PTSC M&C Company Limited: Structural Checklist

STRUCTURAL CHECKLIST
C 28/10/2010 ANE NAD Draft

REV. Date Originator Checked By Approved by Status
PTSC M&C COMPANY LIMITED
1|31
Contents
1. INPLACE ANALYSIS 3
2. EIGEN VALUE ANALYSIS 6
3. SPECTRAL FATIGUE ANALYSIS 8
4. SIESMIC ANALYSIS 11
5. TOPSIDE LIFTING ANALYSIS 14
6. JACKET LIFTING ANALYSIS 16
7. TOPSIDE LOADOUT ANALYSIS 18

8. JACKET LOADOUT ANALYSIS 20
9. TOPSIDE TRANSPORTATION ANLYSIS 22
10. JACKET TRANSPORTATION ANALYSIS 24
11. JACKET ON-BOTTOM STABILITY ANALYSIS 26
12. JACKET FLOATATION AND UPENDING 28
13. JACKET STATIC LAUNCH 30
These checklists are to be used as part of Design Quality Assurance program which may include
independent and periodic review sessions. These checklists are by no means exhaustive and
should be used as a guide only. The checker must always use His/her judgment while checking.
2|31
1.0 INPLACE ANALYSIS
DESCRIPTION SELFCHECK CHECKER’S

REVIEW
1. All information gathered has been reviewed and confirmed
adequate?
a) Design Basis Report
b) Design Report
c) Client provided model (if any )
2. All necessary changes required have been summarized and
discussed with Lead?
a) Revision due to WSD (e.g. classification of deadload due to
different load factor)
b) Modification required (e.g. platform modification , damage,
inspection data)
c) Load combination table
3. All requirements /agreed changes have been incorporated into
the model?
a) Design Basis
b) Item (2) above
4. All computer files have been created following standard file name
conventions
e.g. C/Projects/BD1….
5. All input files are the latest?
6. All inputs have been checked as per DWP?
a) Unit (kN, kg, m) and Global coordinate system (origin @ MSL ,
X= platform North, Z=upward
b) Coordinates for key nodes
c) Visual check of plots (plan-by-plan, overall in X, Y, Z no
overlapped numbers, no unexplained items etc.)
d) Numbering system (Node number bottom up, 4-digit for jacket
and deck. Group number to follow basis), systematic joint
numbering.
e) Section and group assignment (OD, WT, W size) as per
Drawings?
f) Can size , can length as per API RP2A requirement, chord
member
g) Corrosion allowance for Inplace as per Design Basis
h) Boundary (e.g. jacket-foundation connection)
i) Wave data (H, T, direction, crest position, water depth,
apparent period, spreading factor, conductor shielding effect)
j) Current data (u &z , direction, stretching, current blockage
3|31
factor)
k) All jacket appurtenance loads shall be buoyant loads
l) Cd, Cm, marine growth profile as per Design Basis
m) Flood card
n) Water depth and mudline elevation (considered maximum and
minimum water depth in the analysis)
o) Water density , steel density, Fy , E(note small E for non-
structural)
p) Basic load cases (load sum)
q) Load combinations (factors, combination, load sum)
r) Special release (wishbone, conductors, etc.)
s) Member D/t ratios does not exceed requirements
t) Code checks parameters (Ky/Ly,Kz/Lz, local coordinates system,
Lb, Cm, Fy override for joint check). K factors for X-brace are
accordance with API RP2A
u) PSI Input
 Pile/conductor head node number and reference node
 Pile section, density, E
 Scour(see information Geotechnical Report)
 PY, TZ and QZ as per soil report? Soil ID assigned to
right pile?
 P,T and Q of soil springs input in the correct unit
required in SACS?
 Y factor for conductors assigned?
v) P-delta effect analysis(if any)
7. In-place Analysis
a) Water depth/wave periods/wave crest based on maximum
overturning moment/base shear? Critical crest position is within
the start and end crest position defined?
b) Load sum checked and reasonable? All signs are correct (e.g +
add to + etc...).Compare against Weight Control Report.
c) Platform displacement reasonable?
d) Pile head force and displacement reasonable? Pile lateral
deflections at mudline are within 20% of pile diameter.
Compare against soil report
e) Conductors shear take-off reasonable?
f) Member stress results reasonable? Overstress justified or
highlighted?
g) Joint stress results reasonable? Overstress justified or
highlighted?
h) Vertical bracing configuration in upper level of jacket provides
redundancy in event of damage from ship impact (if any jacket
impact analysis)
i) Hydrostatic collapse checks have been included in the analysis?
4|31
j) Pile axial capacity and stress results reasonable?

