Marine Structures 4 (1991) 203-229

Reliability of Jack-up Platforms Against Overturning

J. J u n c h e r J e n s e n a, A. E. M a n s o u r b & P. T e r n d r u p P e d e r s e n a
aDepartment of Ocean Engineering, Technical University of Denmark.
DK-2800 Lyngby, Denmark
bDepartment of Naval Architecture and Offshore Engineering, University of
California, Berkeley, USA
(Received 21 August 1989: revised version received 12June 1990;accepted 14June 1990)

ABSTRACT

A probabilistic model for assessing the safety of jack-up platforms against

overturning is presented in this paper. Stoke's fifth order wave theory was used
to determine the wave kinematics and wave forces acting on the platform.
Because of the non-linearities associated with the waveforces, the overturning
moment and the non-Gaussian character of the wave surface, a probabilistic
non-linear response model was used to determine the probability distributions
of the overturning moment and the associated extreme value statistics. The
probability of overturning (failure) was then developed for short- and long-
term sea conditions. In an application to an actual platform, the results
indicate that the non-linearities with wave heights play an important role and
have a large impact on the probability of overturning. A sensitivity analysis for
the platform pointed out the importance of the drag coefficient as a major
factor in determining the reliability of the platform.

Key words." jack-up platform, non-normal excitations, Hermite series

expansion, extreme valve predictions, reliability analysis.

1 INTRODUCTION

Self-elevating m o b i l e offshore drilling units (jack-ups) are being used

extensively for water depths below 100 m. O n a few occasions jack-ups
have also b e e n u s e d as t e m p o r a r y p r o d u c t i o n units.
203
Marine Structures 0951-8339/91/$03.50 1991 Elsevier Science Publishers Ltd, England.
Printed in Great Britain.
204 J. Juncher Jensen, A. E. Mansour, P. Terndrup Pedersen

Even though a jack-up platform is a mobile unit it has narrow limits

for operation. The platform is designed for a certain set of environmental
conditions but in m a n y cases the environmental conditions at a specific
location are incompatible with the design conditions. Therefore~ when a
jack-up is moved to a new location it normally needs a location approval.
The national or international regulations that apply to a location
approval differ from each other and result in different requirements.
However, c o m m o n to the relevant authorities and regulating bodies is
that location approval of jack-ups is based on deterministic analyses. In
these deterministic analyses weights and environmental forces are
chosen such that the analyses give potentially conservative results. Using
these normally conservative estimates of the loads~ a structural analysis
is performed. The location approval usually includes a check of the stress
level in the legs and the hull structure, a calculation of the necessary,
preload capacity, an assessment of the soil conditions and the safety
towards punch through of a leg~ the holding capacity of the jacking
mechanism, and a check of the overturning stability. As an example, the
overturning stability criterion of jack-ups is based on a factor of safety.
This factor depends on the regulating body and is normally between 1.0
and 1.5. Overturning is here defined as the condition where the soil
reaction becomes zero for one of the legs. For most platform designs the
actual failure mode associated with overturning will be collapse of the
load carrying legs due to excessive leg bending moments rather than a
tumble over of the intact platform.
It is the purpose of this paper to present an approach by which it is
possible to relate the results of the traditional deterministic analyses to
the safety or reliability of jack-up structures. The procedure is developed
to assess the reliability against overturning. However, on the basis of this
analysis procedure it is not difficult to derive similar probabilistic
procedures for the other failure modes associated with the survival
capability of jack-ups.

2 THE O V E R T U R N I N G A N D STABILIZING M O M E N T S
Figure 1 shows a typical jack-up platform with three vertical legs and
footings in the form of spud cans. The legs are constructed as lattice
structures with triangular cross-sections. The platform shown in Fig. 1
has a derrick placed on a retractable cantilever.

2.1 Standard deterministic analysis

The most significant environmental loads for jack-up platforms are
those induced by the combined action of waves and current. Together
 Reliability of jack-up platforms against overturning 205

~L.c~e/ / ~ Wave direction

, & I.

~<

,< ~<
~< ~<
,< ~<
,<
Aft legs :orwardleg
~< ~<

~< ~<
~<
~<

~< ~<

~<

See Bed

Fig. 1. Jack-up platform with cantilever.

with the wind pressure on the hull and on leg segments above the water
surface, it is these hydrodynamic forces which produce the major
overturning moments about axes through the centroids of the legs at the
lower face of the spud cans. In the present analysis the destabilizing
effect of the compressive gravity loading on the legs, the deck sway and
dynamic excited inertia forces are also taken into account.
For the jack-up to be stable it is necessary that the sum of these
destabilizing moments is smaller than the restoring moment produced
by the effective weight of the platform multiplied by the distance from the
axis of overturning to the center of gravity.
Since a consistent calculation of the overturning moments must
include inertia forces and the effect of sway, it is necessary to establish a
mathematical model which reflects the structural behavior of the
platform. Therefore, the core of the mathematical model to be used is a
simple 3-D linear beam structural model of the jack-up.
The hull is modelled as a rigid body but the jack houses, the upper
guides and the elevating system are flexible relative to the hull.
206 J. Juncher Jensen, .4. E. Mansour, P Terndrup Pedersen

