Concrete Offshore LNG Terminals - A Viable Solution and Technical Challenges
Pourquoi ce travail est dans la base
Une base qui oublie comment elle a trouvé un travail ne peut pas être vérifiée. Voici les voies qui ont admis celui-ci.
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Abstract This paper discusses the feasibility of concrete offshore LNG terminals with a focus on applications in the Gulf of Mexico and other coastal areas of the United States. There is an ever growing need to import more natural gas into the United States. Yet, this need is limited by the lack of infrastructure for receiving liquefied natural gas (LNG) from LNG carriers. In the search for safe, economical and environmental-friendly installations, concrete offshore LNG terminals are emerging as a very promising solution. A prestressed concrete structure has many advantages over steel installations, such as high resistance to cryogenic temperatures, high resistance to thermal shock, good durability in the marine environment, extended fatigue life, strong resistance against boat impact, fire, explosion, etc. There are, however, many challenges in design, construction, transportation and installation. Complicating the situation are the concerns over consequences of LNG leakage, boat impacts, fire explosions, etc., which are not fully discussed in the existing design codes. Aiming at the feasibility of building concrete offshore LNG terminals, the paper presents in detail the major advantages and technical challenges in design aspects, construction, transportation and installation. It reviews the state-of-the-art technology, and refers to the successful experience of an offshore concrete platform in more harsh environmental conditions, the Hibernia concrete platform in Newfoundland, Canada. Recently, ABS issued its ABS Guide for Building and Classing Offshore LNG Terminals, which provides a comprehensive guidance for design, construction and survey of concrete offshore LNG terminals. This paper highlights the ABS Guide, and addresses the regulatory requirements and class interface with the regulatory agencies. 1. Introduction There is an ever-growing need to build offshore LNG import terminals in the Gulf of Mexico and other coastal areas of the United States. In the search for safe, economical and environmental-friendly installations, concrete offshore LNG terminals are emerging as a very promising solution. Figure 1 shows a concept of an offshore LNG terminal. ABS has approved it in principle. This LNG terminal is a concrete gravity base structure (GBS). Prestressed concrete structures have many advantages over steel installations [9,10,11]:Large volume to accommodate LNG tanks and topside facilities,Durable life in marine environment,Low maintenance cost,Variety of structural configuration,Excellent resistance to cryogenic temperature,Better resistance to fatigue and buckling,Stronger resistance against accidents of boat/vessel impact, missile attack, fire and explosion,Good sea station keeping capability. Figure 1: Offshore LNG concrete GBS terminal [14] (Available in full paper) There still remain many challenges in design, construction, transportation, and installation [9 to 13]:Relatively less experience,Only a few design codes and rules specifically devoted to concrete offshore LNG terminals,Design of high performance concrete,Material deterioration,Difficulties in quality control of field construction,Possible catastrophic shear failure,Lack of design experience about various accident scenarios, i.e., accidental LNG leakage, vessel impact, fire, explosion, etc.,Procedure of transportation and installation.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Prédiction distillée sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découle