FRINK Linked Data Fragments server

Matches in SemOpenAlex for { <https://semopenalex.org/work/W2079756850> ?p ?o ?g. }

• W2079756850 abstract "ABSTRACT The improvement in techniques and data used to define seismic exposure has resulted in redefinition of the seismic demand for many existing structures. Maintaining these structures for continued safe operation will require structural reassessment for seismic conditions. This paper presents the details ofa seismic reassessment of Maui A, an existing platform located off the west coast of New Zealand. Redefinition of seismic criteria for a new satellite platform resulted in a reevaluation of the existing Maui A drilling, production, and quarters (PDQ) and platform. Site hazard, geotechnical and structural analyses were performed which demonstrated the adequacy of Maui A for extended service. INTRODUCTION Background Shell Todd Oil Services (STOS) operates the Maui A PDQ platform for production of gas and condensate the Maui field, 1ocated approximately 34 km off the exposed west coast of the North Island of New Zealand (Figure 1). Maui A was designed in 1974 for a service life of 30 years and has been in continuous operation since 1979. In order to optimize production from the Maui field, a second platform was required to be installed 15 km offshore from Maui A, and to be onstream by Quarter 1 1993. Conceptual studies resulted in the configuration of Maui B as an unmanned satellite connected by pipeline to Maui A, which would in turn be modified to receive and process the Maui B wellstream fluids. In parallel, design criteria were reviewed resulting in the development of new strength and ductility level earthquake ground motion spectra for the Maui site. These spectra were developed utilizing data and methods regarding historical regional seismicity, attenuation relationships and local site effects that were not available at. the time of the development of seismic criteria for Maui A. The resulting Maui B seismic criteria were significantly more severe than those used for the original design of Maui A. Subsequent response spectrum analyses of Maui A indicated the potential for significant overstress in both the structure and in the topsides framing when subjected to strength level earthquake (SLE) loadings. Designed as a K braced structure, the Maui A substructure does not conform with current API recommendations for ductile response [1]. This fact, plus the presence ofa number of main framing members that had been damaged during the installation phase, heightened concern over the likely structural performance under the revised ductility level event (DLE) even though DLE analyses had been performed during the original design [2]. Study Objectives The Operator subsequently initiated a structured reassessment program to comprehensively review all aspects affecting Maui A seismic performance, these being the seismic demand, structure capacity, and performance criteria. Seismichazard analyses were performed for the site to determine explicit horizontal and vertical uniform risk spectra and to evaluate the original basis for the development of seismic source model parameters [3]. The ultimate capacity of the structure, including the effects of localized member damage, was assessed through nonlinear structural analyses using both pushover and time domain techniques. Performance criteria were reviewed using a risk-based approach." @default.
• W2079756850 created "2016-06-24" @default.
• W2079756850 creator A5003702363 @default.
• W2079756850 creator A5003725802 @default.
• W2079756850 creator A5049591153 @default.
• W2079756850 date "1992-05-04" @default.
• W2079756850 modified "2023-09-27" @default.
• W2079756850 title "Seismic Reassessment of Maui A" @default.
• W2079756850 doi "https://doi.org/10.4043/6934-ms" @default.
• W2079756850 hasPublicationYear "1992" @default.
• W2079756850 type Work @default.
• W2079756850 sameAs 2079756850 @default.
• W2079756850 citedByCount "3" @default.
• W2079756850 countsByYear W20797568502016 @default.
• W2079756850 crossrefType "proceedings-article" @default.
• W2079756850 hasAuthorship W2079756850A5003702363 @default.
• W2079756850 hasAuthorship W2079756850A5003725802 @default.
• W2079756850 hasAuthorship W2079756850A5049591153 @default.
• W2079756850 hasConcept C127313418 @default.
• W2079756850 hasConcept C162284963 @default.
• W2079756850 hasConcept C165205528 @default.
• W2079756850 hasConcept C187320778 @default.
• W2079756850 hasConcept C2985650181 @default.
• W2079756850 hasConceptScore W2079756850C127313418 @default.
• W2079756850 hasConceptScore W2079756850C162284963 @default.
• W2079756850 hasConceptScore W2079756850C165205528 @default.
• W2079756850 hasConceptScore W2079756850C187320778 @default.
• W2079756850 hasConceptScore W2079756850C2985650181 @default.
• W2079756850 hasLocation W20797568501 @default.
• W2079756850 hasOpenAccess W2079756850 @default.
• W2079756850 hasPrimaryLocation W20797568501 @default.
• W2079756850 hasRelatedWork W1968702681 @default.
• W2079756850 hasRelatedWork W2022035173 @default.
• W2079756850 hasRelatedWork W2031573214 @default.
• W2079756850 hasRelatedWork W2092739438 @default.
• W2079756850 hasRelatedWork W2371527909 @default.
• W2079756850 hasRelatedWork W2772196783 @default.
• W2079756850 hasRelatedWork W3016255354 @default.
• W2079756850 hasRelatedWork W3036915269 @default.
• W2079756850 hasRelatedWork W3109652668 @default.
• W2079756850 hasRelatedWork W3113596969 @default.
• W2079756850 isParatext "false" @default.
• W2079756850 isRetracted "false" @default.
• W2079756850 magId "2079756850" @default.
• W2079756850 workType "article" @default.