Académique Documents
Professionnel Documents
Culture Documents
1. Introduction 4
Description 4
Objective / Scope of work 6
Assumptions and limitations 6
Summary and conclusions 7
Abbreviations 8
2. References 9
3. Design Basis 10
Regulations 10
Material data 10
System of units 10
Location of New DIFFS skid 11
Design conditions 12
1. Introduction
Description
As a part of this contract, Apply Srco shall perform an upgrade of the Deck Integrated Fire
Fighting System (DIFFS).
A new DIFFS skid will be placed on top of Living Quarters L18, elevation +74.700.
1) DIFFS skid dim.: 4,6x2,5x2,4; wet weight 11,0 ton (12,0 ton used in the analysis)
3) DIFFS tank skid will be supported at 4 points by pads welded to the deck. The DIFFS skid
will be bolted to the pads.
4) Loads and geometry applied in the supplier analysis are representative with exception of
lifting loads which are found to be somewhat to small.
5) The existing structure is checked for the new loads in report 229A-APS-N-RA-0009.
6) Environmental loads are taken from the living quarter original report; 229A-HHI-N-RA-
0451_Z01 LQ Module Analysis Report.
7) As a result of the verification some modifications to the structure of the DIFFS skid was
introduced. Latest skid modifications are included in verification (not covered by Supplier
report):
a) Side channel beams C160x100x8 are closed with 8mm plate creating BOX section
160x100x8. Plate is added between lifting points.
b) Beams supporting tank are reinforced with welded plate of 100x8 mm forming minimum
top flange of 200mm width
c) Roof plate bolt spacing to perimeter beams is reduced (halved) and plate bolting to
transverse channel beams is added.
STRUCTURAL ANALYSIS, DIFFS SKID
Figure 1-4 DIFFS skid ISO view (roof plate not shown)
At ALS-blast case, the critical components are the skid doors. They may be overstressed locally
and deform but will not break free from its anchorage.
The fatigue utilisation is within allowable limit.
STRUCTURAL ANALYSIS, DIFFS SKID
Abbreviations
THK Thickness
PL Plate
ULS Ultimate Limit State
SLS Serviceability Limit State
ALS Accidental Limit State
FLS Fatigue Limit State
NA Not applicable
DC Design class
MDS Material Data Sheet (acc. to Norsok M120)
EL Elevation
DRG Drawing
No. Number
GR Grade
CoG Centre of Gravity
DF Design Factor
LF Load Factor
LC Load Case
LTB Lateral Torsional Buckling
STRUCTURAL ANALYSIS, DIFFS SKID
2. References
Standards:
Norsok N-001, Rev. 8, Sep. 2012, Structural Design.
Norsok N-004, Rev. 3, Feb. 2013, Design of steel structures.
Norsok N-003, Ed. 2, Sep. 2007, Actions and action effects
Norsok M-001, Ed. 5, Sep. 2014, Material selection
Norsok M-120, Ed. 5, Oct. 2011, Material data sheets for structural steel
NS-EN 1993-1-1:2005+NA: 2015, Eurocode 3: Design of steel structures - Part 1-1: General
rules and rules for buildings.
NS-EN 1993-1-8:2005+NA: 2009, Eurocode 3: Design of steel structures - Part 1-8: Design
of joints.
NS-EN 1993-1-5:2006, Design of steel structures - Part 1-5: Plated structural elements
NS-EN 1993-1-5:2006, Design of steel structures - Part 1-4: Supplementary rules for
stainless steel (including NS-EN 1993-1-4:2006/A1:2015)
NS-EN 1993-1-7:2007, Design of steel structures - Part 1-7: Plated structures subject to
out of plane loading
DNV-RP-C203, OCTOBER 2011: Fatigue Design of Offshore Steel Structures
Norsok R-002 Lifting Equipment (Edition 2017)
3. Design Basis
Regulations
The structure of the FPSO including substructure is to be design and constructed in accordance
with the following NORSOK Standards.
Structure modifications follow the same requirements.
Material data
DIFFS skid is made of AISI 316 / AISI 316L steel. EN 1.4401 / 1.4404
Table 3-1 Steel material data
System of units
The System International (SI) is used for structural design.
Length: meters (m)
Force: Newton (N)
Mass: tons (tons)
Acceleration: m/s2 (g = 9,81 m/s2)
Density: kg/m3
Stresses: Mega Pascal (MPa or N/mm2)
Pressure: Mega Pascal (MPa or N/mm2)
STRUCTURAL ANALYSIS, DIFFS SKID
L18 module
Design conditions
Design is carried by the LRFD method. Design condition as defined in Norsok N-001 to be
checked:
ULSa and ULSb - Ultimate limit state stress, buckling
SLS Serviceability limit state deflections, deformation
ALS - Accidental Limit State (blast)
FLS Fatigue Limit State
Action type
Limit state Permanent Variable Environmental Deformation
ULS a) 1,3 1,3 0,7 1,0
ULS b) 1,0 1,0 1,3 1,0
SLS 1,0 1,0 1,0 1,0
ALS 1,0 1,0 1,0 1,0
1.15
115
ULS
1.3
1.3 Stability and section capacity.
1.0 Utilization 1.0.
10
ALS
1.1
1.1
Type /L
For all members the span 1/250
For cantilevers 1/125
4. Structural Analysis
The following chapter contains independent check of skid structure with special focus on the
issues described in chapter 4.1.