8. Report
a) QA check print available?
b) Report prepared following format provided?
c) Inform Team Leader the results and highlight anomaly?
5|31
2.0 EIGEN VALUE ANALYSIS

REVIEW
1. Foundation Spring
a) Min. 3 pairs of In-place load combination cases selected?
b) One set of springs for operating and one set for storm
c) WSD factor included in spring calculation
d) Verify the linearised foundation by comparing the top deflection
of jacket/topside against non-linear PSI foundation for the same
model and the load cases; the difference shall be reasonable,
e.g. < 10%
2. Eigen value Precede file
a) All relevant gravity loads have been converted to mass?
Contingency factor included
b) Height effect of critical topside mass simulated?
c) Operating and storm mass consistent with In-place model?
d) “Super-element input” defined in model file.
e) Steel density revised to include weight contingency factor
f) Dynamic dof defined to all key nodes?
g) Pile/leg nodes at all key elevation ,X-brace intersection nodes,
Horizontal bracing intersection nodes, Pile cluster nodes
3. Dynamic input file checked?
a) Additional mass over-ride defined
b) Pile and leg not doubly flooded
c) Override for dummy member to eliminate flood mass
d) Min.20 modes
4. Total mass generated by Dynpac reviewed
a) Topside mass consistent with In-place load sum
b) Jacket mass consistent with In-place gravity(w/o WSD factor)+
marine growth mass + water added mass
c) Mass participation factors in X, Y, and Z directions shall be >90%
5. Two runs performed?
a) 1 for operating and the other for storm, difference are
topside mass and foundation spring
6. QA check prints available?
a) Dynamic d.o.f.
b) Mass check
c) Boundary conditions-foundation springs
7. Mode shape reviewed and reasonable?
8. Periods reasonable?
9. Check DAF assumption in inplace analysis.
6|31
a) For operating, calculate DAF using new natural period based on

equation of single DOF. Is the calculated DAF matches previously
assumed DAF in inplace? If not re visit inplace.
b) For storm:
 Is Tn>0.5*Tass ? If yes, need to perform detailed
dynamic analysis.
 If Tn<0.5*Tass, calculate DAF using new natural
period based on equation of single DOF. Is the
calculated DAF matches previously assumed DAF in
inplace? If not re-visit inplace.
10. Inform Team Leader the outcome and highlight anomaly
11. Inplace report compiled using the format (template)
provided?
12. All computer files follow standard convention? Back up of
latest files done?
7|31
3.0 SPECTRAL FATIGUE ANALYSIS

REVIEW
adequate?
b) Design Report
inspection data)
the model?
a) Design Basis
b) Item (2) above
conventions
numbering.
Drawings?
member
g) Steel density, Fy, E (Note small E for Non structural member)
h) All jacket appurtenance loads shall be buoyant loads
i) Corrosion allowance for fatigue as per Design Basis
j) Boundary (e.g. jacket-foundation connection)
k) Cd, Cm, marine growth profile as per Design Basis
8|31
l) Flood card
m) Water depth and mudline elevation (considered MSL and
minimum water depth in the analysis)
n) Water density , steel density, Fy , E(note small E for non-
structural)
o) Special release (wishbone, conductors, etc.)
p) Member D/t ratios does not exceed requirements
7. Foundation Spring Linearization
a) Center of Damage wave and associated Hmax, Tmax, correct
and checked?
b) Load case for spring: dead + center of seastate wave (Hmax,
Tmax) without WSD factors
8. Eigen value Model(Precede and Dynpac input)
a) All relevant gravity loads have been converted to mass? (WSD
factors excluded. Contingency factors included)
c) “Super-element input” defined in the model
d) Dynamic DOF defined to all key nodes?
e) Dynpac input file checked? Mass over-rides defined?
f) Minimum 20 modes or participation factors in X, Y, and Z
direction shall be >90%
9. Dynpac Results
a) Total mass generated is consistent?
b) Mode shape is reasonable?
c) Periods are reasonable?
10. Transfer function (TRF)
a) Preliminary static BS TRF generated such that all peak and
trough frequencies selected?
b) Primary structural frequencies selected?
c) Wave steepness correctly defined?
d) Maximum and minimum cut-off wave defined?
e) Current ignored?
f) Minimum 18 crest positions selected?
g) Maximum and minimum wave frequencies checked?
h) Vertical wave area at splash zone correct?
i) Cd/Cm with wave encounter effect defined?
j) Marine growth roughness defined?
11. Wave response run
a) Check each Wave response listing file and make sure no error.
b) Check common solution files not corrupted
c) Damping factor correct? Minimum 20 modes selected?
d) Relative velocity not used (“-1” in column 49-50 WROPT card)
12. Fatigue
9|31
a) Sequence of common solution file (CSF) from wave response is

