P. 1
Finite element analysis of ship structures using a new stiffened plate element

Finite element analysis of ship structures using a new stiffened plate element

|Views: 20|Likes:
Published by milad66teh
Finite element analysis of ship structures using a new stiffened
plate element
Finite element analysis of ship structures using a new stiffened
plate element

More info:

Published by: milad66teh on Mar 31, 2013
Copyright:Attribution Non-commercial

Availability:

Read on Scribd mobile: iPhone, iPad and Android.
download as PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
See more
See less

02/05/2014

pdf

text

original

Finite element analysis of ship structures using a new stiffened

plate element
Y.V. Satish Kumar, M. Mukhopadhyay
*
Department of Ocean Engineering and Naval Architecture, Indian Institute of Technology, Kharagpur 721 302, India
Received 1 February 2000; accepted 1 May 2000
Abstract
A new stiffened plate element is developed for the three-dimensional ®nite element analysis of ship structures. The plate element can
accommodate any number of arbitrarily oriented stiffeners and obviates the use of mesh lines along the stiffeners. The new element provides
a very economic global analysis of the complete ship structure with fewer elements and without any loss of accuracy. The global analysis of a
rectangular box shaped vessel is carried out with the present element and compared with the general-purpose ®nite element software NISA.
An Offshore Tug/Supply Vessel is analysed for crest at perpendiculars. q 2001 Elsevier Science Ltd. All rights reserved.
Keywords: Ship; Stiffened plate element; Stiffener; 3D Finite element analysis; Allman's triangle; Discrete Kirchhoff±Mindlin triangle
1. Introduction
During the last three decades, there has been a signi®cant
departure in ship sizes and types from the conventional
ones. When VLCC's and container ships came into being
and bulk carriers increased in size considerably, the struc-
tural failures have been catastrophic. There was no experi-
ence at hand to premeditate such failures at design stage
itself. The structural design of ships is primarily rule
based where rules are formulated on the basis of experience
and empirical studies. As such when the sizes of the ships
started increasing in the 1970s, there were no existing rules
to guide the designer who looked forward to the methods
based on `®rst principles'. The ®nite element method has
been used as an important tool for the analysis and design of
ship structures since then. The catastrophic failures of bulk
carriers in recent times have entailed in a detailed analysis
of these vessels based on three-dimensional ®nite element
analysis. Ever since, extensive research has been carried out
on the topic.
Refs. [1±11] have carried out the 3D ®nite element analy-
sis of ship structures using discrete plate and beam/bar
elements. Ships being extensively stiffened with longitudi-
nals, girders, transverses and beams, the plate and beam
elements strictly desire a mesh line along the stiffener.
This constraint proposes irregular mesh which is very
much undesirable for a reliable stress output. Moreover,
the addition of a new longitudinal or transverse requires a
complete rede®nition of the ®nite element mesh. Hence, the
analysis of the complete vessel with conventional plate and
beam elements is uneconomical and prohibitive.
Elbatouti et al. [12] have used the orthotropic model of
the stiffened panel in which the panel is substituted with an
equivalent rigid plate. Similar to the orthotropic model, Paik
et al. [13] have developed a new stiffened panel model in
which the stiffened panel is replaced by a plate of optimal
thickness providing the same buckling or collapse strength
as the parent stiffened plate. These methods assume that the
stiffener spacing is uniform and all the stiffeners have the
same cross-sectional dimensions. The latter assumption can
be ruled out in ship structures as girders and beams have, in
most cases, signi®cantly greater scantlings than those asso-
ciated with local stiffeners which directly support plating.
Hughes et al. [14] have discussed a rationally based
method for the automated optimum design of ship struc-
tures. They have developed a software called SHIPOPT,
which incorporates the ®nite element program for the analy-
sis of ship structures and a cost-effective optimisation algo-
rithm for the solution of nonlinear redesign problem. The
latest version of this software is called MAESTRO, which
includes a stiffened shell element [15] to model the stiffened
plating of the vessel and also a double bottom element to
model the double bottom structure. However, the double
bottom element cannot predict the local deformations of
the double bottom. Refs. [5,16±18] have developed
Applied Ocean Research 22 (2000) 361±374
0141-1187/00/$ - see front matter q 2001 Elsevier Science Ltd. All rights reserved.
PII: S0141-1187(00)00014-6
www.elsevier.com/locate/apor
* Corresponding author.
E-mail address: jit@naval.iitkgp.ernet.in (M. Mukhopadhyay).
simpli®ed models for the structural analysis of ships using
®nite beam techniques/method of equivalent thickness
plates. However, these models have compared moderately
with the 3D ®nite element solutions. Chen et al. [19] have
presented the development of load criteria, strength criteria
for minimum scantling requirements and strength criteria
assessment procedures for double hull tankers.
The paper presents a new stiffened plate element for the
three-dimensional ®nite element analysis of the complete
ship structure. The element can accommodate any number
of arbitrarily oriented stiffeners and eliminates the use of
mesh lines along the stiffener. Hence, the 3D ®nite element
analysis of ship structures is carried out ef®ciently and
elegantly with fewer elements and fewer degrees of freedom
(d.o.f.). Moreover, the element ensures uniform mesh
though it is to be graded in case of stress concentrations
over the hull components irrespective of the stiffener loca-
tion. The basic plate element is a combination of Allman's
plane stress element and Discrete Kirchhoff±Mindlin Trian-
gular plate bending element. The in¯uence of the stiffener
parameters is re¯ected only at the nodes of the correspond-
ing plate element without introducing any additional node.
The three noded faceted plate element consists of six d.o.f.
per node and is adaptable to curvilinear hull surface in
different planes.
A few examples of stiffened plates are presented in the
paper to demonstrate the accuracy and the elegance of
the element. The ef®ciency of the present element over
the existing isoparametric stiffened plate element of
Mukhopadhyay and Satsangi [20] is also demonstrated.
A rectangular box shaped vessel is analysed and
compared with those obtained by the general purpose
®nite element software ªNumerically Integrated Elements
for System Analysis (NISA)º. Based on these tests, the
structural analysis of an Offshore Tug/Supply Vessel is
carried out.
2. Theory
2.1. Stiffness matrix of the stiffened plate element
The stiffness matrix of the stiffened plate element consists
of the stiffness matrix of the plate and that of the stiffener.
The stiffness matrix of the plate element is given by
‰K
p
Š ˆ
‰K
m
Š ‰0Š
‰0Š ‰K
b
Š
_ _
…1†
where [K
m
] is the membrane stiffness matrix corresponding
to the displacements u, v, and u
z
at corner nodes of the
triangle as developed by Allman [21]. [K
b
] is the stiffness
matrix of the Discrete Kirchhoff±Mindlin Triangular plate
bending element (DKMT) corresponding to w, u
x
and u
y
at
the three corner nodes [22].
Y.V. Satish Kumar, M. Mukhopadhyay / Applied Ocean Research 22 (2000) 361±374 362
Nomenclature
k
s
shear correction factor
x, y, z Cartesian coordinate system of plate element
xÂ, yÂ, z local coordinate system of the stiffener
u, v, w, u
x
, u
y
, u
z
nodal displacements
uÂ, vÂ, u

