1、Designation: F1455 92 (Reapproved 2011)An American National StandardStandard Guide forSelection of Structural Details for Ship Construction1This standard is issued under the fixed designation F1455; the number immediately following the designation indicates the year oforiginal adoption or, in the ca
2、se of revision, the year of last revision. A number in parentheses indicates the year of last reapproval. Asuperscript epsilon () indicates an editorial change since the last revision or reapproval.INTRODUCTIONThe principal aim of this guide is to depict recommended practices related to the design o
3、f shipstructural details. The importance of structural details is clear:1) Their layout and fabrication represent a sizable fraction of hull construction costs.2) Details are often the source of cracks and other failures which, under certain circumstances,could lead to serious damage to the ship hul
4、l girder.3) The trend toward decreasing ship hull scantlings (that is, increasing average hull stresses) has thepotential of increasing the damage to details.4) Researchers have largely neglected the analysis of structural details at least in part because theconfiguration and purpose of these detail
5、s vary greatly and are not commonly described or discussedin the literature.Due to lack of analytical and experimental effort devoted to structural details, their determinationhas been left up to draftsmen and designers, with very little engineering input.In two comprehensive reviews2,3of the perfor
6、mance of structural details, 86 ships were surveyed.These included naval and commercial ship types. The commercial ships included both U.S. andforeign built. The vessels ranged from 428 to 847 feet in length, from 18,000 to 90,000 tons indisplacement, and from five to twenty-six years in age. The de
7、tails obtained were grouped into 12typical families. Knife Edge Crossings (Family No. 6) and Structural Deck Cutout Details (Family No.9) are shown but not covered in detail in this guide. The remaining ten detail families were furthercategorized into 53 groups comprising a total of 611 detail confi
8、gurations. A number of theseconfigurations are very similar to others in detail geometry and such duplicates have been excludedfrom this guide. A number of others were eliminated because of relatively infrequent observed use. Asa result, a total of 414 details are included herein. However, all 611 d
9、etails can be found in “StructuralDetails,”4if desired.In total, 607,584 details were observed with a total of 6,856 failures. Failures were attributed to oneor a combination of five categories: design, fabrication, welding, maintenance, and operation (see 4.1through 4.1.5). This extensive, well doc
10、umented research, together with engineering judgement,provides the principal support for this guide.1. Scope1.1 This guide provides a recommended list of selected shipstructure details for use in ship construction.1.2 Structural details which have failed in service and arenot recommended for use in
11、ship construction are included aswell.1.3 This guide is intended to convey the lessons learned ondifferent configurations of ship structure details, not the dimen-sions, thickness, or construction methods which would resultfrom structural calculations.42. Terminology2.1 Definitions of Terms Specific
12、 to This Standard:2.1.1 Terms:1This practice is under the jurisdiction of ASTM Committee F25 on Ships andMarine Technology and is the direct responsibility of Subcommittee F25.01 onStructures.Current edition approved Nov. 1, 2011. Published November 2011. Originallyapproved in 1992. Last previous ed
13、ition approved in 2007 as F1455 - 92(2007).DOI: 10.1520/F1455-92R11.2Jordan, C. R., and Cochran, C. S., “In-service Performance of StructuralDetails,” SSC-272, Ship Structure Committee Report, March 1977, availablethrough the National Technical Information Service, Springfield, VA 22161.3Jordan, C.