read by Fatigue consistent with the wave direction
b) Thickness correction factor applied?
c) Fatigue life and safety factor correctly input?
d) Selection of SCF formula correct?
e) Minimum SCF defined correctly?
f) For Efthymiou SCF, chord length (Use K factor) , boundary factor
, etc correct?
g) Load path SCF selected?
h) SN curve correct?
i) Thickness correction factor on SN curve defined?
j) Splash zone defined correctly and endurance limit correct?
k) All relevant joints selected? (doubler plate ,In-line tubular
connection ,stiffened etc.)
l) Any other check required, e.g. overlapped joint closure weld?
m) Input on wave scatter diagram checked i.e.
 Sea-state (Hs ,Td)
 % each sea-state
 % on direction
 Td input (note SACS requires Td not Tz)
13. Report
b) Fatigue lives are reasonable?
c) Report prepared following format provided?
d) Inform Team Leader the results and highlight anomaly?
10 | 3 1
4.0 SEISMIC ANALYSIS

REVIEW
adequate?
b) Design Report
2.0 All necessary changes required have been summarized and
d) Revision due to WSD (e.g. classification of deadload due to
e) Modification required (e.g. platform modification , damage,
inspection data)
f) Load combination table
3. All requirements /agreed changes have been incorporated into the
model?
a) Design Basis
b) Item (2) above
conventions
E.g. C/Projects/BD1….
numbering.
Drawings?
member
g) Steel density, Fy, E (Note small E for Non structural member)
h) All jacket appurtenance loads shall be buoyant loads
i) Corrosion allowance for Seismic as per Design Basis
j) Boundary (e.g. jacket-foundation connection)
k) Cd, Cm, marine growth profile as per Design Basis
11 | 3 1
l) Flood card
m) Water depth and mudline elevation (considered maximum
water depth and minimum water depth in the analysis)
n) Water density , steel density, Fy , E(note small E for non-
structural)
o) Special release (wishbone, conductors, etc.)
p) Member D/t ratios does not exceed requirements
7. Foundation Spring Linearization
a) Load case for spring: gravity load + base shear of seismic (SLE
and DLE)
Note: Use 100-yr storm as an initial load case to generate
foundation spring
8. Eigen value Model(Precede and Dynpac input)
a) All relevant gravity loads have been converted to mass? (WSD
factors excluded. Contingency factors included)
c) “Super-element input” defined in the model
d) Dynamic DOF defined to all key nodes?
e) Dynpac input file checked? Mass over-rides defined?
f) Minimum 20 modes or participation factors in X, Y, and Z
direction shall be >90%
9. Dynpac Results
a) Total mass generated is consistent?
a) Mode shape is reasonable?
b) Periods are reasonable?
10. Dynamic Response/Earthquake Run
a) Inertial loads are within 10% converge as compared to the
preceding runs? If not, revisit item 7, 8 and 10 above until 10%
convergence criteria are achieved.
b) Seismic load data as per Design basis? i.e. 2000 Yr. return
period (basis of ductility check) and 200 Yr. return period (basis
of strength check
c) A uniform structural damping ratio of 5% is used?
d) CQC (Complete Quadratic Combination) method is adopted for
modal combination?
e) All three directional spectra are applied simultaneously and the
responses are combined using SRSS method?
f) Response Assessment(Member and joint check)
a) 70% increase in basic allowable stresses for both members and
joint?
b) In static run, structure is analyzed with static load only?
c) In dynamic run, seismic loads are only generated?
11. Response Assessment(Foundation check)
a) Safety factors as per API RP2A criteria?
12 | 3 1
12. Report
b) Pile Safety factors are satisfactory?
c) Report prepared following format provided?
d) Inform Team Leader the results and highlight anomaly?
13 | 3 1
5.0 TOPSIDE LIFTING ANALYSIS

