OFFICFR TFCHNICAI
RFPRF=FNTATIVFS
SEA55Y3
SEA55 f3
SHIP STRUCTURF SUBCOMMITIEE The SHIP STRUCTURE SUBCOMMlllEE acts for the Ship Structure Committee on technical matters by providing t~hnical coordination for determinating the goals and objectives of the program and by evaluating and interpreting the results in terms of structural design, construction, and operation. AMERICAN BUR EAU OF SHIPPING Mr. Stephen G. Avntson (Chairman) Mr. John F. Corrlon Dr. John S. Spenoer Mr. Glenn M. *he Mll ITARY SFAI IIT ~ Mr. Albert J. Attermeyer Mr. Michael W. Touma Mr. Jeffery E. Beach MARITIME ADMINISTRATION Mr. Frederick Seibold Mr. Norman O. Hammer Mr. Chao H. Lin Dr. Walter M. Maolean SHIP STRUCTURF SUBCOMMITTFF U.S. COAST GUARD ACADFMY Mr. Afexander B. Stavovy NATIONAL A ~Mr. Stanley G. Stiinaen SOCIEIY OF NAVAI ARCHITECTS ANII MARINE ENGINEERS 11rEE Dr. William Sandbarg Dr. W. R. Porter WEl OING RESEARCH COUNCIL Dr. Mantin Prager AMERICAN IRON AND STEEL INSTITUTE Mr. Alexander D. Wilson I IAISON MFMRFF@ NAVAL SEA SYSTEMS COMMAND Mr. Mr. Mr. Mr. Rolmt A Sielski Charles L Null W. Thomas Packard Allen H. Engle
U.S. COA5T GI IAIU! CAPT T. E. Thompson CAPT Donatd S. Jensen CDR Mark E. tdoll
LT Bruce Mustain
U. S.NAAL v ACADEMY
Dr. Ramswar Bhattacharyya
Member Agencies: United States Coast Guatrl Naval Sea Systems timmand Maritime Administration American Bureau of Shi~ing Militaty SealRCommand
&
Ship Structure Committee
An Interagency Advisory Committee Dedicated totheImprovement ofMatineStructures
Address Correspondence
to:
Secretary, Ship Structure Committee U.S. Coast Guard(GMTH) 2100 SecondStreet S.W. Washington, D.C.205930001 PH: (202) 2670003 FAX: (202) 2670025
January
31,
1991
SSC347 SR1304
STRATEGIES FOR NONLINEAR ANALYSIS OF MARINE STRUCTURES Marine structures are designed to withstand the extreme responses caused by environmental factors during its lifetime. This report covers available and emerging techniques to determine extreme responses of nonlinear marine structures and systems. Nonlinear characteristics of wave induced forces and extreme value analyses of nonlinear systems are addressed. The review of procedures for nonlinear analysis and how they may be applied to the probability analysis of extreme events should prove to be useful.
Page
SSC347
1
4.
Title
ad Svbtitle
5.
Report Date
Analysis
of
6.
AUGUST
Performing
1988
Organization Cod=
8. I
Performing
Organization
Rmport No.
SR1304
10. Work Unit No. (TRAIS)
Subrata K. Chakrabarti ~.Performing Organization Name and Address CBI Research Corporation 1501 North Division Street Plainfield, IL 605448929
12. Sponsoring Ag~nGY Name and Address !
11.
Contract
or Grant No.
DTCG2385C20069
13. Type of Report ond P*riod Covered
Final
Report
14.
I
Sp~sorig
Agency
Code
GM
Sponsored
16. Abstruet
by the Ship
Structure
Committee
agencies.
This report extensively reviews the stateoftheart of available and emerging techniques for determining extreme responses of nonlinear marine structures and systems. The contents may be categorized into two parts. The first presents the nonlinear characteristics of wave induced forces and corresponding structural responses. The other discusses the extreme value analysis of nonlinear systems relevant to offshore and marine structural design. Generic procedures for the nonlinear analysis of marine structures were reviewed. Discussions of nonGaussian random processes and the use of extreme value statistics are included. Methods that may be applied to the probability analysis of extreme events were investigated. Different types of nonlinear behavior of interest for various classes of offshore structures were studied. Various statistical analysis methods are summarized and their applicability, assumptions and limitations are discussed.
17.
Key ~ords
Mar~ne Structures Nonlinear Analysis Probabilistic Methods Extreme Value Analysis Structural Analysis
Security Clossif. (of this report)
avdLLclvle L L Ulll . 18. Distribution Statement Nat1 Technical Information Service Springfield, VA 22161 or Marine Tech. Information Facility National Maritime Research Center Kings Point, NY 100241699
19.
I 20.Security
Reproduction
Classif.
22.
Price
Unclassified
Form DOT F 1700.7(B72)
Unclassified
of completed pogc authorized
380
METRIC
Approttimmlt Comromions te
COWEFISIOW
FACTORS
Mwric
Mamrm T Fisd
.S~mb*l
*
LENGTH
m
fz
. 
m,~limzws centiIMIEIS nmtms Ilmta#s ttilanzlws
LENGlll
0.04 0.4 3.3 1.V 0s inclmo indms W vwd3 mil.s
in in
n @
inchm
Vd
mi
rni
MEA
Zquzm 2qum2 Cenmmmz, 2qu2w Mt2hmvms 0.1
imz
tr
mia
mzmvs
1.2
quart
rmlmm
q$m*molar,
Zquws kitolnotzf,
V12cvwm
0.4 2,6
mi2
2c1*m
MASS [wilht)
02
lb
20 0,45
0.9
0.036
2,2 1.1
0s
lb
VOLUME
~w
Imfmnns la bloopaom 6 ?5 30
VOLUME
rnilliliiazg liwrs Iiws I iters
cubic nmlms cubic Inntms
Tbzp tl 02
I!uti cups
OIJnC*s
:
ql gzl fis vdJ
tl 02
w qt
gzl
Vt d
Celsius
9/% Ithen
Fa!wmheil temfwaiuro
,, f
F
Fe.hmnhoit
wnlpmtura
Cntslm kmm.ntat.m F 40 1,,1,1 .,tilp. :: 1; 0 , 1 20 I , 1 0 32 40 1 , 20 906 00 ! l,, 40 3? 120 ,,, !60 it; 60 tril,, 80 200
2r2 j too Oc
,.,l,l<,., .1 ,,1 : 2.64 ,.,..,, ,, ,, t 4. ,,41,4,, ,...,, # , ,,,,.,,,.,,,,,, ,,,,,1,,,,,. d,, !,,.,, 10,,,1%,,1 W,.,dlhh .,8,! M,.IwM, PI,rd. 52,25. SD C,,l,, hq N,,. tl, i 10 ?Hli,
..,.,.
MA
hi,.,,
TABLE OF CONTENTS
1.0 2.0
q w9*.*..* INTRODUCTION
*********9
q ***mmmm9m*
q **********
..*m.=...
1 3 3 4 8 10 10 14 15 18 19 19 ;: ;: 25 28 28 32 36 39 :; 45 47 50 50 51 % 54 56 57 57 58 58 62 63 77 79 83
.9*99*9****
q *..m.*mmm.
q .m9*m***
2.5
q **9*** DEFINITION OF NONLINEAR SYSTEMS .*w*****D.* q *m*.m***9* NONLINEAR WAVES AND WAVE SIMULATION ......................... WAVES PLUS CURRENT q ,**w.***mm* q 00000099909 8***=******* q *.*** NONLINEAR WAVE FORCE q u******.* q ***mmmm..m q m*m****** q ****. 2.4.1 Mori$on Equation ..................................... 2.4.2 Fixed Cylinder in Waves and Current .................. 2.4.3 Oscillating Cylinder in Waves ........................ 2.4.4 Oscillating Cylinder in Waves and Current ............ STEADY DRIFT FORCE q *****.*~**~ q mm*m*mmmmm* . ...8*****.* q **... 2.5.1 Steady Drift Force Due to Viscous Flow............... 2.5.2 Steady Drift Force Due to Potential Flow ............. 2.5.2.1 Wave Elevation Drift Force ................. 2.5.2.2 Velocity Head Drift Force .................. 2.5.2.3 Body Motion Drift Force .................... 2.5.2.4 Rotational Inertia Drift Force ............. q =**=****** NONLINEAR MOTION RESPONSE q .*.m******* 9m..*m.mm.m* 2.6.1 First Order Motions with Nonlinear Damping ........... q m.*mm*9*** q *******99* q * LOW FREQUENCY OSCILLATION q mm.mmmmmm. HIGH FREQUENCY SPRINGING FORCE q .9*9****** q *9mmm**9mm q mmm.mmm 2.8.1 Damping at Low and High Frequency Responses .......... MATERIAL PROPERTIES 9*.89******* q **.m.m*.mmm q mmmm*9..*** q **** 2.9.1 Catenary System ...................................... 2.9.2 Flexible Structures ..................................
3.0
3.2
3.3
3.4
3.5
3.6 4.0
SHORT TERM RESPONSE PREDICTION q m..m.m.a.m q *m*.*m.*m. .******* 3.3.1 Linear Systems ....................................... 3.3.2 Nonlinear Systems .................................... 3.3.2.1 Wave Drag .................................. 3.3.2.2 WavePlusCurrent Drag ..................... 3.3.2.3 Structural Dynamic Response ................ 3.3.2.4 General Linearization Technique ............ 3.3.2.5 Nonlinear Response Spectra ................. 3.3.2.6 Statistics of Narrow Band Morison Force .... 3.3.2.7 Statistics of Wide Band Morison Force ...... 3.3.2.8 Statistics of WaveCurrent Force ........... 3.3.2.8.1 NarrowBand Gaussian Wave and Small Current ................... 3.3.2.8.2 Finite Current .................. 3.3.2.9 Statistics of Nonlinearly Damped System .... 3.3.2.10 Statistics of Drift Force Response ......... 3.3.2.11 Statistics of Low Frequency Motion ......... SHORT TERM RESPONSE MEASUREMENTS .m.m*****.m q ..m.m...mm q mme.. 3.4.1 Random Wave Load Tests ............................... 3.4.1.1 Vertical Cylinder .......................... 3.4.1.2 Inclined Cylinder .......................... 3.4.1.3 Force Distributions ........................ 3.4.2 Response of an Articulated Tower ..................... 3.4.3 Response of a Moored Tanker .......................... 3.4.4 Response of a Barge ................................. 3.4.5 Response of a $emisubmersible ........................ LONG TERM RESPONSE PREDICTION q **O.*9*0** q W********, W****,,,* 3.5.1 Bivariate Short and LongTerm Prediction ............ 3.5.1.1 Short Term ................................. 3.5.1.2 Long Term .................................. 3.5.2 Time and Frequency Domain Long Term Predictions ...... 3.5.3 Extrapolation of Wave Scatter Diagram to Longer Duration q O*Om*mm**O q 0mmm*99*0m q mOmm**m*** q *m*e***** EXTREME VALUE STATISTICS q mmm**m***. q DD******** q ********** . . .
q mm*mmm*m*m .*.*.
:; 90 90 91 92 98 100 104
110
118 118 121 125 129 132 137 138 138 140 141 145 146 146 147 147 150 150 152 154 157 159 162
DISCUSSION OF LINEARIZATION TECHNIQUE. ,..................... 162 DISCUSSION OF NONLINEAR EXCITATION STATISTICS ............... 164 DISCUSSION OF NONLINEAR RESPONSE STATISTICS ................. 165
q ****.****. q m . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
5.0
170
171 174 175 178 184 186 191 195 198
EXTREME VALUE PREDICTION FOR NONLINEAR SYSTEMS .............. A CONSISTENT LINEARIZATION METHOD q mm.mmmmmmm .m**m**m*m* q *.** RESPONSE SPECTRUM COMPUTATION q amm.m.mm.. q *m.*9***.* . . . . . . . . . RESPONSE PROBABILITY DENSITY FUNCTION ....................... RESPONSE EXTREMES BY ORDER STATISTICS ....................... LONGTERM RESPONSE PREDICTION FOR NONLINEAR SYSTEMS .........
q mm.mm.m**m q **9******* q *******... . . .
q mmmmm
..m
q 9***.**...
q .
ii
SUMMARY
Marine
Structures
are
employed
in
the
exploration,
production
and
I
I
I
of offshore across
minerals and
of people The
nations
country.
at the mercy of the harsh environment of the ocean in the form of waves, wind, current and earthquake and must survive the severest storm encountered during its lifetime. Design experienced environment components responses of an offshore components by the structure of the is based on the extreme responses of the
by the faced
structure in its
under the
influence
structure
lifetime.
If
the
structural
practical
systems have nonlinear responses, and these design tools are not applicable. The purpose review of the of this report is to perform an extensive and emerging techniques for the stateoftheart determination of
available
extreme responses of a nonlinear marine structure and system. this report may be categorized into two parts; one presents
characteristics of waveinduced forces and corresponding and the other to discusses the extreme value analysis design. of
relevant generic
offshore
structure
The
procedures the
analysis may be
marine to
structures the
investigates
method
applied
probability
analysis of extreme events. Different types of nonlinear behavior of interest for various classes of offshore structures have been studied. Nonlinearities in the analysis of
these structures
appear at various stages, e.g., waves, material properties, response. The solutions of the dynamic problem deterministic and
forcing function and motion with time dependent nondeterministic domain time
(stochastic).
Deterministic solutions include both the time domain analysis. nonlinearities linearized. in While the a marine Review of
(time history analysis) and the frequency analysis can retain most are of the
history
system,
frequency
domain
solutions
necessarily
iii
these various generic procedures for nonlinear analysis has been made.
to 3 hours.
statistical
distribution
of certain extremes over a given short term may be predicted. assumed Gaussian for this purpose. linearity nonlinear are inherent is a assumptions. nonGaussian
For responses, the narrow handedness and However, random the response even (output) the of a
system
process
though
waves in the
This fundamental
principle
of the statistical
properties
nonlinear
random processes have been included. a longterm (of the order of 20100 years) The longterm non
distribution of the response parameters is often required. stationary shortterm random process is sometimes written stationary process. The extreme
level are also obtained by orderstatistics. Various available their applicability, methods
in the above areas have been summarized, and limitations have been discussed.
assumptions
Based
on this discussion,
iv
LIST OF SYWOLS
a : c
amplitude of wave rms wave amplitude wave celerity drag coefficient steady drag coefficient restoring force matrix inertia (or mass) coefficient cylinder diameter water depth Youngs modulus expected value mean force force per unit length of structure drag force per unit length of structure inertia force per unit length of structure maximum force per unit length of structure acceleration due to gravity wave height Hermite polynomial of order n rms value of wave height significant wave height H / Hrms
CD CD Cj~
CM
ratio of rms drag to rms inertia force wave number PCA:D2 KeuleganCarpenter l~pCDD cumulants number ( = UOT / D ) (=&)
wave length length of mooring line added mass matrix mass matrix
n
N N(p,
nth moment of wave spectral density (n = 0,1,2,...) TR / Tz ; also, number of wave components
a2)
N?
Jk
N! Jk x P(x) P P(x)
nonlinear damping matrix direction cosine cumulative probability or probability distribution of x dynamic pressure or slope probability density of x longterm probability of exceedance shortterm probability of exceedance or probability density cylinder (structure) radius Reynolds number ( = UOD /
u )
Q c!
R Re R Xy r
correlation function between functions x(t) andy(t) cosh ky/sinh kd spectral energy density of wave spectral energy density of wave in current force spectral density spectral energy density of horizontal velocity wave period period of cylinder oscillation expected time between two successive crests record length of time time current velocity wind speed horizontal water particle velocity horizontal water particle acceleration amplitude of horizontal velocity reduced velocity ( = o /D )
u Uw
u i o
v~
v vR j r v(t)
vi
weight per unit length of chain normal velocity vector amplitudes of motion coordinate in the horizontal direction
Xk Y
motion components
(k = 1,2,...,6)
coordinate in the vertical direction phase angle of force or empirical parameter ~ or probability level
a a
crest front steepness spectral width parameter rms incident wave amplitude wave profile or elevation angle of mean wave direction l/lnN vertical asymmetry factor current strength skewness kurtosis minus 3 eigenvalues peak rate density ( U / U. )
E/E
A c
z
n 00
K
lJ
x
T
i (lJ
peak frequency or undamped natural frequency velocity potential standard normal distribution vector sign r gamma function
vii
TABLE 1.1
 TYPES OF OFFSHORESTRUCTURES
Q cl
FIXED1*2 Drilling Jackets Production Platforms Oil Storage Tanks Caissons
I
FLOATING2s3
r
Chains Risers
FLEXIBLE
1
Catenary Cables TLP Tendons Marine Hoses
Ships Barges Sernisubmersibles Buoys TLPs Articulated Buoyant Towers Guyed Towers4
NOTES:
1.
2.
Fixed structures may be piled or gravity type. Fixed or floating rigid structures structures will may be rigid or nonrigid. small deflections The non
undergo
or displacements
under environmental loads. 3. 4. Floating structures are usually moored in place in operational mode. Strictly speaking, guyed towers do not belong to this category; but its analysis is similar to the others in this category.
1.0
INTRODUCTION
The marine and offshore structures and their components may be classified
into
three
broad
fixed
structures,
floating
structures
and
flexible structures.
Generally, jacket type structures consisting of a large number Many such largein the
of tubular members in various planes are held inplace by piling. structures volumed North may be seen in the Gulf of Mexico. of concrete The On the other
hand,
structures
made
gravitytype
structures.
structures
provides sufficient bearing pressure to overcome sliding or overturning dueto environmental loads, thus fixing their position. One type is powered
to move from one location to another and is used to transport materials across bodies of water. Examples of this type of.structures is mechanically in offshore are ships and barges. connected to the ocean such as in the
The other type of floating structures bottom or moored in place for use
operation
production, processing and storing of oil. towers, semisubmersibles, Fixed and floating tural components are
considered
rigid for
of wave
motions. undergo
Long members of small cross sections, e.g., in jacket platforms may deflections or displacements which are substantial and should be
An articulated tower may also experience natural period vibration modes than the rigid body motion. These
members are treated as nonrigid in the response calculation. The third type of structures, namely, the flexible structures undergo It
large deformations
may be important to update the external forcing function on these structures based on their displaced configuration. Examples of these structures are
risers, TLP tendons, catenary lines, hoses, etc. Because of the nature of these flexible structures, the nonlinearities the design analyses appear in different in
the
structures
in are
question. common to
On most of
the
other
hand,
certain
types on
of the
nonlinearities
these
structures,
depending
environment experienced by them. This report discusses the common types of nonli nearities (Chapter 2)
encountered in the design of offshore structures. are arranged in the order in which
structure. included in
Applicability Table
1.1
presented from which the importance of the nonlinear terms may be assessed. The main thrust nonlinear systems of the present report is the extreme value analysis of or marine structures. This area is
relevant to
offshore
Because of the complexity of the problem, the extreme value assumptions in order to make value and
analysis of nonlinear systems makes approximate the mathematical analysis methods. problems tractable 3
and fit one of the known extreme various probabilistic and of the
Chapter used
discusses in
methods
distribution response
functions for an
predicting structure.
shortMost
longterm nonlinear
extreme systems
values
offshore
which appeared in Chapter 2 are addressed here. The applicability value analysis is of the various approximate methods in nonlinear extreme in Chapter 4. Some of the assumptions and
discussed
limitations
of these techniques
are summarized.
Based
on this
evaluation, is provided
approaches
As will be clear from the discussions in the earlier chapters, may not be appropriate certain input for evaluation depending of all systems. the types of
parameters and
on are of
nonlinearities, Moreover,
different of the
formulations constraints
recommended. contract,
because
schedule
this
several recommendations are made for possible future work in this area.
2.0
TYPES OF NONLINEARITIES
The nonlinearities enter into an offshore structure analysis at various foremost of these conditions is the that environment influence itself. the
phases. describing
The
first
and
In
the
environmental
offshore
structures, nonlinear theories are often needed. nonlinear various and wave the require parameters effect of a mathematical (e.g. wave the series height) on
in
nonlinear structure,
fashion. the
describing loading
environment Examples
the
external
may become
nonlinear.
of such nonlinearities
are current
load, wind load and wave drag load. from the environmental example. Let us, at this point, explain
what
is understood
about
a nonlinear
2.1
that
is single
valued
and nonlinear
, t, then time,
y(t) = g[x(t)]
,
(2.1)
where
g(x) is a single
~alued nonlinear
function. of x.
nonlinear if
(2.2)
a zero
memory system, meaning that the response of the system does not depend on the past value of the excitation.
system and if the excitation x(t) represents a stationary random process, then the response y(t) will also be a stationary random process.
correlation function of the output, and between input and output are given by
RYY(T) = E[y(t)y(t
+ T)]=
(2.3)
(2.4)
where
refers value.
to the
correlation of zero
at
a time
lag,
expected
Examples
memory
nonlinear
q q q
In this section, we shall describe the various types of nonlinearities that are encountered are in the in marine order and offshore at structure the design. of The this the these
subjects section.
introduced of be
the
mentioned
beginning in
all,
nonlinearities Then
encountered external
describing from
environment environments
described.
the
loading
will
be discussed.
Finally, the
responses
from external
loadings
be addressed.
It should be
noted that the design extreme value analysis should properly account for these nonlinearities.
2.2
NONLINEAR WAVES AND WAVE SIMULATION In computing the wave loads on the components of an offshore structure, a
must be chosen based on the wave parameters. have been developed which describe the
Numerous and
kinematic
dynamic properties of the water particles at or below the free surface of the wave profile. Although wave basic the ocean waves are are random and in in nature, in the wave
theories There
describe three
profiles
that
periodic describing
nature. wave
are
parameters
that
all
theories: water depth, wave height and wave period. The slope. theory linearity The which of waves is determined commonly by the wave height or the wave as Airy linear
simplest
and most
used wave
theory
is known
theory).
Because
even though
necessarily
This
almost exclusively used in the extreme value analysis of responses, and forms the basis for the latter chapters. The free surface boundary conditions are linearized in describing the
Therefore, it is not possible to accurately predict properties et al. of particle kinematics the in the free
surface
(1982) derived
probability
density
cylinder were computed to demonstrate the nonlinear properties of the particle kinematics. However, in many physical situations the linear theory is not adequate to accurately describe waves. In this case one has to resort to other theories Besides the linear theory, structures (2)
to match or at least approach the physical data. other commonly are (1) Stokes used nonlinear theories higher [Weigel order theory (1960)] and
(1960)], [Dean
cnoidal theory
(1965),
(1970)].
To offer an example of the differences among theories, Airy linear theory provides an expression for the horizontal water particle velocity as mH cosh ky Cos (kx  &) ~sinh kd
(2.5)
whereas Stokes second order nonlinear theory expresses the same parameter as
d++(+)
2=COS
2(kxut)
(2.6)
T k
= wave = wave
period, number
= water (= 2T/L,
depth, L =
= vertica length)
wave
The first term on the right hand side of Eq. 2.6 corresponds to theory and is linear with the wave height. However, the
order
second term is proportional to the square of the wave height (or wave slope). Similarly, the horizontal water particle velocity of an Nth order stream
Up
to N as follows:
u =.
N z nk cosh (2nl)ky [X(2n1) cos(2nl)kx + X(2n) sin(2n)kx] n=l X(n) are the coefficients properties of the stream function. waves have received
(2.7)
in which
distribution
of nonlinear
recent years which have been discussed in Chapter 3. The applicability of the d/gT2 wave and theories H/gT2 may on be the described three by two wave
nondimensional parameters,
parameters,
based
basic
d, H and T.
The limits of validity of the various theories are based on how well the free surface boundary conditions are satisfied, although there has been limited
For this reason, in using this chart, one need not lines in selecting to work quite well a theory. in In fact, the structure
theory
predicting
responses well beyond its analytic limitations. These offshore wave theories structure. are used High order in computing the response function wave theories are of an used to
deterministic structures
extensively
despite their
inability
linear system this procedure is straightforward with the use of a wave energy spectrum model as will be described in the next chapter. For a nonlinear This
response function, the solutions are often obtained in the, time domain. requires the simulation of a time series from the energy spectrum model. The model. random waves in the ocean cannot be described by
a theoretical Often
(2.8) u in which S(w) is onesided height (i.e. and ~ O < w < =) energy spectral density, to the
Hs = significant
wave
= peak
frequency
corresponding
0.05
1 I I
I !
0.02 0.01
0.0002}
f~
/
1= I
gT2
FIGURE 2.1
[AFTER LEMEHAUTF
energy
density ~
spectrum
may
having
Hs and
as independent
o s
9
0.161
(2.9)
Thus,
given a significant
wave height, the peak frequency can be determined (1986) analyzed ocean wave data obtained
in the Gulf of Mexico, NOAA data buoys, Navy and Great Lakes waters. Based on the
data
Canadian
significant
wave
height
of this
set of data,
an empirical
2 o s = 9
0.306
(2.10)
which is about twice that prescribed by the PM spectrum. For a frequency domain analysis, these spectrum formulas are used directly. time domain the time A wave profile is simulated (e.g., Eq. 2.8)
series spectrum
of dividing Then
density
several
of width,
Am.
the wave
Hi(ui) =2
f7qq%i
(2.11)
.
where ~
The corresponding
period is given by
(2.12)
This,
then,
gives
the
component
of
the
wave
representing
the
interval,
i, given
by the wave
height
(Hi, Ti).
angle is assumed
uniformly
distributed
Then the profile of the random wave is obtained by adding all the components of the wave thus generated
n(x,t) =
N H. E ~cos(kix j=l
 wit + vi)
(2.13)
where ki = 2~/Li , Li = wave length at a frequency O+ and N = number of slices made in the wave spectrum (typically 50200). The random wave profile produced by this method is Gaussian only in the limit as N extends to infinity. al. In order to avoid this problem [Tucker, et ai, bi
(instead of vi) which are functions of the cosine and sine component of (kix Wit). These coefficients are then assumed to be randomly distributed in a
n to be Gaussian.
(1985)] that the group statistics of the wave profiles by either of the two methods produce similar results. In a deterministic approach the maximum wave cycle in a random wave field is often used to obtain the design response value. highly nonlinear with sharper crasts and require Such cycles are generally higher order wave theory
(e.g. stream function theory) to describe the wave cycle. A method of simulation of nonlinear random seas was provided by Hudspeth (1975). The method involves inverting the Fourier wave amplitude spectral
These
frequencies that are sums or differences of the linear frequencies and include the product of the linear spectral components. The nonlinear random sea
surface is derived from a linear simulation. particle velocity and acceleration technique.
2.3
WAVES PLUS CURRENT When current is present along with the waves, the current is often
considered steady and its effect is linearly superimposed on the effect of the waves on responses. and current linearly It is sometimes found that the combined effect of waves from their individual effects interaction. This is
superimposed
wavecurrent
particularly true for a moving structure for which the motion may become quite complex and nonlinear even for linear waves. In addition, however, when
current is in the direction of waves there are additional changes experienced by the waves. On encountering a current, the characteristics of a wave change. In
particular, experience
of current the wave height and the wave If the current is in the direction of
length wave
On the other
hand, if the current opposes the wave, the wave slope increases in magnitude and the wave length shortens. between the waves and current. In deepwater in the presence of a uniform current the wave number, k, is related to the wave frequency, 4&g [1+ where U may to (l+4uM/g)VJ* be positive the wave (in the direction direction). dispersion Note of wave propagation) that the expression
or
k=
(2.14)
in
to the
deepwater
relation
(k = u2/g) in the
absence
(U = O).
When U is positive the value of k is smaller so that the Likewise when U is negative, the value of k increases
and the wave length is smaller than the nocurrent case. The wavecurrent interactions in a random wave field show that the wave Under the action
energy density spectrum likewise undergoes profound changes. of a steady current in deepwater, the wave ener~ 4 S(LJ (l+!A : 12 [1+(1+
S*(U) =
(2.15)
~)1212
1 + 4Um/g = O beyond which no waves
When the current speed is negative there is a cutoff frequency in the surface wave spectrum given by the condition
exist.
Since the phase speed, c (= w/k), of gravity waves is a monotonically function predominant from the of wave at the number and frequency, higher wave wave number number range the influence of current the
decreasing will be
range. dominates
contribution
higher
surface This
slope whereas the current changes the surface slope pattern drastically.
is demonstrated in Fig. 2.2 in whichthe ratio of S*(W)/S(m) is plotted versus u for different values of steady current with and against the wave
.
10 5

