DNV CN - 31-3
DNV CN - 31-3
DNV CN - 31-3
No. 31.3
STRENGTH ANALYSIS OF
HULL STRUCTURES IN TANKERS
JANUARY 1999
DET NORSKE VERITAS AS (DNV AS), a fully owned subsidiary Society of the Foundation, undertakes classification and
certification and ensures the quality of ships, mobile offshore units, fixed offshore structures, facilities and systems, and carries
out research in connection with these functions. The Society operates a world-wide network of survey stations and is
authorised by more than 120 national administrations to carry out surveys and, in most cases, issue certificates on their behalf.
Classification Notes
Classification Notes are publications which 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.
An updated list of Classification Notes is available on request. The list is also given in the latest edition of the Introduction-
booklets to the "Rules for Classification of Ships", the "Rules for Classification of Mobile Offshore Units" and the "Rules for
Classification of High Speed and Light Craft".
In "Rules for Classification of Fixed Offshore Installations", only those Classification Notes which are relevant for this type of
structure have been listed.
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. General.........................................................................................................................................4
1.1 Introduction...................................................................................................................................4
1.2 Procedure ......................................................................................................................................4
1.3 Definitions ....................................................................................................................................4
2. Cargo Tank Analysis ..................................................................................................................6
2.1 General..........................................................................................................................................6
2.2 Model extent .................................................................................................................................6
2.3 Modelling of geometry .................................................................................................................7
2.4 Elements and mesh size ................................................................................................................9
2.5 Boundary conditions ...................................................................................................................10
2.6 Loading conditions .....................................................................................................................12
2.7 Presentation of input and results ................................................................................................16
2.8 Result evaluation and applicable acceptance criteria .................................................................17
3. Local Structure Analysis ..........................................................................................................21
3.1 General........................................................................................................................................21
3.2 Stiffeners with brackets subjected to large deformations............................................................21
3.3 Other fine mesh models. .............................................................................................................23
3.4 Documentation and result presentation.......................................................................................24
3.5 Acceptance criteria......................................................................................................................24
4. Shear Force Correction ............................................................................................................24
4.1 Introduction.................................................................................................................................24
4.2 Rule requirement.........................................................................................................................24
4.3 Allowable shear force .................................................................................................................25
4.4 Corrected shear force ..................................................................................................................25
Appendix A. Boundary Conditions for the Application of Hull Girder Loads..............................28
Appendix B. Checklist for Finite Element Analysis .........................................................................30
Appendix C. Beam Models .................................................................................................................32
C.1 Beam modelling general .............................................................................................................32
C.2 Beam modelling for tankers of type A........................................................................................37
C.3 Beam modelling for tankers type B ............................................................................................39
C.4 Beam modelling for tankers type C ............................................................................................40
January 1999
Any recognised calculation method or computer program Figure 1.1 shows the different tanker types. Other types of
may be applied, provided the combined effects of bending, tank arrangements shall be handled in an equivalent way.
shear and axial torsional deformations are adequately
considered. For smaller tankers, a 3-dimensional beam analysis or a
combination of 2-dimensional beam analyses may be used. A
Strength analysis carried out in accordance with this note procedure for such calculations is presented in Appendix C.
will be accepted as a basis for class approval in general.
1.3 Definitions
D - Moulded depth in m, Ref. Pt.3 Ch.1 Sec.1.
σ - Normal stress
τ - Shear stress
η - Usage factor
1.2 Procedure Figure 1.2 and Figure 1.3 shows the nomenclature for a
typical double hull midship section.
Acceptable calculations of 3-dimensional girder systems
should normally be carried out by means of finite element
analysis. An applicable procedure for such calculations is
presented for 3 standard types of tanker in Chapter 2 and 3 of
this Classification Note. These three standard types are in the
following called tankers of type A, B and C where:
January 1999
Section X–X
Web
Web plate
stiffeners
Face
plate
Sheerstrake
X
End bracket
Inner side
Bracket Longitudinal longitudinal
Vertical girder radius BHD plating & BHD
(web frame) Bracket toe
longitudinals Side shell plating
& longitudinals
Cross tie
Centre Wing
Vertical girder
on longitudinal cargo cargo
bulkhead tank tank
Double side water
ballast tank
Horizontal girder
(stringer) Upper
& lower Inner bottom
hopper plating & Hopper plate
corners longitudinals
Y
Bilge plate
Manhole Transverse girder Longitudinal Keel Bottom shell Y Double Outboard girder
or floor plating girder in plating plating & bottom water (margin girder)
centreline longitudinal ballast tank
Floor stiffener
Lug
Backing bracket
Floor plating
Bottom longitudinal
January 1999
January 1999
Figure 2.1 Example of a coarse mesh 3D-model of a tanker of type B, and a detailed 3D-model of a tanker of type A.
