Probabilistic Seismic Assessment and Fragility Curves for Fixed Pile-Founded Offshore Platforms

Document Type : Original Research Article

Authors

1 Ph.D. Candidate, University of Qom, Qm, Iran

2 Assistant Professor, University of Qom, Qom, Iran

Abstract

Fixed pile-founded offshore platforms installed in the seismic-prone areas are exposed to the risk of earthquake-induced disastrous failure and costly operation interruption. Accordingly, the development of applied seismic evaluation methodologies for these infrastructures is a matter of utmost importance. In the context of performance-based earthquake engineering (PBEE), probabilistic seismic assessments of fixed pile-founded offshore platforms have been investigated, here. A three-dimensional (3D) finite element model of a recently installed platform located in the South Pars Oil and Gas field of the Persian Gulf has been made. Soil-pile-structure interaction, as well as dynamic site response effects, has been considered. Probabilistic seismic demand modeling (PSDM) has been employed to manifest the efficient and sufficient ground motion intensity measures (IMs) which can rigorously predict the structural engineering demand parameters (EDPs). Derived from probabilistic seismic demand analysis (PSDA), the superb results have been also evaluated by means of the predominantly used method of incremental dynamic analysis (IDA). On the other hand, the drawn findings contributed to representing the fragility curves of the fixed pile-founded offshore platforms. The demonstrated results are highly recommended to be considered in related research.