14、R., and Knight, L. T., “Further Survey of In-service Performance ofStructural Details,” SSC-294, Ship Structure Committee Report, May 1979, avail-able through the National Technical Information Service, Springfield, VA 22161.4Jordan, C. R., and Krumpen, P., Jr., “Structural Details,” American Weldin
15、gSociety Welding Journal, Vol 63, No. 1, January 1984.1Copyright ASTM International, 100 Barr Harbor Drive, PO Box C700, West Conshohocken, PA 19428-2959, United States.2.1.2 beam bracketa bracket at the end of framing orstiffening members that is used for increased strength, conti-nuity and end con
16、straint.2.1.2.1 Discussionsee Fig. 1.2.1.3 clearance cut-outsa hole or opening in a piercedmember to allow passage of a piercing member.2.1.3.1 Discussionsee Fig. 2.2.1.4 gunwale connectionthe connection of the sheerstrake to the stringer strake of the uppermost deck of the hull.2.1.4.1 Discussionse
17、e Fig. 3.2.1.5 knife edge crossingthe projected point intersectionof members (plate members, stiffeners or bulkheads) onopposite sides of an intervening plate member. An undesirablecondition to be avoided.2.1.5.1 DiscussionIncluded for information only, see 3.1.2.1.5.2 Discussionsee Fig. 4.2.1.6 mis
18、cellaneous cut-outsmall holes or openings of avariety of sizes and shapes used for access, drainage, ease offabrication, stress relief, and so forth.2.1.6.1 Discussionsee Fig. 5.2.1.7 non-tight collara fitting at the cut-outs in way of theintersection of two continuous members that provides laterals
19、upport for the piercing member which does not fully fill thecut-out area of the pierced member. May be a lug.2.1.7.1 Discussionsee Fig. 6.2.1.8 panel stiffenersintercostal, non-load-carrying mem-bers used to reduce the size of plate panels.2.1.8.1 Discussionsee Fig. 7.2.1.9 stanchion endsstructural
20、fittings at the ends (top andbottom) of a stanchion to transfer loads from the supportedmember to the supporting member.2.1.9.1 Discussionsee Fig. 8.2.1.10 stiffener endsthe configuration of the end of anunbracketed, non-continuous stiffener.2.1.10.1 Discussionsee Fig. 9.2.1.11 structural deck cutsa
21、llow passage through decksfor access, tank cleaning, piping, cable, and so forth.2.1.11.1 DiscussionIncluded for information only, see3.1.2.1.11.2 Discussionsee Fig. 10.2.1.12 tight collaras per non-tight collar but the cut-out inthe pierced member is fully filled and is air-, oil-, or watertightas
22、required. Tight collars may be lapped or flush fitted.2.1.12.1 Discussionsee Fig. 11.2.1.13 tripping bracketa bracket or chock that provideslateral support to framing and stiffening members. Supportmay be provided to either the web or the flange, or to both.2.1.13.1 Discussionsee Fig. 12.2.2 Symbols
23、:2.2.1 Symbols are as indicated in Fig. 13. The detailidentification symbol (Fig. 13, 1-J-1 for example) is the sameas that assigned in the original research reports and is retainedthroughout for all details for ease in referring back to thereports if desired.3. Summary of Guide3.1 In this guide, de
24、tails are shown for the ten families ofstructural details identified above and as shown in Fig. 13,59, 11 and 12. Knife Edge Crossings, Fig. 4, are not discussedfurther in this guide since none were observed in the researchFIG. 1 Beam Brackets (Family No. 1)FIG. 2 Clearance Cut-outs (Family No. 8)FI
25、G. 3 Gunwale Connections (Family No. 5)FIG. 4 Knife Edge Crossing (Family No. 6)FIG. 5 Miscellaneous Cut-outs (Family No. 7)FIG. 6 Non-Tight Collars (Family No. 3)F1455 92 (2011)2and fortunately so. This detail represents very undesirablestructural conditions and is to be avoided. Structural DeckCut
26、s, Fig. 10, are not discussed in this guide since this detailmust be considered in relation to the size of the opening and itsproximity to primary structures.3.2 Evaluation of details shown in Figs. 14-23 is based onin-service experience as described in “Design Guide forStructural Details”.5Data for
27、 over 400 details is summarizedand rated in the figures by observed relative successfulperformance. Each of the ten families of details includeconfigurations with no signs of failures. The details withoutfailures within each family group are shown in descendingorder of numbers observed. Those detail
28、s with failures areshown in ascending order of failures (percentage are indicatedfor each). Thus the first detail shown in each family group hasthe best observed service performance and is most highlyrecommended while the last has the highest failure rate andtherefore least desirable.3.3 These detai
29、ls, rated as indicated above, provide guid-ance in the selection of structural detail configurations in futuredesign and repair of such details.4. Failure Causes4.1 Failures in the details shown in Figs. 14-23 wereattributed to either one or a combination of five categories:design, fabrication, weld
30、ing, maintenance, and operation.4.1.1 Design:4.1.1.1 Design failures generally resulted from the omissionof engineering principles and resulted in a buckled plate orflange; the formation of a crack in a plate, flange or web; or therupture of the bulkhead, deck or shell. Each of the families,with the
31、 exception of tight collars, had detail failures attributedto design.4.1.1.2 Failures directly related to design in structural de-tails and supporting members were the result of being sizedwithout adequate consideration of applied forces and resultingdeflections.4.1.1.3 In the beam bracket configura