The legs are modelled as equivalent Timoshenko beams. The stiffness

properties of these beams are determined assuming that the braces do
not carry any moments. The legs are connected to the hull and the jack
houses through hinges at the lower and upper guides. In addition the
elevating systems are represented by rotational springs between each leg
and the hull. The stiffness of these rotational springs is determined from
the effective stiffness of the elevating system and the stiffness of the jack
house.
The hull weight is applied to the legs at the positions of the elevating
systems. Distributed wave and current induced forces are calculated for
any orientation and position of Stoke's fifth order waves. The current
velocities are adjusted below the wave profile to maintain a constant
mass flow. The current velocities so obtained are added to the horizontal
wave particle velocities assuming the waves and current to propagate in
the same direction. Each leg consists of a n u m b e r of beam elements. The
distributed wave-induced loads are transfered into equivalent nodal
forces. The hydrodynamic loads on the legs are calculated using
Morison's equation in connection with an equivalent leg model. ~ The
only vertical components of the wave loading considered are buoyancy
variation effects.
The wind loading calculations for leg sections above the water surface
are based on the same equivalent leg model. For calculation of the wind
loading on the hull the projected area approach is used.
The functional deck loads are described by a mean value estimated
from the weight of the hull, plus parts of the variable loads, and a standard
deviation describing the uncertainty of the variable load. Similarly the
position of the center of mass is described by a Gaussian probability
distribution with a mean value and a variance which reflect the
variability of the position of the cantilever and the position of the center
of gravity of the variable load.
Thus, in a standard deterministic analysis of safety against over-
turning, the characteristic weight, F c, is typically taken as the sum of the
lightweight of the hull, the weight of the legs including spud cans
corrected for buoyancy, and finally a variable load chosen such that it
corresponds to a conservative lower limit. Also the center of gravity is
taken at a position which produces a conservative value for the restoring
moment. In the examples to follow it is assumed that the numerical
values of the characteristic weight F c and the horizontal distance
between the axis of overturning and the center of gravity d c are equal to
their mean values minus two standard deviations.
For the standard deterministic calculation of the overturning m o m e n t
full coherence of the wind, current and wave forces are assumed. This is
 Reliability of jack-up platforms against overturning 207

possibly a conservative assumption but due to lack of data on the joint

probability distribution of these parameters, this assumption is generally
taken I for design purposes. The wind velocity is defined as the wind
velocity averaged over over 1 min and this velocity is assumed to vary
with the height above sea level. The reference wave height for a specific
location is normally derived as the most probable largest wave height
a m o n g 1000 peak amplitudes in a short term sea condition where the
peak amplitudes are assumed to have a Rayleigh distribution. The
associated wave period is then determined from an average relation. ~
A series of static calculations are performed in order to determine the
position and direction of the Stoke's fifth order wave which produces the
smallest ratio between the restoring moment and the overturning
moment.
Including the destabilizing effect of the deck sway u~ the standard
deterministic factor of safety y can be expressed as
M~ .c6
r - (1)
(M~, + M~)
whereM~ is the characteristic value of the restoring moment, M~ = F c. d c,
and where M~o and M~w are the characteristic values of the overturning
m o m e n t due to waves (including current) and wind, respectively.
Furthermore c~ is given by
c
C6 = 1 lld
dc (2)

and represents the reduction of the restoring m o m e n t due to deck sway,

the P-6 effect.

2.2 Stationary stochastic analysis

The overturning m o m e n t of a platform is not linear with respect to the

wave surface elevation due to the non-linear character of the drag term in
the Morison equation and the fact that the submerged portion of the legs
varies as the wave passes. Moreover, the usual Gaussian representation
of the wave surface elevation is not accurate enough particularly in
shallow waters such as those where the platform operates. Therefore, the
response of the platform can not be represented by a Gaussian process.
The method described in detail in Section 3 is based on matching the
non-linear overturning response by applying an appropriate monotonic
function to a Gaussian process, i.e. applying a functional transformation to
a standard Gaussian process. Hermite m o m e n t models of the overturning
moments are then formulated following an approach described by
208 J Juncher Jensen, A. E. Mansour, P. Terndrup Pedersen

Winterstein. 2 This model uses response moments (skewness, kurtosis,

etc.) to form the non-Gaussian contributions, made orthogonal through
Hermite series. A description of how the overturning moment can be
expressed as a non-linear function of a Gaussian process follows.
First the overturning moment Mo(t) in regular waves with a super-
imposed current profile is determined neglecting the motions of the
platform. The Stoke's fifth order wave theory, characterized by the wave
height H and wave period To, is used together with the Morison's
equation. These numerical calculations show for the example platform
that the overturning moment Mo(t) can be approximated as

M,,(t) = A0 + At ~ cos 2rr +,42 cos

+A3 cos 2rr i (3)

where the constants A0, A~. A2 and A3 are derived by curve fitting and
depend on the platform geometry, the water depth and the current
profile. In deriving this formula a one-to-one relation zbetween the wave
height H and wave period To is used.
The inertia forces due to the platform motion are estimated using a
modal approach where only the lowest horizontal vibration mode is
included. The corresponding equation of motion becomes

dt~__ + 2~w + Lo2~o(t) = w-Mo(t)/kM (4)

where 6o(t) is the deck sway. The structural parameters are the lowest
natural frequencyw, the damping ratio ~ and the generalized stiffness kM
related to the deck sway.
It is then assumed that the dynamic effects due to the superharmonics
in the overturning moment Mo(t) can be ignored compared to those
arising from the fundamental frequency. This assumption is in line with
the conclusions by Haver. 3The deck sway amplitude 6o thereby becomes

60 - 2kMU/[max (Mo(t))- c r (Mo(t))]

min, (5)

in which q~ is the classical dynamic amplification factor

1

1 \ToJJ +
where T = 2rr/oois the fundamental natural period. Substitution of eqn
(3) into (5) yields
 Reliabilityofjack-up platformsagainstoverturning 209

~
6~kM A1 + A3 (7)

Thus, the dynamic amplification increases the deck sway by the

contribution
, (
6o(t) ~_ ~ ( ~ t - 1). A , ~ + A 3 (,)
cos 2rrT~o (8)

corresponding to an increase MDo(t) in the overturning moment

MDo(t) = 6Do(t)kM -- B~(H, To, T,~)cos 2zr To (') (9)

the total wave-induced overturning moment Mo(t) due to wave, current

and inertia forces becomes
t H
Mo(t) = Ao+(A, H~+ B ~ ) c o s ( 2 r r ~ o ) + A ~ ( ~ c o s ( 2 r t ~ ) ) 2

,,0,
For the example platform, A0 = 7.7 MN m, A~ = 5.77 MN m / m A2 =
1.88 MN m/m 2 and A 3 = 0.2568 MN m/m 3. The fundamental natural
period is 8.16 s with full variable loads and the damping ratio ~ is taken
to be 5%, to account also for hydrodynamic damping. With these values
and the relation between wave heights H and wave periods To given by
Odland, 1the dynamic overturning moment amplitude Bp turns out to be
nearly linearly dependent on the wave height H

