0
Research Papers: Structures and Safety Reliability

Probabilistic Seismic Collapse Analysis of Jacket Offshore Platforms

[+] Author and Article Information
M. Zarrin

Faculty of Civil Engineering,
K. N. Toosi University of Technology,
P.O. Box 15875-4416,
Tehran 1996715433, Iran
e-mail: mo_zarrin@yahoo.com

B. Asgarian

Faculty of Civil Engineering,
K. N. Toosi University of Technology,
P.O. Box 15875-4416,
Tehran 1996715433, Iran
e-mail: asgarian@kntu.ac.ir

M. Abyani

Faculty of Civil Engineering,
K. N. Toosi University of Technology,
P.O. Box 15875-4416,
Tehran 1996715433, Iran
e-mail: abyani.mohsen88@gmail.com

1Corresponding author.

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 28, 2017; final manuscript received November 9, 2017; published online January 2, 2018. Assoc. Editor: Jonas W. Ringsberg.

J. Offshore Mech. Arct. Eng 140(3), 031601 (Jan 02, 2018) (11 pages) Paper No: OMAE-17-1047; doi: 10.1115/1.4038581 History: Received March 28, 2017; Revised November 09, 2017

This paper analyses and evaluates the variability of seismic demand and capacity of a case study jacket offshore platform considering different sources of uncertainty. The aleatoric uncertainty due to variability of near-fault ground motions, as well as uncertain properties of the damping ratio, material elastic modulus, material yield strength, mass, and gravity load have been investigated. The main aim of this study is to pursue which sources of the uncertainty considerably affect the seismic response of the platform. To this end, the sensitivity analysis was conducted not only in the particular earthquake level, but also in all other ranges of intensity using incremental dynamic analysis (IDA) with a special focus on the seismic collapse fragility. In order to reduce the number of simulations, the Latin hypercube sampling (LHS) scheme has been utilized as an efficient sampling procedure to combine the effects of modeling random variables. The collapse fragility curves are derived for each of the model realizations created with LHS technique. Thereafter, the summarized random fragility curve is compared with the deterministic mean parameter model fragility curve. It is found that the uncertainty in the mass and gravity load on the platform are the most influential variables, which can notably alter the IDA and collapse fragility curves. Furthermore, the random combination of the considered sources of uncertainty shifts the median of collapse fragility away from the mean parameter model collapse fragility. Overall, the effects of the uncertainties do not lead to notable changes in the summarized collapse fragility curve.

FIGURES IN THIS ARTICLE
<>
Copyright © 2018 by ASME
Your Session has timed out. Please sign back in to continue.

