World Applied Sciences Journal 30 (8): 1000-1019, 2014 ISSN 1818-4952 © IDOSI Publications, 2014 DOI: 10.5829/idosi.was).2014.30.08.14126 Fatigue Assessment Analysis of Offshore Structures with Application to an Existing Platform in Suez Gulf, Egypt A.A. Khalifa, S.Y, Aboul Haggag and M.N, Fayed Department of Structural Engineering, Faculty of Engineering, ‘Ain Shams University, Cairo, Egypt Abstract: Fatigue has long been recognized as an important consideration for designing offshore structures and intensive cooperative industry research on tubular joints. In this paper, fatigue life assessment for single side welded tubular joints of fixed platforms is numerically assessed as part of mitigation for platform lifetime. The analysis procedures are presented for numerical fatigue assessment methods based on S-N eurve approach, for API standard ullizing the simplified method and the spectral (stochastic) method, The wave scatter diagram land the subsequent selection of characteristic individual wave height and period pairs for analysis purposes hhave been calculated based on individual wave data collected in the Suez Gulf, Egypt. Applications have been performed on a four-leg piled fixed type platforms located in Eastern and Souther blocks of the Suez Gulf, gypt in order to determine the fatigue life-time of the jacket tubular joints and to check the minimum factor of safety achieved for each joint. The effects of current, jacket natural period and jacket stability on fatigue life assessment have been investigated. The results are discussed and summarized through tables and plotted figures, Key words: API + Assessment + Fatigue + Jacket » INTRODUCTION Experience over the lest 100 years and many laboratory tests [1] have proven that a metal may fracture at a relatively low stress if that stress is applied a great number of times. It is known that sometimes a crack will form and grow under the repeated action of applied stresses that are lower than those required for yielding the same material under unidirectional static loading. Such fractures are referred to as fatigue failures. The intially small erack formed at the point of high localized stress ‘grows or spreads until the remaining solid cross section of the load-carrying member is not sufficient to transmit the load and the member fractures, Offshore structures are designed to resist continual wave loading which may lead to significant fatigue damage on individual structural members and other types of loads duc to severe storms, corrosion, fire and explosion ete, Fatigue life is one of the major concems for the offshore installations since the utilization of tubular members gives rise to significantly high stress concentrations in the joints, Most steel Platforms * Suez Gulf + Tubular joints offshore support structures are three-dimensional frames fabricated from tubular steel members. This gives the best compromise in satisfying the requirements of low drag. coefficient, high buoyancy and high strength to weight ratio [2], The most common used offshore structure is a jacket structure, which comprises a prefabricated steel support structure (jacket) extended from the sea bed (connected with piles at the sea bed) to some height above the water surface level and a steel deck (topside) fon the top of the jacket. Staccy [3] reported that fatigue cracking has been a principal cause of damage to some offshore jackets. Wave-induced dynamic force is one of the most significant forces leading to fatigue of offshore tubular structures. Fatigue has long been recognized as fan important consideration for designing offshore structures and intensive cooperative industry research on. tubular joints has been carried out. The primary objective for performing fatigue analysis of the platform is 10 ddtormine the relative sensitivity of platform components to fatigue damage so that future inspection programs will put more emphasis on those components that are more Corresponding Author: S.