B~ ~- Ap H for H > 8m (11)

with Ap = 12.60 MN m/m. Substitution of eqn (11) into (10) yields

( ~ cos ( 2 . ; o ) ) 2

+~(~cos(2~,)/3 ~,2,

In Fig. 2 the maximum and minimum values obtained by eqns (3), (10)
and (12) are compared. For the high wave heights which govern the
survival capability of the platform, the approximate eqn (12) is seen to be
quite accurate. The importance of dynamic amplification is clearly
present for all wave heights, as can be seen by comparison with the result
given by eqn (3) (Fig, 2).
Similarly, Fig. 3 shows a comparison between direct numerical
210 J. Juncher Jensen, A. E. Mansour, P. Terndrup Pedersen

400

- - " Equation (12)

..... ' E q u a t i o n (10)
300 - " E q u a t i o n (3)

2OO

Z
L~ Peak
0

100 // ~ / .

~4 ""
'"IL//I
0 6 8 10 ~ 12 114 /
I ",
\
~ H(m)
/
./' /
\\ ./

-100

Fig. 2. Maximum (peak) and minimum (trough) values of the static and dynamic wave
and current induced overturning moment Mo as function of wave height H.

calculations a n d the a p p r o x i m a t i o n o b t a i n e d by eqn (12) o f the variation

o f the o v e r t u r n i n g m o m e n t with time t for a regular wave with height
H -- 15 m a n d a period To = 13.11 s. A r e a s o n a b l y good a g r e e m e n t is
found.
G e n e r a l i z a t i o n o f eqn (12) to a stochastic sea is not straightforward
due to the use o f n o n - l i n e a r wave kinematics. However, n o n - l i n e a r time
simulations 4 in a stationary sea have s h o w n that a n a p p r o a c h such as
eqn (12) will yield extreme loads in r e a s o n a b l e a g r e e m e n t with the time
simulation results, a l t h o u g h the full d y n a m i c p e a k - t o - p e a k values will be
too small.
 Reliability ofjack-up platforms against overturning 211

400 r

H=15m
300
To = 13.11 sec
Direct calculation
Equation (12)

200 I
I
I
I
I
I

Z / ~
I --

0 100
/ I
I
I
I
/ u
/ (1)
>

\
/,
/
/

\ \\\ /
-100

",.2.~-"
I J

004 0"25 0/50 075 1.00

t/To

Fig. 3. Variation of the dynamic wave and current induced overturning moment Mo with
time t.

In the present analysis, only extreme loads are considered. Therefore,

it is to be expected that in a stationary stochastic sea with significant wave
H
height/4.,, eqn (12) will still be valid provided ~ cos(2n/To) is replaced
1
by ~H~U(t), where U(t) denotes the standard Gaussian process

Mo(t) = g[U(t)] = ao + al U + a2U 2 + a3 U3 (13)

The coefficients a0=A0; al = (Ai + A D ) ( H s / 4 ) ; a2 = A 2 ( H , / 4 ) 2 and
a3 = A 3 ( n s / 4 ) 3.
212 J. Juncher Jensen, A. E. Mansour, P Terndrup Pedersen

In order to illustrate the character of the statistical predictions, eqn

(13) is rearranged according to the four-moment Hermite modeF
M o = /~Mo + xcrM,,[U + C3( U2 -- 1) + c 4 ( U ~ - 3U)] (14)
where
c3 = a2(al + 3a3) -I

c4 = a3(al + 3a3) -I
KCrM,~ ---- al + 3a3
and where the variance aM,,: and the mean value/4~,, of the overturning
m o m e n t are given by:
: ) = off~ + 2a~ 2 + 15a3 2 + 6ala3
O'M,

/~M,, = a0 + a2
The skewness of this distribution can be expressed approximately as
a3 = 6c3(1 + 6c4)
and the kurtosis approximately as
2
0~4 = ~ [(18C4 + 1) 2 -- 11 + 3

In order to illustrate the variation of these statistical parameters the jack-

up described in Section 4 is used again. For this platform Table 1 shows
numerically determined values ofpM,, aM,, a3 and a4 for the dynamic
wave and current induced overturning m o m e n t Mo as function of the
significant wave height H,.

TABLE I
Statistical Parameters for the Wave and Current Induced Dynamic Overturning
Moment Mc,

Significant Mean value Standard Skewness Kurtosis

wave height IIM, (MN m) deviation a~ a4
H~(m) ~M,,(MN m)

I 7.82 4.61 0- 153 3-021

2 8.17 9.30 0.312 3.086
3 8.76 14-18 0.472 3.197
4 9.58 19-33 0.634 3.361
5 10.64 24.84 0.811 3.583
6 11.93 30.81 0.986 3.868
7 13-46 37.33 1-172 4.222
8 15.22 44.48 1.352 4.645
9 17.22 52.37 1.537 5.138
10 19-45 61.09 1-722 5-697
 Reliability of jack-up platforms against overturning 213

From Table 1 it is seen that for small wave heights the overturning
m o m e n t is nearly Gaussian distributed. However, for significant wave
heights around 7 m which are characteristic for the survival condition
there is a non-zero skewness and a coefficient of kurtosis well above 3.0
indicating significant non-linearities.

