Professional Documents
Culture Documents
No. 30.7
FOREWORD
DET NORSKE VERITAS (DNV) is an autonomous and independent foundation with the objectives of safeguarding life, property and the environment, at sea and onshore. DNV undertakes classification, certification, and other verification and consultancy services relating to quality of ships, offshore units and installations, and onshore industries worldwide, and carries out research in relation to these functions. Classification Notes Classification Notes are publications that give practical information on classification of ships and other objects. Examples of design solutions, calculation methods, specifications of test procedures, as well as acceptable repair methods for some components are given as interpretations of the more general rule requirements. All publications may be downloaded from the Societys Web site http://webshop.dnv.com/global/. The Society reserves the exclusive right to interpret, decide equivalence or make exemptions to this Classification Note.
This edition replaces the October 2008 edition of Classification Note 30.7. Main Changes The following topics have been included or changed: A table of stress reduction factors to be used if principal stress direction is parallel with the weld line, is included. Analysis guidance for bent hopper knuckle type is included. Guidance on post weld treatment for low cycle fatigue is included. The validity of the S-N curve is elaborated. It is states that the curves is also valid for duplex, and austenitic steels.
The electronic pdf version of this document found through http://www.dnv.com is the officially binding version Det Norske Veritas Any comments may be sent by e-mail to rules@dnv.com For subscription orders or information about subscription terms, please use distribution@dnv.com Computer Typesetting (Adobe Frame Maker) by Det Norske Veritas
If any person suffers loss or damage which is proved to have been caused by any negligent act or omission of Det Norske Veritas, then Det Norske Veritas shall pay compensation to such person for his proved direct loss or damage. However, the compensation shall not exceed an amount equal to ten times the fee charged for the service in question, provided that the maximum compensation shall never exceed USD 2 million. In this provision "Det Norske Veritas" shall mean the Foundation Det Norske Veritas as well as all its subsidiaries, directors, officers, employees, agents and any other acting on behalf of Det Norske Veritas.
CONTENTS
1. 1.1 1.2 1.3 1.4 1.5 1.6 2. 2.1 2.2 2.3 2.4 2.5 2.6 3. 3.1 3.2 3.3 3.4 3.5 3.6 4. 4.1 4.2 4.3 4.4 4.5 4.6 4.7 5. 5.1 5.2 5.3 5.4 5.5 6. 6.1 6.2 6.3 6.4 6.5 7. 7.1 7.2 7.3 7.4 8. 8.1 8.2 8.3 8.4 9. 9.1 9.2 9.3 9.4 9.5 9.6 9.7 GENERAL................................................................. 5 Introduction..................................................................5 Validity of Classification Note ...................................5 Methods for fatigue analysis........................................5 Guidance to when a detailed fatigue analysis can be omitted .........................................................................6 Definitions ...................................................................6 Symbols and abbreviations ..........................................7 ANALYSIS OF FATIGUE CAPACITY ............... 9 Introduction..................................................................9 Fatigue damage accumulation .....................................9 Fatigue analysis methodology and calculation of stresses ......................................................................10 S-N curves .................................................................11 Effect of corrosive environment ................................13 Fatigue damage from multiple loading conditions ....13 FATIGUE ANALYSIS OF SHIPS........................ 14 General.......................................................................14 Oil tankers..................................................................14 Gas carriers ................................................................14 Bulk carriers...............................................................15 Container Ships .........................................................16 Roll on / Roll off- and Car carriers............................17 SIMPLIFIED FATIGUE CALCULATIONS ...... 17 General.......................................................................17 Calculation procedure................................................17 Long term distribution of stresses .............................17 Definition of stress components ................................18 Calculation of stress components ..............................18 Combination of stresses.............................................18 Cumulative damage ...................................................19 SIMPLIFIED STRESS ANALYSIS ..................... 20 General.......................................................................20 Hull girder bending....................................................20 Bending of girder systems .........................................20 Local stiffener bending ..............................................20 Local plate bending....................................................22 SIMPLIFIED WAVE LOAD CALCULATIONS .................................................. 22 General.......................................................................22 Wave induced hull girder bending moments .............23 External pressure loads ..............................................23 Internal pressure loads due to ship motions...............24 Ship accelerations and motions .................................25 SPECTRAL FATIGUE CALCULATIONS......... 26 General.......................................................................26 Cumulative damage ...................................................26 Component stochastic analysis ..................................27 Full stochastic analysis ..............................................28 WAVE LOADING BY DIRECT CALCULATIONS .................................................. 29 General ......................................................................29 Hydrodynamic modelling ..........................................29 Transfer functions......................................................29 The long-term distribution ........................................29 FINITE ELEMENT ANALYSIS .......................... 31 Finite element models................................................31 Load cases..................................................................32 Global hull analysis ...................................................33 Cargo hold analysis....................................................33 Frame and girder models ...........................................35 Local structure models...............................................35 Stress concentration models ......................................36 10. 10.1 10.2 10.3 10.4 10.5 10.6 10.7 10.8 10.9 11. 11.1 11.2 11.3 11.4 12. CALCULATION OF HOT SPOT STRESS BY FINITE ELEMENT ANALYSIS .......................... 36 Stress field at a welded detail .................................... 36 FE modelling ............................................................. 37 Derivation of hot spot stress...................................... 37 Derivation of stress at read out points 0.5t and 1.5t .. 38 Hot spot S-N curve .................................................... 38 Derivation of effective hot spot stress from FE analysis ...................................................................... 42 Procedure for analysis of web stiffened cruciform connections ............................................................... 42 Hot spot stress concept for simple connections ........ 44 Verification of analysis methodology ....................... 44 IMPROVEMENT OF FATIGUE LIFE BY FABRICATION ............................................... 45 General ...................................................................... 45 Weld toe grinding...................................................... 45 TIG dressing .............................................................. 45 Hammer peening ....................................................... 45 REFERENCES ....................................................... 46
APPENDIX A STRESS CONCENTRATION FACTORS ..................... 47 APPENDIX B FATIGUE DESIGN TABLES .......................................... 72 APPENDIX C EXAMPLE OF APPLICATION - SIMPLIFIED CALCULATION METHOD ............................................ 75 APPENDIX D SIMPLIFIED LOADS FOR DIRECT STRENGTH ANALYSIS ......................................................................... 88 APPENDIX E SIMPLIFIED CALCULATION OF THE COMBINED LONGITUDINAL STRESS IN SHIPS WITH LARGE HATCH OPENINGS......................................................... 89 APPENDIX F WORKMANSHIP AND LINK TO ANALYSIS PROCEDURES.................................................................. 92 APPENDIX G S-N CURVE FATIGUE DAMAGE EXPRESSIONS .... 94 APPENDIX H UNCERTAINTIES IN FATIGUE LIFE PREDICTIONS ................................................................. 95 APPENDIX I LOW CYCLE FATIGUE ................................................. 97 APPENDIX J WAVE INDUCED HULL GIRDER VIBRATIONS .. 107 APPENDIX K DERIVATION OF EFFECTIVE HOT SPOT STRESS ........................................................................... 108
1. General
1.1 Introduction
1.1.1 Fatigue cracks and fatigue damages have been known to ship designers for several decades. Initially the obvious remedy was to improve detail design. With the introduction of higher tensile steels (HTS-steels) in hull structures, at first in deck and bottom to increase hull girder strength, and later on in local structures, the fatigue problem became more imminent. 1.1.2 In the DNV Rules for Classification of Ships, the material factor f1, which gives the ratio of increase in allowable stresses as a function of the material yield point was initially introduced in 1966. The factor is varying with the yield point at a lower than linear rate in order to give some (but insufficient) contribution to the general safety against fatigue fracture of higher tensile steels. However, during recent years a growing number of fatigue crack incidents in local tank structures made from HTS steels have demonstrated that a more direct control of fatigue is needed. 1.1.3 This Classification Note is intended to give a general background for the rule requirements for fatigue control of ship structures, and to provide detailed recommendations for such control. The aim of the fatigue control is to ensure that all parts of the hull structure subjected to fatigue (dynamic) loading have adequate fatigue life. Calculated fatigue lives, calibrated with the relevant fatigue damage data, may give the basis for the structural design (steel selection, scantlings and local details). Furthermore, they can form the basis for efficient inspection programs during fabrication and throughout the servicelife of the structure. 1.1.4 To ensure that the structure will fulfil its intended function, fatigue assessment, supported where appropriate by a detailed fatigue analysis, should be carried out for each individual type of structural detail subjected to extensive dynamic loading. It should be noted that every welded joint and attachment or other form of stress concentration is potentially a source of fatigue cracking and should be individually considered.
Guidance on how to take into account the effect on fatigue strength by low cycle fatigue (repeated yielding), e.g. as occurring during the cargo ballast loading cycles is presented in Appendix I Low cycle fatigue. This Classification Note may be adapted for modification to existing ship structures, subject to the limitations imposed by the original material and fabrication techniques. This Classification Note is valid for C-Mn steels, duplex and super duplex steels and austenitic steels with yield stress less than 500 MPa.
1 Fatigue limit
Stress cycling
Figure 1-1 Stress cycling where further fatigue assessment can be omitted
1.5 Definitions
1.5.1 Classified structural detail: A structural detail containing a structural discontinuity including a weld or welds, for which the nominal stress approach is applicable, and which appear in tables of many fatigue design standards such as CSR for Tanker Structures and DNV-RP-C203, also referred to as a standard structural detail. Each classified detail is defined to belong to one S-N curve. This means that the K-factor for this detail is included in the S-N curve. Constant amplitude loading: A type of loading causing a regular stress fluctuation with constant magnitudes of stress maxima and minima. Crack propagation rate: Amount of crack propagation during one stress cycle. Crack propagation threshold: Limiting value of stress intensity factor range below which the stress cycles are considered to be non-damaging. Eccentricity: Misalignment of plates at welded connections measured transverse to the plates. Effective notch stress: Notch stress calculated for a notch with a certain effective notch radius. Fatigue: Deterioration of a component caused by crack initiation and/or by the growth of cracks.
Fatigue action: Load effect causing fatigue. Fatigue damage ratio: Ratio of fatigue damage at considered number of cycles and the corresponding fatigue life at constant amplitude loading. Fatigue life: Number of stress cycles at a particular stress range magnitude required to cause fatigue failure of the component. Fatigue limit: Fatigue strength under constant amplitude loading corresponding to a high number of cycles large enough to be considered as infinite by a design code. Fatigue resistance: Structural details resistance against fatigue actions in terms of S-N curve or crack propagation properties. Fatigue strength: Magnitude of stress range leading to particular fatigue life. Fracture mechanics: A branch of mechanics dealing with the behaviour and strength of components containing cracks. Geometric stress: See hot spot stress. Hot spot: A point in structure where a fatigue crack may initiate due to the combined effect of structural stress fluctuation and the weld geometry or a similar notch. Hot spot stress: The value of structural stress on the surface at the hot spot (also known as geometric stress or structural stress). Local nominal stress: Nominal stress including macro-geometric effects, concentrated load effects and misalignments, disregarding the stress raising effects of the welded joint itself. Local notch: A notch such as the local geometry of the weld toe, including the toe radius and the angle between the base plate surface and weld reinforcement. The local notch does not alter the structural stress but generates non-linear stress peaks. Macro-geometric discontinuity: A global discontinuity, the effect of which is usually not taken into account in the collection of standard structural details, such as large opening, a curved part in a beam, a bend in flange not supported by diaphragms or stiffeners, discontinuities in pressure containing shells, eccentricity in lap joints. Macro-geometric effect: A stress raising effect due to macrogeometry in the vicinity of the welded joint, but not due to the welded joint itself. Membrane stress: Average normal stress across the thickness of a plate or shell. Miner sum: Summation of individual fatigue damage ratios caused by each stress cycle or stress range block according to Palmgren-Miner rule. Misalignment: Axial and angular misalignments caused either by detail design or by fabrication. Nominal stress: A stress in a component, resolved, using general theories such as beam theory. Nonlinear stress peak: The stress component of a notch stress which exceeds the linearly distributed structural stress at a local notch. Notch stress: Total stress at the root of a notch taking into account the stress concentration caused by the local notch. Thus the notch stress consists of the sum of structural stress and nonlinear stress peak. Notch stress concentration factor: The ratio of notch stress to structural stress. Paris law: An experimentally determined relation between crack growth rate and stress intensity factor range (Fracture mechanics). Palmgren-Miner rule: Fatigue failure is expected when the Miner sum reaches unity. Rainflow counting: A standardised procedure for stress range counting.
Shell bending stress: Bending stress in a shell or plate like part of a component, linearly distributed across the thickness as assumed in the theory of shells. S-N curve: Graphical presentation of the dependence of fatigue life (N) on fatigue strength (S). Stress cycle: A part of a stress history containing a stress maximum and a stress minimum. Stress intensity factor: Factor used in fracture mechanics to characterise the stress at the vicinity of a crack tip. Stress range: The difference between stress maximum and stress minimum in a stress cycle. Stress range block: A part of a total spectrum of stress ranges which is discreet in a certain number of blocks. Stress range exceedance: A tabular or graphical presentation of the cumulative frequency of stress range exceedance, i.e. the number of ranges exceeding a particular magnitude of stress range in stress history. Here frequency is the number of occurrences. Stress ratio: Ratio of minimum to maximum value of the stress in a cycle. Structural discontinuity: A geometric discontinuity due to the type of welded joint, usually found in tables of classified structural details. The effects of a structural discontinuity are (i) concentration of the membrane stress and (ii) formation of secondary bending stress. Structural stress: A stress in a component, resolved taking into account the effects of a structural discontinuity, and consisting of membrane and shell bending stress components. Also referred to as geometric stress or hot spot stress. Structural stress concentration factor: The ratio of hot spot (structural) stress to local nominal stress. In this classification note the shorter notation: Stress concentration factor due to geometry (Kg) is used. Variable amplitude loading: A type of loading causing irregular stress fluctuation with stress ranges (and amplitudes) of variable magnitude.
L Lpp M Mwo MH Q ()
S ( )
S ( )
Td Tact T Tz Z
Rule length of ship in m, confer DNV Rules for Ships Pt.3 Ch.1 Sec.1. Length between perpendiculars Moment Wave induced vertical moment Wave induced horizontal moment Probability level for exceedance of stress range Wave spectrum Stress response spectrum Design life Draught actual vessel mean moulded summer draught Zero crossing period Section modulus S-N fatigue parameter Local / global load combination factor Local / global load combination factor Flange width Acceleration in direction I Material factor as specified in the Rules Pt.3 Ch.1 Sec.1 Environmental reduction factor Mean stress reduction factor Factor for calculation of load effects at 10-4 probability level Acceleration of gravity (=9.81 m/s2) Weibull shape parameter Basic Weibull shape parameter Web height Stiffener length 10th logarithm Natural logarithm S-N fatigue parameter Spectral moment of order n Lateral pressure Occurrence probability of sea condition i and heading j Sailing rate = fraction of design life at sea Weibull scale parameter Stiffener spacing Plate thickness Plate thickness Flange thickness Web thickness Net plate thickness Deformation Zero crossing frequency in short-term condition i, j Wave frequency Long-term average zero up-crossing frequency Correlation coefficient Stress amplitude Secondary stress amplitude Tertiary stress amplitude produced by bending of plate elements between longitudinal and transverse frames/ stiffeners Nominal stress amplitude, e.g. stress derived from beam element or finite element analysis Fatigue usage factor Moulded displacement in tonnes in salt water (density 1.025 [t/m3] on draught T Stress range
a
a b bf ai f1 fe fm fr g h ho hw l log( ) ln( ) m mn p pij ps q s t tp tf tw tn d vij
vo
2 3 nominal
( )
g l h v
Global stress range Local stress range Nominal stress range due to horizontal bending Nominal stress range due to vertical bending Gamma function [-]
Simplified Analysis
Rule Loads Ch. 6 Long Term Load Distribution
Direct Analysis
Load Transfer Functions Sec. 8.3
Stress Components
Ch. 5
Interchangeable Results
Interchangeable Results
Sec. 7.3
ties. The specified design procedure in this document is considered to provide reliable connections also with respect to this failure mode.
a)
Fatigue crack growth from the weld toe into the base material
b)
Fatigue crack growth from the weld root through the fillet weld
c)
Fatigue crack growth from the weld root into the section under the weld
d)
Fatigue crack growth from a surface irregularity or notch into the base material
D=
where
D k ni Ni
i =1
ni 1 = Ni a
n
i =1
( i )m
the hole. The maximum principal stress range within 45 of the normal to the weld toe should be used for the analysis.
a ,m
= = = = = =
accumulated fatigue damage S-N fatigue parameters number of stress blocks number of stress cycles in stress block i number of cycles to failure at constant stress range i usage factor. Accepted usage factor is defined as = 1.0
Applying a histogram to express the stress distribution, the number of stress blocks, k, is to be large enough to ensure reasonable numerical accuracy, and should not be less than 20. Due consideration should be given to selection of integration method as the position of the integration points may have a significant influence on the calculated fatigue life dependent on integration method.
2.2.3 Expressions for fatigue damage based on long term stress distributions defined through Weibull distributions and short term Rayleigh distribution within each sea state are given in Appendix C.
2.3.3 The maximum principal stress is considered a significant parameter for analysis of fatigue crack growth. When the principal stress direction is different from that of the normal to the weld toe, it becomes conservative to use the principle stress range together with a classification of the connection for stress range normal to the weld toe as shown in Figure 2-3. As the angle between the principal stress direction and the normal to the weld, , is increased further, fatigue cracking may no longer initiate along the weld toe, but may initiate in the weld and grow normal to the principal stress direction as shown in Figure 2-4. This means that the notch at the weld toe does no longer significantly influence the fatigue capacity and a higher allowable hot spot stress applies for this stress direction. More guidance on this effect of stress direction relative to the weld toe as shown in Figures 2-3 and 2-4 when using finite element analysis and hot spot stress S-N curves is presented in Appendix K.
//
//
Fatigue crack
Section
//
//
Weld toe
stress range for fatigue analysis can therefore be reduced due to the mean stress effect also for regions affected by residual stresses from welding. The following reduction factor on the derived stress range may be applied for welded joints:
fm =
Fatigue crack
t + 0.7 c t + c
Figure 2-4 Fatigue cracking when principal stress direction more parallel with weld toe
2.4.1 The fatigue design is based on use of S-N curves which are obtained from fatigue tests. The design S-N curves which follow are based on the mean-minus-two-standard-deviation curves for relevant experimental data. The S-N curves are thus associated with a 97.6% probability of survival. 2.4.2 The S-N curves are applicable for normal and high strength steels used in construction of hull structures.
2.3.4 For fatigue analysis of regions in the base material not significantly affected by residual stress due to welding, the stress range may be reduced dependent on whether the cycling stress is tension or compression. Mean stress means the static hot spot stress including relevant stress concentration factors. The calculated stress range may be multiplied with the reduction factor fm before entering the S-N curve, see also Figure 2-5:
The S-N curves for welded joints include the effect of the local weld notch. They are also defined as hot spot S-N curves. Thus these S-N curves are compatible with calculated stress that does not include the notch stress due to the weld. This also means that if a butt weld is machined or grind flush without weld overfill a better S-N curve can be used. Reference is e. g. made to DNV-RP-C203.
2.4.3 The basic design S-N curve is given as
fm =
where
t
= tension stress
t + 0.6 c t + c
compression stress
= stress range = negative inverse slope of S-N curve = intercept of log N-axis by S-N curve
min static 2 0
log a
log a = log a 2s
where
a s = = = is constant relating to mean S-N curve standard deviation of log N; 0.20
For variable amplitude stresses can be taken as the stress range at 10-4 probability level of exceedance.
Reduction factor fm 1.0 0.6 Compression - m = /2 m = 0 m = /2 Tension
S-N Curve
Material
N 107 m log a
3.0 4.0
Figure 2-5 Stress range reduction factor that may be used with S-N curve for base material
I III
For unprotected joints in sea water the S-N curve I presented in Table 2-1 shall be reduced by a factor of 2 on fatigue life.
Table 2-2 S-N parameters base material for corrosive environment
2.3.5 Residual stresses due to welding and construction are reduced over time as the ship is subjected to external loading. If it is likely that a hot spot region is subjected to a tension force implying local yielding at the considered region, the effective
S-N Curve
IV
Material
Base material
log a
12.436
m
3.0
2.4.4 Most of the S-N data are derived by fatigue testing of small specimens in test laboratories. For simple test specimens the testing is performed until the specimens have failed. In these specimens there is no possibility for redistribution of stresses during crack growth. This means that most of the fatigue life is associated with growth of a small crack that grows faster as the crack size increases until fracture.
Table 2-3 Stress reduction factor KP Stress reduction factor KP 0.72 Figure Description Requirement
The initiation of a fatigue crack takes longer time for a notch in base material than at a weld toe or weld root. This also means that with a higher fatigue resistance of the base material as compared with welded details, the crack growth will be faster in base material when fatigue cracks are growing. For practical purpose one defines the failures in test data as being crack growth though the thickness. When this failure criterion is transferred into a crack size in a real structure where some redistribution of stress is more likely, this means that this failure criterion corresponds to a crack size that is somewhat less than the plate thickness.
