International Journal of Naval Architecture and Ocean Engineering

The Society of Naval Architects of Korea (대한조선학회)
권호 표지
DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

Explosion induced dynamic responses of blast wall on FPSO topside: Blast loading application methods

  • Kang, Ki-Yeob (Department of Naval Architecture and Ocean Engineering, Pusan National University) ;
  • Choi, Kwang-Ho (Department of Naval Architecture and Ocean Engineering, Pusan National University) ;
  • Choi, Jae Woong (Central Research Institute, Samsung Heavy Industries Co., Ltd) ;
  • Ryu, Yong Hee (Central Research Institute, Samsung Heavy Industries Co., Ltd) ;
  • Lee, Jae-Myung (Department of Naval Architecture and Ocean Engineering, Pusan National University)
  • Received : 2016.04.13
  • Accepted : 2016.08.30
  • Published : 2017.03.31
Download PDF
⟨ Previous Next ⟩

Abstract

Topside areas on an offshore oil and gas platform are highly susceptible to explosion. A blast wall on these areas plays an important role in preventing explosion damage and must withstand the expected explosion loads. The uniformly distributed loading condition, predicted by Explosion Risk Analyses (ERAs), has been applied in most of the previous analysis methods. However, analysis methods related to load conditions are inaccurate because the blast overpressure around the wall tends to be of low-level in the open area and high-level in the enclosed area. The main objectives of this paper are to study the effects of applying different load applications and compare the dynamic responses of the blast wall. To do so, various kinds of blast pressures were measured by Computational Fluid Dynamics (CFD) simulations on the target area. Nonlinear finite element analyses of the blast wall under two types of identified dynamic loadings were also conducted.