3 RELIABILITY AGAINST OVERTURNING

To determine the probability of overturning (failure) of a jack-up

platform, it is important to determine first the probability distribution of
the extreme overturning moment in a given sea condition. As discussed
in Section 2, the overturning moment is not linear with respect to wave
amplitude. An exact treatment of the non-linearities requires a time
simulation analysis. 4 However, asymptotically correct solutions can be
obtained by the equivalent linearization technique, 5 by expansions in
Gram-Charlier or Edgeworth series, 6by the Markov diffusion method or
by expansion in Hermite polynomials. 2 An extensive treatment of these
methods can be found in Madsen et al. 7 The last mentioned method will
be used here to determine the probability distribution of the overturning
moment. It is based on matching the non-linear response by applying an
appropriate monotone function to a Gaussian process. This method,
which will be described briefly, has been shown 2 to be more flexible than
the Gram-Charlier and Edgeworth series with the ability to reflect
stronger non-linearities. It is also general enough to handle a wide range
of non-linear problems.
It is noted that the present analysis uses an exact integration of the
probability of failure. This restricts the number of statistical variables
and their distribution functions. Therefore, only uncertainties relating to
the significant wave height Hs, the wave height conditioned on Hs, the
drag coefficient Co, the wind induced overturning moment Mw and the
restoring m o m e n t Mr are considered. In Jensen et al. 8 approximate
probabilities of failure are determined for the same example platform
using first and second order reliability methods. 7 The findings in Jensen
et al. 8 show that the above-mentioned uncertainties are indeed the most
important ones. Similar conclusions also hold for jacket structures, see
for instance Olufsen et al. 9

3.1 Probability distribution of the overturning moment

The non-linear overturning m o m e n t Mo(t) is considered as a stationary

random process. As indicated by eqns (13) and (14) then Mo(t) can be
214 J. Juncher Jensen, A. E. Mansour, P. Terndrup Pedersen

represented as a functional transformation of the standard Gaussian

process U(t), i.e.
Mo(t) = g[U(t)] (15)
and for a specific realization
m = g(u) and u = g-I(m) (16)
IfMo has a cumulative distribution function FM,,(m), then
FM~(g(u)) = O(u) or g(u) = FMI,IO(u)] (17)
where O(.) is the standard Gaussian distribution function. The
transformation described above reduces, in m a n y cases, the non-linear
analysis to simple well-known results for the linear (Gaussian) response.
For example, the following distributions of Mo(t) can be determined.

3.1.1 Distribution of the process Mo(t)

The cumulative distribution function FMo(m) of Mo is
FM,~(m) = P[Mo < m] = P[g(U) < m]
= P[U<g-l(m)] = O(g-I(m)) = O(u) (18)
a n d the corresponding probability density function is

dFM,,(m) dO(u) du du (19)

fM,,(m) -- dm - du d m - 0(u) dm

where O(u) is the probability density function of the standard Gaussian

distribution.

3.1.2 Distribution of the peaks 'P' of Mo(t)

T r a n s f o r m i n g to the G a u s s i a n model leads to a cumulative distribution
function Fp(m) of the peaks P in the form 7

Fp(m) = 1 - P I P > m l = 1 v(m) _ l - e -j/2"~ (20)

Vo
where v(m) a n d v0 are m e a n rate of crossing level m a n d zero,
respectively. The c o r r e s p o n d i n g probability density functionfp(m) of the
peaks is
dFe(m) _ dFe(m) du _ du e_l/2,,~ (21)
fp(m) - dm du dm u dm

3.1.3 Distribution of extreme peak 'E' in time duration T

The extreme peak E is defined as the m a x i m u m peak value of Mo(t) (one-
sided barrier) in a time duration T
 Reliability of jack-up platforms against overturning 215

E = max[Mo(t), 0<t<T}
The time T must be sufficiently short to ensure stationarity.
If the functiong(.) is monotonic in u, the conventional Poisson's model
for upcrossing gives
FE(m) = e -vl"}r (22)
where, from eqn (20), v ( m ) = roe -v2u:, i.e.
FE(m) = e x p l - v o T e x p ( - 1/2u2)1 (23)
Returning to eqn (15), the functiong(.) is assumed to have the polynomial
form (eqn (13)):
Mo = ao + a l U + a2U 2 + a3 U3 (24)
A specific realization m of the overturning moment can thus be written as
m = ao + a l u + a2 u2 + a3 u3 (25)

Solving (25) for u and retaining only the real solution, one obtains
u = [ - A + ~/A 2 + B] v 3 - [.4 + x / A 2 + B] v 3 - C (26)
where

C - 02
3a3

Z = C 3 - C 2~33 -~- a02a3-m (27)

B =
(;03-
The coefficients a~, a2 and a 3 depend on the significant wave height Hs.
Equation (23) for the cumulative distribution function of the extreme
overturning m o m e n t together with eqns (26) and (27) for u provide the
necessary input for formulating the reliability equations against
overturning, as will be discussed in the next section.

3.2 Probability of overturning

The limit state function G ( m ) describing the relation between the

moments tending to overturn the platform due to wave current and wind,
and that tending to stabilize it due to gravity, can be written in the form,
(see eqn (1)):
G ( m ) = Mr "ca - M,,, - Mo (28)
216 ~L Juncher Jensen, A. E. Mansour, P. Terndn~p Pedersen

where Mr, M w and M o are the restoring moment due to gravity, the wind
moment and the overturning moment due to waves and current,
respectively, c,s is a coefficient, given by eqn (2), to account for the effect of
the platform deflection on the restoring moment, i.e. the P--6 effect.
Negative G(m) as given by eqn (28) indicates a failure state where the
moments tending to overturn the platform are larger than those tending
to restore it. Then. the probability of overturning p~ is given by
p~ = P [ G ( m ) < 0] (29)
The cumulative distribution function of an extreme peak of the
overturning moment Mo is given by eqn (23) with u given by eqns (26) and
(27). The restoring moment M~ and the wind moment M,~ are assumed Io
be statistically independent and normally distributed with means/4 and
/1,, and standard deviation o.. and cr,~, respectively. The coefficient c~ is
assumed deterministic. Equation (28) can be rewritten as

G(m) = M~ - M,, (30)

where
M, = Mr'c,s - M~ (31)
M~ is thus normally distributed with mean ~
/1~ = /~r "c~ - ~, (32)

and variance o , 2
o-] = (or-c~)-" + o,, ~ (33)
The probabiliW of overturning becomes

p,, = P[M~ - M,, < O] = 1 - ~ Fr.:(m) f s ( m ) d m (34)

J~)

wherefs(.) is the probability density function of M~ (normal) and FE(.) is

given by eqn (23). Equation (34) can be written in a final form as

p,, = 1 - 1 ( -voTexp _u2 _ m - /& dm

2-7 J0 cr~ (35)