, u

stiffener displacements
A
e
area of the plate element
A
st
, S
st
, I
st
, J
st
area, ®rst and second moment of area, polar moment of inertia of the stiffener, respectively
[B
st
] strain displacement matrix of the stiffener
C
k
, S
k
cosine and sine of the angle of the edge of the element, containing the midside k, with x-axis
[D
st
] rigidity matrices of the stiffener
E, G, n elastic modulus, rigidity modulus and Poisson's ratio, respectively
[K
b
], [K
m
] stiffness matrices of Allman's triangle and DKMT element
[K
p
], [K
st
] stiffness matrices of plate and stiffener elements, respectively
L
st
length of the stiffener element
P
k
, N
i
linear and quadratic shape functions, respectively
[T] condensation matrix of the plate element (Allman's 1DKMT)
[T
Â
st
] strain transformation matrix of the stiffener
a
k
angle of the edge of the triangle containing the midside node k with x-axis
{d} displacement vector
{d
m
} displacement vector of Allman's triangle
{d
st
} displacement vector of the stiffener
{eÂ
st
}, {e
st
} strains in the stiffener in stiffener local coordinates and plate coordinates, respectively
u
x
, u
y
nodal rotations of DKMT element in Cartesian coordinate system
w angle of inclination of stiffener w.r.t. x-axis
Du
sk
nodal rotation of midside node k
The plate elements are discussed in detail in Refs.
[21,22]. Hence, their formulations are not presented in this
paper.
2.1.1. Stiffness matrix of the stiffener
The middle plane of the plate is taken as the reference
plane for the stiffener in its stiffness matrix formulation. The
adoption of common shape functions for both the plate and
the stiffener elements allows the stiffness matrix of the stif-
fener to be expressed in terms of the nodal parameters of the
plate element.
The membrane and rotational displacements (Figs. 1 and
2) at any point within the plate element are interpolated
using the relations
{d
m
} ˆ
u
v
_ _
ˆ