Submodels will be necessary for the coarse mesh model
January 1999
When reduced effectivity of curved flanges are not represented 2.3.3 Stiffeners
by the model formulation itself, the reduced effectivity shall be Continuous stiffeners oriented in the direction of the girders
defined by assigning reduced thickness of plate elements or contribute to the overall bending stiffness of the girders and
cross sectional areas of beam and rod elements. Such reduced shall be included in the model in such a way that the bending
effectivity may be calculated as given in Pt.3 Ch.1 Sec.3 stiffness of the girder is correctly modelled.
Half thicknesses shall be applied on plates in symmetry planes Non-continuous stiffeners may be included in the model as
on the boundaries of the model. beam element with reduced effectivity. Sectional area of
such stiffeners may be calculated as follows:
2.3.2 Girders
Flanges of girders shall be included in the model. Sniped at both ends 30 % of actual area
Openings in the girder webs will be present in ship structures Sniped at one end 70 % of actual area
for access and pipe penetrations. If such cut-outs affect the
Connected at both ends 100 % of actual area
overall force distribution or stiffness of the girder, the cut-out
shall be accounted for in the model. This may be done by
either: Stiffeners on girders perpendicular to the flanges may be
included in the model when considered important,
− reducing the thickness according to the formula below
alternatively by transferring them to the nearest nodes
or,
instead of introducing additional nodes. Buckling stiffeners
− by geometrical modelling of the cut-out. considered less important for the stress distribution, as sniped
buckling stiffeners, may be ignored. Buckling stiffeners on
For the first approach the mean girder web thickness may be brackets and stringers paralell to the girder flanges, like the
taken as follows: 2nd, 3rd, 4th etc. stiffeners from the free flanges, as shown in
Figure 2.3, may normally be ignored.
L.BHD
tmean
1st
tw hco h
lco
where:
tw = web thickness
2 Figure 2.3 Buckling stiffeners , like the 2nd, 3rd, 4th etc.
l co
rco = 1+ stiffeners from the free flanges on stringers parallell to
2.6 (h − h co )2 the girder flanges may normally be ignored
January 1999
The element mesh should preferably represent the actual Figure 2.5 Alternative mesh in longitudinal direction
plate panels between stiffeners so that the stresses for the The figure shows horizontal stringer and cross ties.
control of yield and buckling strength can be read and
averaged from the results without interpolation or • For determination of stresses in large brackets mesh
extrapolation. sizes equal to stiffener spacing may be accepted,
provided that considerable discontinuities (knuckles)
In practise, the following may be applied:
along curved free flanges are avoided. An acceptable
mesh is shown in Figure 2.6. The mesh at the bracket
• There should be minimum three elements over the
toes may be terminated at the nearest node as long as
height of girders. The mesh should in general, and as far
this does not influence the force distribution in the
as practical, follow the stiffener system on the girders.
bracket. It is emphasised that this relatively coarse mesh
See Figure 2.4.
is only suited for determination of the stress in the
• One element between longitudinals. See Figure 2.4. This
middle of the bracket’s free edge as described in 2.8.1.
contributes to a correct load transfer from the
longitudinal to the transverse frame.
January 1999
8 ASi E
Ki =
7.8 × 3 × l t
Where:
January 1999
Line C is the intersection between the vertical part of the When a full breadth model is made the boundary conditions
shell and the transverse bulkhead. Line D is the intersection are to follow the principles for tankers of type B with respect
between the vertical part of the inner side and the transverse to fixation in the transverse direction.
bulkhead. Line E is the intersection between the transverse
bulkhead and the longitudinal bulkhead.