,,
,.
~, RAD./ SEC.
FIGURE
2.2
CURRENT UNDER RATlO OF ENERGY SPECTRA WITH AND WITHOUT DIFFERENT CURRENT CONDITIONS ; U IN M/ SEC [ HUANG ET AL. (1972)]
U IN FT/SEC. /
/ I / /
\
\ A \ =
Uw = ML. / HR.
3.0
FT / SEC.
I / I I /
o

/ \ \ . 
/
.
6.5
1:5
2:0
2.5
.0
~: RAD / SEC.
FIGURE
SURFACE WAVE ENERGY [ TUNG
2.3
CONDITIONS (1972)]
effect
of current of current it
is
At higher
level is
it opposes
waves in
is with is shown
waves. m.
This
further
illustrated
2.3 where
S*(U)
versus
The wave
energy density
spectrum,
S(W) represents
Uw = 20 miles/hr.
su*(m)
and
= (? S*(U)
(2.16)
(2.17)
Figure 2.4 shows the effect of wave current interaction on the water particle velocity spectrum, S*U(U) for different current speeds of U = t3 ft/sec.
2.4
NONLINEAR FORCE It is clear from the prev ious sections that nonlinear waves will produce
nonlinear
responses
even
if the transfer
mechanism
is linear.
On the other
hand, for a linear wave the responses are nonlinear if the transfer function is nonlinear. the exciting Thus the responses of a marine structure will be nonlinear if forces arising from (linear) waves are nonlinear. One of the
most common types of dynamic nonlinearity is due to the drag force. current is wellknown. inertia component The nonlinear
encountered
cycle, an empirical formula was proposed about 25 years ago which is commonly known as the Morison equation.
2.4.1 Morison Equation The Morison equation was developed by Morison, et. al. (1950) for
It is written in terms
f = kM O
+ kDlulu
(2.18)
10
. ...
..
o @
o iii
A
u= 3.0
/
FT./SEC.
v
I
.:
/
I /
%
No . pm IL
n /
/
I
o.
N
I
I o .u=3FT. /sEc.
F
5 .0
CONDITIONS
0.5
~ 1.0
1.5
2,0
O, RAD. /SEC.
FIGURE 2.4
VELOCITY SPECTRA UNDER DIFFERENT CURRENT [ TUNG AND HUANG (1972)]
~
~ ~
LEGEND
K/D
1/50 1/100 1/200
~ . 

1/400 i/coo 0
KC= 20
:M ~
CM 2.0 1.8 I .6 I .4 1.2r
KC=
40
CM
KC= 100
2.0 /
~6:
III
I .2 0
1.0 Ml
5 015
1 1 I I I 1I 1
0.5
Re~
I
l@2
1 1 I I I 1*
5
..
0,5 Rex
I.0 105
/ ,1,,,,1 I t @ 10 u Q5
Rex
/
I
Lo
1(35
I 2
I 1 1 5
I1 I
Iol
CD
c.
iii
1.6 1. I .4 ~ 1.2 1.0 0.s 0. 61 a15 1 I x 1 1 Ill R@ x 105 051a25 I I 11
1.2 1.
0.6
0.6
1 I
1 0.4L 020.5 n
Re
105
1
OF Re, KC
=I
I 1 I I I I I II 1.0 2 Re x 105
I 1 I I Ill 10 5
I
I
FIGURE 2.5
VALUES
OF
CM
AND
CD
AS
FUNCTION
AND
ROUGHNESS
COEFFICIENT
in which
M and
=pCMf
D2
(2.19)
kD=;
pCDD
(2.20)
and f = hydrodynamic force per unit length of the vertical cylinder, P = mass density of water, D = cylinder diameter, u and d = water particle velocity and acceleration, and CM, CD = inertia and drag force coefficients respectively. This determining offshore particle empirical forces force on model has been the most widely used method in in an
small The
diameter
vertical depends on
cylindrical a knowledge
members of the
structure. kinematics
computation empirically
water
and
determined
coefficients.
Extensive
research effort has been expended force coefficients, results CM and CD.
In this area, the most noteworthy laboratory by $arpkaya [see Sarpkaya and Isaacson
on CM and CD were
produced
(1981)] from his Utube experiments. are functions of the KeuleganCarpenter roughness parameter of the cylinder.
His data show that these coefficients number (KC), Reynolds number (Re) and The KeuleganCarpenter number is a
measure of the water particle orbital amplitude with respect to the cylinder diameter and is defined as KC = oT/D where U. is the amplitude of the water particle velocity. Typical results for CM and CD from Sarpkayas experiments His analysis shows that for 1.8 at
for different values of KC are shown in Fig. 2.5. smooth cylinders, the value of CD approaches
be considered
data in waves has been made. was made quite by Chakrabarti except for
good
KC where
Chakrabarti s data are sparse and need further verification. The Morison equation has been used in the application of both regular
In a design, the coefficients in the random waves are regular wave tests and assumed constant with
11
I .5
+


Re

= 2X104

0.5
10
20
30
40 u OT/D
50
60
70
FIGURE 2.6
1000
500
1
m
90%
100
DRAG
50
10
cm# o
CD #O y 5.0 
10 % DRAG

m
0.5
LARGE INERTIA
1 % DRAG


o.1.
0.05
NEGLIGIBLE DIFFRACTION
1 ALL INERTIA
Ir
DIFFRACTION REGION
0D5
0.1 kR
1.0
50
FIGURE 2.7
The coefficients have generally been derived in the laboratory in motion or in regular does waves. not The data the from ocean tests of have the
large
scatter
which
validate
applicability
In a test with a vertical cylinder in a wave tank, Vugts measured the forces and corresponding water particle Then they
kinematics
at a small section
of the
cylinder
in random waves.
considered these signals as output and input signals respectively, and applied the measurements nonlinear Morison giving paths. to a general transformation They The chose four models, Morison equation model consisting of linear and to the suited, was
signals.
inertia
coefficient
found to be reasonably constant for a given frequency spectra while the drag coefficient decreased in value with frequency. The Morison equation has been extended to inclined cylindrical members of an offshore structure in terms of a normal velocity component, ~, and a normal acceleration quantity component, ~. In this case, the force is written as a vector
~=kM~+kDl~
(2.21)
(2.22)
(2.23)
(1985)] that
values from the vertical cylinder tests. The expression for the inclined cylinder, Eq. 2.21, is general enough
from it.
is applicable
12
structures
and
structure
components.
Some
of these
are jacket
structure,
risers, tendons,
articulatedtower,
legs of semisubmersible
It should be noted, however, that the applicability oriented cylinder needs further investigation. The regions of applicability
the areas of drag and inertia force predominance the chart in Fig. 2.7.
the maximum drag force, fDO, to the maximum inertia force, flO, for a cylinder in linear waves. DO = 10 where ~ M number. Assuming CD = 1 and CM = 2, the The limits are stated in CD (KC) (2.24) Note that
KC is the KeuleganCarpenter
percentage
terms of the KC number, and the diffraction parameter, kR = mD/L, R = cylinder radius. According to this chart the nonlinear force due to the drag effect The wave force from
tends to become important when KC becomes greater than 2. the Morison equation becomes mostly drag for KC >90. 4 By virtue in of the the time form of the drag if term, the the water drag
force
component velocity
is is
nonlinear sinusoidal.
series
even
particle
On the other hand, the inertia term is linear if the sinusoidal (e.g. by linear wave theory) acceleration terms, is used for the (local) is replaced by the total the inertia term has a
acceleration
convective
QL+v
M+W* ay
(2.25)
in which u, v and w are the components of the water particle velocity vector in a rectangular Cartesian coordinate system. basis of nonlinear wave (irregular) and local stream Wave force data reduced on the theory have dependent shown on the
function forces
measured
profile
measured
satisfactory
correlation with measured total forces [Chakrabarti (1980)]. In addition several modified to the extensions, of of the formula the are Morison used equation stated above,
forms
in the
offshore
structure
13
design. the
These have to do with combining different environmental effects into The two most important of these are current and structure
formula.
motion.
2.4.2 Fixed Cylinder in Waves and Current When current is present with waves, the formula for a fixed structure is written in terms of the total velocity including a steady current, 11,and an
oscillatory component, u as
f =kM~+kD
Iutul
(U.tu)
(2.26)
where tion.
U represents
uniform
of wave propaga
it is sometimes argued that a single drag coefficient does not the total drag force in the presence of waves and
express
f=kMfi+kD
Iulu +rD
U2
(2.27)
~D=~P~DD
(2.28)
number in a wavecurrent
KC= ~e
(2.29)
(2.30)
where U. = amplitude of u and v = kinematic viscosity of water. It should be emphasized that the values of the hydrodynamic coefficients in the wavecurrent alone. field are expected to be different data are limited. from those et in waves (1983)
Unfortunately,
such
Iwagaki,
al.
14
presented values of CM, CD versus KC from a combined wavecurrent test. values shown in Fig. 2.8 are not much different from the wave alone data. Because alternative of the and difficulty of generating equivalent waves on a steady is taken.
These
current
an
often
considered
approach
Sarpkaya
et al. (1984) had adopted one such method in his Utube in which the cylinder was moved steadily in an oscillating flow field. They used the relative
Sarpkayas (1984) paper for other similar data. Moe oscillated measured and Verley (1980) took a slightly different approach. They
a horizontal
cylinder sinusoidally
similar to Eq. 2.27, with the exception that u is replaced by kM by kA, where x is the amplitude of the oscillating
= PCAmD2/4. . The coefficient, CA, is defined as the added mass A coefficient for the oscillating cylinder and is related to CM by CM = 1 + CA for a buoyant cylinder. CA and CD. The They derived the values of~D ,and Fourier averaged dependencies on the
coefficients CA and CD showed complex * amplitude parameter x = xo/D and the reduced velocity,
v~ = UTO/D
(2.31)
where
To = period
of cylinder
oscillation.
values of VR is shown in Fig. 2.11. From the above tests coefficients are directly it is obvious that the values of the hydrodynamic related to the form of the force equation used,
e.g., independent flow field or relative velocity model. threeterm separated Morison equation is that the steady drag
part, e.g.,
in the analysis
of a structural
dynamic problem.
2.4.3 Oscillating Cylinder in Waves When a rigid structure is free to move in waves, the effect of the
15
SYMBOL
q
2 CD
0
q
fidio
Ov
o o o
q q
t
2
q
q
CM 1
o
i
01~
o
FIGURE 2.8
10
20
KC
INERTIA AND DRAG COEFFICIENTS OF FIXED VERTICAL CYLINDER COMBINED WAVECURRENT FIELD [IWAGAKI, ET AL. (1983)]
IN A
,.
 0 N ~ x
~= ~
k o
k o m d
10
20
30
50
10
20
30
50
KC *
KC
FIGURE 2.9
INERTIA
COEFFICIENT
FOR
SMOOTH
OSCILLATING
CYLINDER
IN
UNIFORM COLLINEAR CURRENT (A) Re/KC = 1594 AND (R) Re/KC = 2487 [SARPKAYA ET AL. (1984)]
. . ..
0 .
x
VR3.63 VR =6.17
Qg
v
N.
\ i
lo
10
20
30
50
KC
KC
FIGURE 2.10
CYLINDER
IN UNIFORM
TEST CYLINDER
. .,mmm
WEIGHTS c!
rl
TEST FLUME
II
I 2,
c
O*4J 0 1 I
I 2.0
1.0
3.0
4.0
5.0
Xo/D
FIGURE 2.11
OSCILLATORY
DRAG
COEFFICIENT
FOR
SINUSOIDALLY
OSCILLATING
f =kM8
kA~+kDIUlu
k~lllx
(2.32)
where
kA=pCA~D2/4, k; ~
P C~ D, CA = added mass
coefficient
and C~ = drag
coefficient due to structure motion defined separately from the fluid dynamic drag. This form is known as the independent flow fields; a far field due to
the wave motion and relatively unaffected by the structure motion, and a near field resulting from the structure from wave experiments motion. The values of CM and CD may be CA and CL are derived The
obtained
values of the KC and Re numbers are obtained from the respective velocities and periods. When the forces are written in terms of the relative motion, single
the force term including the structure inertia due to its acceleration, (m; term) is
f =kM(ti
 ;) + kDlu  ~l(u  ~)
(2.33)
to evaluate the stochastic dynamic response of offshore platforms, motions of articulated towers, etc. In this case, the Reynolds number and KC number are defined in terms of thd relative velocity, Vr, as rOTr Re . _ rOD v
KC=
(2.34)
where Vro = amplitude of Vr and Tr = combined period of Vr. not be sinusoidal even if u and X are. It is sometimes added mass
coefficient.
provides different
16
f =kMfi
kA;
+kDlu
x1(u
x)
(2.35)
The
question
arises
as to which
is the
more
appropriate
form
of the
modified Morison equation for a structure moving in waves. variety of offshore structures, e.g., jacket platforms,
articulated
risers, tension leg platforms, that fall under this category in which the drag effect is important, of it is worthwhile 2.33 and to discuss the appropriate 2.35. Because the and useful Morison
applications equation
Eqs. 2.32,
original
is empirical,
formulations
justifiably
application scarce.
of that
form only.
However, experimental
still water, and (3) free to move in the plane of the waves.
velocity of the structure was comparable to the water particle velocity. test showed that the relative velocity form of the Morison equation
appropriate, even though the observations were limited. needed to determine the appropriate values of CM and
Considerable CD in the
work is relative
velocity model in waves. An experiment by Dahong, et al. transverse the values with a submerged articulated tower was performed recently
(1982) in which the motions of the tower both inline and of waves were measured. a relative velocity From these measurements (Eq. 2.33) and lift
model
coefficient,
versus
KC are presented in Fig. 2.12. The region of applicability of the relative velocity and independent flow fields model may be discussed in terms of reduced velocity, VR (defined by U. instead of U in Et q 2.31) and an amplitude parameter, ~ . The limits of
while the yaxis is the KC number based on the water particle velocity. For relatively small. compliant large. structures, e.g. articulated jackets, towers, KC, VR and i are
For conventional
17
CM
.
. \
CD
1, 0
CL
o 0 . 04
I I
10
12
14
16
is
KC
FIGURE 2.12
HYDRODYNAMIC
COEFFICIENTS
KC
1015
10:15
FIGURE 2.13
OF
INDEPENDENT
FLOli FIELD
of the structure
generally
The use of the relative velocity term in the computation of the drag force may be appropriate in these cases. Two other respond to a cases may be considered. resonating drag dominated High KC and small i.e. a VR values corhighfrequency
structure,
cylinder oscillation
Examples of this
case are vibrating structures at high resonant frequency such as riser cables, TLP tendons, etc. Similarly, low KC and high VR values mean a low frequency flow oscillation. of a moored caissons, This second case structure, e.g., two is ap
slowlyoscillating TLP
motions
surge,
floating
relative
velocity flow
applied fields
in Eqs. model,
suspect
independent
plicable.
The main reason for this choice is that the two motions are quite Thus, the smaller motions The
different and relatively independent of each other. are capable of creating local wakes independent
relative velocity model accounts for their combined effect, thus ignoring the smaller motions. The two drag coefficients may be chosen from the two types
of test data, one from a fixed cylinder in waves and one from an oscillating cylinder in still water cylinder). (or alternately, oscillating water past a stationary
for this purpose. A models, simple technique velocity may and be employed in determining field, is which of the two in a
relative
independent
flow
applicable
When the two flows are comparable, one influences the velocity model is applicable. The independent flow
fields model may be used when one of the velocities is large compared to the other. The applicable coefficients are chosen based on the test results
2.4.4 Oscillating Cylinder in Waves and Current For a structure free to oscillate in the presence of waves and current,
f kMfikA
;+kDIUt
Ukl(Ut
UA)
(2.36)
18
Other forms of Eq. 2.36 may be written past. These forms are applicable
to moving structures
whose member sizes are such that the hydrodynamic Even though the equation from is written Eq. 2.36 to define
the terms
appear
on both sides
of the equation
For example,
on the
is a forcing
is an inertia term and belongs to the left hand The third term includes both a force term and If this term is linearized, then the two
side of the equation of motion. a damping term coupled together. components equation. Test may be uncoupled
In a time domain analysis it is treated as a damping term. results work under is this condition, to achieve are however, insight dependent are into upon almost this nonexistent. most complex particle
force
motion
the water
of the
lack of data in this area, the hydrodynamic of such problems are chosen from studies
analysis
those
2.5
STEADY DRIFT FORCE The secondorder theory for the steady drift force is based on the first
order diffractionradiation
theory
and is applicable
to
regular waves.
The In
regular wave results are then applied to wave groups and irregular waves. addition,
a steady drift force develops from the drag force term at the free
surface as well as in current. In the following discussed. section, the steady drift force due to viscous flow is
It is generally applicable to structures that have members in the areas (refer to Fig. 2.7), e.g., in jacket structures, TLP
2.5.1 Steady Drift Force Due to Viscous Flow The forces on a small vertical cylinder due to linear waves may be obtained from the Morison formula by substituting Sinmt , u(t) = U. cosut in Eq. 2.18.
19
f=kMuuosinut+kDu~
Ices
mtlcos (l)t
(2.37)
This form of the wave force at a submerged location has a zero mean over one wave cycle.
If
the cylinder
is allowed to oscillate
harmonically
in waves
amplitude of X. at a phase angle of a with respect to the = X. Cos(ti + a), then the relative velocity model
f = kM AIsin(ti
+ ~) + kD V2 Icos(ut + $)lcos(mt + $)
(2*38j
[u: + (Wo)z
 2 M U. X. Cosl a]llz
(2.39)
tanl( u o
(2.40)
The
expression
in Eq. 2.38
2.38, it is clear that for a moving structure in waves, U. should be replaced by V and ut by wt+ $. fixed cylinder. Note that there aretwo areas that will prod,uce a nonzero mean viscous drift force. When current is present along with waves, a mean drift force is Moreover, due the force will pence, the subsequent derivations are done only for a
generated from the drag force at any elevation of the cylinder. to the changing free surface of the waves at the cylinder,
produce a mean drift at the stil 1 water level (SWL). In the presence broken of current, U, the relative velocity drag force may be depending on the relative magnitude
expressions
+ cos 2ti) + 2 U U.
COS
d]
(2.41)
20
UI <U.
fD = kD [U* + +U:(
1 + cos 2&)
(2.42)
in which
and takes
on values of ~1 depending
on the
sign of u + U. When normalized by kDuo 2 , the mean viscous drift force for unit submerged length of a vertical cylinder is given by the following expressions. the quantity, V, as Defining
o<l#<lr
(2.43)
2 =*[;+(})21 D O and
(2.44) o
TD =+2
D O
{(+)2(24T) + q(+)sin*+
o 0
(vf+~sin
2V)] for~<
U.
(2.45)
normalized force are presented in Fig. 2.14 as functions of U/u. in the range of 2.0 to 2.0. parabolic Note that the curve is asymmetric about U/u. and becomes
at higher
values of U/uo.
A few experimental
current values are also shown in this figure. In vertical order to obtain use of the the expressions Morison of the free surface force on a
cylinder,
equation
is made.
Current
is not
present up The
in the application
equation.
force per unit length of the cylinder due to wave only is given by Eq. 2.18. According to linear theory, the maximum velocity, U. is given as kH cosh ky u o = F u cosh kd
(2.46)
21
o. . w
FIGURE 2.14
VISCOUS DRIFT FORCE ON A FIXED VERTICAL CYLINDER IN A WAVECURRENT FIELD [CHAKRABARTI (1984)]
MEAN
TABLE 2.1
VALUES OF c1 AS FUNCTIONW kH
kH
c1
kH
c1
0.05 0.15 0.25 0.35 0.45 0.55 0.65 0.75 0.85 0.95
1.0003
1.0030 1.0084 1.0164 1.0272 1.0409 1.0574 1.0768 1.0994 1.1251
0.10
0.20 0.30 0.40 0.50 0.60 0.70 0.80 0.90 1.00
1.0013 1.0053 1.0120 1.0215 1.0337 1.0487 1.0667 1.0877 1.1118 1.1392
due to gravity, k = wave number, H = wave height, from bottom. Assuming that the linear
= elevation
th@ory can be applied up to the free surface, the total force is the integral
obtained from
(2.47)
kd )2
(d + ~) + sinh 2k (d + ~) ] ]Cos ut ICos Wt 2k part of the force has a zero mean. The drag
(2.48)
The
inertia
force yields
an
F =J#[&
2.49 is due only to
+C,(W
the free
COth Zkd 1
(2.49)
The numerical values of Cl are shown in Table 2.1 as functions of kH. that Eq. surface variation even though
integration in Eq. 2.47 is carried out over the entire submerged length. mean value, however, is a function of the water depth. Since the linear theory is applicable and is valid up up to the to the SWL, use free for infinitesimal
surface
questionable.
stretching formulas have been suggested in finite water depth by particle kinematics at the wave crest and the wave trough
the water
If
water particle velocity is written as = gkH u z cosh kY (~) cosh kd cos ut (2.50)
and ~ is expressed in terms of U. and u as done earlier, then the total force up to the free surface is given by
22
(d +
n) [1 ++
]ICOS
utlcos tit
(2.51)
T
2kD g/k2 ~
(kH)3
[ sin; 2kd +*
(2.52)
Thus, the mean force from the free surface effect of a small vertical cylinder (where viscous effect is important) is a function of the cube of the wave
height as opposed to the square of it for the potential drift force, as will be found in the following section. Note that in deep water, mates as M2 = gk and the expression in Eq. 2.49 approxi
T
Zk
However, D
c1
(2.53)
g,k2 ~(kH)3 the mean free surface force from Eq. 2.52 approaches zero as the
The mean drift force from Eq. 2.53 have been that the normalized force depends on kH
(1984)].
2.5.2 Steady Drift Force Due to Potential Flow For structures that are large, the force is mainly inertial and potential theory is applicable. The steady drift force is second order and can be shown potential. The contribution due to the steady
drift force from the potential flow about a floating body has four components which are addressed in the following section.
2.5.2.1 Wave Elevation Drift Force Consider the extension of pressures above the mean water level to the Then the
integration of this pressure around the object at the water line gives rise to a steady secondorder is given by force whose component, Tl, in the horizontal direction
23
0.0
62
0.4
0.6
0.8
Lo
kH
FIGURE 2.15
MEAN VISCOUS DRIFT FORCE FROM FREE SURFACE VERTICAL CYLINDER IN DEEPWATER (kd < T)
EFFECT ON A FIXED
VELOCITY VISCOUS
n .. ml 