2.4.5 The fatigue strength of welded joints is to some extent dependent on plate thickness and on the stress gradient over the thickness. Thus for a thickness larger than 25 mm, the S-N curve in air reads
0.80
1. No startstop position is permitted except when the repair is performed by a specialist and inspection carried out to verify the proper execution of the repair.
log N = log a
m t log m log 4 25
2. Automatic fillet or butt welds carried out from both sides but containing stopstart positions. 3. Automatic butt welds made from one side only, with a backing bar, but without start-stop positions. 3. When the detail contains start-stop positions use Kp = 0.90
where t is thickness (mm) through which the potential fatigue crack will grow. This S-N curve in general applies to all types of welds except butt-welds with the weld surface dressed flush and small local bending stress across the plate thickness. The thickness effect is less for butt welds that are dressed flush by grinding or machining. Also a less severe S-N curve can be used if the weld notch is removed by machining. Reference is made to DNV-RP-C203 if needed.
2.4.6 The S-N curves given in Table 2.1-2 are developed for principal stresses acting normal to the weld and should be used together with the maximum stress range within 45 of the normal to the weld as explained in 2.3.2.
0.90
4. Manual fillet or butt welds. 5. Manual or automatic butt welds carried out from one side only, particularly for box girders
If the governing stress direction is parallel with the weld direction a stress reduction factor KP should be used on the principal stress range before entering stress into the SN curve. The stress reduction factor will depend on the quality of the weld, Table 2-3. Alternatively the procedure of effective hot spot stress described in 2.3.3 and Appendix K may be used.
1000 I III IV Stress range (MPa)
100
5. A very good fit between the flange and web plates is essential. Prepare the 6. Repaired au- web edge such that the tomatic or manual fillet or root face is adequate for butt welds the achievement of regular root penetration with out brake-out. 6. Improvement methods that are adequately verified may restore the original category.
10 10000
100000
1000000
10000000
100000000
1000000000
Number of cycles
2.4.7 For Duplex and Super Suplex steel one may use the same S-N curve as for C-Mn steels. Also for austenitic steel one may use the same S-N curve as for C-MN steels.
Ballast tank 1) / Other category 2.0 1.0 space 3) Cargo oil tank only / Other catego1.0 0.5 (0) 2) ry space 3) Hold of dry bulk carrier 4) / Other 0.5 0.5 category space 3) 1) The term ballast tank includes also combined ballast and cargo oil tanks, but not cargo oil tanks which may carry water ballast according to Regulation 13 (3), of MARPOL 73/78, see Rules 2) The figure in bracket refers to non-horizontal surfaces. 3) Other category space denotes the hull exterior and all spaces other than water ballast and cargo oil tanks and holds of dry bulk cargo carriers. 4) Hold of dry bulk cargo carriers refers to the cargo holds of vessels with class notations Bulk Carrier and Ore Carrier 5) The figure in bracket refers to lower part of main frames in bulk carrier holds.
1) Calculate the fatigue damage for non-corrosive environment equal to the design life, Tdesign, of the vessel, DInAir:
D InAir = p i D InAir,i
i =1
where i = loading condition no. i = 1 to n pi = fraction of the lifetime operating under loading condition i 2) Calculate the fatigue damage for corrosive environment equal to the design life, Tdesign, of the vessel, DCorrosive:
3) The combined fatigue damage for the design life of the vessel is calculated as:
D = DInAir
Tdesign 5 Tdesign
+ DCorrosive
5 Tdesign
T=
Tdesign DInAir
else
(Tdesign 5)
Table 3-1 Tankers Structure Structural detail member Side-, bot- Butt joints, deck opentom- and ings and attachment to deck plating transverse webs, transand verse bulkheads, hopper longitudiknuckles and intermedinals ate longitudinal girders Transverse Bracket toes, girder girder and flange butt joints, stringer curved girder flanges, structures knuckle of inner bottom and sloped hopper side and other panel knuckles including intersection with transverse girder webs. Single lug slots for panel stiffeners, access and lightening holes Longitudi- Bracket termination's of nal girders abutting transverse of deck and members (girders, stiffbottom eners) structure
Load type Hull girder bending, stiffener lateral pressure load and support deformation
Hull girder bending, and bending / deformation of longitudinal girder and considered abutting member
Table 3-2 Fraction of time at sea in loaded and in ballast condition Vessel type Tankers Loaded condition 0.425 Ballast condition 0.425
Hull girder bending, and bending / deformation of longitudinal girder and considered abutting member Hull girder bending, cargo and sea pressure loads
Table 3-4 Fraction of time at sea in loaded and in ballast condition Vessel type Gas carriers (*) Loaded condition 0.45 Ballast condition 0.40
(*) Fraction of time values should be according to latest version of DNV Ship Rules. Current values for gas carriers refers to DNV Ship Rules, July 2008 issue.
Table 3-6 Bulk Carriers Structure member Structural detail Hatch corners Hatch corner Hatch side coaming Main frames Termination of end bracket End bracket terminations, weld of main frame web to shell for un-symmetrical main frame profiles Connection to transverse webs and bulkheads Connection to transverse webs and bulkheads
Load type Hull girder bending, hull girder torsional deformation Hull girder bending External pressure load, ballast pressure load as applicable
erations need to be considered, see 6.4.1. The appropriate density and pressure height for bulk cargoes should specially be considered to give a hold mass according to Table 3-8. If masses specified in the submitted loading conditions are greater than those in Table 3-8, the maximum masses shall be used for fatigue strength calculations.
Table 3-8 Hold mass Ore holds Alternate MHD or MFull accordcondition ing to Pt.5 Ch.2 Sec.5 Homogenous MH according to Rules condition Pt.5 Ch.2 Sec.5 Empty holds Zero MH according to Rules Pt.5 Ch.2 Sec.5
Hull girder bending, sea- and ballast pressure load Hull girder bending stress, double bottom bending stress and sea, cargo- and ballast pressure load Transverse webs Slots for panel stiff- Girder shear force, and of double bottom, ener including stiff- bending moment, suphopper and top ener connection port force from panel wing tank members, knuckle of stiffener due to seainner bottom and ,cargo- and ballast sloped hopper side pressure load including intersection with girder webs (floors). Single lug slots for panel stiffeners, access and lightening holes 1) The fatigue life of bottom and inner bottom longitudinals of bulk carriers is related to the combined effect of axial stress due to hull girder- and double bottom bending, and due to lateral pressure load from sea or cargo. Table 3-7 Ore Carriers Structure member Structural detail Upper deck plating Hatch corners and side coaming terminations Side-, bottom- and Butt joints and attachdeck longitudinals ment to transverse webs, transverse bulkheads, hatch opening corners and intermediate longitudinal girders Transverse girder Bracket toes, girder and stringer struc- flange butt joints, curved tures girder flanges, panel knuckles at intersection with transverse girder webs etc. Single lug slots for panel stiffeners, access and lightening holes Transverse girders Single lug slots for panel of wing tank1) stiffeners 1) Load type Hull girder bending Hull girder bending, stiffener lateral pressure load and support deformation Sea pressure load combined with cargo or ballast pressure load
Longitudinals of hopper tank and top wing tank Double bottom longitudinals1)
3.4.3 The draught for the loaded conditions shall be taken as the scantling draught. The draught for the ballast condition shall be taken as the ballast draught given in the loading manual, or 0.35T if the loading manual is not available (where T is scantling draught). 3.4.4 For bottom and inner bottom longitudinals the effect of relative deflections and double hull bending shall be taken into account at locations where this effect is significant. The relative deformations are to be obtained by a direct strength analysis.
Sea pressure load (in particular in ore loading condition) The transverse deck-, side- and bottom girders of the wing tanks in the ore loading condition are generally subjected to considerable dynamic shear force- and bending moment loads due to large dynamic sea pressure (in rolling) and an increased vertical racking deflection of the transverse bulkheads of the wing tank. The rolling induced sea pressure loads in the ore loading condition will normally exceed the level in the ballast (and a possible oil cargo) condition due to the combined effect of a large GM-value and a small rolling period. The fatigue life evaluation must be considered with respect to the category of the wing tank considered (cargo oil tank, ballast tank or void). For ore-oil carriers, the cargo oil loading condition should be considered as for tankers.
Hull girder bending, torsion1), stiffener lateral pressure load and support deformation Upper deck Plate and stiffener butt joints, Hull girder bendinghatch corner curvatures and and torsional warpsupport details welded on up- ing stress2). per deck for container pedestals etc. 1) Torsion induced warping stresses in the bilge region may be of significance from the forward machinery bulkhead to the forward quarter length. 2) The fatigue assessment of upper deck structures must include the combined effect of vertical and horizontal hull girder bending and the torsional warping response. For hatch corners, additional stresses introduced by the bending of transverse (and longitudinal) deck structures induced by the torsional hull girder deformation must be included in the fatigue assessment. Table 3-10 Fraction of time at sea in loaded and in ballast condition Vessel type Container vessels Loaded conditions 0.65 Ballast conditions 0.20
3.4.2 For bulk and ore cargoes only pressures due to vertical accel-
For vessels intended for normal, world wide trading, the fraction of design life in the homogeneous design load and ballast conditions, pn , may be taken from Table 3-12.
Table 3-12 Fraction of time at sea in loaded and in ballast condition Vessel type Car carriers Loaded conditions 0.65 Ballast conditions 0.20
where:
Q h q = = = probability of exceedance of the stress range Weibull shape parameter Weibull scale parameter, defined as
q=
(ln n 0 )1 h
where
o = reference stress range value at the local detail exceeded
once out of no cycles
Classification Notes - No. 30.7, June 2010 Page 18 no = total number of cycles associated with the stress range level
The Weibull shape parameter may be established from longterm wave load analysis. In lieu of more accurate calculations, the shape parameter may be taken as h = h0 h = h 0 + h a (D z ) / (D Tact ) h = h0 + ha h = h 0 + h a z Tact 0.005(Tact z ) h = h 0 0.005Tact h = h0 + ha where:
ho ha = basic shape parameter = 2.21 0.54 log (L ) 10 = additional factor depending on motion response period = 0.05 in general = 0.00 for plating where roll motion related forces are governing and vessel roll period TR > 14 sec. = vertical distance from baseline to considered longitudinal (m) For deck longitudinals For ship side above the waterline Tact <z <D For ship side at the waterline z = Tact For ship side below the waterline z < Tact For bottom longitudinals For longitudinal and transverse bulkheads
4.4.4 The total local stress amplitudes due to external or internal pressure loads are the sum of individual local stress components as follows
e ,i = 2 + 2 A + 3
with local stress components defined as
2 2A 3
= = = secondary stress amplitude resulting from bending of girder system stress amplitude due to local stiffener bending between supports tertiary stress amplitude due to bending local plate bending between supports
The above Weibull shape parameters are based on results from the study in [2]. For hopper knuckle connections, the Weibull shape parameter for ship side at the waterline may be used. In lieu of more accurate calculations h0 may, for open type vessels, be taken as 1.05 in connection with fatigue assessment of deck structure subjected to dynamic torsional stresses.
Figure 4-2 Definition of Stress Components
For ships with large hatch openings the also the stress due to torsional wave bending moments should be considered.
4.4.3 The local dynamic stress amplitudes which should be considered are defined as follows
e i
= = total local stress amplitude due to dynamic external pressure loads total local stress amplitude due to dynamic internal pressure loads or forces
4.6.2 The stress components to be combined are the hot spot stresses, i.e. stresses including stress concentration factors, K. The resulting stress concentration factor of a structural detail depends on the structural geometry and type of loading. 4.6.3 Dynamic stress variations are referred to as either stress range () or stress amplitude (). For linear responses, the following relation applies
where e i
= total local stress amplitude due to the dynamic sea pressure loads (tension = positive) = total local stress amplitude due to internal pressure loads (tension = positive) = average correlation between sea pressure loads and internal pressure loads ( from [2] ) = where:
= 2
4.6.4 The combined global and local stress range may be taken as
0 = f m
g + b l = f e max a g + l
fe = Reduction factor on derived combined stress range accounting for the long- term sailing routes of the ship considering the average wave climate the vessel will be exposed to during the lifetime. Assuming world wide operation the factor may be taken as 0.8. For shuttle tankers and vessels that frequently operates in the North Atlantic or in other harsh environments, fe = 1.0 should be used. Reduction factor on derived combined stress range accounting for the effect of mean stresses, see Sections 2.3.4 and 2.3.5. Load combination factors, accounting for the correlation between the wave induced local and global stress ranges. (The below factors are based on [2]). 0.6. 0.6. combined local stress range due to lateral pressure loads. combined global stress range.
The Origin of the coordinate system has co-ordinates (midship, centre line, base line), see Figure 4-3. x, y and z are longitudinal, transverse and vertical distance from origin to load point of considered structural member. It should be noted that the combined local stress range is based on combination stress amplitudes and the sign of stress has to be considered. I.e. for each stress component it has to be evaluated if the applied load causes tension (positive) or compressive (negative) stress at the hot spot.
fm a,b a b
= = = = = =
l g
except for ships with large hatch openings (i.e. container carriers and open hatch type bulk carriers) for which torsional stresses must be included, see Appendix E. v hg vh
= = = = stress range due to wave induced vertical hull girder bending. stress range due to wave induced horizontal hull girder bending. 2h in general (for tankers and vessels without large hatch openings). 0.10, average correlation between vertical and horizontal wave induced bending stress (from [2]).
0 Td
a
N load n =1
p q
n
m n
(1 +
m ) hn
where
Nload pn Td hn qn = = = = = =
m ) hn
4.6.6 The combined local stress range, l, due to external and internal pressure loads may be taken as
o
(1 +
total number load conditions considered fraction of design life in load condition n, pn 1, but normally not less than 0.85 design life of ship in seconds (20 years = 6.3108 secs.) Weibull stress range shape distribution parameter for load condition n, see item 3.2 Weibull stress range scale distribution parameter for load condition n long-term average response zero-crossing frequency gamma function
l = 2 e 2 + i 2 + 2 p e i
The Weibull scale parameter is defined from the stress range level, o, as qn = 0
(ln n 0 )1 / h
where n0 is the number of cycles over the time period for which the stress range level 0 is defined. In simplified fatigue calculations the zero-crossing-frequency may be taken as
5.2.2 In addition to the vertical hull girder stress induced by the waves, the waves also generally induces hull girder vibrations that give rise to additional vertical dynamic stresses in the hull girder. Guidance on the how to account for the effect of combined vertical hull girder stress and wave induced vibration stress is given in Appendix J. The guidance is intended to be applied on a voluntary basis. 5.2.3 The wave induced horizontal hull girder stress is given by
h = K g axial M H 10 3 y / I C
0 =
1 4 log 10 ( L)
where
MH y IC Kg axial = horizontal wave bending moment amplitude in m from vertical neutral axis of hull cross = distance section to member considered hull section moment of inertia about the vertical = the neutral axis concentration factor for considered detail for = stress axial loading
where L is the ship Rule length in meters. Expressions for fatigue damage applying bi-linear S-N curves are given in Appendix G.
4.7.2 In addition to the high cycle fatigue induced by waves, the fatigue strength could be effected by the repeated yielding as occurring during the cargo ballast loading cycles (low cycle fatigue). Guidance on how to account for the effect of combined high cycle and low cycle fatigue is given in Appendix I.
where
Kg bending = stress concentration factor for local stiffener bending Kn = stress concentration factor for un-symmetrical stiffeners on laterally loaded panels M = moment at stiffener support adjusted to hot spot position at the stiffener (e.g. at bracket toe)
v = 2 v
ps l 2 rp 12
Classification Notes - No. 30.7, June 2010 Page 21 = = = = pe for dynamic sea pressure pi for internal dynamic pressure stiffener spacing effective span of longitudinal/stiffener as shown in Figure 5.1 = section modulus of longitudinal/stiffener with associated effective plate flange. For definition of effective flanges, see 5.4.3 = moment of inertia of longitudinal/stiffener with associated effective plate flange. = moment factor due to relative deflection between transverse supports. For designs where all the frames obtain the same deflection relative to the transverse bulkhead, e.g. where no stringers or girders supporting the frames adjacent to the bulkhead exist, m may be taken as 4.4 at the bulkhead. At termination of stiff partial stringers or girders, m may be taken as 4.4. When the different deflections of each frame are known from a frame and girder analysis, m should be calculated due to the actual deflections at the frames by using a beam model or a stress concentration model of the longitudinal. A beam model of a longitudinal covering + cargo hold length is shown in Figure 5-3. Normally, representative m may be calculated for side and bottom, using one load condition, according to
s l Zs I m
Negative if the displacement (in local stiffener z-direction) at the adjacent frame is larger than the displacement at the considered frame or bulkhead (compression stress at hot spot).
h/2
l h x
h/2
m =
rd rp
where M is the calculated bending moment at the bulkhead due to the prescribed deflection at the frames, 1, 2 n. i is the relative support deflection of the longitudinal at the nearest frame relative to the transverse bulkhead. The frame where the deflection for each longitudinal in each load condition, , is to be taken, should be used. deformation of the nearest frame relative to the con= sidered frame or bulkhead in the direction of the local stiffener z-direction (see Figure 5-4) interpolation factors for interpolation to hot = moment spot position along the stiffener length, see Figure 5-2.
M l 2 i EI
l h/2 h h/2
x = 1 2 l
2
0xl
rp
where x
x x 6 6 + 1.0 ; l l
0xl
For stiffener bending stress due to local pressures the following sign convention applies: Positive for pressures acting on the stiffener side of the panel (tension stress at hot spot) Negative for pressures acting on the plate side of the panel (compression stress at hot spot). For stress due to relative deflections the sign convention is: Positive if the displacement (in local stiffener z-direction) at the adjacent frame is less than the displacement at the considered frame or bulkhead (tension stress at hot spot)
Effective bracket length of soft toe brackets Figure 5-1 Definition of effective span lengths
le = l 11
3 /2
z
bf bg tf
zf
tw hw N.A.
zp se
tp
5.5.1 Longitudinal local tertiary plate bending stress amplitude in the weld at the plate/transverse frame/bulkhead intersection (plate short edge) is midway between the longitudinals given by
3 = 0.343 p (s t n )2 K
Figure 5-3 Beam element model of longitudinal through 6 frame spacings
where
p = = = = = lateral pressure pe for dynamic sea pressure pi for internal dynamic pressure stiffener spacing net plate thickness
5.4.2 It is of great importance for a reliable fatigue assessment that bending stresses in longitudinals caused by relative deformation between supports are not underestimated. The appropriate value of relative deformation has to be determined in each particular case, e.g. by beam- or element analyses (Classification Note No. 31.1 and 31.3 show modelling examples). 5.4.3 Effective breadth of plate flanges of stiffeners (longitudinals) in bending (due to the shear lag effect) exposed to uniform lateral load can be taken as For bending at midspan:
l m sin ; se 6 s = s 1.0 ; l for m 9 s lm for 9 s
s tn
Similarly, the transverse stress amplitude at stiffener midlength (plate long edge) is
3T = 0.50 p (s t n )2 K
For local tertiary plate bending due to local pressures the following sign conventions applies: Positive for pressure acting on the welded side of the plate (tension at hot spot) Negative for pressure acting on the non-welded side of the plate (compression at hot spot).
where
lm = l
length of stiffener between zero moment inflection points (at midspan - uniformly loaded and clamped stiffener)
6.1.2 Fatigue damage should in general be calculated for representative loading conditions accounting for the expected operation time in each of the considered conditions using actual draughts, Tact, metacentric heights GMact and roll radius of gyration, kr,act for each condition.
p e = rp p d (kN/m 2 )
where
pd = dynamic pressure amplitude below the waterline
The dynamic pressure amplitude may be taken as the largest of the combined pressure dominated by pitch motion in head/ quartering seas, pdp, or the combined pressure dominated by roll motion in beam/quartering seas, pdr as:
y 1.2(Tact zw ) pdp = pl +135 B + 75 2 (kN/m ) pd = max y + kf zw p = 10 y + C 0 . 7 2 + B dr 16 Tact 2
where
pl L < 100 m 100 m< L < 300 m 300 m < L < 350 m 350 m< L ks = = k sCw + k f
(k s C w + k f ) 0.8 + 0.15
2.5 CB
V if L
V L
> 1.5
= 3C B +
fr
= moment distribution factor 1.0 between 0.40L and 0.65L from = A.P., for ships with low/moderate speed at A.P. and F.P. (linear interpo= 0.0 lation between these values) to transform the load from = factor 10-8 to 10-4 probability level =
0.5
1/ ho
ho
Weibull shape parame= long-term ter = 2.21 0.54 log(L) = Rule length of ship (m) Greatest moulded breath of ship = measured at the summer waterline (m) coefficient (actual load con= Block dition data may be used)
y
kf f
L B CB
V rp
6.2.2 The horizontal wave bending moment amplitude at 10-4 probability level may be taken as follows (ref. Rules Pt.3, Ch.1 /1/):
where
= 0.0 for z > Tact + zwl distance measured from actual water line (m). In the area of side shell above z = Tact + zwl it is assumed that = the external sea pressure will not contribute to fatigue damage =
zwl
6.2.3 Wave torsional loads and moments which may be required for analyses of open type vessels ( e.g. container vessels) are defined in Appendix E.