Lifting analysis
Lifting points are not checked for the sling loads. Skid enclosure is significantly stressed locally
due to lifting. This is thin plate structure and it shall not be included in lifting check for the main,
bottom frame. Sling attachment at plate hole is not conservative as it is reducing bending and
torsion acting on the frame.
Doors
The door contact is modelled as bounded, which is not realistic, in addition, plate buckling is not
accounted for. This also makes the doors carry much more of the shear and moment loads than
it will in reality where walls are carrying all the loads.
STRUCTURAL ANALYSIS, DIFFS SKID
Roof
Roof plate calculations are not clear. It is described (5.1, A1) as to be bolted with the U-profiles
and in rest position over the transverse U-profiles & longitudinal L-profiles but in detail
calculations the plate dimensions are taken between secondary, transverse beams in the roof.
This is not correct if the plate is not bolted to these beams. This was corrected during fabrication
and plate is bolted to the structure as described in 1.3.
Weld
The welds calculated are not properly calculated, effective width is not accounted for. Most
welds are however OK by inspection for ULS and ALS based on plate thickness compared to
weld size.
Bolt connections
T-stubs not correctly checked. The yield line lengths used are incorrect. Also force readout on
bolt connections of roof beams to top frame do not match loads found from hand calculations.
Bolt connections of roof plate to top frame is not assessed.
Fatigue
Stress concentration factor is not applied and there is no documentation on how the stress is
extracted from the model.
STRUCTURAL ANALYSIS, DIFFS SKID
bload
STRUCTURAL ANALYSIS, DIFFS SKID
Lifting analysis
For lifting condition, it is assumed to carry all the loads through bottom frame. The enclosure is
neglected and applied as a dead load to the bottom frame. The self-weight of skid above self-
weight included in the analysis model is applied as linear distributed load on the frame main
beams.
STRUCTURAL ANALYSIS, DIFFS SKID
Sling attachement
Table below shows forces in the slings received from the analysis. They are higher than results
of hand calculations, which means that analysis results are at safe side.
STRUCTURAL ANALYSIS, DIFFS SKID
Figure 4-5 Local reinforcement of wall plate for carrying lifting load
STRUCTURAL ANALYSIS, DIFFS SKID
Corrugated plate is reinforced locally by welded angle bar. Load is transferred gradually to the
nearby plate, OK by inspection. Door frame also acts as reinforcement.
Figure 4-6 Local reinforcement of door frame area for carrying lifting load
STRUCTURAL ANALYSIS, DIFFS SKID
Structure utilizations
STRUCTURAL ANALYSIS, DIFFS SKID
Wall plate is checked for yield and buckling (effective cross-section is used)
Wall plate is assumed partly fixed at the bottom as it is welded to the stiff bottom frame
and pined at the top as the roof plate and beams are bolted.
Roof beams are simply supported
Roof plate is distributing horizontal loads to the side walls
Side walls are carrying the horizontal loads from roof plane to bottom frame
Side wall
Wall plate
Figure 4-19 DIFFS skid ISO view (roof plate not shown)
Loads:
Loads:
Q=0,5kN/m self weight of plate
Q=1,8kn/m = 2,19*0,8 snow
N=6,6kN wind load
STRUCTURAL ANALYSIS, DIFFS SKID
Side wall
Wind
tension/compres
Force
compression/ten
STRUCTURAL ANALYSIS, DIFFS SKID
The door frame angle L40x4 is included in the capacity check (conservatively flange is 2mm
thick).
To simplify calculations a profile with corresponding properties is modelled in Colbeam.
Buckling length of the column is half of the skid height since compression appear only at mid
span.
STRUCTURAL ANALYSIS, DIFFS SKID
Wall plate is checked for yield and buckling (effective cross-section is used)
Wall plate is assumed partly fixed at the bottom as it is welded to the stiff bottom frame
and pined at the top as the roof plate and beams are bolted.