6
iˆ1
‰N
i
Š{d
m
i
} …2†
u
x
ˆ

3
iˆ1
P
i
u
xi
1

6
kˆ4
N
k
C
k
Du
sk
u
y
ˆ

3
iˆ1
P
i
u
yi
1

6
kˆ4
N
k
S
k
Du
sk
…3†
where N
i
are the quadratic shape functions and P
i
are the
linear shape functions [23], {d
m
i
} are the nodal inplane
displacements, u
xi
and u
yi
are the nodal rotations of the
corner nodes and Du
sk
are the nodal rotations of the midside
node k of edge s of the element.
Let the stiffener be arbitrarily oriented at an angle w
with respect to plate element coordinate system as shown in
Fig. 3. The nodal displacements of the stiffener in its local
co-ordinates x and y are given as
{d
st
}
T
ˆ { u w u
x
u
y
} …4†
The generalised strains of the stiffener in the local co-ordi-
nate system are given by
{ e
st
}
T
ˆ
2 u
2 x
2u
x
2 x
2u
y
2 x
2 w
2 x
1u
x
_ _ _ _
…5†
Applying the chain rule of partial differentiation, the gener-
alised strains in the local co-ordinates are transformed into
the plate element co-ordinates as
{ e
st
} ˆ ‰

T
s
Š{e
st
} …6†
where ‰

T
s
Š is the transformation matrix of stiffener strains
(Appendix A) and {e
st
} is the stiffener strains in plate
element co-ordinate system.
{e
st
}
T
ˆ {u
;x
v
;y
1
2
…u
;y
1v
;x
† u
x;x
u
y;y
u
y;x
u
x;y
w
;x
1u
x
w
;y
1u
y
}
…7†
Y.V. Satish Kumar, M. Mukhopadhyay / Applied Ocean Research 22 (2000) 361±374 363
Fig. 1. Allman's triangle.
Fig. 2. DKMT element.
Hence, the generalised strains of the stiffener in plate
element coordinate system are expressed as
{e
st
} ˆ ‰B
st
Š{d} …8†
where [B
st
] is the strain±displacement matrix of the stiffener
and
{d}
T
ˆ {u
1
v
1
u
x1
u
y1
¼
u
4
v
4
Du
S4
¼
Du
S6
} …9†
The stiffness matrix of the stiffener is thus given as
‰K
st
Š ˆ
_
‰TŠ
T
‰B
st
Š
T
‰D
st
Š‰B
st
Š‰TŠ d x …10†
[T] is the condensation matrix which condenses the six node
triangular plate element to a three node element [21,22].
Y.V. Satish Kumar, M. Mukhopadhyay / Applied Ocean Research 22 (2000) 361±374 364
Fig. 3. Stiffener inside the element.
Start
CCLON
SH3DCC
SWEP
GSSS
STRESS
END
Longitudinal
Coordinates
FE Mesh
Development
Stiffener Identification
in Plate Elements
Rigidity Matrices
and Lightweight
Calculation
Nodal
Displacements and
Element Stress
Resultants
Nodal Stresses
Stiffness Matrix of the
Vessel and
Deadweight
Wave Loading
Fig. 4. Flow chart of the program ASSA.
[D
st
] is the rigidity matrix of the stiffener given as
‰D
st
Š ˆ
EA
st
ES
st
0 0
ES
st
EI
st
0 0
0 0 GJ
st
0
0 0 0 k
2
s
GA
st