Line E
Line D
X Restricted from displacement or rotation
Line E
Line D
Line C
- Free
Line C
S Springs (S/Fv means springs or forces)
FV Vertical forces. When vertical forces are applied the z
model must in addition be restricted from translation in
the vertical direction by fixing it in one node, taken as the x
2.5.2 Tanker type B Line C is the intersection between the vertical part of the side
shell and the transverse bulkhead. Line D is the intersection
Basically the same boundary conditions apply as for tankers between the vertical part of the inner side and the transverse
of type A. However, for these vessels unsymmetrical loading bulkhead. Line E is the intersection between the transverse
conditions about the centreline apply. This leads to boundary bulkhead and the longitudinal bulkhead. Line C and D are to
conditions as given in Table 2.2, when the longitudinal be present on both sides of the model.
stresses for double bottom and deck are not considered.
Plane B X - - - X X
Line E
b
Line C, D, E S/Fv
Pla
Line E
Line D
Point a and b X ne
A
Line C
Line D
- Free a
z
S Springs (S/Fv means springs or forces)
FV Vertical forces. When vertical forces are applied the model x
must in addition be restricted from translation in the y
vertical direction by fixing it in one node
January 1999
When longitudinal stresses in double bottom or other the middle tank is empty and surrounding tanks are full, as
longitudinal structure are to be considered, boundary for load condition LC-C1. The magnitude of the force will
conditions following the principles in Table 2.3 with a vary for each loadcase but shall in general be equal to the net
counteracting force may be applied. load on the transverse bulkhead.
Point a is the point of intersection between the bottom, Line C is the intersection between the vertical part of the
centreline and transverse bulkhead. shell and the transverse bulkhead. Line D is the intersection
between the vertical part of the inner side and the transverse
Point b is the point of intersection between the deck, bulkhead. Line C and D are to be present on both sides of the
centreline and transverse bulkhead. model.
2.5.3 Tanker type C Point a is the point of intersection between the bottom,
centreline and transverse bulkhead.
Applicable boundary conditions are shown in Table 2.3.
Point b is the point of intersection between the deck,
Tankers of type C normally have several longitudinal girders
centreline and transverse bulkhead.
in the double bottom. The stresses referred to as longitudinal
girder bending stresses in the Rules Pt.3 Ch.1 Sec.13 shall Point c is the point where the counteracting longitudinal
therefore be calculated. The boundary conditions in Table force is applied.
2.3 introduce a longitudinal counteracting force in the
longitudinal direction. The force shall only be applied when
.
Plane B X - - - X X b
Line C
Line C, D S/Fv Pla
ne
Line D
Point a and b X A
Point c Fh
Line D
Line C
January 1999
LC External Internal
Draught Condition Figure
No pressure pressure
January 1999
LC External Internal
Draught Condition Figure
No pressure pressure
January 1999
LC External Internal
Draught Condition Figure
No pressure pressure
Comments:
1), 2) Pressure to be taken as given in Pt3. Ch.1 Sec.13
January 1999
2.6.4 Fatigue loads model the sea pressure is to be taken as the roll dominated
pressure pdr. The internal tank pressure is to be taken as the
In order to include stresses caused by relative deflection in pressure caused by vertical acceleration av. In case the model
the fatigue assessment of longitudinals, dynamic load cases covers a tank in the fore or aft end of the ship, an evaluation
as specified in Table 2.7 are to be applied to the cargo hold should be made if also the pitch dominated sea pressure pdp
model. The results from these loadcases may also be used for should be included.
fatigue assessment of other structural parts, e.g. hopper
knuckles. It is emphasized that this is pure dynamic load cases for
evaluation of the structures’ fatigue life. The static part is
The fatigue loadcases will be the same for tankers of type A, therefore not included.
B and C.
The further procedure for fatigue calculations is given in the
The external and internal dynamic pressures are to be mentioned classification note.
calculated according to Classification Note 30.7 “Fatigue
Assessment of Ship Structures”. For a midship cargo hold
Table 2.7 Dynamic loadcases for the evaluation of structures’ fatigue life
LC
Draught Condition External pressure Internal pressure Figure
No
2.7 Presentation of input and results • Free flange sectional area considering efficiency of
curved flanges
The requirements given in DNV Rules Pt.3 Ch.1 Sec.13 • Beam section properties
A300 regarding proper documentation of the model shall be • Boundary conditions
followed. A practical guidance is given in the following. In
• Load cases
Appendix B, examples of checklists for internal verification
of FEM analyses are given.
