Chapter 18 Analysis and Design of Ship Structure
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
MASTER SET SDC 18.qxd Page 18-1 4/28/03 1:30 PM Chapter 18 Analysis and Design of Ship Structure Philippe Rigo and Enrico Rizzuto 18.1 NOMENCLATURE m(x) longitudinal distribution of mass I(x) geometric moment of inertia (beam sec- For specific symbols, refer to the definitions contained in tion x) the various sections. L length of the ship ABS American Bureau of Shipping M(x) bending moment at section x of a beam BEM Boundary Element Method MT(x) torque moment at section x of a beam BV Bureau Veritas ppressure DNV Det Norske Veritas q(x) resultant of sectional force acting on a FEA Finite Element Analysis beam FEM Finite Element Method Tdraft of the ship IACS International Association of Classifica- V(x) shear at section x of a beam tion Societies s,w (low case) still water, wave induced component ISSC International Ship & Offshore Structures v,h (low case) vertical, horizontal component Congress w(x) longitudinal distribution of weight ISOPE International Offshore and Polar Engi- θ roll angle neering Conference ρ density ISUM Idealized Structural Unit method ω angular frequency NKK Nippon Kaiji Kyokai PRADS Practical Design of Ships and Mobile Units, 18.2 INTRODUCTION RINA Registro Italiano Navale SNAME Society of naval Architects and marine The purpose of this chapter is to present the fundamentals Engineers of direct ship structure analysis based on mechanics and SSC Ship Structure Committee. strength of materials. Such analysis allows a rationally based a acceleration design that is practical, efficient, and versatile, and that has Aarea already been implemented in a computer program, tested, Bbreadth of the ship and proven. Cwave coefficient (Table 18.I) Analysis and Design are two words that are very often CB hull block coefficient associated. Sometimes they are used indifferently one for Ddepth of the ship the other even if there are some important differences be- ggravity acceleration tween performing a design and completing an analysis. 18-1 MASTER SET SDC 18.qxd Page 18-2 4/28/03 1:30 PM 18-2 Ship Design & Construction, Volume 1 Analysis refers to stress and strength assessment of the entific, powerful, and versatile method for their structural structure. Analysis requires information on loads and needs design an initial structural scantling design. Output of the structural But, even with the development of numerical techniques, analysis is the structural response defined in terms of stresses, design still remains based on the designer’s experience and deflections and strength. Then, the estimated response is on previous designs. There are many designs that satisfy the compared to the design criteria. Results of this comparison strength criteria, but there is only one that is the optimum as well as the objective functions (weight, cost, etc.) will solution (least cost, weight, etc.). show if updated (improved) scantlings are required. Ship structural analysis and design is a matter of com- Design for structure refers to the process followed to se- promises: lect the initial structural scantlings and to update these scant- lings from the early design stage (bidding) to the detailed • compromise between accuracy and the available time to design stage (construction). To perform analysis, initial de- perform the design. This is particularly challenging at sign is needed and analysis is required to design. This ex- the preliminary design stage. A 3D Finite Element plains why design and analysis are intimately linked, but Method (FEM) analysis would be welcome but the time are absolutely different. Of course design also relates to is not available. For that reason, rule-based design or topology and layout definition. simplified numerical analysis has to be performed. The organization and framework of this chapter are based • to limit uncertainty and reduce conservatism in design, it on the previous edition of the Ship Design and Construction is important that the design methods are accurate. On the (1) and on the Chapter IV of Principles of Naval Architec- other hand, simplicity is necessary to make repeated de- ture (2). Standard materials such as beam model, twisting, sign analyses efficient. The results from complex analy- shear lag, etc. that are still valid in 2002 are partly duplicated ses should be verified by simplified methods to avoid errors from these 2 books. Other major references used to write this and misinterpretation of results (checks and balances). chapter are Ship Structural Design (3) also published by • compromise between weight and cost or compromise SNAME and the DNV 99-0394 Technical Report (4). between least construction cost, and global owner live The present chapter is intimately linked with Chapter cycle cost (including operational