Roof beams are simply supported
Roof plate is distributing horizontal loads to the side walls
Side wall
Wall plate
Figure 4-21 DIFFS skid ISO view (roof plate not shown)
STRUCTURAL ANALYSIS, DIFFS SKID
Loads:
Q=3,1kN/m =5,0*1,5*0,417 - blast
N=1,1kN = 2,19*1,2*0,417 snow
N=0,6kN dead load
STRUCTURAL ANALYSIS, DIFFS SKID
Side wall
Blast
tension/compre
Force
compression/te
Check of the side roof beam against force from side wall
STRUCTURAL ANALYSIS, DIFFS SKID
Figure 4-22 von Mises stress blast - south door (3mm plates)
STRUCTURAL ANALYSIS, DIFFS SKID
Figure 4-23 von Mises stress blast - west door (2mm plates)
STRUCTURAL ANALYSIS, DIFFS SKID
Figure 4-24 von Mises stress blast - north door (2mm plates)
STRUCTURAL ANALYSIS, DIFFS SKID
Fatigue FLS
A simplified fatigue calculation is performed for most critical detail beam flange splice at tank
supporting balm, see Figure 4-25 Fatigue detail.
Calculations are done acc. /S -11/ with use of nominal stress method.
Design basis are acc. /D -6/.
The stresses are taken from STAAD analysis, see Figure 4-26.
Signed Date
Document Title
This document contains NIPUNN legal entity proprietary and confidential information that is legally privileged and is intended only f or the
person or entity to which it is addressed and any unauthorized use is strictly prohibited. It is provided for limited purpos e and shall not be
reproduced, stored electronically, transferred to other documents, disseminated or disclosed to any third parties without the prior written
consent of the relevant NIPUNN legal entity. Any attachments are subject to the specific restrictions and confidentiality regulations stated
therein and shall be treated accordingly. The document is to be returned upon request and in all events upon completion of us e for which
it was provided.
229A-APS-ER203-N-RA-0001 Page 3 of 165
TABLE OF CONTENTS
1 INTRODUCTION ............................................................................................................ 7
2 REFERENCES............................................................................................................... 7
2.1 References ..................................................................................................................... 7
2.2 Definition & Abbreviations ............................................................................................... 8
3 SUMMARY & CONCLUSIONS ....................................................................................... 9
4 DESIGN BRIEF .............................................................................................................. 12
4.1 Material Properties ......................................................................................................... 12
4.2 FE Load Cases............................................................................................................... 13
4.3 Load Factors .................................................................................................................. 14
4.3.1 Partial Load Factors ........................................................................................................ 14
4.3.2 Partial Load Factor for Lifting .......................................................................................... 15
4.4 Acceptance Criteria ........................................................................................................ 16
4.4.1 Allowable Stress Criteria ................................................................................................. 16
4.4.2 Allowable Deformation Criteria ........................................................................................ 17
5 ANALYSIS ..................................................................................................................... 18
5.1 FE Geometry .................................................................................................................. 18
5.2 FE Mesh......................................................................................................................... 20
5.3 FE Loads........................................................................................................................ 21
5.3.1 Functional Loads ............................................................................................................ 21
5.3.1.1 Structural Weight ............................................................................................................ 21
5.3.1.2 Variable Loads ................................................................................................................ 21
5.3.1.2.1 Liquid Induced Loads due to Tank Content ...................................................................................... 21
5.3.2 Environmental Loads ...................................................................................................... 21
5.3.2.1 Snow and Ice Loads ....................................................................................................... 21
5.3.2.2 Transportation Accelerations ........................................................................................... 22
5.3.2.3 Platform Motions & Accelerations .................................................................................... 22
5.3.2.4 Wind Loads..................................................................................................................... 23
5.3.2.5 Live Loads ...................................................................................................................... 24
5.3.3 Accidental Loads ............................................................................................................ 25
5.3.3.1 Blast Loads ..................................................................................................................... 25
5.4 FE Assumptions ............................................................................................................. 25
5.5 Load Combinations......................................................................................................... 26
5.6 Boundary Conditions ...................................................................................................... 27
TABLE OF FIGURES
Figure 5-41: LC-5C, von-Mises Stress, limited to yield strength of the material (i.e. 170 MPa), plot-1 72
Figure 5-42: LC-5C, von-Mises Stress, limited to yield strength of the material (i.e. 170 MPa), plot-2 73
Figure 5-43: LC-5C: Total Deformation .......................................................................................... 74
Figure 5-44: LC-6: Applied Loads, plot-1 ....................................................................................... 76
Figure 5-45: LC-6: Applied Loads, plot-2 ....................................................................................... 77
Figure 5-46: LC-6: Applied Loads, plot-3 ....................................................................................... 78
Figure 5-47: LC-6: Applied Loads, plot-4 ....................................................................................... 79
Figure 5-48: LC-6, von-Mises Stress, limited to yield strength of the material (i.e. 170 MPa), plot-1.. 80
Figure 5-49: LC-6, von-Mises Stress, limited to yield strength of the material (i.e. 170 MPa), plot-2.. 81
LIST OF TABLES
1 INTRODUCTION
This document reports the structural analysis conducted to verify structural strength and
integrity of the Deck Integrated Fire Fighting System Buffer Skid to be delivered by Fire
Protection Engineering AS (FPE) for Goliat FPSO. The Goliat field is located in the Barents
Sea, 85 km North West of Hammerfest.
