The evolution of naval vessels toward high-speed crafts subjected to severe sea conditions has promoted an increasing interest in lightweight high-strength materials. Due to its strength and weight characteristics, aluminum has been proven especially suitable as construction material for hull structures as well as other vessel parts. However, fatigue in aluminum naval crafts needs to be effectively addressed for the proper life-cycle assessment. Structural health monitoring systems constitute effective tools for measuring the structural response and assessing the structural performance under actual operational conditions. In this article, an approach for using structural health monitoring information in the fatigue reliability analysis and service life prediction of aluminum naval vessels is presented. The accumulated fatigue damage and the fatigue reliability are quantified based on structural health monitoring data acquired under different operational conditions, specified by the ship speeds, sea states, and heading angles. Additionally, an approach for estimating the reliability-based fatigue life under a given operational profile is presented. Seakeeping trial data of an aluminum high-speed naval vessel are used to illustrate the proposed approach.
SielskiRA. Research needs in aluminum structure. Ships and Offshore Structures2008; 3(1): 57–65.
2.
FisherJWKulakGLSmithIF. A fatigue primer for structural engineers. Chicago, IL: National Steel Bridge Alliance, American Institute of Steel Construction, 1998, pp. 16–33.
3.
PaikJKFriezePA. Ship structural safety and reliability. Prog Struct Eng Mat2001; 3: 198–210.
4.
AyyubBMAssakkafIAKihlDP. Reliability-based design guidelines for fatigue of ship structures. Nav Eng J2002; 114(2): 113–138.
5.
American Bureau of Shipping (ABS). Spectral-based fatigue analysis for floating production, storage and offloading (FSPO) installations. Houston, TX: ABS, 2010.
6.
Det Norske Veritas (DNV). Fatigue methodology of offshore ships. Recommended Practice DNV-RP-C206, October2010. DNV: Høvik.
Eurocode 9. Design of aluminium structures part 1–3, additional rules for structures susceptible to fatigue. Brussels: CEN—European committee for Standardisation, 2009.
10.
Det Norske Veritas (DNV). Fatigue analysis of high speed and light craft. Det Norske Veritas Classification A.S., CN 30.9, 1997. Høvik: DNV.
11.
ColletteM. Strength and reliability of aluminum stiffened panels. PhD Thesis, School of Marine Science and Technology, Faculty of Science, Agriculture and Engineering, University of Newcastle, Callaghan, NSW, Australia, 2005, pp. 139–198.
12.
HessPE. Structural health monitoring for high-speed naval ships. In: Proceedings of the 6th international workshop on structural health monitoring. Quantification, validation, and implementation, 11–14 September 2007, Stanford, CA. Lancaster, PA: DEStech Publishing, 3–15.
13.
OkashaNMFrangopolDMSaydamD. Reliability analysis and damage detection in high-speed naval crafts based on structural health monitoring data. Struct Health Monit2011; 10(4): 361–379.
14.
VioletteFLMPolezhayevaHAChungHW. Basic parameters governing the fatigue of aluminum ships. In: 3rd international forum on aluminium ships, Haugesund, 27–28 May 1998.
15.
FrangopolDM. Life-cycle performance, management, and optimisation of structural systems under uncertainty: accomplishments and challenges. Struct Infrastruct E2011; 7(6): 389–413.
16.
KwonKFrangopolDM. Fatigue life assessment and lifetime management of aluminum ships using life-cycle optimization. J Ship Res2012; 56(2): 91–105.
17.
BradyTF. Wave impact loading response measurement and analysis for HSV-2 from JLOTS and blue game rough water trials. NSWCCD-65-TR-2004/32, 1October2004. West Bethesda, MD: Naval Surface Warfare Center, Carderock Division.
18.
KwonKFrangopolDMKimS. Fatigue performance assessment and service life prediction of high-speed ship structures based on probabilistic lifetime sea loads. Struct Infrastruct E2013; 9(2): 102–115.
19.
ColletteMIncecikA. An approach for reliability-based fatigue design of welded joints in aluminum high-speed vessels. J Ship Res2006; 50(3): 85–98.
20.
SalvinoLWBradyTF. Hull monitoring system development using hierarchical framework for data and information management. In: Proceedings of the 7th international conference on computer and IT applications in the marine industries (COMPIT’08), Liège, 21–23 April 2008.