Keywords

References

  1. Bea, R.G., Puskar, F.J., Smith, C., Spencer, J.S., (1988), Development of AIM (assessment, inspection, maintenance) programs for fixed and mobile platforms. In: Proceedings of the offshore technology conference. Paper OTC 5703.
  2. Yasseri, S. and Ossei, R., (2004), Seismic Fragility Analysis of Pile-founded Offshore Platforms, Proceeding of the Fourteenth International Offshore and Polar Engineering Conference, Toulon, France, Paper Number: ISOPE-I-04-028
  3. Asgarian, B., Aghakouchak, A. A., Alanjari, P. and Assareh, M. A., (2008), Incremental Dynamic Analysis of Jacket Type Offshore Platforms Considering Soil-Pile Interaction, 14th World Conference on Earthquake Engineering, Beijing China.
  4. Park, M., Koo, W., Kawano, K., (2011), Dynamic response analysis of an offshore platform due to seismic motions, Eng. Struct., Vol. 33 (5), p. 1607–
  5. El-Din, M. N. and Kim, J., (2014), Seismic performance evaluation and retrofit of fixed jacket offshore platform structures, J. Performance of Constructed Facilities.
  6. Sharifian, H., Bargi, K., Zarrin, M., (2015), Ultimate strength of fixed offshore platforms subjected to near-fault earthquake ground vibration. Shock Vib., P. 1–19.
  7. Elsayed, T., El-Shaib, M., Gbr, k., (2014), Reliability of fixed offshore jacket platform against earthquake collapse, J. Ships Offshore Struct., Vol.11 (2), p. 167–181.
  8. Babaei, S., Amirabadi, R., Taghikhany, T., (2016), Assessment of Semi-Active Tunes Mass Damper Application in Suppressing Seismic-Induced Vibration of an Existing Jacket Platform, International Journal of Maritime Technology, Vol. 6, p. 1-10.
  9. Konstandakopoulou, F.D., Evangelinosb, K.I., Nikolaouc, I.E., Papagiannopoulosd, G.A., Pnevmatikose, N.G., (2019), Seismic analysis of offshore platforms subjected to pulse-type ground motions compatible with European Standards, Soil Dynamics and Earthquake Engineering, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.soildyn.2019.105713
  10. Jafari, A., & Dezvareh, R. (2021). Evaluation of dynamic effects in the response of offshore wind turbines using incremental wind-wave analysis. Research in Marine Sciences, 6(1), 860-868.
  11. Jafari, A., & Dezvareh, R. (2020). Performance based assessment of offshore wind turbine platform using the constrained new wave method. Journal of Oceanography, 11(43), 71-80.
  12. Jafari, A., & Dezvareh, R. (2021). Determination of collapse prevention (CP) of offshore wind turbine with jacket platform. Iranian Journal of Marine Science and Technology, 24(96), 35-43.
  13. Dezvareh, R. (2019). Providing a new approach for estimation of wave set-up in Iran coasts. Research in marine sciences, 4(1), 438-448.
  14. Lupoi, G.; Franchin, P.; Lupoi, A.; Pinto, P.E., (2006), Seismic fragility analysis of structural systems, J. Eng. Mech., Vol. 132, p. 385–395.
  15. Rosowsky, D.V.; Ellingwood, B.R., (2002), Performance-based engineering of wood frame housing: Fragility analysis methodology. J. Struct. Eng., Vol. 128, p. 32–38.
  16. Jia, H.; Zhao, J.; Li, X., (2018), Probabilistic pounding analysis of high-pier continuous rigid frame bridge with actual site conditions, Earthquakes Struct., Vol. 15, p. 193–202.
  17. Asgarian, B.; Sadrinezhad, A.; Alanjari, P. Seismic performance evaluation of steel moment resisting frames through incremental dynamic analysis. J. Constr. Steel Res. 2010, 66, 178–190.
  18. Fattahi, F.; Gholizadeh, S. Seismic fragility assessment of optimally designed steel moment frames. Eng. Struct. 2019, 179, 37–51.
  19. Bakalis K. and Vamvatsikos D., (2018), Seismic Fragility Functions via Nonlinear Response History Analysis, Journal of Structural Engineering, ASCE, 144(10): 04018181 DOI: 1061/(ASCE)ST.1943-541X.0002141
  20. Mander, J.B.; Dhakal, R.P.; Mashiko, N.; Solberg, K.M., (2007), Incremental dynamic analysis applied to seismic financial risk assessment of bridges. Eng. Struct., Vol. 29, p. 2662–2672.
  21. Jia, H.; Lan, X.; Luo, N.; Yang, J.; Zheng, S.; Zhang, C., (2019), Nonlinear Pounding Analysis of Multispan and Simply Supported Beam Bridges Subjected to Strong Ground Motions. Shock Vib.
  22. Jia, H.; Lan, X.; Zheng, S., (2019), Assessment on required separation length between adjacent bridge segments to avoid pounding. Soil Dyn. Earthq. Eng., Vol. 120, p. 398–407.
  23. Mackie, K., and Stojadinovic, B., (2004), Fragility curves for reinforced concrete highway overpass bridges, 13th World Conference on Earthquake Engineering Vancouver, B.C., Canada
  24. Muntasir Billah, A.H.M., & Shahria Alam, M., (2014), Seismic fragility assessment of highway bridges: a state-of-the-art review, Structure and Infrastructure Engineering: Maintenance, management, Life-Cycle Design and Performance, DOI: 10.1080/15732479.2014.912243
  25. Berahman, F., Behnamfar, F., (2007), Seismic fragility curves for un-anchored on-grade steel storage tanks: bayesian approach, J. Earthquake Eng. Vol.11(2), p. 166–92.
