Proceedings of the ASME 27th International Conference on Offshore Mechanics and Arctic Engineering

OMAE2008
June 15-20, 2008, Estoril, Portugal

OMAE2008-57487
PIPELINE-LAYBARGE INTERACTION MODEL FOR THE SIMULATION OF
S-LAY INSTALLATION PROCEDURES

Danilo Machado Lawinscky da Silva

Mauro Henrique A. de Lima Jr.

Breno Pinheiro Jacob

LAMCSO Laboratory of Computational Methods and Offshore Systems PEC/COPPE/UFRJ

Rio de Janeiro, RJ, Brazil

ABSTRACT
The most common method of pipeline installation in
shallow water is the S-Lay method. In this method, the welded
pipeline is supported by rollers on the vessel and the stinger,
forming the over-bend. Then it is suspended in the water all the
way to seabed, forming the sag-bend. The over-bend and sagbend form the shape of an S.
This work focus in modeling the interaction between
pipeline and lay barge on the over-bend region, considering not
only the contact between the pipeline and the launching
structure, but also the tensioner behavior. Two numerical
models are proposed: (a) a rigorous contact model that provides
important information related to the consequences of impact
between pipeline and rollers. These consequences can be dents
to the pipe or tearing of the coatings; and (b) a model for the
simulation of the tensioner behavior. This latter includes a
delay between the instant that the tensioner is activated until it
effectively starts working. It also considers how fast the
tensioner can recover the desired tension level in the pipeline.
Several simulations of actual operations are shown, in
order to illustrate the application of the proposed model..
INTRODUCTION
The installation of pipelines and flowlines and their
connection to platforms constitute some of the most
challenging offshore operations. Many methods of pipeline
installation have been employed, such as S-Lay, J-Lay and
Reel-Lay. These methods are selected on the basis of
environmental conditions during installation, availability and
cost of equipment, length and size of line, and constraints of
adjacent lines and structures [1,2]. Alternative installation
procedures have also been proposed [3].
The most common method of pipeline installation in
shallow water is the S-Lay method. This method is so called
because the pipeline assumes an S shaped curve as it moves
from the laybarge to the sea-bed as schematically shown in
Figure 1.

Figure 1 Schematic representation of S-Lay method.

In a S-Lay installation, the pipes are welded to each other
in the horizontal position on the barge and the pipeline then
passes over an inclined ramp and stinger which gradually
lowers the pipeline into the water. This region of the S curve is
known as the overbend and as the pipeline leaves the
overbend region it is inclined almost vertically as it descends to
the sea bed, close to the sea-bed it once again returns to the
horizontal position so that it eventually rests on the sea-bed.
This region is known as the sag bend region.
Usual pipelaying operation by S-Lay procedures in
offshore Brazil employ the BGL-1 barge (Figure 2) owned by
Petrobras. The BGL-1 is a second-generation laybarge that
performs installation operations by moving forward using its
own mooring lines. Basically, tug boats drop anchors at some
predefined positions; then the barge winches release the stern
mooring cables, and collect the mooring cables located at the
bow.

Copyright 2008 by ASME

Pipelines in S-Lay installation operations are not easy to

simulate numerically, since the contact mechanism between the
pipeline and the launching structure is complex, specified only
in some points of the ramp and stinger.

Figure 2 The BGL-1 Pipeline Launching Barge

In order to prevent the pipe from buckling in the regions of
maximum bending, the bend radius is controlled by keeping the
pipe under tension, so that the pipe actually follows a lazy S
shape. The tension is applied to the pipe by tensioners on the
barge which are usually arrays of rubber wheels or belts which
surround the pipe and apply an axial force to the pipe through
the friction generated between the tensioner and the pipe
external coating as shown in Figure 3.

Figure 3 BGL-1s tensioner.