The structure of Deck Integrated Fire Fighting System Buffer Skid is evaluated to withstand
all applicable loads and actions subjected to it during the following governing phases in
compliance with the project requirements ref./B1 to B5/.
Transportation
Operation (SLS)
Lifting
ULS
Blast
ALS
Nozzle Loading
Fatigue Evaluation
Buckling Check
Weld Strength Check
Bolt Strength Check
2 REFERENCES
2.1 References
The following codes / standards and documents shall be adhered to. Unless otherwise
stated, the latest revision of the standard shall apply.
Linear static structural analysis is carried out on the Deck Integrated Fire Fighting System
Buffer Skid using finite element calculation software Ansys Workbench v15. The structure
is checked for Blast, Transportation, Lifting, ALS, ULS, Operation (SLS), Fatigue, Weld
Strength check, Bolt Strength check Nozzle Loading & Buckling conditions which are
reported herein.
Lifting condition is checked according to ref. /A8/, Norsok R-002, Lifting Equipment.
DIFFS Skid Structure is checked for maximum deformation for SLS condition. The
maximum deformation in the structure beams & plates is observed to be within the
allowable limit as per ref./A4/, Norsok N-001: Integrity of Offshore Structures, Section 7.2.4
& ref./A7/, Norsok R-001: Mechanical Equipment.
The maximum significant von-Mises stress and deformation summaries are tabulated
below, ref./Table 3-1/ & /Table 3-2/.
For Blast & ALS 10000-years return period environmental condition, the maximum von-
Mises stress is compared against the yield strength of the material as per ref. /B2/, 229A-
HHI-R-SP-0001- General Technical Specification for Equipment Packages- Rev. C04,
Section 5. It is observed that the maximum significant von-Mises stress in the DIFFS skid
structure is within the yield strength of the material. Hence, it can be concluded that for ALS
condition, the structure will remain at its original location without any substantial damage to
it & its internal equipments.
In order to calculate bolt sizes for foundation locations of DIFFS Skid, separate analysis is
carried out by holding the foundation bolt holes in all DOF to obtain the reactions at bolt
hole locations for ALS & ULS condition. Stringent foundation bolt hole reactions of load
case (ALS condition) are taken into consideration. Total Eight M24 x 3 (ISO 8.8) bolts for
four foundation pads are selected as per ref./A3/, EN1993-1-8 - Design of Joints. The
foundation bolt design calculations for ALS & ULS condition are presented in APPENDIX A.
Bolt calculation for connection between U-Profile (Supporting roof plate) to longitudinal U-
profile is also carried out for ALS condition and presented in APPENDIX A.
For lifting of DIFFS Skid Lifting RUD VLBG 7t M36 is selected/proposed as per
manufacturers selection methodology (i.e. the total lifting weight and sling angle). Lifting
RUD details for DIFFS Skid are presented in APPENDIX B.
Deck Integrated Fire Fighting System Buffer Skid is equipped with 8 nozzle for
Firewater/Afff Outlet so in order to verify for the nozzle loads, nozzle support is checked
and found safe for its respective loads which are calculated as per ref. /B2/, 229A-HHI-R-
SP-0001- General Technical Specification for Equipment Packages- Rev. C04. Section
10.1.2. Nozzle Load case is presented in APPENDIX C.
The fatigue calculation has been carried out for the intended design operation life of 20
years as per ref. /A12/, DNVGL-RP-C203- Fatigue Design of Offshore Steel Structures.
Fatigue accelerations 0.49 m/s^2 horizontal (both directions) and 0.89 m/s^2 vertical are
considered for inertia loads due to the vessel motion. fatigue check is carried out for the
foundation of the tank and the structure is found safe for fatigue evaluation. Detailed
calculations are presented in APPENDIX D.
Buckling check is carried out for corrugated plates & roof plate of the DIFFS skid for ULS,
ALS & ULS loading conditions respectively as per ref. /A11/, EN 1993-1-5- Plated structural
elements. Corrugated plates & roof plate of the DIFFS Skid is found safe for buckling
condition. Detailed Calculations are presented in APPENDIX E.
Beam buckling is checked to have the sufficient capacity for the bottom beams during lifting
condition as bottom beams will experience compressive forces when the structure will be
lifted. In order to evaluate bottom beams for buckling separate hand calculation is carried
out by incorporating the maximum axial compressive forces on bottom beams obtained
from lifting condition and structure of DIFFS is found to be safe for beam buckling. Buckling
check calculations are done as per ref. /A9/, EN 1993-1-1- General rules and rules for
buildings and presented in /APPENDIX E/.