2.7.2 Presentation of results
2.7.1 Presentation of input data The stress presentation should be based on element
A reference to the set of drawings (drawing numbers and membrane stresses or gauss membrane stresses at the middle
versions) the model is based on should be given. The of element thickness, excluding plate bending stress, in the
modelled geometry is to be documented preferably as an form of iso-stress contours in general. Numerical values
extract directly from the generated model. The following should also be presented for highly stressed areas (e.g. areas
input shall be reflected: where stress exceeds 60% of allowable limits or areas in way
of openings not included in the model).
• Plate thickness
The following should be presented:
January 1999
January 1999
Upper deck
N.A.
N.A.
N.A.
Hull Girder Bending Double Bottom Bending Local Bending of Longitudinal
Figure 2.8 Stress components related to hull girder, girders, stiffener and plates
It should also be noted that the stiffener bending stress is not 2.8.1.2 Mean shear stress
a part of the girder bending stresses. The magnitude of the
stiffener bending stress included in the stress results depends The mean shear stress, τmean, is to be used for the capacity
on the mesh division and the element type that is used. This check of a plate. This may be defined as the shear force
is shown in Figure 2.9 where the stiffener bending stress, as divided on the effective shear area. For results from finite
calculated by the FE-model, is shown depending on the mesh element methods the mean shear stress may be taken as the
size (valid for 4-noded shell elements). One element between average shear stress in elements located within the actual
floors results in zero stiffener bending. Two elements plate field, and corrected with a factor describing the actual
between floors result in a linear distribution with shear area compared to the modelled shear area when this is
approximately zero bending in the middle of the elements. relevant. For a plate field with n elements the following
When a relatively fine mesh is used in the longitudinal apply:
direction the effect of stiffener bending stresses should be
i=n
∑ (τ ⋅ A )
isolated from the girder bending stresses when buckling and
i i
stress level are checked.
i =1
τ mean =
Aw
Where
January 1999
σbkt
January 1999
Table 2.8 Examples of areas to be checked and procedure to be used for buckling control
Item Remarks
Buckling of girder plate flanges 1) Uniaxial buckling in transverse direction to be analysed based on mean transverse compressive stress
in: with ψ = 1 and allowable usage factor, η=0.8
2) Uniaxial buckling in longitudinal direction to be analysed according to Sec.14 based on hull girder
• Double bottom (including stress σal = σS + σW.
bottom and inner bottom) 3) Bi-axial buckling to be analysed based on longitudinal stress and mean transverse stress. When the
• Double side (including longitudinal stresses are obtained from hull girder loads on a probability of exceedance of 10-4, usage
side and inner side) factors ηx=ηy=0.85 shall be used. For a probability of exceedance of 10-8, usage factors ηx=ηy=1.0
• Deck shall be used.
• Long. Bulkhead Comment:
Mean transverse compressive stress is to be calculated from a group of elements representing one plate
field between stiffeners.
Longitudinal stress are to be taken as described in 2.8.1
Buckling of girder plate flanges 1) Buckling to be analysed based on mean transverse compressive stress with ψ = 1 and allowable usage
in: factor, η=0.8.
• Transverse bulkheads 2) Bi-axial buckling to be checked when relevant.
Comment:
Mean transverse compressive stress are normally to be calculated from a group of elements
representing one plate field between stiffeners
Buckling of: 1) Buckling to be analysed based on axial stress with usage factor according to Rules.
• Cross tie Comment:
Axial stress in cross tie may normally be taken as the stress at the mid height and at the mid span. The
effective span of the cross tie may be taken as:
• When the cross tie is located in the centre tank and connected to vertical girders on the
longitudinal bulkheads located in the same tank as the cross tie, the effective span of the cross tie
may normally be taken as: Breadth of tank – Depth of one vertical girder.