¥. Aboul Haggsg, Department of Structural Engineering, Faculty of Engineering, Ain Shams Univesity, Cairo, Egypt 1000World Appl. Sek. J susceptible to fatigue damage. Research on the fatigue of offshore structures has attracted much attention during. recent decades (4-12). Nolte and Hansford [4] developed closed-form mathematical expressions for determining. the fatigue damage of structures due to ovean waves, ‘These expressions incorporated relationships between the wave height and the stress range, considering the stress range versus the number of cycles to failure end the probability distribution for the oveurrence of wave heights. Almar-Naess (5] diseussed the most important subjects related to fatigue of the offshore steel structures, such as calculation of fatigue stresses and fatigue lives, Dover and Madhava Reo (6] reviewed and summarized the knowledge in the arca of SCF (stress concentration factor), fatigue and fracture mechanics of the tubular joints, damage assessment and reliability analysis of Joints. Etube er al. (7] presented a modeling of jack-up response for fatigue calculation. By analyzing a mathematical model to obtain the transfer function of the dynamic response for a typical jack-up platform, they found out that the complex leg-soil interaction can be adequately modeled using springs and assuming a rigid The effect of tanslational spring is insignificant and the leg-soil connection can be satisfactorily treated as pinned. Ramachandra Murthy cet al, (8) and Gandhi et al. (9, 10) performed several studies about fatigue of stiffened stecl tubular joints, such as corrosion fatigue and fatigue behaviors Vugts [11] discussed fatigue damage assessments and the influence of wave directionality, investigated for a rotationally symmetric. structure (a vertical circular cylinder) and presented quantitative resulls. Based on the spectrum analysis theory, Shunfeng et al. [12] presented. a fatigue calculation of a tubular jacket structure located in South China Sea, By investigating the transfer function ff joint stresses, it was concluded that the first order ‘mode provides @ primary contribution to the dynamic response and an appropriate selection of frequency and bandwidth has remarkable effect response. A practical jacket platform with an ice-breaking cone in the Bohai Gul was optimized by Li et al. [13] and the results demonstrate that the fatigue life of tubular joints could be improved and the weight of jackets decreased simultancously. Marco er al. [14] presented an efficient nonlinear dynamic approach for ealeulating wave induced fatigue damage of offshore structures and its industrial epplications for lifetime extension, In this study, as a part of integrity checks; fatigue life assessment for single side welded tubular joints of fixed platforms is numerically assessed as part of mitigation for platform life fon the structural 30 (8): 1000-1019, 2014 time, The numerical fatigue assessment method is based. fon S-N curve approach for API standard utilizing the Simplified method. The Spectral (stochastic) method has been performed using SACS software package [15] Applicetions have been performed on a four-leg piled fixed type platforms located in Eastern and Southern blocks of the Gulf of Suez, Egypt. For more accurate fatigue calculations, the time domain stress history is calculated for each wave load case with respect to direction, period and wave height. This assessment is carried-out to investigate the effect of current, jacket natural period and jacket stability on the fatigue life-time of the jacket tubular joints and cheek the minimum factor of safety achieved for each joint. The results indicate that, for fixed offshore structures such as jackets, the change of dynamic characteristic may result in a significant change of calculated fatigue life ‘Sea Wave Data and Hydrodynamic Forces Wave Histogram: The records for total 8 wave directions, at 45 degree intervals forthe significant wave height “Hs” land responding crossing time period “1” associated number of waves occurrence “ai” in one year with active control heading are presented in the wave histogram data, to determine the centre of damage wave, with the Selection of Block & C.G. of Blocks: The numerous numbers of data given in the wave histogram records is| categorized into blocks in-order to develop the scatter diagram. Wave heights are grouped in the blocks, for which one stress range is calculated with the minimum of three blocks per each wave direction, For each block, one wave with an average mean time “T.” and significant wave height “H," is chosen to present the whole block action to give a spectral peak period close to the structural fundamental period; usually the highest wave is considered. where: T.