REVIEW
adequate
d) Design Report
e) Client provided model (if any )
inspection data)
3. All requirements /agreed changes have been incorporated
into the model?
a) Design Basis
b) Item (2) above
4. All computer files have been created following standard file
name conventions
numbering.
Drawings?
member
g) Model the padeye/trunnion as a dummy member to
accommodate secondary moment effect of the members
connecting to lifting points
h) Boundary (e.g. hook points and springs for analytical stability)
i) Steel density, Fy, E (note small E for non-structural)
14 | 3 1
j) Low value of E and zero density for sling properties

k) Remove future loads and operating weights
l) Basic load cases (load sum)
m) DAF, Skew Load, Consequence factor etc., shall be added as per
Design Basis.
n) Load combinations (factors, combination, load sum)
o) Member release for sling (axial tension load only)
p) COG envelope/shifting
q) Code check parameters (Ky/Ly,Kz/Lz. Local coordinate system,
Lb, Cm, Fy override for joint check). K factors for X-brace are in
7. Lifting Analysis
a) Load sum checked and reasonable? All signs are correct (e.g.
+add to +, etc)
k) Lift weight reasonable against weight and COG report (make
amendments as required)
l) Hook load reasonable?(COG envelope and load distribution as
per Design Basis (e.g. 67%/33%)
m) Spring load reasonable? (10kN-close to zero)
n) Sling forces reasonable? (no moments and compression)
o) Platform displacement and shape deflection reasonable?
p) Member stress results reasonable? Overstress justified or
highlighted?
q) Joints stress results reasonable? Overstress justified or
highlighted?
r) Inform Team Leader the outcome and highlight anomaly?
8. Report
b) Enclose joint support reactions?
c) Enclose spring reactions?
d) Enclose member check summary?
e) Enclose joint check summary?
f) Enclose sling forces?
g) Enclose lifting drawings, check for accuracy of sling, shackle
data, and lifting weight information
h) Enclose design of spreader bar/beam or frame and
padeyes/trunnion(if any)
15 | 3 1
6.0 JACKET LIFTING ANALYSIS

REVIEW
adequate
b) Design Report
inspection data)
3. All requirements /agreed changes have been incorporated
into the model?
a) Design Basis
b) Item (2) above
4. All computer files have been created following standard file
name conventions
b) Check LDOPT card to ensure the jacket is not under water
c) Coordinates for key nodes
d) Visual check of plots (plan-by-plan, overall in X, Y, Z no
e) Numbering system (Node number bottom up, 4-digit for jacket
numbering.
f) Section and group assignment (OD, WT, W size) as per
Drawings?
g) Member D/t ratios does not exceed requirements
h) Can size , can length as per API RP2A requirement, chord
member
i) Model the padeye/trunnion as a dummy member to
accommodate secondary moment effect of the members
connecting to lifting points
16 | 3 1
j) All post installed items such as boat landing etc. has been
removed from jacket lifting model (check against
installation/lifting procedure)
k) Boundary (e.g. hook points and springs for analytical stability)
l) Steel density, Fy, E (note small E for non-structural)
m) Low value of E and zero density for sling properties
n) All jacket appurtenance load shall be dry loads and remove
future loads
o) Basic load cases (load sum)
p) DAF, Skew Load, Consequence factor etc., shall be added as per
Design Basis.
r) Member release for sling (axial tension load only)
s) COG envelope/shifting
t) Code check parameters (Ky/Ly,Kz/Lz. Local coordinate system,
7. Lifting Analysis
s) Load sum checked and reasonable? All signs are correct (e.g.
+add to +, etc)
t) Lift weight reasonable against weight and COG report (make
amendments as required)
u) Hook load reasonable?(COG envelope and load distribution as
per Design Basis (e.g. 75%/25%)
v) Spring load reasonable? (10kN to close to zero)
w) Sling forces reasonable? (no moments and compression)
x) Jacket displacement and shape deflection reasonable?
y) Member stress results reasonable? Overstress justified or
highlighted?
z) Joints stress results reasonable? Overstress justified or
highlighted?
aa) Inform Team Leader the outcome and highlight anomaly?
8. Report
b) Enclose joint support reactions?
c) Enclose spring reactions?
d) Enclose member check summary?
e) Enclose joint check summary?
f) Enclose sling forces?
g) Enclose lifting drawings, check for accuracy of sling, shackle
data, and lifting weight information
h) Enclose design of spreader bar/beam or frame and
padeyes/trunnion(if any)
17 | 3 1
7.0 TOPSIDE LOADOUT ANALYSIS