1
1
I 2
1 3 m
I 4
1 5
FIGURE 2.16
in
which
the
bar
denotes
mean
value,
acceleration
due
to
gravity,
C1 = first order wave amplitude at a point on the moving body, nx = direction cosine, and WL = water line at the body surface. For a fixed vertical cylinder that extends from the free surface to a
submerged point where there is no wave action, the body may be treated as twodimensional and the MacCa~Fuchs theory is applicable. In this case, the The
1
An(kR) An+l(kR)
(2.55)
~2(kR)3 n=O
where
D = cylinder
diameter
(= 2R),
g = incident wave
amplitude
(= H/2),
k = wave order n
number, and An(kR) = J:2(kR) + Y~2(kR) , Jn,Yn = Bessel function of of the first and second kind respectively, and prime denotes
2.5.2.2 Velocity Head Drift Force The second term of Bernoullis equation provides a steady secondorder
velocity potential
radiation effect is used to compute the pressure. Then the steady horizontal force component may be obtained from the integral
(2.56)
in which s = surface of the body and V@ = firstorder velocity vector. For the fixed vertical cylinder in deep water, the horizontal velocity
head drift force may be calculated using the total velocity potential.
(2.57)
Combining
vertical cylinder.
24
1
AnAn+l
(2.58)
In intermediate water depths, this force is a so a function of the depth. Numerical values of the wave elevation drift force, ~1 , and the velocity head drift force, ~2 potential Fig. 2.16. versus the in the , as well as the total steady force due to the total wave presence of a fixed vertical cylinder are shown in
parameter,
values
ranging from d/R = 1 to reasonably deep water, d/R = 5. is positive whileT2 is negative over the
Note
quantity~l
range of kR ) approaches
considered.
a constant value of 1/3 in deep water at higher values of kR. For a moving cylinder there are two other components due to the motion of the body contributing to the total steady drift force.
2.5.2.3 Body Motion Drift Force The position. firstorder However, wave the force on the body is computed waves at and its mean a
body
undergoes
motion
due to
assumes
Therefore, if
a Taylor series expansion about the mean body position is made, the second. order steady horizontal force term takes the following form:
(2.59)
2.5.2.4 Rotational Inertia Drift Force This term arises because the firstorder forces due to the pressure are
always normal to the surface. As the vessel oscillates the direction of these normals rotate. fixed Then, form coordinate If the components system the are of these normals in the directions of the a nonlinear drift load develops.
considered,
mathematically,
assumes the
25
o o ti
Z:lo
o N
0 
0 +
In
0 o 0
0
0.2
0.4
kR
0.6
0.8
!.0
FIGURE 2.17
REGIMES
OF
POTENTIAL
VERSUS
VISCOUS
DRIFT
FORCE (1984)1
ON
FIXED
.,
113
WAVE ~
n
o
2.0
/ f / I
1.0
\
0 o 2.5 WAVE
.. .. .
5.0 PERIOD
7.5 ,
10.0 SEC.
12.5
FIGURE 2.18
=
(2.60)
where F= force vector. Thus, only the results based on the firstorder velocity potential are
needed to obtain the steady second order force. is obtained by adding the four components
(2.61)
in the direction of surge. The preceding four contributions arise from the assumption that the fluid flow is irrotational and the potential theory is applicable. In order to
determine whether the viscous effect is important, calculations may be made to compute the viscous drag force on the moving body from the drag part of the Morison equation. form For a moving cylinder in surge, this calculation takes the
=kDlu;
l(u
~)
(2.62)
in which ~ = surge velocity of the cylinder. the free surface above to the the SWL, of a
arises A
which deep
is
proportional
thtrd
power
amplitude.
water
approximation of this expression in the absence of motion gives , ~= &kD (gk) L3 , (2.63)
which
is comparable
to
Eq. 2.53
except
(= 1 here) and
(kR)( c/R)
(2.64)
PgG2D The effect of the viscous drift force on the cylinder in relation to the drift force contribution from the potential flow is shown in Fig. 2.16. Con
sider the radius of the cylinder to be 2 ft. and a wave height of 0.5 ft. for all wave periods so that L/R = 0.125. The value of CD is considered to be
26
1.0.
Then, the values of the viscous drift force are as shown in Fig. 2.16.
Note that, in general, the viscous drift force is small compared to the potential force for all values of kR and increases the viscous effect is about 15 percent linearly with kR. drift At kR = 2, force. For
of the potential
smaller diameter cylinders and higher waves the viscous effect can become more predominant because of its third order dependence on the wave height. For a general floating body, it is difficult to discuss the ranges of the diffraction parameter, kR and viscosity parameter, H/D (or q/R) where the
viscous or the potential drift forces are predominant. assessment of their relative importance
to the potential drift force, then the region may be constructed Fig. 2.17 for different values of Z = 0.1, 1 and 10. represents equal contribution from the viscous
and potential
For Z = 10, the potential drift may be neglected just as the viscous drift at z = 0.1. An example of the effect of a nonlinear viscous term on the motion of a TLP [Kobsyashi, et al. (1985)] is shown in Fig. 2.18. In this case, steady The The
drift force as a function of the wave period in regular waves is given. solid line represents the computed values based on potential theory.
dotted line includes the effect of the viscous drift force from the relative velocity model. The correlation of the experimental data is much better with
Moreover, the contribution of the viscous drift force is potential waves drift have force at higher energy. periods Note (beyond that 7.5 a
the
sees.)
ocean
much
higher
for
(where
Z is closer to 10), Fig. 2.17 shows the drift force to be primarily viscous. In order to compute the steady wave drift force due to wave groups and irregular spectrum, waves, the following u = wave procedure frequency, is used. The wave energy density wave group or
S(U), where
, due to the
(2.65)
27
in which ml and w
2.6
NONLINEAR MOTION RESPONSE A floating structure is connected to the ocean floor in several different
ways. which
An articulated tower is connected to the seafloor via a universal joint allows certain degrees of freedom to the of the tower. by means A ship, barge or a of a catenary system
semisubmersible through
is attached
seafloor
a turntable
has all six degrees of freedom. series of vertical tendons. pitch motion. In addition to the forcing
function,
the
equation
of motion
typically
includes an inertia, a linear damping and a restoring force term. term includes an added mass term. the linear diffraction/radiation
The inertia
The added mass coefficient is obtained from theory for a large structure or from the
modified Morison equation for a small member. * terms of the diffraction 0.5 the diffraction parameter
becomes
important.
The restoring force term arises from system. This term is often
nonlinear,
if the motion
of the structure
The nonlinear viscous damping is often significant and, therefore, needs to be introduced analysis. in the equation of motion of the system in the firstorder
2.6.1 FirstOrder Motions with Nonlinear Drag Damping The problem of calculating exciting forces using the firstorder theory
written as the sum of an incident velocity potential, $i(x,y,z,t) and a scattered velocity potential, @s(x,y,z,t). The incident velocity potential, ~i is
Laplaces equation and the appropriate free surface, the ocean bottom and
28
Sommerfeld normal
velocity of in the
is zero. of this
approach problem
application
numerical to a two
terms
unknown
scattered
potential
reduces
dimensional
Fredholm
integral equation
in Greens function.
The firstorder
The
submerged surface of the cylinder at its equilibrium position is obtained from the first term in Bernoullis equation,
(2.66)
coefficients
associated
of
harmonically
in still water.
The formulation of this problem is quite similar to the previous one for fixed structures and uses the same Greens function. The integral equation is
modified by the body surface boundary condition which states that the normal velocity component of the fluid at a point on the body is equal to the
is absent and the velocity potential for a particular motion of the body e.g., surge, sway, heave, pitch, roll and yaw, @j (j = 1, 2, . , ., 6) replaces the scattered known, potential inphase in the earlier formulation. components Once of a particular the reaction
@j j5
the
and
outofphase
forces
constitute the added mass and damping coefficients for that degree of freedom. Considering system may that the nonlinear damping is important, the motion differential of the of
be described
equations
. .
k + ~k k + ~k!;k!~k
j =1,2,
..6
(2.67)
in
which
mjk
mass
and
moment
of
inertia Njk =
matrix, nonlinear
?4j k
added
mass
matrix, Njk =
linear
damping
matrix,
damping
matrix,
29
xk, with respect to the time, t. linear diffraction radiation buoyancy The problem. change of theory The the
Fj and
obtained
from the
while
of the corresponding
i$
restoring structure
matrix, spring
composed in the
of
the
the
constant
system.
nonlinear
damping
term, N~k is evaluated from the drag part of the Morison equation and depends on a drag coefficient. This term is particularly important for a motion near
the natural period of the structure. All terms the mooring simplified in Eq. 2.67 are linear (on the assumption that the springs in damping term. 2.67, this For a term is
equation
xk=xk@i(d+~)
in which Xk and = amplitude Bk = its of phase motion angle. not necessarily linear with amplitude Then the nonlinear damping
(2.68)
the
wave is
term
approximated as
(2.69)
The
right hand
side
of
Eq.
2.69
is the
first
term
of
the
Fourier
series
On substitution t, the
time,
following
unknowns, Xk and Bk are obtained: 6 ~ [W2(llljk+ Mjk) + i~(N~k +$N~k k=l Xk ei6k =FjelUj, j=l,2, ..6
~Xk) jk]
(2.70)
the term with ti~k is assumed zero initially to obtain the first estimate of Xk and Bk through a 6 x 6 matrix inversion. for Xk in the t@rtTIwith N~k to This value of Xk is then substituted the subsequent solution until a
compute
30
Several different
variations
(drag) damping effects on the structure are considered small, the equations of motion reduce to 6
~
ei(~t +
j
~j)
~ZII( =
jk
jk)
N~k
jk
k]
(2.71)
which is a linear equation whose solution is obtained as Eq. 2.70 for N? = (). Jk The correlation of the numerical results with experiments in wave tanks
on a variety of floating structures has shown that satisfactory agreement can be obtained by the simplified for a conventional theory. An example of such an experimental The
correlation
barge was tested in the head sea position in which the surge, heave and pitch motions where were sway, significant, heave and (Fig. 2.19) as well as in the beam The sea position cross marks
rol1 were
important
(Fig. 2.20).
results.
The correlation
everywhere except near the natural period of the springmass roll). The theory seems to overpredict
the experimental
data, partly due to the low damping values near the natural
period from the linear theory. In Figs. 2.19 and 2.20, the nonlinear solution obtained from Eq. 2.70 is shown as the solid line. due to (while a different the amount While the scatter in the experimental of nonlinear is damping with for a different wave term. data may be wave height the the the
theoretical is better
curve with
obtained added
given damping
height) Thus, of
correlation nonlinear
this the
nonlinear near
damping
improves
solution
the
natural
period
structure in a particular mode of oscillation. The coupled nonlinear equations describing the various degrees of motion that solved istics. model water force. include in the a significant frequency relativevelocitysquared while retaining their drag term cannot be
domain
nonlinear
character
The use of the independent flow fields model or the relative velocity of motion drag depends on the relative magnitudes the structure motion of the damping seems
force
comparable
relative
velocity
model
appropriate.
31
1.5
. OEXPERIHENTRL NONLINEWI
W 0.6
K
0 1.0
9 t
;0.8
Y
x 0.2
z PERIOD
FIGURE 2.19
CORRELATION OF THE MOTIONS OF A MOORED BARGE IN REGULAR WAVES IN AHEAD SEA ICHAKRABARTI AND COTTER (1983)]
1.5
I
mExPER1RENT9L XLINERR
NBNLINEhR
k \ 60 a
x x
~e
AX
15 0 0 I 2 PERIOD 3
FIGURE 2.20
CORRELATION OF THE MOTIONS OF A MOORED BARGE IN REGULAR WAVES IN A BEAM SEA [CHAKRABARTI AND COTTER (1983)]
In random waves the equation of motion is written as before except that the added mass This and damping coefficients are obtained from the convolution
integrals.
is required
for a random seastate because these quantities Thus, the equation of motion including
are functions
of wave
frequencies.
~k (t 
T) ik(~)
dr Cjk
Xk] = Fj(t)
(2.72)
where
(2.73)
and
(2.74)
The quantities Mjk and Njk are the frequency dependent added mass and damping coefficients, respectively. It is clear that this set of equation can only be The solution method is quite cumbersome and
2.7
LOW FREQUENCY OSCILLATION The surface profile of a unidirectional random seastate may be
random
by Eq. 2.13.
The wave
profile
may be conveniently
in a
where the quantity under the radical sign is the wave amplitude and complex Gaussian random variable with the following properties:
in
is a
(2.76)
32
where
argument,
m # n and asterisk
denotes conjugate. The appear steady potential drift force in regular waves has been shown to
terms
potential.
Since an of two
components
the interaction
force as before, but also oscillating drift force components at low as well as high frequencies. There This is illustrated by a simple example. contributions to the high and low order components. in the
are several
One of them is the free surface component. present example. The pressure
at a submerged
p=p2&l
7P
(u*+
V*)
(2.77)
where Q is the total potential due to the wave field in the presence of TLP, u and v are the corresponding horizontal and vertical velocity components and p By linear theory, the first term in Eq. 2.77 is Let us consider of two
a first order pressure while the second term is secondorder. only the incident wave wave field and also assume Ml that and
regular
components
having
frequencies
linear
u = u Cos Ut 11
Cos u2t
(2.78)
sin m9t
(2.79)
where (ul, Vl) and (U2, V2) are the velocity amplitude components at Ml and m2 respective Y* Then, the secondorder pressure term, on expansion, reduced to
P2 =
+ M*)t +
33
 w2)t]
a steady force, a component
W2,
(2.80)
produce
of force at
twice the frequency of the individual components, force and a difference frequency force.
ml and
a sum frequency
Thus, while the energy of wave at the heave and pitch natural frequencies as well as surge frequency the wave energy may be is negligible, chosen such two individual their sum or frequencies their within
that
difference
(e.g., heave and pitch of a TLP) periods or the For example, a 6 second period will
produce a second harmonic at 3 seconds which may correspond to heave or pitch natural period. second period. difference seconds. The oscillating drift force is computed following the method outlined by Pinkster (1980). In an irregular wave this force appears as a slowlyvarying Similarly, an 8 second and 4.8 second period would add to a 3 A combination of 8 second and 8.7 second period will produce a corresponding to the surge natural period of 99.4
frequency
F2(t) =
(n = 1, 2, . . ., N) in
the irregular wave, P (symmetric) is the inphase component of the wave drift force in a wave group of frequencies component ~ and Un, Q (asymmetric) is the
corresponding
outofphase
of the drift
force, and
~n represents
The force, F2, in Eq. 2.73 may be similarly expressed as N F2(t) = ~ x ~mn uu*e mn m=l n=l where i(wm  mn)t (2.82)
(2.83)
34
In the above expression for F2, real Parts are assumed= For a linearly moored lightly danped system, the equation of horizontal
motions (to which the secondorder force is sensitive) may be written as shown in Eq. 2.71 where the right hand side is replaced by expressions of Eqm 2.82. of the form
where
(2*85)
and
T;
is given by
T: = [Newmans +,
(OJ m
Wn)2 (mij+
(2.86)
(1974) approximate
solution
narrowband spectrum, e.g., for a wave group, it may be assumed that ~ are close to each other without appreciable error. [ ~+%z so that Then they
P(wm,un) P
~+n ,~]
Pmn
(2.87)
(2.88)
and (2.89)
where Pmn is obtained from the regular wave steady drift force at a frequency corresponding to the mean of the frequencies, If it is further consequence ~ and ~. that is of any large line load is the
in determining
mooring
natural frequency, ~,
35
(2.90)
and only the diagonal terms in Eq. 2.89 are relatively important which gives
F(t) =~p
cOS (~t)
(2.91)
Since natural
the
slowly of
mooring in
line a
frequency
surge,
(2,92)
in which
m = total
mass
of the cylinder
including
N2 = nonlinear
damping coefficient,
Eq. 2.67
x XOCOS(~t+E)
(2.93)
where
X. = amplitude of oscillation
The solutions
(2.94)
and
tan z=
q4[Nl+~qqN2xol
[K~m]
(2.95)
TM=
2.8
Kxo
(2.96)
HIGH FREQUENCY SPRINGING FORCE When a floating structure, e.g., a TLP is restrained in the vertical
36
direction by its tendons, the natural period in heave is small, being of the order of 24 seconds. This gives rise to the problem of high frequency The
oscillation of TLP in heave due to a high frequency second order force. general design approach offshore for the TLP structures. is its is not particularly different
from any
What makes the dynamics of TLP unique response to the high frequency wave
floating
structures
Besides the responses at the wave frequency, the platform is frequency tension oscillation of the vertical tethers The is they
a high
(often cal led springing) and a low frequency drift osci 1lation in surge. overall extremely damping small of for the both system the (including springing mechanical and hydrodynamic) so that
and drift
oscillation
produce a significant load in the tendons and significant motion in surge. The velocity transfer difference secondorder potentials functions forces and the are obtained from the firstequation. are and secondorder The quadratic derive the
Bernoullis expressions
obtained
used to
force
j~l + Qfj
Uj)t
(Ei
Ej)]
(2.97)
,j and Q:. are the even and odd components of normalized forces due to where P?
lJ
and gj are the corresponding wave amplitudes, and N is the i and m. J i number of wave components in the random wave simulation. It is clear from the above expressions that in regular waves
F(2)(t)= ()
and N F(2)+(t) = I <:{P;i Cos 2(uit ~i) + i=l
(2.98)
(2.99)
Thus, the low frequency force is absent while the high frequency force appears at twice the regular wave frequency. a function of the square of the Moreover, this force is nonlinear, being amplitudes, ~i (secondorder). The
wave
37
(2.100)
ii
= tan1
($) ii
(2.101)
Based
on
this
transfer
function
then,
the
tether
forces
in the
high
frequency springing may be simply obtained by solving a linearized equation of motion in heave and pitch. in waves generated The wave in which forces A model test was performed on a vertical cylinder on the fixed cylinder were wave measured. The waves
regular
waves
of the forces measured due to one of the wave groups is shown in Fig. 2.21. The wave profile corresponds to waves of frequencies 0.44 HZ and 0.88 HZ. force has additional peaks present corresponding to second harmonics The
of the
These higher
order loads are small, being on the order of 3 to 5 percent of the firstorder loads. waves The correlation with the computed of the secondorder load approximated fixed cylinder by the loads in regular potential is
firstorder
shown in Fig. 2.22. Numerous analyses and model tests have been performed on TLPs which One of TLP was
aspects of platform motion and tether included et al. The all three areas They pitch of response the
performed forces
analyzed natural
motion
tether almost
for
periods
identical.
In random waves, the added mass and damping terms were assumedto The solution was obtained by
be frequency dependent as outlined in Eqs. 2.72. a finite difference scheme. an analytical solution with
DeBoom, et al. (1984) conpared results from such the measured high frequency tether forces in is
regular waves
in a test with
a four
The correlation
The fore and aft tether forces were found to be almost From this, it is concluded that most of the high frequency motion of the TLP. The springing force
appeared at the higher (twice for regular waves) frequencies and was nonlinear
38
6 4 2 0 2 4
6
I
pI
I
I
bk~PRO& I&;
I I I I I 1 I
1 I
&&&
I
I
I i I 1
I
I
I
I I I i I
2CM
If
!1 u
1 I
ulf
1111
0.0
2.5
Elae
L~
7:s
10.0 ~
12. s
TOT*
HW?IZHW
15.0
17.5
20:0
FIGURE 2.21
MEASURED WAVE AND HORIZONTAL FORCE ON A FIXED VERTICAL CYLINDER IN A PAIRED REGULAR WAVE
r
F2
!
I
= ~
O I
PETRAUSKAS&NIU
o 0 0 0
00 0
* 00
A A A
o 0
u &
%
c o
c, c,
0.5
OoA A A 1
1:0
1:5
Ka
FIGURE 2.22
HIGH FREQUENCY FORCES ON A FIXED VERTICAL CYLINDER [PETRAUSKAS AND LIU (1987)]
F2 n Fi
F3 F4
Computed 
Measured
q
Fl&F2 F3&F4
t\ \ , \ \ \ \ \
2.0
ii 0 w f) I 1 I E)u, # +
0 0.5
1.0

