: Stress analysis considering the thermal loads in step Elastic modulus [MPa] 206000
1 and mechanical loads Density [kg/m3] 7850
Yield strength [MPa] 425
Kim et al. [5] studied that if LNG is loaded into a cargo Thermal elongation [mm/mmoC] 9.9e-6
tank without cooling, significant shrinkage would occur rapidly,
leading to problems such as cracking of the tank shell. For this The objective of thermal stress analysis performed in current
reason, the inner hull temperature was reduced to -130oC before study was to check the movement of the tank structure and
loading the LNG into the tank. Thus, the initial inner temperature associated stresses if occur. Therefore, the support wood and
of the LNG tank was set at -130oC and the initial outer below structures were removed from the analysis model and an
temperature was conservatively set as 15oC. The insulation and appropriate boundary was defined at the steel foundation on the
cargo tank were modelled with solid element and the other tank side.
structural elements were modelled with shell elements.

V001T01A014-5 Copyright © 2022 by ASME

 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 Symbol Support TX TY TZ RX RY RZ

1 vertical free free fixed free free free

2 Anti-pitching fixed free free free fixed fixed

1 1 1 1 2 1 1 1 1 3 Anti-rolling free fixed free fixed free fixed

Note: The wood and steel foundation (hull side) were removed from the stress analysis
model and above boundary was defined at the steel foundation on the tank side.

Downloaded from http://asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/OMAE/proceedings-pdf/OMAE2022/85857/V001T01A014/6928386/v001t01a014-omae2022-79445.pdf by Shanghai University user on 26 October 2022

3 3

Resultant displacement (mm)

1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1
Steel foundation
Cargo tank
(tank side)

wood Steel foundation

(hull side)
1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 Length contraction (FEM) =
11330-11326.4 =3.6 mm

FIGURE 7: BOUNDARY CONDITION FOR THERMAL STRESS

ANALYSIS According to equation, Length contraction = LoαΔT = 11330*9.5e-6*(163-
130) = 3.55 mm

According to ABS guideline [8], in each partial filling case, FIGURE 9: THERMAL STRESS ANALYSIS RESULTS
(DISPLACEMENT)
the mechanical loads such as hydrostatic pressure due to the
filled liquefied gas together with the design vapor pressure
4. CRACK PROPAGATION ANALYSIS FOR PARTIAL
should be applied to the tank structure together with thermal
2ND BARRIER
loads. The hydrostatic pressure due to filled LNG together with
The final crack size can be determined through the process
the design vapor pressure (i.e. 0.025MPa) was applied as per the
in FIGURE 10.
ABS’s requirement. As this study focused only on thermal
performance of the tank and thus the tank’s strength against other
Step 1: It should be verified that no fatigue cracks occur in
types of loads (hull girder, external and internal) were not
the tank structure. That is, it should be verified that the initial
evaluated. The results of thermal stresses are presented in
crack does not develop to a size that causes a decrease in the
FIGURE 8 and 9. Due to thermal loads the maximum stresses
strength of the tank structural member in consideration of the
occurred on the cargo tank elements located below and above the
ship's periodic inspection interval, inspection method, or
LNG loading line. The numerically calculated displacement
detectable crack size.
value is also well matched with the predicted value. However,
the mesh size of current FE model is very coarse and therefore,
Step 2: It should be verified that, even if fatigue cracks
more refined meshes for exact stress calculation would be
occur, they will not penetrate the members of the tank during the
performed in the next phase of the study. Again, the thermal
design life.
stress analysis case presented in this study is just an example case
and performed only to support the developed design procedure.
Step 3: It should be verified that even if the fatigue crack
penetrates the member of the tank, it does not lead to brittle
fracture and remains as a local crack for a period of time (15
days). Next, the fatigue crack size should be estimated and the
LNG leakage should be calculated.