=Z,* ny En w HE Ht ny Dn @ TThe density of each block, expresses a percentage of the total number of waves given as the block % of Scatter Diagram: The scatter diagram (Table 1) presents ‘no more individual waves as the wave histogram presents, but individual sea-states with the given statistical periods. 1001World Appl Set J. 30 (8): 1900-1019, 2014 ‘Table: Sater Diagram Block Seton hin) ft yl | ob ” yy fos * 1) | 2) | (3), (4) ro 7 ‘The advantage in this case is to consider the individual periods of each of these sca-states, where waves with same height also have a range of different periods that allows constructing long term distribution fatigue. The wave data ‘are provided on a statistical basis where a cell ofthe diagram represents a particular combination of the relation between the zero crossing time period “Tz” of each block, (which is based on the type of the wave cnergy spectrum), the significant wave height “Hs” and its probability of occurrence. Energy Wave Spectrum: There are basically three wave spectra commonly used (15, 1516), the "Pierson Maskovitz (ISSC), JONSWAP and Ochi-Hubble Double Peak”, The “P-M” spectrum is valid for the entire world while the “JONSWAP” is valid for the North Sea, The “OHDP” spectrum is very limited use, where the “P-M" and “JONSWAP” are frequently applied in offshore engincering. ‘The following equation presents the “P-M” and “JONSWAP” spectra: pil ° Syn (0) = 0°" g? 0 ve where: a= Angular wave frequene} 258 ; T, = Wave period; T,= Peak period or significant wave height period T,. «, Angular spectral peak frequency = 2*£ ; g= Gravity acceleration; o = Generalized Philip's constant; 0 = Spectral width 7; parameter 0.07 if @ < «, or 0.09 if w > «, and y ~ Peak parameter; equals to 1.0 for “P-M" spectrum. Wave Heights: The wave height corresponding to each wave frequency will be based on a constant wave steepness Ha. He |, 1:18 or 1:20, based on the average steepness from the wave scatter diagrams. The influence of wave weer { “"} steepness is minor in ease of smaller fatigue waves are inertia dominated and hence, linearized forces are insensitive 10 wave steepness. The applied wave theory should be appropriate for the fatigue analysis based on the maximurn wave height and water depth Linearized Wave Theory: Linearized (Airy) wave theory [15] is adopted to model the wave elevation, water particle velocity and acceleration. The water surface elevation of an itregular wave can then be calculated by the linear superposition of the wave components. According to the linear random wave theory, the water surface elevations and particle kinematics (the velocity and acceleration) ate all Gaussian distributed and are therefore fully defined by the variances of their associated probability distributions, which are equal to the area under their frequency spectra, 1002World Appl. Sek. J Hydrodynamic Forees: The hydrodynamic forces on a tubular component per unit length are calculated by Morison's equation, This equation is only applicable When the diameter ofthe structural member dis less than US of the wave length [17, 18], which is fulfilled by jacket structures F=pAat0SpCyD+pC, Aa o where: p isthe density of sea water, A i the eross section area of the body, ais the component of the water particle acceleration aormal to the member axis, C, is the added mass coefficient, A, is the reference area normal to the structural member axis, ar is the relative acceleration between water particle and member normalto member axis, Cis the drag coefficient, v, is the water particle velocity relative to the member normal to the member axis and D is diameter of the member exposed to the sea. Marine Growth: Marine growth is a common designation for a surface coat on marine structures caused by plants, animals and bacteria. It may cause increased hydrodynamic action, inereased weight and added mass, which may influence