Stabilization and FEA of the offside OIL RIGS

© All Rights Reserved

Als PDF, TXT **herunterladen** oder online auf Scribd lesen

26 Aufrufe

Stabilization and FEA of the offside OIL RIGS

© All Rights Reserved

Als PDF, TXT **herunterladen** oder online auf Scribd lesen

- FSI Chinyanja (aka Chewa, Nyanja, Chichewa, Cinyanja) Language Course
- Frequency Dictionary of German
- FSI Greek Basic Course
- FSI Russian Active Introduction - Student Text
- Fsi FrenchBasicCourserevised Volume1 StudentText
- FSI Vietnamese Basic Course
- Fsi-ModernWrittenArabic-Volume1-StudentText
- FSI Spanish Basic Volume 4
- FSI Cambodian Basic Course Volume 2
- FSI Sub-Saharan French FAST
- FSI Vietnamese FAST
- Fsi Spanish Programmatic Course Volume1 Student Text
- Russian Frequency Dictionary Proposal
- FSI - Luganda Pretraining - Student Text
- FSI Cambodian Basic Course Volume 1
- Lao Basic Course (FSI)
- Learn Shona - FSI Basic Course
- FSI - Reading Lao - Student Text
- FSI - Adapting and Writing Language Lessons
- Fsi SpanishProgrammaticCourse Volume1 Workbook

Sie sind auf Seite 1von 109

(JACK-UP AND JACKET TYPE)

A Dissertation Submitted

In Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Award

of the Degree of

Bachelor of Engineering in

CIVIL ENGINEERING

Submitted By

(Roll No.: B80020006)

UNDER THE SUPERVISION OF

Assistant Professor,

Department of Applied Mechanics

MIT, Pune

MAHARASHTRA INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY,

PUNE

MAHARSHTRA INSTITUTE OF

TECHNOLOGY,

PUNE

CERTIFICATE

This is to certify that the dissertation entitled,

Stabilization and Finite Element Analysis of Offshore Oil rigs (JackUp and Jacket type)

Submitted by

Atul Kumar Singh

(Roll No. B80020006)

for fulfilment of the curriculum requirements for the award of Bachelor

of Engineering in Civil Engineering at Department of Applied Mechanics,

Maharashtra Institute of Technology, Pune. This work is being submitted

for the award of degree of Bachelor of Civil Engineering. It is submitted

in the partial fulfilment of the prescribed syllabus of Savitribai Phule

Pune University, Pune for the academic year 2014 2015. The matter

embodied in this dissertation has not been submitted for the award of any

other degree at any other Institute/ University.

Head of Department

Guide

Maharashtra Institute of Technology,

Pune

Maharashtra Institute of Technology,

Pune

Principal

Maharashtra Institute of Technology,

Pune

The dissertation report entitled

STABILIZATION AND FINITE ELEMENT ANALYSIS OF

OFFSHORE OIL RIGS (JACK-UP AND JACKET TYPE)

By

ATUL KUMAR SINGH

are approved for the degree of B. E. (Civil) of

Savitribai Phule Pune Univeristy at MAEERs M. I. T, Pune.

Examiner:

1. Name of External Examiner: ___________________.

Signature: __________________.

Signature: __________________.

Signature: __________________.

Date: _____/_____/_______.

Place: ____________.

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT

I owe a debt of deepest gratitude to my guide, Prof Sumant S. Shinde, Assistant Professor,

Department of Applied Mechanics, for his guidance, support, motivation and encouragement

throughout the period this work was carried out. His readiness for consultation at all times, his

educative comments, his concern and assistance even with practical things have been invaluable.

I am grateful to Dr. M.S.Kulkarni, Head of Department, Department of Applied

Mechanics for providing the necessary opportunities for the completion of my project. I also

thank the other staff members of my department for their invaluable help and guidance.

I am also grateful to MR. R.K.Ghanekar of ONGC for allowing me to do the

experimentation work required for this project at the same time I extend me sincere thanks to the

Prof. DR. P.R.Maiti of IIT BHU for developing my software skills during my 2 months

Internship under him.

I also pay my sincere gratitude towards the University of Wisconsin and NOAA for

providing me with the data required for the analytical work.

I extend my sincere thanks to, Dr. L. K. Kshirsagar, Principal, MIT, Pune for

extending all kinds of co-operation during the course. I am also thankful to Prof.

Sharadchandra.S.Darade (Patil), Dean Faculty of Engineering, MAEERs MIT, Pune for his

constant inspiration and encouragement.

I take this opportunity to express my sincere appreciation for the co-operation given by

Prof. Dr. Vishwanath D. Karad, Founder, Executive President, Maharashtra Academy of

Engineering &Educational Research (MAEER), Pune, and need a special mention for all the help

extended by him to make my dissertation a memorable experience.Finally and most significantly,

I am deeply grateful to my Parents for their love, sacrifice, inspiration and valuable help that

enabled me to complete this assignment.

ATUL KUMAR SINGH

BE CIVIL

Department Of Civil Engineering

MIT, PUNE

ii

ABSTRACT

An oil platform, offshore platform, or (colloquially) oil rig is a large structure with facilities to

drill wells, to extract and process oil and natural gas, or to temporarily store product until it can

be brought to shore for refining and marketing. In many cases, the platform contains facilities

to house the workforce as well. Depending on the circumstances, the platform may be fixed to

the ocean floor, may consist of an artificial island, or may float. Remote subsea wells may also

be connected to a platform by flow lines and by umbilical connections. These subsea solutions

may consist of one or more subsea wells, or of one or more manifold centres for multiple wells.

Since offshore structures are used worldwide for a variety of functions and in a variety of water

depths, and environments there is a need for right selection of equipment, types of platforms

and method of drilling and also right planning, design, fabrication, transportation, installation

and commissioning of petroleum platforms, considering the water depth and environment

conditions are very important, this work deals with the practical methods for soil investigation

required for the establishment of the oil rig and then the analytical method to determine the

effect of sea waves on the standing jacket type oil rig.

Firstly, before the oil rig is established there is a need to determine various soil properties below

the sea bed, so that we can conclude that till which depth the rig is supposed to be penetrated

or what kind of material and what should be the dimensions of the rigs so that the rigs will with

stand the soil structure interaction. At the same time there are various forces which are applied

on the oil rigs above the sea bed and that forces are because of Fluid-Structure Interaction, and

this force is because of the load that is generated due to the sea waves.

Various tests such as sieve analysis, Atterberg limits test, UU Triaxial test etc. were done on

the soil samples that were extracted from the sea bed so as to determine the soil characteristics,

the soil stratigraphy and the type and strength characteristics of various soil strata. Along with

these Lateral load deformation characteristics (p-y, t-z and q-z data) for pile used in Jack-up

legs and Mud mat bearing capacity was determined.

iii

In the second part of the work, the effects of linear sea waves were studied using the concept

of Fluid- Structure Interaction with the help of concept of Finite Element Analysis and

Computational Fluid Dynamics. This study of the effect of Hydrodynamic Loading on the Jackup rig was studied with the help of ANSYS WORKBWNCH 14.5. As we know the sea waves

are non-linear in nature so to it is very tough to determine the various properties of waves. So

in my work I have assumed that the sea waves in the western offshore basin are linear and I

have determine the properties like wavelength, time period etc. with the help of Airys Wave

theory and some data of WOB was taken from Oil & Natural Gas Corporation and National

Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, USA

iv

TABLE OF CONTENTS

1. Acknowledgement

2. Abstract

ii

3. List Of figures

vi

4. List Of tables

vii

5. Abbreviation

vii

6. Nomenclature

xi

CHAPTER-1 INTRODUCTION

[1-6]

1.1 Introduction

[7-20]

10

11

13

13

15

16

17

18

19

2.5.4 ANSYS

20

[21-23]

[24-36]

25

4.2 Hydrodynamics

25

26

27

29

30

33

34

[37-46]

5.1 General

37

37

38

5.3.1 General

38

5.3.2 Stratigraphy

38

40

5.3.3.1 Clays

40

5.3.3.2 Sands

40

5.3.3.3 Silts

41

42

vi

42

44

45

[48-52]

49

50

50

50

51

51

6.7 Loading

54

55

[57-67]

7.1 Results

57

65

7.3 Discussion

66

[68-70]

68

68

70

REFERENCES

ILLUSTRATIONS

APPENDIX A

APPENDIX B

[71-73]

vii

LIST OF FIGURES

Figure 1.1 Types of Oil Platform

Figure 1.2 Jack-Up rig of ONGC installed in the western offshore basin

Figure 2.1 Anatomy of oil rig

Figure 2.2 (a) Jack-up structure (designed in CREO 3.0); (b) a jack up oil rigs

Figure 2.3 (a) Jacket structure (designed in CREO 3.0); (b) a jacket oil rig

Figure 2.4 Graph depicting the grain size distribution.

Figure 2.5 Cassagrande Cup in Action.

Figure 2.6 Triaxial Test Apparatus.

Figure 4.1 Sample offshore structure design

Figure 4.2 Various Loads on the Oil Rigs

Figure 4.3 Airy Wave Theory

Figure 4.4 Wave spectra of a fully developed sea for different wind speeds according to

Moskowitz (1964)

Figure 4.5 Significant wave height and period at the peak of the spectrum of a fully

developed sea calculated from the Pierson-Moskowitz spectrum using.

Figure 4.6 Flow forces according to the Morison equation as function of time (a) Blue

Line: - Drag Force (b) Red Line: - Inertial Force (c) Black Line: - Total Force

Figure 5.1 Loading mechanism of a pile

Figure 5.2 Calculation for by various method

Figure 6.1 Flow chart showing whole research work in steps.

Figure 6.2 Dimensions of Jacket Oil Rigs

Figure 6.3 Hydrodynamic load history generated for Jacket model for H = 33 m and

T= 16 s for different water depths.

Figure 7.1 Static collapse modes for different water depths and corresponding

inundation levels

Figure 7.2: - Stiffness curves for in terms of base shear (BS) for different water depths

Figure 7.3: -Dynamic displacement response for different water depths / inundation

levels

Figure 7.4:- Dynamic and static response history, water depth 78 m /inundation 3.06m

Figure 7.5: Acceleration response for different water depths / inundation levels

Figure 7.6: Structural plastic state at dynamic max. Displacement, water depth 78 m

Figure 7.7: Contributions from structural restoring forces and inertia force

viii

LIST OF TABLES

Table 4.1 API recommendation of C d and Cm

Table 5.1 Onshore Laboratory Tests

Table 5.2 Description Of soil Layers

Table 6.1 Material Properties for the Structural Steel

Table 6.2: Jacket Model dynamic forces to be used in analysis

Table 7.1: results from non-linear static and dynamic analyses, h =33 m, T = 16 s

ix

ABBREVATION

ONGC

FEA

FEM

DOF

Degree of Freedom

CAD

Computer-Aided Design

UU

Unconsolidated Undrained

WOB

MODU

CPT

API

ASTM

Materials

TLP

NOMENCLATURE

Symbol

Definition

Dimension

Force

Stiffness

Displacement

Resultant Force/Vector

CG

Centre of Gravity

m/s

Weight

Kg

Stress

Pa

Strain

Density

kg/m3

Mass

Kg

Gravity

m/s

STABILIZATION AND FINITE ELEMENT ANALYSIS OF OFFSHORE OIL RIGS (JACK -UP AND JACKET TYPE)

CHAPTER 1

INTRODUCTION

1.1

General

An oil platform, offshore platform, or (colloquially) oil rig is a large structure with

facilities to drill wells, to extract and process oil and natural gas, or to temporarily store

product until it can be brought to shore for refining and marketing. In many cases, the

platform contains facilities to house the workforce as well. Depending on the

circumstances, the platform may be fixed to the ocean floor, may consist of an artificial

island, or may float. Remote subsea wells may also be connected to a platform by flow

lines and by umbilical connections. These subsea solutions may consist of one or more

subsea wells, or of one or more manifold centres for multiple wells.

moored tension leg mini-tension leg platform; 6) Spar; 7,8) Semi-submersibles; 9)

floating production, storage off loading facility 10) Sub-sea completion and tie back to

host facility.

STABILIZATION AND FINITE ELEMENT ANALYSIS OF OFFSHORE OIL RIGS (JACK -UP AND JACKET TYPE)

These platforms are built on concrete or steel legs, or both, anchored directly onto the

seabed, supporting a deck with space for drilling rigs, production facilities and crew

quarters. Such platforms are, by virtue of their immobility, designed for very long term

use (for instance the Hibernia platform). Various types of structure are used: steel jacket,

concrete caisson, floating steel, and even floating concrete. Steel jackets are vertical

sections made of tubular steel members, and are usually piled into the seabed.

1.1.2 Jacket drilling rigs

Jacket Mobile Drilling Units (or Jackets), as the name suggests, are rigs that can be

jacked up above the sea using legs that can be lowered, much like jacks. These MODUs

(Mobile Offshore Drilling Units) are typically used in water depths up to 120 metres

(390 ft), although some designs can go to 170 m (560 ft) depth. They are designed to

move from place to place, and then anchor themselves by deploying the legs to the ocean

bottom using a rack and pinion gear system on each leg.

