Journal of Ocean Engineering and Technology (한국해양공학회지)

Korean Society of Ocean Engineers (한국해양공학회)
권호 표지

Comparison of Buckling Check Formulas and Optimal Design

보강판의 좌굴 평가식에 따른 좌굴 강도 및 최적설계의 비교

  • 장범선 (삼성중공업(주) 해양기본설계팀 서울해양설계) ;
  • 조호영 (삼성중공업(주) 해양기본설계팀 서울해양설계)
  • Published : 2009.10.31
Download PDF
⟨ Previous Next ⟩

Abstract

In ship design or offshore structure design, the evaluation of buckling strength (or ultimate strength) is critical to the determination of scantling of stiffened plates. For this reason, it is useful to study the effect of applying different formula or the relationship between stiffened plate with buckling utilization factor (UF). It can facilitate a designer to decide how much the scantling should be reinforced or how much can be reduced for an optimal design. This paper conducts a comparative study for three buckling check methods; DNV-Ship-Rule, DNV-RP-C201, DNV-PULS. The capacity curves and 2D contour plot for utilization factors versus bi-axial in-plane stresses are compared. The contour plots of DNV-Ship-Rule and DNV-PULS show smoothly increasing trends of UF as the applied in-plane stresses increase, however that of DNV-RP-C201 shows rapidly increasing trend as the applied stresses go beyond transverse buckling stress. A sensitivity analysis is performed to investigate the influence level of each parameter of a stiffened plate on UF. Resulting from the analysis, plate thickness is identified to be the most affective parameter to UF regardless of the buckling check methods. Based on the addressed study, optimal designs for bottom plate of 165 K tanker corresponding to three formulas are compared with each other. DNV-PULS yields 1 mm and 2 mm less thickness than DNV-Ship-Rule and DNV-RP-C201, respectively.

Keywords

References

  1. 백점기 (1997). "선체구조의 좌굴, 최종 강도에 관한 연구동향", 전산구조공학학회지, 제10권, 제2호, pp 13-26
  2. 유성모 (2006). Minitab으로 배우는 기초통계, 이레테크, 서울
  3. American Bureau of Shipping (2005). Commentary on the Guide for Buckling and Ultimate Strength Assessment for Offshore Structures, Houston, USA
  4. Bleich, F. (1953). Buckling Strength of Metal Structures, McGraw-Hill Book Co., New York
  5. IACS (2006). Common Structural Rules for Double Hull Oil Tankers, International Association of Classification Societies, London, UK
  6. Det Norske Veritas (2004). Rules for Classification of Ships:Part3 Chapter 1 Hull Structural Design Ships with Length 100 meteres and above, H$\o$vik, Norway
  7. Det Norske Veritas (2002). Recommended Practice DNV-RPC201 Buckling Strength of Plated Structures, Høvik, Norway
  8. Det Norske Veritas (2005). Nauticus Hull User Manual, PULS, Høvik, Norway
  9. Paik, J.K., Ham, J.H. and Ko, J.H. (1992). "A New Plate Buckling Design Formula (2nd Report) - On the Plasticity Correction", J. of the Society of Naval Architects of Japan, Vol 171, pp 559-566
  10. Paik, J.K., Kim, J.Y., Kim, W.S. and Chung, Y.S. (1993). "A New Plate Buckling Design Formula (3rd Report) - On the Real Edge Condition", J. of the Soeciety of Naval Architects of Japan, Vol 174, pp 625-633
  11. Paik, J.K., Kim, B.J. and Seo, K.J. (2008a) 'Methods for Ultimate Limit State Assessment of Ships and Ship-Shaped Offshore Structures: Part I-Unstiffened Plates', Ocean Engineering, Vol 35, pp 261–270 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.oceaneng.2007.08.004
  12. Paik, J.K., Kim, B.J. and Seo, J.K. (2008b). "Methods for Ultimate Limit State Assessment of Ships and Ship-Shaped Offshore Structures: Part II - Stiffened Panels", Ocean Engineering, Vol 35, pp 271–280 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.oceaneng.2007.08.007
  13. Paik, J.K., et al. (2009). Ultimate Strength, Report of the ISSC Committee III.1, Proceedings of the 17th International Ship and Offshore Structures Congress, Seoul, Korea, Vol I, pp 375-474
  14. Williams, D.G. (1976). "The Influence of the Torsional Rigidity of Plate Stiffeners on Plate Effectiveness", International Ship Building Progress, Vol 23, No 268, pp 355-360