0
Research Papers: Offshore Technology

Reliability-Based Factors of Safety for Vortex Induced Vibration Fatigue Using Field Measurements

[+] Author and Article Information
Michael Tognarelli, Pierre Beynet

BP America Production Company,
Houston, TX 77079

Emmanuel Fontaine, Hayden Marcollo

AMOG Consulting,
Melbourne, VIC 3167,
Notting Hill, Australia

Contributed by the Ocean, Offshore, and Arctic Engineering Division of ASME for publication in the JOURNAL OF OFFSHORE MECHANICS AND ARCTIC ENGINEERING. Manuscript received March 5, 2011; final manuscript received September 17, 2011; published online July 15, 2013. Assoc. Editor: Antonio C. Fernandes.

J. Offshore Mech. Arct. Eng 135(4), 041301 (Jul 15, 2013) (7 pages) Paper No: OMAE-11-1026; doi: 10.1115/1.4023794 History: Received March 05, 2011; Revised September 17, 2011

The development of a vortex induced vibration (VIV) fatigue factor of safety (FoS) consistent with state-of-the-art industry design practice is cast within the coherent framework of reliability analysis. The proposed methodology consists of the following steps: (i) define the failure criteria or limit-state function (ii) setup a deterministic analysis model (iii) characterize the uncertainties involved in the problem (iv) propagate the uncertainties through the deterministic model and assess the probability of failure due to VIV fatigue and (v) calculate the FoS required to achieve a given failure probability. The proposed methodology is demonstrated by determining the FoS associated with using state-of-the-art VIV prediction models to attain varying reliability levels (probabilities of failure) in a hypothetical design scenario. Prediction uncertainty is based herein on measured flow and response data for several full-scale drilling risers working in the field. Results indicate that depending on the reliability level required of a particular design, different FoS than those that currently appear in guidance may be appropriate. Results also indicate the sensitivity of the FoS to the riser and prevailing current type, analysis program and input parameters, and accumulation of conservatism in aggregate versus single-event damage predictions.

FIGURES IN THIS ARTICLE
<>
Copyright © 2013 by ASME
Your Session has timed out. Please sign back in to continue.

References

Figures

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 1

Predicted versus measured damage rate for drilling risers subject to VIV (default analysis parameters, maximum damage along riser length)

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 2

Predicted versus measured damage rate for drilling risers subject to VIV (calibrated analysis parameters, maximum damage along riser length)

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 3

Safe and unsafe design scenarios for VIV fatigue

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 4

Example fitting of the bias PDF (all risers included)

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 5

Design points (straight lines), observed bias frequency (bars), and fitted distribution for Riser 6

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 6

Fatigue damage prediction error comparison between SHEAR7v4.5 and VIVANA 3.7.7, maximum damage along riser length

Tables

Errata

Discussions

Some tools below are only available to our subscribers or users with an online account.

Related Content

Customize your page view by dragging and repositioning the boxes below.

Related Journal Articles
Related eBook Content
Topic Collections

Sorry! You do not have access to this content. For assistance or to subscribe, please contact us:

  • TELEPHONE: 1-800-843-2763 (Toll-free in the USA)
  • EMAIL: asmedigitalcollection@asme.org
Sign In