Notice that u is a function ofm and thus of the significant wave height H~.
/~ andos can be determined from eqns (32) and (33) respectively, in terms
of/4,/aw, Or and Ow. These latter quantities can be estimated from their
components using conventional first order second moment methods.
Since the restoring moment Mr is a product of a weight.F times the
 Reliabili~ of jack-up platforms against overturning 217

distance d of the center of gravity to the axis of rotation, then error

analysis gives
/Jr = ]'/FJ'/d (36)
and
err = flr(Vv + V~) w-' (37)
Similarly, assuming that the wind moment is proportional to the square
of the wind velocity, V and to the projected platform area A above the
water level, then
~r,v = ta,,.(V}, + 4Vv) j'2 (38)
where/1,~ is determined by evaluating Mw at the nominal (average) values
of its components. In the above equations V, represents the coefficient of
variation (c.o.v.) of the variable i.
Although eqn (35) and the above analysis reflect uncertainties in
several parameters, the drag coefficient CD is not one of them. It is well
known that scatter in data on the drag coefficient is large m and that the
overturning moment is a strong function Of CD. It is important therefore
to treat CD as an uncertain parameter with a specified distribution.
Since eqn (35) was developed for a specific value Of CD, the probability
of overturning computed by that equation must be considered as a
conditional probability of overturning given a specific value of CD. The
drag coefficient can then be varied according to a probability distribution
and the total probability of overturning is determined by integrating pc
over all values Of CD weighted by the probability of their occurrence. IfCD
is given a discrete distribution, then the total probability of overturning
Po is given by

Po = EP~i f (39)
i

where Pci is the conditional probability of overturning given a certain

value of CD as determined by (35) and,/,, is the probability of having that

value of CD. The f r e q u e n c y f are such that Z f = 1.

The quantity voT appearing in eqn (35) is equal to the n u m b e r of peaks

n of the overturning moment Mo, if it can be considered as a narrow-band
process. This is the case since in a narrow-band process each zero
crossing with a positive slope is followed by a positive peak. Thus VoTorn
depend on the time duration T the jack-up is exposed to the postulated
storm condition and will affect both Pc and Po- It should be emphasized
however, that the resulting total probability of overturning po is a
218 J. Juncher Jensen, A. E. Mansour, P Terndrup Pedersen

conditional probability; conditioned on the jack-up encountering the

postulated storm condition for the assumed duration T. This type of
analysis is usually called short-term analysis and the postulated storm
condition is determined from wave data at the site using a specified
return period.
In the long-term analysis on the other hand, one may compute the
unconditional probability of overturning during the entire duration of
operation of the platform at one site (several months or years). This
probability can be determined as the union of the events of overturning
in each sea state encountered during the operation of the platform as the
site (series system where a failure in any sea state constitutes a failure of
the platform). If the event of overturning in the ith sea state is F,, then the
long-term probability of overturning P/is
P~ = P(UF,) = 1 - P ( N S i ) (40)
I I

where Si is the event of 'no overturning' in the ith sea state, i.e. the
complementing event ofF,.. Here U and N are the union and intersection
symbols and i = 1, 2 . . . . . s, where s is the total n u m b e r of sea states.
Evaluation of (40) is difficult and requires information on the
dependence of all failure events in the different sea states. An upper
bound for Pt can be constructed however, if the events of overturning in
the different sea states are assumed statistically independent. This
assumption leads to the conservative b o u n d

p~ < 1 - I-I (1 - p,,g) (41)

where poi is the probability of overturning in the ith sea state.

The lower b o u n d for a series system is usually taken as the m a x i m u m
probability of failure a m o n g all events of failure and is based on the
assumption of full correlation between the events of failure. Here
however, the m a x i m u m probability of failure a m o n g the different sea
states depends on how the wave data are arranged in terms of increments
AHs of significant wave heights. This is because the probability of failure
may not always be highest for largest Hs since the associated ng may be too
small. It is therefore important to determine the significant wave height
Hs and the corresponding ni which gives the m a x i m u m probability of
failure or, by other means, eliminate the arbitrariness in selecting AH~
and n~.
To determine the significant wave height Hs and ni which give the
m a x i m u m probability of overturning is not an easy task and leads to a
rather complicated expression. An easier criterion to handle is one in
 Reliability of jack-up platforms against overturning 219

which the most probable extreme value of the wave amplitude is

maximized rather than the probability of failure. Indeed, the most
probable extreme value of the wave amplitude depends on both Hs and n~
and should give results that correspond closely to maximizing the
probability of failure.
The distribution of the wave amplitudes in any stationary sea
condition with n peaks is described by a Rayleigh distribution. In the
long term analysis it is assumed that the significant wave height H~
follows a Weibull distribution with shape parameter p and scale
parameter kw. This leads to the following expression for the long term
most probable extreme wave amplitude h N in s different sea conditions
each with n peaks

hN -~ ~ hw(ln s)l/r(21n n) I/2 (42)

Assuming that n = N/s where N is the total number of wave peaks during
the operation of the jack-up platform at a site, and differentiating eqn
(42) with respect to s and equating it to zero lead to the following simple
expressions for s and n
S = N 2/~p + 2) (43)
and
n = Np/~p + 2t (44)

The most probable extreme wave amplitude can be determined by

substituting (43) and (44) in (42) and is then expected to occur in a sea
state described by a significant wave height Hs
2 tip
H~ = k w ~ + 2 1 n N ] (45)

Equations (44) and (45) provide the sea state Hs and the number of peaks
n to be used in determining a probability of overturning which can be
considered as a lower bound for the long-term analysis. This will be
discussed further in the application example of Section 4.
One last remark regarding the long-term analysis. For more realistic
estimates of the bounds, it is important to include the directionality of the
main train of waves with respect to the platform. Unlike the short-term
analysis where only the 'worst' wave direction is considered, the long-
term analysis must be realistically based on a variety of sea conditions
and wave directions estimated from data at the site. The long-term
variation of the main wave direction is taken into account using a
formula equivalent to eqn (39).
220 J. Juncher Jensen, A. E. Mansour. P. Terndrup Pedersen

4 APPLICATION

In order to illustrate the application of the procedure described in the

preceding sections, the following example is considered. In addition, the
example serves to relate the safety factor ~" currently used in design
against overturning to the probability of overturning (failure). A
sensitivity analysis of the probability of overturning to several design
parameters is also given in the last section of this application.