Fig 1.2 Jacket rig of ONGC installed in the western offshore basin

STABILIZATION AND FINITE ELEMENT ANALYSIS OF OFFSHORE OIL RIGS (JACK -UP AND JACKET TYPE)

1.2

Motivation

concerned with foundation design, construction, and maintenance and decommissioning

for human-made structures in the sea. Oil platforms, artificial islands and submarine

pipelines are examples of such structures. The seabed has to be able to withstand the

weight of these structures and the applied loads. Geo-hazards must also be taken into

account. The need for offshore developments stems from a gradual depletion of

hydrocarbon reserves onshore or near the coastlines, as new fields are being developed

at greater distances offshore and in deeper water, with a corresponding adaptation of the

offshore site investigations.

1.2.1 Geotechnical surveys

Geotechnical surveys involve a combination of sampling, drilling, in situ testing as well

as laboratory soil testing that is conducted offshore and/or onshore. They serve to ground

truth the results of the geophysical investigations; they also provide a detailed account

of the seabed stratigraphy and soil engineering properties. Depending on water depth

and met ocean conditions, geotechnical surveys may be conducted from a

dedicated geotechnical drillship, a semi-submersible, a Jacket rig, a large hovercraft or

other means. They are done at a series of specific locations, while the vessel maintains

a constant position. Dynamic positioning and mooring with four-point anchoring

systems are used for that purpose.

The purpose of deep penetration geotechnical surveys is to collect information on the

seabed stratigraphy to depths extending up to a few 100 meters below the mud-line.

These surveys are done when larger structures are planned at these locations. Deep drill

holes require a few days during which the drilling unit has to remain exactly in the same

position.

STABILIZATION AND FINITE ELEMENT ANALYSIS OF OFFSHORE OIL RIGS (JACK -UP AND JACKET TYPE)

Seabed surface sampling can be done with a grab sampler and with a box corer. The

latter provides undisturbed specimens, on which testing can be conducted, for instance,

to determine the soils relative density, water content and mechanical properties.

Sampling can also be achieved with a tube corer, either gravity-driven, or that can be

pushed into the seabed by a piston or by means of a vibration system.

Drilling is another means of sampling the seabed. It is used to obtain a record of the

seabed stratigraphy or the rock formations below it. The set-up used to sample an

offshore structure's foundation is similar to that used by the oil industry to reach and

delineate hydrocarbon reservoirs, with some differences in the types of testing.

Information on the mechanical strength of the soil can be obtained in situ (from the

seabed itself as opposed to in a laboratory from a soil sample). The advantage of this

approach is that the data are obtained from soil that has not suffered any disturbance as

a result of its relocation. Two of the most commonly used instruments used for that

purpose are the cone penetrometer (CPT) and the shear vane.

Now, In case of the Oil rigs in India, all the initial soil testing for the establishment of

the structure is done in the Indian Engineering and Ocean Technology, ONGC. The

purpose of the investigation was to ascertain the soil condition at the location for

assessment of ultimate axial pile capacity, load deformation data for open-ended tubular

piles for the platform, assessment of Mudmat bearing capacity and estimation of Jacket

rig penetration for standard ONGC rig.

Designing and Stability

There are more than 9000 fixed offshore platforms around the world related to

hydrocarbon production, the largest numbers of platforms are located in South East Asia,

Gulf of Mexico and the North Sea followed by the coast of India, Nigeria, Venezuela

and the Mediterranean Sea. The majority of the worlds platforms have been designed

according to the different editions of Recommended Practice by The American

Petroleum Institute (API), which until 1993 have been in Working Stress Design (WSD)

format.

STABILIZATION AND FINITE ELEMENT ANALYSIS OF OFFSHORE OIL RIGS (JACK -UP AND JACKET TYPE)

The 20th edition (1993) was also issued in Load and Resistance Factor Design (LRFD)

format, and was in 1997 supplemented with a section on requalification of offshore

structures. However, from the mid-seventies, Norwegian Petroleum Directorate (NPD)

and Det Norske Veritas (DNV) in Norway and Health and Safety Executive (HSE) in

Great Britain developed their own set of rules, which replaced the API recommendations

relating to design of structures for petroleum exploitation in the North Sea.

The structural design requirements of an offshore platform subjected wave induced

forces and moments in the jacket can play a major role in the design of the offshore

structures. For an economic and reliable design; good estimation of wave loadings are

essential. A nonlinear response analysis of a fixed offshore platform under wave loading

is presented, the structure is discretized using the finite element method, wave force is

determined according to linearized Morison equation. Hydrodynamic loading on

horizontal and vertical tubular members and the dynamic response of fixed offshore

structure together with the distribution of displacement, axial force and bending moment

along the leg are investigated for regular and extreme conditions, where the structure

should keep production capability in conditions of the one year return period wave and

must be able to survive the 100 year return period storm conditions.

With the development of the concept of the Finite Element Analysis along with the

softwares related to the FEA, it is easy to study the effect of various environmental

loads, fluid-structure interaction as well as the soil-structure interaction. Because of the

Finite Element Method it is easy to analyse various effects on the Oil rigs without

actually constructing them and then we can select the best possible structure.

To Determine the Soil Properties, by doing various testings on the soil in the

laboratory.

STABILIZATION AND FINITE ELEMENT ANALYSIS OF OFFSHORE OIL RIGS (JACK -UP AND JACKET TYPE)

response of jacket platforms and, based on that, present results on jacket response

and capacity to withstand wave loads for the benefit of the structural engineering

community.

The results of this study shall be helpful for an offshore geotechnical as well as offshore

structural engineer to understand the behaviour of the soil as well as the behaviour of

various environmental loads on the offshore jack up rig, in construction of the Jacket

rigs in the Western Offshore Basin of India. It can also be used as a database for the

forthcoming students who are interested to work further in this field of Offshore

Engineering.

The scope of this report is to present:

Soil Characteristics including boring logs showing the soil stratigraphy and the

type and strength characteristics of various strata.

Determining the Jacket leg penetration analysis Mud Mat bearing capacity of the

oil rig.

Generating a 3D model of the Jacket type rig with the help of the data determined

in the 1st part of the research in the software CREO 2.0

Last but not the least; validate the developed model by analysing the mechanical

behaviour under static loading, FE Analysis was done in ANSYS R14.5

Computational analysis can be performed estimation of the effects of the Fluid Structure

Interaction effects on the structure. So, these results are expected to be helpful for a

researcher. The aim of this dissertation is to check whether the Jacket type oil rigs are

suitable in WOB.

STABILIZATION AND FINITE ELEMENT ANALYSIS OF OFFSHORE OIL RIGS (JACK -UP AND JACKET TYPE)

CHAPTER 2

THEORETICAL BACKGROUND

The objective of this chapter is to provide a basic relevant theoretical outline of the

various types soil testing done on the soil samples that are gathered from the sea bed and

finite element method used to solve the problem of wave in deck loading. It will serve

as the reference to the topics described ahead.

2.1 Anatomy of Oil Rigs

There are three primary rig types. Jackups/Jackets, semisubmersibles and drillships

make up the majority of the offshore rig fleet and all are used worldwide. Other rig types

such as platform rigs, inland barges and tender-assisted rigs are used as well, but they

are fewer in number and are generally used in specific geographic areas.

Jack-Up/Jackets Used for shallow water drilling, there are two jackup types: Independent-leg jackups make up the majority of the existing fleet. They have legs

that penetrate into the seafloor and the hull jacks up and down the legs.

Mat-supported jackups are presently used only in the U.S. GoM. As the name implies,

the mat rests on the seafloor during drilling operations. Cantilever jackups are able to

skid out over the platform or well location, while slot units have a slot that fits around

a platform when drilling development wells.

Semisubmersibles Used for deepwater drilling, these floating rigs have columns

that are ballasted to remain on location either by mooring lines anchored to the

seafloor or by dynamic positioning systems. They are used for both exploratory and

development drilling.

Drillships Also used for deepwater drilling, these ship-shaped floating rigs move

from location to location under their own power. They are capable of operating in

more remote locations and require fewer supply boat trips than do semis.

STABILIZATION AND FINITE ELEMENT ANALYSIS OF OFFSHORE OIL RIGS (JACK -UP AND JACKET TYPE)

They maintained on location via dynamic positioning systems, and most of the rigs

currently under construction are drillships.

Platform Rigs These are self-contained rigs that are placed on fixed platforms for

field development drilling. Some are called self-erecting and can be rigged up in as

little as a few days. Other larger units require a derrick barge to be installed and can

take up to two weeks to be rigged up. Once drilling is completed, the rig is removed

from the platform.

Tender-Assist Rigs There are only about 25 of these rigs left in existence, used

mostly in West Africa and Southeast Asia. They are monohull units that are moored

next to a platform. The rig is then installed onto the platform, while all the power,

storage and other functions remain on the tender.

Inland Barges These rigs are specially adapted for inland waters close to shore.

They are used in the GoM as well as other areas of the world.

This image shows some of the major components of an offshore Jacket rigs: -

STABILIZATION AND FINITE ELEMENT ANALYSIS OF OFFSHORE OIL RIGS (JACK -UP AND JACKET TYPE)

Hull initially rigs were built out of tanker hulls, so the terminology remains

Power Module converts available fuel into power for the station

A Jacket rig or a self-elevating unit is a type of mobile platform that consists of a

buoyant hull fitted with a number of movable legs, capable of raising its hull over the

surface of the sea. The buoyant hull enables transportation of the unit and all attached

machinery to a desired location. Once on location the hull is raised to the required

elevation above the sea surface supported by the sea bed. The legs of such units may be

designed to penetrate the sea bed, may be fitted with enlarged sections or footings, or

may be attached to a bottom mat. Generally Jacket rigs are not self-propelled and rely

on tugs or heavy lift ships for transportation.

The primary advantage of the Jacket design is that it offers a steady and relatively

motion-free platform in the drilling position and mobilizes relatively quickly and easily.

Although they originally were designed to operate in very shallow water, some newer

units, such as the ultra-harsh environment Maersk MSC C170-150 MC, are huge (Fig.

2.2) and can be operated in 550 ft in the GOM. With 673.4-ft. leg length, a hull

dimension of 29133639 ft, and a variable deck load (VDL) of 10,000 long tons, it is

mammoth and rivals some of the larger semis. This type of unit can be commercially

competitive only in the North Sea and in very special situations.

STABILIZATION AND FINITE ELEMENT ANALYSIS OF OFFSHORE OIL RIGS (JACK -UP AND JACKET TYPE)

(a)

(b)

Fig 2.2 (a) Jacket structure (designed in CREO 3.0); (b) a jack up oil rigs

Jacket refers in the oil and gas exploration and production to the steel frame supporting

the deck and the topsides in a fixed offshore platform. There are multiple types of

offshore platforms depending on the applications and the depth of the water. Most of the

platforms are used in the shallow waters of the continental shelf, so 95% of the offshore

platforms in the world are jacket designed. In these areas and where the water depth does

not exceed 500 meters, these platforms may be anchored directly to the seabed.

These platforms are fixed and their deck is supported by a steel tubular structure having

its feet on the seabed. This steel tubular structure is called the jacket. To fix the jacket

onto the seabed, the jacket is equipped with thick steel piles of 2 meters diameter that

can penetrate the sea floor up to 100 meters deep to ensure the stability of the whole

platform.

10

STABILIZATION AND FINITE ELEMENT ANALYSIS OF OFFSHORE OIL RIGS (JACK -UP AND JACKET TYPE)

The jacket may be hundreds meters high and weight thousands tonnes. The height of the

jacket is defined by the water depth plus about 15 meters above the sea level.

The tubular structure of a jacket is designed to support multiple constraints:

- Weight of the processing equipment (topsides)

- Impact of the waves

- Pressure of the wind on the topsides

- Flow of the sea water streams and tides

- Corrosion

- Fatigue effect

- Life cycle time

Acting as a cage, the jacket is protecting all the piping going through to the seabed. This

space tubular frame is also protecting these pipes from lateral load. The deck structure

is connected to the jacket by the deck legs transferring efforts both ways.

(a)

(b)

Fig 2.3 (a) Jacket structure (designed in CREO 3.0); (b) a jacket oil rigs

11

STABILIZATION AND FINITE ELEMENT ANALYSIS OF OFFSHORE OIL RIGS (JACK -UP AND JACKET TYPE)

As the basic structural foundation for almost all construction, soil materials play an

important role in the ultimate success of a project. Whether you're working in clay, silt,

sand, gravel, peat, or loam, understanding the soil properties of your site help you make

good construction decisions.

In-lab and onsite

Element laboratories perform in-house and onsite testing of soil materials used for

subgrades, structural fills, roadways, and earthen dams, providing valuable information

that assists design engineers in achieving sound engineering practices. Element soils

laboratory scientists sample, analyse, and classify soil materials, utilizing the most

current state, federal, and industry standards and specifications.