The force on the pipeline is reacted at the sea-bed end of
the pipeline by the dead weight of the pipeline and friction
between it and the sea-bed. Obviously the larger the force
applied by the tensioners to the pipeline, the more gradual will
be the bending radius in the S portion of the laying curve. Also,
as the pipe weight increases it is necessary to apply a greater
force to the pipe to maintain the desired bend radius and so
prevent buckling, particularly in the sag bend portion of the
curve as schematically shown in Figure 4.
As individual pipe lengths are welded onto the growing
pipeline, the barge is winched forward and the new section of
pipeline passes over the stinger towards the sea-bed. In the case
of anchor positioned barges tugs are used to continuously
reposition the anchors ahead of the barge so that it can keep
moving forward.

Figure 4 Scheme of S-lay installation: Pipeline Loads;

Propagating Buckle from a Local Bending Buckle
It is recognized that deepwater offshore oil exploitation
activities requires the use of sophisticated computational tools
to predict the behavior of floating offshore systems under the
action of environmental loads. These computational tools
should be able to perform coupled dynamic analyses,
considering the non-linear interaction of the hydrodynamic
behavior of the platform with the structural/hydrodynamic
behavior of the mooring lines and risers, represented by Finite
Element models. The implementation of such analysis tools
considers the coupling of the equations of motion of the FEM
model of the lines with the 6-DOF equations of motion of the
platform hull.
The use of such a sophisticated computational tool
becomes mandatory not only for the design of production
platforms, but also for the simulation of offshore installation
operations. For instance, in the installation of submarine
pipelines, the wall thickness design may not be governed by the
pressure containment requirements of the pipeline during the
operation, but by the installation process, specifically the
combined action of bending, tension and hydrostatic pressure
acting on the pipeline, that is also submitted to the motions of
the laybarge (Figure 4). Therefore, to predict the behavior of
such offshore operations it is very important to use a
computational tool that not only considers the coupling of the
pipeline with the motions of the barge, but also that rigorously
consider the contact between the pipeline and its supports
(laybarge, stinger, seabed).
Therefore, the objective of this work is to present a tool
that improves the coupled analysis model described above.
Such tool represents, during the dynamic analysis, the contact
of the pipeline and the laybarge, as well as the tensioner
behavior during installation procedures.

Copyright 2008 by ASME

CONTACT MODEL
A contact problem is an initial-boundary-value problem in
which two bodies A and B interact according to the principles
of the mechanics of continuous media. The domains of the
bodies are AW0 and BW0 respectively, at a reference time t = 0,
A t
W and BWt at a time t. Thus the primary kinematic axiom of a
contact problem is that configurations AWt and BWt of AW0 and
B 0
W , respectively, do not penetrate each other, i.e.
A

Wt BWt =
(1)
The equation (1) is called the impenetrability condition. The
intersection of the two bodies is the null set. In other words, the
two bodies are not allowed to overlap, which can also be
viewed as a compatibility condition. The impenetrability
condition is highly nonlinear for large displacements problems,
and in general cannot be expressed as an algebraic or
differential equation in terms of the displacements. The
difficult arises because in an arbitrary motion it is impossible to
anticipating which points of the two bodies will contact [4].
The boundaries of the bodies are denoted by AGt and BGt
respectively and are defined as
A t

G = G

t
D

t
F

B t

G ; G = G
t
C

t
D

t
F

t
C

(2)

and
A

GDt AGFt = ; BGDt BGFt =

(3)

Where Gt is the total boundary, GDt and GFt are regions where
displacements and surface forces are prescribed, respectively,
GCt is the region where the contact interactions occur.

sijt = Cijklt klt in Wt

(5)

u(x,0) = u0 e v(x,0) = v0 in W
ut on G t ; stnt =
q t on G t
ut =

(6)

(7)
F
t t
t
t

Where s , x , b , r a , q i, u , Cijkl, kl are the Cauchy stress,

material coordinates, body force, material density, acceleration,
surface force, displacement, constitutive tensor and strain,
respectively; n1jt are the components of the outward surface
normal. Overbarred quantities mean prescribed values.
A variety of methods for the treatment of contact constraint
conditions have been introduced [6,7,8,9]. Traditionally, the
numerical simulation of pipelines in S-Lay installation
operations considers contact models based on generalized
scalar element. This element consists of two nodes linked by a
non-linear gap spring [10,11]. The contact model proposed
here combines Finite and Discrete Element methods. Its
formulation is described as follows.
D

t
ij

t
j

t
i

t
i

FEM DEM FORMULATION

The well-known finite element equation for dynamic

problems is
M at = Fbt + Fpt + FCt - FDt - Fintt = Fextt - Fintt

(8)

