Uncertainty Propagation of Structural Computation for Fatigue Assessment

Abstract

Offshore wind substations are subjected to uncertain loads from waves, wind and currents. Sea states are composed of irregular waves which statistics are usually characterized. Irregular loads may induce fatigue failure of some structural components of the structures. By combining fatigue damage computed through numerical simulations for each sea state endured by the structure, it is possible to assess fatigue failure of the structure over the whole deployment duration. Yet, the influence of the discretization error on the fatigue damage is rarely addressed. It is possible to estimate the discretization error on the quantity of interest computed at the structural detail suspected to fail. However, the relation between this local quantity of interest and the fatigue damage is complex. In this paper, a method that allows propagating error bounds towards fatigue damage is proposed. While increasing computational burden, computing discretization error bounds is a useful output of finite element analysis. It can be utilized to either validate mesh choice or guide remeshing in case where potential error on the fatigue damage is too large. This method is applied to an offshore wind substation developped by Chantiers de l’Atlantique using two discretization error estimators in a single sea state.

Keywords

Offshore wind turbines / Uncertainty propagation / Fatigue damage / Discretization error

References

[1] Ainsworth M, Oden J. A posteriori error estimation in finite element analysis. Computer methods in applied mechanics and engineering, 1997, 142(1–2): 1-88

[2] Alvin K. Method for treating discretization error in nondeter-ministic analysis. AIAA journal, 2000, 38(5): 910-916

[3] Becker R & Rannacher R (1996) A feed-back approach to error control in finite element methods: Basic analysis and examples. IWR

[4] Bitner-Gregersen E. Joint met-ocean description for design and operations of marine structures. Applied Ocean Research, 2015, 51: 279-292

[5] Casciati F, Colombi P & Faravelli L (1992) Fatigue lifetime evaluation via response surface methodology. In European safety and reliability conference’92 (pp. 157–166)

[6] Demeyer S, Fischer N, Marquis D. Surrogate model based sequential sampling estimation of conformance probability for computationally expensive systems: application to fire safety science. Journal de la société fran. caise de statistique, 2017, 158(1): 111-138

[7] Díez P, Calderón G. Remeshing criteria and proper error representations for goal oriented h-adaptivity. Computer methods in applied mechanics and engineering, 2007, 196(4–6): 719-733

[8] Dong Y, Teixeira A, Soares CG. Time-variant fatigue reliability assessmentofwelded joints based on the phi2 and response surface methods. Reliability Engineering & System Safety, 2018, 177: 120-130

[9] Ducrozet G, Bonnefoy F, Perignon Y. Applicability and limitations of highly nonlinearpotential flow solversin the contextofwaterwaves. Ocean Engineering, 2017, 142: 233-244

[10] Gallimard L. Error bounds for the reliability index in finite element reliability analysis. International journal for numerical methods in engineering, 2011, 87(8): 781-794

[11] Ghavidel A, Mousavi S, Rashki M. The effect of FEM mesh density on the failure probability analysis of structures. KSCE Journal of Civil Engineering, 2018, 22(7): 2370-2383

[12] Ghavidel A, Rashki M, Arab H, Moghaddam M. Reliability mesh convergence analysis by introducing expanded control variates. Frontiers of Structural and Civil Engineering, 2020, 14(4): 1012-1023

[13] Huchet Q, Mattrand C, Beaurepaire P, Relun N, Gayton N. AK-DA: An efficient methodfor the fatigue assessmentofwind turbine structures. Wind Energy, 2019, 22(5): 638-652

[14] Ladevèze P. Upper error bounds on calculated outputs of interestfor linear and nonlinear structuralproblems. Comptes Rendus Académie des Sciences -Mécanique, Paris, 2006, 334(7): 399-407

[15] Ladevèze P. Strict upper error bounds on computed outputs of interest in computational structural mechanics. Computational Mechanics, 2008, 42(2): 271-286 01

[16] Ladeveze P, Leguillon D. Error estimate procedure in the finite element method and applications. SIAM Journal on Numerical Analysis, 1983, 20(3): 485-509

[17] Ladevèze P & Pelle J-P (2005) Mastering calculations in linear and nonlinear mechanics (Vol. 171). Springer

[18] Matsuishi M, Endo T. Fatigueof metals subjectedtovarying stress. Japan Society of Mechanical Engineers, Fukuoka, Japan, 1968, 68(2): 37-40

[19] Mell L, Rey V, Schoefs F. Multifidelity adaptive kriging metamodel based on discretization errorbounds. International Journal for Numerical Methods in Engineering, 2020, 121(20): 4566-4583

[20] Parés N, Díez P, Huerta A. Subdomain-based flux-freeaposteriori error estimators. Computer Methods in Applied Mechanics and Engineering, 2006, 195(4–6): 297-323

[21] Paris PC. A rational analytic theory of fatigue. Trends Engin, 1961, 13: 9-14

[22] Pasqualini O, Schoefs F, Chevreuil M, Cazuguel M. Measurements and statistical analysis of fillet weld geometrical parameters for probabilistic modelling of the fatigue capacity. Marine structures, 2013, 34: 226-248

[23] Pled F, Chamoin L, Ladevèze P. On the techniques for constructing admissible stress fields in model verification: Performances on engineering examples. International Journal for Numerical Methods in Engineering, 2011, 88(5): 409-441

[24] Rey V, Gosselet P, Rey C. Study of the strong prolongation equation for the construction of statically admissible stress fields: implementation and optimization. Computer Methods in Applied Mechanics and Engineering, 2014, 268: 82-104

[25] Rüter M, Stein E. Goal-orientedaposteriori error estimates in linear elastic fracture mechanics. Computer methods in applied mechanics and engineering, 2006, 195(4–6): 251-278

[26] Sarpkaya T. Force on a circular cylinder in viscous oscillatory flow at low keulegan—carpenter numbers. Journal of Fluid Mechanics, 1986, 165: 61-71

[27] Schoefs F. Sensitivityapproachfor modelling the environmental loading of marine structures through a matrix response surface. Reliability Engineering & System Safety, 2008, 93(7): 1004-1017

[28] Schoefs F & Boukinda ML (2010) Sensitivityapproachfor modeling stochastic field ofkeulegan- carpenter and reynoldsnumbers througha matrix response surface. Journal of offshore mechanics and Arctic engineering 132(1). https://doi.org/10.1115/1.3160386

[29] Soares CG, Garbatov Y. Fatigue reliability of the ship hull girder accounting for inspection and repair. Reliability Engineering & System Safety, 1996, 51(3): 341-351

[30] Strouboulis T, Babuŝka I, Datta D, Copps K, Gangaraj S. Aposteriori estimation and adaptive control of the error in the quantity of interest. part i: Aposteriori estimation of the error in the von mises stress and the stress intensityfactor. Computer Methods in Applied Mechanics and Engineering, 2000, 181(1–3): 261-294

[31] Veritas DN (1996) Guidelines for offshore structural reliability analysis-application to jacket platforms (Tech. Rep.). DNV Report.

[32] Veritas DN. DNV-RP-C203 fatigue design of offshore steel structures, 2010, Baerum, Norway: DNV

[33] Veritas DN (2014) Dnv-rp-c205: Environmental conditions and environmental loads (Tech. Rep.). DNV GL

[34] Waeytens J, Chamoin L, Ladevéze P. Guaranteederrorbounds onpointwise quantities of interest for transient viscodynamics problems. Computational Mechanics, 2012, 49(3): 291-307

[35] Zienkiewicz O, Zhu J. A simple error estimator and adaptive procedure for practical engineerng analysis. International journal for numerical methods in engineering, 1987, 24(2): 337-357