Geotechnical Soil Testing and Analysis: Element soil labs perform sophisticated and

complex geotechnical soil testing methods, such as permeability, unconfined

compressive strength Triaxial shear, consolidation linear shrinkage tests and hydrometer

analysis.

12

STABILIZATION AND FINITE ELEMENT ANALYSIS OF OFFSHORE OIL RIGS (JACK -UP AND JACKET TYPE)

This test is performed to determine the percentage of different grain sizes contained

within a soil. The mechanical or sieve analysis is performed to determine the distribution

of the coarser, larger-sized particles, and the hydrometer method is used to determine

the distribution of the finer particles.

The distribution of different grain sizes affects the engineering properties of soil. Grain

size analysis provides the grain size distribution, and it is required in classifying the soil.

The Atterberg limits are a basic measure of the critical water contents of a finegrained soil, such as its shrinkage limit, plastic limit, and liquid limit. As a dry, clayey

soil takes on increasing amounts of water, it undergoes dramatic and distinct changes in

behaviour and consistency.

13

STABILIZATION AND FINITE ELEMENT ANALYSIS OF OFFSHORE OIL RIGS (JACK -UP AND JACKET TYPE)

Depending on the water content of the soil, it may appear in four states: solid, semisolid, plastic and liquid. In each state, the consistency and behavior of a soil is different

and consequently so are its engineering properties. Thus, the boundary between each

state can be defined based on a change in the soil's behavior.

The Atterberg limits can be used to distinguish between silt and clay, and it can

distinguish between different types of silts and clays. These limits were created by Albert

Atterberg, a Swedish chemist. They were later refined by Arthur Casagrande. These

distinctions in soil are used in assessing the soils that are to have structures built on.

Soils when wet retain water and some expand in volume. The amount of expansion is

related to the ability of the soil to take in water and its structural make-up (the type of

atoms present). These tests are mainly used on clayey or silty soils since these are the

soils that expand and shrink due to moisture content. Clays and silts react with the water

and thus change sizes and have varying shear strengths. Thus these tests are used widely

in the preliminary stages of designing any structure to ensure that the soil will have the

correct amount of shear strength and not too much change in volume as it expands and

shrinks with different moisture contents.

Shrinkage limit

The shrinkage limit (SL) is the water content where further loss of moisture will not

result in any more volume reduction. The test to determine the shrinkage limit is ASTM

International D4943. The shrinkage limit is much less commonly used than the liquid

and plastic limits.

Plastic limit

The plastic limit (PL) is determined by rolling out a thread of the fine portion of a soil

on a flat, non-porous surface. The procedure is defined in ASTM Standard D 4318. If

the soil is at a moisture content where its behaviour is plastic, this thread will retain its

shape down to a very narrow diameter. The sample can then be remoulded and the test

repeated. As the moisture content falls due to evaporation, the thread will begin to break

apart at larger diameters

14

STABILIZATION AND FINITE ELEMENT ANALYSIS OF OFFSHORE OIL RIGS (JACK -UP AND JACKET TYPE)

Liquid limit

The liquid limit (LL) is conceptually defined as the water content at which the behavior

of a clayey soil changes from plastic to liquid. However, the transition from plastic to

liquid behaviour is gradual over a range of water contents, and the shear strength of the

soil is not actually zero at the liquid limit.

A Triaxial shear test is a common method to measure the mechanical properties of many

deformable solids, especially soil (e.g. sand, clay) and rock, and other granular materials

or powders. There are several variations on the tests;-

15

STABILIZATION AND FINITE ELEMENT ANALYSIS OF OFFSHORE OIL RIGS (JACK -UP AND JACKET TYPE)

results in drainage. The rate of axial deformation is kept constant, i.e. is strain controlled.

The idea is that the test allows the sample and the pore pressures to fully consolidate

(i.e. adjust) to the surrounding stresses. The test may take a long time to allow the sample

to adjust, in particular low permeability samples need a long time to drain and adjust

strain to stress levels.

Consolidated Undrained (CU)

In a consolidated undrained test the sample is not allowed to drain. The shear

characteristics are measured under undrained conditions and the sample is assumed to

be fully saturated.

Unconsolidated Undrained (UU)

In an unconsolidated undrained test the sample is not allowed to drain. The sample is

compressed at a constant rate (strain-controlled).

16

STABILIZATION AND FINITE ELEMENT ANALYSIS OF OFFSHORE OIL RIGS (JACK -UP AND JACKET TYPE)

Finite Element Analysis (FEA) is an engineering analysis tool, with a wide applications

of linear, non-linear, static, dynamic, buckling, thermal, structural and fatigue analysis

that is often used in medicines to assist in the design of implants and devices. It is an

approximate numerical method that gives mathematical representation of actual

problem. For load carrying structures of unlimited complexity FEA is used to calculate

stresses, although there are limitations of a practical nature.

2.5.1 Domain Discretization

The basic concept of the finite element method is the subdivision of the computational

domain into elements of arbitrary shape and size. The only restriction is that the elements

may not overlap and that they have to cover the complete computational domain. The

geometric object is finally represented by a mesh of 1-D, 2-D and/or 3-D basic elements

(geometric units) such as bars, triangles, quadrilaterals, tetrahedrons, hexahedra and

pyramids. (Which type of element is most appropriate for a particular problem depends

on several factors, such as domain geometry, required accuracy, computational costs

etc.). The ability to handle non-uniform and distorted computational domains has always

been an important feature of the finite element method.

17

STABILIZATION AND FINITE ELEMENT ANALYSIS OF OFFSHORE OIL RIGS (JACK -UP AND JACKET TYPE)

An analyst can obtain a solution for the stress and strain distribution throughout a

continuum when the applied loads, boundary conditions and material properties are

known with the help of FE method. The basic steps in any software based finite element

analysis consist of the following:

a) Pre-processing Phase

Creating a 3D CAD Model: Use any of the 3D CAD modelling tools like ProE, Catia,

Creo and solid Edge etc. for creating the 3D geometry of the part/assembly of which you

want to perform FEA.

Importing 3D CAD geometry to FEA Package: Start the FEA package and import the

CAD geometry into the FEA package like Abaqus, Ansys, and Nastran.

Defining Material Properties: Define material which is going to be used for the

part/assembly in FEA package. By this process, one can define modulus of elasticity,

Poissons ratio and all other necessary properties required for the FEA.

Meshing: Meshing is a fundamental step in FEA. In this operation, discretization is used

to convert infinite DOF to finite elements. So, after this operation the CAD geometry is

divided into large numbers of small elements. The small elements are called mesh. The

analysis, accuracy and duration depend on the mesh size and orientations. With the

increase in mesh size, the finite element analysis speed increases but the accuracy

decreases. A sample Meshing is shown in Figure 2.7

Defining Boundary Condition: Boundary conditions are the loads and constraints that

represent the effects of the surrounding environment on the model. Loads can be forces,

moments, pressures, temperatures, accelerations and constraints are for resist the

deformations induced by the loads. So, by defining where loads applied and where

constraints applied to rest the part/assembly.

18

STABILIZATION AND FINITE ELEMENT ANALYSIS OF OFFSHORE OIL RIGS (JACK -UP AND JACKET TYPE)

in the form

{F} = [K] {}

......Eq 2.1

where, {F} is the vector of applied nodal forces, [K] is a square matrix, known as the

stiffness matrix, and {} is the vector of (unknown) nodal displacements.

b) Solution Phase

In this step, FEA package solve the problem for the defined material properties,

boundary conditions and mesh size. Internally, software carries out matrix formation,

inversion, multiplication & solution for unknown, such as displacement & then finds

strain & stress for static analysis.

The solution is obtained numerically through a set of linear equations, equal to the

amount of degrees of freedom in the model: the number of nodal points times the number

of displacement components in each node (two in a 2-D, three in a 3-D model). The

processing time and memory space required for a problem in computer progressively

depends on the number of degree of freedom. A time-efficient element mesh is crucially

important, since computer hardware capacity is the only practical limit to the level of

model complexity feasible.

c) Post processing Phase

In this step, FEA package gives results of the solution. The result can be viewed in

various formats like graph, value, animation etc. through which you can verify, conclude

and think what steps could be taken to improve the design.

19

STABILIZATION AND FINITE ELEMENT ANALYSIS OF OFFSHORE OIL RIGS (JACK -UP AND JACKET TYPE)

a) Increases visualization: It is not easy to visualize or predict failure location for real

life complex problems but with the help of this tool one can successfully predict failure

location for the given set of forces.

b) Decrease design cycle time: Conventional chain design cycle is a very long & time

consuming process while current concurrent engineering design cycle is very fast &

more efficient due to which design cycle time is decreased.

c) Optimum design: It provides most appropriate environment which results into a

favourable design outcome.

2.5.4 ANSYS

ANSYS is a widely used finite element analysis package which can simulate problems

in area of structural mechanics, electromagnetics, heat transfer, fluid dynamics, and

acoustics and coupled problems. It has the capability to analyse static and dynamic,

linear and non-linear problems in structural analysis. The simulations carried out in this

work are linear static in nature.

Linear static analysis is the most basic type of analysis. The term linear signifies that

the computed response (displacement, stress or strain) is linearly related to the applied

force. And the term static signifies that there is no variation of forces with respect to

the time or, that the time variation is insignificant and can therefore be safely ignored.

20

STABILIZATION AND FINITE ELEMENT ANALYSIS OF OFFSHORE OIL RIGS (JACK -UP AND JACKET TYPE)

CHAPTER 3

LITERATURE REVIEW

Since the beginning of 19th century, offshore engineering has become one of the subjects

of interest for research. Significant contributions to understand the concept of

construction of structures in offshore were made by different type of studies that always

helped Sub-Sea Engineer and researchers to do the needful applications for it.

Nowadays, numerical modelling, especially computer modelling is widely used by the

researchers for this study. Some authors who have done work in a similar fashion

adopting different techniques and concluding different results:

George Biddell Airy in the 19th century gave a theory In fluid dynamics, Airy wave

theory (often referred to as linear wave theory) gives a linearized description of

the propagation of gravity waves on the surface of a homogeneous fluid layer. The

theory assumes that the fluid layer has a uniform mean depth, and that the fluid

flow is inviscid, incompressible and irrotational.

Sir George Stokes, again gave a wave theory named as Stokes wave is a nonlinear and periodic surface wave on an inviscid fluid layer of constant mean

depth. Stokes' wave theory is of direct practical use for waves on intermediate and deep

water. It is used in the design of coastal land offshore structures, in order to determine

the wave kinematics (free surface elevation and flow velocities). The wave kinematics

are subsequently needed in the design process to determine the wave loads on a structure.

In 1992 Bill Madock et all evaluated the Canadian Standards Association Code for the

Design, Construction, and Installation of Fixed Offshore Structures in its application to

the design of an actual steel jacket structure. The evaluation compared the results of a

design based on the CSA standards to British Petroleum's GYDA platform, applying the

design criteria and environmental conditions used in the original design and focusing on

the jacket structure and the pile foundations only.

21

STABILIZATION AND FINITE ELEMENT ANALYSIS OF OFFSHORE OIL RIGS (JACK -UP AND JACKET TYPE)

template type platforms and to evaluate the ultimate limit state lateral loading capacities

of such platforms and verification of these procedures have been accomplished by

comparing results from three dimensional linear and nonlinear analysis of various

template type platforms.

Chakrabarti S.K (1990) explained that in computing the wave load on the components

of offshore structures, various wave loads are computed with the help of various wave

theories such as airy wave theory, stokes higher order theory, cnoidal theory and Stream

function theory. He worked on the applicability of various wave theories in terms design

wave parameters. He also worked on the different effects of wave on the different type

of offshore structures.

Chaudhary, G.K and Dover, W.D. 1985 gives the fatigue damage calculation for

random loading on offshore platforms takes the form of a rainflow analysis of the

dynamic response of individual members to various sea states. They provided a

theoretical method for determining random load fatigue damage. In this case, an analysis

based on broad band random loading has been produced. Their theoretical approach

gives a fatigue life estimate which is slightly (6.6%) more conservative, for a typical

example, than a rainflow analysis.

Gerwick, B.C.Jr. in 1986 worked on the geotechnical and structural aspects of the

offshore structures. He worked on the topic related to the fluid-structure interaction and

soil-structure interaction where the structure was made up of prestressed concrete.

Srinivasan Chandrasekaran and Subrata Kumar Bhattacharyya (2012) worked on

the presence of extreme waves like freak waves, which is capable of causing irreparable

damages to offshore installations and (or) create inoperable conditions to the crew on

board. Knowledge on the extreme wave environment and the related wave-structure

interaction are required for safer design of deep-water offshore structures.

22

STABILIZATION AND FINITE ELEMENT ANALYSIS OF OFFSHORE OIL RIGS (JACK -UP AND JACKET TYPE)

He worked on the Dynamic response of the Tension Leg Platforms (TLP) under these

extreme waves for different wave approach angles. Based on the analytical studies cared

out, he concluded that the TLPs are sensitive to the wave directionality when

encountered by such extreme waves; ringing type response is developed in TLPs which

could result in tether pull out.