Where M a are the inertia forces, M is the mass matrix, at

is the acceleration vector, Fbt are the body forces, Fpt are the
surface force, FCt are the contact forces, FDt are damping forces,
Fintt are the internal forces. Each vector contains the assembly of
all elements contribution in the finite element mesh.
The only term in equation (8) that is not trivial is the vector
of contact forces FCt . Here, this vector is assembled according
to the discrete element formulation.
The discrete element modeling is a Lagrangian numerical
technique used to solve problems that can be represented as a
set of discrete bodies or particles. Such discrete elements can
be rigid or deformable and interact with one another through
normal and shear contact forces [12,13]. At the proposed model
the elements are the rollers supporting the pipeline over the
laybarge ramp and singer and their positions in space and time
are associated to the rigid body motion of the laybarge.
Evaluation of Contact Forces

Figure 5 Contacting bodies.

The governing equations for a multi-body contact problem
are the same as for a single body system, equations of motion,
constitutive equations, initial conditions, boundary conditions,
with the addition of the contact conditions [5]. Thus the
problem formulation is
sijt
+ bti = rtati in Wt
xtj

Once contact between a pair of elements has been detected,

the forces occurring at the contact point are calculated. The
interaction between the two interacting bodies can be
represented by the contact forces Aqt and Bqt, which by the
Newtons third law satisfy the following relation:
A t

q = - Bqt

(9)

Taking qt = Aqt and decompose qt into the normal and

tangential components, qNt and qTt , respectively.

(4)

qt = qNt + qTt = qNt n + qTt

(10)

Copyright 2008 by ASME

Where n is the unit vector normal to the contact surface at

the contact point.
Several models that describe contact forces are found in the
literature. The model used combines the linear ForceDisplacement Law (Hookes Law) with a viscous dumping
force which is proportional to the relative velocities of particle
elements in contact. Then the normal contact force qNt is
decomposed in two components: the elastic component, qNet and
the damping component, qNdt .
qNt = qNet + qNdt

(11)
t
Ne

The elastic component q is proportional to the normal

stiffness kN and to the interpenetration g
qNet = - kN g

(12)

If g > 0, the equation (12) holds, if g 0, there is no

interpenetration and the normal component is zero.
The damping component reduces the oscillations of contact
force and dissipates kinetic energy during collision [14]. This
component is assumed viscous and is given by:
qNdt = CN vN

(13)

Where CN is the viscosity coefficient at normal direction

and vN is the relative velocity at normal direction.
Normal force magnitude is given by
qNt = - kN g + CN vN

(14)

The tangential component has a critical value, following the

Coulomb friction Law, allowing sliding between elements.
The tangential force magnitude is given by

t
qTt = min mqNt , kT vT dt + CT vT
i

(15)

Where the integral of the relative velocity during the time of

contact represents the elastic tangential energy stored. CT is the
viscosity coefficient at this direction. The total tangential force
is limited by Coulombs friction Law. When this force reaches
its maximum value of mqNt , with m being the friction coefficient,
there is relative sliding and tangential elastic energy storage is
ceased.
The physical parameters CN and CT reflect energy
dissipation during collisions, which is hard to evaluate directly.
They can be taken as a fraction of the critical damping for the
system of two rigid bodies i and j with mass mi and mj.
CN = 2 g

mij kN

(16)

and
g=-

ln(eN)
2

p + ln2(eN)

mi mj
mij = m + m
i
j

(17)

eN is the coefficient of restitution in the normal direction. In

a similar way CT can also be obtained.
Normal Stiffness

The discrete elements, the rollers of ramp and stinger, are

assumed to be rigid. This means that the normal stiffness need
to be chose large enough to prevent any interpenetration during
the dynamic analyze.
Thus the normal stiffness should be, in principle, an
arbitrarily large number. However, for computer calculations, it
should be large enough to enforce the constraint condition, but
not so large that the governing equations become illconditioned. On the other hand, too small a normal stiffness
parameter results in an unacceptable penetration of the pipeline
into the rollers and the overall response is disturbed.
In fact, the choice of the normal stiffness is a crucial part in
contact-impact calculations. The normal stiffness here is chose
to be approximately the same order of magnitude as the
stiffness of the degree of freedom normal to the contact
interface.
CONTACT DETECTION