21.
BarsomJMRolfeST. Fracture and fatigue control in structures: applications of fracture mechanics. 3rd ed.West Conshohocken, PA: ASTM, 1999.
22.
KimSFrangopolDM. Optimum inspection planning for minimizing fatigue damage detection delay of ship hull structures. Int J Fatigue2011; 33: 448–459.
23.
Eurocode 3. Design of steel structures part 1–9, fatigue strength. Brussels: CEN—European committee for Standardisation, 2010.
24.
YeNMoanT. Improving fatigue life for aluminium cruciform joints by weld toe grinding. Fatigue Fract Eng M2008; 31(2): 152–163.
25.
MaddoxSJ. Review of fatigue assessment procedures for welded aluminum structures. Int J Fatigue2003; 25: 1359–1378.
26.
RadajDSonsinoCMFrickeW. Fatigue assessment of welded joints by local approaches. 2nd ed.Boca Raton, FL; Boston, MA; New York; Washington, DC: Woodhead Publishing and Maney Publishing on behalf of The Institute of Materials, Minerals & Mining; CRC Press, 2006, pp. 33–90.
27.
NiemiE. Stress determination for fatigue analysis of welded components. Abington; Cambridge: International Institute of Welding; Abington Publishing, 1995, pp. 53–65.
28.
MinerMA. Cumulative damage in fatigue. J Appl Mech1945; 12(3): 159–164.
29.
FatemiAYangL. Cumulative fatigue damage and life prediction theories: a survey of the state of the art for homogeneous materials. Int J Fatigue1998; 20(1): 9–34.
30.
KwonKFrangopolDM. Bridge fatigue reliability assessment using probability density functions of equivalent stress range based on field monitoring data. Int J Fatigue2010; 32: 1221–1232.
31.
EstesACFrangopolDM. RELSYS: a computer program for structural system reliability analysis. Struct Eng Mech1998; 6(8): 901–919.
32.
LiuPLLinHZDer KiureghianA. CalREL user manual. Berkeley, CA: Department of Civil Engineering, University of California, Berkeley, 1989.
33.
HughesOF. Ship structural design. Jersey City, NJ: The Society of Naval Architects and Marine Engineers, 1988.
34.
JensenJJ. Load and global response of ships, vol. 4 (Elsevier ocean engineering series; ed BhattacharyyaRMcCormickME). Oxford: Elsevier, 2001.
35.
FrangopolDMStraussAKimS. Bridge reliability assessment based on monitoring. J Bridge Eng2008; 13(3): 258–270.
36.
BradyTF. HSV-2 swift instrumentation and technical trials plan. NSWCCD-65-TR-2004/18, 1July2004. West Bethesda, MD: Naval Surface Warfare Center, Carderock Division.
BradyTF. Global structural response measurement of SWIFT (HSV-2) from JLOTS and blue game rough water trials. NSWCCD-65-TR-2004/33, 1December2004. West Bethesda, MD: Naval Surface Warfare Center, Carderock Division.
TveitenBW. Fatigue assessment of welded aluminium ship details. PhD Thesis, Department of Marine Structures, Norwegian University of Science and Technology, Trondheim, 1999.
41.
MathWorks Inc. Signal processing toolbox™ 6—user’s guide. Natick, MA: MathWorks, Inc., 2012.
42.
DowningSDSocieDF. Simple rainflow counting algorithms. Int J Fatigue1982; 4(1): 31–40.
43.
AngAH-STangWH. Probability concepts in engineering: emphasis on applications to civil and environmental engineering. 2nd ed.New York: John Wiley & Sons, 2007, pp. 278–302.
StraussAFrangopolDMKimS. Use of monitoring extreme data for the performance prediction of structures: Bayesian updating. Eng Struct2008; 30(12): 3654–3666.
46.
ZhuBFrangopolDM. Incorporation of SHM data on load effects in the reliability and redundancy assessment of ships using Bayesian updating. Struct Health Monitor2013; 12(4): 377–392.
47.
FrangopolDMEstesAC. Lifetime bridge maintenance strategies based on system reliability. Struct Eng Inter1997; 7(3): 193–198.
48.
FrangopolDM. Life–cycle cost analysis for bridges. Chapter 9 in Bridge Safety and Reliability, ASCE, 1999: 210–236.