Pierre Le Tirant in 1979 gave the idea of the geophysical and geotechnical survey

recommended before the installation of Jacket rigs especially in cohesive soils. He also

gave the new methods for estimating the amount of penetration in the spud cans or mud

mats according to the type of soil and the stratification of soil present. He also did the

finite element analysis on the foundations of jack up rigs in different soils so as to

calculate the foundation fixity of the legs.

Oana-Mirela Dobrot, Florentina Tocu and Costel Iulian Mocanu used numerical

methodology for which deals with the determining of stress state occurring in the

structure of the oil rig legs for various incidence angles of the wave. The hydrodynamic

forces and moments resulting from the FORHID programme were taken as loading

situations. The hydrodynamic wave loads acting on the legs of the offshore oil rig were

determined for various wave incidence angles. These hydrodynamic trials were applied

in the nodes of the structure of the oil rig legs, and the stress state was calculated by the

Solid Works-COSMOS/M programme. The stress variation graphs are shown in the

study.

Tim A. Newson worked on the FEA of the Jacket leg penetration, he did the punch

through analysis with the help of FEM modeling with ABASQUS and PLAXIS

software. His analysis was based on the concept of FEM but at the same time the exact

result that he determined was also based on the field observation (centrifuge testing). In

the component approaches one seeks to estimate wave loading on each deck member

and all equipment separately. Interaction between different structural components can

be taken into account by using shielding or blocking factors, which can be determined

by experiments (see e.g. Sterndorff, 2002) or computational fluid dynamics (CFD)

technique.

23

STABILIZATION AND FINITE ELEMENT ANALYSIS OF OFFSHORE OIL RIGS (JACK -UP AND JACKET TYPE)

Obviously, when using this kind of approach, the deck must be modelled in detail. The

amount of equipment and members in a normal platform deck necessitates, for practical

purposes, computer software to carry out the calculations. Software based on the

recommendations by dr. Kaplan (Kaplan et al., 1995) is commercially available. More

detailed information about the different methods is given in the following: Company internal models Amoco (now part of BP) has a company internal wave-indeck load model, which was made available to HSE for comparison purposes (HSE,

1997b). It requires a detailed deck model.

Kaplan et al.s (1995) model uses stretched (Wheeler, 1970) linear wave theory and

requires a detailed deck model. The model includes drag, inertia and impact loads as

well as buoyancy. The formulation handles both horisontal and vertical forces and

includes time variation.

24

STABILIZATION AND FINITE ELEMENT ANALYSIS OF OFFSHORE OIL RIGS (JACK -UP AND JACKET TYPE)

CHAPTER 4

ENVIRONMENTAL FORCES

Hydrodynamic wave loading on fixed offshore structures has been an issue of concern

to the offshore oil and gas industry. The analysis, design and construction of offshore

structures are arguably one of the most demanding sets of tasks faced by the engineering

profession. Over and above the usual conditions and situations met by land-based

structures, offshore structures have the added complication of being placed in an ocean

environment where hydrodynamic interaction effects and dynamic response become

major considerations in their design. In general, wave and current can be found together

in different forms in the ocean. The existence of waves and currents and their interaction

play a significant role in most ocean dynamic processes and are important for ocean

engineers

In addition, the range of possible design solutions, such as: Tension Leg Platform (TLP)

deep water designs; the more traditional jacket and Jacket oil rigs; and the large number

of sized gravity-style offshore platforms themselves, pose their own peculiar demands

in terms of hydrodynamic loading effects, foundation support conditions and character

of the dynamic response of not only the structure itself but also of the riser systems for

oil extraction adopted by them. Invariably, non-linearity in the description of

hydrodynamic loading characteristics of the structure-fluid interaction and in the

associated structural response can assume importance and need be addressed. Access to

specialist modelling software is often required to be able to do so.

25

STABILIZATION AND FINITE ELEMENT ANALYSIS OF OFFSHORE OIL RIGS (JACK -UP AND JACKET TYPE)

A basic understanding of a number of key subject areas is essential to an engineer likely

to be involved in the design of offshore structures.

These subject areas, though not mutually exclusive, would include;

Hydrodynamics

Structural dynamics

4.2 Hydrodynamics

Hydrodynamics is concerned with the study of water in motion. In the context of an

offshore environment, the water of concern is the ocean. Its motion, (the kinematics of

the water particles) stems from a number of sources including slowly varying currents

from the effects of the tides and from local thermal influences and oscillatorymotion

from wave activity that is normally wind-generated.

26

STABILIZATION AND FINITE ELEMENT ANALYSIS OF OFFSHORE OIL RIGS (JACK -UP AND JACKET TYPE)

The characteristics of currents and waves, themselves would be very much site

dependent, with extreme values of principal interest to the LFRD approach used for

offshore structure design, associated with the statistics of the climatic condition of the

site interest.

The topology of the ocean bottom also has influence on the water particle kinematics as

the water depth changes from deeper to shallower conditions. This influence is referred

to as the shoaling effect, which assumes significant importance to the field of coastal

engineering. For so called deep water conditions (where the depth of water exceeds half

the wavelength of the longest waves of interest), the influence of the water bottom

topology on the water particle kinematics is considered negligible, removing an

otherwise potential complication to the description of the hydrodynamics of offshore

structures in such deep water environment.

27

STABILIZATION AND FINITE ELEMENT ANALYSIS OF OFFSHORE OIL RIGS (JACK -UP AND JACKET TYPE)

Numerous water wave theories have been developed whichh are applicable to different

environments dependent upon the specific environmentals parameters, eg. Water depths,

wave height and wave period. Most of the wave theories that are normally used in the

design of an offshore structure bassed on these three parameters. While some theories

are avaikable that apply to a slopping bottom or other bottom conditions, the categories

that will be discussed here will be a limited to a flat bottom having a constant water

depth.

Unlike the ocean waves. All water wave theories assume that the waves are perodic and

uniform, having a period T and a height H. Note that the period of the wave is defined

as the time required for a crest to travel a distance of one wave length, and the height of

thr wave is defined as the time required for a crest to travel the adjacent trough of wave.

The wave length is the horizontal ditance between similar points on two successive

waves measured in the direction of propogation of the wave. For a periodic wave, the

speed of an crest in the wave is called the celerity. Since a succession of wave crest pass

a given point in space at a fixed interval of time, T, and since the length between the two

consecutive crests is the wave length L, the velocity of wave propgation or celerity, c, is

obtained by dividing the wave length L, by the wave period, T,

Eq 4.1

equation and certain boundary conditions describing the various boundaries is solved in

an approximate way. In this chapter, the complete boundary value problem will be

examined and the various simplifying assumptions made in developing a particular wave

theory will be discussed.

28

STABILIZATION AND FINITE ELEMENT ANALYSIS OF OFFSHORE OIL RIGS (JACK -UP AND JACKET TYPE)

differential equations which is illustrated in next sections. As will become evident, the

complete boundary value cannot be solve in general, even in the simple cases of uniform

water depths. There are two general types of approximate theory: one is developed

around the wave height as a perturbation (e.g., in deep water) while the other is

developed as function of water depth.

4.4 Airys Wave Theory

Airy wave theory uses a potential flow (or velocity potential) approach to describe the

motion of gravity waves on a fluid surface. The use of inviscid and irrotational

potential flow in water waves is remarkably successful, given its failure to describe many

other

fluid

flows

where

it

is

often

essential

to

take viscosity, vorticity, turbulence and/or flow separation into account. This is due to

the fact that for the oscillatory part of the fluid motion, wave-induced vorticity is

restricted to some thin oscillatory Stokes boundary layers at the boundaries of the fluid

domain.

Airy wave theory is often used in ocean engineering and coastal engineering. Especially

for random waves, sometimes called wave turbulence, the evolution of the wave

statistics including the wave spectrum is predicted well over not too long distances

(in terms of wavelengths) and in not too shallow water. Diffraction is one of the wave

effects which can be described with Airy wave theory.

Airy wave theory is a linear theory for the propagation of waves on the surface of a

potential flow and above a horizontal bottom. The free surface elevation (x,t) of one

wave component is sinusoidal, as a function of horizontal position x and time t:

Eq 4.2

29

STABILIZATION AND FINITE ELEMENT ANALYSIS OF OFFSHORE OIL RIGS (JACK -UP AND JACKET TYPE)

Where,

a is the wave amplitude in metre,

cos is the cosine function,

k is the angular wavenumber in radian per metre, related to the wavelength as

Eq 4.2(a)

is the angular frequency in radian per second, related to the period T and frequency f by

Eq 4.2(b)

The waves propagate along the water surface with the phase speed cp:

Eq 4.2(c)

The angular wavenumber k and frequency are not independent parameters (and thus

also wavelength and period T are not independent), but are coupled. Surface gravity

waves on a fluid are dispersive waves exhibiting frequency dispersion meaning that

each wavenumber has its own frequency and phase speed.

Note that in engineering the wave height H the difference in elevation

between crest and trough is often used:

Eq 4.2(d)

30

STABILIZATION AND FINITE ELEMENT ANALYSIS OF OFFSHORE OIL RIGS (JACK -UP AND JACKET TYPE)

Ocean waves are produced by the wind. The faster the wind, the longer the wind blows,

and the bigger the area over which the wind blows, the bigger the waves. In designing

ships or offshore structures we wish to know the biggest waves produced by a given

wind speed.

4.5.1 Pierson-Moskowitz Spectrum

Various idealized spectra are used to answer the question in oceanography and ocean

engineering. Perhaps the simplest is that proposed by Pierson and Moskowitz (1964).

They assumed that if the wind blew steadily for a long time over a large area, the waves

would come into equilibrium with the wind. This is the concept of a fully developed sea.

Here, a long time is roughly ten-thousand wave periods, and a "large area" is roughly

five-thousand wave-lengths on a side.

31

STABILIZATION AND FINITE ELEMENT ANALYSIS OF OFFSHORE OIL RIGS (JACK -UP AND JACKET TYPE)

Fig. 4.4 Wave spectra of a fully developed sea for different wind speeds according to

Moskowitz (1964).

To obtain a spectrum of a fully developed sea, they used measurements of waves made

by accelerometers on British weather ships in the North Atlantic. First, they selected

wave data for times when the wind had blown steadily for long times over large areas of

the North Atlantic. Then they calculated the wave spectra for various wind speeds, and

they found that the spectra were of the form (Figure 4.3):

Eq 4.3

32

STABILIZATION AND FINITE ELEMENT ANALYSIS OF OFFSHORE OIL RIGS (JACK -UP AND JACKET TYPE)

where = 2 f, f is the wave frequency in Hertz, = 8.1 10-3, = 0.74, 0 = g/U19.5 and

U19.5 is the wind speed at a height of 19.5 m above the sea surface, the height of the

anemometers on the weather ships used by Pierson and Moskowitz (1964).

For most air flow over the sea the atmospheric boundary layer has nearly neutral

stability, and

U19.5 1.026 U10

Eq 4.4

Assuming a drag coefficient of 1.3 10-3.

The frequency of the peak of the Pierson-Moskowitz spectrum is calculated by

solving dS/d = 0 for p, to obtain

p = 0.877 g / U19.5.

Eq 4.5

The speed of waves at the peak is calculated from above formulae, which gives:

Eq 4.6

Hence waves with frequency p travel 14% faster than the wind at a height of 19.5 m or

17% faster than the wind at a height of 10 m.

The significant wave-height is calculated from the integral of S() to obtain:

33

STABILIZATION AND FINITE ELEMENT ANALYSIS OF OFFSHORE OIL RIGS (JACK -UP AND JACKET TYPE)

Eq 4.7

Remembering that H1/3 = 4 < 2>1/2, the significant wave-height calculated from the

Pierson-Moskowitz spectrum is:

Eq 4.8

Fig. 4.5 Significant wave height and period at the peak of the spectrum of a fully developed

sea calculated from the Pierson-Moskowitz spectrum using.

34

STABILIZATION AND FINITE ELEMENT ANALYSIS OF OFFSHORE OIL RIGS (JACK -UP AND JACKET TYPE)

In fluid dynamics the Morison equation is a semi-empirical equation for the inline force

on a body in oscillatory flow. It is sometimes called the MOJS equation after all four

authorsMorison, O'Brien, Johnson and Schaafof the 1950 paper in which the

equation was introduced. The Morison equation is used to estimate the wave loads in the

design of oil platforms and other offshore structures.

Fig. 4.6 Flow forces according to the Morison equation as function of time (a) Blue Line: - Drag Force

(b) Red Line: - Inertial Force (c) Black Line: - Total Force

The Morison equation is the sum of two force components: an inertia force in phase with

the local flow acceleration and a drag force proportional to the (signed) square of the

instantaneous flow velocity. The inertia force is of the functional form as found

in potential flow theory, while the drag force has the form as found for a body placed in

a steady flow. In the heuristic approach of Morison, O'Brien, Johnson and Schaaf these

two force components, inertia and drag, are simply added to describe the force in an

oscillatory flow.