The first stage in a contact algorithm consists in checking if

the bodies have interpenetrated. The algorithm works by
monitoring the position of finite elements of pipeline mesh and
comparing these to the instantaneous location of discrete
elements of ramp and stinger at each solution iteration.
Of course to check all discrete elements of ramp and stinger
against every finite element of the pipeline mesh is not of
interest. Therefore, the discrete domain is split into cells as the
scheme shown in Figure 6. Then the contact search is only
among elements belonging to the same cell. This procedure has
a very low cost and eliminates a lot of unnecessary
computations.

Figure 6 Roller Box into a sub-cell.

In order to turn more efficient and to refine the search for
the collision points, a cell hierarchy is created. This is made
putting the whole discrete domain into a first level cell, which
is subdivided into sub-cells at each roller box. Those sub-cells
are verified independently, with that, when the contact is
detected in a sub-cell the other cells do not need to be verified.
A cell hierarchy scheme for a ramp and stinger configuration is
shown in Figure 7.

(18)

Copyright 2008 by ASME

Others characteristics of the tensioner behavior are also

incorporated to this model:
Operational Range defines a range in which the
tensioner is not activated. This means that the tension
level is near to the desired tension;
Response Delay after the tension level leave the
operational range the tensioner is activated but there is a
delay until it effectively starts working;
Response Velocity once effectively working, it is
necessary to set how fast the tensioner is capable of
restore the tension level;
Figure 7 Cell hierarchy Scheme (first level cell).
TENSIONER MODEL
The tensioner model is based on a generalized scalar
element that consists of two nodes linked by a nonlinear gap
spring. Force-displacement or stiffness-displacement functions
associated to each local direction are defined, and the local
coordinates systems can also be actualized at each step during
simulation.
In the tensioner case, the objective is to control the tension
level in the pipeline during the pipelaying operation. It should
keep the tension level in an operational range.
The tensioner model is schematically shown in Figure 8.

Displacement Limit there is a limit in which the

tensioner can move the pipeline ahead and back in order
to compensate its tension level.
OUTPUT DATA
Some output data are of particular interest in pipelaying
operations, such as support separation and reactions. These data
are automatic calculated and printed.
SUPPORT SEPARATION

The separation is the distance, measured between the

pipeline and the roller of the support. This distance is
calculated at the middle point of each discrete element of all
roller boxes on the laybarge and stinger as schematically shown
in Figure 9.

Figure 9 Points for Separation Distance Output.

There is a plan for the three points at each roller level in a
roller box. The support separation and reactions are calculated
on this plan at the point of the pipeline that crosses it. This
point is easily determined by simple vector calculation, as
shown in Figure 10.

Figure 8 Tensioner Model.

An additional element is created at the pipeline top and to
simulate the tensioner behavior its axial stiffness varies keeping
the tension level at the defined range. Varying the axial
stiffness implies change the scalar element length moving the
pipeline top back and ahead. This behavior simulates the
movement of the pipeline induced by the tensioner.

Figure 10 Pipeline crossing the roller level plan.

Copyright 2008 by ASME

If n1 ( v1 v2 ) > 0 and n2 ( v1 v2 ) 0 then the finite

element crosses the plan of this roller level. The relation
between the lengths of vectors n1 and n2 define the point in the
finite element.
Then distances are given by the follow equations:
(19)
D1 = d1 n1 rPipe
D2 = d2 n2 rPipe

(20)

D3 = d3 n3 rPipe

(21)

Where Di, di and ni are shown in Figure 11, and rPipe is the
pipeline external radius.

Figure 11 Separation Distance.