3 p dT 4 g
pdT
The accelerations av, at and al are given in 6.5. For the upper part of bulkheads the pressure range due to horizontal acceleration may be reduced by a factor rull within a distance zul below the tank top due to the effect of ullage as follows: p1 = a v hs pi = f a max p 2 = rull at y s (kN/m2 ) p3 = rull al xs
rull = h s + z ull , max 1.0 for cargo oil tanks 2z ull
where
z ull =
3 p3 4 g
zull =
3 p2 4 g
Note: The above scaling of pressures, by use of the factor fa, is only valid for fatigue assessment and may be justified as the dominating fatigue damage is caused mainly by moderate wave heights.
---e-n-d---of---N-o-t-e---
For bulk and ore cargoes, only p1 need to be considered. The appropriate density and pressure height should be specially considered.
Figure 6-2 Distribution of pressure amplitudes for tankers in the fully loaded condition.
The factor fa is estimated for ships with a roll period TR < 14 sec., and may otherwise be less for roll induced pressures and forces, see also 4.3.
---e-n-d---of---N-o-t-e---
The distance is related to the roll axis of rotation that may be taken at zr (m) above the baseline, where zr is the smaller of [ D / 4 + T / 2 ] and [ D / 2 ]. RRZ = vertical distance from axis of rotation to centre of tank/mass (m) RRY = transverse distance from axis of rotation to centre of tank/ mass (m) TR = period of roll = 2k r
GM , maximum 30 (s)
Figure 6-4 Distribution of pressure amplitudes for a bulk carrier in the ore loading condition.
In case the values of roll radius, kr, and metacentric height, GM, have not been calculated for the relevant loading conditions, the following approximate values may be used:
kr = = = = GM = = = = = = = = roll radius of gyration (m), kr in the main rules Pt.3 ch.1 sec.17 shall be used unless the calculated value of kr is available 0.39 B for ships with even distribution of mass and double hull tankers in ballast. 0.35 B for single skin tankers in ballast. 0.25 B for ships loaded with ore between longitudinal bulkheads. metacentric height (m) 0.07 B in general 0.12 B for single skin tankers, bulk carriers and fully loaded double hull tankers. 0.17 B for bulk and ore carriers in the ore loading condition. 0.33 B for double hull tankers in the ballast loading condition. 0.25 B for bulk carriers in the ballast condition 0.05 B for container ships with B<32.2m 0.08 B for container ships with B>40.0m With interpolation for B in between maximum roll angle, single amplitude (rad)
a y 2 + g 0 sin + a ry
a x 2 + g 0 sin + a px
a 2 +a 2 z rz max 2 a pz + a z 2
)2
)2
c k
= = = = = =
50c (B + 75)
(1.25 0.025TR )k
1.2 for ships without bilge keel 1.0 for ships with bilge keel 0.8 for ships with active roll damping facilities
Acceleration components:
ax = = ay az ao = = = = = = CV V = = surge acceleration (m/s2)
0.2ga 0 C B
Pitch motions:
(m/s2) ap apx = = = = apz RP = = = tangential pitch acceleration (m/s2)
acceleration due to sway and yaw heave acceleration (m/s2) 0.7g a o C B acceleration constant
0.3g a o
(2 TP )2 R P
longitudinal component of pitch acceleration (m/s2)
3C W L + C V V
L 50 max. 0.2
(2 TP )2 R PZ
vertical component of pitch acceleration (m/s2)
(2 TP )2 R PX
distance from the axis of rotation to the tank centre (m) The distance is related to the pitch axis of rotation that may be taken as 0.45L from A.P. at centreline, zr above baseline, where zr is the smaller of [D / 4 + T / 2] and [D / 2]. vertical distance from axis of rotation to centre of tank/ mass (m) longitudinal distance from axis of rotation to centre of tank/mass (m) period of pitch (s)
Roll motions:
ary arz = horizontal component of roll acceleration (m/s2) = (2 T )2 R R RZ = vertical component of roll acceleration (m/s2) = (2 TR ) R RY
2
RPZ
RPX = TP = =
RR
1.80
L g
= =
0.25 a o C B
sure range may be taken as the sum of the pressure amplitudes in the two tanks. Otherwise the range may be taken equal to the amplitude. Unless otherwise specified, it may be assumed that tanks ( in tankers ) are partly filled 10% of the vessels design life.
component stochastic analysis full stochastic analysis. Component stochastic calculations may in general be employed for stiffeners and plating and other details with a well defined principal stress direction mainly subjected to axial loading due to hull girder bending and local bending due to lateral pressures. Full stochastic calculations can be applied to any kind of structure. 7.1.2 Spectral fatigue calculations imply that the simultaneous occurrence of the different load effect is preserved through the calculations and the uncertainties are significantly reduced compared to simplified calculations. The calculation procedure includes the following assumptions for calculation of fatigue damage: wave climate is represented by scatter diagram Rayleigh distribution applies for stresses within each short term condition (sea state) cycle count is according to zero crossing period of short term stress response linear cumulative summation of damage contributions from each sea state in the wave scatter diagram. 7.1.3 The spectral method assumes linear load effects and responses. The hydrodynamic loads should be calculated using 3D potential theory as described in Section 8. Non-linear effects due to large amplitude motions and large waves can be neglected in the fatigue analysis since the stress ranges at lower load levels (intermediate wave amplitudes) contribute relatively more to the cumulative fatigue damage. In cases where linearization is required, e.g. in order to determine the roll damping or intermittent wet and dry surfaces in the splash zone, the linearization should be performed at a load level representative to stress ranges giving the largest contribution to the fatigue damage. In general a reference load or stress range at 10-4 probability of exceedance should be used.
Figure 6-6 Illustration of acceleration components and centre of mass for double hull tankers or bulk carriers with connected top wing- and hopper/bottom ballast tanks
For similar tank filling conditions on both sides of a bulkhead, e.g. for a bulkhead between two cargo tanks, the following apply; a) the effect of vertical acceleration is cancelled and may be set to zero b) the pressures due to motion are added for bulkheads normal to the direction (plane) of the motions. The combined pressure on a bulkhead between two tanks, i and ii, may be calculated by adding the pressure calculated independently for each tank:
pi pi = = p2, tank i + p2, tank ii for longitudinal bulkheads between cargo tanks and, p3, tank i + p3, tank ii for transverse bulkheads between cargo tanks,
6.5.2 As a simplification, sloshing pressures may normally be neglected in fatigue computations. However, if sloshing is to be considered, the sloshing pressures in partly filled tanks may be taken as given in the Rules [1], Pt.3 Ch.1 Sec. 4, C306. The pressure amplitude is defined at the probability level of 10-4. In case of partly filled tanks on both sides of a bulkhead, the pres-
D=
0 Td
all seastates
where
= the relative number of stress cycles in short-term condition i, j vo = long-term average response zero-crossing-frequency moij = zero spectral moment of stress response process rij
surface to the load point in x-, y- and z-direction defined by the coordinate of the free surface centre minus the coordinate of the load point. The acceleration transfer functions are to be determined in the tank centre of gravity and include the gravity component due to pitch and roll motions. 7.3.2 For each load transfer function the corresponding stress transfer function is determined as H ,k ( ) = A k H k ( ) where
Ak = = Stress/load ratio for load component k Load transfer function for load component k
Expressions for fatigue damage applying bi-linear S-N curves are given in Appendix D
H k ( )
The combined stress response is determined by a linear complex summation of stress transfer functions
H ( ) =
H ( )
, k
k =1
Hot spot stress transfer functions per load component Sec. 7.3
7.3.3 The following stress component factors may be relevant to determine the combined stress in stiffeners and plating:
A1 A2 A3 A4 A5 A6 A7 = = = = = = = = = Axial stress per unit vertical hull girder bending moment Axial stress per unit horizontal hull girder bending moment Axial stress per unit global axial force Bending stress per unit local external pressure Bending stress per unit local internal pressure (to be combined with accelerations in x-, y- and z-direction) Axial stress due to double hull bending per unit external pressure Axial stress due to double hull bending per unit internal pressure (to be combined with accelerations in x-, y- and zdirection) Bending stress due to relative deflection of stiffeners between web frames per unit external pressure Bending stress due to relative deflection of stiffeners between web frames per unit internal pressure (to be combined with accelerations in x-, y- and z-direction)
A8 A9
7.3.1 The load transfer functions to be considered normally include: vertical hull girder bending moment horizontal hull girder bending moment hull girder axial force vessel motions in six degrees of freedom external (panel) pressures.
Load transfer functions for internal cargo and ballast pressures due to accelerations in x-, y- and z-direction are derived from the vessel motions: H p _ ax ( ) = x s H ax ( ) H p _ ay ( ) = y s H ay ( ) H p _ az ( ) = z s H az ( ) where xs, ys and zs is the distance from the centre of free liquid
The stress factors Ak may be either positive or negative depending on the position in the structure, type of loading and sign convention of sectional loads used in the wave load programme. As wrong sign will change the phase of the transfer function by 180 degrees it is important to ensure that correct signs are used. Depending on the detail to be investigated the stress per load ratio is either calculated directly by finite element analyses or derived from the simplified formulas for nominal stress given in Section 5 combined with stress concentration factors as given in Section 12. 7.3.4 In the surface region the transfer function for external pressures should be corrected by the rp factor as given in 6.3 to account for intermittent wet and dry surfaces. The dynamic pressure at the mean waterline at 10-4 probability of exceedance should be used to calculate zwl. Since panel pressures refers to the midpoint of the panel an extrapolation using the values for the two panels closest to the waterline has to be carried out to determine the dynamic pressure at the waterline. Above the waterline the pressure should be stretched using the
pressure transfer function for the panel pressure at the waterline combined with the rp-factor.
7.3.5 Stress due to deformation of the main girder system, such as double hull bending and relative deflections, is a result of the pressure distribution over the frame and girder system. Consequently the corresponding stress component factors should be calculated using reference panels representative for the pressure distribution over the hull section rather than the local pressure at the stiffener considered. In general a panel at B/4 from the Centreline (CL) may be used as reference panel for bottom structures and a panel at 2/3 of the draught may be used for side structures. Relative deflections and double hull stresses may be calculated based on a cargo hold analysis applying the direct calculated long term pressure loads at 10-4 probability of exceedance, see 9.4.
Boundary displacements
7.4.3 A prerequisite for correct load transfer from the hydrodynamic program is there is sufficient compatibility between the hydrodynamic and the global model:
the total mass and mass distribution is similar the total buoyancy and buoyancy distribution is similar. Similar mass properties are ensured using the structural model as mass model in the hydrodynamic analysis. Having performed the load transfer the final load equilibrium is to be checked by comparing transfer functions and longitudinal distribution of bending moment and shear forces for different wave headings. Unbalanced forces will disturb the global response, and the final check is critical for the reliability of the results.
7.4.4 Local models are used as sub models to the global analysis and the displacements from the global analysis are automatically transferred to the local model as boundary displacements. In addition the local internal and external pressure loads and inertia loads are transferred from the wave load analysis.
From the local stress concentration models local geometric stress transfer functions at hot spots are determined using element sizes in the order of the plate thickness to pick up the geometric stress increase, see Section 10. DET NORSKE VERITAS
M v ( ) H 2
8.3.4 The horizontal bending moment transfer function, Hh(,), is to be determined similarly to the vertical bending moment transfer function with consistent phase relations. 8.3.5 The external pressures are to be determined similarly to the vertical bending moment with consistent phase relations. In the waterline region, a reduction of the pressure range applies due to intermittent wet or dry surfaces [3]. 8.3.6 The internal tank pressures may be obtained by combining the accelerations described in 6.4, substituting the given acceleration estimates with those obtained from computations with combined transfer functions for motions and accelerations relative to the ship axis system. 8.3.7 A consistent representation of phase and amplitude for the transfer functions are required in order to achieve a correct modelling of the combined local stress response.
The length of the model should at least extend over Lpp. The mass model should reflect the steel weight distribution and the distribution of cargo both in vertical, longitudinal and transverse directions.
8.2.2 In the evaluation of the ship response due to external wave induced loading, the effect of wave diffraction and radiation should be accounted for.
The scatter diagrams are equal for all wave directions and specified at class midpoint values.
8.4.2 The environmental wave spectrum for the different sea states can be defined applying the Pierson Moskowitz wave spectrum,
4 1 2 4 H2 2 4 z 5 exp T 4 T z z
S ( Hz , Tz ) =
8.4.3 The response spectrum of the ship based on the linear model is directly given by the wave spectrum, when the relation between unit wave height and response, the transfer function H ( ), is established as
S ( H z , Tz , ) = H ( ) S ( H z , Tz )
2
8.4.4 The spectral moments of order n of the response process for a given heading may described as:
m n = S ( H z , Tz , )d
rij =
v ij v0
is the ratio between the response crossing rates in a given sea state and the average crossing rate.
ij
v0 =
p
1 2
v ij m 2ij m 0ij
mn =
90
+ 90o
o
f s ( ) S ( H s , Tz , )d
n
v ij =
f () = 1
8.4.7 A Weibull distribution is found to describe the long-term load distribution well, having shape parameter h and scale parameters q. The Weibull distribution is described as:
8.4.5 The load response for ship structures can be assumed to be Rayleigh distributed within each short term condition. The stress range distribution for a given sea state i and heading direction j is then,
2 Fij ( ) = 1 exp 8m 0ij
h F ( ) = 1 exp q
The fitting of the Weibull distribution to the sum of Rayleigh distributions in 8.4.6 should preferably be based on a least square technique for a number of exceedance probability levels. With Weibull shape parameters in the range 0.8 -1.0 the main contribution to the cumulative fatigue damage comes from the smaller waves, see Figure 8-1, and the distribution should be fitted at probability levels 10-2, 10-3 and 10-4. The long term stress range should be based on reference loads at a 10-4 probability of exceedance If the highest stress range out of 108 stress cycles is used to describe the long-term stress range distributions, the calculated fatigue damage is very sensitive to the estimate of the Weibull shape parameter h.
8.4.6 In order to establish the long-term load distribution, the cumulative distribution may be estimated by a weighted sum over all sea states and heading directions. The long-term load distribution is then calculated from
all seastates all headings
F ( ) =
where: p ij
r
i =1 J =1
ij
Fij ( ) p ij
Tz(s) Hs (m) 0.5 1.5 2.5 3.5 4.5 5.5 6.5 7.5 8.5 9.5 10.5 11.5 12.5 13.5 14.5 15.5 16.5 Sum
3.5
4.5
5.5
6.5
7.5
8.5
9.5
10.5
11.5
12.5
13.5
Sum
1.3 133.7 865.6 1 186.0 634.2 186.3 0 29.3 986.0 4 976.0 7 738.0 5 569.7 0 2.2 197.5 2 158.8 6 230.0 7 449.5 0 0.2 34.9 695.5 3 226.5 5 675.0 0 0 6.0 196.1 1 354.3 3 288.5 0 0 1.0 51.0 498.4 1 602.9 0 0 0.2 12.6 167.0 690.3 0 0 0 3.0 52.1 270.1 0 0 0 0.7 15.4 97.9 0 0 0 0.2 4.3 33.2 0 0 0 0 1.2 10.7 0 0 0 0 0.3 3.3 0 0 0 0 0.1 1.0 0 0 0 0 0 0.3 0 0 0 0 0 0.1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 165 2 091 9 280 19 922 24 879
36.9 2 375.7 4 860.4 5 099.1 3 857.5 2 372.7 1 257.9 594.4 255.9 101.9 37.9 13.3 4.4 1.4 0.4 0.1 0 20 870
5.6 0.7 0.1 0 0 0 703.5 160.7 30.5 5.1 0.8 0.1 2 066.0 644.5 160.2 33.7 6.3 1.1 2 838.0 1 114.4 337.7 84.3 18.2 3.5 2 685.5 1 275.2 455.1 130.9 31.9 6.9 2 008.3 1 126.0 463.6 150.9 41.0 9.7 1 268.6 825.9 386.8 140.8 42.2 10.9 703.2 524.9 276.7 111.7 36.7 10.2 350.6 296.9 174.6 77.6 27.7 8.4 159.9 152.2 99.2 48.3 18.7 6.1 67.5 71.7 51.5 27.3 11.4 4.0 26.6 31.4 24.7 14.2 6.4 2.4 9.9 12.8 11.0 6.8 3.3 1.3 3.5 5.0 4.6 3.1 1.6 0.7 1.2 1.8 1.8 1.3 0.7 0.3 0.4 0.6 0.7 0.5 0.3 0.1 0.1 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.1 0.1 12 898 6 245 2 479 837 247 66
0 0 0.2 0.6 1.3 2.1 2.5 2.5 2.2 1.7 1.2 0.7 0.4 0.2 0.1 0.1 0 16
0 0 0 0.1 0.2 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.5 0.4 0.3 0.2 0.1 0.1 0 0 0 3
0 3 050 0 22 575 0 23 810 0 19 128 0 13 289 0.1 8 328 0.1 4 806 0.1 2 586 0.1 1 309 0.1 626 0.1 285 0.1 124 0 51 0 21 0 8 0 3 0 1 1 100 000
Tz(s) Hs (m) 1.0 2.0 3.0 4.0 5.0 6.0 7.0 8.0 9.0 10.0 11.0 12.0 13.0 14.0 Sum
3.5
4.5
5.5
6.5
7.5
8.5
9.5
10.5
11.5
12.5
13.5
14.5
15.5
16.5
17.5
Sum
311 20 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 331
2 734 764 57 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
19 42 50 53 49 39 27 17 9 5 2 1 0 0 313
6 12 14 15 15 13 10 6 4 2 1 1 0 0 99
2 3 4 4 4 4 3 2 1 1 1 0 0 0 29
1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 9
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 100 000
1) Global stiffness model. A relatively coarse mesh is to be used to represent the overall stiffness and global stress distribution of the primary members of the hull. Typical models are shown in Figure 9-2 and Figure 9-3. 2) Cargo hold model. The model is used to analyse the deformation response and nominal stresses of the primary members of the midship area. The model will normally cover +1+ cargo hold length in the midship region. Typical models are shown in Figure 9-4 and Figure 9-5.
3) Frame and girder models are to be used to analyse stresses in the main framing/girder system. The element mesh is to be fine enough to describe stress increase in critical areas (such as bracket with continuos flange). Typical models are: web frame at mid-tank and at the transverse bulkhead in the midship area and in the forebody, Figure 9-6a transverse bulkhead stringers with longitudinal connection, Figure 9-6b longitudinal double bottom girders and side stringers. 4) Local structure models are used to analyse stresses in stiffeners subjected to large relative deformation. Areas which normally are considered are: side, bottom and inner bottom longitudinals at the intersection to transverse bulkheads, Figure 9-7 vertical stiffeners at transverse bulkhead, Figure 9-7 horizontal longitudinals on longitudinal bulkheads at the connection to horizontal stringer levels at the transverse bulkheads, Figure 9-6b. 5) Stress concentration models are used for fully stochastic fatigue analyses and for simplified fatigue analyses for details were the geometrical stress concentration is unknown. Typical details to be considered are: panel knuckles bracket and flange terminations of main girder system.
9.1.2 All FE models are to be based on reduced scantlings, i.e. corrosion additions tk, are to be deducted as given in the Rules [1]. 9.1.3 Effects from all stress raisers that are not implicitly included in fatigue test data and corresponding S-N curves must be taken into account in the stress analysis. In order to correctly determine the stresses to be used in fatigue analyses, it is important to note the definition of the different stress categories:
9.1.4 In general the various mesh models have to be compatible meaning that the coarser models are to have meshes producing deformations and/or forces applicable as boundary conditions for the finer mesh models. If super-element techniques are available, the model for local stress analysis may be applied as lower level super-elements in the global model. 9.1.5 Fine mesh models may be solved separately by transferring boundary deformations/ boundary forces and local internal loads to the local model. This load transfer can be done either manually or, if sub-modelling facilities are available, automatically by the computer programme. The finer mesh models are usually referred to as sub-models. The advantage of a submodel or an independent local model is that the analysis is carried out separately on the local model. In this way less computer recourses are necessary and a controlled step by step analysis procedure can be carried out. 9.1.6 Refined mesh models, when subjected to boundary forces or forced deformation from the coarser models, shall be checked to give comparable deformations and/or boundary forces as obtained from the coarse mesh model. Furthermore, it is important that the extent of the fine mesh model is sufficiently large to prevent that boundary effects due to prescribed forces and/or deformations on the model boundary affects the stress response in the areas of particular interest.
Nominal stresses are those derived from beam element models or from coarse mesh FEM models of type 2 and type 3 as defined above. Stress concentrations resulting from the gross shape of the structure, e.g. shear lag effects, are included in the nominal stresses derived from coarse mesh FEM models Geometric stresses include nominal stresses and stresses due to structural discontinuities and presence of attachments, but excluding stresses due to presence of welds. Stresses derived from fine mesh FEM models (type 5) are geometric stresses. Effects caused by fabrication imperfections as e.g. misalignment of structural parts, are however normally not included in FEM analyses, and must be separately accounted for. The greatest value of the extrapolation to the weld toe of the geometric stress distribution immediately outside the region effected by the geometry of the weld, is commonly denoted hot spot stress. Notch stress is the total stress at the weld toe (hot spot location) and includes the geometric stress and the stress due to the presence of the weld.
dynamic external pressure internal dynamic pressure static internal and external pressure. The static loads are included to calculate the mean stress correction factor, see 2.3. Global hull girder loads may be applied as end moment or sectional forces as described in Appendix D.