REVIEW
adequate
b) Design Report
inspection data)
the model?
a) Design Basis
c) Item (2) above
b) All computer files have been created following standard file
name conventions
numbering.
Drawings?
member
g) Model the load out support members as dummy members and
release moment connection on load out support points
h) Support points are provided as linear springs to simulate the
18 | 3 1
hydraulic support systems of the trailer (for trailer load out

option) as per Design Basis (e.g. sub grade modulus of
40000kN/m3 )
i) Model the link beam from the front to the rear load out support
to transfer the breaking load/dynamic pull out load
j) Boundary (e.g. springs for analytical stability)
k) Steel density, Fy, E(Note small E for non-structural)
l) Remove future loads and operating weights
m) Basic load cases (load sum)
n) Loss of support and support settlement as per Design Basis( e.g.
+/- 25mm normal and +/-50mm extreme case)
o) Pulling forces as per Design Basis (e.g. 15%-20% of vertical load)
p) Lateral load (for trailer load out option) to account for uneven
elevations of trailer during load out due to ground undulations
as per Design Basis (e.g. 5% of total vertical load)
r) Member release for sling (axial tension load only)
s) COG envelope/shifting
t) Allowable stress modifiers (for extreme case only)
u) Code check parameters (Ky/Ly,Kz/Lz. Local coordinate system,
6. Load out Analysis
a) Load sum checked and reasonable? All signs are correct (e.g.
+add to +, etc)
b) Ensure the COG falls inside the support envelope when
selecting the loss of support cases
c) Load out support reaction reasonable?(axial compression and
lateral forces only?)
d) Platform displacement and shape deflection reasonable?
e) Member stress results reasonable? Overstress justified or
highlighted?
f) Joints stress results reasonable? Overstress justified or
highlighted?
g) Inform Team Leader the outcome and highlight anomaly?
7. Report
d) QA check print available?
e) Enclose joint support reactions?
f) Enclose spring reactions?
g) Enclose member check summary?
h) Enclose joint check summary?
i) Enclose load out drawings?
19 | 3 1
8.0 JACKET LOADOUT ANALYSIS

REVIEW
adequate
d) Design Report
e) Client provided model (if any )
a) Revision due to WSD (e.g. classification of deadload due to different
load factor)
inspection data)
the model?
d) Design Basis
e) Item (2) above
conventions
a) Unit (kN, kg, m) and Global coordinate system (origin @ MSL , X=
platform North, Z=upward
c) Visual check of plots (plan-by-plan, overall in X, Y, Z no overlapped
numbers, no unexplained items etc.)
d) Numbering system (Node number bottom up, 4-digit for jacket and
deck. Group number to follow basis), systematic joint numbering.
e) Section and group assignment (OD, WT, W size) as per Drawings?
f) Can size , can length as per API RP2A requirement, chord member
h) All post installed items such as boat landing etc. has been removed
from jacket load out model(check against installation procedure)
i) Model the load out support members as dummy members and
release moment connection on load out support points
j) Support points are provided as linear springs to simulate the
20 | 3 1
hydraulic support systems of the trailer (for trailer load out option)
as per Design Basis (e.g. sub grade modulus of 40000kN/m 3 )
k) Model the link beam from the front to the rear load out support to
transfer the breaking load/dynamic pull out load
l) Boundary (e.g. springs for analytical stability)
m) Steel density, Fy, E(Note small E for non-structural)
n) All jacket appurtenance loads shall be dry loads and remove future
loads
p) Loss of support and support settlement as per Design Basis( e.g. +/-
25mm normal and +/-50mm extreme case)
q) Pulling forces as per Design Basis (e.g. 15%-20% of vertical load)
r) Lateral load (for trailer load out option) to account for uneven
elevations of trailer during load out due to ground undulations as
per Design Basis (e.g. 5% of total vertical load)
s) Load combinations (factors, combination, load sum)
t) COG envelope/shifting
u) Allowable stress modifiers (for extreme case only)
v) Code check parameters (Ky/Ly,Kz/Lz. Local coordinate system, Lb,
Cm, Fy override for joint check). K factors for X-brace are in
7. Load out Analysis
a) Load sum checked and reasonable? All signs are correct (e.g. +add
to +, etc)
b) Ensure the COG falls inside the support envelope when selecting
the loss of support cases
c) Load out support reaction reasonable?(axial compression and
lateral forces only?)
d) Platform displacement and shape deflection reasonable?
highlighted?
f) Joints stress results reasonable? Overstress justified or highlighted?
8. Report
j) QA check print available?
k) Enclose joint support reactions?
l) Enclose spring reactions?
m) Enclose member check summary?
n) Enclose joint check summary?
o) Enclose load out drawings?
21 | 3 1
9.0 TOPSIDE TRANSPORTATION ANALYSIS

