PDF

STRUCTURAL ANALYSIS, DIFFS SKID
Doc no. Rev. Page:

229A-APS-N-RA-0013 C01 2 of 63
1. Introduction 4
Description 4
Objective / Scope of work 6
Assumptions and limitations 6
Summary and conclusions 7
Abbreviations 8
2. References 9
3. Design Basis 10
Regulations 10
Material data 10
System of units 10
Location of New DIFFS skid 11
Design conditions 12
Acceptance criteria and material factors 12

3.6.1. Yield and buckling criteria 12
3.6.2. Displacement criteria 12
Computer models in supplier report 13
4. Structural Analysis 13
Issues not sufficiently covered in supplier report 13
General design basis 15
4.2.1. Material properties and factors 15
4.2.2. Main loads 16
4.2.3. Corrugated wall plate effective section properties 17
4.2.4. Bolt capacity calculation 18
Lifting analysis 19
4.3.1. Analysis of the skid frame 20
4.3.2. Check of corrugated plate above lifting points 24
In-place analysis - ULS 26
4.4.1. Check the bottom frame 26
4.4.2. Check of the skid enclosure 34
Check of the corrugated wall plate (typical) 34
Doc no. Rev. Page:

229A-APS-N-RA-0013 C01 3 of 63
Check of roof beams 36

Check of roof plate 37
Check of the side walls 39
4.4.3. Check of weld of tank support 41
Blast analysis - ALS 43
4.5.1. Check of the skid enclosure 43
Check of corrugated wall plates 44
Check of the roof beams 45
Check of the roof plate 46
Check of the side wall 48
4.5.2. Check of connection to starter pads 51
4.5.3. Check of skid doors 55
Fatigue FLS 58
Appendix A1 Analysis input and output files 61
Appendix A2 Supplier analysis report 62
Appendix A3 Drawings 63
Doc no. Rev. Page:

229A-APS-N-RA-0013 C01 4 of 63
1. Introduction
Description
As a part of this contract, Apply Srco shall perform an upgrade of the Deck Integrated Fire
Fighting System (DIFFS).
A new DIFFS skid will be placed on top of Living Quarters L18, elevation +74.700.
Figure 1-1 New DIFFS skid location PDMS view

Doc no. Rev. Page:

229A-APS-N-RA-0013 C01 5 of 63
Figure 1-2 DIFFS skid 3d view
Figure 1-3 GA drawing of the DIFFS skid

Doc no. Rev. Page:

229A-APS-N-RA-0013 C01 6 of 63
Objective / Scope of work

The Scope of work for this report is to verify strength of the new DIFFS tank skid. The structural
analysis of the skid is provided by the Supplier document 229A-APS-ER203-N-RA-0001 which
is attached to this report as an Appendix A1. As the Supplier report was found insufficient in
some areas, an independent verification of the selected skid structural elements and load cases
is performed. The verification covers main parts of the skid: bottom frame end enclosure in two
most critical loading situations: Lifting and In-place case. The verification is performed in
simplified manner by use of STAAD Pro, Colbeam software and hand calculations.
Assumptions and limitations

Preliminary analysis assumptions:
1) DIFFS skid dim.: 4,6x2,5x2,4; wet weight 11,0 ton (12,0 ton used in the analysis)
2) DIFFS skid location: LQ at el. 74,7 T.O.P., North-EAST side.
3) DIFFS tank skid will be supported at 4 points by pads welded to the deck. The DIFFS skid
will be bolted to the pads.
4) Loads and geometry applied in the supplier analysis are representative with exception of
lifting loads which are found to be somewhat to small.
5) The existing structure is checked for the new loads in report 229A-APS-N-RA-0009.
6) Environmental loads are taken from the living quarter original report; 229A-HHI-N-RA-
0451_Z01 LQ Module Analysis Report.
7) As a result of the verification some modifications to the structure of the DIFFS skid was
introduced. Latest skid modifications are included in verification (not covered by Supplier
report):
a) Side channel beams C160x100x8 are closed with 8mm plate creating BOX section
160x100x8. Plate is added between lifting points.
b) Beams supporting tank are reinforced with welded plate of 100x8 mm forming minimum
top flange of 200mm width
c) Roof plate bolt spacing to perimeter beams is reduced (halved) and plate bolting to
transverse channel beams is added.
Doc no. Rev. Page:

229A-APS-N-RA-0013 C01 7 of 63
Figure 1-4 DIFFS skid ISO view (roof plate not shown)
Summary and conclusions

The analysis and detail calculations shows that the new DIFFS tank skid has the sufficient
structural capacity. The largest usage is 0.99 for the bottom frame beam at ULS condition; this
is conservative value since the wall above the beam is not considered.
Table 1-1 Structure utilisations
Str. member ULS lift ULS a and b ALS (blast)
Side beam BOX160x100x8 0,327 0,991 -
Tank sup. beam C160x10x8+100x8 0,604 0,833 -
Wall plate - 0,41 0,88
Roof trans. Beam C80x60x6 - 0,49 0,54
Roof plate 4mm - 0,56 0,43
Foundation bolts, M24 - ok 0,44
Roof plate bolts, M10 - 0,06 0,13
At ALS-blast case, the critical components are the skid doors. They may be overstressed locally
and deform but will not break free from its anchorage.
The fatigue utilisation is within allowable limit.
Doc no. Rev. Page:

229A-APS-N-RA-0013 C01 8 of 63
Abbreviations
THK Thickness
PL Plate
ULS Ultimate Limit State
SLS Serviceability Limit State
ALS Accidental Limit State
FLS Fatigue Limit State
NA Not applicable
DC Design class
MDS Material Data Sheet (acc. to Norsok M120)
EL Elevation
DRG Drawing
No. Number
GR Grade
CoG Centre of Gravity
DF Design Factor
LF Load Factor
LC Load Case
LTB Lateral Torsional Buckling
Doc no. Rev. Page:

229A-APS-N-RA-0013 C01 9 of 63
2. References
Standards:
Norsok N-001, Rev. 8, Sep. 2012, Structural Design.
Norsok N-004, Rev. 3, Feb. 2013, Design of steel structures.
Norsok N-003, Ed. 2, Sep. 2007, Actions and action effects
Norsok M-001, Ed. 5, Sep. 2014, Material selection
Norsok M-120, Ed. 5, Oct. 2011, Material data sheets for structural steel
NS-EN 1993-1-1:2005+NA: 2015, Eurocode 3: Design of steel structures - Part 1-1: General
rules and rules for buildings.
NS-EN 1993-1-8:2005+NA: 2009, Eurocode 3: Design of steel structures - Part 1-8: Design
of joints.
NS-EN 1993-1-5:2006, Design of steel structures - Part 1-5: Plated structural elements
NS-EN 1993-1-5:2006, Design of steel structures - Part 1-4: Supplementary rules for
stainless steel (including NS-EN 1993-1-4:2006/A1:2015)
NS-EN 1993-1-7:2007, Design of steel structures - Part 1-7: Plated structures subject to
out of plane loading
DNV-RP-C203, OCTOBER 2011: Fatigue Design of Offshore Steel Structures
Norsok R-002 Lifting Equipment (Edition 2017)
Reference documents and drawings:

/D -1/. PDMS model
/D -2/. https://eni.ayelix.com/
/D -3/. 229A-HHI-N-RA-5001_Z01 Structural Design Brief for Hull and Topside Structure
/D -4/. 229A-HHI-S-RA-0032_C05 Design Accidental Load (DAL) Specification
/D -5/. 229A-HHI-N-RA-0451_Z01 LQ Module Analysis Report
/D -6/. 229A-HHI-N-RA-0453_Z01 LQ Fatigue Analysis Report
/D -7/. 229A-APS-ER203-R-XD-0001-01 GA DIFFS BUFFER SKID
Doc no. Rev. Page:

229A-APS-N-RA-0013 C01 10 of 63
3. Design Basis
Regulations
The structure of the FPSO including substructure is to be design and constructed in accordance
with the following NORSOK Standards.
Structure modifications follow the same requirements.
Material data
DIFFS skid is made of AISI 316 / AISI 316L steel. EN 1.4401 / 1.4404
Table 3-1 Steel material data
Material grad 316 / 316L

Modulus of elasticity 200 000 MPa
Density 7850 kg/m
Poissons ratio 0.3
Yield strength fy, corrugated 240 Mpa
plate
Yield strength fy, other 220 Mpa
Ultimate strength f u 530 MPa
System of units
The System International (SI) is used for structural design.
Length: meters (m)
Force: Newton (N)
Mass: tons (tons)
Acceleration: m/s2 (g = 9,81 m/s2)
Density: kg/m3
Stresses: Mega Pascal (MPa or N/mm2)
Pressure: Mega Pascal (MPa or N/mm2)
Doc no. Rev. Page:

229A-APS-N-RA-0013 C01 11 of 63
Location of New DIFFS skid
L18 module
Figure 3-1 Location of DIFFS skid

Doc no. Rev. Page:

229A-APS-N-RA-0013 C01 12 of 63
Design conditions
Design is carried by the LRFD method. Design condition as defined in Norsok N-001 to be
checked:
ULSa and ULSb - Ultimate limit state stress, buckling
SLS Serviceability limit state deflections, deformation
ALS - Accidental Limit State (blast)
FLS Fatigue Limit State
Table 3-2 Load factor according to NORSOK N-001
Action type
Limit state Permanent Variable Environmental Deformation
ULS a) 1,3 1,3 0,7 1,0
ULS b) 1,0 1,0 1,3 1,0
SLS 1,0 1,0 1,0 1,0
ALS 1,0 1,0 1,0 1,0
Acceptance criteria and material factors

The following acceptance criteria and material factors are used in the design:
Table 3-3 Material factors and acceptance criteria according to NORSOK N-004
Design-conditions Material factor Acceptance criterion
1.15
115
ULS
1.3
1.3 Stability and section capacity.
1.0 Utilization 1.0.
10
ALS
1.1
1.1
3.6.1. Yield and buckling criteria

Yield and buckling assessment is verified in accordance with /S -1/, /S -2/, /S -6/, /S -8/ and /S -
9/.
3.6.2. Displacement criteria

According to section 7.7 of Structural Design Brief /D -3/, the vertical deflection of the beams of
the modules shall be checked to ensure the following limits:
Doc no. Rev. Page:

229A-APS-N-RA-0013 C01 13 of 63
Table 3-4 Deflection Limits for Serviceability Limit State (SLS)
Type /L
For all members the span 1/250
For cantilevers 1/125
Computer models in supplier report

The supplier report includes linear elastic finite element analysis of the skid performed in Ansys
Workbench. This report does not include further computer analysis. Additional hand calculations
are performed in this report. See appendix A1.
4. Structural Analysis
The following chapter contains independent check of skid structure with special focus on the
issues described in chapter 4.1.
Issues not sufficiently covered in supplier report

In the following a summary of what is not properly assessed in the supplier report is
summarized:
Plate buckling of corrugated plates

The most critical modes of plate buckling are not assessed in the supplier report. Effective width
is not reduced and the corrugated plates, roof plate and doors are not checked for plate
buckling due to compression in the plates.
Beam buckling
All beam members are modelled as plates. It is performed a buckling check of the u-channel
supporting the tank based on the forces from the analysis; however other u-channels are not
assessed for buckling.
Lifting analysis
Lifting points are not checked for the sling loads. Skid enclosure is significantly stressed locally
due to lifting. This is thin plate structure and it shall not be included in lifting check for the main,
bottom frame. Sling attachment at plate hole is not conservative as it is reducing bending and
torsion acting on the frame.
Doors
The door contact is modelled as bounded, which is not realistic, in addition, plate buckling is not
accounted for. This also makes the doors carry much more of the shear and moment loads than
it will in reality where walls are carrying all the loads.
Doc no. Rev. Page:

229A-APS-N-RA-0013 C01 14 of 63
Roof
Roof plate calculations are not clear. It is described (5.1, A1) as to be bolted with the U-profiles
and in rest position over the transverse U-profiles & longitudinal L-profiles but in detail
calculations the plate dimensions are taken between secondary, transverse beams in the roof.
This is not correct if the plate is not bolted to these beams. This was corrected during fabrication
and plate is bolted to the structure as described in 1.3.
Weld
The welds calculated are not properly calculated, effective width is not accounted for. Most
welds are however OK by inspection for ULS and ALS based on plate thickness compared to
weld size.
Bolt connections
T-stubs not correctly checked. The yield line lengths used are incorrect. Also force readout on
bolt connections of roof beams to top frame do not match loads found from hand calculations.
Bolt connections of roof plate to top frame is not assessed.
Fatigue
Stress concentration factor is not applied and there is no documentation on how the stress is
extracted from the model.
Doc no. Rev. Page:

229A-APS-N-RA-0013 C01 15 of 63
General design basis

The analysis model including loads and load combinations is described in appendix A1.
4.2.1. Material properties and factors

Doc no. Rev. Page:

229A-APS-N-RA-0013 C01 16 of 63
4.2.2. Main loads

Doc no. Rev. Page:

229A-APS-N-RA-0013 C01 17 of 63
4.2.3. Corrugated wall plate effective section properties
bload
Doc no. Rev. Page:

229A-APS-N-RA-0013 C01 18 of 63
4.2.4. Bolt capacity calculation

M10 bolts are used for roof plate connection.
Doc no. Rev. Page:

229A-APS-N-RA-0013 C01 19 of 63
Lifting analysis
For lifting condition, it is assumed to carry all the loads through bottom frame. The enclosure is
neglected and applied as a dead load to the bottom frame. The self-weight of skid above self-
weight included in the analysis model is applied as linear distributed load on the frame main
beams.
Doc no. Rev. Page:

229A-APS-N-RA-0013 C01 20 of 63
4.3.1. Analysis of the skid frame
Sling attachement
Figure 4-1 Lifting loading
Figure 4-2 Reactions at lifting points

Doc no. Rev. Page:

229A-APS-N-RA-0013 C01 21 of 63
Figure 4-3 Beams utilisations due to lifting
Table below shows forces in the slings received from the analysis. They are higher than results
of hand calculations, which means that analysis results are at safe side.
Doc no. Rev. Page:

229A-APS-N-RA-0013 C01 22 of 63
Table 4-1 Forces in the slings

Doc no. Rev. Page:

229A-APS-N-RA-0013 C01 23 of 63
Doc no. Rev. Page:

229A-APS-N-RA-0013 C01 24 of 63
4.3.2. Check of corrugated plate above lifting points

The figure shows that the stress are larger than the allowable stress in a small region, and the
stresses are relatively large in the entire section above the lifting points. Doubling plates are
welded in the area of large stress.
The base bottom frame on its own was found sufficient strength for lifting the skid.
Vendor analysis model does not include latest frame reinforcement boxed bottom side beam.
Then the stress will be half and OK by inspection.
Figure 4-4 Plate stress above lifting points
Figure 4-5 Local reinforcement of wall plate for carrying lifting load
Doc no. Rev. Page:

229A-APS-N-RA-0013 C01 25 of 63
Corrugated plate is reinforced locally by welded angle bar. Load is transferred gradually to the
nearby plate, OK by inspection. Door frame also acts as reinforcement.
Figure 4-6 Local reinforcement of door frame area for carrying lifting load
Doc no. Rev. Page:

229A-APS-N-RA-0013 C01 26 of 63
In-place analysis - ULS

In-place analysis of the skid is divided in two main parts, first is the bottom frame check and the
second is the verification of enclosure structure: walls and roof.
4.4.1. Check the bottom frame

Below chapter provides strength analysis of the bottom skid frame with following assumptions:
The analysis is performed for bottom frame elements only, without including walls and
roof structure
Walls and roof are added as dead load to the bottom frame
Drip tray frame is included and assumed to carry horizontal loads
Reinforcements of bottom beams are included
Figure 4-7 Base frame structure arrangement and section properties

Doc no. Rev. Page:

229A-APS-N-RA-0013 C01 27 of 63
LC1: Self-weight and dead load: 11 tons
Figure 4-8 Self-weight and dead loads LC1
LC2: Live load: 5kN/m2
Figure 4-9 Live loads LC2

Doc no. Rev. Page:

229A-APS-N-RA-0013 C01 28 of 63
LC3: Snow: 2,19kN/m2
Figure 4-10 Snow loads LC3
LC4: wave load in X direction: acceleration 0,28g
Figure 4-11 Wave loads, accelerations in x direction LC4

Doc no. Rev. Page:

229A-APS-N-RA-0013 C01 29 of 63
LC5: wave load in Z direction: acceleration 0,28g
Figure 4-12 Wave loads, accelerations in Z direction LC5
LC6: wave load in Y direction: acceleration 0,21g
Figure 4-13 Wave loads, accelerations in Y direction (vertical) LC6
LC7: wind load in +Z direction: wind pressure 2,11kN/m2.

Doc no. Rev. Page:

229A-APS-N-RA-0013 C01 30 of 63
Figure 4-14 Wind loads in +Z direction LC7
LC8: wind load in -Z direction: wind pressure 2,11kN/m2.
Figure 4-15 Wind loads in -Z direction LC8

Doc no. Rev. Page:

229A-APS-N-RA-0013 C01 31 of 63
Table 4-2 Loads combinations

Doc no. Rev. Page:

229A-APS-N-RA-0013 C01 32 of 63
Bending moments plots for most decisive load combinations
Figure 4-16 Bending moment plot - LC 84
Figure 4-17 Bending moment plot - LC 71
Structure utilizations
Doc no. Rev. Page:

229A-APS-N-RA-0013 C01 33 of 63
Figure 4-18 Bottom frame utilisations

Doc no. Rev. Page:

229A-APS-N-RA-0013 C01 34 of 63
4.4.2. Check of the skid enclosure

Enclosure structural members are checked independently in Colbeam software one by one.
Some of the beam profiles are to complex and not possible to model in Colbeam. In such cases,
a simplified unsymmetrical H profile with corresponding, effective properties has been modelled.
Assumptions are:
Wall plate is checked for yield and buckling (effective cross-section is used)
Wall plate is assumed partly fixed at the bottom as it is welded to the stiff bottom frame
and pined at the top as the roof plate and beams are bolted.
Roof beams are simply supported
Roof plate is distributing horizontal loads to the side walls
Side walls are carrying the horizontal loads from roof plane to bottom frame
Side wall
Roof beam and

plate
Wall plate
Check of the corrugated wall plate (typical)

Effective section according 4.2.3.
Doc no. Rev. Page:

229A-APS-N-RA-0013 C01 35 of 63
Loads:
Q=0,9kN/m =2,11*0,417 - wind
N=1,1kN = 2,19*1,2*0,417 snow
N=0,6kN dead load

Doc no. Rev. Page:

229A-APS-N-RA-0013 C01 36 of 63
Check of roof beams
Loads:
Q=0,5kN/m self weight of plate
Q=1,8kn/m = 2,19*0,8 snow
N=6,6kN wind load
Doc no. Rev. Page:

229A-APS-N-RA-0013 C01 37 of 63
Check of roof plate

The roof plate is bolted to the roof beams and the walls as shown on below figure. The plate is
verified acc. DNV-RP-C201 in Stipla software. The stresses applied to the plate are calculated
below based on environmental actions: wind on the wall and snow on the roof.
Doc no. Rev. Page:

229A-APS-N-RA-0013 C01 38 of 63
Doc no. Rev. Page:

229A-APS-N-RA-0013 C01 39 of 63
Check of the side walls

The side walls are mostly utilised from the wind action at long side of the skid. Reaction from
the roof will be carried as shear force in the wall; this force will result in tension/compression
stress in the wall. These stresses are relatively small but there is a risk of out of plane buckling
at the side of the wall attached to the door frame.
Side wall
Wind
tension/compres
Force
compression/ten
Doc no. Rev. Page:

229A-APS-N-RA-0013 C01 40 of 63
Effective wall profile at door

frame.
The door frame angle L40x4 is included in the capacity check (conservatively flange is 2mm
thick).
To simplify calculations a profile with corresponding properties is modelled in Colbeam.
Buckling length of the column is half of the skid height since compression appear only at mid
span.
Doc no. Rev. Page:

229A-APS-N-RA-0013 C01 41 of 63
4.4.3. Check of weld of tank support

Doc no. Rev. Page:

229A-APS-N-RA-0013 C01 42 of 63
Figure 4-20 Welds of tanks support

Doc no. Rev. Page:

229A-APS-N-RA-0013 C01 43 of 63
Blast analysis - ALS

The blast (ALS) analysis of the skid is performed only for enclosure structure: walls and roof.
The bottom frame will not be affected significantly by the blast.
4.5.1. Check of the skid enclosure