Temperature (oC) X-stress (MPa)

Step 1 Step 2 Step 3

(Initiation) (Surface Crack) (Through Thickness Crack)

FIGURE 10: CRACK PROPAGATION ANALYSIS STEPS

Von-Mises stress (MPa)

FIGURE 8: THERMAL STRESS ANALYSIS RESULTS 4.1 Stress Distribution

(STRESS)
The welded part of the independent tank is exposed to the
stress caused by the internal cargo motion and the residual stress
caused by the welding. The crack opening stress due to internal
and external pressure can be calculated through the finite
element analysis. In general, since the actual load and stress
history cannot be accurately considered at the design stage, a
simplified stress history was used as shown in FIGURE 11. In
crack propagation analysis, the low cycle fatigue loads due to

V001T01A014-6 Copyright © 2022 by ASME

thermal cycles and impact loads due to sloshing were not
considered. 𝑧 𝑧 2 𝑧 3
𝜎𝑅𝐿 = 𝜎𝑌 [0.75 + 4.766 ( ) − 26.696 ( ) + 38.11 ( )
𝐵 𝐵 𝐵 (2)
𝑧 4
− 16.82 ( ) ]
𝐵

Downloaded from http://asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/OMAE/proceedings-pdf/OMAE2022/85857/V001T01A014/6928386/v001t01a014-omae2022-79445.pdf by Shanghai University user on 26 October 2022

P : Wave induced load
Q : Probability of occurrence The residual stress distribution in the transverse direction is
N : Number of occurrence
as follows.

25 years 𝑧
𝜎𝑅𝑇 = 𝜎𝑌 [1 − ( )] (3)
𝐵

4.3 Stress Linearization

FIGURE 11: SIMPLIFIED STRESS DISTRIBUTION
This can be determined as a long-term stress corresponding
to the design life of the ship (i.e. probability level (10−8 )). The
simplified long-term stress distribution applied in the
calculations was determined using the modified Weibull
distribution in equation (1).
∆𝜎𝑖
log10 𝑁𝑖 = 8 × (1.0 ×
∆𝜎0
) (1)
The total stress spectrum was divided into 20 groups to
eliminate the effect of the stress sequence on the crack
propagation life. ∆𝜎0 is the maximum stress range that can
occur during the life of the ship, ∆𝜎𝑖 is an arbitrary stress range,
and 𝑁𝑖 is the frequency of occurrence corresponding to an
arbitrary stress range.
In order to determine the stress distribution for fracture
mechanics evaluation, stress linearization is required. In the
fracture mechanics evaluation code, in general, the stress
distribution is classified into the membrane stress and the
bending stress component due to the primary and secondary
loads. The stress caused by the secondary load achieves self-
equilibrium, and due to the phenomenon that is relieved and
resolved by plastic deformation, it does not affect material
failure. For this reason, only the membrane stress ( 𝑃𝑚 ) and
bending stress (𝑃𝑏 ) due to the primary load are used to calculate
the stress intensity factor.
In this study, as shown in FIGURE 13 and equation (4), as
a method of linearizing stress using the maximum and minimum
stress, the stress linearization was repeated according to crack
propagation so that the welding residual stress could be
considered. The stress applied in the calculation is the hot spot
stress, and the size of the element is the unit of the thickness.

4.2 Residual Stress Distribution

The welding residual stress distribution in the crack opening
direction can be calculated directly through welding analysis, but
in this study, the distribution of the T-butt welds in BS-7910
Annex Q was applied to the calculation in FIGURE 12.
FIGURE 13: STRESS LINEARIZATION (BS 7910)

1.4
1.2 𝜎1 + 𝜎2 𝜎1 − 𝜎2
1 𝑃𝑚 = , 𝑃𝑏 = (4)
2 2
0.8
0.6
sR /sY

0.4 4.4 Stress Intensity Factor

0.2
0
In order to compare the stress intensity factor under the load
-0.2
Longitudinal
control condition and the displacement control condition,
-0.4 Transverse FIGURE 14 shows the case where residual stress is applied in
-0.6
0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 the form of pure bending (σ=300Mpa). As shown in FIGURE
z/B
14, the stress intensity factor solution determined under the load
(a) Shape of T-butt welds (b) Distribution of residual stress controlled condition in BS 7910 cannot describe the
FIGURE 12: RESIDUAL STRESS DISTRIBUTION redistribution of residual stress according to crack propagation.
(BS7910) Therefore, when the length of the crack exceeds a certain critical
point, the stress intensity factor tends to increase rapidly, which
The residual stress distribution in the longitudinal direction is can be a conservative approach.
as follows.