9.2.2 For spectral fatigue calculations loads are directly transferred from the wave load program to the finite element models. In this case FE model has to be compatible with the mass and panel model used in the wave load analysis. This means the vessels buoyancy (hull shape) and mass distribution has to be similar. Unbalanced forces will disturb the hull girder shear
force and bending moment distribution, and equilibrium in applied loads should be verified by calculating and comparing hull girder shear forces and bending moments along the hull girder.
vertical hull girder bending including shear lag effects vertical shear distribution between ship side and bulkheads horizontal hull girder bending including shear lag effects torsion of the hull girder (if open hull type) transverse bending and shear.
9.3.2 The extent of the model is dependent on the type of response to be considered and the structural arrangement of the hull. In cases where the response within the region considered is dependent on the stiffness variation of the hull over a certain length, the finite element model is generally required to extend over minimum the same length of the hull. Thus for determination of the torsional response as well as the horizontal bending response of the hull of an open type ship it is generally required that the model extent covers the complete hull length, depth and breadth. A complete finite element model may also be necessary for the evaluation of the vertical hull girder bending of ships with a complex arrangement of superstructures (e.g. passenger ships), and for ships of complex cross-section (e.g. catamarans). For car carriers and Ro-Ro ships, the transverse deformation- and stress response due to rolling may also require a model extending over the complete vessel length. 9.3.3 The global analysis may be carried out with a relatively coarse mesh. Stiffened panels may be modelled by means of anisotropic elements. Alternatively, a combination of plate elements and beam elements, may be used. It is important to have a good representation of the overall membrane panel stiffness in the longitudinal/transverse directions and for shear.
Figure 9-2 Global hull model of container vessel
9.3.4 For the purpose of calculating the stress due to hull girder bending moments and torsion by direct global finite element analyses, simplified loads may be obtained from Appendix D.
Examples showing global finite element models for torsional analysis of a container vessel and global analysis of an oil tanker are shown in Figure 9-2 and Figure 9-3 respectively. The models may also be used to calculate nominal global (longitudinal) stresses away from areas with stress concentrations. In areas where local stresses in web frames, girders or other areas (as hatch corners) are to be considered (see 6.4-6) fine mesh areas may be modelled directly into the coarser model using suitable element transitions meshes to come down from coarse meshes to finer meshes. This approach leads to a fairly large set of equations to be solved simultaneously. An example of this is the container vessel shown in Figure 9-2 where the six hatch corner models initially were put directly into the global model and analysed together in order to determine hot-spot stresses in the hatch corners.
ported vertically by distributed springs at the intersections of the transverse bulkheads with ship sides and the longitudinal bulkheads. The spring constants are to be calculated for the longitudinal bulkheads and the ship sides based on actual bending and shear stiffness and for a model length of three cargo holds. In addition, symmetry conditions at the model ends are to be applied. In this way no hull girder loads enter into the model. To account for the hull girder loads cases (moments and shear) the symmetry conditions at the ends have to be removed and the loads applied at the ends as described above applying the loads one at the time as separate load cases. In cases where reduced models spanning hold on each side of the transverse bulkhead is used the model can be fixed along the intersection between ship sides and transverse bulkheads. To cater for case b) loads by direct computations the same spring system as in case a) can be applied, but all load components (lateral, moment and shear) are to be applied as a consistent set of simultaneously acting loads as produced by the hydrodynamic analysis.
9.4.3 Load application. Two alternative ways of applying the loads are described in 9.2. In both cases lateral loads from sea pressure, cargo etc. are to be applied along the model. The longitudinal hull girder loads, however, have to be treated differently.
a) Simplified loads: Hull girder loads, moments and shear forces, are to be applied to the ends of the model and analysed as separate load conditions. The shear forces are to be distributed in the cross-sections according to a shear flow analysis. Then, the hull girder response and the response from the lateral load distribution can be combined as outlined in 3.4. Using this option, vertical load balance for the lateral load case will not be achieved and it will be important to use boundary conditions that minimise the effects of the unbalance. b) Loads by direct load computations: A consistent set of lateral loads along the model and hull girder loads at the model ends can be applied simultaneously to the model. This will automatically take care of the load combination issue, as loads based on direct hydrodynamic analysis will be simultaneously acting loads. In this case the combined set of loads will approach a balance (equilibrium) such that a minimum of reaction forces at the supports should be present. In any case the boundary conditions should be arranged such as to minimise the effects of possible unbalances. The loads and boundary conditions in the hull cross section at each end of the model should be evaluated carefully when modelling only a part of the hull in order to avoid unrealistic stiffness from the forebody/aftbody.
9.4.4 Boundary conditions are closely related to how the loads are being applied to the FEM model. If the model covers one half breadth of the vessel, symmetry conditions are to be applied in the centreline plane. In order to cover the lateral load response associated with case a) simplified load application above, the model is to be sup-
9.4.5 Finite element mesh. The mesh fineness of the cargo hold/tank analysis is to be decided based on the method of load application and type of elements used.
The element mesh of the cargo hold/tank model shall represent the deformation response and be fine enough to enable analysis of nominal stress variations in the main framing/girder system. The following may be considered as guidance: A minimum of 3 elements (4-noded shell/ membrane elements) over the web height will be necessary in areas where stresses are to be derived. With 8-noded elements, 2 elements over the web/girder height will normally be sufficient. Figure 9-4 illustrates these two alternatives for possible mesh subdivisions in a double skin tanker. An additional example for the cellular cargo area of a container vessel is shown in Figure 9-5 using 4-noded shell elements. For the tanker model shown in Figure 9-4a, the general element length is equal to the web frame spacing. This implies that the effective flange/shear lag effect of the plate flanges (transverse web frames) will not be properly represented in this model, and that the mesh is not suitable for representation of stresses in way of stress concentrations as knuckles and bracket terminations. The mean girder web thickness in way of cut-outs may generally be taken as follows;
w l co
h h co tw hrco
hco
To the extent that reduced effectivity of flanges, webs etc. are not represented by the element formulation itself; the reduced effectivity may be defined by assigning reduced thickness of plate elements or cross-sectional areas of area elements. Efficiency of girder and frame flanges may be calculated by formulae given in Design Principles in the Rules [1]. However, care should be exercised in reducing thicknesses, as the effective flange for bending is different from the effective flange for membrane response. It will therefore not be possible to satisfy both conditions with the same model. Hence, an appropriately fine mesh able to capture the shear lag effect of girders and the warping effect of unsymmetrical members is recommended.
9.5.4 The model for analysis of frames and girders should be compatible with the cargo hold model if forced deformations are applied. If a separate analysis of frames and girders is carried out without any finite element calculation of the global stress response, the extent of the model, boundary conditions and load distribution should be carefully evaluated in order to obtain an acceptable global support and stiffness for the frame/ girder model. Similarly to the cargo hold model, the frame/girder model may be used for calculation of nominal stresses. For the models shown in Figure 9-4, Figure 9-5 and Figure 9-6, the notch stresses at bracket toe terminations and panel knuckles have to be calculated using additional K-factors (Kg).
lco length of cut-out hco height of cut-out h = girder web height For large values of rco ( > 2.0 ), geometric modelling of the cutout is advisable.
Normally element sizes equal to the stiffener spacing will be acceptable. In the longitudinal direction 3 elements between transverse frames is recommended for 4-noded elements. For 8-noded elements 2 elements is considered acceptable. A minimum of 3 elements (4-noded shell/ membrane elements) over the web and girder heights will be necessary in areas where stresses are to be derived, see for example Figure 9-4b showing the framing system in a double skin tanker with 4-noded elements. With 8-noded elements, 2 elements over the web/girder height will normally be sufficient, Figure 9-4a. If cut-outs are not modelled, the mean girder web thickness in way of cut-outs may generally be taken as in 9.4.5 above.
cal areas. Stresses in laterally loaded local plates and stiffeners subjected to large relative deformations between girders/ frames and bulkheads may be necessary to investigate along with stress increases in critical areas (such as brackets with continuous flanges). Local structure models may also be used to determine the edge stress in way of critical hatch corner openings in, e.g. container vessels. In such cases the mesh fineness (i.e. the element length along the critical edge) is not to be larger than 0.2 R where R is the radius of curvature of the hatch corner. If 4-noded elements are used fictitious bar elements are to be applied at the free edge in order to facilitate a precise and straight forward read-out of the critical edge stress to be used in the fatigue analysis. The model may be included in the 3-D cargo hold/tank analysis model of the frame and girder system, but may also be run separately with prescribed boundary deformations/forces from the frame and girder model. Note that local lateral pressure loads must be applied to the local model (if of relevance for the response).
9.6.2 Areas to model. As an example the following structures of a tanker are normally to be considered:
ing element sizes are to be used for the stiffener flange and the plate, noting that the plate mesh should be fine enough to pick up the shear lag effect. It is especially important to model unsymmetrical stiffeners correctly in order to capture the skew bending effect. In a model like the one in Figure 9-7, the best strategy will be to combine the local structure stiffener model with the mesh fineness as described here with a stress concentration model (item 9.7) in order to get a good description of the stress concentration in the bracket as basis for fatigue analysis. In a stochastic fatigue analysis procedure this is the preferred way of modelling.
The procedure on calculation of hot spot stress by finite element analysis is described in Section 10.
longitudinals in double bottom and adjoining vertical bulkhead members. See Figure 9.7, which shows a model with 8-noded shell elements deck longitudinals and adjoining vertical bulkhead members double side longitudinals and adjoining horizontal bulkhead members.
Stress
9.6.3 As a simplified approach local structure stiffener models may be modelled with beam elements in order to establish a simple basis for nominal stress to be applied in conjunction with established stress concentration factors as given in Section 12. It should be noted, however, that the Kg factors are derived on the basis of nominal stresses calculated according to the simplified stress analysis procedure in Section 5 using effective span and plate flanges. 9.6.4 Finite element mesh. Normally three (3) 8-noded elements are to be used over the height (web) of the stiffeners. Correspond-
View:A-A
Figure 10-1 Schematic stress distribution at hot spot
10.2 FE modelling
10.2.1 The following guidance is made to the computation of hot spot stresses with potential fatigue cracking from the weld toe with local models using the finite element method. Hot spot stresses are calculated assuming linear material behaviour and using an idealized structural model with no fabrication-related misalignment. The extent of the local model has to be chosen such that effects due to the boundaries on the structural detail considered are sufficiently small and reasonable boundary conditions can be formulated. 10.2.2 In plate structures, three types of hot spots at weld toes can be identified as exemplified in Figure 10-2:
For efficient read out of element stresses and hot spot stress derivation a mesh density in the order of t x t where t is the plate thickness is in general preferred at the hot spot region. For 8-node shell elements and 4-node shell elements with additional internal degrees of freedom for improved in plane behaviour and a mesh size from t/2 up to 2t may be used. For conventional 4-node element a mesh size from t/2 to t may be used. Larger mesh sizes at the hot spot region may provide non-conservative results.
10.2.4 An alternative particularly for complex cases is offered by solid elements which need to have a displacement function allowing steep stress gradients as well as plate bending with linear stress distribution in the plate thickness direction. This is offered, e. g. by iso-parametric 20-node elements (with mid-side nodes at the edges) which mean that only one element in plate thickness direction is required. An easy evaluation of the membrane and bending stress components is then possible if a reduced integration order with only two integration points in the thickness direction is chosen. A finer mesh sub-division is necessary particularly if 8-noded solid elements are selected. Here, at least four elements are recommended in thickness direction. Modelling of the welds is generally recommended and easily possible as shown in Figure 10-4. For modelling with three dimensional elements the dimensions of the first two or three elements in front of the weld toe should be chosen as follows. The element length may be selected to correspond to the plate thickness. In the transverse direction, the plate thickness may be chosen again for the breadth of the plate elements. However, the breadth should not exceed the attachment width, i.e. the thickness of the attached plate plus 2 x the weld leg length (in case of type c: the thickness of the web plate behind plus 2 x weld leg length). The length of the elements should be limited to 2t. In cases where three-dimensional elements are used for the FE modelling it is recommended that also the fillet weld is modelled to achieve proper local stiffness and geometry. In order to capture the properties of bulb sections with respect to St. Venant torsion it is recommended to use several three-dimensional elements for modelling of a bulb section. If in addition the weld from stiffeners in the transverse frames is modelled the requirements with respect to element shape will likely govern the FE model at the hot spot region.
a) at the weld toe on the plate surface at an ending attachment b) at the weld toe around the plate edge of an ending attachment c) along the weld of an attached plate (weld toes on both the plate and attachment surface). Models with thin plate or shell elements or alternatively with solid elements are normally used. It should be noted that on the one hand the arrangement and type of elements have to allow for steep stress gradients as well as for the formation of plate bending, and on the other hand, only the linear stress distribution in the plate thickness direction needs to be evaluated with respect to the definition of hot spot stress.
c b a c
10.2.3 The following methods of modelling are recommended. The simplest way of modelling is offered by thin plate and shell elements which have to be arranged in the mid-plane of the structural components, see also Figure 10-3. 8-node elements are recommended particularly in case of steep stress gradients. Care should be given to possible stress underestimation especially at weld toes of type b) in Figure 10-2. Use of 4-node elements with improved in-plane bending modes is a good alternative. The welds are usually not modelled except for special cases where the results are affected by high local bending, e. g. due to an offset between plates or due to a small free plate length between adjacent welds such as at lug (or collar) plates. Here, the weld may be included by transverse plate elements having appropriate stiffness or by introducing constrained equations for coupled node displacements. A thickness equal to 2 times the thickness of the plates may be used for modelling of the welds by transverse plates.
10.3.1 Recommended stress evaluation points are located at distances t/2 and 3t/2 away from the hot spot, where t is the plate thickness at the weld toe. These locations are also denoted as stress read out points. Two alternative methods can be used for hot spot stress derivation. For modelling with shell elements without any weld the following procedures can be used:
A linear extrapolation of the stresses to the intersection line from the read out points at t/2 and 3t/2 from the intersection line. The principal stress at the hot spot is calculated from the extrapolated component values (Principal stress within an angle 45o to the normal to the weld). The hot spot stress is taken as the stress at the read out point t/2 away from the intersection line and multiplied by 1.12. For modelling with three-dimensional elements with the weld included the following procedures can be used: A linear extrapolation of the stresses to the intersection line from the read out points at t/2 and 3t/2 from the weld
toe. The principal stress at the hot spot is calculated from the extrapolated component values (Principal stress within an angle 45o to the normal to the weld). The hot spot stress is taken as the stress at the read out point t/2 away from the weld toe and multiplied by 1.12. The stress components on the plate surface should be evaluated along the paths shown in Figure 10-3 and Figure 10-4 and extrapolated to the hot spot. The average stress components between adjacent elements are used for the extrapolation. An alternative procedure for deriving the hot spot stress is presented in Appendix K. The procedure is intended to replace the above procedure on a voluntary basis.
if the mesh density differ from txt, the stresses at the stress read out points are determined by interpolation as shown in Figure 10.6 c). 8-node shell elements t/2 element size t: element edge surface stress points can be used as stress read out points as illustrated in Figure 10.7 a) and b) if the mesh density differ from txt, the stress at the stress read out points are determined by interpolation as shown in Figure 10.7 b). 8-node shell elements t element size 2t: element surface result point stress is used as illustrated in Figure 10-8 a) the stress at the surface result points are extrapolated to the line A-A as shown in Figure 10-8 b) the stress at the read out points are determined by 2nd order interpolation as shown in Figure 10-8 c). Solid elements: in case of solid elements the stress may first be extrapolated from the Gaussian points to the surface. Then these stresses can be interpolated linearly to the surface centre or extrapolated to the edge of the elements if this is the line for hot spot stress derivation to determine the stress read out points.
10.4.2 For meshes with 4-node shell elements larger than t x t it is recommended to fit a second order polynomial to the element stresses in the three first elements and derive stresses for extrapolation from the 0.5 t and 1.5 t points. An example of this is shown schematically in Figure 10-5. This procedure may be used to establish stress values at the 0.5 t and 1.5 t points. 10.4.3 For 8-node elements a second order polynomial may be fitted to the stress results at the mid-side nodes of the three first elements and the stress at the read out points 0.5 t and 1.5 t can be derived.
Hot spot stress 0.5 t 1.5 t Second order polynomial
4-node shell elements t/2 element size t: element surfaces stress at the centre points is used as illustrated in Figure 10-6 a) the stress at the element centre points are extrapolated to the line A-A as shown in Figure 10-6 b) to determine the stress at read out points
a)
Section I-I: (II-II and III-III similar)
Linear or 2nd order extrapolation curve for upper (or lower) surface based on element centre point stress values I
b)
Section A-A: (standard procedure)
Linear extrapolation to hot spot based on 3t/2 and t/2 Linear or 2nd order interpolation curve for upper (or lower) surface based on I, II and III
HS
t/2
II
3t/2
III
Hot Spot
t/2 3t/2
c)
Section A-A: (web stiffened cruciform joint)
Linear or 2nd order interpolation curve for upper (or lower) surface based on I, II and III
HS
II
III
xshift
Hot Spot
d)
Figure 10-6 Determination of stress read out points and hot spot stress for 4-node shell elements
a)
Section A-A: (standard procedure)
Linear extrapolation to hot spot based on 3t/2 and t/2 Linear (or 2nd order) interpolation curve based on element edge surface stress points
HS
t/2
II
3t/2
III
b)
t/2 3t/2
Linear (or 2nd order) interpolation curve based on element edge surface stress points
HS
III
xshift
c)
Hot Spot
Figure 10-7 Determination of stress read out points and hot spot stress for 8-node shell elements t/2 element size t
a)
Section I-I: (II-II and III-III similar)
2nd order extrapolation curve for upper (or lower) surface based on element surface stress point values I
b)
Section A-A: (standard procedure)
Linear extrapolation to hot spot based on 3t/2 and t/2 2nd order interpolation curve for upper (or lower) surface based on I, II and III 3t/2 Hot Spot (element intersection lines) II III
HS
t/2
t/2 3t/2
c)
HS
2nd order interpolation curve for upper (or lower) surface based on I, II and III II III
d)
xshift
Hot Spot
Figure 10-8 Determination of stress read out points and hot spot stress for 8-node shell elements t element size 2t
The reduction factor on the bending stress can be explained by redistribution of loads to other areas during crack growth while the crack tip is growing into a region with reduced stress. The effect is limited to areas with a localised stress concentration, which occurs for example at a hopper corner. However, in a case where the stress variation along the weld is small, the difference in fatigue life between axial loading and pure bending is much smaller. Therefore it should be noted that it is not correct to generally reduce the bending part of the stress to 60 percent. This has to be restricted to cases with a pronounced stress concentration (where the stress distribution under fatigue crack development is more similar to a displacement controlled situ-
It should be noted that the procedure described in the following is limited to the plate flange connection. Other hot spots as indicated in Figure 10-9 are to be checked according to the procedure given in 10.7.3. The procedure described in the following does not apply to bent type hopper knuckles. The hotspot stress for hopper knuckles of the bent type should be established by following the extrapolation procedure described in section 10.3.
Ho
Other Hot spots
e pp la rp te
Hot spot (cruciform)
Side shell
c) Connection between deck web frame and side web frame in vehicle carrier, 90o
Figure 10-9 Example of web stiffened cruciform joints
It is assumed that the weld is not included in the shell finite element analysis. The procedure is calibrated such that surface stress can be read out from read out points shifted away from the intersection line at a position of the actual weld toe. The distance from the intersection line to the weld toe is obtained as
x wt x wt + 0.36 t t1 1
x shift =
where
t1 xwt
t1 + x wt 2
x wt t 1 The procedure is calibrated for 0 xwt/t1 1.0. The derived hot spot stress is to be entered the hot spot S-N curve for welded connections. The analysis procedure is illustrated in Figure 10-10.
= 1 . 20 + 0 . 04
x wt + 0 . 30 t1
= plate thickness of the plate number 1 in Figure 10.12. = additional fillet weld leg length
Intersection line
The stress at the shift position is derived directly from the analysis (without any extrapolation of stresses). The surface stress (including membrane and bending stress) is denoted surface (xshift). The membrane stress is denoted membrane (xshift). The membrane and bending stress are denoted membrane (xshift) and bending (xshift) respectively. Then the hot spot stress is then derived as hot spot = membrane ( x shift ) + bending ( x shift ) * 0.60 * where bending ( x shift ) = surface ( x shift ) membrane ( x shift ) For 135 connections a correction factor is derived as
(xshift)
xshift = t2 + xwt 2
Figure 10-10 Illustration of procedure for derivation of hot spot stress using shell finite element model
= 1.07 0.15
x wt x wt + 0.22 t t1 1
10.7.3 Other hot spots located in way of the web as indicated in Figure 10-9 are to be checked according to the following procedure: The maximum principal surface stress along the curve segment defined by the distance xshift = t3/2 +xwt (t3 = web thickness) from the hot spot but no closer than t3/2 from the element intersection lines is to be used in the fatigue evaluation. This stress is to be combined with stress concentration factors from Table A-7. I.e. Kg = 1.2 - 1.67 depending on weld penetration depth.
that this detail includes a stress concentration equal 1.27 relative to that of the hot spot stress S-N curve. This means that the calculated stress from finite element analysis should be multiplied by a correction factor KG = 1.27 for derivation of a hot spot stress before it is entered the hot spot stress S-N curve.
xshift
t3
t3/2
10.9.1 The analysis methodology may be verified based on finite element analysis of details with derived target hot spot stress. Such details with target hot spot stress are shown in Commentary section in DNV-RP-C203.
