Effect of Skew on Lifting Analysis

1 Abstract
Many jackets and topsides are installed by lifting. Lifting analysis needs to be carried out to
check the integrity of structure during onshore and/or offshore lifting. Lifting should be
carried out as per API RP2A requirements, lifting weight should be multiplied by factors to
account for dynamic amplification, change of center of gravity and other factors which will
affect lifting operations. API factors for lifting analysis can be used if fabrication tolerances
of slings do not exceed the allowable values as per API RP2A. Otherwise skew should be
considered in lifting analysis. Some codes such as DNV accept use of additional factors to
consider skew effect.
To investigate skew effect on lifting analysis, three different topsides were analyzed to
evaluate different parameters that may contribute to the effect of skew on lifting analysis.
Also, to evaluate whether applying a factor to account for skew effect in lifting operations
will result in design which is conservative or not. The analysis will be carried out assuming
one pair of opposite slings are carrying 75% of loads while the other pair are carrying 25% of
loads. This can be achieved by applying temperature gradient to increase (or decrease)
lengths of slings. Weights of decks are varying from 800 ton to 1500 ton, lifting analysis
were carried out for three cases:
• Normal case without skew.
• First skew case where two opposite slings will carry 75% of load and other slings will
carry 25% of load.
• Second skew case where two opposite slings will carry 25% of load and other slings
will carry 75% of load (opposite to first skew case).
The analysis shows that the following points have effect on the results of the analysis:
• Variance in slings lengths
• Angles of slings
• Location of center of gravity
• Lifting arrangements
• Modeling of fabrication tolerances
Based on the results of the analysis, the following points were concluded:
• Appling a factor to consider skew will save a lot of analysis time but this will not be
on the conservative side for topsides with a considerable shift in center of gravity.
• Variance in slings lengths and angles of slings have an important effect on results of
lifting analysis thus selection of lifting arrangement is of great importance to avoid
overstresses and failure in members / structures and to reduce effect of skew.
2 Structural Analysis
Skew effect on lifting analysis should be considered if fabrication tolerances as per
API requirements cannot be achieved. The structure to be analyzed assuming one pair of
opposite slings is carrying 75% of loads while the other pair is carrying 25% of loads. This can
be achieved by applying temperature gradient.
Another way to analyze skew but with less accuracy is to connect the slings to two
lifting points, each opposite slings will be connected to a point. One point only will be
restrained vertically and the other joint which is not restrained vertically will be subjected to
a vertical force upward equal to 75% of topsides weights. This will force slings connected to
this joint to carry 75% from topsides weight and other two slings will carry 25% only from
topsides weight. The analysis will be repeated again by swapping joint conditions to check
other case of skew. It should be noted that results of this simulation are not accurate since
this method is not simulating the actual behavior of structure during lifting.

To investigate skew effect on lifting analysis, three different topsides were analyzed to
evaluate different parameters that may contribute to the effect of skew on lifting analysis.
Also, to evaluate whether applying a factor to account for skew effect in lifting operation
will result in design which is conservative or not. The analysis will be carried out assuming
one pair of opposite slings are carrying 75% of loads while the other pair are carrying 25% of
loads. This can be achieved by applying temperature gradient to increase (or decrease)
lengths of slings. Weights of decks are varying from 800 ton to 1500 ton, lifting analysis
were carried out for three cases:
• Normal case without skew using API factors of 2 and 1.35 for members connected to
lifting joints and other members.
• First skew case where two opposite slings will carry 75% of load and other slings will
carry 25% of load. Dynamic amplification factor (DAF), consequence factor (COF) and
center of gravity shift factor (COG) will be applied (1.2, 1.15 & 1.03 based on Noble
Denton criteria).
• Second skew case where two opposite slings will carry 25% of load and other slings
will carry 75% of load (opposite to first skew case). Dynamic amplification factor
(DAF), consequence factor (COF) and center of gravity shift factor (COG) will be
applied (1.2, 1.15 & 1.03 based on Noble Denton criteria).

The results of the analysis of skew cases will be compared to the results of analysis using API
factors.

The weights and lifting configurations for the three structures to be analyzed are shown on
the next pages.