4.1 The jack-up platform

The rig considered here is an independent three leg sell-elevating

cantilever mobile offshore drilling platform. Its main characteristics are:
Dimensions
Distance between forward and aft legs 40 m
Distance between aft legs 40 m
Leg length 120 m
Distance between leg chord centres 11 m
Bay height 6m
Distance between lower and upper guide 11 m
Wind area 1200 m ~
Masses (1 t = 1000 kg)
Hull lightship including cantilever 5200 t
Legs including spud cans 750 t
Variable loads:
m e a n value (50% variable load) 900 t
standard deviation i 50 t
Distance between center-of-gravity and overturning axis:
mean value 11.0 in
standard deviation 0.5 m
The effective vertical stiffness of the elevating system is 1.2 10 ~ N/m
for the pinions on one chord. The upper guide tower is assumed rigid
relative to the hull.
In the structural modelling, each leg is modelled by seven equivalent
beam elements. The sectional properties of these beam elements are
calculated as described in Section 2 from the dimensions of the chord
and bracing system. For the present jack-up, the segment properties for
all leg elements are nearly equal. Typical values are:
Bending stiffness 1.4 10 ~2N m 2
Shear stiffness 1.5 l0 9 N
 Reliability of jack-up platforms against overturning 221

Axial stiffness 6 X 10 ~ N
Effective drag coefficient 3-1
(based on Co = 0.7 for tubular members)
Effective inertia coefficient 2.0
C o r r e s p o n d i n g diameter 1.4m
The design survival condition for the present jack-up is:
Water depth 90m
Air gap llm
Wave height (Stoke's 5th) 13-4 m
Surface current 0-8 m/s
Bottom current 0.2 m/s
W i n d velocity (1 m i n mean) 42 m/s
Penetration (all legs) 5m
A deterministic structural analysis using the design survival condition
a n d the characteristic values
F c = 64.25 M N
d c = 10m
for the weight a n d distance from center-of-gravity to axis of overturning,
respectively, yields the overturning m o m e n t s
M~ = 2 8 5 M N m and M~w = 1 7 0 M N m
a n d a deck sway
u~ = 1.15m
Then, from eqns (1), c~ = 0.885 a n d the safety factor y = 1.25.

4.2 Probability of overturning, the safety index and the safety factor
As described in Section 2, the following values for the coefficients in eqn
(13) were d e t e r m i n e d for the jack-up u n d e r consideration
a0 = 7.7 al = 18-367(Hs/4)
a2 = 1"88(HJ4) 2 a3 = 0"2568 (HJ4) 3
All as have d i m e n s i o n s of m o m e n t , M N m. Using these values in eqns
(27) a n d (26) result in an explicit equation for u in terms of m, which can
be inserted in eqn (35) to evaluate the conditional probability of
overturning for a given value of CD. The values o f the other parameters
a p p e a r i n g in eqn (35) are calculated as follows.
A s s u m i n g that the overturning m o m e n t is a n a r r o w - b a n d process, roT
is equal to the n u m b e r of peaks n. The design wave height 13.4 m is
222 J. Juncher Jensen, A. E. Mansour. P. Terndrup Pedersen

a s s u m e d to c o r r e s p o n d to the expected m a x i m u m wave height in o n e

t h o u s a n d peaks (n = 1000) in a sea state of significant wave height
H~ = 7.0m.
Based o n the data given in Section 4.1, the r e m a i n i n g p a r a m e t e r s
a p p e a r i n g in e q n (35), i.e.,/~ a n d cr~ are calculated from eqns (32), (33),
(36), (37) a n d (38) using
/~F = 67.2 M N V~- = 0.022
/.t,l = l l m ~t = 0.045
Vv = 0.05 VA = 0"05
This leads to
~r = 7 3 9 M N m Vr = 0-0501
Pw = 1 7 0 M N m Vw = 0-1118
p~ = 4 8 4 M N m a~ = 3 7 . 8 8 M N m
E q u a t i o n (35) was integrated n u m e r i c a l l y with the values given above
yielding the c o n d i t i o n a l probability o f overturning, c o n d i t i o n e d o n the
drag coefficient CD. Based on statistical analysis of data on CD (Kim &
Hibbardl), CD for t u b u l a r m o m e n t s was a s s u m e d to be n o r m a l l y
distributed with m e a n lac~, = 0.61 a n d a coefficient of variation Vc,, =
24%. E q u a t i o n (39) was t h e n used to calculate the total probability o f
overturning. For c o m p a r i s o n , similar c o m p u t a t i o n s were carried out for
~Cl, = 0.7 with Vc,, = 0%.
In o r d e r to relate the total probability o f o v e r t u r n i n g p o to the factor o f
safety ?', see eqns (1), ~ was varied a n d the c o r r e s p o n d i n g Po was
calculated. This was d o n e by varying the significant wave height H~ a n d
thus the c o r r e s p o n d i n g deterministic wave height H.
Two curves for the probability of failure are s h o w n in Fig. 4, o n e for
~c,, = 0.61, Vc,, = 24% a n d the o t h e r for/J(,,, = 0"7, Vc~, = 0%. T h e two
curves cross each o t h e r indicating that in the high probability range
(10 -~) the influence o f increasing the m e a n of Cr) is m o r e i m p o r t a n t t h a n
decreasing the coefficient o f variation o f Cir. In the lower probability
range, the reverse is true, i.e. c h a n g e in the coefficient of variation has a
large i m p a c t o n the probability of overturning.
It is seen that the design c o n d i t i o n H = 13.4 m with y = 1-25 yields a
c o r r e s p o n d i n g probability o f o v e r t u r n i n g equal to 1.0 10 -2 a n d
0.6 10 -2 for the two cases considered.
As seen from Fig. 4, the probability of o v e r t u r n i n g is extremely
sensitive to the sea state. This h i g h sensitivity is m o s t likely b e c a u s e the
o v e r t u r n i n g m o m e n t Mo is highly n o n - l i n e a r with respect to the wave
height a n d increases rapidly with it.
 Reliability of jack-up platforms against overturning 223

,5 ,, la 12 1, H(m)
7.7g 7.27 . 6:7s ~3 ~.71 H s ( rn )
Po
. I.l.Co- 0.61 , Vco 24 %
10-'
~ _ _ : ~CD =0.7 , Vc =0 %
O

Desiqn point

:0-:

!\
\
\
\
10-3,
\
\
\
\
\
\
\
10-4
1.0 1.1

Fig. 4. Probability of overturning Po versus the deterministic safety factor y, the

significant wave height Hs and the deterministic wave height H.