SUPPORT REACTIONS

The support reaction is the force exerted on the pipeline by

the roller boxes in the laybarge and stinger. The horizontal,
vertical and lateral support reactions are also calculated for
each discrete element of all roller boxes on the laybarge and
stinger.
The reactions are the perpendicular components of the force
on the roller box surface. Their values come from the contact
model at the end of the iterative process in each time step. The
resultants are printed at the same points as the support
separation distance, Figure 12.
In ideal situations all rollers components make contact with
the pipe reducing/redistributing the applied local forces. In real
situations, under dynamic loading conditions some of the
rollers may miss the pipe contact, resulting in more
concentrated forces on a fewer number of rollers, as
schematically shown in Figure 13. These situations are easily
identified in the proposed model.

Figure 12 Reactions on the pipeline.

Figure 13 Pipeline Support.

NUMERICAL EXAMPLE: S-LAY INSTALLATION
The proposed contact model has been incorporated into the
SITUA-Prosim system, a computer program that performs the
coupled static and dynamic analysis of floating offshore
systems. The SITUA-Prosim system has been developed since
1997 [15], in cooperation by Petrobras and LAMCSO
(Laboratory of Computational Methods and Offshore Systems,
at the Civil Eng. Dept. of COPPE/UFRJ, Federal Univ. of Rio
de Janeiro).
A module for pipeline installation simulation is
incorporated into SITUA-Prosim. This module, called
PETROPIPE, integrates a graphic interface to the numerical
tools proposed here. It can easily generate numerical models
for pipeline installation procedures.
Several small preliminary problems have been run to test
the validity of the algorithms. A variety of examples involving
complex configurations and nonlinear boundary conditions
were also analyzed.
BGL-1 DATA

The basic operations of the laybarge during pipelaying can

be outlined as it follows: (a) The laybarge is positioned on its 8
anchors holding it aligned with the pipeline route; (b) The
anchors are progressively moved forward as the laying takes
place. Each anchor is lifted clear of the bottom and set in its
new position.
The laybarge is restrained from lateral motion by the
mooring lines and it is moved periodically one pipe length
ahead. The mooring lines are kept under tension by the
winches. These tension varies cyclically due to the long-period
sway plus surge built up by the waves, storing energy in the
wire lines as the barge gradually moves to one extreme of its
lateral range.
The mooring lines must provide the horizontal restraint
against wave drift, wind drift, and current drift. They also react
against one another and especially must counter the tension on
the pipe, which in effect is like a mooring line of relatively
equal tension, leading directly astern.
The simulations performed here do not consider the
laybarge mooring line system. Since the focus is on the
pipeline-laybarge interaction, the units are represented simply
by motion RAOs.
The geometrical and hydrodynamics characteristics of
BGL-1 were provided by Petrobras and are summarized below.

Copyright 2008 by ASME

PIPELINE DATA

The physical and geometric properties of the pipeline are

presented in Table 4.
Table 4 16 Pipeline data
Parameter
Outside Diameter
Wall Thickness
Yield Stress
Modulus of Elasticity of steel
Axial Stiffness (EA)
Flexional Stiffness (EI)
Poisson Coefficient
Density of steel
Corrosion Coating Thickness
Corr. Coating Weight Density
Concrete Coating Thickness
Concrete Coating Weight Density
Hydrodynamic Diameter
Tube Length
Field Joint Length
Joint Fill Weight Density
Weight in Air
Weight Submerged

Figure 14 BGL-1 Geometry

Table 1 Main geometric characteristics of BGL-1
Propriety

Values (real scale)

Drought
Height
Beam
Length

5.182 m
9m
30 m
120 m

Ramp and Stinger Data

The local ramp-stinger coordinates system has its origin on

the stern shoe, X-axis positive direction from bow to stern and
Z-axis is vertical with positive direction upwards, Figure 15.
The geometric data of ramp and stinger are presented in
Tables 2 and 3.

Value
0.40640
0.011125
414000
207000
2859694.14
55894.90
0.3
77
0.0032
9.32
0.0381
21.974
0.489
12
0.6
10.065
2.255935
0.368493

ENVIRONMENTAL LOADS

The barge azimuth is 90o (point to east). It means that the

current load, Table 5, act obliquely on the system. The wave
load is presented in Table 6
Table 5 Current Profile
Depth (m)
0
20
70
84
89

Figure 15 Ramp/Stinger Local Coordinates System.

