Comparative analysis of the regulatory standards for calculating ice load in different countries

1.

Engineering School
Department of Hydraulic Engineering,
Theory of Buildings and Structures
Comparative analysis of the regulatory
standards for calculating ice load in
different countries
MSc student: A. A. Vakhnenko
Scientific advisor: T. E. Uvarova
Linguist: L. A. Shegai

2.

Purpose:
• Make a comparative calculation of ice loads on the structure
and analyze the results
Tasks:
• Analyze existing standards for calculating ice load and highlight
the basic of them
• Find main differences between standards
• Accept initial data
• Identify the causes of disaccord in the results (if available)
2

3.

3

4.

Picture 2. The Gulf of Bothnia on the map
Picture 3. Ice interaction on the structure
4

5.

Basic standards
API RP*2N-95 (USA)
Elforsk report (Sweden)
EM 1110-2-1612 (US Army)
ISO/FDIS 19906:2010 (International
Organization for Standardization)
• CSA 471-04 (Canada)
• СП 38.13330.2012 (СНиП 2.06.0482) (Russia)
5

6.

Parameter
Diameter of the
building
Ice thickness
Contact area
Ice field area
Coefficient of form
design in the area
of ​contact with ice
Contact leak factor
(stopped or ongoing)
Effective ice pressure
Crushing ratio
Compressive ice
strength
Empirical coefficient
API RP 2N Elforsk
report
EM 1110-2- ISO/FDIS
1612
19906
CSA 471-04
SNiP
2.06.04.82
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
Half taper angle
+
Drift speed
+
6

7. Input data

• The diameter of the column (b) = 16
m;
• Ice thickness (h) = 1 m;
• The area of ​the ice field (A) = 3x3
km;
• Column - vertical, conical, 1 piece;
• Wind speed of 1% probability during
the period of freezing (W) = 20 m / s.
7

8.

Analysis of results

9.

Calculating results
API RP Elforsk
EM
ISO/FDI
CSA
2N
report, 1110- S 19906 471-04
Swede 2-1612
n
F(MN)
32.4
25
37.3
17.6
24
SNiP
2.06.04.82*
176
9

10. Why?

• The first reason for the discrepancy in the results in a
variety of methodologies is a different approach to
assessing the main factors affecting the ice load.
• Another reason explaining the spread is the adopted
mathematical model, or the method of estimating the
load, which depends mainly on the type of ice
formation and the scenario of interaction.
10

11.

Conclusion

12.

• In conclusion, calculation result analysis of ice
loads on a conical column show that further
comprehensive study of the characteristics of ice
formations, strength properties and the
mechanism of influence on structures in real
conditions of water areas is necessary.
12

13.

Thanks for your
attention!