VALIDATION OF SPECTRAL FATIGUE ANALYSIS OF

STRUCTURES IN MUMBAI HIGH FIELD

BY
S.Nallayarasu, S.Goswami, J.S.Manral, R.M.Kotresh

Presenter: S.K. Bhattacharyya

Dept. of Ocean Engineering
IIT Madras
Mumbai high field location
Historically, Bombay High Field
of ONGC has several offshore
platforms in the shallow water
region of 50 to 80m water
depth.
Most of these platforms are
fixed template type structures
with either main or skirt piles.
Many of these structures are
as old as 20 to 30 years &
have been designed as per API
RP 2A guidelines.
These structures mostly
produce oil & Gas and have
both process & well head
platforms.
These platforms have been
designed against fatigue from
cyclic wave loads.
DIRECTIONAL DISTRIBUTION OF WAVES

1. The field is located on

the west coast of India
and the wave approach
is from south to north-
west directions and the
other directions are
shielded from land.
2. Generally waves are
approaching the
platforms only from
South, South-West,
West and North-West.
The directional
distribution of waves
used in the
deterministic and
spectral methods is
shown in Figure
FATIGUE RESPONSE ANALYSIS
Deterministic method of analysis

Seastate is discretised in discrete (deterministic) waves

the scatter data based sea state specific information is used.
Structural response to these discrete waves is then calculated
either with or without dynamic effects depending on natural period.

Spectral method of analysis

Seastate is characterised by the spectral energy.

Further, the scatter data for different directions and wave
heights are used to simulate the seastate.
The structural response is then calculated using stochastic
method of structural analysis.
Dynamic analysis is performed to generate the dynamic
characteristics such as mode shapes and mass
characteristics.
 WAVE SCATTER DATA

Wave scatter data and exceedance information used for the

deterministic fatigue analysis is shown in Table 1 and 2.

The exceedance data has been converted to occurrence cyclic

data with intermediate data range by interpolation

It has been summarised in Table 3.

WAVE SCATTER DATA Deterministic Table - 1

WAVE HEIGHT PERIOD (SEC)

(M)
S SW W NW

0.0-1.524 8.7 9.6 8.3 6.6

1.524 - 3.047 9.2 10.1 8.7 7.4

3.048 4.571 9.5 10.3 9.2 7.9

4.572 6.095 9.7 10.4 9.6 8.4

6.096 7.619 9.9 10.5 10.0 8.9

7.620 - 9.143 10.6 10.3 --

9.144 10.667 10.8 10.6 --

10.668 12.192 11.0 10.9 --

WAVE SCATTER DATA Deterministic Table - 2

Wave Number of Waves Exceeding Specified Height

Height (m) In One Year
S DIR SW DIR W DIR NW DIR CUMULATIV
E
0 1276045 770535 1015713 1220511 4282804

1.524 61704 219347 220985 69788 571824

3.048 3132 37929 31902 3764 76727

4.572 167 5878 4073 177 10295

6.096 11 869 493 8 1381

7.620 0 126 59 0 185

9.144 - 18 7 - 25

10.668 - 2 1 - 3

12.192 - 0 0 - 0
WAVE SCATTER DATA Deterministic Table - 3
Wave Height W SW S NW
(m)
0.381 541944 359421 995444 928660

1.143 252784 191767 218897 222063

1.905 137022 128135 47802 53581

2.667 52061 53283 10770 12443

3.429 20503 22998 2409 2948

4.191 7326 9053 556 639

4.953 2656 3618 124 139

5.715 924 1391 32 30

6.447 322 538 11 8

7.239 112 205 0 0

8.001 39 78 0 0

8.763 13 30 0 0
 WAVE SCATTER DATA Spectral
The wave scatter data for spectral analysis obtained from National
Institute of Oceanography is summarized in Tables 4 to 8 for
south, south-west, west and north-west directions respectively.
The percentage distribution for each combination of wave period
and height will be used for the spectral representation of the
seastate using JONSWAP spectra.
Table-4 ( South)

Hs Mean wave period (s)

