0
Research Papers: Structures and Safety Reliability

Local and Global Responses of a Floating Bridge Under Ship–Girder Collisions

[+] Author and Article Information
Yanyan Sha

Department of Marine Technology,
Center for Autonomous Marine
Operations and Systems (AMOS),
Norwegian University of
Science and Technology,
Trondheim 7491, Norway
e-mail: yanyan.sha@ntnu.no

Jørgen Amdahl

Department of Marine Technology,
Center for Autonomous Marine
Operations and Systems (AMOS),
Norwegian University of
Science and Technology,
Trondheim 7491, Norway
e-mail: jorgen.amdahl@ntnu.no

Cato Dørum

Norwegian Public Roads Administration,
Hamar 2318, Norway
e-mail: cato.dorum@vegvesen.no

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 January 2, 2018; final manuscript received June 9, 2018; published online January 17, 2019. Assoc. Editor: Carlos Guedes Soares.

J. Offshore Mech. Arct. Eng 141(3), 031601 (Jan 17, 2019) (12 pages) Paper No: OMAE-18-1003; doi: 10.1115/1.4041992 History: Received January 02, 2018; Revised June 09, 2018

The Norwegian Public Roads Administration is running a project “Ferry Free Coastal Route E39” to replace existing ferry crossings by bridges across eight fjords in western Norway. Since most of the fjords are wide and deep, construction of traditional bridges with fixed foundations is not possible. Therefore, floating bridge concepts are proposed for the fjord-crossing project. Since the floating foundations of the bridges are close to the water surface, the concern of accidental ship collisions is raised. Considering the displacement and speed of the passing ships and the significant compliance of the bridge, interaction between the bridge and the ship can be significant should a collision occur. Many studies have been conducted on ship collision with bridge structures with a special focus on bridge piers. However, the research on ship collision with bridge girders is quite limited. The purpose of this study is to investigate the collision response of a floating bridge for ship–girder collision events. Both the local structural damage and the global dynamic response of the bridge are assessed. Local structural deformation and damage are first investigated by numerical simulations with detailed finite element (FE) models in ls-dyna. Subsequently, the bridge global response to the collision loads is analyzed in usfos using the force–deformation curves from the local analysis. By combining the local and global analysis results, a comprehensive overview of the bridge response during ship–girder collisions can be obtained.

Copyright © 2019 by ASME
Your Session has timed out. Please sign back in to continue.