Z*5
2@i(rod/$ec)
FIGURE 2.23
SPRINGING
1 I
II II II
1 ,!
w
ave
spectrum
/111
1111 1111 I
I 1II
0111 I ! 1011
0.00
0.25
FrequencyJHz
0.50
FIGURE 2.24
RANDOM
WAVES
ON
TLP
AND
CORRESPONDING
TENDON
LOADS
fore and aft tether forces are the same theoretically, different values. The force being secondorder is
accurately and hence the discrepancy and somewhat poor correlation. The springing forces on a large scale (1:16) TLP model were measured in a test in the CBI tank [Petrauskas and Liu (1987)] with a fourlegged TLP hull The springing forces Regular waves at
twice the pitch period amplified the resonant springing force in the tendon. The amplification of the force at the tendon due to a random wave is clearly shown in Fig. 2.24. The tendon load at the wave frequencies is almost The
corresponding correlation of the regular wave (averaged) springing load in the tendons values is shown show the in Fig. 2.25. importance The computed knowledge results for different of damping damping the
of the
in determining
springing force.
2.8.1 Damping at Low and High Frequency Responses The resonant response of a mooring structure, e.g., a TLP, is limited by the amount of damping present in the system. The TLP system experiences Sometimes, systems tendons are and
damping from two natural sources, e.g., material and hydrodynamic. mechanical introduced dampers [Katayama (1984)] or other active damper the
externally.
The material
damping
appears
from
their attachments
slow drift of the structure in the presence of waves produces an added damping force which may be called wave drift damping (or wave damping). motion of a slender body, the contribution was found to be small by Nakamura, et al. For the surge
motion, it was important. The equal. contributions from the material and radiation damping are nearly
factor to be 0.1 while the radiation damping for the dominant pitch response was 0.13. The heave response at a natural period of 2.5 seconds was small
39
70
60
50
40
%
d ~ r 2030
1
0 0
symbol
damping
factor
O.llO/O
0.41% 0.84% 1.600/0 o

w II
0 0
8
}
0 0 0
10 
0 0
8 1 1
I 2.48
0
2.24
I
2.32
I
2.40
I 2.56
Half Wave
Period,
sec.
FIGURE 2.25
CORRELATION
OF
HIGHFREQUENCY
TENDON
LOADS
ON
TLP
MODEL
()
() () c) (1 / c) () \ f
r ()
t%
02
04
06
IiR
0.8
1.0
1.2
I.4
FIGURE 2.26
WAVE DRIFT DAMPING COEFFICIENTS FOR ASEDCO MODEL [HEARN, ET AL. (1987)]
700 SEMISUBMERSIBLE
compared to the pitch response at a natural period of 3.0 seconds. the draginduced damping in the high frequency and pitch motions of a TLP is rather
However,
negligible
platform motion is extremely small. Chakrabarti (1984) presented the lowfrequency hydrodynamic coefficients and
in surge and sway for several floating vessels including a semisubmersible a vertical cylinder.
The results from the vertical cylinder showed that the (less than 0.02 percent) and most of The wave
the still water damping is linear viscous damping (about 1 percent). damping factor in regular waves was proportional
amplitude and was equally impor+afi+ UU11U9 The discussed percent to heave damping factor obtained and Liu from the pluck test of a TLP model
earlier
[Petrauskas The
(1987)] was found to range from 0.11 prototype values should be even
1.6 percent.
corresponding
smaller if they are assumed to be dependent on the Reynolds number. The wave damping at the lowrfrequency analytically Since the in the following way [see in surge of a TLP may be treated (1987) for details]. higher
Hearn, et al.
period
is an order of magnitude
than the wave period, the problem may be assumed to be equivalent to computing the added resistance of the TLP advancing at a slow forward speed during half the drift cycle in regular waves. (1987) in computing wave This approach was taken coefficient in slow by Hearn et al. drift of a
damping
Once the added resistances for different forward speeds and are known, the wave drift damping coefficients quadratic
transfer
may be computed
of the added
resistance as the forward speed approaches zero. aRU(U) b21=r U=o (2.102)
where b21 = wave drift damping coefficient, and Rw = added resistance in waves. coefficients with the model test
(1987).
1.1
rad/sec., the damping is large whereas This observation is, however, only
it is quite small.
40
valid drift
particular could be
geometry quite
illustrate surge
that
the wave
drift
oscillation
computation. As mentioned earlier, the surge natural period for a typical TLP is long, being of the order of 100 seconds. model surge. second at a scale of 1:64 for Qi, et al. (1986) tested a fourlegged TLP low frequency hydrodynamic coefficients 12.5 seconds in (100
higher due to
The still water linear damping was obtained from a pluck test using the transient equation of motion. The damping factor in surge was found to be a possibly due to the presence of viscous provided higher damping al., the damping values. was
function of the initial displacement, damping. From the As expected, information rectangular presented by
pontoons Qi, et
factor
Damping Factor Circular pontoon Rectangular pontoon 0.03  0.06 0.03  0.09
increased decrease
in value
2.9
MATERIAL PROPERTIES Often the nonlinearities are encountered in the properties of the
material involved in the offshore structure system. for the flexible members of an offshore
structure.
components that exhibit nonlinear behavior are risers, mooring lines, etc.
2.9.1 Catenary System The type of nonlinearities is illustrated here. Consider encountered in a catenary type mooring system a mooring system that is composed of two
41
different
The clump weight may be considered acting positive upwards in which case it is replaced by a buoy. The two elements of the line may have different weight
cable element at the upper part and a chain element at the lower part of the catenary. A clump weight is also often used at the junction. Thus, the upper
part of the catenary reacts to the smaller waves and behaves as a soft system while the lower part is prov ded to make the system stiff in response to
occasional big waves. Given conditions quantities these where in the conditions, both parts and Fig. of in the the 2.27 line demonstrates assume a the four possible The as
catenary are
shape. defined
figure
subsequent
analysis
follows: Q = length of lower element lying on seafloor; B =weight buoyancy of buoy at the intersection of element intersection; of two elements;
of clump or
vessel; *1 = angle lower element makes with horizontal upper element makes with horizontal at surface vessel. of Fig. 2.27 can be broken down into two cases. seafloor or it does not.
only problem remaining is to choose the proper location for the intersection {al, bl} such that the summation of forces at the intersection Fig. 2.28. Turning assumptions first to the are made: the situation described by Fig. 2.29a, the following is zero. See
the line can only carry loads along its axis. Then, the summation of forces on a small element,
9=
where w
f[l
= weight
+(+)211/2
per unit length, which may be reduced to
(2.103)
a first
order
(2.104)
42
...
a)
(Go}
b)
. (0,0)
(0,0)
t
d)
(qo)
FIGURE 2.27
FIGURE 2.28
EQUILIBRIUM IN CATENARY
CONDITIONS
.. .
a)
*
As (AX,AY)
FYI
1
..  . 
[ Bx@y)
b)
%AY)
FIGURE 2.29
~=%
(2.105)
Thus
$f= k
(1 +
,2)1/2
(2.106)
Y=+
(2.107)
Equation there
2.107 must
be solved
in terms
of boundary
conditions.
Since
k, Cl, and C2, there must be three boundary condthese are line length, ~; scope, Sc = Bx  Ax; Using these boundary conditions the following
itions.
and elevation,
(2.108)
where u = ~
Equation 2.108 is solved by a computer program using standard numerical technique such as the Newton Rhapson method. When u is known, Cl and C2 can
be derived from Eq. 2.107. The depart, analysis. constant. above analysis from gives the the the classical theory catenary if solution. is added of It will to the is
however,
stretch
Throughout
horizontal
component
tension
is constantly
line changes.
in the line is a function of position which It is assumed that the stretch can per unit length can be
will change with the stretch in the line. be added to the initial line length
modified uniformly which is cons dered a valid assumption. Employing Hook@s law for e astic deformation F..ds (2.109)
43
where d6 = incremental
deformation;
Fx = load; ds = incremental
length, A =
crosssectional area of cable; and E = Youngs modulus. On substitution of various quantities on the right hand side, the form of 6 becomes
(2.110)
After
d is determined
from
Eq. 2.110
line is
This procedure
repeated until the tension in the line balances the stretch in the line. Turning to the situation described in Fig. 2.29b, part of the mooring assume that {Ax, AYI = {Q,
For simplicity,
0}.
At this point, the slope of the line is zero; therefore, Eq. 2.107 can be
 l/k
(2.111)
and
(2.112)
(2.113)
Upon substitution
{Bx,By} into
Eq. 2.111, two simultaneous equations with two unknowns are derived.
 l/k
(2.114)
(2.115)
equations for k and Q, Cl and Stretch may then with the on the
C2 can be easily derived and the catenary equation defined. be added to the slight change line in a fashion no integration
that
lying
bottom. Fx = w/k.
In this
part
of the
line,
the tension
is constant
and
equal
to
Therefore, FXQ
81 r
(2.116)
Fx
~z=~ {
X +
[1 + cosh
2(kx
+ Cl)]dx
(2.117)
(2.118)
This length,
total stretch is
~,
substituted
simultaneous
process is repeated until convergence is achieved. It is cle,ar from the above analysis that this type of system will produce a nonlinear spring constant in the mooring line, making the motion analysis of a floating offshore storage moored system nonlinear. of Such a system of is quite systems prevalent are in
operations. tankers,
Examples
such
moored
pipelay
barges,
mooring
systems,
floating
production systems, and guyed towers. A typically moored tanker system with catenary chains is shown in
Fig. 2.30 where four chains have been used on a turntable. an example of the loadelongation used in a wave from tank model test. equations characteristic The solid while the
obtained
the
above
2.9.2 Flexible Structures The material stiffness of the components of a flexible structure
of the structure.
The application
of such an element in the marine field may be seen in the marine risers, OTEC coldwater pipes, and members or conductors in a production platform. end conditions for a flexible member are possible, e.g., fixedfixed, etc. The basic horizontal equation Various fixed
free, pinnedfree,
of motion of such a
45
\9
\\
TURRET ~ ANCHOR (TYI?) i)
v ~
NYLON HAWSER
CLUMP
LENGTH
WEIGHT
(TYP)
CHAIN ON BOTTOM
OF
ANCHOR RADIUS
FIGURE 2.30
o 0 g
 THEORY
 MEASURED
I
12
16
20
TANKER
DISPLACEMENT .
(M)
FIGURE 2.31
LOADELONGATION
flexible
cylindrical
member
including
[ wY)~l
 Te(Y) ~ ay
 w(y) ~+
f(y~t)
(2.119)
The first term on the left hand side in Eq. 2.119 is the horizontal from the flexural rigidity, the second and third terms arise
effective tension, Te, and buoyant weight, w, respectively. the inertia of the riser accelerating
hand term represents the external forcing function. For static riser problems, the value of the last term is zero and the
right hand side of Eq. 2.119 is replaced by the time independent drag term due to a constant current profile as
f(y) = ; P CD(Y)
D(y)
U2(Y)
(2.120)
where
current velocity as a function of the vertical coordinate, y. For a dynamic riser analysis, the righthand side of Eq. 2.119 may
is given as a forcing function, f(y,t) which may be expressed by the modified Morison equation (including relative velocity, e.g., Eq. 2.35). An added mass
effect from Eq. 2.35 is included in the last term of the left hand side of Eq. 2.119. The additional at the two solution of Eq. 2.119 for the static or dynamic case requires
constraints ends or
conditions,
horizontal
offset
marine riser.
solutions are achieved in one of several available numerical techniques, e.g., direct or indirect finite difference or finite element methods. A frequency
domain analysis is possible only after the linearization of all the nonlinear terms, and may not be suitable in many riser applications.
46
3.0
The design and performance of an offshore structure depends largely upon the response of the structure to the environmental loading such as waves. response analyses outlined waves. should extreme However, be known in Chapter 2 are generally applicable to The
regular
offshore
response
chosen
structure
should
LIFETIME RESPONSE The expected maximum response during its lifetime should be known to
OPERATIONAL RESPONSE The responses of the structure under its normal operating conditions must be known to ensure the intended operability of the structure.
FATIGUE DAMAGE The accumulated responses of the structure during its entire lifetime
must be known to assess the cumulative damage of the structure over this period.
criterion due
governed it is
members This
failure
be caused
by the maximum
instantaneous Alternatively,
stress it may
these quantities. The primary concernof this report is to discuss available computational loading. The design of
methods of the extreme event due to the environmental an offshore approach. structure In a is based on either method,
or a probabilistic described in
deterministic
analyses
Chapter 2 for a given wave and wave theory may be applied. method of design may include a shortterm prediction
47
prediction.
response statistics are obtained on the basis of This seastate is specified by an energy spectral On
one particular
model having a given significant wave height and a characteristic the other hand, the longterm
period.
the structure is expected to encounter during its design lifetime. For fixed structures, for example, steel piled value and concrete gravity
method
of extreme
prediction
is normally method is
assessment, For an
cases,
floating
structures, seas.
a probabilistic
method
is common,
but only
shortterm
The operational
mode of floating
structures
is generally analyzed on
the basis of longterm prediction. A shortcoming based of on the deterministic and probabilistic is in the extreme choice of value the
shortterm
statistics
It is not always obvious which set of environmental the largest responses. On the other hand, the
conditions longterm
environmental
data over the entire service life of a structure, e.g., in the is scarce. on which of a Therefore, the reliability of the the few responses (typically, lifetime and are 25) based years may be
The
extrapolation to the
direct
data
structures
beyond
introduces are
used to obtain similar information. For Gaussian response processes, the probability of system failure may be related to the excitation process statistics. This relationship is well small This
established
and straightforward
to perform.
Unfortunately,
however,
nonlinearities nonlinearity,
however small, may cause significant departures of the response from the Gaussian form in the extreme tails of the response Sinc,e the extreme responses are derived from the tail end of
characteristics distributions.
the response distribution, such derivations have a very profound effect on the probability of the system failure. methods case. of The predicting general on the the It is thus of vital importance to develop of is the response in the nonlinear Some limited the
distribution problem
nonlinear response
largely may
unsolved. be
information
characteristics
obtained
from
48
perturbation
methods
and equivalent
linearization
techniques.
Distribution
functions of some nonlinear probability theory. Tickell probabilistic structure. particle sea, (1978)
presented to the
review
of of
the fluid
stateoftheart loading on an
on
the
approach
problem
offshore
Linear random wave theory is generally used to describe the water While it represents a versatile model for the random
kinematics.
limitations. derivatives
kinematics frequencies
increasingly
(tail end of the spectra) where wave energy is generally small. enhanced in the free surface zone. The higher moments
This is particularly
of the spectra, mn, which depend on the nth power of frequency, likewise blow up due to this divergence of spectra at the high frequencies. These moments Moreover,
are often needed for the computation of the distribution functions. the linear process of describing
horizontal asymmetry seen in steep storm waves. For a particular seastate characterized by the random wave parameters, period of the
H SY Tz and f30,where Hs = significant wave height, Tz = zerocrossing and 00 = angle of mean wave direction, the short term response
structure may be obtained by the spectral and probabilistic techniques. linear system, this procedure is straight forward.
For a
waves are assumed to be a stationary responses spectral for which all the
Gaussian random process, so will be the properties are known. Thus, the
statistical
analysis
technique
may
be used to determine
the statistics
of the
For structures whose responses are linear with respect to the once the of force distribution normalized function with is known, to the
force,
distributions
response
respect
standard
deviation will have the same form. The prediction of the effect of nonlinearities either due to the
environmental
loading or due to nonlinear structural behavior for an offshore and a general procedure is not the response is elements, the
structure in random seas is not straightforward known. also For a linear system However, no longer responses if
Gaussian.
be Gaussian. may be
In this
for the of
obtained
only
types
49
Often applied
approximations to the
before
a probabilistic of
nonlinear
of random variables.
3.1
SOME COMMON TYPES OF PROBABILITY DISTRIBUTION FUNCTIONS The probability density function (pdf) henceforth denoted by p, is
defined as the fraction of a designated period of time that a particular event is expected to occur. The probability distribution or the cumulative
distribution
function
(CDF), denoted by P, is the fraction of the time period The probability of exceedance, denoted by Q, Thus, P is related to Q by the I
3.1.1 Normal or Gaussian Distribution The probability density of a normal or Guassian distribution variable, x, is given by of a random
(X
Pxjz
1
p(x) = m
1 ox
exp [ 20X2
(3.1)
where
value
of x, and
ox is its standard a to += .
deviation.
This
is clear that p(x) is symmetric about the mean value of x and has a maximum at I.Ix. It drops off fast in the shape of a bell. width of the bell. If Eq. 3.1 is integrated The value of ax determines the between tax about Vx, it will
shaped curve contains 68 percent of the area of population, a *2ux covers 95 percent while a k30x gives 99.7 percent of a normal population. The expression for the cumulative probability, P, is not known in closed
form, and the values of P are obtained from Eq. 3.1 by integration
P(x) =
a
T P(X)
dx
(3.2)
50
The
plots
of the
probability
density,
p, and the
probability
distribution
function, P, for a zero mean (l.Ix = O) and unit variance (ax) are shown in Fig. 3.1. The shaded area in the density curve is represented by the value of the
(3.3)
then
this
transformation normal
is
called
normalization it has a
and zero
z mean
is
called
the
standard
distribution,
because
(l.Iz =
O) and
(OZ = 1).
and cumulative
(3.4)
and
@(Z)
= ;
$(Z)
dz
.
(3.5)
[e.g., Tobias and Trinclade (1986)]. , 3.1.2 Rayleigh Distribution Unlike the Gaussian distribution, random variable, x, which density the Rayleigh distribution (o <x<=). applies to a
The probability
value of x, Px, as
[+121
(3.6)
51
G
0 ;
... . . . .
1
oa
2
1 I I I I
I
I
I
1
1 I I I I I I
a ;
x
FIGURE 3.1 GAUSSIAN PROBABILITY DENSITY AND DISTRIBUTION FUNCTION (MEAN= 0.0; VARIANCE= 1.0)
P(x) = lexp[~(~
)21
(3.7)
The
probability
density
and.
the
cumulative
probability
of
Rayleigh plots is
distribution taken
are shown
in Fig 3.2.
{ a(x  6)}]
(3.8)
(Type 1) distribution
y=a(xf3)
(3.9)
The quantities a and B are the slope and the mode defined as
a=
E(uN)/aN
(3.10)
where E(oN) and E(YN) are the expected value of the dispersion of N values and the expected deviation, Gumbel value of the reduced variate, respectively, uN iS
q
and~N
distribution
3, is
y = ln [in PI
(3.12)
52
a).
to
q.
ml
I
.. )
0 0. 
J=Jj
. . .. . . .. .. ..._ ... ____
In
k,
g
d
UJ
8 >
FIGURE 3.2 RAYLEIGH
IHA
PROBABILITY DENSITY AND DISTRIBUTION FUNCTION
(MEAN = 1.0)
FIGURE 3.3
(3.13)
(3.14)
which may be used for large but finite number of observations. the extreme values is then given by
P(x) = 1 
exp[(xA ~)kl
(3.16)
The quantity k is called the shape parameter and is generally assigned a value between 0.75 and 2.0. The parameters A and B are determined from observed
data by the leastsquare method. An alternate form of the Weibull distribution is given by
(3.17)
The probability density is obtained by differentiating the above equation with respect to the variable, x
p(x)
(3.18)
If Eq. 3.17
In [ln ~1
1
=lnB+mlnx
(3.19)
53
where In B is the intercept and m is the slope. determined by fitting data. The Weibull written as cumulative probability
be
distribution
p(H) =le
A (~)m rms
(3.20)
A(~)m p(H) = Am( ~ rms Taking the logarithm twice and rearranging terms )m Hle ms
(3.21)
In In ~.=lnA+mln~
(3.22)
which is the equation of a straight line of intercept in A and slope m. parameters A and m are determined by the empirical fitting of data. and m = 2, the expressions reduce to the Rayleigh distribution.
The
For A = 1
3.1.5 Frechet Distribution A distribution function of the Frechet type was proposed by Thorn (1973)
P(x)
= exp [ ( ~
)kl
(3.23)
in [ in P] = klnx+klnA
(3.24)
in which k is the slope and klnA is the intercept of the line. the Frechet distribution Fig. 3.4.
An example of
54
ml
8(
.
FIGURE 3.4
FRECHET DISTRIBUTION
1.
a c
n
3U.
Uil.
50.
k 60.
IIs (FTI
FIGURE
3.5
PROBABILITY
DISTRIBUTION
OF SIGNIFICANT
WAVE HEIGHT,
H~,
FOR
EXAMPLE PROBLEM
P(x) =}(;
)kl
exP[(*)kl
(3.25)
This
type
of
Frechet
distribution
is known
as FisherTippett Type
Type
II
distribution.
The Type
II distribution
is related to the
I (Gumbel)
more efficient to compute, from which the Type II parameters may be obtained by a transformation. Analyzing the significant wave height data from Ocean Station Vessel
function
P(Hs) = exp [  ( } s
)60 ]
(3.26)
in which the scale parameter of the wave distribution parameter of the wind distribution by
bs = 0.455 bv
(3.27)
where
The
scale of wind is obtained from OSV data as . bv = [373.8 ijmax + 5.~2.4]1/2 23.3 , in which ~max = maximum These values of the of the speed monthly have mean wind speed for in a year all oceans in mph. by Thorn (3.28)
wind
been
charted
(1973).
Hs(P) =exp
[ln bs ~ln
in (~)]
(3.29)
The
extreme
waves
may
be
derived
from
115on
the
assumption
of
Rayleigh
EXAMPLE:
55
The location
maximum
monthly
mean
wind
speed, ~max
, for
the
above
North
Sea
The
probability
distribution
of
H~
based
on this
value of bs is shown
in
Fig. 3.5.
in (~)
110 ft.
(33.6m)
where a factor of 1.8 has been used considering 9001000 waves in the record to achieve the maximum wave height.
3.1.6 Cumulants and GramCharlier Series The nth cumulant of a random process x is defined as
kn= ~ in
L
den
(3.30)
function.
M(e) =%
~
m
P(X)
e ox
dx
(3.31)
The quantity, kl, can be shown to be the mean value of the variance, 02 say.
x, ~ say , while kz is
The importance of the cumulants lies in the fact that random process can
56
p(x)
* mo 4 (~) o
e 1/2 2 { 1 ++
(23  3Z)
+ &
(3.32)
where
(3.33)
kn = O
for
n > 2
(3.34)
Thus, for a random process if higher cumulants are evaluated, e.g., k3 and k4, they * provide a measure of the deviation of the process from the Gaussian
process.
3.2
3.2.1 Wave Elevation Distribution The sea surface elevation with a zero mean. assumed to be zero) Therefore, is assumed to follow a Gaussian distribution n (where ~n is
(3.35)
where u = @ n curve.
and mo
is the
area
under
the
wave
energy
spectral
density
57
3.2.2 Wave Height Distribution For a narrowband phase uniformly Gaussian ocean *n, wave the whose wave components height are in random
distribution
over
follows
Rayleigh
distribution given by its probability density function, ~2 p(H) =#exP rms (~] rms (3.36)
where H = individual wave heights in a wave record and Hrm~ = rootmeansquare wave height. Based on this distribution the most probable maxima in a given number of waves can be determined. According to Cartwright and LonguetHiggins (1956)
the largest expected value is related to the rms value in terms of the number of zero upcrossings, N, by the formula
Hrms
(3.37)
G = 0.5772.
For example,
H where
max = 1.86 Hs
Hs = 1.416 Hrms
constitutes
the
shortterm
extreme
value
prediction
for
wave
If the input waves are assumed to be Rayleigh distributed, then the distributed as well. In this as
case the extreme value of the response is computed from this distribution above. This analysis
linear system.
3.2.3 wide Band Spectrum The extreme arbitrary probable values of a shortterm spectrum value as stationary random process having an (1973). at a The most prescribed
bandwidth extreme
by Ochi value
extreme
58
probability
level have been derived, the latter of which was recommended for Selected points on a scalar random process the extreme value, values be noted it is clear (or minima that the
the design of offshore structures. are illustrated that with in Fig. 3.6. of the need
In evaluating
presence of several maxima between consecutive zero crossings indicate a broad band spectrum for the random process. The probabi ity density function of the maxima, x, is given by ( ~)2} 5($
O<x<
(3.38)
~@Un5(U)
du
(3.39)
and m is referred to as the standard normal distribution given by U2 o(u) = $ ~~e~du (3.41)
If
the
variable
is
nondimensionalized
by
dividing
by ~,
then
the
(3.42)
59
FIGURE 3.6
0.8
0.6
p(i
~~ I.0 (TRUNCATED NORMAL )I
FIGURE 3.7
PROBABILITY (= X/ @
DENSITY
FUNCTION
OF
RANDOM
VARIABLE,
becomes
O<;
<w
(3.43)
If the random process is assumed to have a narrowband spectrum Eq. 3.43 reduces to $  p(~)=~e 2 o<~<m
(E
O) then
(3.44)
which
Similarly,
for a wideband
(3.45)
(at ~ = O) normal
(Gaussian) distribution.
Figure 3.7
shows the probability density function for various values of E. The cumulative distribution functions of x and~are derived by
P(x) =
(3.46)
60
In order observations
to
derive
extreme
values,
let
us consider
that
there
are N
Let~i
We first arrange~i
a be a small probability
for e < 0.9, a simple formula for the extreme value may be obtained as
for G <0.9
(3.48)
This formula is valid when a is small, on the order of 0.10 or less. O (narrow band process)
For s =
(3.49)
Figure 3.8 shows the relationship in Eq. 3.48 for various values of s when a = 0.01. by 45. , Note that the dimensional It is interesting values, xN, may be obtained by multiplying
YN=J7ri7rR
forc=O
(3.50)
larger.
of eXC&2ditWJzN.IIIay
quite high
limp[i~>~N]=lel N+=
U.b3Z