Enclosure structural members are checked independently in Colbeam software. Some of the
beams profiles are to complex and not possible to model in Colbeam. In such cases a simplified
unsymmetrical H profile with corresponding, effective properties are modelled.
Assumptions are:
Wall plate is checked for yield and buckling (effective cross-section is used)
Wall plate is assumed partly fixed at the bottom as it is welded to the stiff bottom frame
and pined at the top as the roof plate and beams are bolted.
Roof beams are simply supported
Roof plate is distributing horizontal loads to the side walls
Side wall
Roof beam and

plate
Wall plate
Doc no. Rev. Page:

229A-APS-N-RA-0013 C01 44 of 63
Check of corrugated wall plates

Effective section according 4.2.3.
Loads:
Q=3,1kN/m =5,0*1,5*0,417 - blast
N=1,1kN = 2,19*1,2*0,417 snow
N=0,6kN dead load
Doc no. Rev. Page:

229A-APS-N-RA-0013 C01 45 of 63
Check of the roof beams

Doc no. Rev. Page:

229A-APS-N-RA-0013 C01 46 of 63
Check of the roof plate

The roof plate is bolted to the roof beams and the walls as shown on below figure. The plate is
verified acc. DNV-RP-C201 in Stipla software. The stresses applied to the plate are calculated
below based on environmental actions: blast on the wall and snow on the roof.
Doc no. Rev. Page:

229A-APS-N-RA-0013 C01 47 of 63
Doc no. Rev. Page:

229A-APS-N-RA-0013 C01 48 of 63
Check of the side wall

For the side walls the stresses from the supplier analysis are very small, however in this
analysis the doors are calculated as if they were welded to the walls and the other door for the
double doors. In the following a conservative approach is used to show that the side walls have
sufficient capacity.
Side wall
Blast
tension/compre
Force
compression/te
Check of the wall edge and door frame against buckling

Doc no. Rev. Page:

229A-APS-N-RA-0013 C01 49 of 63
Check of the side roof beam against force from side wall
Doc no. Rev. Page:

229A-APS-N-RA-0013 C01 50 of 63
Doc no. Rev. Page:

229A-APS-N-RA-0013 C01 51 of 63
4.5.2. Check of connection to starter pads

Doc no. Rev. Page:

229A-APS-N-RA-0013 C01 52 of 63
Doc no. Rev. Page:

229A-APS-N-RA-0013 C01 53 of 63
Doc no. Rev. Page:

229A-APS-N-RA-0013 C01 54 of 63
Doc no. Rev. Page:

229A-APS-N-RA-0013 C01 55 of 63
4.5.3. Check of skid doors

All the doors are analysed separately with appropriate boundary conditions pined around the
edges where back frame is provided and at hinges locations.
Doors pointing towards process area, where the explosion pulse would influence most likely are
reinforced. Plate thickness increased from 2 to 3 mm.
Doors may be deformed due to the blast, but will not collapse or break free from its anchorage.
Stainless steels can absorb considerable impact without fracturing due to their excellent
ductility (especially the austenitic grades) and their strain hardening characteristics.
Figure 4-22 von Mises stress blast - south door (3mm plates)
Doc no. Rev. Page:

229A-APS-N-RA-0013 C01 56 of 63
Figure 4-23 von Mises stress blast - west door (2mm plates)
Doc no. Rev. Page:

229A-APS-N-RA-0013 C01 57 of 63
Figure 4-24 von Mises stress blast - north door (2mm plates)
Doc no. Rev. Page:

229A-APS-N-RA-0013 C01 58 of 63
Fatigue FLS
A simplified fatigue calculation is performed for most critical detail beam flange splice at tank
supporting balm, see Figure 4-25 Fatigue detail.
Calculations are done acc. /S -11/ with use of nominal stress method.
Design basis are acc. /D -6/.
The stresses are taken from STAAD analysis, see Figure 4-26.
Figure 4-25 Fatigue detail

Doc no. Rev. Page:

229A-APS-N-RA-0013 C01 59 of 63
Max stress in the beam
Figure 4-26 Fatigue analysis results

Doc no. Rev. Page:

229A-APS-N-RA-0013 C01 60 of 63
Doc no. Rev. Page:

229A-APS-N-RA-0013 C01 61 of 63
Appendix A1 Analysis input and output files
Lifting analysis input and output file, STAAD.Pro
In-place and fatigue analysis input and output file, STAAD.Pro

Doc no. Rev. Page:

229A-APS-N-RA-0013 C01 62 of 63
Appendix A2 Supplier analysis report

Goliat Field
This report does not

completely document
the structural integrity of
the DIFFS skid. This
Review and Acceptance Codes:
report will be voided,
Accepted 1
and used as an
appendix to report Accepted with comments incorporated - 2
229A-APS-N-RA-0013, Revise and Resubmit
where the outstanding
items will be Not Accepted - Revise and resubmit 3
documented. Issued for Information. 4
Interface information as clouded is 5 x

accepted and frozen
Signed Date
C02 22.03.2017 Issued for Project Acceptance JOKR AREI SIPU

C01 27.01.2017 Issued for Project Acceptance ALBE AREI SIPU
Rev. Date Description Prepared Verified Approved
Document Title
Structural Design Report - DIFFS

Buffer Skid
Fire Protection
Engineering AS
Document Number
PO No.: Tag No.:
229A-APS-ER203-N-RA-0001 C02
G05BX053-6502 72SU006
Supplier Doc. No.: Sup. Rev.: PO
Proj. Orig. Disc. Doc. Seq.
Pkg Rev.
P737-FPE-RA-002 02 Code Code Code Type No.
ref.
229A-APS-ER203-N-RA-0001 Page 2 of 165
DESIGN CALCULATION REPORT

DECK INTEGRATED FIRE FIGHTING SYSTEM BUFFER
SKID
GOLIAT
Document No: PN201701-NIP-N-CA-0001
04 21-03-2017 Issued for Approval SSD SK HSA

00 23-01-2017 IDC SSD SK
Doc. Rev. Date Description Prepared Checked Approved
PN201701 NIP N CA 0001

Document Number
Project No Originator Discipline Doc.Type Seq.No
This document contains NIPUNN legal entity proprietary and confidential information that is legally privileged and is intended only f or the
person or entity to which it is addressed and any unauthorized use is strictly prohibited. It is provided for limited purpos e and shall not be
reproduced, stored electronically, transferred to other documents, disseminated or disclosed to any third parties without the prior written
consent of the relevant NIPUNN legal entity. Any attachments are subject to the specific restrictions and confidentiality regulations stated
therein and shall be treated accordingly. The document is to be returned upon request and in all events upon completion of us e for which
it was provided.
Document No.: PN201701-NIP-N-CA-0001 Design Calculation Report

Revision No.:04 Deck Integrated Fire Fighting System Buffer Skid
Date: 21-03-2017 Goliat
REVISION HISTORY SHEET
Revision Date Description of Change

- Buckling check is added.
- Fatigue check for fillet welds is added.
- Weld calculations are added.
02 27-02-2017
- ULS, Transportation, SLS & ALS Load cases are updated.
- Reactions for Lifting case are added.
- Foundation Bolt Calculations are updated.
- Beam buckling is added.
- Weld calculations for ULS & ALS case are added & updated.
03 10-03-2017 - Weld Calculations for lifting pad are added.
- Bolt calculations for ALS & ULS are added & updated.
- GA Drawing is updated.
- Fatigue calculations are updated.
- Bolt Calculations are added and updated.
04 21-03-2017 - Buckling Calculations are added and updated.
- Live load is updated.
- Nozzle loading case is updated.
2017 NIPUNN Engineering AS Page 2 of 164


TABLE OF CONTENTS
SECTION TITLE PAGE
1 INTRODUCTION ............................................................................................................ 7
2 REFERENCES............................................................................................................... 7
2.1 References ..................................................................................................................... 7
2.2 Definition & Abbreviations ............................................................................................... 8
3 SUMMARY & CONCLUSIONS ....................................................................................... 9
4 DESIGN BRIEF .............................................................................................................. 12
4.1 Material Properties ......................................................................................................... 12
4.2 FE Load Cases............................................................................................................... 13
4.3 Load Factors .................................................................................................................. 14
4.3.1 Partial Load Factors ........................................................................................................ 14
4.3.2 Partial Load Factor for Lifting .......................................................................................... 15
4.4 Acceptance Criteria ........................................................................................................ 16
4.4.1 Allowable Stress Criteria ................................................................................................. 16
4.4.2 Allowable Deformation Criteria ........................................................................................ 17
5 ANALYSIS ..................................................................................................................... 18
5.1 FE Geometry .................................................................................................................. 18
5.2 FE Mesh......................................................................................................................... 20
5.3 FE Loads........................................................................................................................ 21
5.3.1 Functional Loads ............................................................................................................ 21
5.3.1.1 Structural Weight ............................................................................................................ 21
5.3.1.2 Variable Loads ................................................................................................................ 21
5.3.1.2.1 Liquid Induced Loads due to Tank Content ...................................................................................... 21
5.3.2 Environmental Loads ...................................................................................................... 21
5.3.2.1 Snow and Ice Loads ....................................................................................................... 21
5.3.2.2 Transportation Accelerations ........................................................................................... 22
5.3.2.3 Platform Motions & Accelerations .................................................................................... 22
5.3.2.4 Wind Loads..................................................................................................................... 23
5.3.2.5 Live Loads ...................................................................................................................... 24
5.3.3 Accidental Loads ............................................................................................................ 25
5.3.3.1 Blast Loads ..................................................................................................................... 25
5.4 FE Assumptions ............................................................................................................. 25
5.5 Load Combinations......................................................................................................... 26
5.6 Boundary Conditions ...................................................................................................... 27


5.6.1 Boundary Conditions for LC-3, ........................................................................................ 27