cost, maintenance, etc.), 11 – Parametric Design, Chapter 17 – Structural Arrange- and ment and Component Design and with Chapter 19 – Reli- •builder optimum design may be different from the owner ability-Based Structural Design. References to these optimum design. chapters will be made in order to avoid duplications. In ad- dition, as Chapter 8 deals with classification societies, the present chapter will focus mainly on the direct analysis 18.2.1 Rationally Based Structural Design versus methods available to perform a rationally based structural Rules-Based Design design, even if mention is made to standard formulations There are basically two schools to perform analysis and de- from Rules to quantify design loads. sign of ship structure. The first one, the oldest, is called In the following sections of this chapter, steps of a global rule-based design. It is mainly based on the rules defined analysis are presented. Section 18.3 concerns the loads that by the classification societies. Hughes (3) states: are necessary to perform a structure analysis. Then, Sections In the past, ship structural design has been largely empir- 18.4, 18.5 and 18.6 concern, respectively, the stresses and ical, based on accumulated experience and ship perform- deflections (basic ship responses), the limit states, and the fail- ance, and expressed in the form of structural design codes ures modes and associated structural capacity. A review of or rules published by the various ship classification soci- the available Numerical Analysis for Structural Design is per- eties. These rules concern the loads, the strength and the formed in Section 18.7. Finally Design Criteria (Section design criteria and provide simplified and easy-to-use for- 18.8) and Design Procedures (Section 18.9) are discussed. mulas for the structural dimensions, or “scantlings” of a Structural modeling is discussed in Subsection 18.2.2 and ship. This approach saves time in the design office and, more extensively in Subsection 18.7.2 for finite element analy- since the ship must obtain the approval of a classification sis. Optimization is treated in Subsections 18.7.6 and 18.9.4. society, it also saves time in the approval process. Ship structural design is a challenging activity. Hence Hughes (3) states: The second school is the Rationally Based Structural Design; it is based on direct analysis. Hughes, who could The complexities of modern ships and the demand for be considered as a father of this methodology, (3) further greater reliability, efficiency, and economy require a sci- states: MASTER SET SDC 18.qxd Page 18-3 4/28/03 1:30 PM Chapter 18: Analysis and Design of Ship Structure 18-3 There are several disadvantages to a completely “rulebook” Hopefully, in 2002 this is no longer true. The advantages approach to design. First, the modes of structural failure of direct analysis are so obvious that classification societies are numerous, complex, and interdependent. With such include, usually as an alternative, a direct analysis procedure simplified formulas the margin against failure remains un- (numerical packages based on the finite element method, known; thus one cannot distinguish between structural ad- see Table 18.VIII, Subsection 18.7.5.2). In addition, for new equacy and over-adequacy. Second, and most important, vessel types or non-standard dimension, such direct proce- these formulas involve a number of simplifying assump- dure is the only way to assess the structural safety. There- tions and can be used only within certain limits. Outside fore it seems that the two schools have started a long merging of this range they may be inaccurate. procedure. Classification societies are now encouraging and For these reasons there is a general trend toward direct contributing greatly to the development of direct analysis structural analysis. and rationally based methods. Ships are very complex struc- tures compared with other types of structures. They are sub- Even if direct calculation has always been performed, ject to a very wide range of loads in the harsh environment design based on direct analysis only became popular when of the sea. Progress in technologies related to ship design numerical analysis methods became available and were cer- and construction is being made daily, at an unprecedented tified. Direct analysis has become the standard procedure pace. A notable example is the fact that the efforts of a ma- in aerospace, civil engineering and partly in offshore in- jority of specialists together with rapid advances in com- dustries. In ship design, classification societies preferred to puter and software technology have now made it possible to offer updated rules resulting from numerical analysis cali- analyze complex ship structures in a practical manner using bration. For the designer, even if the rules were continuously structural