REVIEW
adequate
b) Design Report
load factor)
inspection data)
the model?
a) Design Basis
b) Item (2) above
conventions
g) Model the seafastening members
h) Check end releases of seafastening members (small E for Static
case)
i) Check end releases of seafastening members (for Transportation
case E=200,000MPa)
j) Check model axis with respect to barge axes ( roll, pitch directions
22 | 3 1
reverse if the orientations are different)

k) Steel density, Fy, E(Note small E for non-structural)
l) Remove future loads and operating weights
m) Basic load cases (load sum)
n) Load combinations (factors, combination, load sum)
o) Check center of rotation data on transportation input file
p) Check roll and pitch direction representation
q) Check roll and pitch acceleration data (inertia acceleration data)
r) COG envelope/shifting(if any)
s) Allowable stress modifiers (if any)
t) Code check parameters (Ky/Ly,Kz/Lz. Local coordinate system, Lb,
Cm, Fy override for joint check). K factors for X-brace are in
7. Transportation Analysis
to +, etc)
b) Support reaction reasonable (axial compression and lateral forces
only?)
c) Platform displacement and shape deflection reasonable?
d) Member stress results reasonable? Overstress justified or
highlighted?
e) Joints stress results reasonable? Overstress justified or highlighted?
f) Inform Team Leader the outcome and highlight anomaly?
8. Report
b) Enclose seastate summary?
c) Enclose dynamic loading summary?
d) Enclose joint support reactions?
e) Enclose member check summary?
f) Enclose joint check summary?
g) Enclose transportation drawings?
23 | 3 1
10.0 JACKET TRANSPORTATION ANALYSIS

REVIEW
adequate
b) Design Report
load factor)
inspection data)
the model?
a) Design Basis
b) Item (2) above
conventions
g) Member D/t ratios does not exceed requirements?
h) Model the seafastening members
i) Check end releases of seafastening members (small E for Static
case)
j) Check end releases of seafastening members (for Transportation
case E=200,000MPa)
24 | 3 1
k) Check model axis with respect to barge axes ( roll, pitch directions
reverse if the orientations are different)
l) Steel density, Fy, E(Note small E for non-structural)
m) All post installed items such as boat landing etc. has been removed
from transportation model (check against installation procedure)
n) All jacket appurtenance loads shall be dry load and remove all
future loads
p) Load combinations (factors, combination, load sum)
q) Check center of rotation data on transportation input file
r) Check roll and pitch direction representation
s) Check roll and pitch acceleration data (inertia acceleration data)
t) COG envelope/shifting(if any)
u) Allowable stress modifiers (if any)
v) Code check parameters (Ky/Ly,Kz/Lz, member lengths have been
correctly translated in the rotated jacket model, local coordinate
system, Lb, Cm, Fy override for joint check).Specify a local Z-axis
reference joint if necessary. K factors for X-brace are in accordance
with API RP2A
w) Wave slamming checks if the structure contacts sea water
7. Transportation Analysis
to +, etc)
b) Support reaction reasonable (axial compression and lateral forces
only?)
c) Jacket displacement and shape deflection reasonable?
d) Member stress results reasonable? Overstress justified or
highlighted?
e) Joints stress results reasonable? Overstress justified or highlighted?
f) Load transfer across chord results reasonable? Overstress justified
or highlighted?
8. Report
c) Enclose dynamic loading summary?
d) Enclose joint support reactions?
e) Enclose member check summary?
f) Enclose joint check summary?
g) Enclose load transfer across chord summary?
h) Enclose transportation drawings?
25 | 3 1
11.0 JACKET ON-BOTTOM STABILITY ANALYSIS