(m)
3-4 4-5 5-6 6-7 7-8 8-9 9-10 10-11 Total

0.0 - 0.38 0.77 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 1.15
0.5
0.5 - 0.00 5.00 17.31 18.85 11.54 1.15 0.00 0.00 53.85
1.0
1.0 - 0.00 2.69 10.77 15.00 1.92 2.31 0.00 0.00 32.69
1.5
1.5 - 0.00 0.00 2.31 2.31 2.31 3.85 0.77 0.77 12.31
2.0
Total 0.38 8.46 30.38 36.15 15.77 7.31 0.77 0.77 100.00
 WAVE SCATTER DATA Spectral
Hs Mean wave period (s)
(m)
3-4 4-5 5-6 6-7 7-8 8-9 9-10 10-11 Total

0.0 - 0.5 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

0.5 - 1.0 0.21 2.92 5.22 1.67 0.84 0.00 0.00 0.00 10.86

1.0 - 1.5 0.00 0.84 11.90 9.81 2.71 0.21 0.00 0.00 25.47

1.5 - 2.0 0.00 0.00 4.59 16.08 9.60 2.09 0.00 0.00 32.36

2.0 - 2.5 0.00 0.00 0.00 3.97 5.22 2.30 0.00 0.00 11.48

2.5 - 3.0 0.00 0.00 0.00 3.55 2.51 0.42 0.00 0.00 6.47

3.0 - 3.5 0.00 0.00 0.00 1.88 2.51 0.00 0.00 0.00 4.38

3.5 - 4.0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.63 3.34 0.00 0.00 0.00 3.97

4.0 - 4.5 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.42 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.42

4.5 - 5.0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 1.25 0.84 0.00 0.00 2.09

5.0 - 5.5 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.63 1.67 0.00 0.00 2.30

5.5 - 6.0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.21 0.00 0.00 0.21

Total 0.21 3.76 21.71 37.58 29.02 7.72 0.00 0.00 100.00
 WAVE SCATTER DATA Spectral
Hs Mean wave period (s)
(m)
3-4 4-5 5-6 6-7 7-8 8-9 9-10 10-11 Total

0.0 - 0.5 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

0.5 - 1.0 0.28 1.83 1.83 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 3.94

1.0 - 1.5 0.00 1.69 4.22 0.70 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 6.61

1.5 - 2.0 0.00 0.42 9.00 2.81 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 12.24

2.0 - 2.5 0.00 0.00 6.05 5.63 0.56 0.00 0.00 0.00 12.24

2.5 - 3.0 0.00 0.00 2.39 12.80 0.84 0.14 0.00 0.00 16.17

3.0 - 3.5 0.00 0.00 0.14 9.00 3.66 0.00 0.00 0.00 12.80

3.5 - 4.0 0.00 0.00 0.00 3.52 6.33 0.14 0.00 0.00 9.99

4.0 - 4.5 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.14 9.85 0.00 0.00 0.00 9.99

4.5 - 5.0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 6.61 1.69 0.00 0.00 8.30

5.0 - 5.5 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 2.53 3.38 0.00 0.00 5.91

5.5 - 6.0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.14 1.27 0.00 0.00 1.41

6.0 - 6.5 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.42 0.00 0.00 0.42

Total 0.28 3.94 23.63 34.60 30.52 7.03 0.00 0.00 100.00
 WAVE SCATTER DATA Spectral

Hs Mean wave period (s)

(m)
3-4 4-5 5-6 6-7 7-8 8-9 9-10 10-11 Total

0.0 - 0.5 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

0.5 - 1.0 4.35 34.78 19.57 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 58.70

1.0 - 1.5 0.00 17.39 19.57 2.17 0.00 0.00 0.00 2.17 41.30

Total 4.35 52.17 39.13 2.17 0.00 0.00 0.00 2.17 100.00
SELECTED STRUCTURES

RS-14 WELLHEAD PLATFORM

4 LEGGED PRODUCTION CUM DRILLING PLATFORM

WATER DEPTH- 76.2 M
0 MAIN & 8 SKIRT PILES
16 WELL SLOTS & CONDUCTORS
MODULAR DRILLING RIG HAVING RIG MAST, RIG
SUPPORT & LQ MODULE
TOPSIDE WEIGHT- 6000 MT
JACKET WEIGHT-3300 MT (GROSS)
SELECTED STRUCTURE