hydrodynamic instability as a result of vortex shedding and possible corrosion effects The modcling of marine growth at different clevations on the jacket structure is according to API [19] Fatigue Parameters Stress Concentration Factor (SCF) for Simple Tubular Joints: Hot-spot stress ranges at each point will be calculated (19, 19] using multiplying the stress range with the appropriate stress concentration factors (SCF: axial, in-plane bending (IPB) and out-of-plane bending. (OPB). The aim ofthe stress analysis [2120] s to ealeulate the stress at the weld toc (hot spot), “a hot spot”. The stress concentration factor due to the geometry effect is defined as: for SCF= Shouret 6) ‘Fnormat There ae three approaches [22] to determine the SCF. Experimental Data Finite Element Analysis and Parametric equations based on experimental data or finite element analysis. Given thata variety of SCF need to be estimated on any given tubular joint, SCF determinations have to rely more on sets of parametric equations, which account forthe joint geometry configurations and applied loading, Al stress risers have to be considered when evaluating oF, The resulting SCF the stress concentration factors S [20, 22] is derived as: 30 (8): 1000-1019, 2014 SCF = SCF, * SCF, * SCF, * SCF, * SCF, o where: Stress concentration factor due geometry of the detail considered to the gross SCF, = Stress concentration factor due to the weld geometry SCF, = Additional stress concentration factor duc to ceecentricity tolerance (nominally used for plate connections only) SCF, = Additional stress concentration factor due to angular mismatch (normally used for plate connection only) SCF, = Additional stress concentration factor for uun-symmetrical stiffeners on laterally loaded panels, applicable when the nominal stress is {derived from simple beam analysis ‘The parametric equation (21, 23, 24] gives the most convenient way of estimating the hot-spot stress in simple tubular joints. Fig. 2 shows the geometric stress zone in tubular joints, where the hotspot stress is calculated by a linear extrapolation of the stress in the geometric stress zone to the weld toe where is refno (24) There are various parametric equations [25, 26] in the literature forthe determination of SCF, for instance: where is ref no (26) ‘SCF equations for tubular connections: API RP2A- WSD [19], NORSOK N-004 [27], Kuang equations in 1975 and 1977 (28, 29], ERhymiowDurkin equations {n1985 and 1989 (30, 31], Hellier / Connolly / Dover ‘equations in 1990 [32] and the parametrie formula is Lloyd's Register equations in1991 [25] ‘The best known SCF formulas for the fatigue assessment of offshore structures are those of Efthymiou (31] and Lloyd’s Register equations [25] In addition, Smedley and Fisher [32, 33, 34] gave SC¥s for ring stiffened tubular joints under axial loads, in-plane and out-of-plane bending. The SCF equations from the references mentioned above have been summarized in DNV (2005) [19, 20] It should be indicated that the parametric equations are valid (17, 25] only for the applicability range defined in terms of geometry and loads. 1003World Appl Sek J, 30 (8): 1900-1019, 2014 Fig. 1: Wave forces upon a jacket member titan Fig. 2; Hotspot Stress Zone in Tubular Joints Despite considerable differences that exist between parametric SCF formulae, the current offshore installations ‘guidance document [35], accepts the use of parametric equations to determine hot-spot stresses in tubular joints S-N Curve for Joints: The S-N curve presents the bilinear relationship [21] between the stress range and. the number of eycles to failure as a function of the type of Joint, the environment and the plate thickness, For fatigue analysis based on the nominal stress approach, welded nts are divided into several classes, Each class has a designated S-N curve. The classification of $-N curves depends on: the geometry of the deuail, 1 the fluctuating stress relative to the connection detail and the method of fabrication and inspection of the detail [20] The types of joints, including plate-to-plate,tube-to- plate and tube-to-tube connections have alphabetical 1e direction of 00s JRiTy oer OMR LRT, 0.2. classification