For the case w i t h p c , = 0-61, Vc~ = 24%, the safety indexfl = - ~ - ~ (Po)
a n d the safety factor y are s h o w n in Fig. 5 as a function of the significant
wave height H~. Both curves show a nearly linear d e p e n d e n c e with Hs,
but with different slopes. The m a i n reason for the low values of }"
obtained is the use of a low characteristic value for the restoring m o m e n t
M c w h e n evaluating I/.

4.3 Sensitivity analysis

The influence of changes in the design parameters on the probability of

failure was c o n s i d e r e d next. For this purpose, the design limit with
~" = 1.25 was taken as the standard case a n d changes were c o m p a r e d
relative to it.
The deterministic wave height c o r r e s p o n d i n g to ~,-- 1.25 is 13.4 m
which corresponds to a significant wave height of 7.0 m. The values for
224 J. Juncher Jensen, A. E. Mansour, P Terndrup Pedersen

[3~y

.. /_Design point

2.0,

,.ot I

0.5 t .L
5 6 7 8

HS (m)

Fig. 5. Variation of the deterministic safety factor )' and the safety index /3 with
significant wave height H~.

the standard case forpr, V,/~w, VwandPcr,. V~.,,were taken as calculated in

Section 4.2, and are shown in the first row of Table 2.
These parameters were then varied individually by 10% to examine
their effect on the probability of overturning. The results given in Table 2
show that the means of the restoring moment ~r and the drag coefficient
Pco have a marked effect on the probability of overturning. In general, the
influence of the means of the design variables are more important than

TABLE 2
Sensitivity of the Probability of Overturning to Design Parameters

p, Vr It, V, Its. ~ p,,

(MN m) (%) (MN m) (%) (%)

739 5.01 170 11.18 0.61 24 1.02 X 10--'

739 5.01 170 11.18 0.61 21-6 0-79 X 10 --~
739 5.01 170 11-18 0.55 24 0.36 X 10 --2
739 5.01 170 10.06 0.61 24 1.00 X 10--'
739 5.01 153 11.18 0.61 24 (}-70 10 --~
739 4.51 170 11.18 0.61 24 0.97 X 10 ~
813 5.01 170 11.18 0-61 24 0.27 X 10 -2
 Reliability of jack-up platforms against overturning 225

their coefficients of variation in this high probability range. Significantly,

the mean of Co is very important for the probability of overturning and
must be considered further since, unlike the mean of the restoring
moment/Jr, it is not easily controlled. For this reason, Fig. 6 shows the
change in the probability of overturning with the mean of CD. As seen,
several orders of magnitude change in the probability of overturning
take place for a relatively small change in the mean value Of CD, from 0.5
to 0.8. Note that the coefficient of variation ot'Cr~ is taken as 10% in this
figure.

4.4 Long-term analysis

For the long-term analysis, the jack-up platform was assumed to operate
in the Baltic Sea at a location where wave statistics were available./~ The
distributions of the significant wave height given for Marsden area 5
were plotted on a Weibull paper and the long-term Weibull parameters
were estimated. The shape parameterp and the scale parameter hw were
determined to be p = 1.29 and hw = 1.2 m.
10"1
Po Hs = 700m

~6 2. Design point
(y= ~.25)

,(;3 it, :739MNm. V, =0.0501

12w =ITOMNm. Vw:0.1118
Vco=0.10

o.s o:~ o'.~ o;a la%

Fig. 6. I n f l u e n c e o f the actual m e a n value of the drag coefficient on the probability o f

o v e r t u r n i n g for a design based on C D = 0.7, y = 1.25.
226 J Juncher Jensen, A. E. Mansour, P Terndrup Pedersen

Due to the limited fetch at that location, the m a x i m u m significant

wave height was estimated to be Hs = 8.0 m according to the method
described in Mitsuyasu)= It was also assumed that the platform is
scheduled to operate at that location for a period of 1 year with total
n u m b e r of wave peaks N = 107. Significant wave height increments
AHs = 0.5 m were used to construct the individual sea states. The
corresponding n u m b e r of wave peaks n in each sea state was calculated
from the Weibull distribution.
These values are shown in Table 3 together with the probability of
overturning Po for the two sets of values considered earlier for CD. The
directionality of the long-crested waves with respect to the platform was
taken into account in computing the probability of overturning Po-
The upper b o u n d on the long-term probability of failure pt calculated
according to eqn (41) are
P/ = 9 X 10 -3 for Pc,~ = 0.61. VcD = 24%
and
Pt = 6 X 10 - 3 for Pc,, = 0.70, Vc,, = 0%
From Table 3 the lower b o u n d for the probability of overturning can be
taken as the m a x i m u m probability ofoverturningpo, a m o n g the different
sea states. In this application example, the m a x i m u m Po~ occurred at the
m a x i m u m significant wave height, thus, the long-term probabilities of
failure P / a r e b o u n d e d by
4X lO-3<pl<9X 10 .3 for Pc,, = 0"61, Vc,, = 24%

