1

GTG PLATFORM ANALYSIS REPORT

 TABLE OF CONTENT

1.  INTRODUCTION .................................................................................................. 3 

1.1  OBJECTIVES ......................................................................................................... 3 
1.2  DESIGN METHODOLOGY .................................................................................... 3 
2.  CODES AND STANDARDS .................................................................................... 3 
2.1  PROJECT DOCUMENTS ........................................................................................ 3 
2.2  EUROCODES AND APPLICABLE STANDARDS......................................................... 3 
3.  STRUCTURAL MODEL ........................................................................................... 3 
3.1  GENERAL ............................................................................................................. 3 
3.1.1  Global Axis System ................................................................................................ 3 
3.2  MATERIAL PROPERTIES .......................................................................................... 5 
3.3  BOUNDARY CONDITIONS ................................................................................... 5 
3.4  MEMBER PROPERTIES ............................................................................................ 6 
4.  LOADING ............................................................................................................ 6 
4.1  DEAD LOAD ......................................................................................................... 6 
4.1.1  Grating Load ........................................................................................................ 7 
4.1.2  Handrail Load ...................................................................................................... 7 
4.1.3  Piping (Dry) Load .................................................................................................. 7 
4.1.4  Equipment (Dry) Load ............................................................................................ 7 
4.2  LIVE LOAD............................................................................................................ 7 
4.2.1  Platform Load ....................................................................................................... 7 
4.2.2  Ladder Load ......................................................................................................... 7 
4.2.3  Piping (Operating) Load ........................................................................................ 7 
4.2.4  Equipment (Operating) Load ................................................................................. 7 
4.3  WIND LOAD ......................................................................................................... 8 
4.4  LOAD COMBINATIONS ...................................................................................... 11 
5.  COMPUTER ANALYSIS RESULTS........................................................................... 12 
5.1  SUPPORT REACTION SUMMARY.......................................................................... 12 
5.1.1  Serviceability Limit State ....................................................................................... 12 
5.1.2  Ultimate Limit State ............................................................................................. 12 
5.1.3  Member Deflection Limit Computation ................................................................. 12 
5.1.4  Member Stress Check (Unity Ratio) ....................................................................... 12 
6.  CONCLUSION ................................................................................................... 12 
1. INTRODUCTION
1.1 OBJECTIVES
The objective of this analysis and design report is to:
• Design a suitable structural steel platform to support the GTG Utility Systems.
• Ensure that all structural elements satisfy code check requirements in accordance
with Eurocodes and are adequate for Serviceability Limit State and Ultimate Limit
State conditions.
1.2 DESIGN METHODOLOGY
The structural analysis of the proposed platform was performed using STAAD.Pro V8i
structural analysis software in line with factors, loads and parameters defined in the
relevant sections of Eurocodes and other applicable project specifications.
Applied loads were computed with the use of Microsoft Excel. The basic load cases and
load combinations with accompanying partial factors of safety were applied as defined in
EN 1993 and other applicable standards. The Limit State design approach was used to
perform the design for the structure.
The structural configuration and members were checked for various basic load cases and
load combinations including self-weight, imposed, piping, equipment and wind loads.
2. CODES AND STANDARDS
2.1 PROJECT DOCUMENTS
T-xxxxxxx SR.17.xxxxx Project Basis for Design
Single Line Drawings, Stress Analysis &
T-xxxxxxxxxxxxx P000-Gxxxxxxxxx
Loads, Utility Systems – GTG Structures
2.2 EUROCODES AND APPLICABLE STANDARDS
Eurocode 1: Actions on Structures - Part 1-4: General actions -
EN 1991-1-4
Wind actions
Eurocode 3: Design of Steel Structures – Part 1-1: General Rules
EN 1993-1-1
and Rules for Buildings
GFS IG 34.85.02 Loading for Onshore LNG Facilities
3. STRUCTURAL MODEL
3.1 GENERAL
The proposed GTG platform structure was modelled in STAAD.Pro v8i, SELECT series 6
as an open steel framed structure. The structure is made of primary and secondary
beams, with diagonal braces. The entire surface of the platform, supporting the Gas
Turbine Equipment GTG 13-S-400 at EL. 107920, shall be covered with grating.
Also, the proposed platform is designed to support some 2” and 6” piping spools which
are to be supported beneath the platform.
3.1.1 Global Axis System
The model global axis system is as follows:
• +X axis in the longitudinal direction
• +Y axis in the vertical direction
• +Z axis in the transverse direction
Fig. 3.1: Isometric View

Fig. 3.2: Elevation

 Fig. 3.3: Plan
3.2 MATERIAL PROPERTIES
The basic material properties used in the steel structural analysis and design are as
follows:
Steel grade S275
Yield strength 275 N/mm2
Young modulus of steel 210000 N/mm2
Poison ratio 0.3
Steel density 7850 kg/m3
Shear modulus, G 0.81 x 105 N/mm2

3.3 BOUNDARY CONDITIONS

The structural model was fixed at all support points.