(3.51)
(3.52)
61
4661~,2
x 10
4681246 Xlo N 4
OBSERVATIONS,
FIGURE 3.8
EXTREME VALUES OF tN (NONDIMENSIONAL AMPLITUDES) AS FUNCTION OF NUMBER OF OBSERVATIONS FOR a= FOR VARIOUS BANDWIDTH PARAMETERS, s AND
5.0
Id=
= 1.2
1.0 0.8
0.6
1A
\
<Xz
II
<u=
46
10
15 20
30
40
60
T~,
HOURS
FIGURE 3.9
EXTREME VALUES OF ;N (NONDIMENSIONAL AMPLITUDES) AS FUNCTION OF TIME FOR VARIOUS VALUES OF PARAMETER WHERE u = 0.01
[OCHI (1973)]
Expressing N as a function of time, TR, in seconds the extreme value for a narrowband process is obtained as
;N=21n
[{~
]12
for small a
(3.53)
values of
frequency,
as a function of time.
The corresponding
(3.54)
3.2.4
Nonlinear Gaussian Waves The statistical In this prediction case, of waveheights distribution the assume the waves to be
Gaussian. banded
Rayleigh
is applicable is
waves).
For
nonlinear
waves,
distribution
LonguetHiggins
(1980) suggests
may still be
valid as long as the rms value of the linear Gaussian waves are adjusted by a + factor of 0.925 in the distribution. Forristall presented a twoparameter Weibull distribution to fit wave
p(g) = exp( $
(3.55)
where E is nondimensional wave amplitude (half the troughtocrest a and B are empirical parameters. The values of
a
height) and
a=
2.126 and B = 1.052 by fitting the wave data. LonguetHiggins surface (1952) derived Rayleigh distribution for narrowbanded for the
seas of sinusoidal
components
as the distribution
function
wave amplitudes
P(a) =exp(~) a where T denotes wave = by the rms are wave amplitude. For linear the waves zeroth
(3.56)
when moment
the is
individual related to
crests
approximately
sinusoidal,
62
mo=~a
(3.57)
P(a) = exp( ~ o
(3.58)
However, for nonlinear waves where crests are narrower and higher than troughs as well as for finite bandwidth, Inthe latter case, for example, ~2 ~=1 where 2 v= P2 ;2m 0 where P2 is the second moment of the spectrum about the mean frequency, m . Using (3.60)  0.734V2 (3.59) the relationship in Eq. 3.58 is not valid.
For a PM spectrum, the correction factor becomes 0.931. 1/ 0.925 (2mo)2
~=
(3.61)
LonguetHiggins
showed that
the
3.2.5 Nonlinear NonGaussian Waves It has system already been noted random that the response (output) of a nonlinear (input) are
is a nonGaussian
process
even though
the waves
Gaussian.
many nonlinear systems, marine systems with strong nonlinear characteristics, e.g., tension leg platform, may require the probabilistic Gaussian random processes. In recent years, prediction of nonhave
The deepwater waves have been shown to follow Gaussian distribution measurement at sea as well as in the laboratory. A correlation of
from the
63
probability density of time history of random laboratory waves in deep water is shown in Fig. 3.10. model. on the other Note that the wave follows a Bretschneider hand, the wave profile becomes highly spectral in
nonlinear
shallow water due to the bottom effect, shallow troughs. this case will skewed to the This is illustrated not be symmetric positive with
showing excessively
in Fig. 3.11.
side which
will
severity of the sea. Bitner (1980) obtained an expression for the probability density function of the cresttotrough wave height for,nonnormal waves. wave profile is a quasinormal frequency. The timevarying She assumed that the
random process and narrowbanded about a central sine, xs(t), and cosine, xc(t), components of the Written in terms of
(3.62)
where
k4=
(3.63)
and
1 = (xc  c) /
q = (Xs 
(3.64)
a
(3.65)
,
0
k4, is determined
numerically
~ , has a form
(3.66)
64
03
d
+
8
6.00 h, 00 2.00
f
I
0.00
2.00
Y:oo
I G. 00
WflVE ELEVFITICIN
RMS
VFILUE
FIGURE 3.10
::
PHRSE
hRVE
PROBE
[INI
mq 
k]
G,00
I
, :
3.00
,
I 6,0D TIME 
I 9.00
1 12,00
1 15,00
( 16,00
SECONDS
FIGURE 3.11
This density function is compared with the Rayleigh density function in Fig. 3.12. In the derivation of nonGaussian wave probability distribution, is
For strong nonlinearity, the problem is extremely complicated. In obtaining of the the Rayleigh distribution for the height wave heights, the
magnitudes
properties
of wave
are assumed
to be as
amplitudes.
However, more
appropriately
disregarding this assumption which is often invalid. is taken as the sum of an upperenvelope
the profile that are separated by half the average period. this concept to determine the probability density
function of the average of Separated by T/2 where T of where the joint is probability the period
the ttio envelope values [namely, a = (al + a2) / 2] = wave period. It is given as an and integral p(T), distribution
p(T)
TTr 122)exp[
~ (3.67)
where
amplitudes =
ai ~,(i=l,2), o
al
= A(t)
a2
= A(t + T)
(3.68)
(3.69)
P(T)
&
00
a
~ $(w)
S(m)
COS(OI
(AO)Tdw
(3.70)
A(T) = # 00
sin(m  mo)~ d~
(3.71)
assumption
mean frequency,
65
BITNER . RAYLEIGH
DISTRIBUTION DISTRIBUTION
II
,,
1.1.
1.
0.4
0.0
1,2
1.6
2.0
2.4
2.0
3.2
H/~
FIGURE
3.12
COMPARISON
OF
NONNORMAL
CRESTTOTROUGH
DISTRIBUTION
WITH
 
CRESTTOTROUGH . RAYLEIGH
DISTRIBUTION
DISTRIBUTION
I I ! i I / I / I / I 1I I 1 1 I I I 1 I ,
\~ 1
1 H /fi
FIGURE 3.13
(3.72) (3.73)
a2;
~)da2 T
(3.74)
This density function is plotted in Fig. 3.13 along with the Rayleigh density function and observed data. It is noted that this density function has a
higher maximum value than Rayleigh. There are several distribution functions available to represent the non
Gaussian random phenomena, e.g., observed in the wave profiles in finite water depth. from the These generally have series or representation wave and are obtained Examples either of non
probability
theory
nonlinear
theory.
LonguetHiggins
Here,
only the essential results will be given. The GramCharlier theory starts with the normal probability density
function and writes a series in terms of the derivatives (by subtracting This mean gives and dividing the by standard
deviation)
function.
rise to
Hermite
polynomials.
nonGaussian
density function then has the form for a random variable with zero mean and a variance of 02 as follows:
x
2=2 p(x) = ~ m e
CO=l,
C1=C2
=o,c3=7p
c4=~,c5=~,
3 4
6 32 C6 =~+~J7=7+~ 2!(3!)
(3.76)
66
and so on, where Hn is the Hermite polynomial of order n, x is the value of a standardized normal variable k. A.=J (k2) $ = i J (3.77)
(3.78)
E[(x  P)3] = k3
(3.79)
(3.80)
(3.81)
(3.82)
A3
is equal to the kurtosis minus 3. been shown by Ochi (1986) that the form. Edgeworth and the LonguetLonguetof
series
In fact, the
normalized
series
nonzero
standardized
values
Z[ = (x  V) / u ] Eq. 3.75.
may be obtained
It is interesting
to note that the first term of the series reduces to In order to examine the effects function as well as their
the Gaussian density function (since Ho = 1). of various terms in the series on the
density
severe wave
(d = 1.4m), an example from Ochi and Wang (1984) is reproduced in Fig. 3.14. It is found (albeit that the higher order terms value introduce negative x. density values
smal 1 ) at large
negative
of the
variable,
concluded
from this and many other such correlation in the nonGaussian distribution
67
, .,
AS
 +3, A5, A4
A3, A5
GAUSSIAN
DISTRIBUTION
z? \
> 1(D,
1
0
q<
h! ?.
2.0
1,6
1,2
 0;8
0.4
0.4
0.8
1.2
1.6
2.0
WAVE
DISPLACEMENT
IN METERS
FIGURE
3.14
COMPARISON
OF
GAUSSIAN
AND
NONGAUSSIAN
DISTRIBUTIONS
WITH
Knowing the initial distributions of the peaks and troughs may be determined.
(including their extreme values) and the wave heights this respect, it should be emphasized that for
In
nonlinear waves, e.g., shown in Fig. 3.13, the probability functions for peaks and troughs are different and should be derived separately. The variance of
For the variance of troughs, the term inside the parenthesis is inversed. probability density function of peaks, E+, is obtained from the expression
The
~
P(E+) = ~ +
j lx! P(G+,
: IX I P(O, X)
x)dx (3.84) dx
.where p(x, x) is the joint probability velocity. density function of displacement and
Gaussian with zero.mean and variance obtained from a given wave spectrum. displacement probability and velocity are assumed to be statistically density fupction of wave heights independent.
(peaktotrough)
can be derived ,.
from the convolution integral of the individual density functions of peaks and troughs. The linearization technique or the perturbation technique are appropriate only when the nonlinearity the system to waves be in the system is weak. as a Gaussian response of This allows the response of The above system examples will of
expressed that
system.
show
the
a nonlinear
not be
For a stronger nonlinear system, the FokkerPlanck equation may be In this case, system. no restriction For is applied to the the degree of
nonlinearity
in the
a whitenoise
spectrum,
probability
68
(1984).
technique to a single degree of freedom system having the following nonlinear equation
(3.85)
where
f(t)
is the
excitation
force
function
for
unit
(total) mass
of the
system.
(3.86)
the first term of which is linear while the second term is the viscous drag term. The restoring force per unit mass is written as
(3.87)
including a linear spring and cubic spring term; 61N is the natural frequency = dm
q
i
&
p(x, i) ++ ax
P(X, :) = o
(3.88)
where
p(x, i)
function
of
and
~ , x
displacement and S =
whitenoise
spectrum
equation
numerically. Once density method the joint density may function, be derived least p(x, ~) , is known, following the the, probability described The other
p(x), by
previously
applying
square
fitting
technique.
quantities, e.g. density function of peaks, trough, etc., may then be obtained as before. Note that the method is limited by the use of a whitenoise spectrum.
69
methods and obtaining the equivalent whitenoise spectrum. probability density function of the peaktotrough surge
having nonlinear damping and restoring characteristics is shown in Fig. 3.15. The corresponding
Rayleigh distribution
system assumption is shown as dotted line. According to the probability theory [Cramer (1970)], the characteristic elxC . Thus, O(X) can function
function, O(X) can be defined as the expected value of be written as the Fourier transform
+(x) ~ m
eixcP(g) dc
(3.89)
to give
l$(x)=l+lll
+.l+J#+ .. . .
+
. 2 .
..+pm#+. m... F r.
r
q m.,. +Ax+ r w r. q
= exp {Al
ix)+ .
A2~+
* 1
(3.90)
where pr and Ar
are the
rth order
moment
and
cumulant
respectively.
If IJr
represents rth order moment about the mean, then the first eight cumulants are related explicitly to these moments as follows
=0
. ~z 2 A3 = 1.13 =P4. 31122 4 A5 = p5  lol1311* 6 7 8 = ~6  15v41.12 2 + 30 V23  101.13 = ~7  Zl~51.12  35p4V3+?10UjU22 = ~8  Z8U5U2  56P5U3  35v4 + 4201J4U22 + 560u32p2  630u24
(3.91)
pzr
J&N J
Zrr!
70
(3.92)
z \
a! i
k
NONLINEAR
RESPONSE
z o
q 0
~ 0
/ /
/
o
0.4
0.8
1.2
1.6
2.0
2.4
2.8
3.2
PEAKTOTROUGH
EXCURSION
IN METERS
FIGURE 3.15
OF
l2f+1 = o,
and
F>l
(3.93)
A2 = +.=o,
~2
F>2
(3.94)
for all r. The determine values if a of moments is and cumulants or offer a quantitative For measure to
process
Gaussian are
not.
a nonGaussian higher
process, and
approximations LonguetHiggins
necessary
requiring
moments
showed that Edgeworths form of the type A Gramand Stuart (1963)] is a good approximation for
series
[Kendall
nonlinear waves.
In terms of the Hermite polynomial of degree r defined as r2 >+ r4 ~22
Hr=trr([l
l) .
r(rl)j~2) . wave
(r3)
....
(3.95)
where
is the
normalized
the
distribution
(&k4H4+~k32H6)
+..... ]
(3.96)
where kr = Ar / A2
6;2;0k32 7;o:;k4k3
H6 + H7 + 56k5H3 + 35k42 H8+ .....] (3.97) series (Eq. 3.96) the laboratory worse. k3,
k +8 ~
The series up to the sixth term reduces to LonguetHiggins for kr = 0,r>5. data for that Huang and Long (1980) make for showed the
with
additional
terms
approximation the
even
highly
nonGaussian
waves
which
skewness,
approximation
71
predicting the wave elevation distribution. Another appears that the interesting feature evidenced
This is illustrated in Fig. 3.16. figure is that a gentle hump .. This indicates rather than
in this
have a preferred
Note that the GramCharlier expansion introduces value at large negative surface elevation as
discussed earlier. If the sinusoidal wave field is described by denumerably many independent pure
components,
density
however, satisfy only the firstorder wave theory and are applicable for wave slopes, ka, approaching zero (k = wave number, a = wave amplitude). For many real wave fields, the value of ka is finite and higherorder One of the peaks and with
nonlinear theories for individual wave components are applicable. most obvious effects of nonlinearity In this case, in waves waves appears as sharper are no longer
shallower
troughs.
the
symmetric
We have already discussed the nonGaussian distribution using Edgeworths form of the type A GramCharlier the probability density~function series. becomes It was shown that for steep waves, negative for large trough values.
skewness (k3) and flatness (k4) which are extremely difficult to comPute= For nonlinear waves, Tayfun (1980) obtained the probability density
of a pair of random variables and the computation of marginal function from the joint density function (mapping
density
Huang, et al. (1983) presented the probability density function for waves to third order. wave steepness. They used a perturbation The thirdorder scheme on the assumption for the probability of small density
approximation
72
 
z
1
0 (/0
FIGURE
3.16
CORRELATION
OF
PROBABILITY
DENSITY
OF
LONGUETHIGGINS
AND
I
0
I
SLOPE
0.02 0.03 0.05
0.01
*
x
0.04
4
2
1
FIGURE 3.17
PROBABILITY
STOKES
(3.98)
where
= 1 ++
~2k2n2
(3.99)
Jn = N[l
 Zukn + 02k2 (~
n2  2) ]
(3.100)
N = ~ + ~2k2
Hq = N[nuk(n21) + azkz (~ n3  2n)
(3.101)
(3.102)
~=L
(3.103)
where
2 ~ = o k
as well as ok (slope parameter). Note that ok is proportional to the significant slope, s = u/A where a is the rms value and A is wave length corresponding to the peak frequency. The
probability density of surface profile for s = O, 0.01, 0.02, 0.03, 0.04 and 0.05 is plotted in Fig. 3.l7. The density values are always nonnegative
unlike the GramCharl ierapproximation. * Moreover, a hump is evident for high s values (larger skewness) for n between 1 and 2. ,.
order Stokes wave profile and has been found earlier in experimental data in Fig. 3.16. A thirdorder finite water depth approximation following for the density similar a function can be derived In this case, in the
procedure.
Hs2
p(rI)= e~
73
N5 = (1 + a2k2S02$3)1/2
(3.105)
SO = coth kd
(3.106)
(3.107)
i
9 8 sinhb kd
2 =l+&+sin;4kd
(3.108)
S3=
1+(1+
3
2 sinh2 kd
)2
(3.109)
Hs = Ns{n
+a2k2[2(So
+Sl)2n3:S2n32S0
($oSl)rIl
(3.110)
hs=Sl
(3.111)
= { 1 2uk li
(So+
Sl)n+u2k2
[6(S.+
S1)2 &2]n2
 2a2k2SO(So + S1) ] Ns
(3.112)
(3.113)
Rs = 1 + akHshs
(3.114)
In this case, additional dependence on the depth parameter, kd is clear. should note, however, that the !jtokes higher order waves have
One
limited
applications in shallow water. The nonGaussian response characteristics of an offshore structure may be as discussed earlier, as
well as the freesurface fluctuations of the water at the structure freeboard and the nonlinearity in the force due to the presence of the drag effect. first of these make the waves fluctuations mean sea is that and the is nonGaussian. The
loading therefore
level
Gaussian.
conventional
74
spectral analysis is no longer sufficient to fully define the response. spectral response
response
The
analysis
must in terms be
indicates
known of its for
of the
of the
probabilistic skewness
mean,
coefficients.
The nonlinear forces make the response nonGaussian. Kanegaonkar and Haldar (1987) analyzed the dynamic response of an
offshore platform of the jacket type. matrix form for a lumped mass system. relativevelocity drag term which
The equation of motion was written in a The nonlinearity was introduced in the linearized in terms of a relative and
was
their effects on the spectral and probabilistic analysis. Near the mean water level where the structure is intermittently the horizontal water particle velocity is given as
*
loaded,
u = uH(n  Y) A u
(3.116)
where +
is the effective
velocity,
theory
of velocity is
(3.117)
where
(3.118)
Z(B) =
L
m
exp($
(3.119)
and
(3.120)
75
S;(GJ) =
fA2 s;(m)
(3.121)
the spectral density of the displacement S~(M) , the frequency transfer equation. variance, These skewness then and were
used
first
kurtosis)
are
probabilistic (1987).
analysis.
The derivation
by Kanegaonkar
and Haldar
The unknown
nonGaussian
distribution
response can
set of distributions,
and
Wi>o
(3.122)
The distribution, Pi, is chosen such that it has the same mean and variance as the net distribution, the form Px. The response distribution, Px, is assumed to be of
Px = WIP1 + W2P2
(3.123)
where PI = standard normal and P2 = shifted exponential distribution given by its density function
(3.124)
For
this
distribution,
mean
u + i3,variance = $2 , skewness
2.0
and
Through numerical examples, it was shown that if the surface included in the analysis, the high seastates yielded WI =
On the other hand, at low seastates as well as without fluctuations, the of O). the jacket The structure at its deck was Gaussian significant
nonGaussian
distributions
showed
from the Gaussian at the upper tails with much higher probability The rms values were slightly
The skewness and kurtosis were near zero at lower significant wave
76
3.2.6 Wave Period Distribution The probability functions for evaluating the statistical properites of
the ocean wave periods have been derived by LonguetHiggins al. (1976) and Arhan, et al. (1976). They derived the
and the individual density function of one of the variables, namely the wave height, is known, the density the wave period, function for the other single variable, namely probability density function of the
derived the density function of the zero et al. (1976) obtained the density
while
Arhan,
function of the crest period (between the maxima). Defining T , as a nondimensional period having a mean of zerocrossing period,
(3.125)
u=
om2  h2 2 ml
(3.126)
p(n) =
The probability
1
2(1 + l?) 3/2 is symmetric about the mean period
(3.127)
density
having
a bell
shaped curve similar to a normal distribution. It is noted from the definition of n, that the period T becomes negative for rI< (l/u) . Therefore, in orderto n should be truncated limit the probability density to the at n = (l/u)
q
positive periods,
77
p(n) =
1 + /
(1+ 1+U2)
1 (1 i ~z) 312
.:<n<.
(3.128)
O<T<U
(3.129)
is based on a narrowband
spectrum.
On
the other hand, Arhan, et al. obtained an expression for a wide band spectrum in terms of the parameter,
E.
interval between two maxima is given in terms of dimensionless period is ~3 ~2~ p(T) = [(T2  ~) 2 + $621 3/2
.a<~<a
(3.130)
is the expected
positive
(3.131)
.+(1+
1  E2)
(3.132) (3.133)
Note that for E = O, a = 1 and 6 = O, and the probability does not exist. was A comparison made of this relationship T = with n.
LonguetHiggins
correlation
coefficient
values
(E between 0.5
and 0.7) between H and T, there is little difference between the two forms.
78
3.2.7 Wave Heiqhtperiod Distribution While it is important distribution and maximum in a statistical wave heights, in analysis to know the wave height a response analysis the joint
distribution of the wave heights and periods is often needed. description term of the sea surface The is usually divided seastates are
statistics.
shortterm
assumed
stationary period.
even though the seas are often expected For a varying seastate at a given
location,
distribution of the height and period of the highest wave has been derived by Krogstad (1985). Consider a wave record over a time period, TR, during a
constant seastate, s, where the individual wave height and period are denoted by {(Hi, Ti), i = 1, . . . N}, qnd Hmax is the maximum of all the heights. The CDF of Hi with the seastate, s is given by
(3.134)
(3.135)
.
Tz=~
(3.136)
(3.137)
is partitioned
into subintervals
over which the seastate is constant and in the limit R J log FIH, o d stribution
c H I [O,TR]) = exP { P(H max The conditional wave is identical for that to probability the
s(~)]~} z
(3.138)
for the period of the maximum distribution height, of the wave The
conditional seastate
period
particular
p(TIH,s).
79
conditional probability distribution of Tmax for given Hmax for the whole time interval which is partitioned into subintervals is given by N z p(TIH = Hmax, Si) x p(Hmax occurred in Ii) i=l
p(TIH = Hmax) =
(3.139)
which reduces to the following form for max (AIi) + O R JO ~lo9F[H,s(~)] p(TIH = Hmax) = R ~ ~ o log F[H,s(T)] d=/Tz(~)
If the distribution of the seastate is known and is equal to P(s) where ~P(s) ds = 1 for an observation time, TR, then
[F(H,s)I ds ]
(3.141)
Now p(TIH,s).
we
require
the
shortterm
distribution
functions
F(H,s)
and
(3.143)
2 and 6 = 8.
the upper tail (H > Hs) distribution of wave height that is important, not the overall distribution. fit the upper tail. Considering the normalized variable 4H max Hs A where Hs is an estimate of Hs, x is modified by Thus, we are interested in the values of a and B that
x.~
(3.144)
80
(3.145)
F(X) = [ 1
(3.146)
i3are computed from a plot of log [log (1  F1/NO)] Norwegian Sea wave rider data, these values ar@
Based on the
from the Rayleigh distribution parameters, The joint heightperiod distribution (1955) , (1979). LonguetHiggins Both (1975), Ezraty, and
2, and 6 = 8.
in a record was obtained by Wooding et al. et (1978) al. and a Chen, et al.
LonguetHiggins LonguetHiggins
Ezraty,
assumed
narrowband,
formula is easy to apply and shows symmetric On the other hand, Ezraty, et al. showed a is difficult to period, E, to apply. They found an
distribution
asymmetric function
distribution of the
with
respect
distribution on
is a
spectral
width
parameter,
occasionally
unstable fourthspectral moment, m4. of the wave N(p,a2) where period following Chen,
p = CUTZ
(3.147)
and Hs o = COTZ ~ max The values of Cv and Co were found to be functions of Tz only as shown in (3.148)
(1978)
[1 i o.5722/(alogN)]
(3.149)
81
TABLE 3.1
SITE LOCATION
H~ m >5
Utsira
230
12.5
Halten
>5
405
2.50
15.6
Tromsoflaket
>5
384
2.38
12.9
TABLE 3.2
Tz(s)
Cv
c a 0.50
1.50
1.41
0.39
1.32
0.30
10
1.30
0.25
12
1.20
0.23
TABLE 3.3
VALUES W
Cu AND Ca VERSUS Tp
Tp(s)
CD
1.05
0.26
0.94
0.21
10
0.89
0.19
12
0.85
0.20
14 .16
0.82
0.22
0.76
0.26
.,
18
0.70
0.30
for a = 2 and B = 8.
An example
of the joint distribution of Hmax and THmax is shown in Fig. 3.18 for given Hs and Tz. The distribution period, Tz. However, in Fig. 3.18 shows that it is symmetric around the mean field data have shown that the joint distribution [cf. Chakrabarti derivation and by Cooley (1977)]. an is
general ly (1983)
asymmetric his
revised
earlier
introducing
distribution
of wave amplitudes
and periods.
(3.150)
where
~ = 2~mo/ml , we can write the joint probability density function 62 n2 [1 + (1 :)
2 /
V2]
L(v)
P(L,
n) =
~
G V+e
(3.151)
and L(v) is defined as a normalization factor to account for positive m 2 (1+=) Note that for about small the
v,
L=l+~v2
L(v) =
(3.152)
andatv=O, independent of
the the
distribution normalized
is wave
mean
period,
Joint density
0.6, it is not. The density function of the wave amplitude may be obtained by integration with respect to the period n over its positive range
(3.153)
82
1lmax, SEC. e I 13 I I 10 I 12 I 14 1 16 I
14
a : W z
516
g 17
E = 18
19
FIGURE 3.18
JOINT DISTRIBUTION
v= 0.1
I I
V = 0.6
I I
~
., .. .. . . .
FIGURE 3.19
WAVE HEIGHTPERIOD
where
is the
well
known
error
Thus,
the
density
is
almost v. The
Rayleigh
differing
by the
factor
density of the period n may be similarly obtained by integration with respect to c over its positive range,
P(n) =%
[ 1  (1 +
)2/ V21 32
(3.154)
(3.155)
Lindgren and Rychlik (1982) derived approximate expressions for the joint distribution random functions of cresttotrough irrespective of its heights and periods of a stationary or spectral structure. The
process
covariance
process, solutions
approximate positive
only the
maxima,
relatively
narrowband
spectra
0.7)
process
timeconsuming including
numerical
practical
lowfrequency
bimodal
Another Lindgren
based on a simplified model has also been developed by and is simpler to use and is similar to the Cavanie
approximation in accuracy, but includes shorter waves. Nolte (1979) derived the joint probability density function including an additional order of approximation for the wave period which provided better
agreement with the measured data [Nolte and Hsu (1979)]. Truncating the joint probability density function at n = ~ in order
P(E., ll) =
1
1 0(E/v) m
E,2exp
[J
(3.156)
3.2.8 Extreme Wave Height  Steepness Distribution The extremely high waves in deep water are responsible for capsizing
smaller vessels as well as for damaging marine structures with their slamming
83
loads.
of the encounter
probabilities
of occurrence
of
these waves are very important from the design point of view. invariably asymmetric. In describing these individual
waves, period.
require additional
parameters
Myrhaug
and Kjeldsen (1984, 1987) presented the following three additional parameters to describe their steepness and asymmetry:
(1)
(3.157)
(2)
=?
where T = time between crest and zerodowncrossing (3) Horizontal asymmetry factor, B
(3.158)
so that Tc = T + T.
(3.159)
the
estimation these of
of
the
of
steep
waves the
include
parameters. crestfront
and
probability product of
distribution density
purpose of
written height
marginal
distribution
wave
and
(3.160)
84
where
normalized
height
and
crest
steepness is the
respectively,
~ and p(~l~)
Based on the measured wave data on the Norwegian continental Wiebull distribution was found to be suitable for distribution, equally well. both Weibull and lognormal p(~) .
shelf, the
distribution
1 p(x) Bxxx = ~
Px
[  (y
(3.161)
p(x) = 4%
1 Vxx
exp [
XZO
(3.162)
.
Erm~
were obtained by
rms
= 2.8582 $
(3.163)
rms
0.0202 + 32.4K ; K =
(3.164)
Thus,
from data
(3.165) 85
distribution Norwegian
distribution following
of
the
functional
relationships
p.(i)
E
I
(
*2
1.37  l.10i
+ 0.57h
for
i < 1*9
(3.166)
i3A(i) = 0.56
&
(3.167)
On the other hand, the lognormal distribution distribution of the same data gave the
following
(3.168)
A = Y2 &
(3.169)
Both these models fit the data reasonably well. distribution estimates of seemed the to do better of at the higher of
values
probability
occurrence
extremely
3.3
SHORTTERM RESPONSE PREDICTION The short term is defined as the period of time in which the ocean waves
stationary density of
energy
the
properties
severity
level.
severity level may be described wave height typically (H$) and wave period
by the mean wind speed or the characteristic (Tz). The duration of a shortterm record is typically sea is
the wave
on the order of
30 reins. long.
86
The shortterm
response analysis
If a frequency domain analysis is possible, then only the wave energy density spectrum is required. In the case of a numerical time domain analysis, a time It has already been shown how the
history of the shortterm waves is needed. time history may be generated is performed of where the a
from a wave
spectrum.
frequency time
domain
solution may be
amplitudes
response
history
function to generate the shortterm distribution of the response. may be used in the shortterm prediction of a nonlinear
system.
however, time consuming. For waves, the a linear system analysis will in which provides be shown the response is linearly related to the
a spectral
information a nonlinear
responses,
as
approximations are often made in both frequency and time domain analysis. approximation in the system.
chosen depends on the extent and complexity of the nonlinearity The majority of the work on nonlinear problems deals with the
shortterm responses and the statistics related to the shortterm responses. ~ Section 3.2 is the longest section of Chapter 3 as most of the available techniques on handling nonlinear problems in offshore mechanics are reviewed for the
of the equations
response
history
important
addressed here is the probability Of course, response Methods once the distribution at a chosen this
distribution is known,
the distribution
amplitude of
probability
projecting
response structure
corresponding
to the design
under
consideration,
3.3.1 Linear Systems The linear inertia force on an object is a including linear the forces The obtained inertia by the part of
wave
diffraction
theory
force.
Morisons equation can be written for a vertical cylinder per unit length as
fl(t) = kM t(t)
(3.170)
87
(t) =  %%% or
in (X  t)
(3.171)
:(t) =
(3.172)
where T is the wave period and T/4 in this case represents a phase lead of 90, i.e. the acceleration is zero at the wave crest. Therefore,
fl(t) = kM gk
ngOO (t)
(3.173)
(3.174)
I
where
Hfl
.Mg~
(3.175)
The significant
amplitude
f5=24rb
fI(@dm
(3.176)
Assuming a mean period of 9 seconds and a shortterm period (TR) of 2.5 hours, the probable maximum value of the force amplitude (for 1000 waves) is
= 1.86 fs f max
(3.177)
In usual extreme value analysis, the maxima (or minima) are assumed to be uncorrelated and statistically independent. This may be a crude approxi
88
mation.
If the
random
process
under
investigation
is Gaussian
and narrow
banded, then one may work with the derived process, namely, the envelope of the narrowband generally not process. as well The neighboring correlated as maxima of of an envelope the process are process.
those
underlying
Moreover, the extreme values of the envelope process may be taken as an upper estimate of the extreme formulas Assuming for values of the base process. the the envelope process of a Naess (1982) developed band Gaussian
analytical system.
narrow
that
random
variable
under investigation
is given by
x(t) for a time interval, TR, the expected maximum value of x(t) is given by
(3.178)
where G denotes the Eulers constant, G = 0.5772, and n is obtained from the solution of
n=
2 M(KnN)
(3.179)
K=2
42 11(1  p~) 41
E~(l
+/~)
(3.180)
(3.181)
n = 0,1,2,...
(3.182)
It was shown through numerical examples that the introduction of statistical dependence prediction estimates. between generally neighboring leads to maxima a (through of
p)
into
the
extreme extreme
value value
decrease
the
resulting
89
3.3.2 Nonlinear Systems When amplitude, system, the response function has a nonlinear relationship with the wave
the system
it constitutes
In these cases, approximate methods are employed values. One of these approximations is a
response
representation
of the nonlinear term so that only a few terms in the depending series is on the extent retained, of nonlinearity. system If
the
then the
is called
linearized.
3.3.2.1 Wave Drag In the case where drag is important and cannot be ignored, the conversion of the wave spectrum to the response spectrum is not straight forward. In
this case, a linearization technique is often used for the drag force. Since the drag force is proportional to the square of the velocity, the
(3.183)
where
x(t)
u(t)/ou u(t) is
and
ISu is
the
rms
value with
of
the
profile. standard
Assuming
that
normally
distributed
zero
c1 = d~
(3.184)
(3.185)
(3.186)
90
(3.187)
In terms
of the dimensionless
quantity,
does a fair job for 1x1 < 2; that is, if the velocity is within +2uU.
according to normal theory this happens 95% of the time, the linear approximation will do a good job of estimating the spectral density most of the time. The cubic approximation sion, yielding is quite an improvement over the linear expresThe quintic approximation
is only slightly better than cubic producing results accurate to nearly 4au.
3.3.2.2 WavePlusCurrent
Drag
When current is present and drag is not negligible compared to inertia, then the relationship by the between of the wave force U. and wave If the profile is further
complicated
presence
current,
current
is considered
uniform and flows ~n the same direction as the wave (or opposing it, in which case U is negative) then ihe drag force per unit length of a vertical cylinder is written in terms of , the relative velocity between current and water
particle velocity.
fD(t) kD
IU(t)
U [u(t)  u]
(3.189)
In
the presence of current, the mean value of the relative velocity is not zero as before. In this case, the linearization is more complicated. If we
approximate vlvl as
Vlvl = Co+clv
(3.190)
91
where v = u(t)  U, uv is the mean value of v, and Ovz iS itS variance about the mean, then
co and
(0: 
U:) [20(Y)
112PVL3V+
(Y)
(3.191)
Cl=2Uv[2@
(Y)
1]4crv
$(Y)
(3.192)
where the mean value pv = U and y = U/au is the strength of the current. The quantity, $(x), is written as X212 $(x) =~ = whereas O(X) is given by its integral and known as the error function ~t2/2 o(x) = Jx ~ dt = m ~x y(t) dt m (3.194) (3.193)
3.3.2.3 Structural Dynamics Response When a structure responds to waves, the motion of the structure results
in a relative velocity between the wave velocity and the structure velocity. The modified form of the Morison equation is used in analyzing structural
dynamic response in random waves. In many cases, the structural motions are small compared to the water
Assuming that the response velocity is small compared to the velocity, the nonlinear drag term is expressed in a Taylor
(3.195)
Further
the
term
involving
absolute
values
of
are
replaced
by
their
polynomial approximations
(3.196)
92
(3.197)
The
parameter,
a,
is
introduced
in
Eq.
3.197
which
indicates
small
the solution may be obtained by a perturbation method. A second method, equation of motion known as an equivalent to its fundamental damping method, resonance mode transforms and uses the the
approximations of the wave drag force outlined above, including a time varying damping first in a series form. approximation term. To a The first by An equivalent the constant damping terms is obtained with as a
replacing
time
varying
constant cycl e.
equivalence
is obtained the
in terms
of work as
approximation,
resonant
response
well
the
nonresonant response are considered to be Gaussian. The linear and cubic estimates of the spectral density of the wave drag
force on a cylinder of unit diameter and unit length are shown in Fig. 3.20. For + this example, The the random is wave is chosen at the as having and Hs 40m = 24m below and the
Tz = 14 sec. surface.
spectrum
computed
surface
more energy
frequency.
response of the structure at higher frequencies in waves. and Rajagopalan (1981) compared the method of equivalent
for the nonlinear term with the complete nonlinear time history They found may that be the response spectra produced in high by the
technique
underestimated,
particularly
waves.
Inclusion of the cubic term significantly Dao and Penzien (1982) investigated
force through an example where a single degree of freedom system was subjected to a harmonic excitation. order linear differential velocity They considered the forcing function for the second equation model to be nonlinear and composed Three of the
modified
relative
of the Morison
equation.
different
(2) the uncoupled nonlinear drag term and, (3) the linearized form
93
103
LINEAR CUBIC
10*
u #
10
w
,_
,.oL
10
102 0.00
El
I 1.
.20
.40
.60
.80
1,00
L20
1~40 1.60
. 1.
@, RAD/ SEC