TABLE 3
Probabilities of Overturning at a Site in the Baltic Sea

Hdm) n, lacr, = 0.61, Vcp = 24% I~(o = O. 7, Vc~ = 0%

P,,i Po/

<3.0 9 616 475 < 1 0 - ~-~ < 10- t-~

3.0-3.5 196 361 3 10 -L" < 10 -I-~
3.5-4.0 98 564 2 X l 0 -9 2 X 10- 12
4-0-4.5 47 803 2 X 10 7 1 10 -~
4.5-5.0 22 483 4 X 10 ~ I X 10-:
5.0-5.5 10 284 4 X 10 -~ 4 X 10 ~'
5-5-6.0 4 586 2 X 10 -4 4 X 10 -~
6.0-6.5 1 997 8 X 10 -4 2 x 10 4
6-5-7.0 851 2 X 10 -3 8 x 10 -7
7-0-7-5 355 3 X 10 ~ 2 x 10 -~
7.5-8.0 145 4 10 -3 3 X 10 -3
 Reliability of jack-up platforms against overturning 227

and
3 10 -3 <Pt < 6 10 -3 for PCD = 0"70, Vco = 0%
The criterion described in Section 3.2 was also used to estimate a lower
b o u n d for the probability of overturning. The values o f p and hw for the
Weibull distribution of the significant wave height were substituted in
eqns (44) and (45) (with N = 107) t o give
Hs = 7.039m and n = 555
These values were then used to determine the probability of overturning
Po for the two sets of Co values
po = 3 X 10 -3 for Pc,, = 0.61, VcD = 24%
and
Po = 2 X 10 -3 for /JCo = 0.70, Vc,, = 0%
The estimate of the lower b o u n d using this criterion is thus slightly lower
than the lower b o u n d found from Table 3.
In order to examine the effect of including the directionality of the
long-crested waves with respect to the platform, the previous calculations
were repeated, but using only the wave heading which gives the largest
value of the overturning moment. The resulting upper and lower bounds
then become
9 x 10 -3 <pt < 24 X 10 .3 for PCD = 0"61, Vc,, = 24%
and
8 X 10 -3 < P t < 15 10 -3 for ~c, = 0.70, Vco = 0%
which are about 2-5 times larger than the previously obtained bounds.

5 CONCLUSION

The probability distributions of the non-linear overturning m o m e n t

acting on a jack-up platform were determined using a functional
transformation of a standard Gaussian process. In particular, the
extreme distribution was developed and used in the reliability formulation
to determine the probability of overtuming. Short- and long-term
analysis procedures were developed to assess the safety of a platform
during a specified storm or during its total operation period at a site.
Bounds on the long-term probability of overturning were also constructed.
The procedure was illustrated by application to an actual jack-up
228 J. Juncher Jensen, A. E. Mansour, P Terndrup Pedersen

platform assumed to operate in the Baltic Sea at a water depth of 90 m.

The results of this application indicate that the probability of over-
turning is extremely sensitive to the sea state as shown in Figs 4 and 5.
This high sensitivity is most likely because the overturning moment is
highly non-linear with respect to the wave height and increases rapidly
with it.
A sensitivity analysis of the probability of overturning due to changes
in the design parameters as well as in the distribution parameters was
conducted (Table 2). The results showed that the mean value of the
restoring moment and the mean value of the drag coefficient have a large
influence on the probability of overturning. Unlike the restoring
moment, the scatter in the drag coefficient data is high and its value is not
easily controlled during the operation of a platform. Figure 6 shows the
variation of probability of overturning with the mean value of the drag
coefficient and indicates that the drag coefficient is a crucial parameter
in the design of jack-up platforms.
The long-term analysis (Table 3) showed that the contribution of lower
sea states to the long-term probability of overturning is very small. This
points out that the short-term analysis and the selection of a design storm
condition are important considerations in design for extreme conditions.
while long-term analysis is more suitable for fatigue evaluation.

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT

The research work presented in this paper was partially sponsored by

The Danish Research Council in the form of support to the second
author during a sabbatical leave at the Technical University of
Denmark. This support is gratefully acknowledged.

REFERENCES

1. Odland, J., Response and strength analysis of jack-up platforms. Norwegian

Maritime Research, No. 4, (1982) pp. 2-25.
2. Winterstein, S. R., Nonlinear vibration models for extremes and fatigue.
J. Engng Mech., 114(10) (1988) 1772-90.
3. Haver, S., On the relative importance of various load mechanisms regarding
an idealized jackup. Internal Report, Department of Civil Engineering,
Stanford University, 1989.
4. Kjeoy, H., Boe, N. G. & Hysing, T., Extreme-response of jack-up platforms.
Proc. Second lnt. Conference on the Jack-Up Drilling Platform. J. Mar. Struct.,
2(3-5) (1989) 305-34.
 Reliability of jack-up platforms against overturning 229

5. Caughey, T. K., Equivalent linearization techniques. J. Acoust. Soc. Amer.,

35(11) (1963) 1706-11.
6. Longuet-Higgins, M. S., The effect of non-linearities on statistical distri-
butions in the theory of sea waves. J. Fluid Mech., 17 (1963) 459-80.
7. Madsen, H. O., Krenk, S. & Lind, N. C., Methods of Structural Safety. Prentice
Hall, Englewood Cliffs, N.J., 1986.
8. Jensen, J. J., Madsen, H. O. & Pedersen, P. T., The effect of a non-linear wave
force model on the reliability of a jack-up platform. Proc. IFIP Working
Conference on Reliability and Optimization of Structural Systems, eds P. Thoft-
Christensen & A. Der Kiureghian. Springer-Verlag, Berlin, 1990.
9. Olufsen, A., Karunakaran, D., Moan, T. & Nordal, H., Uncertainty and
sensitivity analysis of wave and current induced extreme load effects in
offshore structures. 8th OMAE, Vol II, (1989) pp. 23-30.
10. Kim, Y. K. & Hibbard, H. C., Analysis of simultaneous wave force and water
particle velocity measurements. OTC paper no. 2192, Proc. Offshore
Technology Conference, 1975.
11. Hogben, N., Dacunha, N. M. C. & Olliver, G. F., Global Wave Statistics.
British Maritime Technology Ltd, UK, 1986.
12. Mitsuyasu, H., Recent studies on ocean wave spectra. Proc. the XVth
International Congress of Theoretical and Applied Mechanics, North-Holland,
Amsterdam, 1985.