The Morison equation contains two empirical hydrodynamic coefficientsan inertia

coefficient and a drag coefficientwhich are determined from experimental data. As

shown by dimensional analysis and in experiments by Sarpkaya, these coefficients

depend in general on the KeuleganCarpenter number, Reynolds number and surface

roughness. In an oscillatory flow with flow velocity (), the Morison equation gives

the inline force parallel to the flow direction: -

35

STABILIZATION AND FINITE ELEMENT ANALYSIS OF OFFSHORE OIL RIGS (JACK -UP AND JACKET TYPE)

Eq 4.9

Where,

velocity ()

force

,

is the inertia coefficient, and

the flow direction,

For instance for a circular cylinder of diameter D in oscillatory flow, the reference

area per unit cylinder length is

length is

. As a result,

Eq 4.10

Besides the inline force, there are also oscillatory lift forces perpendicular to the flow

direction, due to vortex shedding. These are not covered by the Morison equation, which

is only for the inline forces.

36

STABILIZATION AND FINITE ELEMENT ANALYSIS OF OFFSHORE OIL RIGS (JACK -UP AND JACKET TYPE)

The present API procedure for the calculation of hydrodynamic loads on slender

offshore structures is described in API RP 2A. The updated API Recommended Practice

is based on a consistent treatment of all variables involved in calculating hydrodynamic

load. For a review of selection of wave kinematics models. A considerable increase in

hydrodynamic loads results from the use of updated hydrodynamic coefficients and

inclusion of current, especially if load reducing factors, such as shielding, blockage, etc.

are not considered.

37

STABILIZATION AND FINITE ELEMENT ANALYSIS OF OFFSHORE OIL RIGS (JACK -UP AND JACKET TYPE)

API recommends the following drag and inertia values for unshielded circular cylinders:

Smooth cylinders: - = 0.65, = 1.6

Rough cylinders: - = 1.05, = 1.2

These values are said to be appropriate for

The case of a steady current with negligible waves;

Or

The case of large waves with /D (KC Number) > 30

Where,

= maximum horizontal particle velocity at storm mean water level under the wave

crest from a two-dimensional wave kinematics,

= apparent wave period,

D = platform leg diameter at storm mean water level.

For wave dominant cases with /D < 30, the hydrodynamic coefficients for

nearly vertical members are modified by 'wake encounter'. Such situations may arise

with large diameter caissons in extreme seas or ordinary platform members in lower sea

states (typically considered in fatigue analysis).

38

STABILIZATION AND FINITE ELEMENT ANALYSIS OF OFFSHORE OIL RIGS (JACK -UP AND JACKET TYPE)

CHAPTER 5

LABORATORY SOIL TESTING

5.1 General

Every site soil survey operation is associated with specific conditions depending on the

environment, geography, climatic condition, survey equipments available (or

ignorance) of the survey zone. Hence it is necessary to draw up a typical soil survey

program a sort of recipe to be applied step-by-step to each site. After having compelled

all the information of a logical nature which may be available on the zone, the soil survey

for the installation of a Jacket can roughly be broken down into two phases:a) In the first phase, a geological survey on the scale of the site is designed for:-

Identification of the sea bed and the superficial layers of the soil.

conducted:-

Either prior to the installation of the Jacket, from a geotechnical survey ship

(SAMUDRA SARVEKSHAK in case of ONGC oil rigs).

The purpose of the geotechnical survey is to determine the type, thickness and

mechanical properties of the different formations below the actual installation location

of the Jacket, allowing estimated studies of leg penetration and stability of the structure.

The geotechnical survey is conducted either before the Jacket arrives on site or from the

Jacket during installation.

39

STABILIZATION AND FINITE ELEMENT ANALYSIS OF OFFSHORE OIL RIGS (JACK -UP AND JACKET TYPE)

An onshore laboratory testing programme was planned and performed on the samples

available to confirm and supplement the findings of the offshore findings (investigation).

These tests are performed according to the Indian Standards. A summary of the onshore

lab. Testing programme is given below (Table 5.1):-

Tests

No. of Tests

17

Atterberg Limits

UU(Triaxial)

B3. The Grain Size Distribution Curves are presented on the plates GS-01 to GS-14 for

hydrometer tests and sieve analysis in Appendix B. The plots of Unconsolidated Triaxial

Test (UU) are presented in Appendix B on plates LAB-UU-01 to LAB-UU-07 and UU1 to UU-5.

5.3 Soil Conditions

5.3.1 General

The soil conditions at the locations have been interpreted up to a depth of 107.50 m from

the CPTU tests results, on board test results and onshore laboratory test results. Soil

Classification and description is based on the laboratory classification test results

profiles of measured CPTU parameters and interpretation of CPTU data as per

classification systems proposed by Robertson (1990) and Wride (1998).

5.3.2 Stratigraphy

This section gives the layer wise soil-profile in a tabular form. Soil profile of the boring

RS-19 is described in Table 5.2.

DEPARTMENT OF APPLIED MECHANICS

40

STABILIZATION AND FINITE ELEMENT ANALYSIS OF OFFSHORE OIL RIGS (JACK -UP AND JACKET TYPE)

Sl. No

Depth (m)

Soil Description

0.0 m -1.2m

1.2 m - 4.0 m

yellow with few shell fragments

4.0 m -13.0 m

brownish black with few pockets

13.0 m-15.1 m

15.1 m- 18.2 m

yellowish brownish

18.2 m-30.6 m

plastic in nature

30.6 m- 33.7 m

CLAY, stiff

33.7 m- 36.0 m

cemented

36.0 m- 51.9 m

plastic

10

51.9 m-53.0 m

SAND

11

53.0 m-54.5 m

CLAY, stiff

12

54.5 m-58.5 m

cemented

13

58.5 m-72.0 m

14

72.0 m-73.5 m

CLAY stiff

15

73.5 m- 78.0 m

yellow

16

78.0 m- 86.0 m

17

86.0 m -93.0 m

18

93.0 m 96.0 m

19

96.0 m 102.3 m

20

102.3 m -106.0 m

21

106.0 m -107.5 m

DEPARTMENT OF APPLIED MECHANICS

41

STABILIZATION AND FINITE ELEMENT ANALYSIS OF OFFSHORE OIL RIGS (JACK -UP AND JACKET TYPE)

5.3.3.1 Clays

A thin very soft sandy clay layer is observed in the soil profile starting at seabed up to

1.2m depth, followed by a weakly to moderately cemented sand layer of 2.8 m thickness.

Then there is an 11.1 m thick clay zone comprising of two clay layers ranging from firm

to stiff consistency as the depth increases. After 3.1 m thick cemented sand layers, 12.4

m thick to stiff clay layer is observed, followed by another 3.1 m thick clay layer at the

depth of 30.6 m. Another major clay layer of stiff to very stiff consistency is observed

in the soil profile between 36.0 m and 51.9 m depth. There is a stiff clay layer at the

depth of 53.0 m and a very stiff clay layer at a depth of 72.0 m, both having 1.5 m

thickness. One clay layer of very stiff to hard consistency of thickness 8.0 m is observed

at the depth of 78.0 m. lastly a hard clay layer, sandwiched between thick sand layers, is

observed from 96.0 m to 102.30 m depth.

The clay layers show increase in strength or constant strength as the depth increases.

Based on the results of carbonate content tests conducted on clay samples the clays have

been classified either as carbonate clay or calcareous clay.

Plasticity chart shows the clays to be medium to high plastic. The activity chart shows

clays to be inactive to medium active, mostly being inactive. The variations of liquidity

index, unit weight, water content and normalized undrained shear strength (UU Triaxial)

with depth is also presented graphically in Appendix B.

Liquidity index and normalized undrained shear strength (UU Triaxial) show a general

trend of decrease with depth.

5.3.3.2 Sands

First Sand layer is observed between depths 1.2 m and 4.0 m below the seabed having

weak to moderate cementation. Between depths of 15.1 m and 36.0 m, there are two

layers of thickness 2.3 m to 3.1 m having weak to strong cementation having clay layers

in between. One thin sand layer is observed depths 51.9 m and 53.0 m.

42

STABILIZATION AND FINITE ELEMENT ANALYSIS OF OFFSHORE OIL RIGS (JACK -UP AND JACKET TYPE)

There is a thick sand zone having moderate to strong cementation between depths 54.5

m to 74.0 m, having one clay layer thickness at the depth of 72.0 m. There is another

sand zone of moderate strong cementation between depths 86.0 m to 96.0 m. Last sand

zone of 4.75 m thickness is observed between the depths 102.3 m and 106.0 m.

Carbonate content measured on the available samples on sand layers indicates sand layer

to be siliceous carbonate or carbonate sand. The design Friction angles on the sands were

evaluated from the estimated densities and soil types, the relative densities of sand layer

were estimated based on the correlation proposed by JAMIOLKOWSKI et al. 2001

based on Cone resistance and are presented on plates on C-9-1 and C-9-2. However this

correlation is based on silica sands and the nature of calcareous/carbonate sands-lower

crushing strength, Higher compressibility and arching effect causing low residual radial

stresses after pile driving- has been given due consideration while selecting design

friction angles.

The design friction angles vary from 30 to 35 degree for the sand layers. Limiting skin

friction of 20.0 KPa is recommended for all the sand layers. The limiting end bearing

values were selected on the basis of relative density, degree of cementation and cone

resistance. The recommended limiting end bearing value for sand layers vary from 3.0

to 6.0 MPa.

5.3.3.3 Silts

No silt layer is observed in the soil profile up to the investigated depth of 107.50 m.

43

STABILIZATION AND FINITE ELEMENT ANALYSIS OF OFFSHORE OIL RIGS (JACK -UP AND JACKET TYPE)

5.4.1 Axial Pile capacity

The American Petroleum Institute (API) provides design recommendations for axially

loaded piles in the API RP 2A publication titled Recommended Practice for Planning,

Designing, and Constructing Fixed Offshore Platforms (API 1993). Although this

method is not as commonly used by highway agencies as is Nordlund's method, it is

worth presenting here because the API recommendations are based on a large database

of axial pile load tests that is continuall evaluated and updated (Pelletier, e al. 1993).

Where QT is the estimated ultimate axial capacity, Q S is the ultimate shaft capacity

resulting from the surrounding soil in side shear, QB is the total ultimate tip load at the

base or tip of the Pile (Total indicates the weight of displaced volume of soil is included),

WP is the weight of the pile.

44

STABILIZATION AND FINITE ELEMENT ANALYSIS OF OFFSHORE OIL RIGS (JACK -UP AND JACKET TYPE)

IN SANDS: - Ultimate axial bearing capacity in sands is calculated based on API RP2A1993 using k=0.7 in compression and k=0.5 in tension. Also, limiting unit skin friction

and unit end bearing values as given in the design parameters on plate No 1 and 2 are

used in engineering analysis.

() = () tan()

..Eq 5.1

The load capacity contributed by the shaft shear (QS) is calculated by integrating the

side shear stresses along the piles embedded length:

QS = 0 ()()

Eq 5.2

Where is the shear stress between the pile and the soil at the depth z, p (z) is the pile

perimeter at depth z, and L is the embedment depth of the pile.

The expression used for the ti or end-bearing of the pile is usually of the form: =

Eq 5.3

Where Ab is the tip or end area of the pile, and qb is the total ultimate end bearing or tip

stresses.

RP2A 1986.

For evaluating axial pile capacity in tension (Pull capacity), only the outer skin friction

has been considered.

Self-weight of pile and weight of the soil plug inside the pile have not been considered

in the calculation of ultimate axial capacity both in tension and compression which needs

to be taken into consideration during design.

DEPARTMENT OF APPLIED MECHANICS

45

STABILIZATION AND FINITE ELEMENT ANALYSIS OF OFFSHORE OIL RIGS (JACK -UP AND JACKET TYPE)

Unit friction for skin friction and end bearing as derived from the design parameters are

presented in graphical form on plate nos.3 and 4 respectively. The ultimate capacity in

tension and compression of a 1.524 m diameter open ended pile is presented on plate no.

5.

5.4.2 Mud-Mat Bearing Capacity

The bearing capacity of a shallow strip footing is generally determined by the Terzaghi

method (Terzaghi, 1943). Terzaghis equation is based on an approximate solution

which uses superposition to combine the effects of cohesion, surcharge, and soil weight.

The resulting bearing capacity equation is typically written in the form: = + + .5

Eq 5.4

where the bearing capacity factors Nc, Nq and represent the effects of soil cohesion

c, surcharge q, and soil unit weight c, respectively, and B is the width of the strip footing.

These bearing capacity factors are all functions of the internal friction angle.

= tan( + )

4 2

.Eq 5.5 (a)

= ( 1) cot

.Eq 5.5 (b)

For the calculation of the Davis and Booker method is applied.

46

STABILIZATION AND FINITE ELEMENT ANALYSIS OF OFFSHORE OIL RIGS (JACK -UP AND JACKET TYPE)

Mudmat ultimate bearing capacities for vertical load have been computed for square,

rectangular and triangular Mudmat without considering any factor of safety and

assuming that penetration into the sea floor does not occur.