Plate 2 t2
t3/2
t1 Plate 1
Figure 10-12 Three dimensional model used for calibration of analysis procedure
II
Figure 10-13 Illustration of difference to attract stresses normal to and in plane of a shell element model
12. References
/1/ /2/ /3/ /4/ /5/ /6/ /7/ /8/ /9/ /10/ /11/ /12/ /13/ /14/ /15/ /16/ /17/ /18/ /19/ /20/ /21/ /22/ /23/ /24/ /25/ /26/ /27/ /28/ /29/ /30/ /31/ /32/ /33/ /34/ Det Norske Veritas, Rules for Classification of Ships, Part 3, Chapter 1, Hull Structural Design, Ships with Length 100 Meters and above, Hvik, January 2005. Hovem, L., Loads and Load Combinations for Fatigue Calculations - Background for the Wave Load Section for the DNVC Classification Note: Fatigue Assessment of Ships, DNVC Report No. 93-0314, Hvik, 1993. Cramer, E.H., Lseth, R. and Bitner-Gregersen, E.,. Fatigue in Side Shell Longitudinals due to External Wave Pressure, Proceedings OMAE conference, Glasgow, June 1993. Bergan, P. G., Lotsberg, I.: Advances in Fatigue Assessment of FPSOs. OMAE-FPSO'04-0012, Int. Conf. Houston 2004. Berge, S., Kihl, D., Lotsberg, I., Maherault, S., Mikkola, T. P. J., Nielsen, L. P., Paetzold, H., Shin, C. H., Sun, H. H and Tomita, Y.: Special Task Committee VI.2 Fatigue Strength Assessment. 15th ISSC, San Diego, 2003. British Maritime Technology, BMT, (Primary Contributors Hogben, H., Da Cunha, L.F. and Olliver, H.N), Global Wave Statistics, Unwin Brothers Limited, London, 1986. Doerk, O., Fricke, W., Weissenborn, C. (2003), Comparison of Different Calculation Methods for Structural Stresses at Welded Joints. Int. J. of Fatigue 25, pp. 359-369. Fricke, W. (2001), Recommended Hot Spot Analysis Procedure for Structural Details of FPSOs and Ships Based on Round-Robin FE Analyses. Proc. 11th ISOPE, Stavanger. Also Int. J. of Offshore and Polar Engineering. Vol. 12, No. 1, March 2002. Fricke, W., Doerk, O. and Gruenitz, L. (2004), Fatigue Strength Investigation and Assessment of Fillet-Welds around Toes of Stiffeners and Brackets. OMAE-FPSO'04-0010. Int. Conf. Houston. Hobbacher, A. (1996), Fatigue Design of Welded Joints and Components. IIW. XIII-1539-96/ XV-845-96. Holtsmark, G. The Bending Response of Laterally Loaded Panels with Unsymmetrical Stiffeners, DNVC Report No. 93-0152. Hvik, 1993. Holtsmark, G., Eimhjellen, R. and Dalsj, P. The Elastic Bending Response of Panel Stiffeners of Unsymmetrical Cross-section subjected to Uniform Lateral Pressure Loads. DNV Report No. 2004-1150. September 2004. Kim, W. S. and Lotsberg, I., Fatigue Test Data for Welded Connections in Ship Shaped Structures. OMAE-FPSO'04-0018, Int. Conf. Houston 2004. Also Journal of Offshore and Arctic Engineering, Vol 127, Issue 4. November 2005, pp 359-365. Kuo, J.-F., Lacey, P. B., Zettlemoyer, N. and MacMillan, A. (2001), Fatigue Methodology Specification for New-Built FPSO. OMAE Paper no 3016, Rio de Janeiro. Lotsberg, I., Cramer, E., Holtsmark, G., Lseth, R., Olaisen, K. and Valsgrd, S.: Fatigue Assessment of Floating Production Vessels. BOSS97, July 1997. Lotsberg, I., Nygrd, M. and Thomsen, T.: Fatigue of Ship Shaped Production and Storage Units. OTC paper no 8775. Houston May 1998. Lotsberg, I., and Rove, H.: Stress Concentration Factors for Butt Welds in Stiffened Plates.OMAE, ASME 2000. Lotsberg, I.: Overview of the FPSO Fatigue Capacity JIP. OMAE, Rio deJaneiro, June 2001. Lotsberg, I.: Design Recommendations from the FPSO Fatigue Capacity JIP. PRADS, Changhai 2001. Lotsberg, I., Fatigue Capacity of Fillet Welded Connections subjected to Axial and Shear Loading. IIW Document no XIII-2000-03 (XV-1146-03). Lotsberg, I., Fatigue Design of Welded Pipe Penetrations in Plated Structures. Marine Structures, Vol 17/1 pp. 29-51, 2004. Lotsberg, I., Recommended Methodology for Analysis of Structural Stress for Fatigue Assessment of Plated Structures. OMAEFPSO'04-0013, Int. Conf. Houston 2004. Lotsberg, I. and Sigurdsson, G., Hot Spot S-N Curve for Fatigue Analysis of Plated Structures. OMAE-FPSO'04-0014, Int. Conf. Houston 2004. Also Journal of Offshore and Arctic Engineering, Vol 128. November 2006, pp 330-336. Lotsberg, I and Landet, E. , Fatigue Capacity of Side Longitudinals in Floating Structures. OMAE-FPSO'04-0015, Int. Conf. Houston 2004. Lotsberg, I. Assessment of Fatigue Capacity in the New Bulk Carrier and Tanker Rules, Marine Structures, Vol 19, Issue 1. January 2006, pp 83-96. Lotsberg, I., Rundhaug, T. A, Thorkildsen, H. and Be, . (2005), Fatigue Design of Web Stiffened Cruciform Connections, PRADS 2007, October 2007, Houston. Na, J. H., Lee, I. H., Sim, W. S. and Shin, H. S. (2003), Full Stochastic Fatigue Analysis for Kizomba A FPSO-Hull Interface Design. Proceedings 22nd Int. conf. on Offshore Mechanics and Arctic Engineering, Cancun Mexico. Polezhaeva, H. and Chung, H. (2001), Effect of Misalignment on the Stress Concentration of a Welded Hopper Knuckle for a Typical FPSO. OMAE Rio de Janeiro. Sigurdsson, S., Landet, E. and Lotsberg, I. , Inspection Planning of a Critical Block Weld in an FPSO. OMAE-FPSO'04-0032, Int. Conf. Houston, 2004. Storsul, R., Landet, E. and Lotsberg, I. , Convergence Analysis for Welded Details in Ship Shaped Structures. OMAE-FPSO'040016, Int. Conf. Houston 2004. Storsul, R., Landet, E. and Lotsberg, I., Calculated and Measured Stress at Welded Connections between Side Longitudinals and Transverse Frames in Ship Shaped Structures. OMAE-FPSO'04-0017, Int. Conf. Houston 2004. Urm, H. S., Yoo, I. S., Heo, J. H., Kim, S. C. and Lotsberg, I.: Low Cycle Fatigue Strength Assessment for Ship Structures. PRADS 2004. Witherby & Co. Ltd 1997: Guidance Manual for Tanker Structures. IIW Recommendations on Post Weld Improvement of Steel and Aluminium Structures. Document XIII-2200-07.
K = K g K te K t K n
where
Kg Kte Kt Kn = stress concentration factor due to the gross geometry of the detail considered = additional stress concentration factor due to eccentricity tolerance (normally used for plate butt weld connections only) = additional stress concentration factor due to angular mismatch (normally used for plate butt weld connections only) = additional stress concentration factor for un-symmetrical stiffeners on laterally loaded panels, applicable when the nominal stress is derived from simple beam analyses.
The S-N curves in 2.4 are given for a welded specimen where the effect of the notch stress is included. The relation between the hot spot stress range to be used together with the S-N-curve and the nominal stress range is hot spot = K no min al All stress risers have to be considered when evaluating the hot spot stress. This can be done by multiplication of K-factors arising from different causes. The resulting K-factor to be used for calculation of hot spot stress is derived as
Table A-1 K-factors for flange connections Geometry Flange connection with softening toe
K-factor
K g = 1.47
Crossing of flanges
R/b >0.15 R b
To be used together with S-N curve for base material.
K g = 1.9
Overlap connection
tf
tp
K g = 4.0
A.2.3 Stiffener supports K-factors for stiffener supports are given in Table A-2. The factors are applicable to stiffeners subject to axial- and latTable A-2 K-factors for stiffener supports Geometry No.
eral loads. Note that the weld connection area between supporting members and stiffener flange must fulfil the requirements in DNV Rules for Classification of Ships.
Kg axial
Point A Kg bending
Kg axial
Point B Kg bending
d
1
1.60
1.60
1.60
1.47
1.27
1.27
1.40
1.73
Classification Notes - No. 30.7, June 2010 Page 50 Table A-2 K-factors for stiffener supports (Continued) Geometry No.
Kg axial
Point A Kg bending
Kg axial
Point B Kg bending
1.27
1.27
1.33
1.60
1.27
1.27
1.27
1.27
1.60
1.80
1.47
1.60
1.60
1.80
1.60
1.73
Classification Notes - No. 30.7, June 2010 Page 51 Table A-2 K-factors for stiffener supports (Continued) Geometry No.
Kg axial
Point A Kg bending
Kg axial
Point B Kg bending
1.60
1.80
1.60
1.80
1.60
1.80
1.27
1.27
10
1.60
1.80
1.60
1.80
11
1.27
1.27
1.60
1.80
Classification Notes - No. 30.7, June 2010 Page 52 Table A-2 K-factors for stiffener supports (Continued) Geometry No.
Kg axial
Point A Kg bending
Kg axial
Point B Kg bending
12
1.60
1.80
1.27
1.27
13
1.60
1.80
1.60
1.80
14
1.60
1.80
1.47
1.60
15
1.60
1.80
1.60
1.80
Classification Notes - No. 30.7, June 2010 Page 53 Table A-2 K-factors for stiffener supports (Continued) Geometry No.
Kg axial
Point A Kg bending
Kg axial
Point B Kg bending
16
1.60
1.80
1.47
1.40
17
1.47
1.40
1.60
1.80
18
1.47
1.40
1.47
1.60
19
1.47
1.40
1.47
1.40
Classification Notes - No. 30.7, June 2010 Page 54 Table A-2 K-factors for stiffener supports (Continued) Geometry No.
Kg axial
Point A Kg bending
Kg axial
Point B Kg bending
20
1.47
1.40
1.60
1.80
21
1.47
1.40
1.60
1.80
22
1.47
1.40
1.47
1.60
23
1.47
1.40
1.47
1.40
Classification Notes - No. 30.7, June 2010 Page 55 Table A-2 K-factors for stiffener supports (Continued) Geometry No.
Kg axial
Point A Kg bending
Kg axial
Point B Kg bending
24
1.47
1.40
1.60
1.80
25
1.60
1.60
26
1.27
1.20
1.40
1.73
27
1.60
1.80
1.60
1.73
Classification Notes - No. 30.7, June 2010 Page 56 Table A-2 K-factors for stiffener supports (Continued) Geometry No.
Kg axial
Point A Kg bending
Kg axial
Point B Kg bending
28
1.60
1.80
1.60
1.80
29
1.47
1.40
1.60
1.80
1.47
1.40
1.60
1.80
30
1.20
1.20
1.20
1.20
31
Notes: For supporting members welded to stiffener web by overlap weld as given in Table A-6, the above factors are to be multiplied by a factor 1.15. Limitations for soft nose stiffeners, brackets and tripping brackets and scallops, see figures a to d below: b) a)
Max 15 mm
Max 20.0
Max 20.0
Max 15 mm
Max 20.0
Min R 30 mm
Min d/2
Min 1.5d
Min d/2
c)
d)
Min R 300 mm M ax 15 m m
Min R 300 mm M ax 15 m m
Max 15.0
Max 5.0
The following should be noted when the value of the K-factor in bending is considered. The K-factors have been determined based on finite element analyses of actual geometries. The hot spot stress has been determined by extrapolation of stresses as defined in Section 10. Then the procedure for stress calculation given in 5.4 has been followed in a reverse direction to establish the K-factors. Effective plate flange and effective span width between supports are included in the calculation. This will assure that the same hot spot stress is derived using the Kfactors based on the specified procedure for the same geometric conditions. Thus the value of the K-factor will depend on the calculation procedure used to obtain the hot spot stress. Therefore, a direct comparison of K-factors from different sources should not be performed without considering how they are defined and derived. A more proper way for comparison is to compare the hot spot stresses due to a specific load. The K-factors in bending have been evaluated for different boundary conditions for the stiffener at the transverse frames. It was found that the K-factors were not very sensitive to whether free support or fixed conditions were used. (It might be added that the effect of boundary conditions would be a function of length of stiffener analysed in relation to geometry of longitudinal and distance between transverse frames. Here, the following geometry has been used: distance from top of longitudinal to end of supporting member equal 560 mm, frames spacing of 3 200 mm, plate thickness of 12.5 mm, Tprofile 350x12 + 100 x17 and spacing 800 mm). To establish alternative K-factors for actual geometries of stiffener supports the following procedure should be followed:
FE model extent: The finite element model should cover minimum four (4) web frame spacings in the longitudinal (stiffener) direction with the detail to be considered located at the middle frame. The same type of end connection is to be modelled at all the web frames. For double hull structures, the model is to include both the outer and inner hull and for single skin type of connections the model should cover the entire depth of the web frame. In the transverse direction, the model may be limited to one stiffener spacing (note that for a sub-model of a cargo hold model the transverse extent should cover minimum five (5) stiffener spacings). Element types: 4- or 8-node shell elements, alt. 8- or 20node solid elements, shall be used in the modelling. Boundary conditions: Symmetry conditions are to be used at the model ends (along cuts). The web frames are to be fixed for displacement in the direction of the web depth (along a single line of nodes at the top or bottom of the web). Fixed displacement in the longitudinal direction is to be applied either at the forward or aft end of the model. FE mesh density: At the location of the hot spots to be considered the element size should be in the order of the plate thickness. In the remaining part of the model the element size should be in the order of the s/10 where s is the stiffener spacing. See also Section 10. Load application: In general two loading conditions are to be considered; axial loading by forced deformation and lateral loading by a unit pressure load applied to the shell
plating. Note that for double hull structures loading of the outer and inner shell should be considered individually. Calculation of the stress concentration factor: The hot spot stress is to be calculated based on the extrapolation procedure described in Section 10. The nominal (reference) stress is to be calculated according to the formulas for simplified stress analysis given in Section 5 based on unit loads (same loads as applied in the FE analysis). The stress concentration factor is then given by the ratio of the hot
Table A-3 Kfactors for stiffeners welded to a plate No. Geometry 1
spot stress derived from the FE analysis on the nominal stress calculated by simplified stress analysis.
A.2.4 K-factors for stiffener welded to a plate K-factors for stiffener welded to a plate is given in Table A-3. The factors are applicable to the connection between plate and stiffener when the plate is stresses perpendicular to the weld direction.
K-factor
A.2.5 Termination of stiffeners on plates K-factors for termination of stiffeners on plates are given in Table A-4.
Table A-4 K-factors for termination of stiffeners on plates No. Geometry 1 Local elements and stiffeners welded to plates: K-factor
tw
t K g = 1.33 1 + w t p 160
tp
Kg = and
2A f lt s K g = min 2.0
A.2.6 Butt welds K-factors for butt welds are given in Table A-5. For some geometry, default values have been established for normal design fabrication of the connections and should be used if not otherwise documented. See also Appendix F.
K-factor Angular mismatch in joints between flat plates results in additional stresses at the butt weld and the stiffener
Default: e = 6 mm
K t = 1 +
s 4 t
where: = 6 for pinned ends = 3 for fixed ends = angular mismatch in radians s = plate width t = plate thickness The eccentricity between welded plates may be accounted for in the calculation of stress concentration factor. The following formula applies for a butt weld in an unstiffened plate or for a pipe butt weld with a large radius:
t
Default: e = 0.15 t
K te = 1 +
3 (e e0 ) t
where e is eccentricity (misalignment) and t is plate thickness. e0 = 0.1t is misalignment inherent in the S-N data for butt welds. Kt from 1 The stress concentration for the weld between plates with different thickness in a stiffened plate field may be derived from the following formula:
K te = 1 +
t2
Defaults:
t1 e
a = min 3( t + e)
Where
6 (e + et e0 ) t 1.5 t1 1 + 21.5 t1
e = 0.15 t1
t = t 2 t1
e = maximum misalignment et = (t2-t1) eccentricity due to change in thickness e0 = 0.1t is misalignment inherent in the S-N data for butt welds t2 = thickness of thicker plate t1 = thickness of thinner plate Kt from 1
a
Kte=1.0 Within the distance 2t2 from the web. Outside this distance No. 3 to be used.
t2 e
Defaults:
e = 0.15 t1 Welding from one side
t1
a = min 3( t + e)
Kg = 1.27with temporary or permanent backing strip without fillet weld Kg = 1.8with backing strip fillet welded to the plate Kg = 2.5without backing strip Welding from one side is not recommended in areas prone to fatigue due to sensitivity of workmanship and fabrication Kt from 1 Kte from 2
Default: e = 0.15 t.
A.2.7 Doubling plates K-factors for doubling plates are given in Table A-6.
Table A-6 Doubling Plates No. 1 Cover plates on beams Geometry K-factor
d tD tp
2 Kg=1.20 d 50 Kg=1.27 50 < d 100 Kg=1.33 100 < d 150 Kg=1.47 d > 150
d tD tp
Kg=1.20 d 50 Kg=1.27 50 < d 100 Kg=1.33 100 < d 150 Kg=1.47 d > 150 For larger doublers, a more detailed analysis should be performed based on the actual geometry.
Note: If the welds of the doubling plates are placed closer to the member (flange, plate) edges than 10 mm, the K-factors in Table A-6 should be increased by a factor 1.15.
A.2.8 Cruciform joints K-factors for cruciform joints are given in Table A-7.
Table A-7 K-factors for cruciform joints No. Geometry 1 K-factor
l3 t2
t3 t1
K te = 1 +
l t4
4
6t 2 (e e 0 ) t 3 t 3 t 3 t 3 l1 1 + 2 + 3 + 4 l1 l2 l3 l4
t3 t2
t1
e0
Kg = 0.60 + 0.60 (tan)1/4 Default value: Kg = 1.2 Kte from 1 Kta = 1.0
t t e = 1 + e0 2 2 2 t1 t 2 e 0 0.3t 1
3 Kg = 0.60 + 0.60 (tan)1/4 Default value: Kg = 1.2 Kte = 1 Kta = 1.0 Applicable also for fillet welds 4
t3 t2
Kg = 0.80 + 0.87(tan)1/4 Default value : Kg = 1.67 Kte from 1 with e as given in 2 Kta = 1.0
t1
t2
t1
t3
Kta = 1.0
t 2 t1
6
a
t1 a Kte from 1 with e as given in 2 K g = 1 .2
Kta = 1.0
t2
t1
t3
A.2.9 Scallops K-factors for scallops are given in Table A-8. The factors are applicable to stiffeners subject to axial loads. For dynamic pressure loads on the plate these details are susceptible to fatigue cracking ref. /33/ and other design solutions should be considered to achieve a proper fatigue life.
Table A-8 Kfactors for scallops No. Geometry 1
100
K-factor
B A
2
120
35
B A
3
150
35
B A
4
120
B
35
10
Notes: For scallops without transverse welds, the Kg at point B will be governing for the design.
A.2.10 K-factors for lower hopper knuckles K-factors for hopper knuckles are given in Table A-9. Hot-spot stresses in panel knuckles should in general be calculated case by case by a stress concentration model. However, for a yard standard geometry, a K-factor related to nominal stress in a frame and girder model may be established using the stress concentration model. The knuckle between inner bottom and hopper plate in oil carriers is called lower hopper knuckle. For this knuckle, the nomTable A-9 K-factors for lower hopper knuckles No. Geometry 1
inal stress should be the transversal membrane stress, a stiffener spacing from the knuckle in the inner bottom plate, and averaged between two floors. For hopper knuckles with angles between inner bottom and hopper plate between 30 and 75 K-factors are given in Table A-9. It is assumed that brackets are fitted in ballast tanks in line with inner bottom. Geometrical eccentricity in the knuckle should be avoided or kept to a minimum.
K-factor
Kg = 7.0
2 Insert plate of 2,0 times the thickness normally required. Insert plates should be provided in inner bottom, hopper tank top, and web frame. The insert plates should extend approximately 400 mm along inner bottom and hopper plate, approximately 800 mm in longitudinal direction, and 400 mm in the depth of the web.