• When the cross tie is located in the wing tank and connected to one vertical girder on the
longitudinal bulkhead, the effective span of the cross tie may normally be taken as : Breadth of
tank – ½ Depth of the vertical girder
2) Buckling of local plate panels on cross ties to be checked according to buckling of girder webs with
one or two plate flanges as appropriate.
3) Buckling of free flanges on the cross tie to be calculated according to Sec.14
Buckling of girder webs in: Buckling of girder webs with one plate flange:
• Double bottom 1) Buckling to be calculated as for girder plate flanges
• Double side 2) Buckling to be analysed based on mean shear stress with allowable usage factor, η=0.85.
• Deck 3) Bi-axial buckling especially in the bracket areas with shear.
• Longitudinal bulkhead
• Transverse bulkhead Buckling of girder webs with two plate flanges:
1) Buckling to be analysed based on mean shear stress with allowable usage factor, η=0.85.
2) Buckling caused by compressive loads from sea and cargo, alternatively together with shear, to be
checked when relevant.
Comment:
Mean shear stress to be taken as described in 2.8.1, representing one plate field between stiffeners.
January 1999
Table 2.9 Examples of areas to be checked and procedure to be used for control of stresses
Item Remarks
Stresses in longitudinal girders 1) Allowable longitudinal nominal stress, σ = 190f1. Based on a probability of exceedance of 10-4.
(when relevant) (longitudinal stress, σLR = σDBL + σS + σWR < 190 f1 , Ref 2.8.1)
2) Allowable mean shear stress τ = 90f1 (sea) and τ =100f1 (harbour) for girders with one plate
flange, and τ =100f1 (sea) and τ =110f1 (harbour) for girders with two plate flanges. Shear stress
in way of openings not included in the calculation to be evaluated in terms of mean shear stress
Ref. 2.8.1.
Stresses in transverse and vertical 1) Allowable nominal normal stress in flanges of girders σ = 160f1 (sea) and σ = 180f1 (harbour) in
girders with two plate flanges general.
like:
2) Allowable mean shear stress of girder webs, τ = 100f1 (sea) and 110f1 (harbour). Shear stress in
• Double bottom way of openings not included in the calculation to be evaluated in terms of mean shear stress Ref.
• Double side 2.8.1.
• Other double skin 3) Allowable equivalent stress, σe = 180f1 for seagoing conditions and σe = 200f1 for harbour
constructions conditions.
Stresses in transverse and vertical 1) Allowable nominal normal stress, σ = 160f1 (sea) and σ = 180f1 (harbour) in general.
girders with one plate flange like: 2) Allowable mean shear stress τ = 90f1 (sea) and 100f1 (harbour). Shear stress in way of openings
• Deck girders not included in the calculation to be evaluated in terms of mean shear stress Ref. 2.8.1.
• Long. bhd. girders 3) Allowable equivalent stress, σe = 180f1 for seagoing conditions and σe = 200f1 for harbour
• Trv. bhd girders conditions
• Cross ties
• Other single skin
constructions
Stresses in brackets 1) Under the assumption that the bracket is of favourable design the allowable axial stress in the
middle of the bracket’s free edge may be taken as 200f1. When there is uncertainty related to the local
design of the bracket toe areas a fine mesh model is to be made.
January 1999
Model extent
The model is recommended to have the following extent:
January 1999
January 1999
4.1.1 Definitions
Symbols:
January 1999
tτ I N
Q allowable = − Qw
Φ100 S N
where
Pc = WCT+WCWBT – 1.025(bLtTmean)
where:
January 1999
WCT = cargo weight in centre tank(s) On the other hand, if the unbalanced forces in way of the
centre tank and the whole cross section have different signs,
WCWBT = weight of ballast water between longitudinal the longitudinal bulkhead will carry less force than that
bulkheads (shaded area in Figure 4.3) calculated by the Φ factor, meaning that double side should
carry more force.