The ultimate bearing capacity is plotted versus side B for square Mudmat, side B for

triangular Mudmat for isosceles right-angular shapes and with W for rectangular

Mudmat, (L/W=2). Seabed soil is sandy carbonate mud in very soft condition. The

thickness of the first layer has been assessed as 1.2 m. There is a cemented sand layer

from 1.2 m and 4.0 m below the very soft soil layer.

The recommended bearing capacity of Mudmat is shown in Plate No. 17 graphical form.

47

STABILIZATION AND FINITE ELEMENT ANALYSIS OF OFFSHORE OIL RIGS (JACK -UP AND JACKET TYPE)

Analysis of penetration of the standard ONGC spudcan with a diameter of 14.0 m and

preload of 45 MN was carried out. The bearing capacity curves for this spudcan is

presented in Plate No. 18- Bearing capacity-1 if the sand layer from 1.2 m to 4.0 m bears

the preload and Bearing Capacity-2. In the event of PUNCH THROUGH. The analysis

does not account for the lateral variability of the soil strata.

There is potential for punch through in the site due to combination of soil layers

existing near the seafloor. Final Penetration for the flat standard ONGC spudcan under

full preload (45 MN) is estimated to be about 1.0 m. The case is marginal due to

uncertainty in the strength of cementation in the second layer and relatively lower

strength of the underline clay layer. In the event of Punch-through, the penetration will

be about 7.0 m. The penetration refer to the bottom of the Flat spudcan below the mud

line.

48

STABILIZATION AND FINITE ELEMENT ANALYSIS OF OFFSHORE OIL RIGS (JACK -UP AND JACKET TYPE)

CHAPTER 6

A common approach to Oil rig modelling for FE analysis was adopted in order to

demonstrate the work, i.e., 3D solid model generation and FE analysis of Jacket

structure. A flow chart indicating step by step work and software used to carry out each

step is shown in Figure 6.1.

DATA ACQUSITION

EXPORT

ASSEMBLING OF COMPONENTS

49

STABILIZATION AND FINITE ELEMENT ANALYSIS OF OFFSHORE OIL RIGS (JACK -UP AND JACKET TYPE)

The Acquisition of data that preserves the geometrical information of Jacket rig

was acquired.

(ii)

Creo 2.0, a CAD package, was used for assembling of rigs and

(iii)

For the final step to investigate the mechanical behavior of the developed model,

FE analysis was done in ANSYS R14.5.

After doing the geotechnical survey i.e. after doing various tests on the soil sample we

have the option of choosing best possible diameter of the pile of the Jacket Oil Rigs.

There are 4 different standard diameter size that are used by the ONGC, and these are

1.524m, 1.676m, 1.82m and 2.13m, with .05m wall thickness. In our case we have taken

1.524m to be the diameter with the wall thickness .05m. In the Jacket rigs we have also

used bracings whose diameter is approximately .6m.

Bracings pile of .6

50

STABILIZATION AND FINITE ELEMENT ANALYSIS OF OFFSHORE OIL RIGS (JACK -UP AND JACKET TYPE)

It is the 2nd phase in which we create the solid model of the Spud can (if necessary),

Main pile and the bracings in three different files in CREO 2.O. We do this because it

is almost very difficult to assemble the whole structure in a single CREO file. So we

create these three things differently. While creating the main pile we have to see to it

that, we either give space for the insertion of the bracings or we do some adjustment in

the main pile so as to accommodate. These three main piles are placed in such a way

that it represent the edges of an equilateral triangle of 8m size.

6.3 Assembly of the Components

CREO 2.0 gives an advantage of assembling various different models. Now, in our case

we can either insert the bracings inside the main pile than we can apply the welding

properties on their point of touching each other, or we can just have the nut bolt joint at

the intersection. .asm is the type of file for the assembly type of pile in the CREO 2.0.

This type of pile can be exported into ANSYS 14.5 so that the FEA analysis can be

done on it to get the result.

6.4 Finite Element Analysis

Final stage after modeling was to analyse the developed 3D solid model of Jacket oil

rigs. Static structural analysis was performed for Jacket oil rigs in ANSYS Workbench

R14.5. ANSYS, a CAD package, is an engineering simulation software which helps in

determining and improving weak points, computing life and foreseeing probable

problems are possible by 3D simulations in virtual environment. In simple language, it

is an FE program for linear and non-linear analysis.

51

STABILIZATION AND FINITE ELEMENT ANALYSIS OF OFFSHORE OIL RIGS (JACK -UP AND JACKET TYPE)

A three-dimensional finite element model was generated for static stress analysis by

using the ANSYS Software. The constructed femur model was imported from Creo 2.0

to ANSYS software as an ASM file to generate a volumetric mesh. For volumetric

meshing of the femur model, tetrahedron automatic mesh generation was used. Meshing

is a discrete representation of the geometry in the problem. It assigns smaller regions

over where boundary conditions are applied to solve the problem. Tetra meshing is a

3D meshing where tetrahedron, element shape, is a polyhedron composed of four

triangular faces, three of which meet at each corner or vertex. Three-dimensional finite

element Tetra mesh model of Jacket oil rigs contains 93,543 elements and 114,137

nodes for the element type solid187.

6.6 Material Assignment

In this study Jacket oil behavior was assumed as a homogeneous isotropic linear elastic

material, i.e. we have assumed material properties of the Jacket rigs to be of Structural

Steel. The consideration of heterogeneous to homogeneous material helps make FE

Analysis, especially meshing part, easier. In this study, material can be assigned in two

ways, either in Creo or in Finite element module. 50 Here material properties are

directly assigned in ANSYS. The average mechanical properties of each type of

Structural steel are shown in Table 6.1 which were extracted from CES selector

(Cambridge Engineering Selector, an engineering materials selection tool).

52

STABILIZATION AND FINITE ELEMENT ANALYSIS OF OFFSHORE OIL RIGS (JACK -UP AND JACKET TYPE)

53

STABILIZATION AND FINITE ELEMENT ANALYSIS OF OFFSHORE OIL RIGS (JACK -UP AND JACKET TYPE)

6.7 Loading

In order to set the structure in deformed equilibrium position corresponding to

permanent static loads (self weight, weight of equipment and live loads etc.), these load

must be applied in a static manner i.e. without dynamic effects before the dynamic

analysis is initiated. It is chosen to apply the permanent loads without dynamic effects

during one second before the dynamic analysis is initiated. Thereafter, the dynamic, i.e.

environmental, loads are applied and the dynamic effects (inertia, and damping if

included) are switched on. In this way, structural motion arising from loads that by

nature are static is avoided. This first static second is not included in any of the

presented results in this chapter.

Self-weight

The self-weight of all members is generated automatically. In addition, a number of node

masses representing e.g. deck weight and weight of equipment are applied.

Wind

No wind loads are included in the analyses.

Hydrodynamic loads

Wave load on jacket structure The wave load is specified by wave theory, wave height

(h), period (T), direction, phase and water depth (d). Airy Wave theory is used, and the

structure is subjected to one wave cycle. The load histories are based on a wave with

and annual probability of exceedance of 10 -4 (a 10 000 years wave), and the water depth

is varied in order to represent different levels of subsidence. Tide and storm surge is

assumed to be included in the different water depths.

54

STABILIZATION AND FINITE ELEMENT ANALYSIS OF OFFSHORE OIL RIGS (JACK -UP AND JACKET TYPE)

Current The current speed at the still water level is set to 1.0 m/s, and there is further

provided a depth profile of current velocity for each analysed model, see Sections 5.3.3

and 5.4.3. Since the depth profiles do not extend above the still water level, current

velocity values in the wave crest are taken from the data of NOAA. This results in e.g.

varying surface current through the wave period for the analysis of Jacket Structure.

Self-weight

The generated weight of all members sums up to 3.78 106 kg. In addition, a node mass

of 11 106 kg representing the deck weight and weight of equipment and personnel is

applied at node 40041 (which is located in the center of gravity of the deck structure).

Hydrodynamic loads

The reference force values for the wave-in-deck force are given in Table 6.2.

Water depth d

Crest max

Deck inund. sd

Fd,max [MN]

75

20.75

0.25

2.406

76

20.68

1.18

11.15

77

20.62

2.12

19.71

78

29.56

3.06

28.03

79

20.50

4.00

36.09

80

20.44

4.94

43.89

81

20.38

5.88

51.45

55

STABILIZATION AND FINITE ELEMENT ANALYSIS OF OFFSHORE OIL RIGS (JACK -UP AND JACKET TYPE)

The hydrodynamic load histories including dynamic load and current load are shown in

Figure 5.10 for the different analysed water depths. The peak wave in deck load is taken

to occur at t = 4.9 s, when the wave crest is at the deck front wall. The force peaks at

this time instant represent the wave-in-deck forces, which increase in size as the water

depth and the corresponding deck inundation increase.

If ignoring the wave-in-deck force, there are only minor variations in the magnitude of

the horizontal wave load as the water depth increases.

The load histories are based on a 33 m high (10 000 years-) wave with a period of 16 s.

Load scenarios based on water depths d = 76,77,,81 m are analysed.

100

d = 76 m

d = 77 m

d = 78 m

d = 79 m

d = 80 m

d = 81 m

80

60

40

20

0

20

8

Time [t]

10

12

14

16

Fig. 6.3: - Hydrodynamic load history generated for Jacket model for H = 33 m and T = 16 s

for different water depths

56

STABILIZATION AND FINITE ELEMENT ANALYSIS OF OFFSHORE OIL RIGS (JACK -UP AND JACKET TYPE)

CHAPTER 7

7.1 Results

In the dynamic analyses the time steps used range from 0.005 s to 0.05 s. This

corresponds to 0.003Tn and 0.03Tn, respectively.

The displacement is recorded at a reference point at deck level, node 40041 with

coordinates x = 1.084 m, y = 1.107 m and z = 99.000 m. This is the node at which the

mass representing the weight of deck and equipment is applied.

Performance based on pushover analysis Figure 7.1 illustrates the different static

collapse modes for Jacket model for two different inundation levels. As the water depth

increases and the deck load increases accordingly, a larger part of the total force has to

be transferred from the deck through the braces in the upper bay and down into the lower

part of the jacket structure. These braces are originally not intended to transfer large

wave loads, and will therefore represent the bottlenecks when the platform is exposed

to large wave-in-deck loads.

57

STABILIZATION AND FINITE ELEMENT ANALYSIS OF OFFSHORE OIL RIGS (JACK -UP AND JACKET TYPE)

Fig. 7.1 Static collapse modes for different water depths and corresponding inundation levels

The static ultimate capacity for base shear is 160.2 MN for 0.25 m deck inundation,

while it is dramatically reduced to 79.8 MN for 5.88 m inundation. This change in

capacity and stiffness curve can be seen in Fig 7.2, in which the static stiffness curve is

compared for the load pattern following from different water depths. Further, the clear

decrease in initial elastic stiffness with increasing deck inundation should be noted from

the figure. This is due to the fact that a larger part of the forces acts on the deck level,

having a larger effect on the displacement of the reference point in the deck.

58

STABILIZATION AND FINITE ELEMENT ANALYSIS OF OFFSHORE OIL RIGS (JACK -UP AND JACKET TYPE)

200

d

d

d

d

d

d

d

150

100

50

0

0.1

0.2

0.3

0.4

0.5

0.6

Displacement [m]

0.7

0.8

=

=

=

=

=

=

=

75 m

76 m

77 m

78 m

79 m

80 m

81 m

0.9

Fig. 7.2: - Stiffness curves for in terms of base shear (BS) for different water depths

Performance based on time domain analysis The resulting displacement histories for

different water depths (and corresponding inundation levels) are given in Figure 7.3.

Fig. 7.3: - Dynamic displacement response for different water depths / inundation levels

inundation. This increase gets more pronounced as the wave load approaches and

exceeds the static ultimate capacity. However, where pushover analyses indicate a total

collapse for the peak in the load time history (i.e. the ultimate capacity is exceeded at

least once during the load history), dynamic time domain simulations compute a large

but limited maximum displacement.

59

STABILIZATION AND FINITE ELEMENT ANALYSIS OF OFFSHORE OIL RIGS (JACK -UP AND JACKET TYPE)

0.4

Dynamic response

0.2

0.2

0

10

12

14

16

Time [s]

Fig. 7.4:-Dynamic and static response history, water depth 78 m /inundation 3.06 m

In Fig. 7.5 time histories of accelerations are given for three chosen analysis cases, the

ones having smallest and largest water depth and inundation, and the one with largest

resulting accelerations.

3

d = 75 m

d = 78 m

d = 81 m

0

1

2

3

0

8

Time [s]

10

12

14

16

Fig. 7.5: Acceleration response for different water depths / inundation levels

For d = 75 m the response is purely elastic, and the accelerations are relatively small,

maximum acceleration is 0.23 m/s2. The case with d = 78 m has moderate acceleration

during the first cycle (1.4 m/s2), but the largest accelerations in the following cycles is

obtained for this case, u = 2.2 m/s2. During the first cycle, the d = 81 m case has the

largest acceleration, u = 2.1 m/s2. Thereafter the accelerations for this case are reduced

to approximately 1.3 1.5 m/s2.