_
_
_
_
_
_
_

_
_
_
_
_
_
_
…11†
where A
st
is the cross-sectional area of the stiffener, S
st
the
®rst moment of area of the stiffener, I
st
the second moment
of area of the stiffener, J
st
the polar moment of inertia, k
2
s
the
shear correction factor ( ˆ (5/6)), and E and G represent the
moduli of elasticity and rigidity, respectively.
3. Software
The structural modelling of the vessel is carried out in an
exclusive ship structural design software ªAdvanced Ship
Structural Analysis (ASSA)º (Fig. 4), developed in-house at
IIT, Kharagpur. The software comprises several modules
comprising CCLON, SH3DCC and SWEP as the preproces-
sors, GSSS as the processor and STRESS as the post proces-
sor. The software uses the coordinates of the longitudinals in
a frame as the information cells to determine the nodal co-
ordinates, element connectivity, location of bulkheads and
girders, the extent of property zones, etc. In ASSA, the ship
is divided into a number of zones or substructures to facil-
itate an ef®cient management of the data. Each zone or
substructure is a part of the vessel between two Water
Tight Bulkheads. The module CCLON generates the co-
ordinates of the longitudinals in all the frames along
which the transverse mesh lines are desired. The
module interpolates the coordinates of the longitudinals
(whose y- or z- coordinate is ambiguous) in a frame based
on the water lines and offsets of the preceding and
Y.V. Satish Kumar, M. Mukhopadhyay / Applied Ocean Research 22 (2000) 361±374 365
Fig. 5. Rectangular plate with T-stiffeners.
0.0 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0
-0.8
-0.6
-0.4
-0.2
0.0
Mukhopadhyay and Satsangi [1984]
Present
D
i
s
p
l
a
c
e
m
e
n
t
,
w
(
m
m
)
Along the cetreline of the plate, x (m)
Fig. 6. Variation of displacement at y ˆ 1.27 m in a rectangular plate with
T-stiffeners.
0.0 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0
-30
-20
-10
0
10
20
Mukhopadhyay and Satsangi [1984]
Present
M
o
m
e
n
t
,
M
x
(
N
-
m
/
m
)
Along the centreline of the plate, x (m)
Fig. 7. Variation of moment, M
x
, at y ˆ 1.27 m in a rectangular plate with
T-stiffeners.
succeeding water-lines/stations. The module SH3DCC
generates the nodal co-ordinates over the main hull, trans-
verse bulkheads, longitudinal bulkheads, tween decks,
girders and ¯oors with the aid of the data generated by
CCLON. ASSA takes advantage of the longitudinal symme-
try of the vessel and performs the analysis with only one half
of the vessel either port or starboard side. Moreover, the
unsymmetric loading on the vessel can be handled by divid-
ing the load into symmetric and anti-symmetric compo-
nents. The analysis is carried out for these two load
components individually on the longitudinally symmetric
structural model with respective boundary conditions. The
module SWEP determines the number of longitudinals and
transverses passing through each plate element of the hull
components. The rigidity of each plate element is evaluated
based on the average nodal thickness and later the rigidities
of the stiffeners in each element are also evaluated. The
module also calculates the nodal lightweight of the vessel.
The data generated in the foregoing modules is passed
on to the module GSSS, which calculates the stiffness
of stiffened plates using the present element. It also
calculates the deadweight due to different types of
cargo and also the load due to the buoyancy for differ-
ent water levels (still water level, crest at perpendiculars
and crest at amidship). The vessel is maintained in
static equilibrium by balancing the forces due to buoy-
ancy, light weight, deadweight and other loadings such
as out®tting, ballast, etc. Then the governing equations
are solved to determine the nodal displacements. Once
the nodal displacements are obtained, the stress resul-
tants in various elements of all the hull components are
calculated. The module STRESS picks up these element
stress resultants and calculates the average nodal stres-
ses of all the structural components.
Y.V. Satish Kumar, M. Mukhopadhyay / Applied Ocean Research 22 (2000) 361±374 366
Fig. 8. Skew bridge deck with beams in both directions.
0 50 100 150 200
-7
-6
-5
-4
-3
-2
-1
0
Just [1981]
Present
D
i
s
p
l
a
c
e
m
e
n
t
,
w
(
m
m
)
x (mm)
Fig. 9. Variation of displacement along P±P of a skew bridge deck.
0 75 150 225 300 375 450
-7
-6
-5
-4
-3
-2
-1
0
1
Just [1981]
Present
D
i
s
p
l
a
c
e
m
e
n
t
,
w
(
m
m
)
y (mm)
Fig. 10. Variation of displacement along Q±Q of a skew bridge deck.
4. Results and discussion
4.1. Static analysis of a simply supported stiffened plate with
T-stiffeners
A rectangular plate stiffened with nine T-stiffeners (Fig.
5) is analysed to check the performance against the eight
noded isoparametric stiffened plate element of Mukhopad-
hyay and Satsangi [20]. The plate is loaded with a concen-
trated load of 10 kN at the centre and is simply supported
along its longer edges and is free along the other two edges.
Young's modulus and Poisson's ratio of the stiffened plate