Lt = length of centre cargo tank(s)
This means that shear force should be re-distributed,
Tmean = mean draught at the middle of tank considering load unbalance in way of centre tank(s). This is
elaborated in Table D2 in the Rules Pt.3 Ch.1 Sec.5.
b = breadth of centre tank for tankers of type A
The correction factor, K, may be calculated as shown below:
= breadth between inner sides, across both port
and starboard tanks for tankers of type B
⎡ s r ⎤ 0.5
K s = ⎢0.5(1 − )(1 − CT )( ) − ΦS ⎥
= breadth between inner sides for tankers of ⎣ lc r +1 ⎦ ΦS
type C or
The first term within the main brackets above represent the
corrected fraction of Pc, based on load distribution by local
Figure 4.3 Breadth to be included for different tanker girders, carried by ship side/longitudinal bulkhead, while the
types last term within the main brackets represent the fraction of Pc
carried by ship side/longitudinal bulkhead based of shear
flow distribution. Thus the terms within the main brackets
4.4.1 Correction factor K for tankers of type A represent the correction to be made to the shear force based
Generally, the load in wing tanks will be distributed by shear flow, Φ.
longitudinal bulkhead and double sides in proportion to the
For other definitions reference is made to the rules Pt.3 Ch.1
Φ factor, while loads in centre tanks would not be distributed
Sec.5 D302
in the same manner. In case there is an unbalanced force in
way of the centre tank(s) and also an unbalanced force for s r
the whole cross section and these forces have the same sign ∆QS = 0.5Pc (1 − )[1 − CT ] − PcΦS
lc r +1
(i.e. weight excess or buoyancy excess), the longitudinal
bulkhead will carry more force than that calculated by the Φ
factor. Accordingly the double side will carry less force.
January 1999
where:
⎡ s ⎤
∆QSL = Pc ⎢0.3(1 − )[1 − CT ] − ΦS ⎥
⎣ l c ⎦
or
⎡ s ⎤
∆QSL = Pc ⎢0.4(1 − )[1 − CT ] − Φ C ⎥
⎣ l c ⎦
January 1999
In general a bending moment shall be applied to the end of F = Magnitude of force at points in deck and bottom
the model. The bending moment at the end may be applied as
a force pair acting in the opposite direction applied at two M = Modified bending moment as described above
points. The points should be positioned vertically above each
other with one point in the deck and one point in bottom. The h = Height from base line to point in deck
size of the bending moment shall be such that the vertical
Table A.1 Boundary conditions for cargo tank analysis of tankers when hull girder bending moments are applied
δx δy δz θx θy θz
Plane A L L L L L L
Plane B X X X X X X ta
F Poin
Centreline (when X X X c e,
Fo r
a
applicable) z
X Fixed. y
Poin
tb
F
L Rigid body linearly dependent. rc e ,
b
Fo
Fa,b Force according to the above. Forces acting in opposite
direction at point a and b.
January 1999
Table A.2 Boundary conditions for cargo tank analysis of tankers when shear forces are applied
H
δx δy δz θx θy θz
Plane A X X X
F
Plane B X X X
Centreline (when X X X
E
applicable)
Line C,D,E S&Fv
C
Line F,G,H Fv z
X Fixed. x
S Springs y
January 1999
Appendix B. Checklist for Finite Element The control may be further adapted to the computer program
used in the analysis. In general the following main items
Analysis should be checked:
The checklist is developed in order to ensure a satisfactory
level of technical quality of work for analysis performed by • Geometry and element mesh
the finite element method. The checklist may also function as • Stiffness properties
guidance for the process of completing the finite element • Boundary conditions
analysis. • Loads and pressures
• Stresses and reaction forces
It is recommended that the checklist is used for self-checking
while carrying out the analysis, and in addition used during
independent verification.
Free flange sectional area has been checked for efficiency of curved flanges.
January 1999
Plots of shear stresses for relevant structural parts are submitted with the checklists
(contour plots and/or plots with numerical values).
Plots of in plane stresses for relevant structural parts are submitted with the checklists
(contour plots and/or plots with numerical values).
Plots of equivalent (von-Mises) stresses for relevant structural parts are submitted with the
checklists (contour plots and/or plots with numerical values).
Plots of axial stress of free flange for relevant structural parts are submitted with the
checklists (contour plots and/or plots with numerical values).
Stresses / forces:
Spot checks of the calculated stresses have been compared to values calculated by
simplified methods.
Plots have been used to identify peak stresses.
Cross sectional forces and moments have been checked with simplified methods.
Code checks / acceptance criteria:
Yield check of main structure performed based on relevant load cases and stresses. Hull
girder stresses added/not added manually.