References

Minorsky, V. U. , 1958, “An Analysis of Ship Collisions With Reference to Protection of Nuclear Power Plants,” Sharp (George G.) Inc., New York, Technical Report.
Meir-Dornberg, K. , 1983, “Ship Collisions, Safety Zones, and Loading Assumptions for Structures in Inland Waterways,” VDI-Berichte, 496, pp. 1–9.
Amdahl, J. , and Eberg, E. , 1993, “Ship Collision With Offshore Structures,” Second European Conference on Structural Dynamics (EURODYN'93), Trondheim, Norway, June 21–23. http://www.usfos.no/publications/collision/documents/1993-DynamicShipCollision.pdf
Pedersen, P. T. , Valsgaard, S. , Olsen, D. , and Spangenberg, S. , 1993, “Ship Impacts: Bow Collisions,” Int. J. Impact Eng., 13, pp. 163–187. [CrossRef]
AASHTO, 1991, Guide Specification and Commentary for Vessel Collision Design of Highway Bridges, American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials, Washington, DC.
Vrouwenvelder, A. , 1998, “Design for Ship Impact According to Eurocode 1, Part 2.7,” Ship Collision Analysis, pp. 123–134.
Norsok, 2007, Actions and Action Effects, 2 ed., Standards Norway, Lysaker, Norway, Standard No. 003.
Storheim, M. , and Amdahl, J. , 2014, “Design of Offshore Structures Against Accidental Ship Collisions,” Mar. Struct., 37, pp. 135–172. [CrossRef]
Travanca, J. , and Hao, H. , 2014, “Numerical Analysis of Steel Tubular Member Response to Ship Bow Impacts,” Int. J. Impact Eng., 64, pp. 101–121. [CrossRef]
Hallquist, J. O. , 2006, “LS-DYNA Theory Manual,” Vol. 3, Livermore Software Technology Corporation, Livermore, CA, pp. 25–31.
Yuan, P. , and Harik, I. E. , 2009, “Equivalent Barge and Flotilla Impact Forces on Bridge Piers,” J. Bridge Eng., 15(5), pp. 523–532. [CrossRef]
Consolazio, G. R. , and Cowan, D. R. , 2003, “Nonlinear Analysis of Barge Crush Behavior and Its Relationship to Impact Resistant Bridge Design,” Comput. Struct., 81(8–11), pp. 547–557. [CrossRef]
Sha, Y. , and Hao, H. , 2012, “Nonlinear Finite Element Analysis of Barge Collision With a Single Bridge Pier,” Eng. Struct., 41, pp. 63–76. [CrossRef]
Sha, Y. , and Hao, H. , 2015, “Laboratory Tests and Numerical Simulations of CFRP Strengthened RC Pier Subjected to Barge Impact Load,” Int. J. Struct. Stability Dyn., 15(2), p. 1450037. [CrossRef]
Larsen, O. D. , 1993, Ship Collision With Bridges: The Interaction Between Vessel Traffic and Bridge Structures, IABSE, Zurich, Switzerland.
Svensson, H. , 2009, “Protection of Bridge Piers Against Ship Collision,” Steel Constr., 2(1), pp. 21–32. [CrossRef]
Sha, Y. , and Amdahl, J. , 2017, “Ship Collision Analysis of a Floating Bridge in Ferry-Free E39 Project,” ASME Paper No. OMAE2017-62720.
Sha, Y. , and Hao, H. , 2013, “Numerical Simulation of Barge Impact on a Continuous Girder Bridge and Bridge Damage Detection,” Int. J. Prot. Struct., 4(1), pp. 79–96. [CrossRef]
Hallquist, J. O. , 2007, “LS-DYNA Keyword User's Manual,” Livermore Software Technology Corporation, Livermore, CA, p. 970.
Søreide, T. H. , Amdahl, J. , Eberg, E. , Holmås, T. , and Hellan, Ø. , 1993, “USFOS-A Computer Program for Progressive Collapse Analysis of Steel Offshore Structures: Theory Manual,” SINTEF, Trondheim, Norway, Report No. STF71 F88038 Rev.
Alsos, H. S. , Amdahl, J. , and Hopperstad, O. S. , 2009, “On the Resistance to Penetration of Stiffened Plates—Part II: Numerical Analysis,” Int. J. Impact Eng., 36(7), pp. 875–887. [CrossRef]
Holm, J. T. , 2016, Analysis and Design of Halsfjorden TLP Supported Suspension Bridge Subjected to Large Ship Collisions, Norwegian University of Science and Technology, Trondheim, Norway.
Sha, Y. , Amdahl, J. , Aalberg, A. , and Yu, Z. , 2018, “Numerical Investigations of the Dynamic Response of a Floating Bridge Under Environmental Loadings,” Ships Offshore Struct., 13, pp. 113–126. [CrossRef]
Seif, M. S. , and Inoue, Y. , 1998, “Dynamic Analysis of Floating Bridges,” Mar. Struct., 11(1–2), pp. 29–46. [CrossRef]

Figures

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 1

Side view and top view of the floating bridge

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 2

Finite element model of the ship bow: (a) outer hull and (b) internal structures

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 3

Perspective view of the girder FE model

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 4

Impact force against design codes

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 5

Structural deformations of ship–girder collision

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 6

Force–deformation curves for the ship and the bridge girder

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 7

Local shear failure and web buckling in the impacted diaphragm

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 8

Global bridge model in usfos

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 9

Ship–bridge collision model in usfos

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 10

Ship–bridge collision setup

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 11

(a) Force–deformation curves and (b) impact force time history in the global simulation

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 12

Force–deformation curves for the three impact energies

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 13

Bridge (a) transverse and (b) vertical displacement time histories at the impact location

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 14

Maximum (a) transverse and (b) vertical displacements along the bridge girder

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 15

Bridge (a) transverse and (b) vertical accelerations at the impact location

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 16

Maximum (a) transverse and (b) vertical acceleration along the bridge girder

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 17

(a) Axial forces, (b) shear forces, and (c) strong axis bending moments in the bridge girder

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 18

(a) Axial forces, (b) shear forces, and (c) strong axis bending moments in the crossbeam

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 19

Different impact locations

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 20

Maximum bridge transverse displacements for the three impact locations

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 21

(a) Force–deformation curves of different ship strengths and (b) maximum bridge transverse displacements for the two ship strengths

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 22

Dimensions of the ship bow

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 23

Dimensions of the structural components in the ship forecastle

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 24

Dimensions of the structural components in the ship bulb

Tables

Errata

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