V001T01A014-7 Copyright © 2022 by ASME

 300.0 The method of BS-7910 uses only alternating stress when
Load controlled K solution 𝑒𝑓𝑓
calculating ∆K 𝐼 , and the method of ASME BPVC uses 𝛥𝐾𝐼
250.0 Displacement controlled K solution
for maximum and minimum stress.
Stress Intensity Factor

200.0

Downloaded from http://asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/OMAE/proceedings-pdf/OMAE2022/85857/V001T01A014/6928386/v001t01a014-omae2022-79445.pdf by Shanghai University user on 26 October 2022

300MPa 4.5 Surface Crack Propagation Analysis
150.0 a
In order to perform the surface crack propagation analysis,
it is necessary to assume the initial crack length and depth. In this
100.0
study, according to the guidelines of the Korean Register [13], a
t crack length of 5.0 mm and a crack depth of 1.0 mm for fillet
50.0 welds were applied.
FIGURE 15 shows the crack length developed during the
0.0 design life of the ship by applying the BS7910 and ASMR BVC
0.00 10.00 20.00 30.00 codes. Both results were calculated to be non-penetrating in the
Crack length (mm) thickness direction, and as expected, the application of BS79810
FIGURE 14: STRESS INTENSITY FACTOR was calculated to be a conservative result.

40.0
However, the stress intensity factor under the displacement
Initial depth (a) : 0.5mm
control conditions in ASME BPVC has the advantage of 35.0 BS-7910 ASME BPVC
Initial length (2c) : 5.0mm
simulating residual stress redistribution. As shown in FIGURE 30.0

14, it can be seen that the calculation of the stress intensity factor

Length (mm)
25.0
according to the two methods is completely different after a
20.0
certain critical point. An effective solution can be applied by
15.0
considering the conservative calculation from the design point of
view or the calculation of the redistribution of residual stress. 10.0

Equations (5), (6) and (7) show the fatigue crack 5.0
propagation equation of BS7910. 0.0
0 5 10 15 20 25
𝑑𝑎 𝐴(𝛥𝐾𝐼 )𝑚 (𝛥𝐾0 ≤ 𝛥𝐾𝐼 ) Time (Years)
={ (5)
𝑑𝑁 0(𝛥𝐾0 > 𝛥𝐾𝐼 ) FIGURE 15: FATIGUE CRACK GROWTH
𝛥𝐾𝐼 = 𝑌(𝛥𝜎)√𝜋𝑎 (6)
5. DESIGN OF PARTIAL 2ND BARRIER
𝑌(𝛥𝜎) = 𝑀𝑓𝑤 {𝑀𝑚 𝛥𝑃𝑚 + 𝑀𝑏 [𝛥𝑃𝑏 + (𝑘𝑚 − 1)𝛥𝑃𝑚 ]} (7) The next step is to calculate the amount of LNG leakage for
15 days after detecting cracks through the leak alarm device and
Equations (8), (9), (10), (11) and (12) show the fatigue crack starting to leak. In the previous step, it was verified that no
propagation equation of ASME BPVC. through thickness cracks occurred in the structural member.
However, in order to perform the through thickness crack
𝑒𝑓𝑓 3.07 𝑒𝑓𝑓
analysis for LNG leakage calculation, the initial crack must be
𝑑𝑎 3.78 × 10−9 (𝛥𝐾𝐼 ) (𝛥𝐾𝑡ℎ ≤ 𝛥𝐾𝐼 ) assumed again.
𝑑𝑁
=[ 𝑒𝑓𝑓 (8)
0 (𝛥𝐾𝑡ℎ > 𝛥𝐾𝐼 )
5.1 Through Thickness Crack Propagation Analysis
5.5 for 𝑅 < 0 Through thickness crack means that the surface crack
𝛥𝐾𝑡ℎ = [ 6.52𝑅 (9) continue to increase and the cracks penetrate completely in the
5.5 − for 0 ≤ 𝑅 < 1.0
2.88 − 𝑅 thickness direction. In this study, the FAD in BS 7910 was
applied to assume the initial crack for leakage calculation.
𝑒𝑓𝑓
𝛥𝐾𝐼 FIGURE 16 shows FAD, which is the relationship between
𝐾𝑚𝑎𝑥 for 𝑅 < 0
(10) the x-axis (Load ratio) and the y-axis (Fracture ratio). 𝐿𝑟 is the
=[ 1 ratio of the yield stress and the actual stress, and 𝐾𝑟 is the ratio
(𝐾 − 𝐾𝑚𝑖𝑛 ) for 0 ≤ 𝑅 < 1.0
1 − 0.3472𝑅 𝑚𝑎𝑥 of the actual stress intensity factor and the fracture toughness. In
the acceptable region where 𝐾𝑟 and 𝐿𝑟 are less than 1.0,
𝑝 𝑝
cracks grow stably, and in the other unacceptable region, cracks
𝐾𝑚𝑎𝑥 = 𝑚𝑎𝑥(𝐾𝐼𝑠 , 𝐾𝐼𝑠 + 𝐾𝐼 ) , 𝐾𝑚𝑖𝑛 = 𝑚𝑖𝑛(𝐾𝐼𝑠 , 𝐾𝐼𝑠 + 𝐾𝐼 ) (11) increase very rapidly. For the conservative of leakage
calculation, the point at which the crack reached the
𝐾𝑚𝑖𝑛
𝑅= (12)
𝐾𝑚𝑎𝑥