Table 2 Ramp radius 150 m
Element
Tensioner
Roller Box 1
Roller Box 2
Roller Box 3
Roller Box 4
Roller Box 5

X (m)
-48.900
-39.030
-26.860
-18.290
-9.470
-0.452

Z (m)
1.404
1.146
0.762
0.036
-1.240
-3.089

Length (m)
3.0
3.0
3.0
3.0
2.5

Table 3 Stinger radius 150 m

Element
Roller Box 1
Roller Box 2
Roller Box 3
Roller Box 4
Roller Box 5
Roller Box 6
Roller Box 7
Roller Box 8

X (m)
5.230
9.077
12.879
16.363
20.348
24.016
27.643
31.224

Z (m)
-4.578
-5.278
-6.995
-8.371
-9.858
-11.454
-13.163
14.780

Offset (m)
0.449
0.456
0.476
0.510
0.555
0.612
0.712
0.861

Length (m)
5.415
4.000
4.000
4.000
4.000
4.000
4.000
4.000

Unit
m
m
kN/m2
MPa
kN
kN*m2
kN/m3
m
kN/m3
m
kN/m3
m
m
m
kN/m3
kN/m
kN/m

Velocity (m/s)
1.02
1.02
0.45
0.39
0.00

Going to
N
N
N
N
N

Azimuth (o)
0
0
0
0
0

Table 6 Irregular Wave (Jonswap)

Hs (m)
4.0

Tp (s)
12.9

Coming from
S

Azimuth (o)
180

S-LAY MODEL

The initial equilibrium configuration of the pipeline is

generated using dynamic relaxation techniques as proposed in
[16,17]. The top tension in the pipeline is the parameter that
defines the s shape.
The generated S-Lay configuration is shown in Figure 16.
Details of the pipeline on the overbend region are shown in
Figure 17.

Copyright 2008 by ASME

Figure 19 Tension (static).

Figure 16 S-Lay Configuration.

Figure 20 Bending Stress (static).

Figure 17 Stinger.
The geometry of the initial configuration is plotted in
Figure 18. In this Figure, and in the follows, the results are first
shown for the whole pipeline and then for the overbend
(laybarge-stinger) region.

Figure 21 Von Mises Stress (static).

Figure 22 Von Mises Stress (dynamic).

Figure 18 Initial Configuration.
RESULTS

Some results of performed analyses are shown in figures

that follow.

TENSIONER

The result for an analysis in which the tensioner is activated

is shown in Figure 23: blue tenisioner not activated; green
tensioner activated. This result is obtained applying a regular
wave (H = 1.2m, Tp = 12s, E) to the model previous described.
The desired tension is set 250kN and the operational range
240kN to 260kN.
It should be noted a transient part of response before the
tensiner has been completely activated. This progressive
activation of the tensioner element follows the same strategies
as the application of environmental loads.

Copyright 2008 by ASME

The pipeline movement due the variation of the tensioner

element length is shown in Figure 24.

Figure 23 Tensioner Response.

Figure 24 Pipeline Movement at the Tensioner.

FINAL REMARKS
This work presented a tool intended to improve the
applicability and accuracy of analysis of pipeline installation
operations, making the simulations more realistic. Such tool
represents, during the dynamic analysis, the contact between
the pipeline and the laybarge as well as the tensioner behavior.
The generalized contact model presented here avoids some
limitations of the computational tools traditionally used for the
static and dynamic analysis of pipeline installation. Also, this
tool provides the engineer with several relevant information at
preliminary design stages.
In summary, the presented model was shown to be quite
efficient and robust, and comprises an important contribution to
the analysis and design of pipeline installation operations. The
resulting numerical tool is able to provide valuable knowledge
for the design of safe offshore operations.
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
The authors would like to acknowledge the active support
of Petrobras, the Brazilian state oil company. Petrobras is
internationally acknowledged as pioneer and leader in deep
water exploitation activities, and has been boosting research
activities in this area and encouraging the use of innovative
numerical tools in real-life design situations.
REFERENCES
[1] GUO, B., SONG, S., CHACKO, J., GHALAMBOR, A.,
Offshore Pipelines, United States, Elsevier, 2005.