types, where cach type relates to a particular S-N- relationship, as determined by experimental fatigue tests. The design S-N curves are based on the meen-minus-two-standard-deviation curves for relevant experimental data, The S-N curves are thus associated with a 97.6% probability of Typical examples of $-N curves in-air are given in Fig. 3. The bilinear relationship between log(S) and log (N) and the change in slope from a gradient (of 1/3) to a gradient (of 1/5) occurs at 107 or 108 cycles. The relationship between the stress range and the number of eyeles to failure indicates that a relatively small change in the estimated stress has a significant effect on the fatigue life, Fig. 3 illustrates trend for different S-N curves with respect to “APT 19], EC3 [36], AWS [37] and UK-DEN [38]” codes of practice: survival 1004World Appl. Sek. J 30 (8): 1000-1019, 2014 ~ mires SS BYE Eu | roca iy wh ge E 00 & tw eo 10 1 10 10 ny a Fig. 3: S-N Curves “API, AWS, Den, EC3" Trend Simplified Fatigue Analysis: This section deseribes the simplified fatigue assessment procedute stated in the APL [19] code of practice, based on a two parameter Weibull distribution scale and shape [20]. The Weibull shape parameter depends on the wave climate and the character of the structural response, especially the possible influence of structural dynamics. The fatigue evaluation result is very sensitive to the Weibull shape parameter ‘The advantage of the simplified fatigue assessment [20] is that closed form expression for fatigue damage may be derived and that the Weibull shape parameter may be calibrated based on historical data of fatigue cracks, ‘The maximum absolute combined beam stresses including summation of the axial, in-plane bending and out of plane bending stresses at the joints under study is monitored resulting ftom maximum damage wave static analysis. combined “Pil Fax! + o1r8 "(SCF +(¢0re*(SCFora) (8) In liew of detailed fatigue analysis, simplified fatigue analyses, which have been calibrated for the design wave climate, may be applied to tubular joints in template type platforms that [19]: Less than 400 feet (122 m) of water, Constructed of ductile steels, Have redundant structural framing, Have natural periods less than 3 seconds. A schematic diagram of the Simplified procedure based on the API- 2A [19] is shown in Fig. 4. The simplified fatigue analysis involves designing all tubular Joints in the structure such that the peak hot spot stresses for the fatigue design wave do not exceed the allowable peak hot spot stresses: Nuveen OF CES 0 PALE AG eppied = SCF * SO computed © AF aitowable o ‘The simplified fatigue assessment is according to the method described in API-2A [19], which is based on the assumption that the long term distribution of stress ranges Ao can be fitted to a Weibull shape parameter "E," of normal distribution of value equals to one. Spectral Fatigue Analysis: In the simplified fatigue assessment, the fatigue damage is estimated assuming that the stress follows a Weibull distribution for long-term response. The simplified fatigue assessment has been successfully applied to ship fatigue design [19, 39] in which allowable stresses are pre-caloulated for different locations in a ship. Due to the excessive sensitivity of the estimated fatigue damage to the Weibull parameters, a spectral fatigue assessment becomes more popular for offshore structural analysis. The spectral approach is to characterize random sea-stas statistically, The dynamic spectral fatigue is this type of analysis that accounts for the dynamic response of the structure (T,, > 3.0 see) [19] to a comprehensive range of representative sea-states, Dynamic response can be important because the natural period of the fatigue waves can be similar to the natural period of the structure or the local members supporting appurtenances. The approach utilizes “wave spectra” (a statistical representation of random sea-states) and “transfer functions” (the relationship between stress response and, wave height) to develop “stress response spectra” (the relationship between stress response to the sea-state) across the wave frequency range. This approach employs 1005World Appl St J. 30 (8): 1900-1019, 