  26. Heidary-Torkamani, H., Bargi, Kh., Amirabadi, R., and McCllough, N.J., (2014) Fragility estimation and sensitivity analysis of an idealized pile-supported wharf with batter piles, Soil Dynamics and Earthquake Engineering, Elsevier, Vol.61-62 p. 92–106, http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.soildyn.2014.01.024
  27. Hariri-Ardebili, M.A., and Saouma, V.E., (2016), Probabilistic seismic demand model and optimal intensity measure for concrete dams, Structural Safety, Elsevier, Vol. 59 p. 67–85, http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.strusafe.2015.12.001
  28. Tian, L.; Pan, H.; Ma, R., (2019), Probabilistic seismic demand model and fragility analysis of transmission tower subjected to near-field ground motions, J. Constr. Steel Res., 156, 266–275.
  29. Peng, O., Cheng, W., Jia, H., and Guo, P., (2020), Fragility Analysis of Gantry Crane Subjected to Near-field Ground Motions, Appl. Sci., Vol. 10, 4219; doi:10.3390/app10124219
  30. Yasseri, S., Ossei, R., (2004), Seismic Fragility Analysis for Pile-founded Offshore Platforms, Proceeding of the 14th International Offshore and Polar Engineering Conference, Toulon, France, ISOPE-I-04-028.
  31. Jahanitabar AA, Bargi Kh., (2017) Time-dependent seismic fragility curves for aging jackettype offshore platforms subjected to earthquake ground motions, J Struct Infrastruct Eng Mainten, Manage, Life-cycle Des Perform, Vol. 14(2):192–202.https://doi.org/10.1080/15732479.2017.1343360
  32. Ajamy, A., Asgarian, B., Ventura, C.E., Zolfaghari, M.R., (2018), Seismic fragility analysis of jacket type offshore platforms considering soil-pile-structure interaction, Journal of Engineering Structures 174 (1), 198–211.
  33. Zarrin, M., Asgarian, B., & Abyani, M., (2019), Probabilistic Seismic Collapse Analysis of Jacket Offshore Platforms, Journal of Offshore Mechanics and Arctic Engineering, Vol. 140, DOI: 10.1115/1.4038581
  34. Abyani, M., Bahaari, M.R., Zarrin, M., and Nasseri, M., (2019), Effects of sample size of ground motions on seismic fragility analysis of offshore jacket platforms using Genetic Algorithm, Ocean Engineering Vol. 189, 106326, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.oceaneng.2019.106326
  35. ASCE, FEMA 356, (2000) Prestandard and commentary for the seismic rehabilitation of buildings, Publication No. 356, Washington (DC): Federal Emergency Management Agency.
  36. FEMA 350, (2000a), Recommended seismic design criteria for new steel moment-frame buildings. SAC Joint Venture, Federal Emergency Management Agency, Washington DC.
  37. FEMA 351, (2000b), Recommended seismic evaluation and upgrade criteria for existing welded steel moment-frame buildings. SAC Joint Venture, Federal Emergency Management Agency, Washington DC.
  38. American Society of Civil Engineers (ASCE), (2007), Seismic rehabilitation of existing buildings. ASCE/SEI 41-06, American Society of Civil Engineers/Structural Engineering Institute, Reston, VA.
  39. Shome, N., (1999), Probabilistic Seismic Demand Analysis of Nonlinear Structures. PhD. Thesis, Dep. Civil and Envir. Eng. Stanford University, Stanford, CA.
  40. Shome, N., Cornell, C.A., Bazzurro, P., & Caraballo, J.E., (1998), Earthquakes, records, and nonlinear responses. Earthquake Spectra, 14(3), 467–500.
  41. Vamvatsikos D., (2002), Seismic performance, capacity and reliability of structures as seen through incremental dynamic analysis. PhD Dissertation, Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering, Stanford University.
  42. Cornell, CA., Jalayer, F., Hamburger, RO., Foutch, DA., (2002), Probabilistic basis for 2000 SAC/FEMA steel moment frame guidelines, J Struct Eng Vol. 128(4) p. 526–533. https://doi:10. 1061/(ASCE)0733-9445
  43. Fisher, RA., (1925), Statistical Methods for Research Workers, Edinburgh, UK: Oliver and Boyd
  44. Tang, WH., Ang, A., (2007), Probability concepts in engineering: Emphasis on applications to civil and environmental engineering, 2nd edn. Wiley, Hoboken, ISBN: 978-0-471-72064-5
  45. Altman, N., Krzywinski, M., (2016), Points of significance: p values and the search for significance, Nat Methods 14:3–4. https://doi:10.1038/nmeth.4120
  46. Tothong P, Luco N (2007) Probabilistic seismic demand analysis using advanced ground motion intensity measures. Earthquake Eng Struct Dyn. https://doi.org/10.1002/eqe.696
  47. Pacific earthquake engineering research center (2006) PEER NGA Database. Berkeley: University of California. http://peer.berkeley.edu/nga/
  48. Babaei, S., Amirabadi, R., Sharifi, M., (2021), Evaluation of Optimal IM-EDP pairs for Typical South Pars Fixed Pile-Founded Offshore Platforms, International Journal of Maritime Technology, Vol. 15:29-49, http://ijmt.ir/article-1-740-en.html
  49. Babaei, S., Amirabadi, R., Sharifi, M., Ventura, C., (2021), Optimal probabilistic seismic demand model for fixed pile-founded offshore platforms considering soil-pile-structure interaction, Structures, Vol.33: 4330-4343, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.istruc.2021.07.040
  50. Babaei, S., Amirabadi, R., Taghikhany, T., Sharifi, M., (2021), Optimal ground motion intensity measure selection for probabilistic seismic demand modeling of fixed pile-founded offshore platforms, Journal of Ocean Engineering, Vol. 242, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.oceaneng.2021.110116