REVIEW
adequate
b) Design Report
load factor)
inspection data)
the model?
a) Design Basis
b) Item (2) above
conventions
g) Member D/t ratios does not exceed requirements?
h) Steel density , Fy, E(note small E for non-structural)
i) Check drag and inertia coefficients all shall be smooth members?
j) Check member group overrides due to jacket appurtenances such
as equivalent Cd/Cm value for anodes
k) All post installed items such as boat landing etc. has been removed
26 | 3 1
from OBS model (check against installation procedure)

l) Remove pile and marine growth from model
m) All jacket appurtenance loads shall be buoyant load and remove all
future loads
n) Check installation environmental parameters
o) Check pile lead and first add on of pile weight and eccentricity
p) Basic load cases (load sum)
r) Allowable stress modifiers (if any)
s) Code check parameters (Ky/Ly,Kz/Lz coordinate system, Lb, Cm, Fy
override for joint check. K factors for X-brace are in accordance with
API RP2A
7. On-Bottom Analysis
to +, etc)
b) Factor of safety against overturning, sliding and bearing pressure
reasonable?
c) Immediate settlement reasonable?
d) Jacket and mudmat member stress results reasonable? Overstress
justified and highlighted?
e) Mudmat plate stress results reasonable?
f) Jacket and mudmat joint stress results reasonable? Overstress
justified or highlighted?
8. Report
c) Enclose calculation of factor of safety against overturning, sliding
and bearing pressure?
d) Enclose calculation of immediate settlement?
e) Enclose member check summary (jacket and mudmat framing?)
f) Enclose mudmat plate calculation?
g) Enclose joint check summary (jacket and mudmat framing?)
h) Enclose On-bottom stability drawings?
27 | 3 1
12.0 JACKET FLOATATION AND UPENDING ANALYSIS

REVIEW
adequate
b) Design Report
load factor)
inspection data)
the model?
a) Design Basis
b) Item (2) above
conventions
h) Steel density, Fy, E(Note small E for non-structural)
i) Model axis with respect to the water plane axes
j) All post installed items such as boat landing etc. has been removed
28 | 3 1
from jacket floatation and upending model(check against

installation procedure)
k) Remove pile and marine growth from the model
l) All jacket appurtenance loads shall be buoyant loads and remove
future loads
m) Check upending sling length
n) Basic load cases (load sum)
o) Load combinations (factors, combination, load sum)
p) COG envelope/shifting
q) Allowable stress modifiers (for extreme case only)
r) Code check parameters (Ky/Ly,Kz/Lz. Member lengths have been
system, Lb, Cm, Fy override for joint check). K factors for X-brace
are in accordance with API RP2A
7. Floatation and Upending Analysis
to +, etc)
b) Maximum jacket roll angle shall be as per Design Basis (e.g. <5.0
degree)
c) Mudmat clearance shall be as per Design Basis(e.g. >6.0m)
d) Minimum geometric metacentric height (transverse/longitudinal)
shall be as per Design Basis (e.g >1.0)
e) Reserve and buoyancy for intact and damage condition shall be as
per Design Basis (e.g >15% and >10% for intact and damage
condition respectively)
f) Floatation and upending stability check
g) Floatation and upending static check
h) Hook load reasonable?
i) Upending sling loads reasonable?
j) Member stress results reasonable? Overstress justified or
highlighted?
k) Joints stress results reasonable? Overstress justified or highlighted?
l) Inform Team Leader the outcome and highlight anomaly?
8. Report
b) Enclose seastate summary
c) Enclose reserve buoyancy calculation?
d) Enclose roll angle plot?
e) Enclose pitch angle plot?
f) Enclose metacentric plot?
g) Enclose mudmat clearance plot?
h) Enclose hook load plots?
i) Enclose upending sling loads?
29 | 3 1
j) Enclose member and joint stress check during upending?