Fig. 3.4: Boundary Condition

 Table 3.1: Structure boundary conditions
Support/Node Translation Rotation
Number Fx Fy Fz Mx My Mz
1 1 1 1 1 1 1
2 1 1 1 1 1 1
3 1 1 1 1 1 1
4 1 1 1 1 1 1
5 1 1 1 1 1 1
6 1 1 1 1 1 1
7 1 1 1 1 1 1
8 1 1 1 1 1 1
9 1 1 1 1 1 1
10 1 1 1 1 1 1
11 1 1 1 1 1 1
12 1 1 1 1 1 1
13 1 1 1 1 1 1
14 1 1 1 1 1 1
Free condition = 0 Fixed condition = 1

3.4 MEMBER PROPERTIES

Section properties were taken directly from the section library available in STAAD.Pro V8i.
Table 3.2: Member Properties
Member ID Profile Material Structural component
R1 PLATE 2.5mm Steel Grating
R2 UB 203 x 133 x 30 Steel Beams
R3 UC 203 x 203 x 46 Steel Columns
R4 UA 100 x 100 x 10 Steel Diagonal bracing

4. LOADING
4.1 DEAD LOAD
The structural dead loads consist of structure self-weight of the platform and other non-
modelled loads. Self-weight of the frame structure was automatically generated by
STAAD.Pro computer program.
Table 4.1: Dead Loads
Basic Load Case
Sym. Basic Load Cases
Actions No.
1 SLW Structure Self weight (-Y direction)
2 GRL Grating Load
DEAD
3 HRL Handrail Load
DL
4 PVD Piping Load (Dry)
5 EQD Equipment (Dry)
4.1.1 Grating Load

Steel density ρ = 7850 kg/m3

Galvanised grating (30x5mm) pg = 19 kg/m2
Steel plate thickness (STAAD.Pro) t = 2.5 mm
Pressure load due to plate ps = ρ x t = 19.6 kg/m2
ps > pg, therefore safe to assume grating load as pressure load due to 2.5mm thk plate.
4.1.2 Handrail Load
Applied handrail load of 0.25 kN/m was used for the analysis of the platform.
4.1.3 Piping (Dry) Load
Int. Area OD Pipe Lt Vol Unit Wt Piping Wt DRY OPR SLIP
Line Size
[mm2] [mm] [mm] [m3] [kg/m] [kg] [kN] [kN] [kN]
6" 3595.0 168.28 6000 0.022 28.23 169.38 1.69 0.22 0.055
2" 693.0 60.33 6000 0.004 5.44 32.64 0.33 0.04 0.010

4.1.4 Equipment (Dry) Load

Based on technical data on CamGT4V-300, a total weight of 384.75 kN was assumed to
be exerted over the platform area of 66.8 m2.
Let Equipment (Dry) load = ⅔ of total weight = 256.5 kN
Therefore, applied load = 256.5/66.8 = 3.84 kN/m2
4.2 LIVE LOAD
Table 4.2: Live Loads
Basic Load Case
Sym. Basic Load Cases
Actions No.
6 FPL Platform Load
LIVE 7 LLV Ladder Load (Live)
LL 8 PVO Piping Load (Operating) + 25% Friction Load
9 EQO Equipment Load (Operating)
4.2.1 Platform Load
Based on Table 5.1 of GFS IG 34.85.02, a platform load of 2.9 kN/m2 was applied on
the structure.
4.2.2 Ladder Load
Fixed ladder load 1.3 kN was distributed at the four possible support points with respect
to the height under consideration.
4.2.3 Piping (Operating) Load
Spools were assumed to be filled with water, and 25% of the operating load was attributed
to slip/frictional force in the direction of flow (see Table 7.1 of GFS IG 34.85.02).
Int. Area OD Pipe Lt Vol Unit Wt Piping Wt DRY OPR SLIP
Line Size
[mm2] [mm] [mm] [m3] [kg/m] [kg] [kN] [kN] [kN]
6" 3595.0 168.28 6000 0.022 28.23 169.38 1.69 0.22 0.055
2" 693.0 60.33 6000 0.004 5.44 32.64 0.33 0.04 0.010