In order to evaluate welds (considered as fillet weld) in DIFFS Skid, stringent joint reactions
obtained from ULS & ALS condition are taken into consideration and separate hand
calculation is carried out. Based on the calculation it is concluded that the fillet welds of
DIFFS Skid are safe. Weld between lifting pad and U-Profile is also checked for welding
strength and found safe. Weld check calculations are presented in refer APPENDIX F.
Based on the results, it can be concluded that the Deck Integrated Fire Fighting System
Buffer Skid is safe for the analysed loading conditions and fit for its intended purposes.
4 DESIGN BRIEF
4.1 Material Properties
The material of construction for the DIFFS Skid is considered as follows-
Material Property
Ultimate Tensile
Poisson's Ratio
Strength [MPa]
Component /
Reference
Assembly
Material
For ULS and ALS conditions, DIFFS skid is checked by applying environmental loads from
both transverse & longitudinal directions. Results from loads acting in transverse direction
only on the door side (i.e. in +Y direction) are presented in report as they are more severe
than the all other sides which is a conservative approach.
In the FE analysis, ULSa & ULSb cases are combined and common load factor of 1.3 is
used for all load actions which is a conservative approach.
As static linear analysis is performed, therefore instead of increasing load by multiplying the
load factor with applied load, the allowable stress is decreased by dividing the load factor
from yield strength of the material. Thus allowable stress value for Transporataion & ULS
condition is calculated to be 67% (i.e. 1/(1.3x1.15)) of yield strength of the material.
Stress check for Lifting case is performed according to ref./A8/, Norsok R-002, Section
F.7.2.3. The material resistance factor of 1.15 is considered which will give the allowable
stress as 87% (i.e. 1/1.15) of yield strength of the material.
Allowable stress for Blast case & ALS (10000-years return period environmental condition)
is evaluated as 170 MPa (170/1.0) according to ref./B2/, 229A-HHI-R-SP-0001- General
Technical Specification for Equipment Packages- Rev. C04, Section 5 where it states that
allowable stress for ALS condition allowable stress is equal to yield stress/1.0.
The weld strength check is evaluated for stringent joint reactions obtained from ULS & ALS
and lifting condition. Partial resistance factor of 1.3 is considered for welded joints for ULS
condition as per ref./A6/, Norsok N-004: Design of Steel Structures.
5 ANALYSIS
Deck Integrated Fire Fighting System Buffer Skid is analysed by using FE tool ANSYS
Workbench v15 and associated hand calculations are performed in MathCAD.
5.1 FE Geometry
The geometry of DIFFS Skid is considered for analysis according to ref. /B4/, 229A-APS-
ER203-P-XD-0001-01- Rev01- GA Drawing. DIFFS skid structure geometry is modified as
per analysis requirement. The minor components and geometrical features which doesnt
affect the overall structural integrity of the system has been neglected for simplification.
Door connections are considered for the locked position of the doors. Doors are in bonded
contact from the hinged sides. Central part of door is bonded with the frame (upon which
the doors will rest in locked position). Roof Plate is considered to be bolted with the U-
profiles and in rest position over the transverse U-profiles & longitudinal L-profiles.
5.2 FE Mesh
The geometry of DIFFS skid is meshed with 4 node shell element. Generated mesh quality
is sufficient & accurate to represent the structure and stress details obtained are
acceptable. The generated mesh is shown in below figure. Mesh details for the DIFFS skid
are tabulated below.
5.3 FE Loads
5.3.1 Functional Loads
Dry and Operational weight of DIFFS skid are taken according to ref. /B4/, 229A-APS-
ER203-P-XD-0001-01- Rev01- GA Drawing and tabulated below as 6000 kg & 11000 kg.
For operational weight, it is considered that vessel content have density of 1000kg/m.
Note: # Weight contingency factor of 1.1 is used in analysis in order to account for the
material variation and additional weight contribution due to welds & other accessories.
Tank content density is taken as 1000kg/m so as to accomplish the effect of liquid induced
loads.
The snow load of 2.19kN/m 2 is considered and ice load caused by rain and snow by
thickness of 10mm and density of 900kg/m is considered as per ref./B1/, 229A-APS-R-SP-
0006- Technical Specifications- DIFFS Buffer Skid- Rev. C02, Section 4.7. Ice loads on
exposed horizontal surfaces are tabulated below
Acceleration Values
Direction Considered in FE Analysis*
g m/s2
Maximum Heave in vertical direction 1.8 17.6
Roll in transverse direction 0.8 7.85
Pitch in longitudinal direction 0.4 3.92
Note: * Max Heave + Roll + Pitch accelerations are combined together in the FE analysis
which is the most stringent load case scenario and therefore the other accelerations
combinations are safely omitted.