5.6.2 Boundary Conditions for LC-1,2,4 to 6............................................................................. 28
5.7 Applied Loads & FE Results ........................................................................................... 29
5.7.1 LC No.-1A, Transportation with wind in transverse direction ............................................ 29
5.7.1.1 Applied Loads ................................................................................................................. 29
5.7.1.2 FE Results ...................................................................................................................... 31
5.7.2 LC No.-1B, Transportation with wind in longitudinal direction ........................................... 34
5.7.2.1 Applied Loads ................................................................................................................. 34
5.7.2.2 FE Results ...................................................................................................................... 36
5.7.3 LC- 2A, Operation case with environmental loads in transverse direction......................... 39
5.7.3.1 Applied Loads ................................................................................................................. 39
5.7.3.2 FE Result........................................................................................................................ 43
5.7.4 LC- 2B, Operation case with environmental loads in longitudinal direction ....................... 46
5.7.4.1 Applied Loads ................................................................................................................. 46
5.7.4.2 FE Result........................................................................................................................ 47
5.7.5 LC- 3 Lifting .................................................................................................................... 50
5.7.5.1 Applied Loads ................................................................................................................. 50
5.7.5.2 FE Results ...................................................................................................................... 51
5.7.6 LC- 4, ULS (Ultimate Loading Condition) ......................................................................... 54
5.7.6.1 Applied Loads ................................................................................................................. 54
5.7.6.2 FE Result........................................................................................................................ 58
5.7.7 LC-5A, Blast in Transverse direction (Door side) ............................................................. 61
5.7.7.1 Applied Loads ................................................................................................................. 61
5.7.7.2 FE Result........................................................................................................................ 62
5.7.8 LC-5B, Blast in Transverse direction (Back side) ............................................................. 66
5.7.8.1 Applied Loads ................................................................................................................. 66
5.7.8.2 FE Result........................................................................................................................ 67
5.7.9 LC-5C, Blast in Longitudinal direction .............................................................................. 71
5.7.9.1 Applied Loads ................................................................................................................. 71
5.7.9.2 FE Result........................................................................................................................ 72
5.7.10 LC- 6, ALS (Accidental Loading Condition)...................................................................... 76
5.7.10.1 Applied Loads ................................................................................................................. 76
5.7.10.2 FE Result........................................................................................................................ 80
APPENDIX A BOLT CALCULATIONS .................................................................................................. 83
APPENDIX B LIFTING RUD DETAILS ................................................................................................. 98
APPENDIX C NOZZLE LOADING CASE.............................................................................................. 100


APPENDIX D FATIGUE EVALUATION ................................................................................................ 105

APPENDIX E BUCKLING CHECK........................................................................................................ 108
APPENDIX F WELD STRENGTH CHECK ........................................................................................... 149
APPENDIX G GA DRAWINGS ............................................................................................................. 162
TABLE OF FIGURES
FIGURE TITLE PAGE

Figure 5-1: FE Geometry, plot- 1 ................................................................................................... 18
Figure 5-2: FE Geometry, plot-2 .................................................................................................... 19
Figure 5-3: FE Mesh ..................................................................................................................... 20
Figure 5-4: LC-3: Boundary Conditions for Lifting ........................................................................... 27
Figure 5-5: LC-1,2,4 to 6: Boundary Conditions ............................................................................. 28
Figure 5-6: LC-1A: Applied Loads, plot-1 ....................................................................................... 29
Figure 5-7: LC-1A: Applied Loads, plot-2 ....................................................................................... 30
Figure 5-8: LC-1A: von-Mises stress, limited to 110 MPa, plot-1 ..................................................... 31
Figure 5-9: LC-1A: von-Mises stress, limited to 110 MPa, plot-2 ..................................................... 32
Figure 5-10: LC-1B: Applied Loads, plot-1 ..................................................................................... 34
Figure 5-11: LC-1B: Applied Loads, plot-2 ..................................................................................... 35
Figure 5-12: LC-1B: von-Mises stress, limited to 100 MPa, plot-1 ................................................... 36
Figure 5-13: LC-1B: von-Mises stress, limited to 100 MPa, plot-2 ................................................... 37
Figure 5-14: LC-2A: Applied Loads, plot-1 ..................................................................................... 39
Figure 5-18: LC-2A, Total Deformation [mm], plot-1 ....................................................................... 43
Figure 5-19: LC-2A, Vertical Deformation [mm], plot-2 ................................................................... 44
Figure 5-20: LC-2B: Applied Loads................................................................................................ 46
Figure 5-21: LC-2B, Total Deformation [mm], plot-1 ....................................................................... 47
Figure 5-22: LC-2B, Vertical Deformation [mm], plot-2 ................................................................... 48
Figure 5-23: LC-3: Applied Loads .................................................................................................. 50
Figure 5-24: LC-3: von-Mises stress, limited to 138 MPa, plot-1 ..................................................... 51
Figure 5-25: LC-3: von-Mises stress, limited to 138 MPa, plot-2 ..................................................... 52
Figure 5-26: LC-4: Applied Loads, plot-1 ....................................................................................... 54
Figure 5-30: LC-4, von-Mises Stress, limited to 112 MPa, plot-1 ..................................................... 58
Figure 5-31: LC-4, von-Mises Stress, limited to 112 MPa, plot-2 ..................................................... 59
Figure 5-32: LC-5A: Applied Loads................................................................................................ 61
Figure 5-33: LC-5A, von-Mises Stress, limited to yield strength of the material (i.e. 170 MPa), plot-1 62
Figure 5-34: LC-5A, von-Mises Stress, limited to yield strength of the material (i.e. 170 MPa), plot-2 63
Figure 5-35: LC-5A: Total Deformation .......................................................................................... 64
Figure 5-36: LC-5B: Applied Loads................................................................................................ 66
Figure 5-37: LC-5B, von-Mises Stress, limited to yield strength of the material (i.e. 170 MPa), plot-1 67
Figure 5-38: LC-5B, von-Mises Stress, limited to yield strength of the material (i.e. 170 MPa), plot-2 68
Figure 5-39: LC-5B: Total Deformation .......................................................................................... 69
Figure 5-40: LC-5C: Applied Loads ............................................................................................... 71


Figure 5-41: LC-5C, von-Mises Stress, limited to yield strength of the material (i.e. 170 MPa), plot-1 72
Figure 5-42: LC-5C, von-Mises Stress, limited to yield strength of the material (i.e. 170 MPa), plot-2 73
Figure 5-43: LC-5C: Total Deformation .......................................................................................... 74
Figure 5-48: LC-6, von-Mises Stress, limited to yield strength of the material (i.e. 170 MPa), plot-1.. 80
Figure 5-49: LC-6, von-Mises Stress, limited to yield strength of the material (i.e. 170 MPa), plot-2.. 81
LIST OF TABLES
TABLE TITLE PAGE

Table 2-1, References .................................................................................................................... 7
Table 3-1, Maximum Significant von-Mises Stress Summary ............................................................ 9
Table 3-2, Maximum Deformation Summary .................................................................................. 10
Table 3-3, Check for Accidental Loading Conditions ...................................................................... 10
Table 3-4, Utilization Summary for checks ..................................................................................... 11
Table 4-1, Material Properties ....................................................................................................... 12
Table 4-2, Material Properties Table from Ansys Workbench.......................................................... 12
Table 4-3, Load Case Description ................................................................................................. 13
Table 4-4, Load Factor Description................................................................................................ 14
Table 4-5, Allowable Stress Criteria............................................................................................... 16
Table 4-6, Allowable Deformation Criteria ...................................................................................... 17
Table 5-1, Mesh Details ................................................................................................................ 20
Table 5-2, Weight Summary.......................................................................................................... 21
Table 5-3, Ice Load Calculation ..................................................................................................... 21
Table 5-4, Transportation Accelerations ........................................................................................ 22
Table 5-5, Platform Motions & Accelerations.................................................................................. 22
Table 5-6, Load Combination Description ...................................................................................... 26
Table 5-7, LC-1A: Foundation Pads Reactions .............................................................................. 33
Table 5-8, LC-1B: Foundation Pads Reactions .............................................................................. 38
Table 5-9, LC-2A: Foundation Pads Reactions .............................................................................. 45
Table 5-10, LC-2B: Foundation Pads Reactions ............................................................................ 49
Table 5-11, LC-3: Lifting Point Reactions ....................................................................................... 53
Table 5-12, LC-4: Foundation Pads Reactions ............................................................................... 60
Table 5-13, LC-5A: Foundation Pads Reactions ............................................................................ 65
Table 5-14, LC-5B: Foundation Pads Reactions ............................................................................ 70
Table 5-15, LC-5C: Foundation Pads Reactions ............................................................................ 75
Table 5-16,LC-6: Foundation Pads Reactions ................................................................................ 82


1 INTRODUCTION
This document reports the structural analysis conducted to verify structural strength and
integrity of the Deck Integrated Fire Fighting System Buffer Skid to be delivered by Fire
Protection Engineering AS (FPE) for Goliat FPSO. The Goliat field is located in the Barents
Sea, 85 km North West of Hammerfest.
The structure of Deck Integrated Fire Fighting System Buffer Skid is evaluated to withstand
all applicable loads and actions subjected to it during the following governing phases in
compliance with the project requirements ref./B1 to B5/.
Transportation
Operation (SLS)
Lifting
ULS
Blast
ALS
Nozzle Loading
Fatigue Evaluation
Buckling Check
Weld Strength Check
Bolt Strength Check
2 REFERENCES
2.1 References
The following codes / standards and documents shall be adhered to. Unless otherwise
stated, the latest revision of the standard shall apply.
Table 2-1, References

Industry Standards & Codes
SL. No. Description
A1 ASTM A240
EN ISO 898-1:1999: Mechanical Properties of Fasteners Made of Carbon Steel and
A2
Alloy Steel
A3 EN1993-1-8 - Design of Joints
A4 Norsok N-001: Integrity of Offshore Structures
A5 Norsok N-003: Actions & Action Effects
A6 Norsok N-004: Design of Steel Structures
A7 Norsok R-001: Mechanical Equipment
A8 Norsok R-002: Lifting Equipment
A9 EN 1993-1-1- General rules and rules for buildings


A10 EN 1993-1-4- General rules-Supplementary rules for stainless steels

A11 EN 1993-1-5- Plated structural elements
A12 DNVGL-RP-C203- Fatigue Design of Offshore Steel Structures
Project Documents and Specifications
B1 229A-APS-R-SP-0006 Technical Specification - Diffs Buffer Skid- Rev C02
229A-HHI-R-SP-0001- General Technical Specification for Equipment
B2
Packages- Rev. C04
B3 229A-HHI-S-RA-0032- Design Accidental Load Specification- Rev. C05
B4 229A-APS-ER203-P-XD-0001-01- Rev01- GA Drawing
B5 P737-FPE-XZ-001- Detail Drawing Pressure Vessel 4000 Litre- Rev02
2.2 Definition & Abbreviations