MNP PROCESS PLATFORM

EIGHT LEGGED 4 LEVEL TOPSIDES

WATER DEPTH-72 M
16 SKIRT PILES
20 PRE-INSTALLED RISERS
LAUNCH JACKET WEIGHT-7200 MT
PROCESS HUB-
TOTAL TOPSIDE WEIGHT-20000 MT
3 PROCESS GAS COMPRESSORS, 1
BOOSTER GAS COMPRESSOR.
SUBSTRUCTURE SUPPORTS FOR 3
BRIDGES
DETERMINISTIC ANALYSIS
The calculation of cyclic stresses on the tubular joints shall include dynamic
amplification. The effects of dynamic amplification can be ignored when the natural
period of the structure is below 3 seconds as stated in API RP 2 A. This is due to the
fact that most of the wave period inducing cyclic loads will be in range of 4 to 12
seconds.

The dynamic amplification factor (DAF) can be calculated using the following formula
assuming a single degree of freedom system for the fixed type jacket structures.
1
DAF 2
T T
(1 ) (2 )
N
2
n 2

T T
where Tn is the natural period of the structure, T is the wave period and is the
damping ratio( 2%). It can be shown that the the response and cyclic stress ranges can
be linearly multiplied by the DAF and hence the total response can be calculated
without going into the full fledged dynamic response of the structure against waves.
However, the accuracy of the analysis depends highly on the descretization of the
seastate and any simplification will lead to erroneous estimation of response and
fatigue damage.
[ K ]{ X } {F * DAF}
Where [K] is the stiffness matrix, {X} and {F} are the displacement and force vectors
respectively. The above approach indicates a simplified method and is very easy to
implement for practice. This method has been in use for several years for the
prediction response of offshore structures.
SPECTRAL ANALYSIS

Alternatively, the response and the cyclic stresses can be calculated using
dynamic wave response including dynamic effects due to the above. This
method of calculation involves procedures involving dynamic characteristics of
the structure and performing the analysis in close intervals of frequency /
wave period. However, the method of calculation involved several
approximations and the discussion on these issues is outside the scope of this
paper and can be found elsewhere.

[ K ]{ X } [ M ]{ X "} 0 (3)

Solution to the following equation will lead to Eigen modes and vectors. The
dynamic analysis is performed to obtain the dynamic characteristics such as
mode shapes and frequencies.
Where X is the Eigen frequencies and X is the displacements. The mode shapes and
frequencies are then used in the subsequent wave response calculation in which the
following equation is solved including the dynamic response of the system.

[ K ]{ X } [C ]{ X '} [ M ]{ X "} {F} ( 4)

The response is calculated as a transfer function to facilitate the computation of the

fatigue damage for various waves in different directions. Typical wave response
stress transfer function for base shear and overturning moment is shown in Figure 1
and 2 respectively
SPECTRAL ANALYSIS FIG-1
TRANSFER FUNCTION FOR BASE SHEAR
SPECTRAL ANALYSIS FIG-2
TRANSFER FUNCTION FOR OVERTUNING MOMENT
 SPECTRAL ANALYSIS
Selection of frequencies for the generation of transfer function is an important
task such that the peaks and valleys of the response is not missed. Following the
guidelines given API RP 2A, the frequencies near the natural period of the
structure and its multiples shall be selected. The transfer function has been
generated for various frequencies from 0.1 Hz to 0.5Hz (Typically from wave
periods in the range of 2 to 10 seconds). The frequency interval is selected such
that more number of points is generated near the natural period,

The transfer function and the response are generated for both maximum base
shear and maximum overturning moment cases and the worst case is used for the
calculation of fatigue damage.

A wave steepness of 1/20 is used for the all the waves as recommended by API RP
2A for the calculation of wave height for each frequency. This has been used for
the generation of the transfer function.

It can be observed from Figure 1 and 2 that the maximum values of transfer
function occurs near the frequency of 0.4 which corresponds to a period of 2.5 sec.
The natural period of the structures for MNP and RS14 is noted to be between 2.5
sec and 3 sec.
ESTIMATION OF FATIGUE DAMAGE
Fatigue damage has been calculated for all the tubular connections using Miners
rule using cumulative fatigue damage model stated as below.