Acceleration Values
Parameter Considered in FE Analysis (m/s2)
SLS ULS ALS FLS
Max. Horizontal Acceleration 1.4 2.75 3.5 0.49
Max. Vertical Acceleration* 1.2 2.15 2.65 0.89#
* The above vertical acceleration values are combined with static gravity force of 1.0 g
acting downwards.
#
For FLS static gravity is not be included.
5.4 FE Assumptions
Minor components and geometrical features which doesnt affect the overall structural
integrity of the system have been neglected in FE calculations.
Material density of the FEA model is adjusted in order to achieve desired self-weight of
the DIFFS Skid structure.
Liquid Induced
Structural self-
Transportation
Accelerations
Accelerations
Accelerations
Accelerations
Acceleration
Blast Loads
Wind Load
LC No. LC Type weight
Loads
Lifting
Load
ULS
SLS
ALS
FLS
1A, 1B Transportation X X X
2A, 2B Operation X X X X X
3 Lifting X X
4 ULS X X X X X
5A, 5B, 5C Blast X X X X
6 ALS X X X X X
APPENDIX D FLS X X
The transportation of DIFFS Skid is evaluated with transit acceleration combinations as per
ref. 5.3.2.2 and wind in transverse direction as per ref. 5.3.2.4. The equipment weights are
considered as a point mass at the CoG of the equipment and applied on respective
supports. Wind load is applied on exposed area to wind in transverse direction. Following
figures shows the applied loads for the transportation condition.
5.7.1.2 FE Results
The equivalent von-Mises stress distribution is shown in the below figure. Significant von-
Mises stress of 110 MPa is observed on doors of the skid which is below the allowable limit
of 114 MPa.
Foundation Reactions
Note:
* Foundation bolts will experience tensile load when the vertical reaction force is occurring
in -Z direction
The transportation of DIFFS Skid is evaluated with transit acceleration combinations as per
ref. 5.3.2.2 and wind in longitudinal direction as per ref. 5.3.2.4. The equipment weights are
considered as a point mass at the CoG of the equipment and applied on respective
supports. Wind load is applied on exposed area to wind in longitudinal direction. Following
figures shows the applied loads for the transportation condition.
5.7.2.2 FE Results
The equivalent von-Mises stress distribution is shown in the below figure. Significant von-
Mises stress of 100 MPa is observed on doors of the skid installed in longitudinal (X
direction) side which is well below the allowable limit of 114 MPa.
Foundation Reactions
Note:
* Foundation bolts will experience tensile load when the vertical reaction force is occurring
in -Z direction
Along with SLS platform acceleration, ice and wind loads are applied on structure
transverse side (Door side) whereas snow load is applied on the roof beams in Z
direction. Liquid induced loads are also applied. Refer- Chapter 5.3 for the applied
acceleration and load values. Below pictures depicts the applied loads for operation case
with transverse environmental loads.
Below figure shows the Liquid induced load i.e. hydrostatic pressure including the inertia
effect due to platform accelerations.
5.7.3.2 FE Result
Maximum relative deformation between two supports (plates) is observed at the door of
DIFFS skid of value 8.5 mm. Below picture shows maximum deformation in the skid during
operation with environmental loads in transverse direction.
Vertical deformation at different beams for Operation case with environmental loads in
transverse direction is shown in the following figure. Maximum vertical deformation is
observed at the U-Profile beams supporting vessel of value 2.8 mm which is below the
allowable limits.
Foundation Reactions
Reactions [N]
Foundation
Pad Reaction in X direction Reaction in Y direction Reaction in Z direction*
Note:
* Foundation bolts will experience tensile load when the vertical reaction force is occurring
in -Z direction.
Along with SLS platform acceleration, ice and wind loads are applied on structure
longitudinal side (-X direction) whereas snow load is applied on the roof beams in Z
direction. Liquid induced loads are also applied. Refer- Chapter 5.3 for the applied
acceleration and load values. Below picture depicts the applied environmental loads. Live
load of 5 kN/m^2 and 5 kN point force is considered at area between equipment.
5.7.4.2 FE Result
Maximum relative deformation between two supports (plates) is observed at the door of
DIFFS skid of value 6.8 mm. Below picture shows maximum deformation in the skid during
operation with environmental loads in longitudinal direction.
Vertical deformation at different beams for Operation case with environmental loads in
longitudinal direction is shown in the following figure. Maximum vertical deformation is
observed at the U-Profile beams suppoting vessel of value 2.8 mm which is below the
allowable limits.
Foundation Reactions
Reactions [N]
Foundation
Pad Reaction in X direction Reaction in Y direction Reaction in Z direction*
Note:
* Foundation bolts will experience tensile load when the vertical reaction force is occurring
in -Z direction.