are 2.1 £ 10
11
N/m
2
and 0.3, respectively. Due to symmetry,
only one quarter of the plate is analysed with a 4 £ 4 mesh.
The de¯ections and stress resultants in the plate at
y ˆ 1.27 m along x-axis are plotted in Figs. 6 and 7. The
results are compared with those of Ref. [20], which uses the
isoparametric stiffened plate element. Excellent agreement
is observed between the two results. The isoparametric
element consists of 40 d.o.f. whereas the present element
consists of 18 d.o.f. only. The total degrees of freedom for
the mesh using isoparametric element are 345 whereas that
using the present triangular element is 150 only. The results
indicate an excellent performance of the element with fewer
d.o.f. only. Hence, the present element is an economic
element for 3D ®nite element analysis of ship structures
compared to the isoparametric stiffened plate element. In
view of this observation, a combination of isoparametric
element and the present element is not warranted.
4.2. Static analysis of a stiffened skew bridge deck
A stiffened skew bridge deck having ®ve equispaced
longitudinal beams and two transverse beams (Fig. 8) is
analysed with the present element to study the performance
of arbitrary plates. The bridge deck is supported at the ends
of the longitudinal beams and horizontal and vertical displa-
cements are restrained along the transverse beams. A
concentrated load of 100 kN is acting at the centre of a
longitudinal free edge. Young's modulus and Poisson's
ratio for 3 mm thick slab are 3354.0 N/mm
2
and 0.390,
respectively, and those for the beams are 3176.0 N/mm
2
and 0.335, respectively. The analysis is carried out for
various mesh sizes varying from 8 £ 8 to 32 £ 32 for full
deck and the element is found to converge with 16 £ 16
mesh. The vertical de¯ections along P±P and Q±Q are
compared with those of Ref. [24] in Figs. 9 and 10 using
16 £ 16 mesh. The plots show a fair agreement between the
two results. Table 1 shows fair agreement between the
displacements at x ˆ 51.9 m along P±P and at y ˆ 450 m
along Q±Q with those of Ref. [24] and indicate that the
element is ef®cient in modelling arbitrary plates with arbi-
trarily oriented stiffeners.
4.3. Static analysis of a rectangular box-shaped vessel
On observing the performance of the present element in
stiffened plates, the stiffened plate element is applied for the
static analysis of a 60 m rectangular box shaped vessel
carrying iron ore. The behaviour of the element in structural
analysis of the complete ship under still water condition is
validated using the general-purpose ®nite element software
NISA. The main particulars of the vessel are given in Table
2 and the structural and loading details of the vessel are
Y.V. Satish Kumar, M. Mukhopadhyay / Applied Ocean Research 22 (2000) 361±374 367
Table 1
Displacements of skew bridge deck
Ref. [24] Present
Along P±P at x ˆ 51.9 mm 22.261 22.4083
Along Q±Q at y ˆ 450 mm 26.060 26.167
Table 2
Main particulars of rectangular box shaped vessel
Length overall (m) 60.00
Length between
perpendiculars (m)
60.00
Breadth moulded (m) 12.00
Depth upto main deck (m) 8.80
Service draught (m) 4.32
Fig. 11. 60 m Rectangular box shaped vessel.
given in Figs. 11 and 12, respectively. The main deck is
subjected to a uniformly distributed load of 0.0123 N/
mm
2
, the cargo load height in the ®rst and the last holds
is 2.952 m and the load height over the second deck is
1.476 m. The total weight due to engine and machinery
is 360 t.
The dimensions of the longitudinals on the main hull are
140 £ 8 equal angle and those on the longitudinal bulkhead
and second deck are 100 £ 8 equal angle, respectively. The
vessel is stiffened with transverse beams at all the frames
over the deck and side shell whose dimensions are 160 £ 8
equal angle. The double bottom ¯oors are placed at all the
frames.
The transverse bulkhead is stiffened with one vertical
stiffener at Y ˆ 0.0 and with two horizontal stiffeners at
Z ˆ 3 m and Z ˆ 7 m. The dimensions of both the vertical
and the horizontal stiffeners are 100 £ 8 equal angle. The
longitudinal bulkhead is also stiffened with vertical stiffen-
ers at frames 5, 10, 15, 25, 30, 35, 45, 50 and 60 whose
dimensions are 120 £ 8 equal angle. Similarly, the second
deck is stiffened with horizontal stiffeners whose location
and dimensions are same as that of the vertical stiffeners of
longitudinal bulkhead.
Only one-half of the vessel is analysed. The vessel is
divided into three zones with forward (frames 40±60) and
aft (frames 0±20) zones containing the cargo and the central
zone (frames 20±40) is the engine and machinery room.
NISA uses the 3D thin quadrilateral shell element based
on Discrete Kirchhoff assumptions to model the hull, bulk-
heads, deck plating, bottom girders and ¯oors. The beam
elements are used to model the longitudinals and transverses
of the vessel in NISA. This 2-noded beam element includes
axial, bending and shear deformations and is based on