[2] KYRIAKIDES, S., CORONA, E., Mechanics of Offshore

Pipelines, Volume 1: Buckling and Collapse, Slovenia,
Elsevier, 2007.
[3] SILVA, D. M. L., BAHIENSE, R.A., JACOB, B.P.,
TORRES, F.G.S., MEDEIROS, A.R., COSTA, M.N.V.,
Numerical Simulation of Offshore Pipeline Installation
by Lateral Deflection Procedure. Procs of the 26st
International Conference on Offshore Mechanics and
Arctic Engineering OMAE, June 10-15, San Diego,
USA, 2007.
[4] BELYTSCHKO, Ted, LIU, Wing Kam, MORAN, Brian,
Nonlinear Finite Elements for Continua and Structures.
Chichester, John Wiley & Sons, 2000.
[5] HUGHES, T.J.R., TAYLOR, R.L., SACKMAN J.L.,
CURNIER A., KANOKNUKULCHAI W., A Finite
Element Method for a Class of Contact-Impact
Problems, Comput. Methods Appl. Mech. Engrg., vol.8,
pp. 249276, 1976.
[6] WRIGGERS, P., Computational Contact Mechanics.
Chichester, John Wiley & Sons, 2002.
[7] LAURSEN, T.A., Computational Contact and Impact
Mechanics. Berlim, Springer, 2002.
[8] BELYTSCHKO, Ted, YEH, I.S., The Splitting Pinball
Method for Contact-Impact Problems, Comput. Methods
Appl. Mech. Engrg., vol. 105, pp. 375393, 1993.
[9] HUNK, I., On Penalty Formulation for Contact-Impact
Problems, Computers & Structures, vol.48, pp. 193203,
1993.
[10] NIELSEN R., PENDERED, J.W., Some Aspects of
Marine Pipeline Analysis, Numerical Methods in
Offshore Engineering, John Wiley & Sons, New York,
1978.
[11] GREALISH, F., LANG, D., CONNOLLY, A., LANE,
M., Advances in Contact Modelling for Simulation of
Deepwater pipeline Installation, Rio Pipeline Conference
& Exposition, October 17-19, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil,
2005.
[12] OATE, E, ROJEK, J., Combination of Discrete
Element and Finite Element Methods for Dynamic
Analysis of Geomechanics Problems, Comput. Methods
Appl. Mech. Engrg., vol.193, pp. 30873128, 2004.
[13] MUNJIZA, A., The Combined Finite-Discrete Finite
Element Method. Chichester, John Wiley & Sons, 2004.
[14] MENDES, R.B., ALVES, J.L.D., SILVA, C.E.,
Simulation of Torpedo Pile Launching by Coupled
Discrete and Finite Element Analysis. Procs of the
XXVII
Iberian
Latin-American
Congress
on
Computational Methods in Engineering CILAMCE,
September 3-6, Belm, Brazil, 2006.
[15] __, SITUA-Prosim Program: Coupled Numerical
Simulation of the Behavior of Moored Floating Units
User Manual, ver. 3.0 (in Portuguese), LAMCSO/
PEC/COPPE, Rio de Janeiro, 2005.
[16] SILVA, D. M. L., Generation of initial stable
configurations of flexible lines by Dynamic Relaxation

Copyright 2008 by ASME

Methods (In Portuguese). M.Sc thesis, COPPE/UFRJ,

Rio de Janeiro, RJ, Brazil, 2005.
[17] SILVA, D. M. L., JACOB, B.P., RODRIGUES, M.V.,
Implicit and Explicit Implemetation of the Dynamic
Relaxation Method for the Definition of Initial
Equilibrium Configurations of Flexible Lines. Procs of
the 25st International Conference on Offshore Mechanics
and Arctic Engineering OMAE, June 4-9, Hamburg,
Germany, 2006.

10

Copyright 2008 by ASME