In lifting case, vertical acceleration of 3.04g is applied. Refer Chapter- 4.3.2 for lifting
acceleration value calculation. The structure is proposed to be lifted from skid top with 1
floating spreader bar. Lifting sling hook points which will be connected to spreader bar
padeyes are fixed in all DOFs by means of defining it as rigid end of the slings and the
mobile sling ends are connected to the plates (where the RUD will be bolted for lifting) with
sling eccentricity. The equipment weights are considered as a point mass at the CoG of the
equipment and applied on respective supports. Below figure shows the applied loads for
the lifting condition of DIFFS skid.
5.7.5.2 FE Results
The equivalent von-Mises stress distribution is shown in the below figure. The maximum
significant von-Mises stress of 138 MPa is observed at lifting pads (where the RUD will be
bolted for lifting) & corrugated plate above lifting pads which is below the allowable limit of
148 MPa. Significant stress is observed to be maximum at door frame and also it is limited
to very small area (2 elements of 20x20 mm size which is acceptable).
Along with ULS platform acceleration, ice and wind loads are applied on structure
transverse side (Door side) whereas snow load is applied on the roof beams in Z
direction. Liquid induced loads are also applied. Refer- Chapter 5.3 for the applied
acceleration and load values. Below pictures depicts the applied loads for ULS condition
with transverse environmental loads.
Below figure shows the Liquid induced load i.e. hydrostatic pressure including the inertia
effect due to platform accelerations.
5.7.6.2 FE Result
Peak stress is observed at U-Profile supporting 4000 litre vessel and Its limited to very
small zone or remains at the surface, its due to the stress singularity and hence it has not
been considered during result evaluation. Significant von-Mises stress of 112 MPa is
observed at the U-Profile supporting 4000 litre vessel installed at the bottom of the DIFFS
skid structure which is limited to a very small region (significant stress limited to only four
elements of size 15x15 mm which is evaluated and acceptable).
Foundation Reactions
Note:
* Foundation bolts will experience tensile load when the vertical reaction force is occurring
in -Z direction.
#
Reactions considered for Bolt Calculations for ULS condition. Ref. APPENDIX A
Along with blast load applied in terms of pressure on the tank in +Y direction, liquid induced
loads & SLS platform accelerations are also applied. Refer 5.3 for applied load values.
5.7.7.2 FE Result
Figure 5-33: LC-5A, von-Mises Stress, limited to yield strength of the material (i.e. 170 MPa),
plot-1
Figure 5-34: LC-5A, von-Mises Stress, limited to yield strength of the material (i.e. 170 MPa),
plot-2
Foundation Reactions
Reactions [N]
Foundation
Pad Reaction in X direction Reaction in Y direction Reaction in Z direction*
Note:
* Foundation bolts will experience tensile load when the vertical reaction force is occurring
in -Z direction.
Along with blast load applied in terms of pressure on the tank in -Y direction, liquid induced
loads & SLS platform accelerations are also applied. Refer 5.3 for applied load values.
5.7.8.2 FE Result
Figure 5-37: LC-5B, von-Mises Stress, limited to yield strength of the material (i.e. 170 MPa),
plot-1
Figure 5-38: LC-5B, von-Mises Stress, limited to yield strength of the material (i.e. 170 MPa),
plot-2
Foundation Reactions
Reactions [N]
Foundation
Pad Reaction in X direction Reaction in Y direction Reaction in Z direction*
Note:
* Foundation bolts will experience tensile load when the vertical reaction force is occurring
in -Z direction.
Along with blast load applied in terms of pressure on the tank in longitudinal (-X) direction,
liquid induced loads & SLS platform accelerations are also applied. Refer 5.3 for applied
load values.
5.7.9.2 FE Result
Figure 5-41: LC-5C, von-Mises Stress, limited to yield strength of the material (i.e. 170 MPa),
plot-1
Figure 5-42: LC-5C, von-Mises Stress, limited to yield strength of the material (i.e. 170 MPa),
plot-2
Foundation Reactions
Reactions [N]
Foundation
Pad Reaction in X direction Reaction in Y direction Reaction in Z direction*
Note:
* Foundation bolts will experience tensile load when the vertical reaction force is occurring
in -Z direction.
Along with ALS platform acceleration, ice and wind loads are applied on structure in
transverse direction (door side) whereas snow load is applied on the roof beams in Z
direction. Liquid induced loads are also applied. Refer- Chapter 5.3 for the applied
acceleration and load values.
Below figure shows the Liquid induced load i.e. hydrostatic pressure including the inertia
effect due to platform accelerations.
5.7.10.2 FE Result
Figure 5-48: LC-6, von-Mises Stress, limited to yield strength of the material (i.e. 170 MPa),
plot-1
Figure 5-49: LC-6, von-Mises Stress, limited to yield strength of the material (i.e. 170 MPa),
plot-2
Foundation Reactions
Reactions [N]
Foundation
Pad Reaction in X direction Reaction in Y direction Reaction in Z direction*
Note:
* Foundation bolts will experience tensile load when the vertical reaction force is occurring
in -Z direction.