Y.V. Satish Kumar, M. Mukhopadhyay / Applied Ocean Research 22 (2000) 361±374 368
Fig. 12. Section of a rectangular box shaped vessel.
0 10 20 30 40 50 60
-10
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
Present NISA
D
i
s
p
l
a
c
e
m
e
n
t
,
w
(
m
m
)
Along the length of the vessel, (m)
Fig. 13. Displacements along the centreline of the main deck of a rectan-
gular box shaped vessel.
0 10 20 30 40 50 60
-6
-5
-4
-3
-2
-1
0
1
NISA Present
S
t
r
e
s
s
,
σ
x
(
N
/
m
m
2
)
Along the length of the vessel, (m)
Fig. 14. Variation of stress, s
x
, along the centreline of the tank top of a
rectangular box shaped vessel.
isoparametric formulation. The data generation for a quad-
ratic beam element in NISA is cumbersome with no signi®-
cant improvement in the results. Hence, the modelling in
NISA is carried out with linear beam element. The 2-noded
beam elements are aligned with the plate element bound-
aries since the plate element cannot accommodate stiffeners
inside it. Hence, the ®nite element model in NISA requires
5021 plate and beam elements to model the vessel whereas
the present element due to its capability in accommodating
any number of arbitrarily oriented stiffeners uses 1516 stif-
fened plate elements only. Hence, the total d.o.f. of the
vessel modelled with the present element are 2166 only
whereas that modelled in NISA has 15,192 d.o.f. The plat-
ing is initially modelled in NISA using the isoparametric
element. A huge discrepancy in the stresses is observed
between those of NISA and the present formulation. The
isoparametric element is replaced with the 3D thin quadri-
lateral shell element based on Discrete Kirchhoff assump-
tions and stresses are found to compare well with the present
formulation. The discrepancy is observed due to the
presence of shear locking effects in isoparametric element.
Fig. 13 shows the de¯ections along the centre line of the
main deck. The stress s
x
is plotted along the longitudinal
centreline of the vessel in Fig. 14. The de¯ections and stres-
ses obtained with the present element are in good agreement
with those obtained using NISA.
The stresses, s
x
; across the midship section (frame 30)
are plotted in Fig. 15. Similarly, the stresses, s
y
; are plotted
over the transverse bulkhead (frame 20) at Z ˆ 3 m, Z ˆ 7 m
and Y ˆ 3 m in Fig. 16. The results show a fair agreement
with those obtained using NISA.
Table 3 shows the stresses, s
x
at various frames along the
centreline of main deck tank top and tank bottom, respec-
tively. The results indicate a fair agreement of the present
formulation with those of NISA.
The present element has predicted the displacements and
the stresses with a few elements only and its accuracy is
comparable to that of using a large number of discrete plate
and beam elements in NISA or any ship structural design
software. The advantages of using the element are mainly
due to its capability in accommodating any number of arbi-
trarily oriented stiffeners within the plate element.
4.4. Static analysis of an Offshore Tug/Supply Vessel
The static analysis of an Offshore Tug/Supply Vessel is
carried out with the present stiffened plate element with the
wave crest at perpendiculars. The length of the wave is
considered as equal to the ship's length and wave height
is taken as equal to (ship's length)/20. The main parti-
culars of the vessel are given in Table 4 and the struc-
tural arrangements are shown in Figs. 17±19. The
Y.V. Satish Kumar, M. Mukhopadhyay / Applied Ocean Research 22 (2000) 361±374 369
Fig. 15. Variation of stress, s
x
, across the cross-section of the rectangular
box shaped vessel at frame `30'.
Fig. 16. Variation of stress, s
y
, in the transverse bulkhead of the rectangular
box shaped vessel at frame `20'.
Table 3
Stresses s
x
across frames 20, 25, 30, 35 and 40 along the centreline of main
deck, tank top and tank bottom
Frame no. Stress (N/mm
2
)
Present NISA
Main deck 25 238.79 234.97
30 242.26 243.32
35 238.82 240.15
Tank top 25 24.38 24.384
30 24.74 25.1
35 24.374 24.28
Tank bottom 20 24.08 24.11
30 24.593 24.927
40 24.08 24.11
Y.V. Satish Kumar, M. Mukhopadhyay / Applied Ocean Research 22 (2000) 361±374 370
Fig. 17. Offshore Tug/Supply Vessel.
Fig. 18. Main deck and tank top of the Offshore Tug/Supply Vessel.
Y.V. Satish Kumar, M. Mukhopadhyay / Applied Ocean Research 22 (2000) 361±374 371
Fig. 19. Section of the Offshore Tug/Supply Vessel.
Fig. 20. Finite element model of the Offshore Tug/Supply Vessel.
vessel is divided into four zones. The ®rst zone lies
between frames 2 and 10, the second zone between
10 and 34, the third zone between 34 and 54 and the
fourth zone between the frames 54 and 69, respectively.
The vessel is transversely framed and consists of trans-
verses at all the frames.
The scantlings of the longitudinals on the main deck are
Hollandishe pro®le (HP) 140 £ 8 and HP 200 £ 9.
The cargo hold lies between the frames 10 and 43 and the
third zone consists of the engine and machinery. The cargo
load height (density 4500 kg/m
3
) is 2.5 m from the tank top