ALS : Accidental Limit State
DAF : Dynamic Amplifying Factor
DF : Design Factor
DOF : Degree of Freedom
FE(A) : Finite Element (Analysis)
g : Standard Earth Gravity (9.81 m/s)
C : Consequence Factor
P : Partial Load Factor
GPa : Giga Pascal
kN : Kilonewton
RM : Material Resistance Factor
LC : Load Case
m : Meter
cm : Centimeter
MPa : Mega Pascal
N : Newton
s : Second
SKL : Skew Load Factor
SLS : Serviceability Limit State
ULS : Ultimate Limit State
W COG : Centre of Gravity (COG) Envelope Factor
WLL : Working Load Limit
DIFFS : Deck Integrated Fire Fighting System


3 SUMMARY & CONCLUSIONS Linear buckling?
Linear static structural analysis is carried out on the Deck Integrated Fire Fighting System
Buffer Skid using finite element calculation software Ansys Workbench v15. The structure
is checked for Blast, Transportation, Lifting, ALS, ULS, Operation (SLS), Fatigue, Weld
Strength check, Bolt Strength check Nozzle Loading & Buckling conditions which are
reported herein.
The ref. /B2/, 229A-HHI-R-SP-0001- General Technical Specification for Equipment

Packages- Rev. C04, Section 5 necessitates the limit state method to be adopted for
various loading conditions. Operation condition is evaluated for SLS and transportation
condition is evaluated for ULS. The blast condition is checked for ALS. DIFFS Skid
Structure is also checked for the ULS 100-years return period environmental condition &
ALS - Extreme Environmental Condition to represent the most critical condition based on
the 10000-years return period environmental condition (Platform Motions and
Accelerations).
Lifting condition is checked according to ref. /A8/, Norsok R-002, Lifting Equipment.
DIFFS Skid Structure is checked for maximum deformation for SLS condition. The
maximum deformation in the structure beams & plates is observed to be within the
allowable limit as per ref./A4/, Norsok N-001: Integrity of Offshore Structures, Section 7.2.4
& ref./A7/, Norsok R-001: Mechanical Equipment.
The maximum significant von-Mises stress and deformation summaries are tabulated
below, ref./Table 3-1/ & /Table 3-2/.
Table 3-1, Maximum Significant von-Mises Stress Summary

Maximum Allowable von
LC Utility
LC Type Significant von- Mises Stress*
No. Ratio
Mises Stress [MPa] [MPa]
Transportation Case with wind
1A 110 114 0.96
loads in transverse direction
Transportation Case with wind
1B 100 114 0.88
loads in longitudinal direction
3 Lifting Condition 138 148 0.93
4 ULS 112 114 0.98
Note: * Refer Chapter- 4.4.1 for allowable stress criteria


Table 3-2, Maximum Deformation Summary

Maximum
Maximum
Relative Allowable Allowable
LC Relative
LC Type Deformation Deformation* Deformation*
No. Deformation
Beams Beams [mm] Plates [mm]
Plates [mm]
[mm]
Operation with environmental
2A 2.8 9.2 8.5 9.3
loads in transverse direction
Operation with environmental
2B 2.8 9.2 6.8 9.3
loads in longitudinal direction
Note: * Refer Chapter- 4.4.2 for allowable deformation criteria
For Blast & ALS 10000-years return period environmental condition, the maximum von-
Mises stress is compared against the yield strength of the material as per ref. /B2/, 229A-
HHI-R-SP-0001- General Technical Specification for Equipment Packages- Rev. C04,
Section 5. It is observed that the maximum significant von-Mises stress in the DIFFS skid
structure is within the yield strength of the material. Hence, it can be concluded that for ALS
condition, the structure will remain at its original location without any substantial damage to
it & its internal equipments.
Table 3-3, Check for Accidental Loading Conditions

Result Result
LC No. LC Type
Passed Failed
Blast condition with loads in transverse direction (door
5A X
side)
Blast condition with loads in transverse direction (back
5B X
side)
5C Blast condition with loads in longitudinal direction X
ALS (10000-years return period environmental
6 X
condition)
In order to calculate bolt sizes for foundation locations of DIFFS Skid, separate analysis is
carried out by holding the foundation bolt holes in all DOF to obtain the reactions at bolt
hole locations for ALS & ULS condition. Stringent foundation bolt hole reactions of load
case (ALS condition) are taken into consideration. Total Eight M24 x 3 (ISO 8.8) bolts for
four foundation pads are selected as per ref./A3/, EN1993-1-8 - Design of Joints. The
foundation bolt design calculations for ALS & ULS condition are presented in APPENDIX A.
Bolt calculation for connection between U-Profile (Supporting roof plate) to longitudinal U-
profile is also carried out for ALS condition and presented in APPENDIX A.
For lifting of DIFFS Skid Lifting RUD VLBG 7t M36 is selected/proposed as per
manufacturers selection methodology (i.e. the total lifting weight and sling angle). Lifting
RUD details for DIFFS Skid are presented in APPENDIX B.


Deck Integrated Fire Fighting System Buffer Skid is equipped with 8 nozzle for
Firewater/Afff Outlet so in order to verify for the nozzle loads, nozzle support is checked
and found safe for its respective loads which are calculated as per ref. /B2/, 229A-HHI-R-
SP-0001- General Technical Specification for Equipment Packages- Rev. C04. Section
10.1.2. Nozzle Load case is presented in APPENDIX C.
The fatigue calculation has been carried out for the intended design operation life of 20
years as per ref. /A12/, DNVGL-RP-C203- Fatigue Design of Offshore Steel Structures.
Fatigue accelerations 0.49 m/s^2 horizontal (both directions) and 0.89 m/s^2 vertical are
considered for inertia loads due to the vessel motion. fatigue check is carried out for the
foundation of the tank and the structure is found safe for fatigue evaluation. Detailed
calculations are presented in APPENDIX D.
Buckling check is carried out for corrugated plates & roof plate of the DIFFS skid for ULS,
ALS & ULS loading conditions respectively as per ref. /A11/, EN 1993-1-5- Plated structural
elements. Corrugated plates & roof plate of the DIFFS Skid is found safe for buckling
condition. Detailed Calculations are presented in APPENDIX E.
Beam buckling is checked to have the sufficient capacity for the bottom beams during lifting
condition as bottom beams will experience compressive forces when the structure will be
lifted. In order to evaluate bottom beams for buckling separate hand calculation is carried
out by incorporating the maximum axial compressive forces on bottom beams obtained
from lifting condition and structure of DIFFS is found to be safe for beam buckling. Buckling
check calculations are done as per ref. /A9/, EN 1993-1-1- General rules and rules for
buildings and presented in /APPENDIX E/.
In order to evaluate welds (considered as fillet weld) in DIFFS Skid, stringent joint reactions
obtained from ULS & ALS condition are taken into consideration and separate hand
calculation is carried out. Based on the calculation it is concluded that the fillet welds of
DIFFS Skid are safe. Weld between lifting pad and U-Profile is also checked for welding
strength and found safe. Weld check calculations are presented in refer APPENDIX F.
Table 3-4, Utilization Summary for checks

Does not match the
Utility
LC Type Location finite element
Ratio
Web weld of U-Profile 0.17 results
Weld Check
Flange weld of U-Profile 0.08
Bolt Check Foundation Pad 0.71
Based on the results, it can be concluded that the Deck Integrated Fire Fighting System
Buffer Skid is safe for the analysed loading conditions and fit for its intended purposes.


4 DESIGN BRIEF
4.1 Material Properties
The material of construction for the DIFFS Skid is considered as follows-
Table 4-1, Material Properties
Yield Strength [MPa]

Modulus of Elasticity
Material Property
Ultimate Tensile
Poisson's Ratio
Strength [MPa]
Component /
Reference
Assembly
Material
DIFFS Skid SS316L [GPa]

193 0.3 170 485 ref. /A1/, ASTM A240
ISO Grade 8.8 ref./A2/, EN ISO 898-
Foundation Bolts 200 0.3 640 800
Galvanized 1:1999
Table 4-2, Material Properties Table from Ansys Workbench


4.2 FE Load Cases

The load case description for DIFFS Skid is tabulated below.
Table 4-3, Load Case Description

LC Type LC No. LC Description
Transportation with wind loads in transverse direction and
1A
max heave + roll + pitch transportation accelerations
Transportation
Transportation with wind loads in longitudinal direction and
1B
max heave + roll + pitch transportation accelerations
Operation with environmental loads in transverse direction &
2A
SLS-1 year return period platform accelerations
Operation
Operation with environmental loads in longitudinal direction &
2B
SLS-1 year return period platform accelerations
Lifting 3 Lifting with 3.04g vertical acceleration
Ultimate Loading Condition with environmental loads in
ULS 4 transverse direction & ULS 100-years return period platform
accelerations
Blast in transverse direction (Door side) & SLS-1 year return
5A
period platform accelerations
Blast in transverse direction (Back side) & SLS-1 year return
Blast 5B
period platform accelerations
Blast in longitudinal direction & SLS-1 year return period
5C
platform accelerations
Accidental Loading Condition with environmental loads in
ALS 6 transverse direction & 10000-years return period
environmental condition platform accelerations
APPEN Fatigue, acceleration loads, as specified in the living quarter
FLS
DIX D. fatigue report. (229A-HHI-N-RA-0453)
For ULS and ALS conditions, DIFFS skid is checked by applying environmental loads from
both transverse & longitudinal directions. Results from loads acting in transverse direction
only on the door side (i.e. in +Y direction) are presented in report as they are more severe
than the all other sides which is a conservative approach.


4.3 Load Factors

4.3.1 Partial Load Factors
Load factors for SLS, Transportation and ULS loading conditions are considered according
to ref./A4/, Norsok N-001, Section - 6.2 as follows-
Table 4-4, Load Factor Description
In the FE analysis, ULSa & ULSb cases are combined and common load factor of 1.3 is
used for all load actions which is a conservative approach.


4.3.2 Partial Load Factor for Lifting

3.04 design factor is considered for the single hook four point lifting with 1 spreader bar for
DIFFS Skid according to ref. /A8/, Norsok R-002, Section- F.7.2.3
Material Resistance Factor is considered as 1.15 as per ref./A4/, Norsok N-001.