References

Lemaire, M. , Chateauneuf, A. , and Mitteau, J. C. , 2005, Structural Reliability, Wiley, New York, Chap. 8.
McKay, M. D. , Beckman, R. J. , and Conover, W. J. , 1979, “ A Comparison of Three Methods for Selecting Values of Input Variables in the Analysis of Output From a Computer Code,” Technometrics, 21(2), pp. 239–245.
Baker, J. W. , and Cornell, C. A. , 2003, “Uncertainty Specification and Propagation for Loss Estimation Using FOSM Methods,” University of California, Berkeley, Berkeley, CA, PEER Report No. 2003/07. http://peer.berkeley.edu/research/peertestbeds/Cct/Baker%20Cornell%20ICASP%20manuscript.pdf
Ibarra, L. , 2003, “ Global Collapse of Frame Structures Under Seismic Excitations,” Ph.D. dissertation, Stanford University, Stanford, CA. https://stacks.stanford.edu/file/druid:dj885ym2486/TR152_Ibarra.pdf
Haselton, C. B. , 2006, “ Assessing Seismic Collapse Safety of Modern Reinforced Concrete Moment-Frame Buildings,” Ph.D. dissertation, Stanford University, Stanford, CA. http://peer.berkeley.edu/publications/peer_reports/reports_2007/webR1_PEER708_HASELTONdeierlein.pdf
Porter, K. A. , Beck, J. L. , and Shaikhutdinov, R. V. , 2002, “ Sensitivity of Building Loss Estimates to Major Uncertain Variables,” Earthquake Spectra, 18(4), pp. 719–43. [CrossRef]
Eschenbach, T. G. , 1992, “ Spiderplots Versus Tornado Diagrams for Sensitivity Analysis,” Decis. Risk Anal., 22(6), pp. 40–46.
Lee, T. H. , and Mosalam, K. M. , 2005, “ Seismic Demand Sensitivity of Reinforced Concrete Shearwall Building Using FOSM Method,” Earthquake Eng. Struct. Dyn., 34(17), pp. 1719–1736. [CrossRef]
Binici, B. , and Mosalam, K. M. , 2007, “ Analysis of Reinforced Concrete Columns Retrofitted With Fiber Reinforced Polymer Lamina,” Compos. Part B: Eng., 38(2), pp. 265–276. [CrossRef]
Talaat, M. M. , and Mosalam, K. M. , 2008, “Computational Modeling of Progressive Collapse in Reinforced Concrete Frame Structures,” Pacific Earthquake Engineering Research Center (PEER), University of California, Berkeley, Berkeley, CA, Report No. PEER-2007/10. http://peer.berkeley.edu/publications/peer_reports/reports_2007/webPEER710_R_TALAATmosalam.pdf
Vamvatsikos, D. , and Cornell, C. A. , 2002, “ Incremental Dynamic Analysis,” Earthquake Eng. Struct. Dyn., 31(3), pp. 491–514. [CrossRef]
Liel, A. B. , Haselton, C. B. , Deierlein, G. G. , and Baker, J. W. , 2009, “ Incorporating Modeling Uncertainties in the Assessment of Seismic Collapse Risk of Buildings,” Struct. Saf., 31(2), pp. 197–211. [CrossRef]
Vamvatsikos, D. , and Fragiadakis, M. , 2010, “ Incremental Dynamic Analysis for Estimating Seismic Performance Sensitivity and Uncertainty,” Earthquake Eng. Struct. Dyn., 39(2), pp. 141–163.
Olsson, A. , Sandberg, G. , and Dahlblom, O. , 2003, “ On Latin Hypercube Sampling for Structural Reliability Analysis,” Struct. Saf., 25(1), pp. 47–68. [CrossRef]
Golafshani, A. A. , Ebrahimian, H. , Bagheri, V. , and Holmas, T. , 2011, “ Assessment of Offshore Platforms Under Extreme Waves by Probabilistic Incremental Wave Analysis,” J. Constr. Steel. Res., 67(5), pp. 759–69. [CrossRef]
Ajamy, A. , Zolfaghari, M. R. , Asgarian, B. , and Ventura, C. E. , 2014, “ Probabilistic Seismic Analysis of Offshore Platforms Incorporating Uncertainty in Soil–Pile–Structure Interactions,” J. Constr. Steel Res., 101, pp. 265–279. [CrossRef]
El-Din, M. N. , and Kim, J. , 2014, “ Sensitivity Analysis of Pile-Founded Fixed Steel Jacket Platforms Subjected to Seismic Loads,” Ocean Eng., 85, pp. 1–11. [CrossRef]
Hezarjaribi, M. , Bahaari, M. R. , Ebrahimian, H. , and Bagheri, V. , 2013, “ Sensitivity Analysis of Jacket-Type Offshore Platforms Under Extreme Waves,” J. Constr. Steel Res., 83, pp. 147–155. [CrossRef]
Mazzoni, S. , McKenna, F. , Scott, M. , and Fenves, G. , 2007, “Open System for Earthquake Engineering Simulation (OpenSEES)—OpenSEES Command Language Manual,” University of California, Berkeley, Berkeley, CA.
Spacone, E. , Filippou, F. C. , and Taucer, F. F. , 1996, “ Fiber Beam Column Model for Nonlinear Analysis of RC Frames—I: Formulation,” Earthquake Eng. Struct. Dyn., 25(7), pp. 711–725. [CrossRef]
