A Comparative Study on Damaged Behavior of Offshore Jacket Structures

Abstract

In this study, the damage behaviour of the offshore jacket structures under environmental loads has been investigated. K-type and inverted K-type jacket structures have been used in order to compare the damage behaviours. A total of four structures such as one K-type, one inverted K-type and two damaged types of each one are modelled. Damage modelling has been performed in the form of a rupture in a leg. The examined models have 60 m height, three stories, cylindrical elements and they are angled-four-legged structures fixed to the seabed. Structures are affected by environmental forces including wind and wave effects as well as operational loads. The Eurocode velocity profile and the linear wave velocity profile have been used to calculate wind and wave forces, respectively. Abaqus finite elements software is utilized in the analyses. The force-displacement transfer between the structure and the marine environment has been performed by bidirectional fluid-structure interaction (FSI) analyses. In the bidirectional interaction analysis, modelling has been generated by CEL technique that is the combination of Eulerian-Lagrangian procedures. In this technique, the marine environment and the structure are created by Eularian and Lagrangian approaches respectively. In structural analysis, modal behaviours, frequencies, displacement and stress distributions for damaged and undamaged models have been obtained. The changes in the behaviour of different types of jacket structures have been investigated in the end.

Keywords

• Coupled Eularian Lagrangian Technique
• Offshore Structures
• Damaged Behaviour
• Environmental Loads

References

1. [1] Asgarian B, Shokrgozar HR (2013). A new bracing system for improvement of seismic performance of steel jacket type offshore platforms with float-over deck. Petroleum Science, 10: 373–384.
2. [2] Gücüyen E, Yiğit ME, Erdem, RT, Gökkuş Ü (2020). Comparative analysis of tripod offshore structure. Građevinar, 72 (11): 1021-1030. [3] Gücüyen E, Erdem RT (2016). Açık deniz uzay kafes sistemin çevresel yükler altında akışkan-yapı etkileşimli analizi. Dicle Üniversitesi Mühendislik Fakültesi Mühendislik Dergisi, 7 (3), 433-444.
3. [4] Zhu B, Sun C, Jahangiri V (2021). Characterizing and mitigating ice-induced vibration of monopile offshore wind turbines. Ocean Engineering, 219: 108406.
4. [5] Dehghania A, Aslani F (2019). A review on defects in steel offshore structures and developed strengthening techniques. Structures, 20: 635–657.
5. [6] Yang Y, Wu Q, He Z, Jia Z, Zhang X (2019). Seismic collapse performance of jacket offshore platforms with time-variant zonal corrosion model. Applied Ocean Research, 84: 268-278.
6. [7] Gücüyen E, Erdem RT (2014). Corrosion effects on structural behavior of jacket type offshore structures. Građevinar, 66 (11): 981-986.
7. [8] Hao E, Liu C (2017). Evaluation and comparison of anti-impact performance to offshore wind turbine foundations: Monopile, tripod, and jacket. Ocean Engineering 130: 218–227.
8. [9] Mazaheri P, Asgarian B, Gholami H (2021). Assessment of strengthening, modification, and repair techniques for aging fixed offshore steel platforms. Applied Ocean Research, 110: 102612.

9. [10] Dong W, Moan T, Gao Z (2012). Fatigue reliability analysis of the jacket support structure for offshore wind turbine considering the effect of corrosion and inspection. Reliability Engineering and System Safety 106: 11–27.
10. [11] Ju SH, Su FC, Ke YP, Xie MH (2019). Fatigue design of offshore wind turbine jacket-type structures using a parallel scheme. Renewable Energy, 136: 69-78.
11. [12] Lin H, Luan H, Yang L, Han C, Karampour H, Chen G (2022). A safety assessment methodology for thermo-mechanical response of offshore jacket platform under fire. Process Safety and Environmental Protection, 160: 184-198.
12. [13] Martínez EL, Quiroga AG, Jardini AL, Filho RM (2009). Computational fluid dynamics simulation of the water – sugar cane bagasse suspension in pipe with internal static mixer. Computer Aided Chemical Engineering, 26:683-688.
13. [14] Gücüyen E, Erdem RT, Gökkuş Ü (2016). FSI analysis of submarine outfall. Brodogradnja/Shipbilding, 67 (2): 67-80.
14. [15] Korobenko A, Yan J, Gohari SMI, Sarkar S, Bazilevs Y (2017). FSI Simulation of two back-to-back wind turbines in atmospheric boundary layer flow. Computers and Fluids, 158: 167-175.
15. [16] Liu ZG, Liu Y, Lu J (2012). Numerical simulation of the fluid–structure interaction for an elastic cylinder subjected to tubular fluid flow. Computers & Fluids, 68: 192-202.
16. [17] Gücüyen E, Erdem RT (2019). Kompozit deniz yapısının dalga kuvvetleri altında incelenmesi. DÜMF Mühendislik Dergisi 10(3): 1125-1136. (In Turkish)
17. [18] Ji C, Cheng Y, Yang K, Oleg G (2017). Numerical and experimental investigation of hydrodynamic performance of a cylindrical dual pontoon-net floating breakwater. Coastal Engineering, 129: 1-16.
18. [19] Abaqus User’s Manual, Version 6.12 (2015). Simulia, Dassault Systèmes Simulia Corp.
19. [20] Dyrbye C, Hansen SO (2004). Wind loads on structures, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
20. [21] Benson DJ, Okazawa S (2004). Contact in a multi-material Eulerian finite element formulation, Computer Methods in Applied Mechanics and Engineering, 193: 4277-4298.
21. [22] Reddy JN (2010). Principles of continuum mechanics, Cambridge University Press, New York, USA.