RMS i 0 H i2 ( f ) Sh ( f )df (5)

RMS i
Tz (6)

f H ( f ) S h ( f )df
0
2 2
ESTIMATION OF FATIGUE DAMAGE (Contd.)
where is the RMS (Root mean square value) of the stress calculated from the
transfer function for a given Seastate, H is the transfer function and S is the
spectral density of the seastate.

mL (7)
n( s )
Tz
where n(s) is the number of applied cycles, L is the design life and Tz is the
spectral mean period calculated above.
Fatigue damage
n( s ) s s2
D exp( 2 i )ds (8)
RMS
2 i 0
RMS N ( s)

where N(s) is the allowable cycles from the S-N curve and S is the stress range.
Stress concentration factor (SCF) for the tubular joints has been calculated as per
Effthimiou formulas as recommended by API RP 2A for tubular joints and the S-N
curve has been adopted as per API RP 2A for tubular joints.
FACTOR OF SAFETY

API RP 2A
FAILURE
INSPECTABLE NON-INSPECTABLE ONGC
CRITICAL

NO 2 5 2
YES 5 10 4

ONGC USE A FOS OF 4.0 FOR JOINTS BELOW TOW LEVELS OF JACKET FRAMING TO COVER FOR
FATIGUE DUE TO WAVE LOADS
 RESULTS AND DISCUSSIONS

MHN (Mumbai High North) field has been presented in

Table 8 and 9 respectively. The fatigue life of major
tubular joints along the jacket legs and X braces is
presented. Fatigue life greater than 1000 years is marked
as * since it is very high compared to the required design
fatigue life of 50 years.

The fatigue life predicted by deterministic analysis for RS

14 well platforms seems to be on a higher side compared
to the spectral fatigue analysis. In the case of MNP
Process platform deterministic results are lower than
spectral for lower three levels and reverse is the case for
4th and 5th level.
This is due to the fact that the Seastate has been
condensed to discrete waves and the DAF has been
treated approximately.
Table 8. RS-14 Well platform
Comparison of results of deterministic & spectral fatigue on
selected joints
FATIGUE LIFE
DIFFERENCE
JOINT NO.
DETERMINISTIC SPECTRAL (D-S)

203L 74.71 17.84 56.87

217L 31.17 31.79 0
283L 968.58 473.76 494
297L * 627.151 400
201X * * 0
303L 224.9 83.01 142
317L 1039.15 215.84 824
383L * 245.01 750
397L 456.34 187.75 269
301X * * 0
302X 287.44 172.09 115
303X 416.70 241.13 175
303 * * 0
304 * * 0
305 * * 0
403L 307.89 844.62 -
417L 1287.7 * 0
483L 369.62 90.76 278.86
497L 118.87 32.14 86.73
401X 23.18 5.32 17.86
402X 4.11 0.87 3.24
 Table 8. Continued

FATIGUE LIFE
DIFFERENCE
JOINT NO.
DETERMINISTIC SPECTRAL (D-S)