4.4 Acceptance Criteria

4.4.1 Allowable Stress Criteria
Stress check for Transportation & ULS 100-years return period platform accelerations
condition is evaluated according to ref./B2/, 229A-HHI-R-SP-0001- General Technical
Specification for Equipment Packages- Rev. C04, Section 5 where it states that allowable
stress for ULS condition is equal to yield stress/1.15. Load factor of 1.3 is also considered
for ULS & Transportation case as per ref./A4/, Norsok N-001.
As static linear analysis is performed, therefore instead of increasing load by multiplying the
load factor with applied load, the allowable stress is decreased by dividing the load factor
from yield strength of the material. Thus allowable stress value for Transporataion & ULS
condition is calculated to be 67% (i.e. 1/(1.3x1.15)) of yield strength of the material.
Stress check for Lifting case is performed according to ref./A8/, Norsok R-002, Section
F.7.2.3. The material resistance factor of 1.15 is considered which will give the allowable
stress as 87% (i.e. 1/1.15) of yield strength of the material.
Allowable stress for Blast case & ALS (10000-years return period environmental condition)
is evaluated as 170 MPa (170/1.0) according to ref./B2/, 229A-HHI-R-SP-0001- General
Technical Specification for Equipment Packages- Rev. C04, Section 5 where it states that
allowable stress for ALS condition allowable stress is equal to yield stress/1.0.
The weld strength check is evaluated for stringent joint reactions obtained from ULS & ALS
and lifting condition. Partial resistance factor of 1.3 is considered for welded joints for ULS
condition as per ref./A6/, Norsok N-004: Design of Steel Structures.
The acceptance criteria summary is tabulated below.
Table 4-5, Allowable Stress Criteria

LC No. Load Case Type Allowable Stress [MPa] Reference
1A, 1B Transportation ref./B2/, 229A-HHI-R-
170 / 1.49 = 114
4 ULS SP-0001
3 Lifting 170 / 1.15 = 148 ref./A8/, Norsok R-002
5A, 5B, 5C Blast ref./B2/, 229A-HHI-R-
170 / 1.0 = 170
6 ALS SP-0001


4.4.2 Allowable Deformation Criteria

Deformation checks for beams and plates are evaluated for SLS condition. The allowable
vertical deflection for beams are considered to be L/250 (where L is the unsupported span)
as per ref./A4/, Norsok N-001: Integrity of Offshore Structures, Section 7.2.4. The allowable
deflection for plates are considered to be W/150 (where W is the shortest unsupported
span of the plate) as per ref. /A7/, Norsok R-001, Chapter- 5.12
Table 4-6, Allowable Deformation Criteria

Allowable Allowable
LC
LC Type Location Deformation Location Deformation
No.
Beams [mm] Plates [mm]
Operation with U-Profile
Doors
2A environmental loads in supporting 4000 9.2 9.3
Transverse side
transverse direction litre vessel
Operation with U-Profile Doors
2B environmental loads in supporting 4000 9.2 longitudinal side 9.3
longitudinal direction litre vessel (+X direction)


5 ANALYSIS
Deck Integrated Fire Fighting System Buffer Skid is analysed by using FE tool ANSYS
Workbench v15 and associated hand calculations are performed in MathCAD.
5.1 FE Geometry
The geometry of DIFFS Skid is considered for analysis according to ref. /B4/, 229A-APS-
ER203-P-XD-0001-01- Rev01- GA Drawing. DIFFS skid structure geometry is modified as
per analysis requirement. The minor components and geometrical features which doesnt
affect the overall structural integrity of the system has been neglected for simplification.
Figure 5-1: FE Geometry, plot- 1
Door connections are considered for the locked position of the doors. Doors are in bonded
contact from the hinged sides. Central part of door is bonded with the frame (upon which
the doors will rest in locked position). Roof Plate is considered to be bolted with the U-
profiles and in rest position over the transverse U-profiles & longitudinal L-profiles.


Figure 5-2: FE Geometry, plot-2


5.2 FE Mesh
The geometry of DIFFS skid is meshed with 4 node shell element. Generated mesh quality
is sufficient & accurate to represent the structure and stress details obtained are
acceptable. The generated mesh is shown in below figure. Mesh details for the DIFFS skid
are tabulated below.
Table 5-1, Mesh Details

No. of Nodes No. of Elements
708743 470083
Figure 5-3: FE Mesh


5.3 FE Loads
5.3.1 Functional Loads
5.3.1.1 Structural Weight
Dry and Operational weight of DIFFS skid are taken according to ref. /B4/, 229A-APS-
ER203-P-XD-0001-01- Rev01- GA Drawing and tabulated below as 6000 kg & 11000 kg.
For operational weight, it is considered that vessel content have density of 1000kg/m.
Table 5-2, Weight Summary
Dry weight as per Dry weight considered in

Component
GA drawing [kg] FEA# [kg]
DIFFS Skid 6000 6600
Note: # Weight contingency factor of 1.1 is used in analysis in order to account for the
material variation and additional weight contribution due to welds & other accessories.
5.3.1.2 Variable Loads
5.3.1.2.1 Liquid Induced Loads due to Tank Content
Tank content density is taken as 1000kg/m so as to accomplish the effect of liquid induced
loads.
5.3.2 Environmental Loads
5.3.2.1 Snow and Ice Loads
The snow load of 2.19kN/m 2 is considered and ice load caused by rain and snow by
thickness of 10mm and density of 900kg/m is considered as per ref./B1/, 229A-APS-R-SP-
0006- Technical Specifications- DIFFS Buffer Skid- Rev. C02, Section 4.7. Ice loads on
exposed horizontal surfaces are tabulated below
Table 5-3, Ice Load Calculation


5.3.2.2 Transportation Accelerations

Out of road, rail and sea transportation acceleration values specified in ref. /B1/, 229A-
APS-R-SP-0006- Technical Specifications- DIFFS Buffer Skid- Rev. C02, Section 7.2.2.2,
the stringent set of accelerations is considered for the analysis purpose which is a
conservative approach.
Table 5-4, Transportation Accelerations
Acceleration Values
Direction Considered in FE Analysis*
g m/s2
Maximum Heave in vertical direction 1.8 17.6
Roll in transverse direction 0.8 7.85
Pitch in longitudinal direction 0.4 3.92
Note: * Max Heave + Roll + Pitch accelerations are combined together in the FE analysis
which is the most stringent load case scenario and therefore the other accelerations
combinations are safely omitted.
5.3.2.3 Platform Motions & Accelerations

Platform motions & accelarations are considered as per ref. /B2/, 229A-HHI-R-SP-0001-
General Technical Specification for Equipment Packages- Rev. C04, Section 5.1, Platform
Motions & Accelerations.
Table 5-5, Platform Motions & Accelerations
Acceleration Values
Parameter Considered in FE Analysis (m/s2)
SLS ULS ALS FLS
Max. Horizontal Acceleration 1.4 2.75 3.5 0.49
Max. Vertical Acceleration* 1.2 2.15 2.65 0.89#
* The above vertical acceleration values are combined with static gravity force of 1.0 g
acting downwards.
#
For FLS static gravity is not be included.


5.3.2.4 Wind Loads

Reference wind velocity of 35.5 m/s is considered as per ref. /B1/, 229A-APS-R-SP-0006-
Technical Specifications- DIFFS Buffer Skid- Rev. C02, Table 4 for 100 year return period
and 1 hour mean speed at 10 m height of mean sea level. The wind load is calculated as
follows-


5.3.2.5 Live Loads

Distrubution Action of 5 kN/m^2 and 5 kN point force is considered at area between
equipment as per ref. /A5/, Norsok N-003: Actions & Action Effects, Table 1.


5.3.3 Accidental Loads
5.3.3.1 Blast Loads

DIFFS Skid is evaluated for overpressure load of 0.05 bar [0.005MPa] as per ref. /B3/,
229A-HHI-S-RA-0032- Design Accidental Load Specification- Rev. C05. The blast load
calculations are given below-
5.4 FE Assumptions
Minor components and geometrical features which doesnt affect the overall structural
integrity of the system have been neglected in FE calculations.
Material density of the FEA model is adjusted in order to achieve desired self-weight of
the DIFFS Skid structure.


5.5 Load Combinations

All the applicable loads in respective loading condition are tabulated below as load
combination description and application of loads are presented in following chapter.
Table 5-6, Load Combination Description
Load Combinations Applicable Loads
Liquid Induced
Structural self-
Transportation
Snow and Ice

Accelerations
Accelerations
Accelerations
Accelerations
Accelerations
Acceleration
Blast Loads
Wind Load
LC No. LC Type weight
Loads
Lifting
Load
ULS
SLS
ALS
FLS
1A, 1B Transportation X X X
2A, 2B Operation X X X X X
3 Lifting X X
4 ULS X X X X X
5A, 5B, 5C Blast X X X X
6 ALS X X X X X
APPENDIX D FLS X X


5.6 Boundary Conditions

5.6.1 Boundary Conditions for LC-3,
The structure is proposed to be lifted with 1 floating spreader bar. Lifting sling hook points
which will be connected to spreader bar padeyes are fixed in all DOFs by means of defining
it as rigid end of the slings and the mobile sling ends are connected to the RUD bolt holes.
Figure 5-4: LC-3: Boundary Conditions for Lifting


5.6.2 Boundary Conditions for LC-1,2,4 to 6

Bottom surface of foundation pads of DIFFS Skid are constrained in all degrees of freedom.
Figure 5-5: LC-1,2,4 to 6: Boundary Conditions


5.7 Applied Loads & FE Results

5.7.1 LC No.-1A, Transportation with wind in transverse direction
5.7.1.1 Applied Loads
The transportation of DIFFS Skid is evaluated with transit acceleration combinations as per
ref. 5.3.2.2 and wind in transverse direction as per ref. 5.3.2.4. The equipment weights are
considered as a point mass at the CoG of the equipment and applied on respective
supports. Wind load is applied on exposed area to wind in transverse direction. Following
figures shows the applied loads for the transportation condition.
Figure 5-6: LC-1A: Applied Loads, plot-1




5.7.1.2 FE Results
The equivalent von-Mises stress distribution is shown in the below figure. Significant von-
Mises stress of 110 MPa is observed on doors of the skid which is below the allowable limit
of 114 MPa.
Figure 5-8: LC-1A: von-Mises stress, limited to 110 MPa, plot-1