Yield check of secondary structure performed based on relevant load cases and stresses.
Local bending has been taken into account.
Buckling check of transverse elements performed based on relevant load cases and
stresses.
Buckling check of longitudinal elements performed based on relevant load cases and
stresses. Hull girder stresses added/not added manually.
Fatigue check performed based on relevant load cases, stresses and available stress
concentration factors.
January 1999
C.1.1.4
The reference location of element with well defined cross-
section (e.g. cross-ties in side tanks of tankers) is taken as the
neutral axis for the element.
Figure C.2 Rigid ends of beam elements
The reference location of member where the shell or
bulkhead comprises one flange is taken as the line of
intersection between the web plate and the plate flange.
January 1999
A ef = C b t
Figure C.3 Equivalent flange thickness
C = as given in Table C.1 for I-profiles with various
numbers of evenly spaced point loads (r) on the
span.
Longitudinal bulkheads and shipsides should obviously be See also 1.1.13 and Figure C.6.
treated as a shell problem. However, for the analysis of
internal structures, they may with reasonably good accuracy C.1.1.11
be condisdered as separate profiles.
With reference to Figure C.4 (a) and (b) the equivalent flange If the flanges in double skin sections have local stiffening
widths may be taken as: parallell to the girders, see Figure C.5, the bending stiffness
contribution of stiffeners may be included by increasing the
web thickness (tw) and the thickness (t1) of flange 1 as
follows.
B x i t i2
bi = ⋅ i = 1,2,L
2
∑x 2
i ti
January 1999
b = flange breadth.
h = web height.
C.1.1.13
When considering the overall stiffness of vertically
corrugated bulkheads with stool tanks (transverse or
longitudinal) subjected to in plane loading the elements
should represent the shear and bending stiffnesses of the
Figure C.5 Double skin sections bulkhead and the torsional stiffness of the stool.
2 2
⎛ 2 h2 ⎞ ⎛ 2 h1 ⎞
A1 ⎜1 − ⎟ − A 2 ⎜1 − ⎟
⎝ h ⎠ ⎝ h ⎠
∆t1 =
6
where
Note that the formula for ∆t1 is based on the assumption that
the cross sectional area of profiles on flange 1 is larger than
for flange 2. Figure C.6 Cross-sectional data for bulkhead
The correct shear area for the girder is obtained by For the corrugated bulkhead part, the cross-sectional moment
multiplying the shear factor by of inertia, Ib, and the effective shear area Ab may be
calculated as follows:
tw
t w + ∆t w A d Ae
Ib = H2
A d + Ae
C.1.1.12
bs
Elements representing members where the flanges are Ab = tk H
bk
formed by double skin as double bottom, double side, double
deck and cofferdam bulkheads etc. should have a torsional where
moment inertia equal to
Ad = cross-sectional area of deck part.
b h2
It =
1 1 Ae = cross-sectional area of stool and bottom part.
+
t1 t 2
H = distance between neutral axis of deck part and
where stool and bottom part.
January 1999
tk = thickness of bulkhead corrugation. With reference to Figure C.7 and Figure C.8 the
rotational spring may be calculated using the following
bs = breadth of corrugation. formula:
bk = breadth of corrugation along the corrugation E
profile. kr =
l ψ 2.6 β E
+ +
sI l As k l 2
For the stool and bottom part, the cross-sectional properties,
moment of inertia Is and shear area As, should be calculated s = 3 for pinned end connection.
as normal. Based on the above a factor, K, may be
determined by the formula: = 4 for fixed end connection, see Figure C.7.