level and the deck is subjected to a uniformly distributed
load of 5 kN/m
2
between the frames 2 and 54. The super-
structure weight between the frames 57 and 80 is treated as a
uniformly distributed load.
The portion of the vessel between the frames 2 and 74 is
analysed using ASSA. The software analyses the portion of
the vessel between the aft bulkhead and the collision bulk-
head only. Since these bulkheads are at frames 2 and 74,
respectively, the analysis is limited to this part of the vessel
only. For ®nite element analysis, the vessel is discretised
Y.V. Satish Kumar, M. Mukhopadhyay / Applied Ocean Research 22 (2000) 361±374 372
10 20 30 40 50 60 70
-60
-50
-40
-30
-20
-10
0
10
20
At frame 60 - Displacement = -47.7 mm
Crest at perpendiculars
D
i
s
p
l
a
c
e
m
e
n
t
,
w
(
m
m
)
Frames
Fig. 21. Variation of displacement along the centreline of the main deck of
Offshore Tug/Supply Vessel.
10 20 30 40 50 60 70
-150
-100
-50
0
50
100
150
At frame 18 - Stress = 129.22 N/mm
2
Crest at perpendiculars
S
t
r
e
s
s
,
σ
x
(
N
/
m
m
2
)
Frames
Fig. 22. Variation of stress, s
x
, along the centreline of the main deck of
Offshore Tug/Supply Vessel.
10 20 30 40 50 60 70
-40
-35
-30
-25
-20
-15
-10
-5
0
5
10
At frame 30 - Displacement = -21.32 mm
Crest at perpendiculars
D
i
s
p
l
a
c
e
m
e
n
t
,
w
(
m
m
)
Frames
Fig. 23. Variation of displacement along the centreline of the tank bottom
of Offshore Tug/Supply Vessel.
Table 4
Main particulars of Offshore Tug/Supply Vessel
Length (m) 54.85
Length between perpendiculars (m) 48.00
Breadth moulded (m) 12.50
Depth upto main deck (m) 5.80
Service draught (m) 4.60
Trial speed (knots) 14.30
Block coef®cient 0.698
10 20 30 40 50 60 70
-160
-120
-80
-40
0
40
At frame 56 - Stress = -145 N/mm
2
Crest at perpendiculars
S
t
r
e
s
s
,
σ
x
(
N
/
m
m
2
)
Frames
Fig. 24. Variation of stress, s
x
, along the centreline of the tank bottom of
Offshore Tug/Supply Vessel.
into 1046 stiffened plate elements which include the main
deck, side shell, tank top, tank bottom, longitudinal bulk-
heads, transverse bulkheads, second deck, longitudinal
girders and ¯oors. The discretised model consists of 6504
d.o.f. The static condensation is carried out over bulkheads,
second deck, ¯oors, and longitudinal girders, which
reduced the number of d.o.f. to 1680 only. The hatch open-
ings in the main deck are replaced with plating of negli-
gible thickness (10
23
mm) to eliminate the problems
associated with the inversion of overall stiffness matrix.
The discretised model of the complete vessel is shown in
Fig. 20.
Fig. 21 shows the displacement along the centreline
of the main deck. The de¯ection of the main deck is
signi®cant in the forward part of the vessel (i.e. 4th
zone) due to the weight of the superstructure. The
de¯ection is signi®cant between the frames 2 and 54
due to the uniformly distributed load over this portion
of the main deck. Fig. 22 shows the variation of the
stress s
x
over the main deck. The stress is maximum in
the second zone and changes sign in the third and the
fourth zones. This may be due to the empty holds in the
forward part of the vessel which in¯uence the stresses over
the deck whereas the deck portion in the second zone
(cargo holds) has been subjected to stresses of signi®cant
magnitude.
Fig. 23 shows the displacement along the centreline
of the tank bottom. The variation of s
x
on the tank
bottom (Fig. 24) shows signi®cant stresses in the
forward part of the vessel and moderate stress levels
in the cargo hold. This is due to the ballast in the double
bottom where the stress levels are unlike those of the main
deck.
Figs. 25 and 26 show the variation of stresses s
x
, s
y
and
s
z
across the frames 30 and 46. The stresses along the side
shell resemble that of a beam bending stress.
Hence, the present element has enabled a very realis-
tic modelling of all the hull components with the least
possible modelling assumptions unlike the approaches
of equivalent plate thickness and double bottom
elements.
5. Conclusions
A new stiffened plate element is developed for the
three-dimensional ®nite element analysis of ship struc-
tures. The element can elegantly accommodate any
number of arbitrarily oriented stiffeners within the plate
element. Hence, the structural analysis of highly stiffened
ship structures can be carried out with very few elements,
few d.o.f. and with no loss of accuracy. A rectangular box
shaped vessel is analysed and the results are compared
with the general-purpose ®nite element software NISA.
The total d.o.f. of the vessel modelled with the present
element are 2166 only whereas that modelled in NISA has
15,192 d.o.f. Moreover, the stresses computed from both
the ®nite element models have compared excellently. An
Offshore Tug/Supply Vessel is analysed for wave crest at
perpendiculars. The stresses are plotted along the main
deck, double bottom and across the frames 30 and 46.
The stresses are signi®cant in the cargo hold portion
(second zone) of the main deck. However, the stresses