#
Reaction values are considered to calculate foundation bolts ref. APPENDIX A
What is load
from?
For lifting of DIFFS Skid RUD VLBG 7t M36 with special bolt is selected / proposed as per
manufacturer's selection methodology (i.e. the total lifting weight and sling angle). Lifting RUD
VLBG 7t M36 with special bolt details are given below.
Nozzle Loads are calculated as per ref. /B2/, 229A-HHI-R-SP-0001- General Technical
Specification for Equipment Packages- Rev. C04. Section 10.1.2. Remote forces and
moments are applied on the nozzle support by pipe from the clamp locations and point of
application of these forces and moment is on centroid of the nozzle support.
In nozzle loading condition, allowable stress is the allowable stress is decreased by dividing
the load factor and material resistance factor from yield strength of the material. Thus
allowable stress value for nozzle loading condition is calculated to be 67% (i.e.
1/(1.3x1.15)) of yield strength of the material according to ref./A4/, Norsok N-001 & ref./A6/,
Norsok N-004
FE Results
The maximum significant stress of 110 MPa is observed at the 8 pipe support beam (L-
profile) which is also limited to a very small region and below the allowable limit.
Conclusion:
As the significant von-mises stress for the nozzle loading case are observed to be within
the allowable limit of 114 MPa, hence it can be concluded that the structure of DIFFS Skid
is safe under nozzle loading condition.
The fatigue calculation has been carried out for the intended design operation life of 20 years as per
ref. /A12/, DNVGL-RP-C203- Fatigue Design of Offshore Steel Structures. Fatigue accelerations 0.49
m/s^2 horizontal (both directions) and 0.89 m/s^2 vertical are considered for inertia loads due to the
vessel motion. Fatigue assessment is carried out for the joint having effective hot spot stress range
(connection between L-profile & vessel support plate installed at the bottom of the DIFFS Skid). The
effective hot spot stress is calculated as per as per ref. /A12/, DNVGL-RP-C203, Section 4.3.4 and
Section 4.3.6. Obtained effective hot spot stress is multiplied by 2 in order to get the stress amplitude.
Buckling Check for Corrugated Plate (Transverse side) for ULS Condition as per Eurocode
1993-1-5
Buckling check for corrugated plate of transverse side is evaluated for ULS condition. Design
normal & shear stresses are obtained from Ansys and considered for buckling calculation as per
ref. /A11/, EN 1993-1-5- Plated structural elements. buckling calculations are summarized below.
Buckling Check for Corrugated Plate (Longitudinal side) for ULS Condition as per Eurocode
1993-1-5
Buckling check for corrugated plate of longitudinal side is evaluated for ULS condition. Design
normal & shear stresses are obtained from Ansys and considered for buckling calculation as per
ref. /A11/, EN 1993-1-5- Plated structural elements. buckling calculations are summarized below.
Buckling Check for Corrugated Plate (Transverse side) for ALS Condition as per Eurocode
1993-1-5
Buckling check of corrugated plate of transverse side is also evaluated for ALS condition. Design
normal & shear stresses are obtained from Ansys and considered for buckling calculation as per
ref. /A11/, EN 1993-1-5- Plated structural elements. buckling calculations are summarized below.
Buckling Check for Corrugated Plate (Longitudinal side) for ALS Condition as per Eurocode
1993-1-5
Buckling check of corrugated plate of longitudinal side is also evaluated for ALS condition loads.
Design normal & shear stresses are obtained from Ansys and considered for buckling calculation
as per ref. /A11/, EN 1993-1-5- Plated structural elements. buckling calculations are summarized
below.
Buckling Check for Roof Plate for ULS Condition as per Eurocode 1993-1-5
Buckling check of roof plate is evaluated for ULS condition. Design normal & shear stresses are
obtained from Ansys and considered for buckling calculation as per ref. /A11/, EN 1993-1-5- Plated
structural elements. Buckling calculations are summarized below.
Buckling check is evaluated for lifting condition which is most stringent condition for bottom beams
(beams installed at bottom will experience large compressive force) and therefore all other loading
conditions are omitted. Column which have maximum axial compressive forces with respect to their
section size and length is checked for buckling and calculations are shown below.
The DIFFS Skid is also checked for weld strength. Reactions are obtained at various connections
from Ansys workbench. Most stringent reactions are obtained at the connection of primary
longitudinal U-Profile & U-profile supporting vessel installed at the bottom for ALS & ULS
conditions and considered for joint strength calculation which is a conservative approach.
The DIFFS Skid is checked for weld strength of lifting pad and longitudinal U-Profile during lifting
condition. Reactions are obtained at various connections from Ansys workbench. Most stringent
reactions are considered for weld strength calculation which is a conservative approach.
APPENDIX G GA DRAWINGS
Appendix A3 Drawings