32、tions of family no. 1(Fig. 14), 20 % of the surveyed failures attributed to designwere caused by instability of the plate bracket edge or byinstability of the plate bracket panel. This elastic instability,which resulted from loads that produce critical compressive orshear stresses, or both, in unsup
33、ported panels of plating, can beeliminated when properly considered in the design process.4.1.1.4 The failures of beam brackets by cracking occurredpredominately where face plates had been sniped, at thewelded connections, at the ends of the brackets, at cutouts inthe brackets, and where the bracket
34、s were not properly backedup at hatch ends. The sniping of face plates on bracketsprevents good transition of stress flow, creates hard spots andproduces fatigue cracks due to the normally cyclic stresses ofthese members. Care must be taken to ensure proper transitionwith the addition of chocks, bac
35、k-up structure, reinforcementof hole cuts, and the elimination of notches.4.1.1.5 To reduce the potential for lamellar tearings andfatigue cracks in decks, bulkheads, and beams, transition5Jordan, C. R., and Krumpin, R. P., Jr., “Design Guide for Structural Details,”SSC 331, Ship Structure Committee
36、 Report, August 1990, available through theNational Technical Information Service, Springfield, VA 22161.FIG. 7 Panel Stiffeners (Family No. 12)FIG. 8 Stanchion Ends (Family No. 10)FIG. 9 Stiffener Ends (Family No. 11)FIG. 10 Structural Deck Cuts (Family No. 9)FIG. 11 Tight Collars (Family No. 4)FIG
37、. 12 Tripping Brackets (Family No. 2)F1455 92 (2011)3brackets should be made continuous through the plating orsupported by stiffeners rigid enough to transmit the loads.4.1.1.6 The greater number of failures in the trippingbracket configurations of family no. 2 (Fig. 15), occurred athatch side girde
38、rs, particularly in containerships. This will be acontinuing problem unless the brackets are designed to carrythe large lateral loads due to rolling when containers arestacked two to four high on the hatches. The brackets must, inturn, be supported by properly designed backing structure totransmit t
39、he loads to the basic ship structure.4.1.1.7 Tripping brackets supported by panels of plating canbe potential problems depending on the plate thickness. Brack-ets landing on thick plating in relationship to its own thicknessmay either buckle in the panel of the bracket, produce fatiguecracks along t
40、he toe of the weld, or cause lamellar tearing inthe supporting plate. Brackets landing on plating with athickness equal to, or less than its own thickness, may causeeither fatigue cracks to develop or buckling of an unsupportedpanel of plating.4.1.1.8 The non-tight collar configurations of family no
41、. 3(Fig. 17) experienced only a few failures. There are consider-ations, however, that must be used by the designer to ensure thecontinuation of this trend. The cutouts should be provided withsmooth well rounded radii to reduce stress risers. Where collarsare cut in high stress areas, suitable repla
42、cement materialshould be provided to eliminate the overstressing of theadjacent web plating. These considerations should reduce theincidents of plate buckling, fatigue cracking, and stress corro-sion observed in this family.4.1.1.9 For detail family no. 7, miscellaneous cutouts, (Fig.20), the reason
43、s for failure were as varied as the types ofcutouts. Potential problems can be eliminated by the designerif, during detail design, proper consideration is given to thefollowing:1) Use generous radii on all cuts.2) Use cuts of sufficient size to provide proper weldingclearances.3) Avoid locating hole
44、s in high tensile stress areas.4) Avoid square corners and sharp notches.5) Use adequate spacing between cuts.6) Properly reinforce cuts in highly stressed areas.7) Locate cuts on or as near the neutral axis as possible inbeam structures.8) Avoid cuts at the head or heel of a stanchion.9) Plug or re
45、inforce structural erection cuts when located inhighly stressed areas.4.1.1.10 The most damaging crack observed during thesurvey was in the upper box girder of a containership. Thisstructure is part of the longitudinal strength structure of theship in addition to being subjected to high local stress
46、es due tothe container loading in the upper deck. Openings in thisstructure must be located, reinforced, and analyzed for second-ary bending stresses caused by high shear loads.4.1.1.11 The clearance cutouts of family no. 8 (Fig. 16) arebasically non-tight collars without the addition of the collarp
47、late. Suggestions made for non-tight collars and miscella-neous cutouts are applicable for this family.4.1.1.12 Well rounded corners with radii equivalent to 25 %of the width perpendicular to the primary stress flows should beused. Special reinforcements in the form of tougher or higherstrength stee
48、l, inserts, coamings, and combinations of theabove should be used where fatigue and high stresses are aproblem.4.1.1.13 In general, failures in stanchion ends, family no. 10(Fig. 21), were cracks which developed in or at the connectionto the attachment structure. The addition of tension brackets,she
49、ar chocks, and the elimination of snipes would reduce theincidents of structural failure. All stanchion end connectionsshould be capable of carrying the full load of the stanchion intension or compression. Stanchions used for container standsor to support such structure as deckhouses on the upper deckshould be attached to the deck with long tapered chocks toreduce stress flows from hull induced loads, and in no caseshould “V” notches be designed into such connections.4.1.1.14 The stiffener ends in family no. 11 (Fig. 22) withwebs or flanges sniped, or a com