2014 Fig. 4: Simplified Fatigue Scheme Based on the API Methodolody Fig, 5: Spectral Dynamic Fatigue Analysis Scheme ‘2 hybrid technique, partially in the time domain and partially in the frequency domain. The structure is subjected to a series of regular waves of different frequencies” wave spectrum”. A. static plus. inertial dynamic analysis procedure will be used to compute member end forces, This procedure accounts for the ‘overall dynamic effects and the local wave leading on individual members. In this approach the inertial dynamic effects alone are first computed. The next stage is to compute the static responses for the same time steps at which the dynamic effects are computed. The total response is obtained as the sum of the two responses ‘The static response computation accurately accounts for the effects of local wave forces. The computed nominal brace stresses based on the total response is factored by the appropriate stress concentration factors “SCE” to 1006World Appl. Sek. J obtain hot spot time his tresses. From the steady state hot-spot the stress range is obtained, which is then divided by the wave height to determine the value of the stress transfer function at that particular frequency, A. schematic diagram of the Spectral (stochastic) procedure is shown in Fig. 5. By repeating the procedure for a range of frequencies of interest, the complete stress transfer functions are generated. These, in combination with sea-state spectra describing the site environmental conditions for a one year interval, enable the stress spectrum at each hot-spot stress location to be obtained. Applications for Fatigue Assessment of an Existing Offshore Jackets General: The fatigue assessments using Simplified and Spectral (stochastic) methods have been applied to four legged piled fixed platform located in Eastern block of the Gulf of Suez, Egypt. The platform is installed in 33.5 meter water depth. The following figure shows the GoS water depth contours Jacket Fatigue Computation Assumptions: The fatigue computations for the two jackets either simplified or spectral approaches are based on the following assumptions: Jacket joints life time of 20 years, Jacket Legs and Joint Cans are manufactured of high tensile steel ASTM-572 Gr. 50 of minimum yield strength 345 MPa (40) Curent is associated with the wave, acting in the same ditection, Applied wave theory is Stocks fifth order. All joints under study are classified as inspectable with no critical failures. Drag (C,~ 0.50 for smooth members and 0.80 for rough members), mass (C= 2.00) coefficients and marine growth thickness are calculated as per API PR-2A-WSD [19] SCF for tubular joints is calculated based on Efhymiou parametric equations [19] Weibull parameter for simplified fatigue Wave steepness [ 41] = 1/2. Wave spectrum is Pierson- Moskowitz (P-M) utilizing Bretschneider's Form. 10, Platform Configuration: The platform is four legged piled fixed type. The spacing in East direction between Row-A. 30 (8): 1000-1019, 2014 to Row-B is 7.62 m and in the North direction between Row-I to Row-2 is 7.62 m; at the working point elevation of (4) 5.182 m. ‘The topside consists of a main production deck located at clevation (+) 16.00 m, with dimensions (18.0 m x 22.0 m), A cellar deck located at elevation () 1150 m, with dimensions (18,0 m x 22.0 m) The mezzanine deck is clevated at (+) 11.63 m, with dimensions (10.30 m x 22.0 m). The helideck is installed at elevation (4) 24.50 m, with dimensions (17.50 mx 18.00 m), The fixed piled jacket consists of three horizontal bracing diaphragms at elevations (+) 3.048 m, () 13.176 m and (-) 33,00 m, respectively, The bottom bracing level is at elevation (-) 33.00 m, where the piles are fixed at the mud-line. The working point where the jacket is fixed to the piles is at elevation (+) 4.115 m. The jacket batter is 1:12 (horizontal: vertical) for all the faces. The legs are built-up of tubular sections of 40 inch diameter, supported on the piles of tubular sections 36 inch diameter. The joint cans are tubular sections of 42 inch diameter. The bracing system is K-type with different tubular sizing varying from 18 to 22 inches diameter. The jacket spider deck (walkway) is located at clevation (+) 3.048 m, with dimensions (7.976 m x.976 m). The deck framing members are built-up with tubular sections of pipe 14 inch diameter. Boat landing is installed atthe platform East side at Row-2. Five risers are located at the platform North side at Row-I, The jacket is accommodating twelve intemal conductors. Fig. 7 shows 3-D view forthe platform, Description of Sea Wave Data: The water depth is 33.50 meter [41] for MSL condition, The fatigue studies are based on the MSL ignoring the tide and surge effects of the water depth i.e, the LAT and HAT water depths conditions, Wave Histogram (Damage Wave): The wave histogram (significant wave height Hs and number of waves n) for fone year retum period for the eight directions in the Easter block of the Suez Gulf is given in Table 2. The total number of waves with respect to associated “Tmax forall directions is given in Table 3 Critical Damage Wave (Hy, & Ty,): The critical ‘maximum wave “H,,:” and associated “T,.” is calculated. 1007World Appl Sek J. 30 (8): 1900-1019, 2014 Longtade, degrees East Fig. 6: Water Depth Contours (Suez Gull) PDH, eH, 10) Haw = 35) (10) BD,t7; a 2DeT 11 Tow “SD, o phew” 2) eT where, D, = Demage estimation; H = Maximum wave height; b= Darg/tnteria domination structure constant (1.5); m= Inverse slope of S-N curve, equals to 3.74; P Probability of wave occurrence (Number of waves); Time associated with H,: Fig. 7: 3D View (33.5 Water Depth Platirom Located in Suez Gulf) 1008World Appl Set J. 30 (8): 1900-1019, 2014 ‘eble2: One Vr Wane Histon for 330 WD Hisl__§ NEE ses sw Ww NW Novefwave sconenee Sie) 00-03 wsiaaoe 785255 150872 22474 121531 168101 —1,668279 _—_LbonADF 12.718 010, O50 mise T2168 me 2a09 332027 15-20 150 ° ° m0 5 1399 20:25 4 ° ° ” 16 ° 6 10 25-30 0) ° ° 1 n ° o 26 30-35 0) ° ° 2 2 ° 6 4 35-80 0) ° ° ° a ° o « 4045 0 ° ° ° “ ° ° o Toul aaiS25 166002 1511S 20.08 144K 170520 —,7OR ION LOIN L0H DO Table: Nunber of Waves Associ with Ty fr 33.50 WD "Number of wave all direto fr Ta os) ufo) Bang ta] __2.441 428 S488 648875238096 8019454 106s 10610 Toul 90-05 046s 137910 ee - - 13719010 05-10 1398 se2027 32027 to-1s 2305 : . 15794 Ls-20 3.255 : : 1m 137 asa Ss : Se os 35-80 6975 : : Be ° 40-45 7908 : Be ° 6 45-50 9935 : ee ° ° eel anges “Table: One Yea Wave 8 sirens (Eater 635) Wave toe) Wave period Wave bi ‘Wave period Ge) oas asl 275 06 075 28 bas sso Las Sst 395 94st 22s 303 475 1.640 Table 5 One Ve. Cant Velo or 38.0 WD. Tale 6 Seater Diagram lack Peresage& ube of waves Se evan om Mado 2) Cente wes) ‘Back ID Na. of waves ‘est block soo 030 2 795092 cor tooo aso 3 ios 1.0 4 22.031 200 ‘The wave of significant height (1.16 meters) that is g oa te equivalent to the given Hy. is classified as the critical 7 1703.98 Bor damage wave because the damage probability percentage & 121 1 equals 6.110" as shown in Fig. 8: Teal 139880 Wave Parameters: The wave parameters (significant ‘wave height Hs and wave period TZ) for one year retum period for 8 directions in the Suez Gulf Eastern block is, taiven in the Table 4. The wave parameters utilized in fatigue assessment are based on the critical damage wave calculated from the directional wave histogram, Current: The approximated current profile For | year [41] is given in Table 5, Wave Seatter Diagram: The scatter diagram is extracted form wave histogram, The seater is built from the wave block data selection as shown in Table 1. Each block ID is 1009World Appl. Sct. J ‘Teble 7: APL Simplified Fatigue "UC" Resuls Case of Sty “I” 30 (8): 1000-1019, 2014 Atak Angle (Degee)/UC oon uss 0199 oust 0166 ox 00% ook out 0128 ose 0203 ons ois 0166 ons 00 0106 os ost 046 oat oan 04st basi one oso on ost0 0386 ass 0385 0426 oe ) oan RB oars a vast ar o60 ors 00s aes oor on oon 14s ost ones 0098 00K ont oon ost ou 0160 oss ois ones oie ose 0.085 0269 026 0288 ox ox 0288 ozone 020 on oom on out 0.085 0108 e107 0s 0203 ® sco, * Wave ele, Fig. 8: Critical Damage for | Yr. Wave 8 directions (Eastern Suez Gulf) presenting one direction form the total § directions with illuminating the zero values form the computation ‘The co-relation between the “H, & T,” is constant for all blocks presenting a particular’ percentage of