V001T01A014-8 Copyright © 2022 by ASME

 1.6 1.6 displacement (COD) can be described as in FIGURE 17-(b), and
1.4 1.4 can be expressed as equation (13).
Kr : Fracture Ratio

1.2 1.2
Initial through thickness crack
Unacceptable area 4𝜎𝑎𝑏 (1 − 𝜐 2 )
1.0 1.0
𝛿(𝑎𝑏 ) = ∙ 𝑉(𝜂) (13)

Downloaded from http://asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/OMAE/proceedings-pdf/OMAE2022/85857/V001T01A014/6928386/v001t01a014-omae2022-79445.pdf by Shanghai University user on 26 October 2022

0.8 0.8 𝐸
Increasing flaw size
0.6 0.6

0.4
Where, δ is the crack opening displacement, 𝑎𝑏 is 1/2 of
0.4
Acceptable area the crack length, and σ is the applied stress and, ν is the
Surface crack
0.2 0.2
Poisson's ratio, E is the elastic modulus and 𝑉𝜂 represents the
0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0 1.2 1.4 1.6 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0 1.2 1.4 1.6 shape modulus. Finally, the cargo leakage rate (Q) is the product
Lr : Load Ratio Lr : Load Ratio of the crack area and the flow velocity outside the crack, and it
(a) Failure assessment diagram (b) Assuming the Initial through can be expressed as follows using the orifice formula.
(FAD) thickness crack

FIGURE 16: FAILURE ASSESSMENT DIAGRAM

𝑝1 −𝑝2
Q = 𝐶𝑜𝑟𝑖𝑓𝑖𝑐𝑒 × 𝐴√2
𝜌
(14)
unacceptable region was assumed to be the initial crack. That is,
repeated loads were continuously applied to the surface cracks
developed in Section 4. The repeated loads stopped when the Equation (14) is the empirical formula for the orifice. It is
crack penetrated in the thickness direction and then entered the defined as a dimensionless and experimentally determined flow
unacceptable region. It was assumed that the crack at this time coefficient. In this study, a flow coefficient (i.e. orifice
was the initial through thickness crack for the calculation of LNG coefficient = 0.1) was applied. [13] Through thickness crack
leakage. propagation analysis was performed on the longitudinal
connection around the vertical support, which is the weak point
5.2 Calculation of Leakage to fatigue strength. FIGURE 18 and Table 4 show the estimated
The leakage rate from the crack opening will be highly LNG leakage for 15 days. The size of the partial 2nd barrier could
dependent on the opening size, which may be expressed as the be determined by integrating the cargo leakage (Q) for 15 days,
crack length and the applied stress. and then it could be efficiently placed in the space between the
LNG cargo tank and the hull.

70.0 20
Crack Length, 2c(mm) 18

60.0 16
Leakage Ratio(Liter/h)
14
Length(mm)

Q(liter/hour)
50.0 12
Initial 2c : 31.16mm 10

40.0 8

30.0 4

20.0 0
0.00 3.00 6.00 9.00 12.00 15.00
Time (Days)

FIGURE 18: CRACK LENGTH AND LEAKAGE RATIO

TABLE 4: SUMMARY OF CUMULATIVE LEAKAGE

FIGURE 17: CRACK OPENING
Time (Days) A(liter/hour) Cumulative leakage (liters)
At this time, if the stress of the opening crack is in a
compressive state, it can be assumed that the crack is closed and 3 2.421 174.31
no leakage. The average flow rates inside and outside of cargo 6 4.082 468.22
tank are 𝑞1 , 𝑞2 and the pressures are 𝑝1 , 𝑝2 in FIGURE 17-
(a). From Bernoulli's equation and continuous conditions can be 9 5.997 899.28
applied to calculate the LNG leakage.
12 7.572 1444.46
As shown in FIGURE 17-(a), when the surface crack on the
tank grows into the through thickness crack, the crack opening 15 9.227 2108.81