403X * * 0
404X * * 0
503L 255.38 252.72 2.66
517L 541.82 432.30 109.52
583L 78.56 14.58 63.98
597L 67.82 25.80 42.02
501X 49.13 3.86 45.27
502X 18.42 1.91 16.51
503X * 655.58 345
504X * * 0
603L 145.32 141.13 131.19
617L 273.35 12.08 261.27
683L 160.99 19.34 141.65
697L 28.88 7.21 21.67
601X * 399.95 600
602X * 398.85 600
603X * 23.92 976
604X * 24.27 976
703L 1344.463 6.60 994
717L * 6.055 994
783L * 6.099 994
797L * 5.54 994
 Table 8. Continued
FATIGUE LIFE
JOINT DIFFERENCE
DETERMINISTIC SPECTRAL
NO. (D-S)
404X * * 0
503L 255.38 252.72 2.66
517L 541.82 432.30 109.52
583L 78.56 14.58 63.98
597L 67.82 25.80 42.02
501X 49.13 3.86 45.27
502X 18.42 1.91 16.51
503X * 655.58 345
504X * * 0
603L 145.32 141.13 131.19
617L 273.35 12.08 261.27
683L 160.99 19.34 141.65
697L 28.88 7.21 21.67
601X * 399.95 600
602X * 398.85 600
603X * 23.92 976
604X * 24.27 976
703L 1344.463 6.60 994
717L * 6.055 994
783L * 6.099 994
797L * 5.54 994
Table 9. MNP Process platform
Comparison of results of deterministic & spectral fatigue on
selected joints
FATIGUE LIFE
DIFFERENCE
JOINT NO. DETERMINISTIC SPECTRAL
(D-S)
203L 52.41 108.38 -56
207L 9.47 34.14 -24
213L 9.26 21.43 -12
217L 78.80 127.34 -49
283L 52.93 129.05 -77
287L 11.55 81.14 -70
293L 11.14 69.06 -58
297L 43.65 88.38 -45
204X * * 0
205X * * 0
206X * * 0
207X * * 0
208X * * 0
209X * * 0
210X * * 0
211X * * 0
212X * * 0
213X * * 0
203L 52.41 108.38 -56
207L 9.47 34.14 -24
213L 9.26 21.43 -12
217L 78.80 127.34 -49
 Table 9. Continued
FATIGUE LIFE
JOINT DIFFERENCE
DETERMINISTIC SPECTRAL
NO. (D-S)
303L 20.89 202.21 -182
307L 70.45 508.03 -438
313L 69.36 806.51 -737
317L 18.49 302.99 -284
383L 19.56 267.49 -248
387L 197.60 485.68 -288
393L 253.92 783.73 -530
397L 18.97 358.24 -339
304X * *
305X * *
306X * *
307X * *
308X * *
309X * *
310X * *
311X * *
312X * *
313X * *
403L 149.07 * -851
407L 20.62 200.44 -180
 Table 9. Continued

JOINT DIFFERENCE
NO. DETERMINISTIC SPECTRAL (D-S)
417L 156.09 72.32 84
483L 185.24 163.23 22
487L 168.31 147.37 21
493L 140.70 132.46 8
497L 135.05 118.97 16
404X * *
405X * *
406X * *
407X * *
408X * *
409X * *
410X * 96.67 903
411X * 513.86 486
412X * 125.03 875
413X 429.95 21.49 409
503L 104.71 0.88 104
507L 24.17 0.06 24
513L 23.69 1.07 22
517L 153.88 0.85 153
583L 301.03 0.87 300
 Table 9. Continued

JOINT DIFFERENCE
NO. DETERMINISTIC SPECTRAL (D-S)
587L 73.39 0.89 72
593L 156.72 1.01 155
597L 181.49 0.69 180
501X * 127.26 873
502X * 136.83 864
503X * 234.38 760
504X * 115.94 884
505X * 108.49 892
506X * 233.61 767
507X * 1.42 999
508X * 1.57 999
509X * 1.42 999
510X * 0.21 999
603L 151.58 0.57 151
607L 99.52 1.18 98
613L 184.74 1.21 183
617L 370.08 0.56 369
683L 206.42 0.70 205
687L 105.74 1.20 104
693L 180.44 1.13 179
 CONCLUSIONS

Based on the results obtained from the fatigue analysis of platforms in

Mumbai High North and South platforms, following observations are made.

Generally both methods predict fatigue life reasonably well for most of the
joints except for some joints at the bottom of the jacket, the deterministic
method predicts the fatigue life lower than the spectral methods. This is
due to the fact that the dynamic response of the structure over-predicted
by deterministic method by approximate calculations of DAF due to course
discretisation of wave periods.

However, the joints near the top of the jacket, the predicted fatigue life
using deterministic methods seems to be higher than the spectral
methods. This is due to the fact that the wave load and associated cyclic
stresses are only due to the local wave loads rather than the dynamic
response.

It is recommended that spectral fatigue analysis be used for large

platforms to assess the fatigue life since the inaccuracy introduced due to
the treatment of dynamic amplification factor.
References

API RP 2A Recommended Practice for the Design and

Construction of fixed offshore platforms, working stress design.

Fatigue User Manual, SACS Software, EDI

Identification of wave spectra for Mumbai offshore region,

National Institute of Oceanography, December 2007.