in the tank bottom are unlike those of main deck since the
ballast in the double bottom has reduced the stress intensi-
ties in the cargo hold portion of the tank bottom. The present
element has ensured the stress prediction in all the hull
components with least possible number of modelling
assumptions.
Y.V. Satish Kumar, M. Mukhopadhyay / Applied Ocean Research 22 (2000) 361±374 373
Fig. 26. Variation of stress, s
x
, across the hull at frame `46' for crest at
perpendiculars.
Fig. 25. Variation of stress, s
x
, across the hull at frame `30' for crest at
perpendiculars.
Appendix
References
[1] Yuille IM, Wilson LB. Transverse strength of single hulled ships Ð
elastic analysis of the displacement method using an electronic
computer. Trans R Inst Naval Architects 1960;102:579±612.
[2] Paulling JR. The analysis of complex ship structures by the ®nite
element technique. J Ship Res 1964:1±14.
[3] Moe J, Arne T. Model experiments and ®nite element analyses of
stress in an open ship. Eur Shipbuilding 1966(5):76±81.
[4] Boylston JW, de Koff DJ, Muntjewerf JJ. SL-7 container ships:
design, construction and operational experience. Trans Soc Naval
Architects Mar Engineers 1974;82:427±78.
[5] Steneroth ER, Ulfvarson AYJ. The snaking of open ships. Int Ship-
building Progr 1976;23(257):3±9.
[6] Robson BL. Development of the Royal Australian Navy GRP mine-
hunter design. Trans R Inst Naval Architects 1983;125:124±42.
[7] Taylor KV, Payer HG, Swift PM. Strength investigations of tanker
longitudinal bulkhead plating. Trans R Inst Naval Architects
1986;128:121±41.
[8] Purcell ES, Allen SJ, Walker RT. Structural analysis of the U.S. Coast
Guard Island class patrol boat. Trans Soc Naval Architects Mar Engi-
neers 1988;96:221±46.
[9] Umeazaki K, Kobayashi M, Kohkawa H, Mizuno H, Nishimura S,
Okayasu T, Yanagi K. Anti-vibration design of a passenger ship.
Naval Architecture Ocean Engng 1993;30:109±18.
[10] Lehman E, BoÈkenhauer B, Fricke E, Hansen H-J. Structural design
aspects of bulk carriers. In: Marine Technology Ð II, Second Inter-
national Conference on Marine Technology, Szczecin. Computational
Mechanics Publications, 1997. p. 25±42.
[11] Szpiek JM, Jazukiewicz A. Structural strength assessment of
40000dwt double hull product tanker. In: Marine Technology Ð II,
Second International Conference on Marine Technology, Szczecin.
Computational Mechanics Publications, 1997. p. 53±62.
[12] Elbatouti AMT, Jan H-Y, Stiansen SG. Structural analysis of a
container ship steel model and comparison with the test results.
Trans Soc Naval Architects Mar Engineers 1976;84:146±68.
[13] Paik JK, Kim DH, Bond HS, Kim MS, Han SK. Deterministic and
probablistic safety evaluation for a new double-hull tanker with trans-
verseless system. Trans Soc Naval Architects Mar Engineers
1992;100:173±98.
[14] Hughes OF, Mistree F, Z
Æ
anicÁ V. A practical method for the rational
design of ship structures. J Ship Res 1980;24(2):101±13.
[15] Thompson PA. Analysis of reinforced openings in ring stiffened shells
using integrally stiffened shell elements. In: Smith CS, Dow RS,
editors. Advances in marine structures. Amsterdam: Elsevier, 1991.
[16] Westin H. Analysis of the torsional response of the SL-7 hull structure
by use of the ®nite-beam technique and comparison with other trials. J
Ship Res 1981;26(1):62±75.
[17] Fransman JW. The analysis of passenger ship superstructures on the
response of the hull girder. Trans R Inst Naval Architects
1989;131:57±71.
[18] Heder M, Ulfvarson A. Hull beam behaviour of passenger ships. Mar
Struct 1991;4:17±34.
[19] Chen HH, Jan HY, Conlon JF, Liu D. New approach for the design
and evaluation of double hull tanker structures. Trans Soc Naval
Architects Mar Engineers 1993;101:215±45.
[20] Mukhopadhyay M, Satsangi SK. Isoparametric stiffened plate bend-
ing element for the analysis of ships' structures. Trans R Inst Naval
Architects 1984;126:141±51.
[21] Allman DJ. A compatible triangular element including vertex rota-
tions for plane elasticity analysis. Comput Struct 1984;19(1/2):1±8.
[22] Katili I. A new discrete Kirchhoff±Mindlin element based on Mind-
lin±Reissner plate theory and assumed shear strain ®elds Ð Part I:
An extended DKT element for thick-plate bending analysis. Int J
Numer Methods Engng 1993;36(11):1859±83.
[23] Zienkiewicz OC, Taylor RL. The ®nite element method. 4th ed.
Singapore: McGraw-Hill, 1989.
[24] Just DJ. Behaviour of skewd beam and slab bridge decks. J Struct Div,
ASCE 1981;107(ST2):299±316.
Y.V. Satish Kumar, M. Mukhopadhyay / Applied Ocean Research 22 (2000) 361±374 374
‰

T
s
Š ˆ
cos
2
w sin
2
w
1
2
sin 2w 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 cos
2
w sin
2
w
1
2
sin 2w
1
2
sin 2w 0 0
0 0 0 2
1
2
sin 2w
1
2
sin 2w cos
2
w 2sin
2
w 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 cos w sin w

_
_
_
_
_
_
_

_
_
_
_
_
_
_
…A1†

You're Reading a Free Preview

Download
scribd
/*********** DO NOT ALTER ANYTHING BELOW THIS LINE ! ************/ var s_code=s.t();if(s_code)document.write(s_code)//-->