Keywords

References

  1. API, 2006. Recommended Practice for the Design of Offshore Facilities against Fire and Blast Loading. American Petroleum Institute, US.
  2. Brill, A., Me-Bar, Y., Sadot, O., Ben-Dor, G., 2012. A method for measuring the impulse on structural foundations due to a blast wave. Int. J. Impact Eng. 49, 214-221. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijimpeng.2012.02.009
  3. Chille, F., Bakke, J.R., Wingerden, K.V., 2008. Use of CFD Tools for Prediction of Explosion Loads. Handling Exceptions in Structural Engineering, pp. 13-14. Roma, November.
  4. Chung Kim Yuen, S., Nurick, G.N., 2005. Experimental and numerical studies on the response of quadrangular stiffened plates. Part 1: subjected to uniform blast load. Int. J. Impact Eng. 31 (1), 55-83. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijimpeng.2003.09.048
  5. Dan, S.K., Lee, C.J., Park, J.P., Shin, D.G., Yoon, E.S., 2014. Quantitative risk analysis of fire and explosion on the top-side LNG-liquefaction process of LNG-FPSO. Process Saf. Environ. Prot. 92, 430-441. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.psep.2014.04.011
  6. Friebe, M., Jang, B.S., Jim, Y., 2014. A parametric study on the use of passive fire protection in FPSO topside module. Int. J. Nav. Archit. Ocean Eng. 6, 826-839. https://doi.org/10.2478/IJNAOE-2013-0216
  7. Geng, J., Mander, T., Baker, Q., 2015. Blast wave clearing behavior for positive and negative phases. J. Loss Prev. Process Indus. 37, 143-151. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jlp.2014.10.018
  8. Gexcon, A.S., 2014. FLACS v10.3 User's Manual.
  9. Guo, J., Sun, X., Rui, S., Cao, Y., Hu, K., Wang, C., 2015. Effect of ignition position on vented hydrogen-air explosions. Int. J. Hydrogen Energy 1-9.
  10. Hansen, O.R., Gavelli, F., Ichard, M., Davis, S.G., 2010. Validation of FLACS against experimental data sets from the model evaluation database for LNG vapor dispersion. J. Loss Prev. Process Indus. 23, 857-877. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jlp.2010.08.005
  11. Hansen, O.R., Johnson, D.M., 2015. Improved far-field blast predictions from fast deflagrations, DDTs and detonations of vapour clouds using FLACS CFD. J. Loss Prev. Process Indus. 35, 293-306. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jlp.2014.11.005
  12. Health & Safety Executive, 2006. Structural strengthening of offshore topsides structures as part of explosion risk reduction methods. Res. Rep. 489, 9-27.
  13. Kang, K.Y., Choi, K.H., Choi, J.W., Ryu, Y.H., Lee, J.M., 2016. Dynamic response of structural model according to characteristics of gas explosion topside platform. Ocean Eng. 113, 174-190. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.oceaneng.2015.12.043
  14. Kauthammer, T., Altenberg, A., 2000. Negative phase effects on glass panels. Int. J. Impact Eng. 24, 1-17. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0734-743X(99)00043-3
  15. Langdon, G.S., Schleyer, G.K., 2006. Deformation and failure of profiled stainless steel blast wall panels. Part III: finite element simulations and overall summary. Int. J. Impact Eng. 32, 988-1012. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijimpeng.2004.08.002
  16. Louca, L.A., Ali Mohamed, R.M., 2008. Improving the ductile behaviour of offshore topside structures under extreme loads. Eng. Struct. 30, 506-521. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.engstruct.2007.04.020
  17. Livermore Software Technology Corporation (LSTC), 2007. LS-DYNA Keyword User's Manual.
  18. Mazurkiewicz, L., Malachowaski, J., Baranowski, P., 2015. Blast loading influence on load carrying capacity of I-column. Eng. Struct. 104, 107-115. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.engstruct.2015.09.025
  19. Moghimi, H., Driver, R.G., 2015. Performance assessment of steel plate shear walls under accidental blast loads. J. Constr. Steel Res. 106, 44-56. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcsr.2014.11.010
  20. Nguyen, T.P., Tran, M.T., 2011. Response of vertical wall structures under blast loading by dynamic analysis. Procedia Eng. 14, 3308-3316. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.proeng.2011.07.418
  21. Rigby, S.E., Tyas, A., Bennett, T., 2014. Elasticeplastic response of plates subjected to cleared blast loads. Int. J. Impact Eng. 66, 37-47. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijimpeng.2013.12.006
  22. Schleyer, G.K., Langdon, G.S., 2005. Inelastic deformation and failure of progiled stainless steel blast wall panels. Part II: analytical modelling considerations. Int. J. Impact Eng. 31, 371-399. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijimpeng.2003.12.011
  23. Stolz, A., Fischer, K., Roller, C., Hauser, S., 2014. Dynamic bearing capacity of ductile concrete plates under blast loading. Int. J. Impact Eng. 69, 25-38. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijimpeng.2014.02.008
  24. UKOOA, 2003. Fire and Explosion Guidance Part 1: Avoidance and Mitigation of Explosions. UK Offshore Operators Association, UK.
  25. Yanlin, J., Jang, B.S., 2015. Probabilistic fire risk analysis and structural safety assessment of FPSO topside module. Ocean Eng. 104, 725-737. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.oceaneng.2015.04.019
  26. Zheng, X., Hua, J., Zhang, N., Feng, X., Zhang, L., 2015. Simulation of the load evolution of an anchoring system under a blasting impulse load using FLAC3D. Shock Vib. 2015, 8. Article ID 972720.

Cited by

  1. A Stepwise Risk Assessment for Explosion Events considering Probability Distribution of Explosion Load Parameters vol.2018, pp.None, 2017, https://doi.org/10.1155/2018/6850281
  2. Failure Statistics Analysis Based on Bayesian Theory: A Study of FPSO Internal Turret Leakage vol.33, pp.1, 2017, https://doi.org/10.1007/s13344-019-0002-z
  3. Numerical Evaluation of Dynamic Responses of Steel Frame Structures with Different Types of Haunch Connection Under Blast Load vol.10, pp.5, 2020, https://doi.org/10.3390/app10051815
  4. Investigation of the Structural Strength of Existing Blast Walls in Well-Test Areas on Drillships vol.8, pp.8, 2017, https://doi.org/10.3390/jmse8080583
  5. Dynamic Response of Drill Floor Considering Propagation of Blast Pressure Subsequent to Blowout vol.10, pp.24, 2017, https://doi.org/10.3390/app10248841
  6. Safety Barrier Management: Risk-Based Approach for the Oil and Gas Sector vol.9, pp.7, 2017, https://doi.org/10.3390/jmse9070722