60

STABILIZATION AND FINITE ELEMENT ANALYSIS OF OFFSHORE OIL RIGS (JACK -UP AND JACKET TYPE)

The reason that accelerations in cycles following the first cycle are reduced for deeper

water than 78 m, is that the larger loads lead to a significant degree of plastic material

behaviour resulting in damping of the motion response.

The term dynamic capacity (to sustain transient loads) cannot be uniquely defined or

interpreted because dynamic response depends on both the structural natural period and

the frequencies of the external load. Intuitively, one might interpret dynamic capacity

as the most onerous load history that the structure is able to sustain. However, the fact

that the structure can sustain a given load history does not give any information about

the response to other load histories.

For practical purposes, a displacement limit related to one or more given reference points

in the structure may quantify the capacity to withstand dynamic load. If the load history

leads to exceedance of this displacement, the capacity is by definition exceeded. An

absolute maximum allowable limit for the displacement can be decided from structural

considerations, e.g. a given fraction of the displacement corresponding to total collapse.

However, there might be other limitations on the displacement, e.g. safety limitations.

There is little help in having the platform deformed but standing, if rupture of pipes

could lead to explosions and subsequent fires. The platform must also, in a deformed

state, be able to withstand subsequent (large) waves, this is the ALS (accidental limit

state) requirement in structural standards.

Static pushover performance versus dynamic performance The main results from

the analyses are shown in Table 7.2 in numerical form. Elastic load limit and

corresponding displacement are extracted at first yield, regardless of the location of the

yielding element.

61

STABILIZATION AND FINITE ELEMENT ANALYSIS OF OFFSHORE OIL RIGS (JACK -UP AND JACKET TYPE)

Table 7.2: results from non-linear static and dynamic analyses, h =33 m, T = 16 s

At 0.25 m inundation, the total wave load is smaller than the elastic load limit of the

structure. The dynamic maximum displacement does not exceed the displacement

corresponding to the elastic load limit, and no yielding is detected during dynamic

analysis for this case. At the next two inundation levels, sd= 1.18 m and sd= 2.12 m, the

wave load peak is still smaller than the elastic load limit, however the elastic limit

displacement is exceeded during dynamic analysis due to dynamic amplification,

meaning that the structure experiences some yielding.

At 3.06 m inundation the total wave load exceeds the elastic load limit. At 4.00 m

inundation the dynamic maximum displacement is larger than the displacement

corresponding to static ultimate capacity. At sd= 4.94 m and sd= 5.88 m (corresponding

to water depths of 80 m and 81 meters, respectively) the load peak in the dynamic

analyses exceeds the static ultimate capacity of the structure. Static displacement, in the

meaning time domain displacement excluding dynamic effects, is theoretically infinite

for these last two cases. However, the displacements estimated from dynamic analyses

are 0.728 m and 1.030 m, respectively. If these displacements are admissible, the

platform can by definition withstand these load histories, and thus it can withstand these

particular waves that generate loads exceeding the static ultimate capacity.

62

STABILIZATION AND FINITE ELEMENT ANALYSIS OF OFFSHORE OIL RIGS (JACK -UP AND JACKET TYPE)

Plots of the structure with yielding zones highlighted show that the collapse modes are

similar during dynamic and pushover analyses for all analysed water depths

respectively. An example is given in Figure 7.8.

Fig. 7.6: Structural plastic state at dynamic max. Displacement, water depth 78 m

Contribution from stiffness and inertia In Figure 7.7 the variation of the structural

restoring forces and the inertia forces is illustrated. The response is clearly dominated

by restoring forces, but for d = 78 m and d = 81 m it can be seen that around the time of

maximum response the inertia force amplifies the response.

63

STABILIZATION AND FINITE ELEMENT ANALYSIS OF OFFSHORE OIL RIGS (JACK -UP AND JACKET TYPE)

80

External force

Restoring force

Inertia force

60

40

20

0

20

0

8

Time [s]

(a)

10

12

14

16

d=75 m

(b)

d=78 m

120

External force

Restoring force

80

Inertia force

40

40

0

10

12

14

16

Time [s]

(c)

d=81 m

Fig. 7.7: Contributions from structural restoring forces and inertia forces

64

STABILIZATION AND FINITE ELEMENT ANALYSIS OF OFFSHORE OIL RIGS (JACK -UP AND JACKET TYPE)

For d = 75 m / sd = 0.25 m, the inertia response is insignificant, a fact that supports the

use of quasi-static considerations for jackets under regular wave loading not including

topside impact.

NS 4931 (1985) gives recommendations related to the sensitivity of human beings to

low frequency horizontal vibrations in buildings and fixed offshore installations. For the

first natural vibration frequency for jacket model, which is 0.63 Hz, the limit

acceleration which an average human being will feel is given as approximately 0.017

m/s2. For the same frequency, 0.0043 m/s2 is given as a threshold value below which

nobody will notice the vibrations. The acceptable acceleration level of the structure

when performing non-routine or exacting work is approximately 0.19 m/s2.

NORSOK S-002 (2004) provides acceptable acceleration limits for (human) exposure

to continuous vibrations from machinery during a 12 hours working day. The

recommendations are only given for vibration frequencies 1 Hz and above, thus

recommendations for 1 Hz are considered herein. For areas that are normally unmanned,

2 m/s2 is an upper limit of acceptable acceleration, whereas 0.05 m/s2 is acceptable for

process, utilities and drilling areas.

The accelerations calculated for model are considerably larger than the comfort levels

indicated in NS 4931. The magnitude is more in agreement with the upper acceptable

limit for continuous vibrations in normally unmanned areas given in NORSOK S-002.

All limit values are, however, related to operating situations, whereas wave-in-deck

slamming is an extreme event. 2 m/s2 acceleration corresponds to accelerating from 0 to

216 km/h in 30 seconds. In a car this is to be considered a considerable but not excessive

acceleration, being less than half the acceleration relevant for the most powerful sports

cars. As structural ground acceleration it will, however, surely be experienced as a

frightening event. A certain fright should be considered acceptable, in lieu of the fact

that wave-in-deck loading is an accidental event.

65

STABILIZATION AND FINITE ELEMENT ANALYSIS OF OFFSHORE OIL RIGS (JACK -UP AND JACKET TYPE)

It is, though, a relevant question if the different equipment located on the platform is

designed to sustain such accelerations, and if required can maintain operation. It

is known that generators can trip (stop temporarily) in case of large accelerations. Such

an incident was e.g. observed on Sleipner A for a large wave impact on the platform legs

(Gudmestad, 2005).

7.3 Discussion

Dynamic performance vs. static

It is important to be aware that the static ultimate capacity of a platform does not

uniquely characterise the structural performance, neither does the load - displacement

curve. The capacity depends on the load pattern, i.e. the distribution of external forces

on the structure. Static ultimate capacity is, however, a unique and informative measure

of nonlinear structural performance when related to a given load distribution. Dynamic

performance should, on the other hand, rather be evaluated against allowable

displacements and accelerations at relevant locations in the structure for each single load

scenario.

All the dynamic analyses carried out in this chapter show dynamic amplification

compared to the static analyses. This corresponds to findings in HSE (1998). The

amplification ranges from some 15% to some 54% (for water depth d = 80 m and d =

81 m for jacket model the term dynamic amplification does not give any meaning, since

the wave load exceeds the static capacity).

The example model has shown to be able to respond to dynamic loads with short

duration peaks exceeding the static ultimate capacity of the structure with only limited

deformations, as opposed to global collapse. In other words, for the situations analysed

herein dynamic considerations are beneficial and important, as they increase the

confidence in the structural performance compared to static considerations.

For the structures and loading conditions analysed herein, it is clear that it is the ductility

of the structure, as opposed to the inertia of the mass that increases the structural ability

to resist external loading when accounting for dynamic effects.

DEPARTMENT OF APPLIED MECHANICS

66

STABILIZATION AND FINITE ELEMENT ANALYSIS OF OFFSHORE OIL RIGS (JACK -UP AND JACKET TYPE)

Initial values

In the analyses all initial values of displacement, velocity and acceleration are set to

zero. In reality, these values will be different from zero at the time when the analysis is

initiated. The choice of initial values will influence the maximum response in the way

that they will be determining for where in a vibration cycle the structure will be at deck

wave impact, and it will be determining for the magnitude of the response immediately

prior to wave impact.

HSE (2003) analysed a Jacket rig and showed that the largest deck displacement

occurred if the wave hit the hull when it had the largest displacement in the direction

opposite to the wave heading direction, i.e. at the time the hull has the largest

acceleration in the direction of the wave heading, but that the variation in response

caused by different phasing is relatively small.

Reasonable initial values different from zero can only be included based on a

precondition of either loading or response. However, one set of initial values would lead

to reduced maximum response whereas another set would lead to an increase. It would

therefore be necessary to analyse the actual extreme wave scenario several times to

cover a representative range of wave or response conditions prior to wave impact and

determine the condition that results in the largest maximum response. One should in that

case have the results from the above mentioned HSE study in mind.

Based on the near static nature of jacket response to wave loading, implying small

accelerations, and the results from the HSE study, it is considered likely that setting the

initial values equal to zero does not imply significant mis estimation of the maximum

response following from the response immediately prior to the wave impact. However,

the magnitude of the mis estimation can only be revealed by running analyses with

different preconditions, being a recommended task for the future.

67

STABILIZATION AND FINITE ELEMENT ANALYSIS OF OFFSHORE OIL RIGS (JACK -UP AND JACKET TYPE)

CHAPTER 8

The soil profile at the location is mixed profile having clay and sand layers within the

investigated depth of 107.50m. Weak to strong cementation is observed in some of the

sand layers.

The typical ultimate compressive capacity of 35.0 MN is achieved at the penetration

depth of about 90.0m below mud line for an open pile.

Mudmat bearing capacity for the vertical loading has been presented for various shapes

and sizes for Mudmat at the level of mud line. The bearing capacity curves are plotted

with the ultimate values of three primary shapes.

There is a potential of punch through in the site due to the combination of soil layers

existing near the seafloor. Final Penetration of the flat standard ONGC under full preload

is estimated to be around 1.0 m. The case is marginal due to uncertainty in the strength

of cementation in the second layer.

8.2 Finite Element Analysis

The aim of this research has been to improve the understanding of the dynamic types of

loading on the response of jacket platforms. Finite element analyses have been used to

simulate response time series. In addition, and as an inherent part of the work, simplified

methods for calculation of wave-in-deck load magnitude and time history have been

evaluated and the use of a simplified model to predict response to wave-in-deck loading

has been investigated.

In the following, the work carried out is summarised. The item lists comprise the

conclusions drawn from each part of the work.

68

STABILIZATION AND FINITE ELEMENT ANALYSIS OF OFFSHORE OIL RIGS (JACK -UP AND JACKET TYPE)

Jacket model with specific brace configurations, and with specific post collapse

behaviour, are analysed under static and dynamic assumptions using finite element

methodology. The external loading comprises extreme wave loading, current and

buoyancy loading. Increasing Dynamic loading is simulated by increasing the water

depth, corresponding to increasing seabed subsidence.

The following conclusions are drawn from the results of the analyses:

significant compared to the wave load on the jacket itself, but also because they

alter the load distribution in a manner that introduces high forces into (relatively)

weaker parts of the structure such as the deck legs (immediately below the deck).

nonlinear structural performance when related to a given load distribution, the

dynamic performance should be evaluated against allowable response values,

such as displacements and accelerations, at relevant locations in the structure for

each single load scenario.

Typical jacket structures with a first natural period of a few seconds will

experience dynamic amplification, i.e. increase of response, when subjected to

dynamic load. This applies to both the displacement response and the base shear

forces.

Typical jacket structures that can be characterised as ductile may resist dynamic

loading with higher peak load than its static capacity relevant for the same load

distribution. For load durations typical for dynamic loading, this favourable

effect is attributed to the beyond-ultimate-capacity ductility of the structure as

opposed to any attenuating effects of the inertia of the mass (in fact, all analyses

show dynamic amplification).

69

STABILIZATION AND FINITE ELEMENT ANALYSIS OF OFFSHORE OIL RIGS (JACK -UP AND JACKET TYPE)

On the other hand, brittle jackets may collapse under dynamic loading that is

considerably smaller than the static capacity associated with the load distribution

in question.

excessive accelerations. It is therefore important to pay explicit attention to

acceleration response during (re)assessment of structures. In the present study,

accelerations are considerably more pronounced for the brittle structural model

than for the ductile one, although the latter has larger displacement response.

It is further desirable to perform investigations of dynamic response under wave-in-deck

loading including damping and relevant pre-load histories implying initial values

different from zero.

The effect of using overturning moment instead of base shear as a measure of loading

and capacity in the FEM models could be a further step from the present work. It would

also be interesting to use a load time history as opposed to the solid curve (the curves

represent displacements, however, loads are given by multiplying with the elastic

stiffness).

Acceleration levels are identified as a point of concern in this work, however the effect

of brittle vs. ductile structural behaviour on acceleration levels could be investigated

more thoroughly.