Menegotto, M. , and Pinto, P. , 1973, “ Method of Analysis for Cyclically Loaded Reinforced Concrete Plane Frame Including Changes in Geometry and Non-Elastic Behavior of Elements Under Combined Normal Force and Bending,” IABSE Symposium on Resistance and Ultimate Deformability of Structures Acted on by Well Defined Repeated Loads, Lisbon, Portugal, pp. 15–22. https://www.google.co.in/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=1&cad=rja&uact=8&ved=0ahUKEwj_iqi9ovLXAhVG7yYKHWpkAk0QFggmMAA&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.e-periodica.ch%2Fcntmng%3Fpid%3Dbse-re-001%3A1973%3A13%3A%3A9&usg=AOvVaw1yiRMEjnlGQEK_6CgexxPO
De Souza, R. , 2000, “ Forced-Based Finite Element for Large Displacement Inelastic Analysis of Frames,” Ph.D. thesis, University of California, Berkeley, Berkeley, CA. http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download?doi=10.1.1.467.1617&rep=rep1&type=pdf
Asgarian, B. , Aghakouchak, A. A. , and Bea, R. G. , 2005, “ Inelastic Post Buckling and Cyclic Behavior of Tubular Braces,” ASME J. Offshore Mech. Arct. Eng., 127(3), pp. 256–262. [CrossRef]
Asgarian, B. , Aghakouchack, A. A. , and Bea, R. G. , 2006, “ Non-Linear Analysis of Jacket Type Offshore Platforms Using Fiber Elements,” ASME J. Offshore Mech. Arct. Eng., 128(3), pp. 224–232. [CrossRef]
Honarvar, M. R. , Bahari, M. R. , Asgarian, B. , and Alanjari, P. , 2008, “ Cyclic Inelastic Behavior and Analytical Modeling of Pile Leg Interaction in Jacket Type Offshore Platform,” Appl. Ocean Res., 29(4), pp. 167–179. [CrossRef]
Alanjari, P. , Asgarian, B. , Bahaari, M. R. , and Honarvar, M. R. , 2009, “ On the Energy Dissipation of Jacket Type Offshore Platforms With Different Pile–Leg Interactions,” Appl. Ocean Res., 31(2), pp. 82–89. [CrossRef]
Uriz, P. , Filippou, F. C. , and Mahin, S. A. , 2008, “ Model for Cyclic Inelastic Buckling of Steel Braces,” ASCE J. Struct. Eng., 134(4), pp. 619–628. [CrossRef]
Uriz, P. , and Mahin, S. A. , 2008, “ Toward Earthquake-Resistant Design of Concentrically Braced Steel-Frame Structures,” Pacific Earthquake Engineering Research Center, University of California, Berkeley, Berkeley, CA, Report No. 2008/08. https://peer.berkeley.edu/publications/peer_reports/reports_2008/web_PEER808_URIZMahin.pdf
Yang, F. , Mahin, S. A. , and Uriz, P. , 2005, “Limiting Net Section Failure in Slotted HSS Braces,” Structural Steel Education Council, Moraga, CA.
Memarpour, M. M. , Kimiaei, M. , Shayanfar, M. , and Khanzadi, M. , 2012, “ Cyclic Lateral Response of Pile Foundations in Offshore Platforms,” Comput. Geotechnics, 42, pp. 180–192. [CrossRef]
Boulanger, R. W. , Curras, C. , Kutter, B. L. , Wilson, D. W. , and Abghari, A. , 1999, “ Seismic Soil Pile-Structure Interaction Experiments and Analyses,” ASCE J. Geotech. Geoenviron. Eng., 125(9), pp. 750–759. [CrossRef]
Yang, Z. , Elgamal, A. , and Parra, E. , 2003, “ Computational Model for Cyclic Mobility and Associated Shear Deformation,” ASCE J. Geotech. Geoenviron. Eng., 129(12), pp. 1119–1127. [CrossRef]
Asgarian, B. , Zarrin, M. , and Boroumand, M. , 2013, “ Nonlinear Dynamic Analysis of Pile Foundation Subjected to Strong Ground Motion Using Fiber Elements,” Int. J. Marit. Technol., 1(1), pp. 35–46. http://ijmt.ir/article-1-195-en.html
Zarrin, M. , Asgarian, B. , and Foulad, R. , 2018, “ A Review on Factors Affecting Seismic Pile Response Analysis: A Parametric Study,” J. Numer. Methods Civil Eng. (accepted).
Asgarian, B. , and Ajamy, A. , 2010, “ Seismic Performance of Jacket Type Offshore Platforms Through Incremental Dynamic Analysis,” ASME J. Offshore Mech. Arct. Eng., 132(3), p. 031301. [CrossRef]
Sharifian, H. , Bargi, K. , and Zarrin, M. , 2015, “ Ultimate Strength of Fixed Offshore Platforms Subjected to Near-Fault Earthquake Ground Vibration,” Shock Vib., 2015, p. 841870.
FEMA, 2000, “Recommended Seismic Evaluation and Upgrade Criteria for Existing Welded Steel Moment Frame Buildings,” Federal Emergency Management Agency, Washington, DC, Report No. FEMA-351. http://www.nehrp.gov/pdf/fema351.pdf