k) Enclose hydrostatic collapse check summary (includes buoyancy
tanks if any?)
l) Enclose upending padeye calculation?
m) Enclose floatation and upending drawings?
13.0 JACKET STATIC LAUNCH ANALYSIS

REVIEW
adequate
b) Design Report
load factor)
inspection data)
the model?
a) Design Basis
b) Item (2) above
conventions
h) Steel density, Fy, E(Note small E for non-structural)
i) All post installed items such as boat landing etc. has been removed
30 | 3 1
from jacket launch model(check against installation procedure)

j) Remove pile and marine growth from the model
k) Model the rocket beam as very stiff member and ensure the
connection to jacket leg is compression only
l) Model the joint springs for analytical stability (if necessary)
m) All jacket appurtenance loads shall be dry loads and remove future
loads
n) Check drag and inertial coefficients for jacket launch slamming
forces
p) Load combinations (factors, combination, load sum)
q) Allowable stress modifiers (if any)
r) Code check parameters (Ky/Ly,Kz/Lz. Member lengths have been
system, Lb, Cm, Fy override for joint check). K factors for X-brace
are in accordance with API RP2A
7. Jacket Launch Analysis
to +, etc)
b) Rocker pin reaction reasonable?
c) Spring reaction reasonable?
d) Minimum geometric metacentric height (transverse/longitudinal)
shall be as per Design Basis (e.g >1.0)
highlighted?
f) Joints stress results reasonable? Overstress justified or highlighted?
8. Report
b) Enclose seastate summary
c) Enclose rocker pin reactions summary?
d) Enclose member stress check summary?
e) Enclose jointr stress check summary?
f) Enclose load transfer across chord summary?
g) Enclose jacket launch slam calculation?
h) Enclose jacket launch drawings?
31 | 3 1

PTSC M&C Company Limited: Structural Checklist

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

PTSC M&C Company Limited: Structural Checklist

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

STRUCTURAL CHECKLIST

C 28/10/2010 ANE NAD Draft

PTSC M&C COMPANY LIMITED

6. JACKET LIFTING ANALYSIS 16

7. TOPSIDE LOADOUT ANALYSIS 18

1.0 INPLACE ANALYSIS

DESCRIPTION SELFCHECK CHECKER’S

j) Pile axial capacity and stress results reasonable?

2.0 EIGEN VALUE ANALYSIS

DESCRIPTION SELFCHECK CHECKER’S

a) For operating, calculate DAF using new natural period based on

3.0 SPECTRAL FATIGUE ANALYSIS

DESCRIPTION SELFCHECK CHECKER’S

a) Sequence of common solution file (CSF) from wave response is

4.0 SEISMIC ANALYSIS

DESCRIPTION SELFCHECK CHECKER’S

5.0 TOPSIDE LIFTING ANALYSIS

DESCRIPTION SELFCHECK CHECKER’S

j) Low value of E and zero density for sling properties

6.0 JACKET LIFTING ANALYSIS

DESCRIPTION SELFCHECK CHECKER’S

7.0 TOPSIDE LOADOUT ANALYSIS

DESCRIPTION SELFCHECK CHECKER’S

hydraulic support systems of the trailer (for trailer load out

8.0 JACKET LOADOUT ANALYSIS

DESCRIPTION SELFCHECK CHECKER’S

9.0 TOPSIDE TRANSPORTATION ANALYSIS

DESCRIPTION SELFCHECK CHECKER’S

reverse if the orientations are different)

10.0 JACKET TRANSPORTATION ANALYSIS

DESCRIPTION SELFCHECK CHECKER’S

11.0 JACKET ON-BOTTOM STABILITY ANALYSIS

DESCRIPTION SELFCHECK CHECKER’S

from OBS model (check against installation procedure)

12.0 JACKET FLOATATION AND UPENDING ANALYSIS

DESCRIPTION SELFCHECK CHECKER’S

from jacket floatation and upending model(check against

j) Enclose member and joint stress check during upending?

13.0 JACKET STATIC LAUNCH ANALYSIS

DESCRIPTION SELFCHECK CHECKER’S

from jacket launch model(check against installation procedure)

You might also like