FIGURE 3.20
FOR A UNITDIAMETER
CIRCULAR
CYLINDER AT [EATOCK
THE WATER SURFACE AND 4otI BELOW SURFACE TAYLOR ET AL. (1981)]
IN PM wAvEs
2C
Ic
I NUMBER
I 2
I
DEVIATIONS
I.
OF STANDARD
.. .,.
FIGURE
3.21
COMPARISON NoNLINEAR
OF
TWOTERM
POLYNOMIAL
APPROXIMATION MODEL
WITH
THE AND
DRAG TERM
IN RELATIVE
VELOCITY
[DUNWOODY
VANDIVER (1981)]
In the second case, the drag term was uncoupled, assuming that the water particle velocity is much larger than the structure velocity, e.g., for a
ICos
d!
cos uit =
r a cos mwt, m m
m=
1, 3, 5, . . .
(3.198)
Also,
Iul =Uolcos
tit
= +~uo
terms are linearized and the equation
(3.200)
Thus, d
the
nonlinear
of motion
can be
solved for x(t) in a series form as functions of mmt. In the third case, linearization is achieved by writing
Iuil(ui)=cl(u
i)
(3.201)
where
Cl minimizes
the
error
The value of Cl is
c1
1.20 UVR
(3.203)
where
is introduced
in
the equation
the expression
in terms of
94
The numerical
waves showed that the first two solutions are quite close while the linearized solution waves. produces large error. The analysis was then extended to random
found to
closely follow the Gumbel Type I distribution given by Eq. 3.8. irrespective of the method of representation
waves, the mean square values produced by the three methods are similar, while the mean extreme value determined by the linearized method can be as low as
65% of the maxima for large values of Hs/D (> 20). Dunwoody and Vandiver (1981) predicted the dynamic response of offshore
the separated flow drag force in terms of the relative velocity formulation. The equation of motion had the form similar to Eq. 2.67 with the nonlinear The drag term of the Morison in the relative velocity
damping replaced by the relative velocity terms. formula was approximated by a cubic polynomial
(3.204)
(3.205)
and
C3
d? nr
1
R to Bergmans between the expressions nonlinear with term
(3.206)
which vR .
Eq. 3.204 is quite good over a large range of OVD (up to about 3) as shown in Fig. 3.21. The cubic term is handled through ;he convolution integral (see The and
next section) similar to Bergman except for the relative velocity form. solution is obtained by iteration due to this coupling. The linear
95
nonlinear components of the hydrodynamic force spectra for a single degree of freedom of cylinder motion in a random fluid field are shown in Fig. 3.22. is large. The quantity
a is the ratio of the fluid added mass to the sum of the cylinder mass and the added mass, while o; is the rms value of the cylinder velocity. term is proportional to the fluid velocity spectrum only. Sigbjbrnsson the series and MHrch (1982) analyzed the effect of the second term of representing a nonlinear drag term that The The linear
(cubic
approximation)
main peak of the wave force spectral density appears at the modal frequency. From the series expression, Eq. 3.204, it is evident that superharmonics may in frequency bands near 3, 5, 7, . . ., of a single peaked the wave load spectral spectral
appear in the load spectral density respectively density. density times the of modal the
Inclusion bimodal.
superharmonics
made
This method
of a jackettype
fixed tower which was permitted to deflect. A JONSWAP Fig. 3.23, type wave spectrum was chosen height for this purpose, as shown in frequency of
having
a significant
of H5 = 15m, a modal
parameter of y = 3.78.
The autospectral
of drag forces acting on a 0.5m diameter is given in Fig. 3.24. The computation
elevations
series approximation for the drag force. No secondary peak is visible close to the free surface. This is because the linear contribution the convolution contribution. of the drag force
secondary peaks become clearly visible because of the slower depth attenuation of the cubic contribution compared to the linear one. The auto spectral
density of the total load on the pile (including inertia) shown in Fig. 3.25 has the same general trend as the drag force spectral density. However, a certain This is a amount of
in this case.
reduction is seen in the relative size of the secondary presence of the inertia forces. Table inertia 3.4 shows the mean square (ins) force
contributions
due to
the
and nonlinear
(secondorder)
drag forces,
respectively, for different water elevations obtained from the threefold convolution
(depths).
contribution
96
0.2
\ N
\ \ \ h \
o. I
\ \ \
i \ \ \ \
k \
~ WC/)
\m \
/ x
q
x~
0.0 0
1
~, RAD/SEC
FIGURE 3.22
COMPONENTS IN A RANDOM
(a = 0.079, u~
VANDIVER (1981)]
100
80
60
40
3
.
04
08
12
~, RAD/ SEC
FIGURE
3.23
AUTOSPECTRAL
DENSITY
OF
EXAMPLE
SEASTATE
GIVEN
BY A
JONSWAP
SPECTRUM; SIGNIFICANT WAVE HEIGHT = 15m; MODEL FREQUENCY = 0.36 rad/s; (1982)] AND PEAKEDNESS PARAMETER = 3.78 [SIGBJORNSSON ET AL.
7 / 1 /
q
q
r \
\
JA02 04 06 os @, RAD/SEC
DENSITY OF OF DRAG CYLINDER DIAMETER
7
q
L
1 14
ON RIGID CIRCULAR ET AL.
10
FIGURE 3.24
[sIGBJORNSSON
o . *
10
50
\ \ \ \ \
I /
q
\ \
\
q
T
o
02 04 067
FIGURE 3.25 AUTOSPECTRAL CIRCULAR DENSITY OF VERTICAL CYLINDER ET AL. (1982)]
4
J
~, RAD/SEC
TOTAL OF
WAVE
FORCES =
ACTING
ON
RIGID
DIAMETER
0.5m
[SIGBJORNSSON
TA8LE 3.4
HEAN SQUARE HAVE FORCE COMPONENTS FOR VERTICAL PILES FOR A JONSUAP SEASTATE SIGNIFICANT WAVE HEIGHT = 1%; MODAL FREQUENCY = 0.35 rad/s [SIG8JORNSSON, ET AL. (1982)1
0.5 5.0
29.6 96.3
60.4 3.2
10.0 0.5
10
0.5 5.0
.
20.1 96.2
68.5 3.3
11.4 0.5
50
0.5 5.0.
37.0 98.3
54.0 1.4
9.0 0.2
.,
,
100
0.5 5.0
58.8 99.3
35.3 0.6
5.9 0.1
10
n ,
162
163
164
165 0
02
04
06
08
10
12
~, RAD/SEC
FIGURE 3.26
AUTOSPECTRAL SUBJECTED
TO JONSWAP
spectrum force).
of are
the
series for
of
the
nonlinear
drag The
given
pile
contribut4 on dominated
the
nonlinear
term
is not significant
inertia
term is of secondary
pile, D = 0.5m, the nonlinear term is only about 15% of the linear drag term. These represents purposes. produce examples the mean indicate squared the that wave the stochastic quite linearization for drag method
forces
reasonably in the
However,
super peaks
present be
secondary
spectral
extremely
important
in the
evaluation of dynamic structural responses. Let response. natural us illustrate this by the following example of a structural
Assume a jacket structure in 300m water depth having a fundamental frequency, ~ = 1.05 rad/sec., and a corresponding modal damping
factor, L = 0.027.
The displacement
of the deck of the structure due to the $igbj~rnsson and M~rch (1982) of motion, for a fixed but with offshore
in terms of a single degree of freedom linear equation nonlinear + excitation derived earlier. Assuming that
structure velocity, or in other words, E[l;l] > E [I;l] , the matrix equation of motion ofthe platform is
m; + Clflli
KX =
F(t)
(3.207)
(3.208)
where
(3.209)
where the superscript, T, refers to transform and a star refers to the complex conjugate. Fig. 3.26. The autospectral density of the deck displacement is shown in
97
the fundamental natural frequency of the platform, produces a sharp secondary peak in the displacement fundamental natural spectra. Thus , in designing fixed platforms, the
frequency
of the platform
should be matched
frequencies
to investigate
in the make
response.
higher
terms
the
analysis
extremely
complicated
consuming. explicitly.
For fixed platforms that respond statically, the extreme value analysis is carried out on in the the usual way and by computing the shortterm and force
quasistatic may
structural
However, of about
be excited
at the loads
and the
superharmonic of the
discussed should be
this
case,
response
structure
accounted for in terms of the dynamic inertia forces. response will depend on the frequency content of the
damping. wave
dynamic
loads,
static
corrected analysis.
amplification level
The method
(of exceedance)
over a given duration of seastate for both the dynamic response and then defining DAF as the ratio between the
3.3.2.4 General Linearization Technique The technique of equivalent linearization for the specific cases outlined in the earlier section is often used as an approximation method of solution of nonlinear problems. A general method may be described to approximate the
nonlinear term as a linear one such that the mean square error between the two terms is a minimum. we write Thus, for a nonlinear damping term of the form l~lal ~,
(3.210)
98
c1 = 4
2/2 ~ ($?
) #
(3.211)
(3.212)
fD(t) =kD
+ouu(t)
(3.213)
In this case, the drag term may be treated as a linear system in constructing a transfer function and calculating the response spectrum using the
appropriate equation, e.g. Eq. 3.174. Roberts density with (1977, 1978) obtained of the an approximation and velocity by white to the stationary response joint
function
displacement
nonlinear
damping
and excitation
noise.
An approximate
dimensional
(Markov envelope) equation to the resulting FokkerPlanck equation The results were compared with digital simulation, as well as and equivalent linearization methods. The stiffness was con
(3.214)
An example
IAU02 is plotted
*
in which
S* for n = 2.
nonlinearity parameter
E Onuon
s = nonlinearity parameter, W. = natural frequency,
(3.215)
o = standard
99
JL
09 \ 07 \ \ 0.6 Cuo \
ME EL
THEORY THEORY
+ q
\ \ \ \ \ \ \ ~ \
RESULTS
\ 
b 05 b
04 03 
O*2 ~
01 I 01
\ \ I \ 0.3 1 05 1 07
02
0.4 E*
0.6
043
FIGURE 3.27
VARIATION OF THE NORMALIZED MEAN SQUARE OF THE RESPONSE WITH E* FOR n = 2; SIMULATION RESULTS ARE SHOWN AS *FOR AS + FOR go= 0.50 [ROBERT (197778)] 30 = 0.05; AND
response
(i.e.,
for
O). result
The
figure
shows
that
the
equivalent (ME
linearization
(EL theory)
is very
E*
Markov envelope
theory) result over the entire range of the damping ratio values of
damping factor, the simulation results are in excellent agreement with the ME theory. but At the higher damping factor, the correlation The perturbation solution matches is less satisfactory, S* is
still close.
smatl (< 0.05), i.e., for small nonlinear damping compared to the linear term.
3.3.2.5 Nonlinear Response Spectra The drag force per unit length of a vertical second term of Eq. 2.18. cylinder is given by the
drag force, the covariance of both sides of this expression is taken. case, the covariance function of the drag force has a highly
Rf (T) = k~(s; YIRu(T)/ofi] D where T = time, a: the variance of the velocity spectrum given by 2 = u
(3.216)
~ o
Su(u) du
(3.217)
of the velocity, u.
Substituting
r = Ru(T)/u~,
(3.218)
$(r) can be expanded in a power series in r as follows: 4r3 r5 T m+ for fD r7 m+) is the Fourier transform of the
~(r) = ~ (8r +
(3.219)
The
spectral
density
covariance
function.
Hence m
sf (LIJ) = D
f Rf (T) eiu~ d~ m D
(3.220)
100
or,
(3.221)
;[8+.
+*+Q+*.
u 30
15U
mlefdT
(3.222)
This yields
the following
expression
k204 sf(w)=+[ D
8SU (u) z a
u
+L
~06
u
] (3.223)
in which
the
asterisk
means
convolution.
Note that
a product
su(d*su(d*su(u)
= 2
~=
~ m
Su((J)Su(LII
in the series, Eq. 3.223 may be similarly written. The discussion in the previous paragraph suggests a reasonable
(3.225)
Then
(3.226)
101
It
is
found [Bergman of
approximation
If
the
first
two nonlinear
terms are introduced, then the error is reduced to about 1%. When current is present along with the waves, the drag force is
the energy density of waves which, in deep water, has been represented by Eq. 2.15. Under the deep water assumption, an expression for the drag force To L
spectrum due to relative velocity is shown by Tung and Huang (1972, 1973). the first order of approximation, the spectrum of the Morison
force may be
(3.227)
where
recall
that
is defined
as the
strength
of the
current
(Y = U/au)
and afiis the variance of the fluid particle velocity spectrum. indicates that the spectrum has been modified by current.
f = where
{E[f2]  E2[f]}12
(3.228)
(3.229)
and
(3.230)
(3.231)
In the
absence
102
Note
that
the
linear
combination
of
the
Gaussian
inertia
force
and
non
Gaussian drag force is nonGaussian. The parameter, K, is a measure of the relative importance of the drag to inertia components of the fluid force. of the degree of closeness of the It, therefore, by Morison serves as an indicator equation, f(t), to a .
force
Gaussian process.
drag force compared to the inertia force , and the more the force deviates from Gaussian. In the presence of current, a similar conclusion may be drawn with The effect of current on the nonGaussian property of when current is negative. The expression for the
probability density function of f(t) = f(t)/P was derived by Tung (1974) and is given by
P(f )=+{
J~exp[+(&+s2)2
~(s+#)2]ds+ .y(@!!)2]ds]
in which k~ = kM/P,
Y is
jjew[+(kif~hs2)2
(3.233)
the current strength parameter already defined, and The probability density function for the force time
s is a dummy variable.
history in the absence of current may be obtained from the above expression by setting T = O in Eq. 3.233. The integrals for the density function cannot be
solved in a closed form and are computed numerically, as is the distribution function. parameters correlation *: This distribution, given as the Eq. 3.233, can be obtained Cu, in terms of four K,
coefficient
of variation,
force
parameter,
coefficient,
p ( =  ~
).
The
Note that the expression in Eq. 3.233 can be written in a nondimensional in terms of ~ = f/kM oh. distribution The probability
of f(t) normalized
103
includes
a nonzero
large values of the maxima was derived by Vinje (1980) and was found to match the numerical results of the distribution. The probability density and distribution function for the force resulting from a current of U = *3 fps (0.915 m/s) as well as for U = O are plotted in Figs. 3.283.31. It is clear from the figures that the distribution is non
velocity and acceleration spectra is shown to be quite important. current case, the Gaussian approximation to numerical error. The density function in Eq. 3.233 is an indicator
property of the total force including inertia and drag. provide the information on the extreme force maxima
which
is the quantity
3.3.2.6 Statistics of NarrowBand Morison Force For the wave force derived from the Morison equation the distribution of the peak values of the force may be obtained by the method of nonlinear
transformation
1.
If
the
sea
surface
is
to
be
Gaussian, In
the this
force case,
model the
becomes
nonGaussian
banded.
2.
If,
on
the
the model
force for
model the
is
assumed
to
be
an a
approximate distribution
Gaussian be derived
variables,
for peak
forces may
analytically
[Bergman (1972)].
3.
If
either
drag may
or be
inertia obtained
is even
disregarded for
then
an
analytical [Tickell
expression (1977)].
a wideband
model
104
r
to