Charney, F. A. , 2008, “ Unintended Consequences of Modeling Damping in Structures,” ASCE J. Struct. Eng., 134(4), pp. 581–592. [CrossRef]
HSE, 2003, “Component-Based Calibration of North West European Annex Environmental Load Factors for the ISO Fixed Steel Offshore Structures Code 19902,” Health and Safety Executive, Merseyside, UK, Report No. 088. http://www.hse.gov.uk/research/rrpdf/rr088.pdf
JCSS, 2001, “Probabilistic Model Code—Part 1: Basis of Design (12th Draft),” Joint Committee on Structural Safety, Technical University of Denmark, Kongens Lyngby, Denmark, Standard No. JCSS-OSTL/DIA/VROU-10-11-2000. https://www.google.co.in/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=1&cad=rja&uact=8&ved=0ahUKEwiSjM70v_DXAhXFYt8KHayLDm0QFggmMAA&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.jcss.byg.dtu.dk%2F-%2Fmedia%2FSubsites%2Fjcss%2Fenglish%2Fpublications%2Fprobabilistic_model_code%2Fdesbasis2a.ashx%3Fla%3Dda&usg=AOvVaw0WYMSyqOhRBTqAZeaDy1B9
Kim, J. , Park, J. H. , and Lee, T. H. , 2011, “ Sensitivity Analysis of Steel Buildings Subjected to Column Loss,” Eng. Struct, 33(2), pp. 421–432. [CrossRef]
Skallerud, B. , and Amdahl, J. , 2002, Nonlinear Analysis of Offshore Structures, Research Studies Press Ltd, Baldock, UK, Chap. 3.
Padget, J. E. , and Roches, R. D. , 2007, “ Sensitivity of Seismic Response and Fragility to Parameter Uncertainty,” ASCE J. Struct. Eng., 133(12), pp. 1710–1718. [CrossRef]
API, 2000, Recommended Practice for Planning, Design and Constructing Fixed Offshore Platforms—Working Stress Design, American Petroleum Institute, Washington, DC.
AISC, 1989, Specification for Structural Steel Buildings: Allowable Stress Design and Plastic Design, American Institute of Steel Construction, Chicago, IL.
Baker, J. W. , Shahi, S. K. , and Jayaram, N. , 2011, “New Ground Motion Selection Procedures and Selected Motions for the PEER Transportation Research Program,” Pacific Earthquake Engineering Research Center, University of California, Berkeley, Berkeley, CA, PEER Report No. 2011/3. http://mfile.narotama.ac.id/files/Umum/JURNAR%20STANFORD/New%20ground%20motion%20selection%20procedures%20and%20selected%20motions%20for%20the%20PEER%20transportation%20research%20program.pdf
Baker, J. W. , and Cornell, C. A. , 2008, “ Vector-Valued Intensity Measures for Pulse-Like Near-Fault Ground Motions,” Eng. Struct., 30(4), pp. 1048–1057. [CrossRef]
Alavi, B. , and Krawinkler, H. , 2001, “Effects of Near-Fault Ground Motions on Frame Structures,” Blume Center, Stanford, CA, Report No. 138. https://stacks.stanford.edu/file/druid:cx534fy3768/TR138_Alavi.pdf
Benjamin, J. R. , and Cornell, C. A. , 1970, Probability, Statistics and Decision for Civil Engineers, McGraw-Hill, New York, Chap. 4.

Figures

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 1

Perspective plot of sample platform

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 2

The logarithmic response spectrum of record suite

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 3

IDA curves of (a) the MSDR profile along the height of platform for record number eleven and (b) various story levels of jacket part under record number fourteen

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 4

Multirecords IDA curves of case study platform under selected records

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 5

Sensitivity of IDA fractile curves to variation in (a) mass and gravity load (upper left curve), (b) yield strength (upper right curve), (c) damping ratio (lower left curve), and (d) material Young's modulus (lower right curve)

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 6

Sensitivity of collapse fragility curve to variation in (a) mass and gravity load (upper left curve), (b) yield strength (upper right curve), (c) damping ratio (lower left curve), and (d) material Young's modulus (lower right curve)

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 7

Cloud of random fragility curves and its final expected value

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