Waves that are large enough to reach the deck of an offshore platform generate not only

horizontal but also vertical forces. The vertical forces are of considerable magnitude,

and their influence on the dynamic performance of offshore structures should be subject

to further investigations.

Validation of the recommendations relating to wave-in-deck load time history through

tank tests of wave-in-deck loading on jacket decks would be strongly recommended.

Particularly the validity range in terms of inundation should be examined.

70

STABILIZATION AND FINITE ELEMENT ANALYSIS OF OFFSHORE OIL RIGS (JACK -UP AND JACKET TYPE)

REFERENCES

Chicago, Illinois, USA.

[2] American Petroleum Institute [API], 1996. (RP-2A 20th edition, Recommended

Practice for Planning, Designing and Constructing Fixed Offshore PlatformsWorking

Stress Design dated December 1996.

[3] Bill Madock, 1992;''Verification of CSA code for fixed offshore steel structures''.

[4] Bea et al. 1995;''Verification of simplified method to evaluate the capacities of

Template Type Platforms'',27th annual OTC, Houston, Texas, USA

[5] Chakrabarti.S.K, 2005, Hand book of offshore engineering, Elsevier.

[6] Dawson.T.H, 1983 ; ''Offshore Structural Engineering'', Elsevier.

[7] DNV (os-c201 &os-c101), Practice on the joint and connection design of jacket

platforms, Environmental Conditions and Environmental load.

[8] ISO 19902, 2007; Petroleum and natural gas industries - Fixed steel offshore

structures. - 1st edition.

[9] Rupam Mahanta, 2011; ''Pile Design for Fixed Platform for Hydrocarbon

Exploration in Indian Offshore'', Proceeding of Indian geotechnical conference, Kochi.

[10] Sadeghi K, 2001; ''Coasts, Ports and Offshore Structures Engineering''.

[11] Thomas Gjerde, 2011;''Structural Analysis of Offshore Module''.

[12] Raman, H., Jothishankar, H. and Venkatanarasaiah, P. (1977). Nonlinear wave

interaction with vertical cylinder of large diameter, Journal of Ship Research, 21: 1, 120124.

[13] Zhu, S. (1993). Diffraction of short-crested waves around a circular cylinder, Ocean

Engineering, 20: 4, 389-407.

71

STABILIZATION AND FINITE ELEMENT ANALYSIS OF OFFSHORE OIL RIGS (JACK -UP AND JACKET TYPE)

[14]. Zhu, S. and Moule, G. (1994). Numerical calculation of forces induced by shortcrested waves on a vertical cylinder of arbitrary cross-section, Ocean Engineering, 21:

7, 645-662.

[15]. Harish, N., Sukomal, M., Shanthala, B. and Subba, R. (2010). Analysis of offshore

jacket platform, Natl. Conf. on Sustainable Water Resources Management - SWaRM

20; NITK, Surathkal; India; 7-9 Jan 2010.

[16]. Nagamani, K. and Ganapathy, C. (1996). Finite element analysis of nonlinear

dynamic response of articulated towers, Computers &Structures, 59: 2, 213-223.

[17]. Dynamics of Offshore Structures, James F. Wilson - Technology - 2002 - 344

pages

[18]. Engin, G. R. Tugrul, E. and Umit, G. (2011). Effect of Changes on Joint

Connections of Steel Lattice Towers due to Environmental Loads, International Journal

of Engineering and Industries, 2: 1, 30-37.

[19]. Jain, K. (1996). Dynamics of offshore structures under sea waves and earthquake

forces, American Society of Mechanical Engineers, Offshore Technology, 1, 191-198.

[20]. Fayed, S.M.M., Zidan, M. and Harb, M. (2005). Dynamic response of fixed

offshore structures under environmental loads, Eleventh International Colloquium on

Structural and Geotechnical Engineering, 11th ICSGE, 17-19 May 2005, Cairo Egypt.

E05SR26, 1-16.

[21].http://latorebondeng90245.tripod.com/api_rp2a.pdf

[22].http://huniv.hongik.ac.kr/~geotech/key%20reference/API%20Offshore%20Struct

ure%20standards%20RP%202A%20and%20much%20more%20(Mangiavacchi%2020

05).pdf

[23].http://www.isope.org/publications/proceedings/ISOPE/ISOPE%202013/papers/vo

l2/13NGZ-05Abdalla.pdf

[24].http://authors.library.caltech.edu/45978/1/AxiallyLoaded%20Centrifuge%20Pile

%20Tests.pdf

DEPARTMENT OF APPLIED MECHANICS

72

STABILIZATION AND FINITE ELEMENT ANALYSIS OF OFFSHORE OIL RIGS (JACK -UP AND JACKET TYPE)

[25].http://www.researchgate.net/profile/Scott_Sloan/publication/222671401_Numeric

al_limit_analysis_solutions_for_the_bearing_capacity_factor_N/links/53d73ef20cf228

d363eadf8e.pdf

[26].http://www.eng.ox.ac.uk/civil/publications/reports-1/ouel_2054_95.pdf

[27].https://books.google.co.in/books?id=RNGW9CucxQsC&pg=PA230&dq=Chakra

barti+S.K&hl=en&sa=X&ei=v7RmVazhMMxuATCrYKYCQ&ved=0CCUQ6AEwA

Q#v=onepage&q=Chakrabarti%20S.K&f=false

[28].http://www.ejse.org/Archives/Fulltext/2007/Special/200705.pdf

[29].NPTEL online courses on Offshore Engineering

73

ILLUSTRATION

ILLUSTRATIONS

Ultimate Skin Friction Values

Ultimate End Bearing Values

Ultimate Axial Capacity

Mud-Mat Ultimate Bearing Capacity

APPENDIX A

APPENDIX A

Positioning Data

APPENDIX B

APPENDIX B

Grain Size Distribution Curve

UU Triaxial Tests

- FSI Chinyanja (aka Chewa, Nyanja, Chichewa, Cinyanja) Language CourseHochgeladen vonLingdog
- Frequency Dictionary of GermanHochgeladen vonshowmer
- FSI Greek Basic CourseHochgeladen vonMarcus Andrew Frost
- FSI Russian Active Introduction - Student TextHochgeladen vonafrancesado
- Fsi FrenchBasicCourserevised Volume1 StudentTextHochgeladen vonJuanjo Mirón
- FSI Vietnamese Basic CourseHochgeladen vonMarcus Andrew Frost
- Fsi-ModernWrittenArabic-Volume1-StudentTextHochgeladen vonMourad Diouri
- FSI Spanish Basic Volume 4Hochgeladen vonMarcus Andrew Frost
- FSI Cambodian Basic Course Volume 2Hochgeladen vonstephen_self_4
- FSI Sub-Saharan French FASTHochgeladen vonMarcus Andrew Frost
- FSI Vietnamese FASTHochgeladen vonMarcus Andrew Frost
- Fsi Spanish Programmatic Course Volume1 Student TextHochgeladen vonmcmapper59
- Russian Frequency Dictionary ProposalHochgeladen voneverfor
- FSI - Luganda Pretraining - Student TextHochgeladen vonJzan Jzani
- FSI Cambodian Basic Course Volume 1Hochgeladen vonstephen_self_4
- Lao Basic Course (FSI)Hochgeladen vonfragilewindows
- Learn Shona - FSI Basic CourseHochgeladen von101_languages
- FSI - Reading Lao - Student TextHochgeladen vonOliveiraBR
- FSI - Adapting and Writing Language LessonsHochgeladen vonsooperdooperfun
- Fsi SpanishProgrammaticCourse Volume1 WorkbookHochgeladen vonsooperdooperfun
- Fsi SpanishProgrammaticCourse Volume2 WorkbookHochgeladen vonsooperdooperfun
- Chinese FSI a Modular ApproachHochgeladen voncebuano88
- FSI - Kirundi Basic CourseHochgeladen vonunfo
- Fsi GreekBasicCourse Volume1 StudentTextHochgeladen vonSakellariou Ruxandra
- Fsi-HebrewBasicCourse-StudentText.pdfHochgeladen vonJehovah Shammah
- Dictionary Petroleum IndustryHochgeladen vonÓscar Medina
- Fsi HungarianBasicCourse Volume1 StudentTextHochgeladen vonannapanna1
- Fsi GreekBasicCourse Volume1 StudentTextHochgeladen vonbudapest1
- Fsi-ConversationalFinnish-Workbook.pdfHochgeladen vondestine

- PPTHochgeladen vonAtul Kumar
- Burland and BurbidgeHochgeladen vonAtul Kumar
- Pore Volume CalaculationHochgeladen vonAtul Kumar
- FHWA Design and Constructionof Driven Pile FoundationsHochgeladen vonSheril Chandrabose
- KGIE OBC Chennai New 2014 Mlal (2)Hochgeladen vonAtul Kumar
- intelligenttransportationsystem-ppt 1Hochgeladen vonAtul Kumar
- Geotechnical Seminar PPTHochgeladen vonAtul Kumar
- spud canHochgeladen vonAtul Kumar
- Cover LetterHochgeladen vonAtul Kumar
- Midterm 2018 (1)Hochgeladen vonAtul Kumar
- MIchelle HydrometerHochgeladen vonAtul Kumar
- Cover LetterHochgeladen vonAtul Kumar
- Homework 8 SolutionsHochgeladen vonAtul Kumar
- Cover LetterHochgeladen vonAtul Kumar
- Grade SheetHochgeladen vonAtul Kumar
- Finite Difference MethodHochgeladen vonAtul Kumar
- Cover Letter FinalHochgeladen vonAtul Kumar
- Cap14Hochgeladen vonJuan Carvajal
- FollowHochgeladen vonAtul Kumar
- ENCE 611 - Project Proposal Rev 2Hochgeladen vonAtul Kumar
- SchnabelHochgeladen vonAtul Kumar
- mayankHochgeladen vonAtul Kumar
- mayankHochgeladen vonAtul Kumar
- Jee Main 2013 Question Paper with solution.pdfHochgeladen vonFirdosh Khan
- Cover LetterHochgeladen vonAtul Kumar
- AbstractHochgeladen vonAtul Kumar
- Atul Kumar Singh CVHochgeladen vonAtul Kumar
- NMBS Castellated Beams CourseHochgeladen vonSeifeldin Ali Marzouk
- ProjectHochgeladen vonAtul Kumar

- Phase Locked LoopHochgeladen vonKulwant Nagi
- Calculus: First-order Linear Differentiation Equation. Derivation of Newton's Law of coolingHochgeladen vonChris Harding
- DBMS-2Hochgeladen vonasp1993
- A Concise Introduction to Multi-agent SystemsHochgeladen vonAl Kash
- Interference and DiffractionHochgeladen vonphydotsi
- Quiz Data MiningHochgeladen vonVenkat Dot
- Singapore Math Worksheets Grade 4 Fractions www.kungfu-math.comHochgeladen vonKungfu Math
- TechSpan_Brochure.pdfHochgeladen vonuet22
- results and discussion gas diffusion pilot plant.docxHochgeladen vonIrMuhammadFaiz
- C3 Fun of Bus MathHochgeladen vonmalindakarunaratne
- Ultimate PryingHochgeladen vonsanjaypatel2291
- Microalga Scenedesmus Obliquus as a Potential Source for Biodiesel Production 2009 LAHochgeladen vonLeon Mayoral
- Comparision of Condylar Guidance Setting Obtained From a Wax Record vs an Extra Oral TracingHochgeladen vonHarsha Reddy
- Unified Quantum Field Theory and BeingHochgeladen vonAnthony J. Fejfar
- Week 5 HomeworkHochgeladen vonscribdpdfs
- CompTopolHochgeladen vonJaschaHeifetz
- Ackremann SteeringHochgeladen vonIshmeet Singh Sachdeva
- [PAPER[Automotive CAE Durability Analysis Using Random Vibration ApproachHochgeladen vonThiago Palmieri
- Data science intern interviewHochgeladen vonAnugrah Muzakki Puar
- Uvm ConfigureHochgeladen vonRajesh Nandi
- STAT 2220 Practice TT1 UofMHochgeladen vonFavelax895
- Isaac Newton and Charles DarwinHochgeladen vonVictorFaraonu
- bca_syllabus_2018_draft1.pdfHochgeladen vonHarshlata Rohilla
- Analysis of Large-Scale Interconnected Dynamical SystemsHochgeladen vonIgor Mezic Research Group
- Lecture 3- Flash Calculations 16-17Hochgeladen vonSamandar Yuldoshev
- JOMAE_06_FINAL_div.pdfHochgeladen vonMoises Negri
- Mechanics Of Materials Chap 1Hochgeladen vonHaseeb Riaz
- 10.1.1.632.5582Hochgeladen vonVipin Kumar Meena
- Pin vs Fixed Joints in TrussHochgeladen vongazzafletch
- 102. Jurnal Internasional - Hand Geometry Verification Based on Chain Code and DTWHochgeladen von1708kyungsoo

## Viel mehr als nur Dokumente.

Entdecken, was Scribd alles zu bieten hat, inklusive Bücher und Hörbücher von großen Verlagen.

Jederzeit kündbar.