4.2.4 Equipment (Operating) Load

Based on technical data on CamGT4V-300, a total weight of 384.75 kN was assumed to
be exerted over the platform area of 66.8 m2.
 Let Equipment (Operating) load = ⅓ of total weight = 128.25 kN
Therefore, applied load = 128.25/66.8 = 1.92 kN/m2
4.3 WIND LOAD
Table 4.3: Wind Loads
Basic Load Case
Sym. Basic Load Cases
Actions No.
WIND (X) 10 WX+ Wind Load on +X direction
WX 11 WX- Wind Load on -X direction
WIND (Z) 12 WZ+ Wind Load on +Z direction
WZ 13 WZ- Wind Load on -Z direction
Below is a computation of the wind loads which were applied on four distinct directions:
 REFERENCE CALCULATIONS OUTPUT

Table 7-1, BfD Maximum mean hourly wind velocity at 10m above ground level, vb,0 = 20.4 m/s
Sec. 4.3.1, EN
Orography factor, co(z) = 1.0
1991-1-4
How to approximate Convert 3 second gust wind speed to 10 minutes mean wind velocity
Wind velocities at
v3/v3600 = 1.52
roof level, by Phil
Dregger (Fig. 3) v600/v3600 = 1.06

v600 = (v600/v3600) * (v3600/v3) * v3 = 14.23 m/s

Basic wind speed (vb) = v600 = 14.23 m/s

Season factor, cseason = 1.0

Directional factor, cdir = 1.0

z0 = 0.05 m

zmin = 2 m
Eqn. 4.1, EN 1991-
vb = cdir*cseason*vb,0 = 20.4 m/s
1-4
Density of air, ρ = 1.25 kg/m3
Eqn. 4.10, EN
Basic wind pressure, qb = 0.5ρvb2 = 0.260 kN/m2
1991-1-4
Fig. 4.2, EN 1991-
Exposure factor (Reference height of 3m & Terrain Category O), ce(z) = 3.0
1-4
Eqn. 4.8, EN 1991-
Peak velocity pressure at height, z, above terrain; qp(z) = ce(z)*qb = 0.780 kN/m2
1-4
Sec. 6.0, EN 1991-
Structural factor, cscd = [1 + 2kpIv(zs)√(B2+R2)]/[(1+7Iv(zs)]
1-4
Reference height, zs = 3 m

Peak factor, kp = 1.0

Eqn. 4.5, EN 1991-
Terrain factor, kr = 0.19(z0/z0,II)0.07 = 0.2460
1-4
Roughness factor, Cr(z) = kr*Ln(z/zo) 0.9

Mean wind velocity, vm(z) = cr(z)*co(z)*vb = 12.9 m/s

Turbulence factor, kl = 1.0
Eqn. 4.6, EN 1991-
Standard deviation of turbulence, σv = kr*vb*kl = 5.018
1-4
Eqn. 4.7, EN 1991-
Turbulence intensity, Iv = σv/vm(z) = 0.389
1-4

Appendix B.3, EN Background factor, B2 = 1.0

1991-1-4 Resonance response factor, R2 = 1.0
2 2
Structural factor, cscd = [1 + 2kpIv(zs)√(B +R )]/[(1+7Iv(zs)] = 0.469
Eqn. 5.3, EN 1991-
Wind force, Fw = cscd*cf*qp(ze)*Aref =
1-4
Where, qp (z) = (1 + 7 . Iv (z)). 1/2 . ρ . V2m (z)

Elev. (z) z/z0,II kr In(z/z0) cr(z) vm = cr(z)*vb σv = kr*vb*kl Iv = σv/vm qp [N/m2]