Figure 5-9: LC-1A: von-Mises stress, limited to 110 MPa, plot-2


Foundation Reactions
Table 5-7, LC-1A: Foundation Pads Reactions
Force Reactions [N]

Foundation
Pad Shear Reaction Shear Reaction Axial Reaction Force
Force in X direction Force in Y direction in Z direction*
A 12238 7815 9944

B -13901 3423 15779
C 6100 -31339 36869
D 21164 -53770 52606
Note:
* Foundation bolts will experience tensile load when the vertical reaction force is occurring
in -Z direction


5.7.2 LC No.-1B, Transportation with wind in longitudinal direction
The transportation of DIFFS Skid is evaluated with transit acceleration combinations as per
ref. 5.3.2.2 and wind in longitudinal direction as per ref. 5.3.2.4. The equipment weights are
considered as a point mass at the CoG of the equipment and applied on respective
supports. Wind load is applied on exposed area to wind in longitudinal direction. Following
figures shows the applied loads for the transportation condition.
Figure 5-10: LC-1B: Applied Loads, plot-1


Figure 5-11: LC-1B: Applied Loads, plot-2


5.7.2.2 FE Results
The equivalent von-Mises stress distribution is shown in the below figure. Significant von-
Mises stress of 100 MPa is observed on doors of the skid installed in longitudinal (X
direction) side which is well below the allowable limit of 114 MPa.
Figure 5-12: LC-1B: von-Mises stress, limited to 100 MPa, plot-1


Figure 5-13: LC-1B: von-Mises stress, limited to 100 MPa, plot-2


Table 5-8, LC-1B: Foundation Pads Reactions
Force Reactions [N]

Foundation
Pad Shear Reaction Shear Reaction Axial Reaction Force
Force in X direction Force in Y direction in Z direction*
A 11254 13693 18831
B -4666 7521 17717
C 6773 -26628 31748
D 22095 -45786 46902
Note:
in -Z direction


5.7.3 LC- 2A, Operation case with environmental loads in transverse

direction
Along with SLS platform acceleration, ice and wind loads are applied on structure
transverse side (Door side) whereas snow load is applied on the roof beams in Z
direction. Liquid induced loads are also applied. Refer- Chapter 5.3 for the applied
acceleration and load values. Below pictures depicts the applied loads for operation case
with transverse environmental loads.




Below figure shows the Liquid induced load i.e. hydrostatic pressure including the inertia
effect due to platform accelerations.



equipment as per ref. /A5/, Norsok N-003: Actions & Action Effects, Table 1. There will be
grating at the equipment free area of the floor so grating of the structure is modeled in
ansys and the load is applied at the grating.


5.7.3.2 FE Result
Maximum relative deformation between two supports (plates) is observed at the door of
DIFFS skid of value 8.5 mm. Below picture shows maximum deformation in the skid during
operation with environmental loads in transverse direction.
Figure 5-18: LC-2A, Total Deformation [mm], plot-1


Vertical deformation at different beams for Operation case with environmental loads in
transverse direction is shown in the following figure. Maximum vertical deformation is
observed at the U-Profile beams supporting vessel of value 2.8 mm which is below the
allowable limits.
Figure 5-19: LC-2A, Vertical Deformation [mm], plot-2


Reactions [N]
Foundation
Pad Reaction in X direction Reaction in Y direction Reaction in Z direction*
A 15681 35486 36089

B -24231 26167 40463
C -198 -30281 41914
D 25548 -60635 59906
Note:
in -Z direction.


5.7.4 LC- 2B, Operation case with environmental loads in longitudinal

direction
Along with SLS platform acceleration, ice and wind loads are applied on structure
longitudinal side (-X direction) whereas snow load is applied on the roof beams in Z
acceleration and load values. Below picture depicts the applied environmental loads. Live
load of 5 kN/m^2 and 5 kN point force is considered at area between equipment.
Figure 5-20: LC-2B: Applied Loads


5.7.4.2 FE Result
Maximum relative deformation between two supports (plates) is observed at the door of
DIFFS skid of value 6.8 mm. Below picture shows maximum deformation in the skid during
operation with environmental loads in longitudinal direction.
Figure 5-21: LC-2B, Total Deformation [mm], plot-1


Vertical deformation at different beams for Operation case with environmental loads in
longitudinal direction is shown in the following figure. Maximum vertical deformation is
observed at the U-Profile beams suppoting vessel of value 2.8 mm which is below the
allowable limits.
Figure 5-22: LC-2B, Vertical Deformation [mm], plot-2


Reactions [N]
Foundation
A 15412 41316 45169

B -15146 29637 42596
C 388 -24755 36424
D 26515 -51844 54184
Note:
in -Z direction.


5.7.5 LC- 3 Lifting
In lifting case, vertical acceleration of 3.04g is applied. Refer Chapter- 4.3.2 for lifting
acceleration value calculation. The structure is proposed to be lifted from skid top with 1
floating spreader bar. Lifting sling hook points which will be connected to spreader bar
padeyes are fixed in all DOFs by means of defining it as rigid end of the slings and the
mobile sling ends are connected to the plates (where the RUD will be bolted for lifting) with
sling eccentricity. The equipment weights are considered as a point mass at the CoG of the
equipment and applied on respective supports. Below figure shows the applied loads for
the lifting condition of DIFFS skid.
Figure 5-23: LC-3: Applied Loads


5.7.5.2 FE Results
The equivalent von-Mises stress distribution is shown in the below figure. The maximum
significant von-Mises stress of 138 MPa is observed at lifting pads (where the RUD will be
bolted for lifting) & corrugated plate above lifting pads which is below the allowable limit of
148 MPa. Significant stress is observed to be maximum at door frame and also it is limited
to very small area (2 elements of 20x20 mm size which is acceptable).
Figure 5-24: LC-3: von-Mises stress, limited to 138 MPa, plot-1


Figure 5-25: LC-3: von-Mises stress, limited to 138 MPa, plot-2


Lifting Pad Reactions
Table 5-11, LC-3: Lifting Point Reactions

Lifting Reactions in Z direction
Point [N]
1 93039
2 103572


5.7.6 LC- 4, ULS (Ultimate Loading Condition)
Along with ULS platform acceleration, ice and wind loads are applied on structure
transverse side (Door side) whereas snow load is applied on the roof beams in Z
acceleration and load values. Below pictures depicts the applied loads for ULS condition
with transverse environmental loads.
Figure 5-26: LC-4: Applied Loads, plot-1







grating at the equipment free area of the floor so grating of the structure is modelled in


5.7.6.2 FE Result
Peak stress is observed at U-Profile supporting 4000 litre vessel and Its limited to very
small zone or remains at the surface, its due to the stress singularity and hence it has not
been considered during result evaluation. Significant von-Mises stress of 112 MPa is
observed at the U-Profile supporting 4000 litre vessel installed at the bottom of the DIFFS
skid structure which is limited to a very small region (significant stress limited to only four
elements of size 15x15 mm which is evaluated and acceptable).
Figure 5-30: LC-4, von-Mises Stress, limited to 112 MPa, plot-1


Figure 5-31: LC-4, von-Mises Stress, limited to 112 MPa, plot-2


Table 5-12, LC-4: Foundation Pads Reactions

Reactions [N]
Foundation
A 22919 39740 40506

B -25890 27134 40895
C 3324 -33336 44719
D# 33119 -67767 65896
Note:
in -Z direction.
#
Reactions considered for Bolt Calculations for ULS condition. Ref. APPENDIX A


5.7.7 LC-5A, Blast in Transverse direction (Door side)
Along with blast load applied in terms of pressure on the tank in +Y direction, liquid induced
loads & SLS platform accelerations are also applied. Refer 5.3 for applied load values.
Figure 5-32: LC-5A: Applied Loads


5.7.7.2 FE Result
Figure 5-33: LC-5A, von-Mises Stress, limited to yield strength of the material (i.e. 170 MPa),
plot-1


Figure 5-34: LC-5A, von-Mises Stress, limited to yield strength of the material (i.e. 170 MPa),
plot-2


Figure 5-35: LC-5A: Total Deformation


Reactions [N]
Foundation
A 23972 14651 3864

B -38743 9240 14299
C 4629 -36311 44756
D 26408 -71281 66869
Note:
in -Z direction.


5.7.8 LC-5B, Blast in Transverse direction (Back side)
Along with blast load applied in terms of pressure on the tank in -Y direction, liquid induced
loads & SLS platform accelerations are also applied. Refer 5.3 for applied load values.
Figure 5-36: LC-5B: Applied Loads


5.7.8.2 FE Result
Figure 5-37: LC-5B, von-Mises Stress, limited to yield strength of the material (i.e. 170 MPa),
plot-1


Figure 5-38: LC-5B, von-Mises Stress, limited to yield strength of the material (i.e. 170 MPa),
plot-2


Figure 5-39: LC-5B: Total Deformation


Reactions [N]
Foundation
A 7406 54764 50869

B -3579 55059 45118
C -10210 -9455 13697
D 23188 -15413 20089
Note:
in -Z direction.


5.7.9 LC-5C, Blast in Longitudinal direction
Along with blast load applied in terms of pressure on the tank in longitudinal (-X) direction,
liquid induced loads & SLS platform accelerations are also applied. Refer 5.3 for applied
load values.
Figure 5-40: LC-5C: Applied Loads


5.7.9.2 FE Result
Figure 5-41: LC-5C, von-Mises Stress, limited to yield strength of the material (i.e. 170 MPa),
plot-1


Figure 5-42: LC-5C, von-Mises Stress, limited to yield strength of the material (i.e. 170 MPa),
plot-2


Figure 5-43: LC-5C: Total Deformation


Table 5-15, LC-5C: Foundation Pads Reactions
Reactions [N]
Foundation
A 16314 26740 28413

B -3669 20669 19796
C 5692 -18969 24100
D 22786 -36333 39294
Note:
in -Z direction.


5.7.10 LC- 6, ALS (Accidental Loading Condition)
Along with ALS platform acceleration, ice and wind loads are applied on structure in
transverse direction (door side) whereas snow load is applied on the roof beams in Z
acceleration and load values.