2.1 Weight and Slings Angles for First Topsides

Topsides weight: 857 ton
 Sling A1 angle 55.6 degrees
Sling A2 angle 55.5 degrees
Sling B1 angle 57.3 degrees
Sling B2 angle 57.2 degrees
Graphs for topsides configuration and center of gravity are shown below.

2.2 Weight and Slings Angles for Second Topsides

Topsides weight: 1383 ton
Sling A1 angle 59.7 degrees
Sling A2 angle 63.1 degrees
Sling B1 angle 61.7 degrees
Sling B2 angle 57.7 degrees
Graphs for topsides configuration and center of gravity are shown below

2.3 Weight and Slings Angles for Third Topsides

Topsides weight: 771 ton
Sling A1 angle 64.6 degrees
Sling A2 angle 64.8 degrees
Sling B1 angle 69.7 degrees
Sling B2 angle 70.1 degrees
Graphs for topsides configuration and center of gravity are shown below
3 Analysis Results

3.1 Analysis Results for First Topsides

Forces in slings for three different cases based on the carried out analysis (normal case
without skew - first skew case - second skew case) are shown in next graphs.
Maximum unity check ratios for joints and members for lifting analysis using API factors of 2
and 1.35 are compared with similar results of skew analysis in the next table:

API factors Skew analysis

Element check
Factor 2.00 Factor 1.35 Case 1 Case 2

Member 0.78 0.70 1.42 1.15

Joint 0.46 0.32 0.50 0.48

High interaction ratios were obtained for skew case, applying a factor instead of carrying out
the analysis will not be on the conservative side here.

3.2 Analysis Results for Second Topsides

Forces in slings for three different cases based on the carried out analysis (normal case
without skew - first skew case - second skew case) are shown in next graphs.
Maximum unity check ratios for joints and members for lifting analysis using API factors of 2
and 1.35 are compared with similar results of skew analysis in the next table:

API factors Skew analysis

Element check
Factor 2.00 Factor 1.35 Case 1 Case 2

Member 0.80 0.80 2.74 1.30

Joint 0.11 0.49 0.70 0.69

High interaction ratios were obtained for skew case, applying a factor instead of carrying out
the analysis will not be on the safe side here.

3.3 Analysis Results for Third Topsides

Forces in slings for three different cases based on the carried out analysis (normal case
without skew - first skew case - second skew case) are shown in next graphs.
Maximum unity check ratios for joints and members for lifting analysis using API factors of 2
and 1.35 are compared with similar results of skew analysis in the next table:

API factors Skew analysis

Element check
Factor 2.00 Factor 1.35 Case 1 Case 2

Member 0.76 0.38 0.70 0.72

Joint 0.37 0.25 0.38 0.42

Interaction ratios within the allowable limits were obtained for skew case, applying a factor
instead of carrying out the analysis will be on the safe side here.

4 Discussion and conclusions

The analysis shows that the following points have influence on skew effect on lifting
analysis:
• Variance in slings lengths
Slings with high variance in lengths will result in more skew effect on lifting analysis.

• Angles of slings
Increasing of sling angle will result in less skew effect on lifting analysis.

• Location of center of gravity

Symmetric or almost symmetric center of gravity will result in less skew effect on
lifting analysis.
• Lifting arrangements
Lifting arrangements have great effect on lifting analysis and skew effect, skew effect
can be reduced (or increased) based on the selected lifting arrangements.

• Modeling of fabrication tolerances

Modeling of fabrication tolerances will affect the analysis and results, fabrication
tolerances should be modeled based on slings lengths as per API requirements.
4.1 Conclusions
Applying a factor to consider skew instead of modeling fabrication tolarances will
save a lot of analysis time but this will not be on the conservative side espically for
topsides with a considerable shift in the center of gravity. However, consideroing of
skew by modeling fabrication tolarances for such topsides can result in very high
interaction ratios and very conservative design.
Variance in slings lengths, angles of slings have a clear effect on results of lifting
analysis and skew effect on lifting analysis.
Selection of lifting arrangment is important, skew effect is less for some lifting
arangment such as spreader bar. Selection of lifting arrangement is of great
importance to avoid overstresses and failure in members / structures.
Skew have a considerable effect on lifting analysis and should be always considered
to check the structural integrity under different skew cases.