occurrences for each direction independently as shown in Table 6, Wave Spectrum: The fatigue assessments scatter diagrams are based on Pierson-Moskowitz spectrum (16). ‘The wave spectrum is calculated in SACS through the Fatigue Module for the fatigue life predictions. Table 7 shows the percentage of the eight blocks to present the ratio to the total number of waves extracted from the PM spectrum values for Tz (note: the “Hs & Tz” all constant forall block spectra). Fatigue Cases of Study: The fatigue cases of study (Simplified & Spectral) for the 33.5 metre water depth platform are based on the three following functions: ‘Natural period of jacket T, < 3.0 seconds, ‘Natural period of jacket T. > 3.0 seconds, resulting from additional masses, with no vertical loads applied to the basie madel with natural period equals to 2.5 seconds (Current (C) acting with wave to evaluate the effect of combined action of wave and current, ‘The fatigue assessment to study the three sbove functions is. carried-out by SACS analysis based on the 6 different simulated jacket natural periods (2.5,2.7,2.9,, 1010World Appl. Sek. J Fig. 9: SACS 33.50 m Jacket Simulation 3-D View 3.1, 33, 3.5 see.) and environmental loading models, ‘Two cases were considered: case 1 with current and case 2 without current. Jacket Geometric Simulation: A 3-D model for the platform including the jacket, sub-structures and the topside is caried-out by the Precede Module in the SACS soft-ware, This model is used for the static and dynamic analyses for the joint fatigue life time calculations. The total applied loads on the topside in addition to the jacket selfweight determine the natural period of the jacket (T.) Since, stiffness from jacket geometry, member sizing and the boundary conditions are fixed parameters, the only covering factor affecting the natural period of the Jacket is the applied masses. The fatigue study is applied ‘on 12 jacket joints of Row-A & Row-B. Fig, 9 shows the 3-D view for the jacket SACS simulation: Simplified Fatigue (33.5 m Water Depth) Computation and Results: Jacket Joints “Unity Checks” Results for Case of Study “1”: Table 8 and Figs 10, 11 and 12 present the simplified fatigue results based on the API [19] utilizations (unity checks) for the case of study number “I” (current is applied) based on the asic model with natural period T, =2.5 seconds. Jacket Joints “Unity Checks” Results for Case of Study “2": Table 9 and Figs. 13, 14 and 15 present the simplified fatigue results based on the API [19] utilizations (unity checks) for the case of study number “2” 30 (8): 1000-1019, 2014 (no current is applied) based on the basic model with natural period T, = 2.5 seconds. Current Effect “UC” Results and Trend: Table 10 presents the simplified fatigue results based on the API [19] utilizations (unity checks) for the case of study number “1” (current is applied) and case of study number “2” (no current is applied) based on the basic model with natural period T, = 2.5 seconds. ‘Comment on (33.5 m) Jacket Simplified Fatigue Results: Referring tothe 33.5 m jacket simplified fatigue results the following is recorded: + The unity check “UC” for the facing joints in the same horizontal clevation changes with about 20%, the reason is that, each horizontal elevation is ‘exposed to the same amount of lateral loads but with a different exposure attack ange ‘The maximum unity checks “UCs” are found at upper 3.0 see, ‘Table 10 illustrates the first 15 mode shape values for the basic model of natural period of 2.50 seconds: 11World Appl Sek J. 30 (8): 1900-1019, 2014 ‘Teble 8: APL Simplified Fatigue "UC" Resuls Case of Sty 2" ‘Arto Angle Deg) / UC tow itd 2 o 2 te om wo ouster aston casa? om oss shots oases ome oe om aim) iah ams orate ae ame ast tats, eis— oan oaso ate tae tat toss ods omn oat oak at wo was ose aast osname wo oss ls Moms ms ome cast oases armors nee ome a canoe ants ome nus uts soa wax Sialit /Coma 89 DA ad as hes? Jom Dt} m3? oxy ear 02 + - “ os ~ al + + : a ne coe Fig, 10: Simplified Fatigue Row-A “UC” Results Case of Study “1” wax Siplii/ Caen No DAF Api te OTe ee . . ——s 3 Sa aaa aa ch an Fig. 11: Simplified Fatigue Row-B “UC” Results Case of Study “I” 1012