1.00 20 0.234 2.996 0.702 9.99 3.33 0.334 208.0

2.00 40 0.246 3.689 0.907 12.91 3.50 0.271 301.8

3.00 60 0.253 4.094 1.036 14.74 3.60 0.244 368.0

3.96 79.2 0.258 4.372 1.128 16.05 3.67 0.229 418.7

 4.00 80 0.258 4.382 1.131 16.10 3.67 0.228 420.6

5.00 100 0.262 4.605 1.208 17.18 3.73 0.217 465.0

6.00 120 0.266 4.787 1.272 18.09 3.78 0.209 503.7

7.00 140 0.269 4.942 1.327 18.88 3.82 0.202 538.2

7.92 158.4 0.271 5.065 1.372 19.52 3.85 0.197 567.1

8.00 160 0.271 5.075 1.376 19.57 3.86 0.197 569.5

9.00 180 0.273 5.193 1.419 20.19 3.89 0.193 598.2

10.00 200 0.275 5.298 1.459 20.75 3.92 0.189 624.7

10.22 204.4 0.276 5.320 1.467 20.87 3.92 0.188 630.3

11.00 220 0.277 5.394 1.495 21.27 3.94 0.185 649.5

12.00 240 0.279 5.481 1.528 21.74 3.97 0.182 672.8

12.52 250.4 0.280 5.523 1.545 21.98 3.98 0.181 684.3

13.00 260 0.280 5.561 1.559 22.18 3.99 0.180 694.7

14.00 280 0.282 5.635 1.588 22.60 4.01 0.177 715.5

14.82 296.4 0.283 5.692 1.611 22.92 4.03 0.176 731.8

15.00 300 0.283 5.704 1.616 22.98 4.03 0.175 735.3

16.00 320 0.285 5.768 1.641 23.35 4.05 0.173 754.2

17.00 340 0.286 5.829 1.666 23.69 4.06 0.172 772.3

17.12 342.4 0.286 5.836 1.668 23.73 4.07 0.171 774.4

18.00 360 0.287 5.886 1.689 24.02 4.08 0.170 789.6

Wind Load

Unit Aref Wind Force on Elevations, Fw [kN/m]

Element D [mm] cf
[m2] 3.96m 7.92m 10.22m 12.52m 14.82m 17.12m

UB203X30 206.8 2.0 0.2068 0.081 0.110 0.122 0.133 0.142 0.150

UC203X46 203.6 2.0 0.2036 0.080 0.108 0.120 0.131 0.140 0.148

L100x100x10 100 2.0 0.10 0.039 0.053 0.059 0.064 0.069 0.073
 11

4.4 LOAD COMBINATIONS

LOAD COMB. BASIC LOAD CASE NUMBER
COMBINATION NBR. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13
DEAD LOAD - DL LIVE LOAD - LL WIND - WX WIND - WZ
W(- W(-
SLW GRL HRL PVD EQD FPL LLV PVO EQO W(+X) W(+Z)
X) Z)
101 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0
102 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0
1.0DL + 1.0WL
103 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0
SLS 104 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0
201 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0DL + 1.0LL
301 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 0.6
302 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 0.6
1.0DL + 1.0LL + 1.0WL
303 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 0.6
304 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 0.6
401 1.35 1.35 1.35 1.35 1.35 1.5
402 1.35 1.35 1.35 1.35 1.35 1.5
1.35DL + 1.5WL
403 1.35 1.35 1.35 1.35 1.35 1.5
404 1.35 1.35 1.35 1.35 1.35 1.5
501 1.35 1.35 1.35 1.35 1.35 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.35DL + 1.5LL
601 1.35 1.35 1.35 1.35 1.35 1.05 1.05 1.05 1.05 1.5
ULS 602 1.35 1.35 1.35 1.35 1.35 1.05 1.05 1.05 1.05 1.5
1.35DL + 1.05LL + 1.35WL
603 1.35 1.35 1.35 1.35 1.35 1.05 1.05 1.05 1.05 1.5
604 1.35 1.35 1.35 1.35 1.35 1.05 1.05 1.05 1.05 1.5
701 1.35 1.35 1.35 1.35 1.35 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 0.9
702 1.35 1.35 1.35 1.35 1.35 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 0.9
1.35DL + 1.5LL + 0.9WL
703 1.35 1.35 1.35 1.35 1.35 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 0.9
704 1.35 1.35 1.35 1.35 1.35 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 0.9
 12
5. COMPUTER ANALYSIS RESULTS
5.1 SUPPORT REACTION SUMMARY
5.1.1 Serviceability Limit State

5.1.2 Ultimate Limit State

5.1.3 Member Deflection Limit Computation

Table 5.1: Member Deflection Check
Structural Load Length Relative Allowable
Direction Member Criteria Remark
component Case [mm] ∆ [mm] ∆ [mm]
Beam Vertical 71 304 1538 0.87 L/300 5.13 OK
Column Horizontal 237 302 2300 0.40 H/600 3.83 OK

5.1.4 Member Stress Check (Unity Ratio)

Table 5.2: Member Stress Check
Member Description Section Member Max. UC Load Case Remark
Beam UB 203 x 133 x 30 115 0.887 704 OK
Column UC 203 x 203 x 46 105 0.375 702 OK
Diagonal Bracing UA 100 x 100 x 10 132 0.266 703 OK

6. CONCLUSION
Analysis and design results show that the general configuration of GTG platform is satisfactory.
Member stress limits are not exceeded in accordance with the reference codes and standards.