m.
~ U=o
GAUSSIAN APPROX.
m.
ml
20
10
10
I 20
30
FIGURE
3.28
PROBABILITY
DENSITY
FUNCTION
OF
FORCE
TIME
HISTORY
f(t)
u= 3 FT/SEC. Uw= 20ML./ HR. WITH INTERACTIONS . ~ x WITHOUT INTERACTIONS GAUSSIAN APPROX.
In
ml
10
ml
30
20
10
10
20
fl,
ft3sec2
FIGURE
3.29
PROBABILITY [= f(t)/ ~]
DENSITY FOR A
FUNCTION
OF
FORCE
TIME
HISTORY
f (t) AND
CURRENT
VALIJE OF
u = 3 FT/SEC.
[TUNG
HUANG (1972)]
50 
u = 3FT./sEc. Uw = 20 MLJHR.
20
m!
to 
al
m +
0 
L 20 /
P (f)
FIGURE 3.30
PROBABILITY DISTRIBUTION
20
I
t
10
10
I
1
20
10 +
30[ +/4
,99 P(f)
.. ... ..
....  ... 
FIGURE 3.31
PROBABILITY [= f(t)/p]
f (t)
[TUNG AND
HUANG (1972)]
Gaussian models for ocean waves involve superposition waves. For a Gaussian sea, all of the probability
properties
In the Gaussian model, the energy density spectrum of all wave properties especially if
the probabilities
A statistical model for the wave the waves are of appreciable of this If
amplitude
causing
nonlinearities
introduced.
Because
the Morison force with its nonlinearities is assumed to be narrow banded, then the probabilities of the extreme values for the force may be derived in a
condition is
m
ll(x,y,t) =
(3.234)
where the subscript n represents the nth linear wave, an is the amplitude of the nth wave, kn, Wn and @n are its wave number, frequency and phase,
respectively.
m(x,y,t) = Jm
o
On the
assumption
that
both
the
amplitude
and phase
waves are random with arbitrary probability stationary, secondorder stochastic process
The Gaussian model is a useful, though somewhat restricted model which assumes that the amplitude is related to the energy content, and phase is independent and random but uniformly distributed plane over the interval (m, m). Thus ,
AO,
tl(x,y,t) = E [ 2 S(f, G) Au A6]l2 cos (kx cose  ky sin6  mt + V) all cells (3.236)
(Au, Ae)
105
where
of the cells.
This expression
o lr
implicitly
assumes
level.
multivariate
in Sections 3.2.2 and 3.2.4 is needed for the sea model, the spectrum is not adequate to It is just one of many characterizing
density.
ll(x,t)= ]
o
[2S(U) dm]l2 .
COS
(kx  ut + V)
(3.238)
Recall that for a narrowband model, the Rayleigh probability law applies for the wave amplitudes, a.
.,
where
Go is the
rms value
of the wave
profile.
The corresponding
density
function is
p(a) =
0,
106
is given by
(3.241)
applied
to
the
Morison
equation,
then
the
I and
= CIH
(3.242)
fD = C2H2
(3.243)
where
Assuming these
(3.244)
The probability density function for the inertia and drag force amplitudes are then obtained assuming that the wave heights follow Rayleigh distribution
2f ~ p(fl) ~ Ir and e
 (>) lr
2 (3.245)
P(fD) $ r
where
I  (~) Dr
(3.246)
Ir = C; H:ms = C2Hr:s
(3.247)
D r
(3.248)
are written as
107
(g)
P(fD) = 1  e r (3.250) Thus, the inertia force peaks follow Rayleigh distribution while the drag force amplitudes follow exponential distribution. Similar expressions may be obtained ,, for the inertia and drag force peaks if the wave heights are assumed to follow twoparameter Wiebull distribution.
The wave force on a onefoot section of a vertical cylinder as a function of time is written as
f=kM;+kDlulu
(3.251)
where kM = CM
A number of simplifications
in the
statistical theory for forces are possible if as before the wave spectrum is assumed to be quite narrow and concentrated the linear theory to describe water as around a single frequency. kinematics, Using
particle
are the peak forces in the profile, the maximum force is given by (kMu)* D;+~ f~={ kM (IIUo kMm if~<l k~w ifq~l spectrum the wave height, H, is Rayleigh by linear theory are also Rayleigh (3.253)
and JO given
108
distributed.
Thus, f. in Eq. 3.253 is a linear combination of a first power The probability law of fo from that
of H may be obtained by converting the probability of nonexceedance of fo to that of H. The cumulative probability of maximum force * amplitudes, f, for the
regions is given by
A
;2
(T) rms ifo<~<l
2kD~ M (3.255)
2kDf if~>l M
the
inertia
and
drag
force
Note that for the inertia dominated case (the upper expression), distribution is obtained. For the dragdominated case, the
distribution
is exponential.
Any normal stochastic process can be completely described by its mean and convariance stochastic functions, but an appropriate description of a nonnormal
the variance of the offshore structural response. approach is that it essentially is usually not a normal
ignores the fact that the structural response For example, the knowledge of
(Gaussian) process.
109
for
normal
process
(with
a given
variance
and
power
spectral
density).
Since kurtosis is a fourth moment property, variance. Hu and Lutes (1987) obtained
expressions
for
computing
fourth
order
cutnulant function
provides the value of the kurtosis of In the frequency domain, the nonspectral density function.
3.3.2.7 Statistics of WideBand Morison Force Tickell including random These (1977) derived a general multivariate nonlinear Probability showed drag force from the of the behavior distribution Gaussian loads of wave loads longcrested developed. process in
the
linear peak of
seas.
were
distributions to
contrast
simpler
distributions
which
resulted
narrowband
assumptions.
p(F) =
m
r
The quantities Xl and $2 are defined as
(3.256)
+l=U
(3.257)
(3.259)
105 a8 $1
(3.260)
110
This basic force distribution theory has been compared with data obtained from an offshore platform in the Southern North Sea. tion function is of the in vertical Fig. 3.32 of bending along stress with in a The cumulative distribubracing member of the
platform kurtosis
shown
the a
Gaussian strong
CDF.
(= E[F4]/E2[F2])
6.9
indicates
deviation
Gaussian distribution as demonstrated in the figure. distribution the corresponding kurtosis is 3.0. While this formulation indicates the
importance
formulation for the nonlinear loads, it is not useful in the practical design where the distribution may be of the peak from forces the is needed. The cumulative of peaks of the peak a
estimated However,
expected
number
above
level.
it involves
spectrum because
(e.g. sixth
moment
of the
velocity
spectrum)
inaccurate
representation of the tail of the wave spectrum inaccurate. process, spectrum. assumed to the If, be
If the time history of the force is assumed to be a narrowband distribution in addition, requires the the fourth its moment first may of the velocity are
force the
and
time
derivative
independent,
then
distribution
be obtained
from the
of the stress range of the prototype data discussed earlier and range from a laboratory in Figs. lowest test on a vertical 3.33 and 3.34. trough between is cantilever
defined
highest record.
the
crossings figures.
Rayleigh
distribution
also
of the nonGaussian distribution. For a narrowband model, the probability distribution of the peak
p(f) =
($ K2+l)?exp
(~ K2 + 1)
111
60 ~
a ; E a q
OBSERVED
VALUES. THEORETICAL
I
CDE
I
o
4U 

GAUSSIAN
NONGAUSSIAN CDE
2U o
s g ~
g 2uHA 2 / H tm4u 0
I 1
1
10
I
50
LESS
90
THAN
.._ ,,_.
I 99
I 999 9999
.
PERCENTAGE
FIGURE 3.32
WIDEBAND AND NARROWBAND CUMULATIVE DISTRIBUTIONS OF STRESS ON A RAYLEIGH SCALE [TICKELL (1977)]
o z
OBSERVED NON
vALuEs
w8cr  m
r
GAUSSIAN CDF.
STRESS
RANGE
CDE
o
0 /
z a
DEVIATION
OF STRESS. ~
o P / / /
0
.
. .
I 1
I
PERCENTAGE
50
90
LESS
THAN
99
I 999
W,99
FIGURE 3.33
THE OBSERVED AND THEORETICAL CDF OF STRESS RANGE IN AN OFFSHORE PLATFORM BRACING MEMBER [TICKELL (1977)]
OBSERVED
VALUES DISPLACEMENT
CDE RANGE
NON  GAUSSIAN
uRAYLEIGH CDE
OF , .
/ /
,,,
,,, d .1 I
o
/
/ ~o
1
50
PERCENTAGE
90
_LESS THAN
99
99.9
99 99
FIGURE
3.34
THE
OBSERVED
AND
THEORETICAL
CDF OF DISPLACEMENT
RANGE
OF A
0.0
I
d:
,/ ,1
N 0
i t
1 O.m
~BILITr
I O.$m
Of
I 0.
NONEXCEEDAMCE
1 O.m
FIGURE
3.35
WIDEBAND
AND
NARROWBAND
CUMULATIVE
PEAK
DISTRIBUTIONS
OF
o f~ = peak force, of = standard deviation of force, and K is where f = , f The draginertia parameter is the defined as the draginertia parameter. ratio of the drag force amplitude to the inertia force amplitude given by 4 CD % MDUZ where u: = Uzuu, Uz = 2 = 2kDou MUi zero uncrossing frequency of the water particle
K =
(3.262)
standard deviation.
p(;) =;exp(*;2)
(3,263)
which is the Rayleigh distribution a narrow band process. Eq. 3.261 reduces to
of
(3.264)
which
is
the
equation
of
an
exponential
distribution.
The
cumulative of p(?).
probability
distribution
of peak forces
is obtained
by integration
values of K, namely K = O, K + m and K = 0.5 has been plotted in Fig. 3.35. For a wideband model, the peak distribution of force, f, is expressed in terms of the joint probability density of force and its first and second
Morison equation)
~ p(f) = 1  w . .
Jo :;
;P (f, #=0,
~) d;
Gaussian
distribution
for the
velocity
and
its
its derivative
Then, it is transformed into the force variable . . p(f, }, f) using the Morison equation [Tickel 1
(1977)].
A simple closed form expression for the general force case does not
112
The individual
probability
densities
for dragdominated
and
erf [
4=
1E21
E
=(
)2+1
+(:)1*
q*exP[qlfll 2&
(3.266)
where
E =
spectral
width
parameter
for
the
water
particle
velocity,
and
p(;l) =+
erf [(+)
fl+*~exP[~1
;2
(3.267)
9,
where
The
last relationship is the Rices distribution. In the above expression, if peak distributions corresponding wideband Eq. 3.267) Fig. 3.35. It may pronounced probability be observed in the upper that the of effect the of nonlinear drag forces is most the
E +
O, then the expressions for the wide band areas reduce to the
for both drag and inertiadominated (Eqs. 3.2633.264). E = 0.7) for K = Eq. O
model and
(dragdominated
region,
3.266)
tails
distribution
function. increasing
Thus,
of exceedance
value of
the draginertia
parameter,
results that are close to and higher than the widesuggest that these models may be conservatively
results
used in predicting extreme responses. If the spectral width parameters nonzero (E > O), the prediction of the It can be
113
Therefore, if the number of force peaks, N, For example, if we choose N = 1000 and
E = 0.7, the reduction in the expected extreme values is 2.4% for the inertiadominated case and 4.9% for the dragdominated A slightly different by Moe (1979). regions.
Moe derived expressions for the expected rate of occurrence of force maxima at any intensity on a cylindrical member of a structure. peaks per unit time exceeding .a prescribed found from these expressions by integration. The expected number of
value of the force maxima can be On the assumption that the sea stochastic
surface is not necessarily a Gaussian process but a nonnarrowband process, the expressions are obtained
unit increment of the loading level, f, is given in terms of the extreme rate density, u(f). Knowing u(f), other statistical quantities may be readily computed. probability density function for extremes is given as The
(3.260)
v(f) df (3.269)
(3.270)
For
the
purpose
of
these These
derivations,
several
definitions
for
the
frequencies
are
required.
frequencies
profile, its derivative, the particle velocity, the particle acceleration its derivative. They are defined as follows:
114
= Uulurn;
= qau:
(3.271)
=U la; ~ifiq
= 0;/ afi
in which r is the decay factor depending on the water depth and m(t) to the decayed vertical amplitude of the water particle orbit. (W2 = kg), We have ~; = (111 and m~ = m2. Note that by Airy theory,
refers
In deepwater
Sa(u) = r2 W4 Sri(W)
(3.274)
The
peak
rate
density
of
the
wave
height
for
sea
surface
of
any
n(i)
[ Jexp(. m
8 &2mo
(1 
H2
{ 1
(*)
(3.275)
where &2 = 1  m~/(mO m4) = 1  (~/u~)2 bution function for a Gaussian variable.
and
O(X)
is the
cumulative
distri 
The shortterm rate density for the inertia force maxima is given by 3 ~(;) =2=+wl(2 M a * f2 ~ M a
(3.276)
Note
that
for
narrowband
process
W3
=(1)=61 i and the above expression 1 The shortterm rate density for the
integrated total inertia force on a cylinder has the same form as Eq. 3.276 if
115
The rate density for the shortterm drag force was derived by Moe (1979) for the deepwater case assuming relatively narrowbanded waves. the total drag force on the pile may be approximated by In this case
(3.277)
and the rate density of the drag force maxima has the form
(3.278)
Mhen the wave amplitude is such that both inertia and drag components are important in the Morison formula then both terms are needed. is established from the parameter This criterion
(3.279)
Note that no has a unit of length as opposed to K in Eq. 3.262 which dimensionless parameter. Thus , no may be thought of as a measure
is a
of wave
the importance
For small values of n < no, inertia is predominant while drag for large values of n > no. Once the expected rate
significant
density of force maxima for a given amplitude is known, the expected number of peaks for this limiting value of force may be determined by integration of the density function. For a point at the surface, we have r = 1 and no = 1.5D to For ~ > no (which means both terms
3.OD, depending on the cylinder roughness. are important in the Morison formula.) * f  fo/2 2 1 L ), ~(f) z 2 kDu~ exp (  2 D U
A
f>fo
(3.280)
(3.281)
116
(3.282)
in which
a = 0.0081
and B .= 3.11/Hs2.
Since
higher
order moments
of the
a distribution
the higher order moments of this type of spectra are divergent, an upper cutoff frequency must be specified in these cases. A cutoff Then frequency of
Assuming the pile diameter D = lm, ~g = 1026 kg/m3, CD = 1, and CM = 1.5, we have kD = 513 and kM = 1209, ml = 0.4507 rad/sec and U2 = 0.5580 rad/sec. force, fo, is obtained as f. = 444 N/m. The
(3.283)
M(FD) =
(3.284)
.,
. .
Thus
the
number process
velocity
0.0848/sec.
expected
(3.285)
(3.286)
For
example,
about
37%
(el)
of
the
peaks
will
exceed
2930
N/m
surface)
and 70770N
(total drag
force),
respectively.
These
functions
117
M(fl) Hz M( FD1)
0.05 \ \ \ \ \ 0.01
\
0.001
fl
0.0005 I I
fl=s~o
1
fl , l~oo
N/m fl=[sooo
1FD1
L_____ = 100000
FD1= 200000
id
FD1= 300000
FIGURE 3.36
3.3.2.8 Statistics of WaveCurrent Force When current is added to the waves, the velocity is given by the relative velocity between the two and the force has a nonzero mean. analysis for this case may be obtained by the above The extreme value if further
analysis
3.3.2.8.1 NarrowBand Gaussian Wave and Small Current The assumption of narrow handedness implies that ml, w, are nearly equal. The amplitude etc. (Eq. 3.271) Gaussian
P(;) =~exp 0 n
I  ~2/20n2 1
(3.287)
u = U+
*
~ r q
cos [kx  qt
+ $(t)]
(3.288)
a=
.
(3.289)
Then
(3.290)
and
;2
2;22exp{2k M 1 u p(;) = 2221 M 1 u
O<;
<f
exp {  [;  fO/2  2(kD U2 [~  fO])l2]/(2 kD o;) } ,;>fo 2 kD cr:[1 + (kD U2/[~  fO])l2] (3.291)
where
{
k;
118
O=2kD
(3.292)
For U = O
which is the same as that given by Bergman (1972). between Eqs. 3.293 and 3.280.
Now consider surface elevation, n(t) not necessarily a narrowband process. this case. Asymptotic estimates of extreme force statistics may be obtained in If the joint probability and density function for the force f(t) per
(3.294)
p(f,?) =BTO: D+
where fO =
2 f12 Zf . D
m2 exp { [;  fo/2  2U(kD~)12] /(2k~ou )} n(f) == 2kD 0U2[1+ (kDU2/~)12] Comparing the two expressions in Eqs. 3.291 and 3.296, the former is (3.296)
valid for any ~ > 0 but is restricted to narrowband waves. band width restriction but is only valid
results are restricted to small currents, i.e. U/ou u 1. difference is m2 vs. ml.
This suggests that the frequency of larger extremes ~ of the velocity, u(t), process rather than
is determined
by the frequency
119
pile 1.3m (4.3 ft.) in diameter for a PM spectrum seastate for wind speed of 30 m/s (67.1 mph) in the absence of current. frequency of 0.98 rad/s. The result is The spectrum is truncated at a calculated at a section where
(5.9 ft/s), Ua= 0.90 m/s2 (3.0 ft/s2), f. = 68 kgf/m 1 = 1.8m/s The extreme rate density is (4.6 lb/ft), and 2fDou 2= 450 kgf/m (310 lb/ft). shown in Fig. 3.37 from Eq. 3.296 by setting U = O. u(f), has an exponential decay here. Grigoriu (1984) considered the. extremes of the modified Morison force in the presence were of current by two based different methods. In the first force case the through The peak rate density,
extremes
predicted
on the
assumption
of Gaussian
linearization.
The corresponding
Gaussian
approximation
will have the form ~D2 P(~~) = [ * +N~o@(~D)]exp {7 NeD 7?2 } (3.297)
where W2 is defined in which N is the number of peaks defined as N = 21TTR/U12 in Eq. 3.271 and TR is the duration of the storm under consideration. second case the actual distribution of force was considered. In the
Expressions for
extreme value density functions were obtained for the drag force alone and for the draginertia force combination from the Morison formula. The probability
density function of the peak drag force (in the presence of current) is given in terms of the nondimensional force D