Distrubution action of 5 kN/m^2 and 5 kN point force is considered at area between

grating at the equipment free area of the floor so grating of the structure is modelled in


5.7.10.2 FE Result
Figure 5-48: LC-6, von-Mises Stress, limited to yield strength of the material (i.e. 170 MPa),
plot-1


Figure 5-49: LC-6, von-Mises Stress, limited to yield strength of the material (i.e. 170 MPa),
plot-2


Table 5-16,LC-6: Foundation Pads Reactions
Reactions [N]
Foundation
A 24958 42325 42487

B -23829 26232 41107
C 5073 -34295 45948
D# 36586 -71212 69291
Note:
in -Z direction.
#
Reaction values are considered to calculate foundation bolts ref. APPENDIX A


APPENDIX A BOLT CALCULATIONS


Foundation Bolt calculation for ALS condition






Effective length too

long, non-circular
patterns are not
checked.




Foundation Bolt calculation for ULS condition










Bolt calculation for connection between U-Profile (Supporting roof plate) to

longitudinal U-profile


What is load
from?






APPENDIX B LIFTING RUD DETAILS


For lifting of DIFFS Skid RUD VLBG 7t M36 with special bolt is selected / proposed as per
manufacturer's selection methodology (i.e. the total lifting weight and sling angle). Lifting RUD
VLBG 7t M36 with special bolt details are given below.
Calculations according to R-002,

comparing to sling design force is
missing. Does not match drawing.
Threads of object is not assessed.


APPENDIX C NOZZLE LOADING CASE


Nozzle Loads for Nozzle Supports

Deck Integrated Fire Fighting System Buffer Skid is equipped with 8 nozzle for
Firewater/Afff outlet so in order to verify for the nozzle loads, nozzle support is checked
against ULS condition and found safe for its respective loads.
Nozzle Loads are calculated as per ref. /B2/, 229A-HHI-R-SP-0001- General Technical
Specification for Equipment Packages- Rev. C04. Section 10.1.2. Remote forces and
moments are applied on the nozzle support by pipe from the clamp locations and point of
application of these forces and moment is on centroid of the nozzle support.
Nozzle Load Calculations
In nozzle loading condition, allowable stress is the allowable stress is decreased by dividing
the load factor and material resistance factor from yield strength of the material. Thus
allowable stress value for nozzle loading condition is calculated to be 67% (i.e.
1/(1.3x1.15)) of yield strength of the material according to ref./A4/, Norsok N-001 & ref./A6/,
Norsok N-004


Applied loads and FE Results for 8 Nozzle- N01

8 nozzle, which is located on DIFFS Skid for Firewater/AFFF outlet is analyzed by applying
nozzle loads for 8 nozzle as mentioned above. For the analysis purpose, nozzle loads are
applied on pipe clamping location of 8 pipe.
Figure: Applied Loads for 8 Nozzle (N01) Loading Case


FE Results
The maximum significant stress of 110 MPa is observed at the 8 pipe support beam (L-
profile) which is also limited to a very small region and below the allowable limit.
Figure: von-Mises Stress [MPa], limited to 110 MPa, plot-1


Figure: von-Mises Stress [MPa], limited to 110 MPa, plot-2
Conclusion:
As the significant von-mises stress for the nozzle loading case are observed to be within
the allowable limit of 114 MPa, hence it can be concluded that the structure of DIFFS Skid
is safe under nozzle loading condition.


APPENDIX D FATIGUE EVALUATION


The fatigue calculation has been carried out for the intended design operation life of 20 years as per
ref. /A12/, DNVGL-RP-C203- Fatigue Design of Offshore Steel Structures. Fatigue accelerations 0.49
m/s^2 horizontal (both directions) and 0.89 m/s^2 vertical are considered for inertia loads due to the
vessel motion. Fatigue assessment is carried out for the joint having effective hot spot stress range
(connection between L-profile & vessel support plate installed at the bottom of the DIFFS Skid). The
effective hot spot stress is calculated as per as per ref. /A12/, DNVGL-RP-C203, Section 4.3.4 and
Section 4.3.6. Obtained effective hot spot stress is multiplied by 2 in order to get the stress amplitude.


Fatigue Evaluation for Fillet Welds

The fatigue calculation for fillet welded joints has been carried out for the intended design operation
life of 20 years as per ref. /A12/, DNVGL-RP-C203- Fatigue Design of Offshore Steel Structures.
Fatigue accelerations 0.49 m/s^2 horizontal (both directions) and 0.89 m/s^2 vertical are considered
for inertia loads due to the vessel motion. Fatigue assessment is carried out for the fillet welded joint
having effective hot spot stress range (connection between primary U-profile & U-profile supporting
vessel). The effective hot spot stress is calculated as per as per ref. /A12/, DNVGL-RP-C203, Section
4.3.4 and Section 4.3.6. Obtained effective hot spot stress is multiplied by 2 in order to get the stress
amplitude.
We can not see stresses are extracted


APPENDIX E BUCKLING CHECK


Buckling Check for Corrugated Plate (Transverse side) for ULS Condition as per Eurocode
1993-1-5
Buckling check for corrugated plate of transverse side is evaluated for ULS condition. Design
normal & shear stresses are obtained from Ansys and considered for buckling calculation as per
ref. /A11/, EN 1993-1-5- Plated structural elements. buckling calculations are summarized below.














Buckling Check for Corrugated Plate (Longitudinal side) for ULS Condition as per Eurocode
1993-1-5
Buckling check for corrugated plate of longitudinal side is evaluated for ULS condition. Design














Buckling Check for Corrugated Plate (Transverse side) for ALS Condition as per Eurocode
1993-1-5
Buckling check of corrugated plate of transverse side is also evaluated for ALS condition. Design














Buckling Check for Corrugated Plate (Longitudinal side) for ALS Condition as per Eurocode
1993-1-5
Buckling check of corrugated plate of longitudinal side is also evaluated for ALS condition loads.
Design normal & shear stresses are obtained from Ansys and considered for buckling calculation
as per ref. /A11/, EN 1993-1-5- Plated structural elements. buckling calculations are summarized
below.












The most critical plate buckling is not checked. Hence

buckling of the corrugated plate due to out of plate
loads leading to bending, hence compression on one
side of the corrugated plate.


Buckling Check for Roof Plate for ULS Condition as per Eurocode 1993-1-5
Buckling check of roof plate is evaluated for ULS condition. Design normal & shear stresses are
obtained from Ansys and considered for buckling calculation as per ref. /A11/, EN 1993-1-5- Plated
structural elements. Buckling calculations are summarized below.
The plate is laying loose on top

of the U-channels, hence not
properly supported.












Buckling Evaluation for Beams
Buckling check is evaluated for lifting condition which is most stringent condition for bottom beams
(beams installed at bottom will experience large compressive force) and therefore all other loading
conditions are omitted. Column which have maximum axial compressive forces with respect to their
section size and length is checked for buckling and calculations are shown below.












APPENDIX F WELD STRENGTH CHECK


Weld Strength Check
The DIFFS Skid is also checked for weld strength. Reactions are obtained at various connections
from Ansys workbench. Most stringent reactions are obtained at the connection of primary
longitudinal U-Profile & U-profile supporting vessel installed at the bottom for ALS & ULS
conditions and considered for joint strength calculation which is a conservative approach.
Weld calculations for ALS Condition


Effective length in compression

or tension is not documented








Weld calculations for ULS Condition










Weld Strength Check for Lifting Condition
The DIFFS Skid is checked for weld strength of lifting pad and longitudinal U-Profile during lifting
condition. Reactions are obtained at various connections from Ansys workbench. Most stringent
reactions are considered for weld strength calculation which is a conservative approach.




APPENDIX G GA DRAWINGS





Doc no. Rev. Page:

229A-APS-N-RA-0013 C01 63 of 63
Appendix A3 Drawings

PDF

Hochgeladen von

Dokumentinformationen

Originaltitel

Copyright

Verfügbare Formate

Dieses Dokument teilen

Dokument teilen oder einbetten

Freigabeoptionen

Stufen Sie dieses Dokument als nützlich ein?

Sind diese Inhalte unangemessen?

Copyright:

Verfügbare Formate

PDF

Hochgeladen von

Copyright:

Verfügbare Formate

STRUCTURAL ANALYSIS, DIFFS SKID

Doc no. Rev. Page:

Acceptance criteria and material factors 12

Doc no. Rev. Page:

Check of roof beams 36

Doc no. Rev. Page:

Figure 1-1 New DIFFS skid location PDMS view

Doc no. Rev. Page:

Figure 1-2 DIFFS skid 3d view

Figure 1-3 GA drawing of the DIFFS skid

Doc no. Rev. Page:

Objective / Scope of work

Assumptions and limitations

2) DIFFS skid location: LQ at el. 74,7 T.O.P., North-EAST side.

Doc no. Rev. Page:

Summary and conclusions

Doc no. Rev. Page:

Doc no. Rev. Page:

Reference documents and drawings:

Doc no. Rev. Page:

Material grad 316 / 316L

Doc no. Rev. Page:

Location of New DIFFS skid

Figure 3-1 Location of DIFFS skid

Doc no. Rev. Page:

Table 3-2 Load factor according to NORSOK N-001

Acceptance criteria and material factors

Design-conditions Material factor Acceptance criterion

3.6.1. Yield and buckling criteria

3.6.2. Displacement criteria

Doc no. Rev. Page:

Table 3-4 Deflection Limits for Serviceability Limit State (SLS)

Computer models in supplier report

Issues not sufficiently covered in supplier report

Plate buckling of corrugated plates

Doc no. Rev. Page:

Doc no. Rev. Page:

General design basis

4.2.1. Material properties and factors

Doc no. Rev. Page:

4.2.2. Main loads

Doc no. Rev. Page:

4.2.3. Corrugated wall plate effective section properties

Doc no. Rev. Page:

4.2.4. Bolt capacity calculation

Doc no. Rev. Page:

Doc no. Rev. Page:

4.3.1. Analysis of the skid frame

Figure 4-1 Lifting loading

Figure 4-2 Reactions at lifting points

Doc no. Rev. Page:

Figure 4-3 Beams utilisations due to lifting

Doc no. Rev. Page:

Table 4-1 Forces in the slings

Doc no. Rev. Page:

Doc no. Rev. Page:

4.3.2. Check of corrugated plate above lifting points

Figure 4-4 Plate stress above lifting points

Doc no. Rev. Page:

Doc no. Rev. Page:

In-place analysis - ULS

4.4.1. Check the bottom frame

Figure 4-7 Base frame structure arrangement and section properties

N=1,1kN = 2,191,20,417 snow