  51. Babaei, S., Amirabadi, R., Sharifi, M., (2021), Sufficiency assessments of ground motion intensity measures employing kullback-leibler theory (applied for typical south pars offshore platforms), Numerical Methods in Civil Engineering Journal, Vol. 5(4). http://nmce.kntu.ac.ir/article-1-340-en.htm
  52. NEHRP (2001) NEHRP recommended provisions for seismic regulations for new buildings and other structures. Washington, DC, USA: Building Seismic Safety Council
  53. Rossetto, T., Ioannou, I., Grant, D., and Maqsood, T., (2014), Guidelines for empirical vulnerability assessment, GEM Technical Rep. 2014-08 V1.0.0. Pavia, Itally: GEM Foundation.
  54. D’Ayala, D., A. Meslem, D. Vamvatsikos, K. Porter, and T. Rossetto. (2015), Guidelines for analytical vulnerability assessment of low/mid-rise buildings, Pavia, Italy: Vulnerability Global Component Project.
  55. Jaiswal, K., Wald, D., and D’Ayala, D., (2011) Developing empirical collapse fragility functions for global building types, Earthquake Spectra 27 (3): 775–795. https://doi.org/10.1193/1.3606398.
  56. Kappos, A.J., Stylianidis, K.C., & Pitilakis, K. (1998). Development of seismic risk scenarios based on a hybrid method of vulnerability assessment. Natural Hazards, Vol.17, p.177–192.
  57. Shinozuka, M., Feng, M.Q., Lee, J., and Naganuma, T., (2000), Statistical analysis of fragility curves, J. Eng. Mech. Vol. 126 (12), p. 1224–1231. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)0733-9399(2000)126:12(1224).
  58. Baker, J.W., (2015), Efficient analytical fragility function fitting using dynamic structural analysis, Earthquake Spectra, Vol.31(1), p. 579–99.
  59. Aslani, H., 2005. Probabilistic Earthquake Loss Estimation and Loss Disaggregation In Buildings, Doctoral Thesis, Stanford University, Stanford CA, 355 pp.
  60. Pagni, C.A. and L.N. Lowes, 2006. Fragility functions for older reinforced concrete beam-column joints. Earthquake Spectra, 22 (1), Feb 2006
  61. Badillo-Almaraz, H., A.S. Whittaker, A.M. Reinhorn, and G.P. Cimellaro, (2006) Seismic Fragility of Suspended Ceiling Systems, Technical Report MCEER-06-0001, Multidisciplinary Center for Earthquake Engineering Research, Buffalo, NY, 225 pp.
  62. Porter, K.A., and A.S. Kiremidjian, (2001), Assembly-Based Vulnerability and its Uses in Seismic Performance Evaluation and Risk-Management Decision-Making, Report No. 139, John A. Blume Earthquake Engineering Center, Stanford, CA, 214 pp., http://keithp.caltech.edu/publications.htm
  63. Mutlu, B., Fredsoe, J., (1997), Hydrodynamics Around Cylindrical Structures, Advanced Series on Ocean Engineering, vol. 26. Technical university of Denmark, Denmark
  64. API, (2000), Recommended Practice for Planning, Design and Constructing Fixed Offshore Platforms—Working Stress Design. American Petroleum Institute, Washington, DC.
  65. Matlock, H., (1970), Correlations for Design of Laterally Loaded Piles in Soft Clay, Second Annual Offshore Technology Conference, Houston, Vol.1204, p. 557 - 594.
  66. Reese, L. C., & Cox, W. R., (1975), Field Testing and Analysis of Laterally Loaded Piles in Stiff Clay, Offshore Technology Conference, OTC 2312.
  67. O’Neill, M. W., & Murchinson, J. M., (1983), An Evaluation of p-y Relationships in Sands, A Report to the American Petroleum Institute.
  68. Sap 2000, (2005), Structural Analysis Program, Analysis Reference Manual, Computers and structures, Inc., Berkeley, California, USA.
  69. American Petroleum Institute, (2008), Recommended Practice for Planning, Designing and Constructing Fixed Offshore Platforms - Working Stress Design, API recommended practice (RP-2A-WSD), 21st Edition, Errata and Supplement.
  70. Rathje EM, Kottke RA, Trent WL., (2010), Influence of input motion and site property variabilities on seismic site response analysis, J Geotech. Geoenviron. Eng. ASCE, Vol. 136(4).
  71. Hashash, Y., Groholski, D., Phillips, C., Park, D., & Musgrove M., (2012), DEEPSOIL 5.1. User Manual and Tutorial.
  72. Shome, N., Cornell, CA., (1999), Probabilistic seismic demand analysis of nonlinear structures, RMS Program, Stanford University, Report No. RMS35. https://blume.stanford.edu/rms-reports. Accessed 2 June 2014
  73. Luco, N., Cornell, CA., (2007), Structure-specific scalar intensity measures for near-source and ordinary earthquake ground motions, Earthq Spectra Vol. 23 p.357–392. http://doi:10.1193/1.2723158
  74. Mackie, K., Stojadinović, B., (2003), Seismic demands for performance-based design of bridges, PEER 312
  75. Housner, GW., (1959), Behavior of structures during earthquakes, J Eng Mech Div Vol. 85 p.109–130
  76. Porter, K., Kennedy, R., and Bachman, R., (2007), Creating Fragility Functions for Performance-Based Earthquake Engineering, Earthquake Spectra, Vol. 23(2), p. 471-489.
International Journal Of Coastal, Offshore And Environmental Engineering(ijcoe)
Volume 7, Issue 1 - Serial Number 26
February 2022
Pages 50-62

Files

Share

How to cite

Statistics