Kg = 4.5
2 t
Bracket
Bracket inside cargo tank. The bracket should extend approximately to the first longitudinals and the bracket toe should have a soft nose design.
Kg = 2.5
A.2.11 K-factors for rounded rectangular holes K-factors for rounded rectangular holes are given in Figure A-1. The factors may be used for hatch opening corners in conventional ships, but not in container carriers.
=1
bg bw + bg
ZW =
Z fw
section modulus of panel stiffener including plate flange with = respect to a neutral axis normal to the stiffener web with respect to the distance, xs from the support. relating the warping of the flange to the bending re= parameter sponse of the stiffener
fw = 6 A f bw + bg
)2
2 6 xs 6 xs 2 l 2 I f 1 + 2 l l
A.2.12 K-factors for un-symmetrical stiffeners on laterally loaded panels The nominal bending stress of laterally loaded panel stiffeners is generally given by:
=
l = p = xs =
2 p s l2 1 6 xs l + 6 xs / l2 12 Z
l, xs = as defined above bw = transverse distance from mid thickness plane of the web to the centre of the flange cross-section. = 0.5 (bf tw) for rolled angle profiles = as given in Table A-10 and Table A-11 for HP and JIS bulb profiles respectively = h-tf in general = as given in Table A-10 and Table A-11 for HP and JIS bulb profiles respectively = parameter of the warping bending moment of the flange at end support
= = Sinh l f sin l f Sinh l f + sin l f (1 + / 280) 12 (1 + / 40 ) (approximate solution)
)
hw
span length of stiffener as defined in 5.4 lateral pressure load axial distance from the stiffener support (= end of l) to the position where the bending stress is determined
The stress concentration factors at the flange of un-symmetrical stiffeners on laterally loaded panels as defined in Figure A2 are calculated as follows: At the flange edge K n1 = 1 + fw 1 + f w 2
lf
= span length of stiffener flange with respect to its warping response. = l as defined in 5.4 for stiffeners without end bracket(s) = span length reduced by the full arm length of any end bracket(s) fitted = parameter of the warping response of the unsymmetrical flange
Kn2 where: 2b g bf
tw bf
1 + f w 2
=
4 2 4 If h fc
1 4h fc t3 w
s t3 p
= 1
= ( lf )4 / 3
= 1
hfc = stiffener height, measured to centre of flange area = as given in Table A-10 and Table A-11 for HP and JIS bulb profiles respectively
If
= moment of inertia of the flange with respect to bending in a plane at right angle to the web of the stiffener = A f rf2
Af
= = =
rf
cross-sectional area of flange bf tf for flanges of rectangular cross-section as given in Table A-10 and Table A-11 for HP and JIS bulb profiles respectively = radius of gyration of the flange area with respect to an axis that is parallel to the plane of the web = for flanges of rectangular cross-section
b f ( 12 )
= as given in Table A-10 and Table A-11 for HP and JIS bulb profiles respectively = breadth of stiffener flange. without relevance for bulb profiles = flange thickness = without relevance for bulb profiles = stiffener height = stiffener web thickness = plate width between stiffeners = plate thickness
bf tf h tw s tp
Table A-10 Characteristic flange data for HP bulb profile h hw two Afo Af bw hfc rfo (mm) (mm) (mm) (mm2) (mm2) (mm) (mm) (mm) 200 171 9 836 50.8 10.9 188 9.54 220 188 9 1 004 56.5 12.1 206 10.3 240 205 10 1 221 62.2 13.3 225 11.4 260 221 10 1 421 67.8 14.5 244 12.1 280 238 10 1 636 73.5 15.8 263 12.8 300 255 11 1 911 79.2 16.9 281 13.9 320 271 11 2 159 84.9 18.1 300 14.6 340 288 12 2 472 90.5 19.3 318 15.6 370 313 13 2 955 99.1 21.1 346 17.1 400 338 14 3 481 107.6 22.9 374 18.5 430 363 15 4 049 116.1 24.7 402 19.9 Note: rf = rfo + 0.275(twn tc two) Af = Afo + (h hw) (twn two) Af tc two is the web thickness, table values of Afo and rfo apply. twn is the as rolled web thickness of the bulb stiffener tc is the corrosion deduction in mm to be applied, if any. Table A-11 Characteristic flange data for JIS bulb profiles h hw two Afo Af bw hfc rfo (mm) (mm) (mm) (mm2) (mm2) (mm) (mm) (mm) 180 156 9.5 635 41.6 9.0 170 8.4 200 172 10 814 48.0 10.4 188 9.4 230 198 11 1 030 54.3 11.7 217 10.6 250 215 12 1 250 60.0 12.9 235 11.6 Note: rf = rfo + 0.275(two tc) Af = Afo Af tc two is the as rolled web thickness for the JIS bulb profile. tc is the corrosion deduction in mm to be applied, if any.
Kn1 nominal
Kn2 nominal
nominal
Neutral axis
Figure A-2 Bending stress in symmetrical and un-symmetrical panel stiffener with same web and flange areas
A.2.13 K-factors in web of un-symmetrical stiffener on laterally loaded panels The nominal web stress of laterally loaded panel stiffeners is generally given by:
p s tw =
sp / t w
bf bg tf
bw
It should be noted that the bending stress in the stiffener web at the weld attachment to the stiffener plate may be significant at mid span of stiffeners with un-symmetrical flange, see Figure A-4. The stress concentration factor, Knw, due to this bending is calculated as:
h
tw
K nw = 1 +
6 A f b w + b g def h fc Z t w 1 + m 2
tp s
where
def = 1 2 Sinh ( lf / 2 ) cos ( lf / 2 ) + Cosh ( lf / 2 ) sin ( lf / 2) Sinh lf + sin lf
/ 32 (simplified formulation) 1 + / 40
m =
( lf ) 3 (1 / 1120)
2
72
1 + / 40
(simplified formulation)
tp H
A A
3.5
3.0
2.5
r/t p
Figure A-4 Bending in webs at mid span of un-symmetrical stiffeners subjected to lateral loading
100 Kg
2.0
50
1.5
A.2.14 K-factors for holes with edge reinforcement K-factors for holes with reinforcement are given for the following details:
20
1.0
Holes in plates with inserted tubular are given in Figure A5 to Figure A-16. Holes in plates with ring reinforcement are given in Figure A-17 to Figure A-21. Holes in plates with double ring reinforcement are given in Figure A-22 to Figure A-25. For stresses parallel with the weld the given stress concentration factors can be reduced according to Table 2.3 of section 2.4.6. At some locations of the welds there are stress in the plate transverse to the fillet weld,w, and shear stress in the plate parallel with the weld 11. Then the fillet weld is designed for a combined stress obtained as
10
0.5 0.0 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0
t r /t p
Figure A-5 Kg at hole with inserted tubular. Stress at outer surface of tubular, parallel with weld. H/tr = 2
tr tr r
A A
tp H
A A
comb =
t a
(1.80 w )2 + (0.6511)2
3.5
where t = plate thickness a = throat thickness for a double sided fillet weld.
Kg
3.0
1.5 20 1.0
Figure A-6 Kg at hole with inserted tubular. Stress at outer surface of tubular, parallel with weld. H/tr = 5
tr tr r
A A
tr tp tr r
A A
tp H
A A
A A
3.5
0.5 r/tp
3.0
0.4
10
2.5 Kg
r/tp 100
Kg
0.3
20
2.0 50
0.2 50
0.1
100
0.0 0.0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0 tr /tp 1.2 1.4 1.6 1.8 2.0
Figure A-7 Kg at hole with inserted tubular. Stress in plate, parallel with weld. H/tr = 2
Figure A-9 Kg at hole with inserted tubular. Stress in plate, normal to weld. H/tr = 2
tr tr r
A A
tp tr H r
A A A A
tr tp H
A A
3.5
0.5 r/tp
3.0
0.4 10
2.5
0.3
20
Kg
r/t p
Kg
50 0.2 100
2.0
100 50 20 10
1.5
0.1
2.0
0.0 0.0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0 tr /tp 1.2 1.4 1.6 1.8 2.0
Figure A-8 Kg at hole with inserted tubular. Stress in plate, parallel with weld. H/tr = 5
Figure A-10 Kg at hole with inserted tubular. Stress in plate, normal to weld. H/tr = 5
A A
tr tp
tr r
tr
H
tr
A A
tp H
r
r/tp
1.4
A A
10 1.3
1.0
20 1.2 Kg
0.9 0.8
r/t p 10
1.1
50
0.7
1.0 100
20
0.9 0.0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0 tr /tp 1.2 1.4 1.6 1.8 2.0
Figure A-11 Kg at hole with inserted tubular. Principal stress in plate. H/tr = 2 Table A-12 Angle to principal stress. H/tr=2 tr/tp 0.0 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 r/tp=10 90 72 56 50 46 r/tp=20 90 80 63 54 50 r/tp=50 90 86 75 64 57 r/tp=100 90 88 82 73 66
100
0.0 0.0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0 tr /tp 1.2 1.4 1.6 1.8 2.0
Figure A-13 Kg at hole with inserted tubular. Shear stress in plate. H/tr = 2
tr
1
tr
A A
tp H
tr tp H
tr r
A A
A A
1.4 r/t p
10
1.3 20
1.2 Kg
50
1.1
100
Kg
100
1.0
0.9 0.0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0 tr /tp 1.2 1.4 1.6 1.8 2.0
0.2 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0 tr /tp 1.2 1.4 1.6 1.8 2.0
Figure A-12 Kg at hole with inserted tubular. Principal stress in plate. H/tr = 5 Table A-13 Angle to principal stress. H/tr=5 tr/tp 0.0 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 r/tp=10 90 66 54 49 46 r/tp=20 90 72 58 52 48 r/tp=50 90 80 65 56 52 r/tp=100 90 85 72 62 56
Figure A-14 Kg at hole with inserted tubular. Shear stress in plate. H/tr = 5
tr tr r
A A
tp H
B R
tR
A
Kg
A A
tp
A A
0.15
3.5
0.10
r/t p
3.4
t R /t p 0.5
0.05 Kg
10
Kg
3.3 1.0
3.2 1.5
20
3.1
100 50 2.0
The following relation applies (a = throat-thickness): tR /tp a/tR 0.5 0.71 1.0 0.40 1.5 0.33 0.0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 B/R 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8
3.0
Figure A-15 Kg at hole with inserted tubular. Stress in plate, normal to weld. H/tr = 2
tr tr r
A A
A
R
Kg
tR
tp
tp H
A A
A A
3.0
0.25
r/tp
0.20
10
0.15
The following relation applies (a = throat-thickness): tR /tp a/tR 0.5 0.71 1.0 0.40 1.5 0.33
0.10
Kg
Kg
1.0
1.5
0.05
2.0
20
0.00
-0.05
50 100
1.5 0.0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 B/R 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8
tr /t p
Figure A-16 Kg at hole with inserted tubular. Stress in plate, normal to weld. H/tr = 5
Figure A-18 Kg at hole with ring reinforcement. Stress at inner edge of ring
B R
tR
A
tp
B R
tR
A
tp
A A
A A
3.0
The following relation applies (a = throat-thickness): tR /tp a/tR 0.5 0.71 1.0 0.40 1.5 0.33
2.5
2.0
0.7
Kg 1.5
t R /t p 0.5
Kg
1.0
1.0 1.5
0.5
0.0 0.0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 B/R 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8
0.0 0.0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 B/R 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8
Figure A-19 Kg at hole with ring reinforcement. Stress in plate, parallel with weld
Figure A-21 Kg at hole with ring reinforcement. Stress in plate, normal to weld
tR
B R A A
tR
A R
tp
tp
A A
3.0
1.0 0.9 0.8 0.7 0.6 Kg 0.5 0.4 0.3 0.2 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 B/R 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8
The following relation applies (a = throat-thickness): a/tR tR /tp 0.5 0.71 1.0 0.40 1.5 0.33 tR /tp 0.5 1.0 1.5
The following relation applies (a = throat-thickness): tR /tp a/tR 0.5 0.71 1.0 0.40 1.5 0.33
2.5
tR /tp
Kg
0.5
2.0
1.0
1.5
1.5 0.0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 B/R 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8
Figure A-22 Kg at hole with double ring reinforcement. Stress at inner edge of ring
tR
B R A A A A
tp
tR
B R A A A A
tp
3.0 The following relation applies (a = throat-thickness): a/tR tR /tp 0.5 0.71 1.0 0.40 1.5 0.33
2.5
1.5
2.0
1.0
Kg
1.5
0.5 0.4
0.5
1.0
0.5
1.5
0.0 0.0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 B/R 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8
0.0 0.0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 B/R 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8
Figure A-23 Kg at hole with double ring reinforcement. Stress in plate, parallel with weld
Figure A-25 Kg at hole with double ring reinforcement. Stress in plate, normal to weld
tR
B R A A A A
tp
1.2
0.8
Kg
0.6
0.4
0.2
The following relation applies (a = throat-thickness): a/tR tR /tp 0.5 0.71 1.0 0.40 1.5 0.33
0.0 0.0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 B/R 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8
Figure A-24 Kg at hole with double ring reinforcement. Shear stress in weld
no min al =
0 K
weibull shape parameter h = 0.87 total number of stress cycles ntotal = 0.7108 welded joint, non-corrosive environment, S-N curve I. It follows from Table B-2 that the maximum allowable hot spot stress range at 10-8 probability level of exceedance is 376 MPa and from Table B-1 that maximum hot spot stress range at 10-4 probability level of exceedance is 169 MPa.
Table B-1 Maximum allowable hot spot stress range (MPa) at a probability of exceedance 10-4 to keep the fatigue damage less than 1.0 for different design life cycles. (A Weibull distribution for the long-term stress range is assumed) Weibull S-N Curve I Welded joint Welded joint S-N Curve III Base material S-N Curve IV Base material ShapeAir/Cathodic Corrosive Air/Cathodic Corrosive parameter 0 0 0 0 h Design life cycles Design life cycles Design life cycles Design life cycles 0.5108 0.7108 1.0108 0.5108 0.7108 1.0108 0.5108 0.7108 1.0108 0.5108 0.7108 1.0108 cycles cycles cycles cycles cycles cycles cycles cycles cycles cycles cycles cycles 0.60 259 233 209 209 188 169 408 375 344 311 278 247 0.61 255 230 206 206 186 167 405 373 342 307 274 244 0.62 252 227 203 203 183 165 402 370 339 302 270 240 0.63 249 224 201 201 181 163 399 368 337 298 267 237 0.64 246 221 198 198 179 161 396 365 335 294 263 233 0.65 242 218 196 196 177 159 393 362 332 290 259 230 0.66 239 215 193 193 175 157 391 360 330 286 256 227 0.67 236 213 191 191 173 155 388 357 327 282 252 224 0.68 233 210 189 189 170 154 385 354 325 278 249 221 0.69 230 208 186 186 168 152 382 352 322 275 245 218 0.70 227 205 184 184 167 150 379 349 320 271 242 215 0.71 225 203 182 182 165 148 376 346 317 267 239 212 0.72 222 200 180 180 163 147 373 344 315 264 236 209 0.73 219 198 178 178 161 145 370 341 313 260 233 207 0.74 216 195 176 176 159 144 367 338 310 257 230 204 0.75 214 193 174 174 157 142 364 336 308 254 227 202 0.76 211 191 172 172 156 141 361 333 306 251 224 199 0.77 209 189 170 170 154 139 359 330 303 248 221 197 0.78 207 187 168 168 152 138 356 328 301 245 219 194 0.79 204 185 166 166 151 136 353 325 299 242 216 192 0.80 202 182 164 164 149 135 350 323 296 239 213 189 0.81 200 180 163 163 148 134 348 320 294 236 211 187 0.82 197 179 161 161 146 132 345 318 292 233 208 185 0.83 195 177 159 159 145 131 342 315 290 230 206 183 0.84 193 175 158 158 143 130 340 313 287 228 204 181 0.85 191 173 156 156 142 128 337 311 285 225 201 179 0.86 189 171 154 154 140 127 334 308 283 223 199 177 0.87 187 169 153 153 139 126 332 306 281 220 197 175 0.88 185 168 151 151 138 125 329 304 279 218 195 173 0.89 183 166 150 150 136 124 327 302 277 215 192 171 0.90 182 164 148 148 135 123 325 299 275 213 190 169 0.91 180 163 147 147 134 122 322 297 273 211 188 167 0.92 178 161 146 146 133 121 320 295 271 208 186 165 0.93 176 160 144 144 132 119 317 293 269 206 184 164 0.94 175 158 143 143 130 118 315 291 267 204 182 162 0.95 173 157 142 142 129 117 313 289 265 202 181 160 0.96 171 155 141 141 128 116 311 287 264 200 179 159 0.97 170 154 139 139 127 116 309 285 262 198 177 157 0.98 168 153 138 138 126 115 306 283 260 196 175 156 0.99 167 151 137 137 125 114 304 281 258 194 174 154
Classification Notes - No. 30.7, June 2010 Page 73 Table B-1 Maximum allowable hot spot stress range (MPa) at a probability of exceedance 10-4 to keep the fatigue damage less than 1.0 for different design life cycles. (A Weibull distribution for the long-term stress range is assumed) Weibull S-N Curve I Welded joint Welded joint S-N Curve III Base material S-N Curve IV Base material ShapeAir/Cathodic Corrosive Air/Cathodic Corrosive parameter 0 0 0 0 h Design life cycles Design life cycles Design life cycles Design life cycles 0.5108 0.7108 1.0108 0.5108 0.7108 1.0108 0.5108 0.7108 1.0108 0.5108 0.7108 1.0108 cycles cycles cycles cycles cycles cycles cycles cycles cycles cycles cycles cycles 1.00 165 150 136 136 124 113 302 279 256 192 172 153 1.01 164 149 135 135 123 112 300 277 255 190 170 151 1.02 162 147 133 133 122 111 298 275 253 189 169 150 1.03 161 146 132 132 121 110 296 273 251 187 167 148 1.04 160 145 131 131 120 109 294 271 250 185 166 147 1.05 158 144 130 130 119 109 292 270 248 183 164 146 1.06 157 143 129 129 118 108 290 268 247 182 163 144 1.07 156 141 128 128 117 107 288 266 245 180 161 143 1.08 154 140 127 127 116 106 286 265 243 179 160 142 1.09 153 139 126 126 116 105 285 263 242 177 158 141 1.10 152 138 125 125 115 105 283 261 240 175 157 139 Table B-2 Maximum allowable hot spot stress range (MPa) at a probability of exceedance 10-8 to keep the fatigue damage less than 1.0 for different design life cycles. (A Weibull distribution for the long-term stress range is assumed.) Weibull S-N Curve I Welded joint Welded joint S-N Curve III Base material S-N Curve IV Base material ShapeAir/Cathodic Corrosive Air/Cathodic Corrosive parameter h 0 0 0 0 Design life cycles 0.5108 0.7108 1.0108 cycles cycles cycles 822 740 662 796 716 641 771 694 622 748 673 603 725 653 585 704 634 568 684 616 552 664 599 537 646 582 522 629 567 509 612 552 495 596 538 483 581 524 471 566 511 459 552 499 448 539 487 437 526 475 427 514 464 418 502 454 408 491 444 399 480 434 391 470 425 382 460 416 375 450 407 367 441 399 360 432 391 352 424 383 346 415 376 339 407 369 333 400 362 327 392 355 321 385 349 315 378 343 309 Design life cycles 0.5108 0.7108 1.0108 cycles cycles cycles 662 597 536 641 579 520 622 561 504 603 544 489 585 529 475 568 514 462 552 499 449 537 486 437 522 473 426 509 460 415 495 448 404 483 437 394 471 426 384 459 416 375 448 406 366 437 396 358 427 387 350 418 379 342 408 370 335 399 362 328 391 355 321 382 347 314 375 340 308 367 333 302 360 327 296 352 320 290 346 314 285 339 308 280 333 303 275 327 297 270 321 292 265 315 287 260 309 282 256 Design life cycles 0.5108 0.7108 1.0108 cycles cycles cycles 1 294 1 192 1 092 1 262 1 161 1 064 1 230 1 132 1 038 1 200 1 105 1 012 1 171 1 078 988 1 143 1 052 965 1 116 1 028 942 1 091 1 004 921 1 066 982 900 1 042 960 880 1 019 939 861 998 919 843 976 900 825 956 881 808 937 863 792 918 846 776 900 829 761 882 813 746 865 797 732 849 782 718 833 768 705 818 754 692 803 740 680 789 727 668 775 715 656 762 702 645 749 690 634 736 679 624 724 668 613 712 657 604 701 647 594 690 637 585 679 627 576 Design life cycles 0.5108 0.7108 1.0108 cycles cycles cycles 988 883 784 956 854 759 925 827 734 896 801 711 869 777 689 843 753 669 818 731 649 794 710 630 771 690 612 750 670 595 729 652 579 710 634 563 691 618 549 673 602 534 656 587 521 640 572 508 624 558 495 609 544 483 595 532 472 581 519 461 568 507 451 555 496 440 543 485 431 531 475 421 520 464 412 509 455 404 498 445 395 488 436 387 478 428 380 469 419 372 460 411 365 451 403 358 443 396 351
0.60 0.61 0.62 0.63 0.64 0.65 0.66 0.67 0.68 0.69 0.70 0.71 0.72 0.73 0.74 0.75 0.76 0.77 0.78 0.79 0.80 0.81 0.82 0.83 0.84 0.85 0.86 0.87 0.88 0.89 0.9 0.91 0.92
Classification Notes - No. 30.7, June 2010 Page 74 Table B-2 Maximum allowable hot spot stress range (MPa) at a probability of exceedance 10-8 to keep the fatigue damage less than 1.0 for different design life cycles. (A Weibull distribution for the long-term stress range is assumed.) Weibull S-N Curve I Welded joint Welded joint S-N Curve III Base material S-N Curve IV Base material ShapeAir/Cathodic Corrosive Air/Cathodic Corrosive parameter h 0 0 0 0 Design life cycles 0.5108 0.7108 1.0108 cycles cycles cycles 372 337 304 365 331 299 359 325 294 353 320 289 347 315 285 341 310 280 336 305 276 330 300 271 325 295 267 320 291 263 315 287 259 311 282 256 306 278 252 302 274 249 297 270 245 293 267 242 289 263 239 285 259 235 Design life cycles 0.5108 0.7108 1.0108 cycles cycles cycles 304 277 252 299 272 248 294 268 244 289 264 240 285 260 236 280 255 232 276 252 229 271 248 226 267 244 222 263 240 219 259 237 216 256 234 213 252 230 210 249 227 207 245 224 204 242 221 202 239 218 199 235 215 197 Design life cycles 0.5108 0.7108 1.0108 cycles cycles cycles 669 617 567 659 608 559 649 599 550 640 590 543 630 582 535 621 574 527 613 566 520 604 558 513 596 550 506 588 543 499 580 536 493 573 529 486 565 522 480 558 515 474 551 509 468 544 503 462 537 496 457 531 490 451 Design life cycles 0.5108 0.7108 1.0108 cycles cycles cycles 435 388 345 427 381 339 419 375 333 412 368 327 405 362 321 398 355 316 391 350 310 385 344 305 378 338 300 372 333 295 366 327 291 361 322 286 355 317 282 350 313 277 344 308 273 339 303 269 334 299 265 330 295 262
0.93 0.94 0.95 0.96 0.97 0.98 0.99 1.00 1.01 1.02 1.03 1.04 1.05 1.06 1.07 1.08 1.09 1.10
Figure C-1 View of ship and location of detail in ship Table C-1 The example ships main dimensions Length of ship Breadth of ship Block coefficient Design speed Depth of ship Moment of inertia of hull cross-section about transverse neutral axis Neutral axis above keel Moment of inertia of hull cross-section about vertical neutral axis
L B CB V D IN n0 IC
= = = = = = = =
m m knots m m4 m m4
The centre of gravity and free surface of the ballast tank is given in Table C-3.