C.1.2.2
Rotational springs k r = M θ
January 1999
January 1999
Table C.2 Spring stiffness for different boundary conditions and loads
P l3 Pl E
δ= + k=
192 E I 4 A s G l3 2.6 l
+
192 I 4 A s
5 P n (n + 2 ) l 3 P (n + 1) l k=
E
δ= +
384 E I (n + 1) 8 As G 5 n (n + 2 ) l 2.6 (n + 1) l
3
+
384 I (n + 1) 8 As
P (n + 1) l 3 P (n + 1) l k=
E
δ= +
384 E I 8 As G (n + 1) l 3 + 2.6 (n + 1) l
384 I 8 As
P (n + 1) l 3 P (n + 1) l k=
E
δ= +
185 E I 8 As G (n + 1) l 3
+
2.6 (n + 1) l
185 I 8 As
Pl E
δ= k=
AE ⎛ l ⎞
⎜ ⎟
⎝A⎠
C.2 Beam modelling for tankers of type A C.2.2 Transverse web frame
Introductions C.2.2.1
Instead of making a full 3-dimensional frame work model, it The web frame analysis may be carried out independently of
is possible to make separate models of transverse web frame, any other preceeding structural analysis. In Figure C.11 is
transverse bulkhead girders and bottom grillage as described shown a typical model for a tanker of type A.
in section C.2.2, C.2.3 and C.2.4.
C.2.2.2
C.2.1 Load conditions Elastic supports at the ship side ks, longitudinal bulkhead kc
and possible longitudinal bottom girders kg may be
C.2.1.1 calculated as described in C.1.2.1. Elements in centre line
The load conditions to be considered are described in chapter (symetri line) must be included with half-properties.
2.6.1.
C.2.2.3
The rotational spring krs, giving the torsional stiffness of the
bilge tanks may be calculated as described in C.1.2.2b.
January 1999
At the deck at side and at the top of the centre line bulkhead In the case of vertical side girders these may be arranged and
rotational springs to be calculated in a similar way if box connected in a similar way as the vertical centre girder. It is,
shaped constructions are arranged. however. recommended that a full 3-dimensional frame work
analysis is carried out.
− The relevant loading conditions are applied assuming The bottom grillage model may also be used to double check
fixed end at "x". the analysis of the bottom transverses based on the transverse
− Unit rotation at "x" should be applied as an additional web frame model. The stresses in the bottom transverse near
loading condition. Thus the stiffness of the system as felt the transverse oiltight bulkheads generally differ to some
by the bottom grillage may be calculated and used in the extent from the bottom transverse in the middle of the tank.
bottom grillage analysis. This variation may be investigated using the bottom grillage
− The stresses in the system is obtained by using the actual model
rotation in "x" found from the bottom grillage
calculation together with relevant loading conditions.
January 1999
C.3.2.2
Elastic supports at the ship side ks, longitudinal bulkhead kc
and possible longitudinal bottom girders kg may be
calculated as described in C.1.2.1.
C.3.2.3
The rotational spring krc and krs giving the torsional stiffness
Figure C.13 Bottom grillage of the stool tanks at the lower end of the centreline bulkhead
and of the bilge tanks may be calculated as described in
C.2.4.2 C.1.2.2b.
When the structural arrangement is symmetrical in the At the deck at side and at the top of the centre line bulkhead
longitudinal direction about the centre of the tank to be rotational springs to be calculated in a similar way if box
analysed, the model shown in Figure C.13 is assumed to be shaped constructions are arranged
sufficiently large. The model is here carried half-way into the
neighbouring tanks "B" where symmetri is assumed.
January 1999
C.3.4.1 C.3.4.4
A typical double bottom structure and corresponding model The moment Mb to be applied per longitudinal girder at the
is shown in Figure C.15. transverse bulkhead nodes due to the lateral pressure from
cargo on the transverse bulkhead may be determined fram
The model is extended athwarthships from one ship side to
the transverse bulkhead calculation using fixed boundary
the other. In the longitudinal direction the model should
conditions at lower end, see C.3.3.1
extend at least from the middle length of one tank to the
middle length of the adjacent tank. Symmetry is assumed at
both ends of the model. If the girder structure on transverse C.4 Beam modelling for tankers type C
bulkheads is not symmetrik the model should include ½ +1 + Introductions
½ tank length.
Instead of making a full 3-dimensional frame work model, it
Floors in line with the stool sides for the transverse bulkhead is possible to make separate models of transverse web frame,
stool and side girders in line with the stool sides for the transverse bulkhead girders and bottom grillage as described
centre line bulkhead and the side girders in line with the in section C.4.2.
sloped bilge tank sides are omitted in the model. This may
normally be done without significant reduction of the C.4.1 Load conditions
modelling accuracy
C.4.1.1
The load conditions to be considered are described in Ch.
2.6.3.