V001T01A014-9 Copyright © 2022 by ASME

6. CONCLUSION
In this study, in order to respond to the demand for small
and medium-sized LNG carriers, procedures and analysis
techniques were developed to be applied to LNG carriers with
between Finite Element Analysis and International
Guidance”. Advances in Material Science and Engineering,
Vol. 2018, Article ID 5734172, 2018.
[6] Islam, M. S., Choi, T. S., An, T. H., Song, K. H.
“Development of Methods for Temperature Calculation of

Downloaded from http://asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/OMAE/proceedings-pdf/OMAE2022/85857/V001T01A014/6928386/v001t01a014-omae2022-79445.pdf by Shanghai University user on 26 October 2022

B-type tanks, which are advantageous in terms of space
utilization of cargo tanks. Also, the developed procedures are
presented with applied examples. Below is the conclusion of this
study.
- Temperature calculation procedure of a Type B tank
using analytical method was developed. The procedure
is applicable for appropriate hull steel grade selection
and optimization of the insulation thickness.
- Thermal stress analysis was performed for a partial
filling condition focusing only on the cargo tank
structures and the analysis results indicate that the
maximum stresses occur on the cargo tank elements
located below and above the LNG filling line.
- A fatigue crack propagation analysis procedure for
partial 2nd barrier design was developed and analysis
was performed.
- The crack propagation pattern according to the solution
of the stress intensity factor was compared.
- The method of defining the initial through thickness
penetration crack using the FAD technique in BS 7910
was presented, and the size of the partial 2nd barrier was
determined by calculating the LNG leakage for 15 days.
- According to the developed procedure, a partial 2 nd
barrier was designed and a program that can satisfy the
requirements of international regulations had been
developed.
LNG Carrier Hull”. Proceedings of the ASME 2021 40th
International Conference on Ocean, Offshore and Arctic
Engineering, Vol. 1: Offshore Technology, V001T01A018,
2021.
[7] KR. “Guidelines of Heat Transfer Analysis for Ships
Carrying Liquefied Gases in Bulk/Ships Using Liquefied
Gases as Fuels”.2018.
[8] ABS. “Guidelines Notes on Thermal Analysis of Vessels
with Tanks for Liquefied Gas”.2019.
[9] BSI Standards Publication (2018), BS 7910- British
Standard Guide to methods for assessing the acceptability
of flaws in metallic structures.
[10] ASME BPVC Section XI Appendix A. 2021.
[11] Noh, I. S., Nam, Y. W., and Lee, H. S. “Structural Safety
Assessment of Independent Spherical LNG Tank (1st
report) - Fatigue Strength Analysis Based on the S-N
Approach”. Journal of the Society of Naval Architecture of
Korea, Vol. 30, No. 2, pp. 132-140, 1993a.
[12] Noh, I. S., Nam, Y. W., and Lee, H. S. “Structural Safety
Assessment of Independent Spherical LNG Tank (2nd
report) - Fatigue Crack Propagation Analysis Based on the
LBF Theory”. Journal of the Society of Naval Architecture
of Korea, Vol. 30, No. 4, pp. 74-82, 1993b.
[13] KR. “Guidelines on Assessment of Fatigue and Crack
Propagation”. 2021.

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
We thank R&D department of Korean Register for
providing us the opportunity to carry-out this research.

REFERENCES
[1] IMO. “International Code for the Construction and
Equipment of Ships Carrying Liquefied Gases in Bulk (IGC
Code)”, Res. MSC.370 (93), 2016.
[2] Kim, J. H. “A Study on the Prediction of Fatigue Life by
use of Probability Density Function”. Journal of the Korean
Society of Marine Engineers, Vol. 23, No. 4, pp. 453-461,
1999.
[3] Park, M. J., Park, J. S., Won, S. I., Choi, B. K., Park, K. W.,
Paik, Y. M., and Kim, Y. I. “Time domain fatigue analysis
on the upper rolling chock of IMO type B tank”. Journal of
the Society of Naval Architects of Korea, Vol. 53, No. 5, pp.
380-387, 2016.
[4] Wen, D., Zhengyi, Z., Jingxi, L., and De, X. “Strength
assessment on support system of LNG independent type B
tank under sloshing loads”. Proceeding of the ASME 2017
36th international conference on Ocean, Offshore and Artic
Engineering, Norway, June 25-30, 2017.
[5] Kim, T. W., Kim, S. K., Park, S. B., Lee, J. M. “Design of
Independent Type-B LNG Fuel Tank: Comparative Study

V001T01A014-10 Copyright © 2022 by ASME