Table C-2 Definition of load conditions Fully loaded Stillwater bending moment 3 874 950 kNm Draught Tf = 13.0 m Metacentric height GM = 1.6 m Roll radius of gyration KR = 15.0 m Part of time in load condition pn = 0.65 Density Ballast 3 874 950 kNm Tb = 9.0 m GM = 1.6 m KR = 15.0 m pn = 0.20 Water= 1 025 kg/m3 Distance from BL [m] 7.174 17.624
Table C-3 Ballast tank centre of gravity and free surface Ballast tank Distance from AP Distance from CL [m] [m] Centre of gravity 138.5 17.896 Centre of free sur138.5 18.94 face
Table C-4 Scantlings and properties of stiffener considered Stiffener sectional modulus at top of flange (with effective plate according to item 5.4.3 and net scantlings) Distance above keel Effective span length as defined in Figure 3.4 Distance from end of stiffener to hot spot Web frame spacing Stiffener spacing Thickness of plate Height of stiffener Thickness of web Width of flange Thickness of flange Distance from neutral axis to top flange
Zs z l x ls s tp h tw bf tf z01
999.6 103
mm3
= = = = = = = = = = =
m mm mm mm mm mm mm mm mm mm mm
C.4 K-factors
An important parameter in the fatigue analysis is the stress concentration factor. The stress concentration factor describes the increase in notch stress due to local geometry, weld geometry and workmanship. The value of the K-factor has to be decided for the considered detail before the hot spot stresses can be calculated. Reference is made to Section 12. The considered geometry is an unsymmetrical L-profile exposed to lateral loading in combination with global bending moments. For the weld at the end of a triangular bracket welded on top of the stiffener flange, the K-factor for axial loading and bending of the stiffener is taken according to Table A-2. For local stiffener bending due to lateral pressures the stress concentration factor Kn2 due to skew bending applies for un-symmetrical profiles, see A2.12.
Kg, axial Kg, bending Kn2 = = = 1.4 1.6 1.52
The stress concentration factor Kg, axial applies to global dynamic stress components (g) and secondary stress due to bending of girder systems (2) and the stress concentration factor Kg, bending applies to local stiffener bending stresses (first term of 2A).
e ,i = 2 + 2 A + 3
where
2 2A 3
is secondary stress resulting from bending of the girder system is stress resulting from bending of stiffener between supports is local plate bending stress
The secondary stress due to bending of girder system stress, 2, is not considered in the present example. The tertiary stress due to local plate bending is not applicable to the considered hot spot.
C.5.2 Calculation of stresses due to stiffener bending The local bending stress of stiffeners between supports is given in 5.4 as:
2A = K
m EI M K 2 r Zs l Zs
Stress due to relative deflections are not considered and the stress is thus psl 2 12rp Z S
2 A = K g , bending K n 2 where
x x rp = 6 6 + 1.0 l l
0 0 rp = 6 6 + 1 .0 = 1 .0 3000 3000
For a unit pressure of 1 kN/m2= 110-3 N/mm2 this gives: 2 A = 1.6 1.52 1 10 3 868 3000 2 1 = 1.583 N mm 2
12 999.6 10 3 kN / m 2 To determine the stresses from stiffener bending in the relevant loading conditions the bending stress is to be multiplied with the relevant dynamic pressure. For an external pressure load (pressure acting on plate side of the panel) there will be compression stress at the considered location and hence the negative sign applies. Internal pressure loads (pressure acting on stiffener side) will give tension stress and the positive sign applies.
for z < Tact z wl for Tact z wl < z < Tact + z wl for Tact + z wl < z
TR = 2 k R
GM
(roll period) (distance from actual water line. It is assumed that the external sea pressure above Tact + zwl will not contribute to fatigue damage) (vertical distance from the baseline to the load point) (at zw = Tact) (for ship with bilge keel) (vertical distance from the waterline to the top of the ships side)
z wl =
3 p dT 4 g
zw = z pdt = pd k = 1.0 f = 11 m
kf
T = min act f
(the smallest of Tact and f , maximum 0.80Cw) (horizontal distance from the centre line to the load point)
y = 20.0 m
TR
= 2 15.6
1.6 = 24.67 s
c = ( 1.25 0.025 24.67 ) 1.0 = 0.633 f = 50 0.633 / (40 + 75) = 0.275 p dp = 30.52 + 135 20 40 + 75 1.2(13 6.34) = 46.00 kN/m 2
zwl = 361.11 / (41.0259.81) = 4.56 m rp= 1.0 pe = 1.0 48.37 = 48.37 kN/m2
C.6.3 Combination of local stress components The stress amplitudes due to internal and external pressures are combined considering the sign of stress. Positive stress is defined as tension at the location of the weld.
0 -76.61 0 -76.61
0 0 0 0
p =
where
x, y and z are the coordinates of the load point, according to the coordinate system described in 4.6.6 with origin at midship, centreline, baseline: x=7m y = 20.00 m z = 6.34 m
p = 7 20 7 6.34 1 6.34 = 0.580 + + 2 10 13 4 263 4 24 5 263 13
C.6.4 Global hull bending moments The vertical wave bending moments are computed according to 6.2.1 as
Mwo,h = -0.11fr kwmCwL2B(CB + 0.7) (sagging moment) (hogging moment) Mwo,s = 0.19fr kwmCwL2BCB
The horizontal wave bending moment is calculated according to 6.2.2 as MH = 0.22 fr L9/4 (Tact + 0.30 B) CB (1-cos(2x/L)) where Cw = 10.75 [(300-L) / 100 ]3/2 (wave coefficient) (factor to transform the load from 10-8 to 10-4 probability level) fr = 0.51/h0 (long term Weibull shape parameter) h0 = 2.21 0.54 log(L) x = L/2 (distance from A.P to considered point) (moment distribution factor) kwm = 1.0 Cw = 10.75 [(300 - 263) / 100 ]3/2 h0 = 2.21 0.54 log(221) fr = 0.51/0.903 For fr = 1.0 (10-8 probability level) Mw0,s = - 0.11 1.0 1.0 10.525 2632 40 (0.7 + 0.7) Mw0,h = 0.19 1.0 1.0 10.525 2632 40 0.7 MH = 0.22 1.0 2639/4 (13 + 0.30 40) 0.7 (1-cos()) For fr = 0.464 (10-4 probability level) Mw0,s = - 0.11 0.464 1.0 10.525 2632 40 (0.7 + 0.7) Mw0,h = 0.19 0.464 1.0 10.525 2632 40 0.7 MH = 0.22 0.464 1.0 2639/4 (13 + 0.30 40) 0.7 (1-cos()) = 10.525 = 0.903 = 0.464 = -4 484.5103kNm = 3 873.0103 kNm = 1 789.1103 kNm
C.6.5 Stresses from global loads The vertical and horizontal bending moments results in the following stress ranges, according to 3.5.1 and 3.5.2 at the 10-4 level.
v = K axial (M Wo.h M Wo.s ) 10 3 y IC
(z n 0 )
IN
hg = 2 K axial M H 10 3
g = V 2 + g 2 + 2 vh V hg
Where y = B/2 (h)
(combined global stress range) (distance in m from vertical neutral axis to considered member) (average correlation between vertical and horizontal wave induced bending stress from 3.4.4) 19.6 m 48.05 N/mm 2
vh = 0.1
y = 40/2 (0.400) =
))
hg = 1.4 2 988.7 10 3 10 3
19.6 1273
42.61 N/mm2
67.33N/mm2
C.6.6 Combined hot spot stresses The combined local and global stress range is given as
g + b l = f e max a g + l
where a, b Load combination factors, accounting for the correlation between the wave induced local and global stress range equal 0.6 67.33 + 0.6 153.2 = 1.0 max 0.6 67.33 + 153.2
= 193.6 N/mm2
DET NORSKE VERITAS
C.6.7 Mean stress correction To calculate the mean stress correction factor the static stress at the hot spot has to be established. The static stress is calculated in the same manner as the dynamic stress, but based on static loads and full correlation between the different stress components.
The static external pressure is: p static,external = 1.025 9.81 (Tact z) = 66.97 kN/m 2 The internal pressure is zero for the full load condition and the static stress due to local stiffener bending is:
Stress per unit pressure 0 -1.583 0 Pressure Stress
Double hull bending Local stiffener bending Relative deflection Total local stress static, local
66.97
0 -106.0 0 -106.0
v,static = K axial M S 10 3
(z n 0 )
IN
= 1.4 3874950 10 3
The total static stress at the hot spot is then static = 106.0 + 47.98 = 58.08 N/mm 2 The compression and tension stress and fm factor is calculated as given in 2.3:
193.6 + = 58.08 + = 38.76 t = max static = 38.72 2 2 0
193.6 = 58.08 = 154.9 c = min static = 154.9 2 2 0
fm =
Non-corrosive environment:
q m1 m D = 0 Td 1+ 1 a1 h S ; 1 q
h
q m2 + a 2
m 1 + 2 h
S ; 1 q
Corrosive environment:
D = 2 D non corrosive
where (the number of cycles during 20 years) v 0 Td = (the Weibull scale parameter) q= 0 (ln n 0 )
1 h
= 12.29 N/mm 2
a1 ,m1, = S-N parameters for N<107 cycles a 2 , m2 = S-N parameters for N>107 cycles
S1 = Stress range for which change of slope occur This gives: Dnon-corrosive = 0.617
The local internal pressure amplitude at the 10-4 probability level is then calculated according to 6.4 as
p1 = av hs pi = fa max p2 = at ys p3 = al xs where
fa = 0.483 (same as for fully loaded condition) DET NORSKE VERITAS
p1 = 1.025 3.24 11.28 = 37.47 p i = 0.483 max p 2 = 1.025 2.82 1.06 = 3.07 p = 1.025 1.24 1.7 = 2.16 3 pi = 18.11 kN/m2
C.7.2 External sea pressure loads The sea pressure is calculated according to 6.3.1
pe = rppd where
for z < Tact z wl for Tact z wl < z < Tact + z wl for Tact + z wl < z
TR = 2 k R z wl = 3 p dT 4 g
GM
kf
T = min act f
(the smallest of Tact and f) (horizontal distance from the centre line to the load point)
y = 20.0 m
TR = 2 15.6
1.6 = 24.67 s
rp =
0 -67.42 0 -67.42
0 +28.68 0 +28.68
p =
where
x, y and z are the coordinates of the load point, according to the coordinate system described in 4.6.6 with origin at midship, centreline, baseline: x=7m y = 20.00 m z = 6.34 m
p =
C.7.5 Stresses from global loads The vertical and horizontal bending moments results in the following stress ranges, according to 3.5.1 and 3.5.2 at the 10-4 level
v = K axial (M Wo.h M Wo.s ) 10 3 hg = 2 K axial M H 10 3 y IC
(z n 0 )
IN
g = V + g + 2 vh V hg
2 2
vh = 0.1
y = 40/2 (0.400) =
(distance in m from vertical neutral axis to considered member) (average correlation between vertical and horizontal wave induced bending stress from 3.4.4) 19.6 m 48.05 N/mm 2
))
hg = 1.4 2 830.5 10 3 10 3
19.6 1273
C.7.6 Combined hot-spot stresses The combined local and global stress range is given as
g + b l = f e max a g + l
where a, b Load combination factors, accounting for the correlation between the wave induced local and global stress range equal 0.6 62.74 + 0.6 113.3 = 1.0 max 0.6 62.74 + 113.3
= 151.0 N/mm2
C.7.7 Mean stress correction To calculate the mean stress correction factor the static stress at the hot spot has to be established. The static stress is calculated in the same manner as the dynamic stress, but based on static loads and full correlation between the different stress components. The static external pressure is:
p static,external = 1.025 9.81 (Tact z) = 26.75 kN/m 2 p static,int ernal = 1.025 9.81 (h s z) = 49.71 kN/m 2 The internal pressure is zero for the full load condition and the static stress due to local stiffener bending is:
Stress per unit Pressure pressure 0 -1.583 26.75 1.583 49.71 0 Stress
Double hull bending Local stiffener bending, external pressure Local stiffener bending, internal pressure Relative deflection Total local stress static, local
The stress due to the stillwater bending moment is v,static = K axial M S 10 3 The total static stress at the hot spot is then static = 36.4 + 47.98 = 84.4 N/mm 2
(z n 0 )
IN
= 1.4 3874950 10 3
The compression and tension stress and fm factor is calculated as given in 2.3: 151 + = 84.4 + = 159.9 t = max static = 159.9 2 2 0 151 = 84.4 = 8.9 c = min static =0 2 2 0
fm =
q m2 + a 2
m 1 + 2 h
S ; 1 q
D = 2 D non corrosive
where v 0 Td =
q=
0 (ln n 0 )
h
151 (ln 10 )
4 1 0.925
= 13.70 N/mm 2
a1 ,m = S-N parameters for N<107 cycles 1, a 2 , m = S-N parameters for N>107 cycles
2
S1 = Stress range for which change of slope occur This gives: Dnon-corrosive = 0.752
MWO,h, MWO,s
F1 A.P 0.4
0.65 F2
F.P
Figure D-1 Distribution of sectional forces for computation of vertical bending stress range.
The combined horizontal wave bending- and wave torsion load at 10-4 probability level may in a global finite element calculation, be defined as a horizontal line load, qh, acting at a level 0.7 T above the vessel base line and a line moment load acting in the ship's centreline, mt, given as:
qh = 0.88 f 1 CB L B CSWP L4 T + 0.3B C cos 2 x ( act ) B r 2 L (kN/m) 18000 Tact
2 2 3
mt
= AWP / (LB) = water plane area in m2 of vessel at draught = T. vessel draught in m in considered condition. (Note a draught equal to the design draught may in general be assumed as rep= resentative for a condition to be applied for a fatigue analysis related to the ships cargo conditions) = distance in m from A.P. to considered position on hull girder. = as defined in 4.2.1 inserting h = 0.95
Note:
in this connection that the first term of the formula for MWT given in E-3 is based on an expression for the horizontal wave shear force which is compatible with the formula for the horizontal wave bending moment MWH defined in E-3.
---e-n-d---of---N-o-t-e---
Appendix E Simplified Calculation of the Combined Longitudinal Stress in Ships With Large Hatch Openings
E.1 General
The combined longitudinal stress, g, due to horizontal and vertical hull girder bending and torsion, may in general be determined in accordance with the following procedure. The combined stress is generally to be determined for a load combination where the torsional wave moment and the horizontal wave bending moment are combined with a reduced vertical wave bending moment. All are generally to be defined with a positive sign in relation to the axis system and sign convention defined in Figure E-1.
g g
= = =
The combined longitudinal stress range, g, is to be determined for both port and starboard side for every member of the cross-section and location for which the fatigue life is to be evaluated. Based on this, the fatigue damage; DS & DP, for the port and starboard member respectively is to be determined separately. The fatigue damage, D, for the member is then obtained according to the following formula:
D =
DS + D P 2
E.3 Determination of combined longitudinal stress range The combined longitudinal stress range, g, is determined ac-
, for longitudinals
= MWH = = fr IC Y = = = = =
M WH IC
horizontal wave bending moment at 10-4 probability level given as:
2 C2 B L BC SWP 2 18000 Tact
0.022 f r 1
11
as defined in 6.2.1 using h = 0.95 moment of inertia of hull cross-section about the vertical axis distance from centre line to considered member, defined in accordance with Figure E-1 stress due to hull girder vertical bending as given in 5.2. warping stress at position considered.
wt
M BWT I
bending stress of (upper) deck structure due to torsional deformation of hatch openings. 0 for members other than (upper) deck.
gt
= = =
M D D ID
the bending moment of considered upper deck at side structure induced by the torsional deformation of the deck due to wave torque MWT preferably calculated based on a direct calculation of the deck structure subjected to prescribed transverse- and longitudinal displacements determined according to the prismatic beam torsional response calculation moment of inertia of considered upper deck at side about vertical axis transverse distance positive in the global y-axis direction from neutral axis of the upper deck structure to considered member. warping bimoment at section considered due to wave torque MWT , see below (with sign as defined in Figure E-1). sectorial moment of inertia of considered cross-section Sectorial co-ordinate (unit warping) for the considered member of the cross-section wave torsional moment at 10-4 probability level is according to [5] given by:
MD ID
= = = = = = = =
D MBWT
I
MWT
+ 0.14 f r 1
Ze CSWP AWP Tact x = = = = =
(kNm)
distance in m from the shear centre of the midship section to a level 0.7Tact above the vessel base line. AWP / (L B) water plane area in m2 of vessel at draught = Tact. vessel draught in m in considered condition. (Note a draught equal to the design draught may in general be assumed a representative loading condition for a fatigue analysis for the ship's cargo conditions) distance in m from A.P. to section considered.
For evaluation of the combined stress of particular stress concentration areas, such as hatch corners, each of the stress components of the formula for g must be adjusted according to its appropriate stress concentration factor.
MBA
L2
xm
M WT dx
MBF
L2
M WT dx
18000 T 2
L 4 (T + 0.3B) C B z e
11
KB
7 0.1241L3 B2 C
SWP
The bending moment of the upper deck member, MD, should preferably be calculated based on direct calculation of the deck structure subjected to prescribed transverse- and longitudinal displacements determined according to the prismatic beam torsional response calculation. For hatch corners calculation procedure reference is given to Classification Note No. 31.7.
fabrication tolerances for alignment of butt joints and cruciform joints, and the local weld geometry. Normally the default values given in the tables in Section 12 should be used if not otherwise defined. These normal default values are estimated assuming geometrical imperfections within limits normally accepted according to good shipbuilding practices, see Table F1. The S-N curves given in this note are assumed to include the effect of surface weld discontinuities representative for normal, good workmanship. The S-N curves are also assumed to include a linear misalignment of 0.1t for butt welds and 0.3t for cruciform joints, see also A2.6. In special cases, K-factors may be calculated based on a specified, higher standard of workmanship. However, care should be taken not to underestimate the stress concentration factors by assuming a quality level which is difficult to achieve and follow up during production. Table F-1 Assumed normal tolerance limits for fabrication imperfections.
TYPE OF IMPERFECTION
TYPE OF IMPERFECTION
EMBEDDED IMPERFECTIONS
SURFACE IMPERFECTIONS
POROSITY, ISOLATED2) Max. pore diameter, d: Min. distance to adjacent pore: POROSITY, CLUSTERED1) Max. pore diameter, d: Max. length of cluster: SLAG INCLUSIONS1)2)3) Max. width: Max. length: UNDERCUT Max. depth: (Smooth transition required ) UNDERFILL1)2) Max. depth: Max. length: EXCESSIVE WELD REINFORCEMENT2)4) Max. height: OVERLAP1)2) Max. Length CRACKS LACK OF FUSION LINEAR MISALIGNMENT2) Max. eccentricity, butt joints: Max. eccentricity, cruciform joints: ANGULAR MISALIGNMENT Max. distortion: INCOMPLETE PENETRATION1)2) Max. length: Max. height: Notes: 1) 2) 3) 4)
Weld Discontinuities Weld Discontinuities Weld Discontinuities Weld Discontinuities Weld Discontinuities Geometrical Imperfections Weld Discontinuities Weld Discontinuities Weld Discontinuities Geometrical Imperfections Geometrical Imperfections Weld Discontinuities
t/4, max. 4 mm 2.5d 3 mm 25 mm 3.0 mm t, max. 25 mm Not applicable Not applicable Not applicable Not applicable Not accepted Not accepted Not applicable Not applicable t 1.5 mm
3 mm 2.5d Not applicable Not applicable 0.6 mm 1.5 mm t/2 b/5, max. 6 mm t Not accepted Not accepted 0.15t, max. 3 mm 0.3t 6 mm t t/10, max. 1.5 mm
Defects on a line where the distance between the defects is shorter than the longest defect are to be regarded as one continuous defect. t: Plate thickness of the thinnest plate in the weld connection. If the distance between parallel slag inclusions, measured in the transverse direction of welding is less than 3 times the with of the largest slag inclusion, the slag inclusions are regarded as one defect. b: Width of weld reinforcement
G.1.2 Bi-linear S-N curves When a bi-linear or two-slope S-N curve is used, the fatigue damage expression is
given by
q m1 m D = 0 Td 1+ 1 a1 h S ; 1 q
h
q m2 + a 2
m 1 + 2 h
S ; 1 q
where
S1
1
a1 , m = S-N fatigue parameters for N < 107 cycles (air condition) a 2 , m = S-N fatigue parameters for N > 107 cycles (air condition)
2
q=
(ln n 0 )1 h
( )
( ; )
Incomplete Gamma function, to be found in standard ta= bles Incomplete Gamma function, to be found = Complementary in standard tables
D=
where
Td h q = = = =
0 Td m m q (1 + ) a h
design life in seconds Weibull stress range shape distribution parameter Weibull stress range scale distribution parameter average zero-crossing frequency
i =1, j=1
r (2
ij
2m 0ij ) m
where
rij vo moij = the relative number of stress cycles in short-term condition i, j = long-term average zero-up-crossing-frequency (Hz) = zero spectral moment of stress response process
(1 +
are listed in Table G-1. Use of one slope S-N curves leads to results on the safe side for calculated fatigue lives (when using slope of curve at N < 107 cycles).
Table G-1 h 0.60 0.61 0.62 0.63 0.64 0.65 0.66 0.67 0.68 0.69 0.70 0.71 0.72 0.73 0.74 0.75 0.76 Numerical values for (1+m/h) m = 3.0 h m = 3.0 120.000 0.77 20.548 104.403 0.78 19.087 91.350 0.79 17.772 80.358 0.80 16.586 71.048 0.81 15.514 63.119 0.82 14.542 56.331 0.83 13.658 50.491 0.84 12.853 45.442 0.85 12.118 41.058 0.86 11.446 37.234 0.87 10.829 33.886 0.88 10.263 30.942 0.89 9.741 28.344 0.90 9.261 26.044 0.91 8.816 24.000 0.92 8.405 22.178 0.93 8.024 h 0.94 0.95 0.96 0.97 0.98 0.99 1.00 1.01 1.02 1.03 1.04 1.05 1.06 1.07 1.08 1.09 1.10 m = 3.0 7.671 7.342 7.035 6.750 6.483 6.234 6.000 5.781 5.575 5.382 5.200 5.029 4.868 4.715 4.571 4.435 4.306
m The Gamma function, 1 + is equal to 1.33 for m = 3.0. 2 G.2.2 Bi-linear S-N curve When a bi-linear or two-slope S-N curve is applied, the fatigue damage expression is given as,
2 2 2 2m 0ijn S0 m1 + 1 ; all seastates a1 2 2 2m 0ijn all seastates D = v 0 Td rijn 2 m2 i =1, j =1 m2 S 0 + 2 2m 0ijn + 1 ; a2 2 2 2m 0ijn
it is recommended that the considered details are evaluated in terms of improvement of local geometry to reduce its stress concentration. At an early design stage it is considered more cost efficient to prepare for minor geometric modifications than to rely on methods for fatigue improvement under fabrication and construction, such as grinding and hammer peening.
Figure H-1 Fatigue life influence of stress level and S-N data for welded connections
Figure H-2 Fatigue life sensitivity to stress concentration factor K and Weibull shape factor h
0.1
0.01
0.0 01
0 .00 01
0.000 01
0.0000 01
0.00000 01
0.0 00000 01
1.00 0.90 A c c u m u la te d p r o b a b ility o f fa tig u e fa ilu r e 0.80 0.70 0.60 0.50 0.40 0.30 0.20 0.10 0.00 0 50 100 Time in service (years) 150 200
Uncertainty in S-N-Curve only Uncertainty in S-N, Miner, CoVnom = 0.15, CoVhs = 0.05 Uncertainty in S-N, Miner, CoVnom = 0.20, CoVhs = 0.05 Uncertainty in S-N, Miner, CoVnom = 0.15, CoVhs = 0.10 Uncertainty in S-N, Miner, CoVnom = 0.20, CoVhs = 0.10
Figure H-4 Accumulated probability of fatigue crack as function of service life for 20 years design life
1E-11
Uncertainty in S-N curve only
Figure H-5 Accumulated probability of fatigue crack as function of service life for 20 years design life (left part from Figure H-4)
Static stress component for each load condition Design cycles , Fraction of load combination at sea Static hot spot stress range
Combined hot spot s tress range Plasticity correction Re- distibution correction Low cycle fatigue damage, DLCF
No
DHCF 1.0
D f 1 .0
Classification Notes - No. 30.7, June 2010 Page 98 Figure I-1 Assessment procedure for low cycle fatigue
Load conditions for low cycle fatigue calculations are quasi static loads due to mainly loading and unloading of cargoes and ballast, while load conditions for high cycle fatigue calculations are dynamic due to wave action. Stress components for low cycle fatigue can be obtained from the normal beam theory with known stress concentration factors or by fine mesh finite element analysis with mesh size equal to the thickness at hot spot regions. The calculated stress ranges for low cycle fatigue should be corrected by using a plasticity correction factor in order to employ the S-N curve instead of a strain-cycle curve.
Tankers over 120 000 TDW Tankers below 120 000 TDW Chemical tankers LNG carriers LPG carriers Over Panamax bulk carriers Panamax bulk carriers Handymax bulk carriers, about 45 000 TDW or smaller Shuttle tankers
I.5.2 Load conditions shall be selected to obtain stress ranges from each load condition. Figure I-2 and Figure I-3 show possible loading and unloading scenarios of a vessel during voyage. The following two stress ranges shall normally be taken into account at the design stage. Stress range due to full load and ballast
1 LCF =
full
ballast
alt 2
1 200
For vessels to be operated with frequent loading and unloading cycles, the design cycle may be increased, but need not be greater than 1 500 cycles for shuttle tankers, chemical tankers, and Handymax bulk carriers, and 1 000 cycles for the other vessel types respectively.
Location Load conditions
The other possible load combinations, e.g. full load to alternate, ballast to alternate, etc. need normally not be taken into account. The static hot spot surface stress range for low cycle fatigue shall be obtained from a combination of load conditions shown in Table I-3, Table I-4 and Table I-5 as appropriate.
Tankers with two longitudinal bulkheads |LC7-LC8| |LC7-LC8| Vessels without longitudinal bulkhead
Table I-3 Load combination for calculation of low cycle fatigue stress range, LCF Tankers with centreline longitudinal bulkhead |LC1-LC2| |LC1-LC2|
Longitudinal flange connections *) Web stiffener on top of longitudinal stiffener Transverse members welded to longitudinals in water ballast tanks, i.e. web stiffener, cutout, lug plate Lower and upper hopper knuckles, lower and upper chamfers *) Horizontal stringer at inner side longitudinal bulkhead *)
Full load -ballast Full load -ballast Full load -ballast Full load -ballast
|LC1-LC2| |LC1-LC2|
|LC7-LC8| |LC7-LC8|
Full load -ballast |LC1-LC2| |LC7-LC8| |LC13-LC14| |LC9-LC10| |LC15-LC16| Alternate load |LC3-LC4| |LC1-LC2| |LC7-LC8| |LC13-LC14| Girder connection to transverse bulk- Full load -ballast head, inner bottom to lower stool, inner Alternate LCs 1 -2 |LC9-LC10| |LC15-LC16| |LC3-LC4| bottom to cofferdam bulkhead *) Remark: *) hull girder stress should be added to the local bending stress for the corresponding load condition in the trim and stability booklet.
1 W
Ballast
Alternate 2
4 W
Full load
1 LCF
1 W
1 LCF
Ballast
2 W
2 LCF
2 W
Full load
Alternate 1
3 W
Figure I-3 Operation scenarios, ballast - full load alternate load conditions
The following load conditions may be applied for vessels with a centreline bulkhead. Normal ballast condition shall be used
for ballast condition. Actual draft, Tact shall be obtained from the loading manual.
Table I-4 Load conditions to be considered for low cycle fatigue for vessels with a centreline bulkhead Load case Stress component Midship section view Plan view LC1 Full load, Ts,
LC 1
LC2
Ballast, Tball, LC 2
LC3
Alternate 1, Tact, LC 3
LC4
Alternate 2, Tact, LC 4
LC5
Alternate 3, Tact, LC 5
LC6
Alternate 4, Tact, LC 6
The following load conditions may be applied for vessels with two longitudinal bulkheads.
Table I-5 Load conditions to be considered for low cycle fatigue for vessels with two longitudinal bulkheads Load case Stress component Midship section view Plan view LC7 Full load, Ts,
LC 7
LC8
Ballast, Tball LC 8
LC9
Tact, LC 9
LC10
Tact, LC 10
LC11
Tact, LC 11
LC12
Tact, LC 12
The conditions in Table I-6 may be applied to vessels without longitudinal bulkhead, e.g. LNG carriers, bulk carriers, ore carriers, etc. As the load combination between load conditions
LC5 and LC6 and between load conditions LC11 and LC12 is unusual, the combinations are normally not taken into account for low cycle fatigue strength assessment at the design stage.
Table I-6 Load conditions to be considered for low cycle fatigue for vessels without longitudinal bulkhead Load case Stress component Midship section view Plan view LC13 Full load, Ts
LC 13
LC14
Ballast, Tball,
LC 14
LC15
Tact, LC 15
LC16
Tact, LC 16
Where
k LCF
= = =
si
sj
static hot spot stress range for the k-th load combination between two load conditions i and j, given in Table I-3 static hot spot stress amplitude for i-th load condition static hot spot stress amplitude for j-th load condition
1/ h
I.6.3 Combined hot spot stress range Thus, combined stress range for, low cycle fatigue strength assessment which represent a peak to peak stress due to loading and unloading and wave actions is given as below
k k i j comb = LCF + 0. 5 w + w
i HCF
n0
hot spot high cycle fatigue stress range corresponding to 10-4 probability level for the i-th load condition, based on dynamic pressure components given in this class note for the intended operation route number of cycles, 108
where
i w
j w
I.6.2 Hot spot stress range for low cycle fatigue The static elastic hot spot stress range for the load combination k for low cycle fatigue calculations is the difference between the hot spot stress components for load condition i and j.
k LCF = si sj
= dynamic stress range at 10-4 probability level for the i-th load condition = dynamic stress range at 10-4 probability level for the j-th load condition
Thus, an effective pseudo stress range for calculation of low cycle fatigue damage for the k-th load combination can be obtained as
k k eff = n comb
where
= n
In order to obtain the plasticity correction factor, a cyclic stress-strain curve for materials should be obtained from tests. If the cyclic stress-strain relation is combined with the Neuber's rule, the Neuber's formula is given using the RambergOsgood relation as follows,
2 n K2
for
comb
> 2.0
2 hs
+ hs hs' E K
1/ n
where
if
comb
hs hs
2 .0
E n, K
= stress concentration factor = the actual stress in the hot spot = the actual strain in the hot spot = Youngs modulus = material coefficients.
comb
> 2 .0
comb > 2 .0
= 0.8
f = yield stress
Coefficients for the plasticity correction factor, a and b are given below.
Table I-7 Plasticity correction factor, ke Stress range
comb
K depends on the magnitude of the load and the sharpness of the notch. Coefficients, n and K' are given in Table I-8 for different steel grades used for derivation of the plasticity correction factors. Normally, the Neubers rule is widely used to obtain the plasticity correction factor, as the rule may give somewhat conservative results. If the plane strain behaviour is relevant, the Glinka rule may be used for derivation of the plasticity correction factor instead of the Neubers rule.
Table I-8 Material properties for cyclic stress-strain curves Material Mild NV32 NV36 K, (N/mm2) n
> 2 .0
602.8 0.117
678.3 0.111
689.4 0.115
pseudo
The combined stress ranges are assumed to be derived from the linear elastic analysis. The hot spot stress range contributing to low cycle fatigue is large and implies local yielding at the hot spot. Thus, a correction of the elastic stress range is needed in order to derive a stress range that is representative for the actual strain range taking the non-linear material behaviour into account.
I.6.4 Plasticity correction factor The plasticity correction factor can be obtained from an actual cyclic stress-strain curve and Neuber's rules or non-linear finite element analysis, as shown in Figure I-4.
elastic
Neubers rules
hs
ke =
where
pseudo elastic
elastic from
Linear FEA
hs
elastic
pseudo
= = =
Elastic hot spot stress obtained from linear elastic finite element analysis or a formula Pseudo linear elastic hot spot stress
E hs
For more complex structural connections only part of the region around the hot spot area will be yielding when subjected to large dynamic loads. This can be accounted for by a factor accounting for redistribution of stress and strain. Based on non-linear analysis of actual connections in ship structures a redistribution factor may be introduced.
I.6.5 Total elastic stress component The total elastic static hot spot stress amplitude due to static hull girder and static pressure loads, section I.6.2, and the total elastic dynamic hot spot stress amplitude at 10-4 probability level due to wave actions during loading and unloading, section I.6.1., are established by use of simplified stress analysis or finite element analysis, Table I-9 below. The relevant pressure and girder loads are established according to chapter 6. The dynamic stress components due to local
and global loads should be combined to a total dynamic stress range according to section 4.6. Locations covered by the PLUS notation should be combined according to Classification Note 34.2.
Table I-9 Stress models for elastic hotspot stress at LCF vulnerable location Location Stress approach Longitudinal flange connec- Simplified stress analysis action cording to chapter 5 Web stiffener on top of lon- Semi-nominal stress model gitudinal stiffener *) according to CN34.2 (50x50mm mesh) Transverse members welded Semi-nominal stress model to longitudinals in water bal- according to CN34.2 last tanks, i.e. cut-outs, lug (50x50mm mesh) plate Fine mesh model according Lower and upper hopper to chapter 10. knuckles, lower and upper (txt mesh) chamfers *) Horizontal stringer at inner Fine mesh model according side longitudinal bulkhead *) to chapter 10. (txt mesh) Girder connection to trans- Fine mesh model according verse bulkhead, inner bottom to chapter 10. to lower stool, inner bottom (txt mesh) to cofferdam bulkhead *)
D LCF =
where
Lk
n LC
k L k D LCF =
L
1
n LC
n LCF Nk
n LC
= total number of design load condition = fraction of load combinations, see Table I-2.
If a non-linear finite element analysis is carried out directly, the effective pseudo-elastic hot spot stress amplitude can be obtained by multiplying the Youngs modulus by the calculated notch strain amplitude.
Table I-10 Low cycle fatigue S-N curve Material
log a
Welded joints & base metal 12.164
3.0
I.8 Corrosion
Corrosion reduction given in DNV rules for Classification of Ships Pt.3 Ch.1 shall be applied. An S-N curve in air is used for the entire design life time.
I.10 Mean stress effect for base metal and welded joints
No mean stress effect should be considered for base metal and welded joints for evaluation of low cycle fatigue damage, section I.7.
Nk
k eff
= number of cycles to failure for low cycle fatigue stress range = effective stress range for the k-th load combination
The basic S-N curve for low cycle fatigue assessment is given in Table I-9. This design curve is applicable to both welded joints and base metal for LCF region.
Df =
D HCF
D LCF 0 . 25 + 0 . 75
1 .0
for 0 . 25 D LCF 1 . 0
where
DHCF DLCF = = damage due to high cycle fatigue based on the 20 years or 25 years design life for NAUTICUS(Newbuilding) or CSR respectively. damage due to low cycle fatigue based on the design cycles, no need to be greater than the maximum design cycles in I-5.
Note that the HCF damage contribution to the combined faDET NORSKE VERITAS
tigue damage should be based on minimum design life, 20 years for Nauticus(Newbuilding) or 25 years for CSR-notation, even if an extended fatigue design life is required for HCF calculations. For low cycle fatigue damage below 0.25, fatigue damage due to HCF shall be satisfied.
D HCF 1 . 0
Figure I-5 shows the requirements for the combined fatigue damages.
From a finite element analysis, it is assumed that the following hot spot stress components are obtained at HS1 in Table I-12.
Table I-12 Hot spot stress components at HS1, N/mm2 Full Stress components load Hot spot stress amplitude due to still water vertical -126.9 bending moment Hot spot stress amplitude due to local bending of -270 stiffener Ballast
126.9 311.0
Total static hot spot stress amplitude, is Dynamic stress range at iHCF 10-4 probability level,
i
Thus, the following stress range for low cycle fatigue is obtained.
Table I-13 Combined stress range for low cycle fatigue strength assessment, N/mm2 Stress component Full load-Ballast
Static hot spot stress range for low k cycle fatigue, LCF
k Combined stress range, Comb
The following figure shows hot spot stress components from loading and unloading and wave actions.
Inner bottom
Non-scale
Ballast
437.9
135.2
HS1
834.8
Full load
396.9
87.5
I.15.2 Fatigue damage calculations due to LCF The following fatigue damage ratio due to LCF is calculated.
Df =
0 . 25 D 2 + LCF D HCF = 0 . 75
0 . 24 2 + 0 . 44 2 = 0 . 50 1 . 0
The number of cycles, Nk Damage ratio due to high cycle fatigue, DHCF Damage ratio due to low cycle fatigue, DLCF
It is found that the current detail is acceptable in view of the combined fatigue due to LCF and HCF.
600 = 0 . 58 1038
I.15.3 Combined fatigue damage due to LCF and HCF Since the LCF damage is greater than 0.25, a combined damage due to high cycle fatigue and low cycle fatigue should be
vibn
Fw
B CB Lpp Z
= 18.5 x 10 6
,9 B (C B + 0.7 ) L1pp
= = = =
moulded hull breadth (m) block coefficient at scantling draught length between perpendiculars (m) hull girder section modulus (m3)
,9 R V 2 B (C B + 0,7 ) L1pp
Fvibn =
2.3 x 10 8
(T
/ L pp )
0, 4
Tn V
= = = = =
route factor 0.937 for North Atlantic operation [1,0] for world wide operation forward draught in m in condition considered, e.g. cargo and ballast condition design service speed with 20% sea margin (knots)
Method B For modelling with shell elements without any weld the hot spot stress is taken as the stress at the read out point 0.5 t away from the intersection line. For modelling with three-dimensional elements with the weld included in the model the hot spot stress is taken as the stress at the read out point 0.5 t away from the weld toe. The effective hot spot stress is derived as
Eff
For modelling with shell elements without any weld a linear extrapolation of the stresses to the intersection line from the read out points at 0.5t and 1.5t from the intersection line can be performed to derive hot spot stress. For modelling with three-dimensional elements with the weld included in the model a linear extrapolation of the stresses to the weld toe from the read out points at 0.5t and 1.5t from the weld toe can be performed to derive hot spot stress. The notations for stress components are shown in Figures K-1 and K-2. The effective hot spot stress to be used together with the hot spot S-N curve is derived as
where , 1 and 2 are explained under method A. The equation for effective stress is made to account for the situation with fatigue cracking along a weld toe as shown in Figure K-1 and fatigue cracking when the principal stress direction is more parallel with the weld toe as shown in Figure K-2.
//
//
Fatigue crack
Eff
+ 0.81 = max 1 2
2
2 //
Section
1 =
and
+ // 1 + 2 2
( // )2 + 4 //2
//
//
Principal stress direction Weld toe
2 =
where
+ // 1 2 2
( // )2 + 4 //2
= 0.90 if manual fillet or butt welds are carried out = 0.80 if automatic welds are carried out from both sides.
The equation for effective stress is made to account for the situation with fatigue cracking along a weld toe as shown in Figure K-1 and fatigue cracking when the principal stress direction is more parallel with the weld toe as shown in Figure K-2.
Fatigue crack
Section
Figure K-2 Fatigue cracking when principal stress direction more parallel with weld toe