Pf D (3.298)
TD =
~fD
where fD = peak drag force amplitudes, wfn = mean value of the peak drag force and The dependence of current is of = corresponding standard deviat~on. D introduced in the expression of the density function in terms of a which is Thus, scan
>.
the inverse of y. ~. au u
be defined as:
(3.299)
120
104
105
166
Iwo
1500
2000
f,
kgf/m
FIGURE 3.37
EXACT GAUSSIAN
1.2
0.5
1.0
0.8 ~ ml
>>0,6
0+
. 9 9 104 I
0.2 ~2
103
(a)
(b)
FIGURE 3.38
(A) NORMALIZED MEAN AND (B) STANDARD DEVIATION OF PEAK MORISON FORCES IN THE PRESENCE OCCURRENT [GRIGORIU (lg84)]
Thus, a + O when l! is dominant (y + m) and a + = The probability densities for the exact to determine the mean and standard
used
deviations standard
of the
integrations.
deviation
methods are normalized by U2 and shown in Fig. 3.38 versus N for a = 0.5. figure shows that the Gaussian hypothesis yields approximations
significantly underestimate the mean and standard deviations of the peak drag force. For example, these values from the exact formula are 10.4 Uz and 0.86 values from the approximate 0.5. formula
3.3.2.8.2 Finite Current Naess (1983) developed a general method of investigating extreme values
frequency, f;(f) at a level E of a process, e.g., force, f(t). situations these upcrossings are rare events. be * statistically independent which is at
crossing frequency is derived in the following way. By the Poisson probability law, the probability that f(t) stays below a
(3.300)
Thus,
distribution
function of max {f(t)} is known. The general procedure is applied to the forcing of obtaining the zero uncrossing function computed by the frequency, f;(f) formula. The
Morison
The fluid velocity, u(t), is assumed to be a stationary Gaussian process and is differentiable. quantities u(t) and fi(t) are independent random ..L ,, L,. .9..* lL\ *L 2.. in me presence oT a curren~ u, T,ne mean value OT u~t~, 1s given Normalizing the velocity and acceleration terms as The
variables.
by E[u(t)] = u.
;(t) =
(3.301)
121
(3.302)
form as
=;(t)
+jKl~(t)l~(t)
(3.303)
The
variables, ~(t)
and~(t)
are two
stationary
Gaussian
processes
of unit
variance
E[il(t)] = O
(3.304)
and
y>o
(3.305)
The
mean
uncrossing
f(t)
is
determined
by
the
wellknown formula of Rice. Using the law of marginal the probability density distribution uncrossing and transformation frequency may of variables, as an between
of mean
be written function
i@egral ~ and ~
probability
density
where
(3.307)
and
 a
= Var[~l; = ;, u =;1=
(1P2) ~2 122
(3.308)
2 ~. Alternately, where u = o~/uu, and the correlation coefficient, P = ~. 2 Uu * 7 e+(Tfi)2+y@ (v f;. ; ~:[~ u ) ] exp {~ [; + (~  Y)21] d; u (3.309)
where
This equation for the zero uncrossing frequency can be solved numerically. asymptotic (1980)
An
(3.311)
Note that Bergman considered the case of U = O while Moe and Crandall investigated the case of For a long time function
Y <
(1977)
1 .
(i.e., large E), the probability assuming distribution interval
interval
of the largest
a time
T=;l
as
max {f(t)]
(3.312)
n}
ssexp { f+ T 1 WI R The expected value of the maximum force is obtained from
(3.313)
Gel(TR)
E[max {f(t)}] = KE[~ = 2K [ BO(TR)2 + U 61(TR) + VI (3.314)
+ O [(in ~ TR)32 ]
123
(3.315)
and
n(T~) = [
Note that ~2K2/6. as TR
1/2 ~
n = 0,1
(3.316)
of the maximum
values
of
f(t)
approach
It may be similarly derived that the component of the drag force has the expected extreme values given by 2TR 1/2 + U12 + 2KG [1 + U(2fln~) 2TR 1/2] = v[(2fln~) 2TR 3/2 + 0 [(~n~) 1
E[max {fD(t)}]
(3.317)
EXAMPLE:
Consider
a pile
of diameter
D =
lm and a seastate
given
by the
significant
period Tz = 8 sec.
Then
and
The mean uncrossing frequencies f: are plotted versus the load level, E in Fig. 3.39 along with the uncrossing component. The expected largest values frequencies f~(fD) of the drag force of the total force, f(t) and drag The Since
force, fD(t) are shown as functions of time interval, TR, in Fig. 3.40. expected values of the inertia force, fI(t) is a Gaussian process.
124
f+ _ f:(FD)
\ \
\ \
\
\
\ \
\ \ L
i2
\
\
165
ii
t
I
NONDIMENSIONAL
LOAD LEVEL
, ~
. ...
....
FIGURE 3.39
MEAN UPCROSSING FREQUENCY, f; OF THE TOTAL MORISON FoRcE (SOLID LINE) AND DRAG FORCE (DOTTED LINE) [NAESS (1983)]
m
1 FD(t);o~t~TR [ f
F1(t);o~t~TR
[
FD(t);O~t<TR
1
] ]
E[max
+E[max
In/ .
1 .1
1
kM
I
8 I I
I 1 I 1 II I
10
I I 11I I I 100
I I I
TIME, TR , HR.
FIGURE
3.40
EXPECTED DRAG
LARGEST
MORISON
FORCE
FORCE
(DOTTED LINE)
ExpEcTED
INERTIA
loading is high and mainly in the drag regime, the extreme value analysis can be performed on the drag force component alone with reasonable results. On
the other hand, a term by term extreme value analysis of the Morison equation (centerline, Fig. 3.40) substantially overpredicts the expected value.
3.3.2.9 Statistics of Nonlinearly Damped Systems If the excitation for a single or multidegree of freedom system is
assumed Gaussian
extreme values of the response of the system is straightforward the response spectra first. This has already been demonstrated.
the damping is nonlinear, then the prediction in general. The problem of the response has been
subject
to a Gaussian expressions
excitation
addressed
by Brouwers
(1982) and
approximate
distributions
have been derived. The derivation is based on the fact that if damping is small in a system, the response near resonance is finite (unlike an undamped system) but still This is, of
course, true if the natural frequency falls near the center of the excitation spectrum. where For a natural frequency far in the tails of the excitation spectrum is very little energy the response will be small even if the
there
damping is small.
response near resonance. Therefore, Gaussian for for small damping the over response a small is narrow band of banded (but nonThe
nonlinear
damping)
frequencies.
excitation spectrum over this band may be considered constant. this scenario is shown in Fig. 3.41. The frequency, ~
An example of to the
corresponds
natural frequency of the system and the relative magnitudes height of the response spectrum is indicated in the figure.
input spectrum may be treated as a white noise for which solutions have been obtained by Roberts (1977). it may be represented Because of the narrow handedness of the solution, wave of slowly and randomly varying
by a sinusoidal
125
1 I II II I I
I I
I
I /
I
1 \ \ \ \ \
I / / / /
/ ,Wo
FREQUENCY
FIGURE
3.41
SCHEMATICS
OF
THE
ENERGY
DENSITY
SPECTRA
OF
EXCITATION
AND
the amplitude and phase has been obtained by Roberts provided an alternate method of solution for these
(1977). density
amplitude and phase in integral form. The equation of motion of a single degree of freedom system involving
(3.318)
ment response, g(;) = damping force as an odd function of ~, and f(t) = stationary Gaussian excitation with zeromean. have the form
g(;) = Nl@
(3.319)
then
simplified density
expression
for
the
integral
representation
of
the
probability friction
Note that for a = O, Coulomb is linear viscous while if density for the
is represented.
1, the damping
a=2,
The probability
(3.320)
where r is the gamma function tabulated in mathematical handbooks. the expression for p reduces to that for a Rayleigh
For a=
2, The
distribution.
The probability density function is plotted in Fig. 3.42 for u= The expected extreme response may be obtained from
O, 1 and 2. probability
the
(3.322)
2r(*l}l/2K E[amax) = Oa {
r(~) 4
.
~;l{l+~.tn.]
. a
a+l
(a~~K
1)*
2
~nK+O(K2)]
(3.323)
K=+r
The expected extreme values of the response for different values large N (= 1000 and 2000) are tabulated seen to decrease as a increases. in Table 3.5.
(3.324)
of
a and
If
an equivalent
linearization
technique
The
square
displacement
solution
and
127
....
.. .......
AT
FIGURE
3.42
PROBABILITY
DENSITY
OF
MAXIMA
FOR A DAMPING
FORCE
WHICH
IS
TABLE 3.5
RATIO ~
a=
1 3.87
2 3.26
3 2.95
4 2.76
5 2.63
1000
5.60
2000
6.05
4.05
3.37
3.02
3.83
2.68
2,.2
eq
0.85
1.0
0.96
0.89
0.82
0.75
1000
0.64
1.0
1.16
1.24
1.27
1.28
(3.326)
(a+l)
r(+)
In all
cases
(except
the i.e.,
case), value
method
underpredicts
increases
increasing
nonlinearity,
increasing a. For an equivalent considered small, the linear representation density of the damping reduces force which to is
probability
of maxima
a Rayleigh
N+
O(~n2N))
(3.327)
expected
extreme
values
between this
solution
and the
general solution is shown in Table 3.5. the extreme response in all cases
(except for
1).
method may be applied as a conservative method in this case. An example problem was provided by Brouwers (1982). offshore structures the response is governed For certain types of
by resonance.
(If
the response
at resonance is not important, on the other hand, the nonlinear damping term is of Storage gory. no consequence in the analysis.) The riser of a Single Anchor Leg
predominantly
in the first mode at a natural frequency of 1.4 rad/sec. which The second natural frequency spectra. Assuming a small
is well in the center of typical wave spectra. of 5.5 radlsec is outside the range of energy
damping,
Brouwers
The results for u = O, (Coulomb friction) and 2 (quadratic damping) are shown in Fig. 3.44. satisfactory. Roberts which have (1987) considered a class of nonlinear motion damping response problems stiffness, Note that the approximate solutions in both cases are quite
a linearplusquadratic
and linearpluscubic
128
universal
lint
Mean
2m ;ea Ieve
chamber
Longitudinal
section
132m
.
Buoy~ncy
ZkEzL77
FIGURE 3.43 SCHEMATIC OF SINGLE ANCHOR LEG STORAGE (SALS) SYSTEM FOR EXAMPLE PROBLEM IBROUWERS (1982)]
4 . .
q q
Nurn~rlCo
I results
solutions
for
SAL!3
riser
Analytical
3 
2 
I 
001
0.99
0.999
. ..
FIGURE 3.44
CALCULATED AND
DISTRIBUTION ANALYTICAL
FOR
RISER
THE
FOR COULOMB
order equation of motion of a moored floating system having dragtype damping and hawser lines. deduce expressions A generalized method of stochastic averaging was applied to for various response statistics. A modification of the
Markov process allowed use of a nonwhite spectrum shape. assumed to be a stationary process with zero mean. The cumulative distribution Fig. 3.45 with the experimental in a random beam sea. are also shown on the
based on this modified theory is compared in data on roll peak amplitudes of a ship model (1982)] the
The results fromthe previous theory [Roberts figure. The modified theory seems to
match
3.3.2.10
Statistics
In addition, the
but that
properties,
finite force
bandwidth, from
statistical exponential
distribution distribution
secondorder (1984)].
wave
differs
[Langley
in regular.waves
i,n terms of a
F = C(U) (~
)2 = C(W) a2
(3.328)
to the square of the wave amplitude, and the is a function of the wave frequency, w. A
(3.329)
n=l
This process may be equivalently written in terms of a single wave component
129
I
0.9999 0.99950.999 0.998 0.995 0.99
THEORY
[ROBERTS
[19s7~
/ / / #/
0.2 0. I
q
10 ROLL
20
30
40
50
AMPLITUDE
, DEG.
.
FIGURE
3.45
CUMULATIVE
PROBABILITY
DISTRIBUTION
OF
ROLL
PEAK
AMPLITUDES
[ROBERTS (1987)]
n(t) =
a(t)
(3.330)
where a(t) = (A2 + B2)l/2 e(t) = tanl (B/A) N Z {an cos (on .~)t +bn sin(mn .~)t} n=l N B = Z {an sin(un Z)t + bn Cos(un .~)t} n=l (3.331) (3.332)
A=
(3.333)
(3.334)
e.g., the mean frequency of the spectrum. is known as the envelope of n(t).
The
varying
frequency
is given as ~+
variation
frequency.
(3.335)
The joint
p(a,~) =
exp{~[a2(~+~)l} mlu2 n u
of the
(3.336)
where
velocity
and au = Vfi;fi u is the rms surface spectral width given in terms of the
q2=
i
O2
(3.337)
Thus, q + O represents a narrow banded spectrum. The joint density function, P(F2,3) may be obtained by transforming (a,~) to (F2,5) from
(3.338)
130
..
Ihe density
..
. .
.
p(F2,5) over s. 2 n
F2 and
F2=T,
(3.339)
n
ll
(3.340)
(3.341)
which is the exponential distribution. The probability density function of 8 is given by integration over the
envelope, and
(3.343)
Letting
r =% J
, the
probability
density
function
of the
modulus
of
r is
obtained as
P(lrl) =2
Irl J p(F)dr = lrl [r2 + q2]1/2 o North Sea wave spectrum bandwidth),
(3.344)
For
0.3
(a typical
8 wi 11 exceed
0.4ti; 20% of the time for which the exponential form for narrow band spectrum will be inaccurate.
131
density
function of ~2 is shown for ~i = 0.38 and q = O shows that even for a slightly wide
This illustration
band spectrum, the second order distribution. marginal Note that the
slow drift force may not follow exponential distribution of described process here refers to the
probability
density
function
the
(force time
history)
which does not say anything about the distribution of the force maxima.
3.3.2.11 Statistics of Low Frequency Motion Pinkster slowdrift simulation optimum and Withers of as (1987) examined floating from model moored tests. the a the statistical structures They properties of the
motions as well of
through the
timedomain expression of
derived
duration is
simulation They
so that assumed
in the limited
properties
achieved.
spectrum for the drift force with an exponential distribution. drift motions become normally distributed about its mean value. It was shown using experimental data that as long as
linear
mooring
systems are used, the assumption of normal distribution of the surge motion is quite valid. The troughs and peaks likewise follow Rayleigh distribution. moored system, the deviation is significant On
Likewise, the amplitudes of motion do not follow Rayleigh. It was statistical statistical oscillation duration also found that of the the duration drift has a s gnificant Longer cycles effect on the reduced period this the
slow
motion. of 1820
duration of surge
length to
achieve needed
stability. for a
About
5 times in
(i.e.,
90100
are
small
variance
statistical results. It is clear from Eqs. 2.89 and 2.84 for forces and motions, that they may be written in a general matrix form as
x(t) = UTHU*
(3.345)
where
H is the ~atri~w ~iven by the tensor notations Hmn or Gin , u is the m vector given by urn e and u* is its conjugate. The matrix, H, is complex
Hermitian,
132
50 .
* x
40
o 
+ 30 ;
p (F2)
t\ \0 \ \\\
05
2o \A
I OO:, ,,, ,, I 1 1 1
1I 11
1 I
I i
I I
I
O*3
I
I I I I I 1 1 I I
00
01
O*2
04
.
FIGURE
3.46
PROBABILITY
DENSITY
FUNCTION
OF
THE
NONDIMENSIONAL
SECOND
x
99.9 99,899.599.0 98.095.0 90.085.080.0 70.0~ \ \ I1 1 c
q
I  DuRATloN
I [2 Hou Rs
x
60.050.0 40.030.020.0 15.0I o.o5.0 2.01,0 0.50.2) \ !
0.1
3 2 1 0
i.
(Xwux
FIGURE
3.47
PROBABILITY
DISTRIBUTION
OF
LOWFREQUENCY
SURGE
MOTION
(3.346)
H = RTAR* (3.347)
The properites of R and A are as follows: (1) (2) (3) (4) A contains the eigenvalues of H which are real. The rows of R* contain the eigen vectors ofH.
RTR* = I
The eigenvalues Aj, and eigen vectors, vj, satisfy the relationship
j H=
Substituting x(t), becomes
AjvjT
(3.348)
these
relationships
in
Eq.
3.345,
the
secondorder
quantity,
x(t)
+
= !
j=l
Aj I Xj I*
(3.349)
X=RU
(3.350)
Since u is a complex Gaussian random variable and X is a linear combination of the components of u, X is also a complex Gaussian random variable at a given time and from Eq. 2.76.
i+j
(3.351)
Then, writing
Aj j 
IXjl
(3.352)
133
The following is according to Naess (1986) and Langley (1987). and imaginary parts of Xj are independent Gaussian random
variables
having a mean squared value of 1/2 (Eq. 3.35). be shown that IXjI has a Rayleigh
distribution
Similarly,
distribution
(zj)=l+Te JJ
The characteristic ei OZj
z./A.
(3.353)
This equation is valid for positive zj if Aj > 0 and negative zj if ~j < 0. function, Mj(o) of zj is defined as the expected value of
Mj(6) = E [eiezj] = ~
a
eiezj
(3.354)
From this and the relationship in Eq. 3.352, the characteristic is given by iexl = ~ J ( 1  iAj6)1
function of x
M(e) =E[e
(3.355)
P(x) = &
7 a the
e i 6XM( 6) d6
value of M(e), the integral is evajuated
(3.356)
Substituting
by
contour
P(x) = {
J;l j ~J . j=~+~ ~
where
the
eigenvalues
have
been
Aj, j
positive given by
The quantities
are
134
k=l k+j
(1 :)1 j
(3.358)
Langley (1987) has shown through numerical computation that the value of N, the number of frequency components, should be in the neighborhood of 200.
Vinje (1983) and Naess (1986) used N = 8 in their computation with a slightly different approach through matrix inversion which is too small for convergence of results.
kn=(nl)!z~~
jJ
an example of a halfsubmerged circular
(3.359)
Langley
considered
horizontal
cylinder of 10m radius in longcrested beam seas. cylinder spectrum. was considered. The incident wave
Only the sway motion of the field was given by an ISSC The
force is highly nonGaussian having a skewness of 1.96 and a kurtosis value of 5.87. The pdf of the sway motion for a damping factor of 0.005 is shown in
Fig. 3.49. It compares quite well with the corresponding Gaussian distribution having the same mean and variance. the tail of is the pdf, the to However, is it should be cautioned so that an the that at value
agreement be quite
poor
extreme
prediction
expected
different
with
assumed
Gaussian
distribution. The term. term. total secondorder response includes a linear and a secondorder
Naess (1986) derived expressions for pdf of the pure quadratic response On the other hand, Vinje (1976) derived the pdf of a weakly nonlinear of cumulants. Kato et al. (1987) obtained a theory of
probability
random variables which yield the Gamma distribution. the secondorder response, x, was obtained as
In this
case,
the pdf of
135
m
I g
at,
0
x .
Q
1
2
3
ml
o
2
1
FORCE , KN / M
FIGURE
3.48
PROBABILITY (1987)1
DENSITY
FUNCTION
OF
SECONDORDER
FORCE
[LANGLEY
GAUSSIAN EXACT
3
RESPONSE , M
FIGURE 3.49
PROBABILITY
DENSITY
FUNCTION OF SECONDORDER
RESPONSE
FOR B =
x/2g1 e
forx>O
and
(3.360)
21
p(x) = c z r=O
r (m2) r (m2 + r)
r m2 r)r (r+ 1) (x)mz
rl
lml+re (=)
/2; z
forx<O
(3.361)
where
%1+ 52
a.
5.
9
.2ele2
mi=~
z (i = 1,2)
(3.362)
and
c =
(261)
1 1
2 (232) r (q) r (m2)
(3.363)
The parameters,
~i , are given by
(3.364)
;. =
(
(z
z ij)2
A;j+c; /4)
,1
= 1,2;
j = 1,2, . . . .
(3.365)
~j (j = 1,2, .....n) are the eigenvalues while ~lj (j = 1,2, .....n2) are the positive and negative
eigenvalues variables.
From the statistical properties of the Gamma distribution, the first and secondorder cumulants are given by
(3.366)
136
K2=2EA:+
EC:=
z
4ml 1
2
+ 4m2e2
(3.367)
where K1 is the mean value E(x) and K2, 1 :he variance V(x) of the secondorder response. The pdf of the slowly obtained varying from the ( ;way . above motion of a moored is given floating in Fig.
rectangular 3.50.
cylinder
formulation
also shown.
The latter matches well with Kate, et al. (1987). the probability distribution of a pure secondorder The
response with that of the total response including the firstorder term, asymmetry of the total secondorder response is higher.
3.4 SHORTTERM RESPONSE MEASUREMENTS Many offshore structural models have been tested in the CBI wave tank. and included random
structures
waves generated in the tank. Waves are generated The wave maker bottom plenum consists chamber in the test tank using a pneumatic type wave maker. of a low pressure blower connected is partially submerged to a large open A flapper
that
in the tank.
valve between the plenum and the blower controls the pressure chamber.
in the plenum
the blower can be connected alternately to the plenum, causing the water level in the chamber to alternately rise and fall. The cyclic motion of the water
in the plenum chamber generates the waves in the tank. The system. transducer position of the flapper valve is controlled by a hydraulic signal servo from a
accepts
flapper
and a reference
and operates
and frequency of the generated waves are directly related to the amplitude and frequency of the reference signal. The method section number, 2.2. e.g. of random wave are generation created is similar through of the to that described summation amplitudes of and in
Random 200, of
waves
a large random
sinewave
components
various
137
,...
In g m% z w nm > ~ ~q z s u II 
KATO,
ET AL.
METHOD
(1987)
NAESSS GAUSSIAN
METHOD
DIST.
(1986.)
2
1
SWAY MOTION , M
FIGURE 3.50
COMPARISONS
OF THE PROBABILITY
TOTAL * PuRE
SECOND SECOND
ORDER ORDER
RESPONSE RESPONSE
5
4
3
2
1
(,XK
)MG
..
FIGURE 3.51
COMPARISON RESPONSE
OF THE WITH A
PROBABILITY COMBINED
DENSITY AND
FIRST
phases.
By tailoring
the amplitudes
a desired
The wave reference signal is initially time series. To generate the analog
stored
point at a time through a digital to analog converter under the control of a dedicated microcomputer. By generating waves from a stored time series,
identical waves can be repeated for any number of tests. The results on the responses of structures tested in the tank in random waves are presented in this section. this presentation are fixed vertical The structures that are considered for and inclined cylinders, articulated the and are
towers, barges, tankers and semisubmersibles. wave loads were measured whereas
motions
were
recorded.
The shortterm
distribution distribution
presented
Where appro
priate, discussions have been presented in correlating the measured distribution with the theoretical techniques presented in the earlier sections.
3.4.1
A
Random Wave Load Tests series of tests were conducted with circular cylinders of various
diameters
fixed in waves.
A small section of the cylinders was instrumented The cylinder was orientated to measure The instrumented sections in air during the from the
to measure two component local forces. the inline and transverse were placed under water
never exposed
passing vertical
of waves. to
inclined
generated along with the random waves. waves generated, kinematics measured
at the instrumented
on these sections.
In a test
cylinder, cylinder were
series
due
in the
to
forces
random Two
measured.
parameter,
frequency A
138
= 2*1 in.
H~ = 9.8
%!0
0.2
(J. U
(J;g
n; n
1:0
FREQUENCYHZ
FIGURE 3.52
FRONT CENTER WFiVE PROBE  INCHES OF HRTER . 0. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ... H 11 A A m ~ o . m y%. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . : : ~! TOTRL .d: o ~NLINE : : F~RCE TDP >ECTIGN ~ PiYUNDi . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
E. I
o ~ TIJTFILTRHNSVER~E F0i3cE ~13P SECTION  PQUNDS ; . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. m :. +/y/nw. y ; . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ..~ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ..{ . . ..+ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ..,.., ++, ++., {,:+ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
0
0
. o
v
I 5
n~
r 10
15
211
I 25
3il
1 35
TIME
SEIXINilS
FIGURE
3.53
SAMPLE
RANDOM
WAVE
AND
FORCE
PROFILES
RECORDED
ON
TWO
forces
on the two instrumental sections is shown in Fig. 3.53. Correlations theoretically are made of the measured inline force spectra with the
computed
spectra.
are considered
constant over the frequency range of the wave spectrum and are chosen based on an equivalent KC number. to assign
depending
on a small frequency
derive the KC number on this basis by dividing the spectrum into several small frequency bands of equal width showed that the method is rather impractical KC number may be
and produced
An equivalent
An equivalent
for example, based on the rms value of the water particle velocity and a mean zerocrossing Calculation period for one obtained of the from the wave moments spectra of the
wave
that
spectrum. au = 0.388
measured
showed
ft/sec. and~z
07
KCeq =+=3,4 (3.368)
value
of KC gives
a mean
CM = 2.2
but are chosen strictly to give a good fit of the computed the measured.
While the chosen CM and CD values are within the range shown in
Fig. 2.6 for KCeq = 3.4, these values are low and fall near the lower limit of the variation at this KC value. The correlations of the force spectra are Thus, it
is good in general.
has been possible to obtain good correlation with constant CM and CD values
139
4
\
1
tlEFi5UBE11 CUtlPUTED
HEW3URED 
CUtlPUTED
, 0.2
o! u Q.6 FREQUENCYHZ
,L
O.a . 1.0
tlEWIURED 
s FREQUENC7HZ !!?
CCWPUTED
tlERSURED CClflFllTED
0.2
0.6 FREQUENCTHZ
11.u
0.8
0.2
O.u
u .s
0.8
1.0
FREQUENC1HZ
FIGURE 3.54
CORRELATION
OF
MEASURED
INLINE
FORCE
SPECTRA
WITH
COMPUTED
AND CD = 0.10
co
z. Mo =; )=
1%
ZE
%0
n! 2
0! u
n!6
0!8
1.0
FREEJUENCTHZ
FIGURE 3.55
TRANSVERSE FORCE SPECTRUM ON AN INSTRUMENTED SECTION DUE TO THE WAVE OF FIGURE 3.52
over
the
frequency to
range
of
the KC
wave
Moreover,
these
values
correspond
an equivalent
number
rms velocity
and mean
period of the wave spectrum, albeit at their low end of the range, in these cases. The transverse generally 3.55. small. force on the cylinder due to these random waves has been A measured transverse force spectrum is given in Fig. 
Note that the peak frequency of the spectrum (~) of the force, peak of the wave while irregular (or inline in nature, force) has
frequency transverse
3.4.1.2
Inclined Cylinder Similar tests were conducted with a 6 inch diameter inclined cylinder
The slope of the boundary was changed from Similarly, the uniform gap from 0.25 inches to 2.5
0 to 40 and 70 with respect to the horizontal. between the cylinder and the boundary was varied
Several random waves were generated past the cylinder The random waves were modeled after the
Bretschneider spectrum and were three minutes in duration. A sample spectrum from the wave generated in the tank is shown in
Fig. 3.56.
A small portion of the corresponding measured wave profile, water forces on the instrumented section is presented from the smallest cylinder
particle velocity and inline andnormal shown in Fig. 3.57. The data are
boundary gap of 0.25 ins. follow the wave profile normal load additional Moreover,
The velocity and load in the inline (X) direction peaks. However, the The
has twice as many peaks as the wave. second harmonic component in the
force.
At the
the downward
force
larger gaps, the normal force frequencies asymmetry linearized in the profile disappears.
A sample calculation
For the wave spectrum chosen, we obtain the and the mean zerocrossing period, ~z = 2.0
140
GAP=4.5 1 /
IN.
c
0.3
0:9
FREQU:NCY
(tiz)
FIGURE 3.56
SFCTlON
IN  LINE
WATER
PARTICLE
VELOCITY
10
20
;5
30
TIME
( SE:ONDS
FIGURE 3.57
KC
eq
OUT* =~=
KC
0.8
the drag coefficient from Sarpkayas
(3.369)
(1981) data is
For
this
value,
CD = 1.0.
The drag force spectra computed with these values was on the order inertia for force the spectra. Since the drag CD force contribution is taken as is
subsequent
calculations
zero.
the computation
correlations
slopes of 0, 40 and 70 are shown in Figs. 3.58  3.60, respectively. that the correlation is good in all cases.
The normal force on the cylinder due to random waves was generally smal 1 in all cases except for the smallest gap of 0.25 ins. the measured in. This is evident from
normal force spectra given in Fig. 3.61 for gaps of 4.5 and 0.25
Note that there are two distinct peaks in the spectrum for the 0.25 in.
gap; one at the peak frequency of the wave and inline force and one at twice this frequency. There is a third peak at a low frequency corresponding to the The correlation of the linear part is made using
transfer function measured in regular waves [Chakrabarti and Libby (1987)] and the following relationship
(3.370)
where RAO = transfer function and Af = frequency increment in the estimate of s(f). spectrum This formula is similar in form to that used in the drift force
computation
3.4*1.3
even for a relatively broad band wave spectrum (S c 0.7) Rayleigh distribution provides a good approximation method. to the individual wave heights defined by the
zerouncrossing
responses due to waves are linear with the wave heights then it is straightforward to show that
141
SIG.
LO~D VAL. ME AS. = 1,75 A
m,
A
\ ,
*=
.3
. .6
., .3
.6
.9
FRE&JEiCY
(tiz)
FIGURE 3.58
MEASURED
1
I
COMPUTED SLOPE = 40
GAP =0.25
w n 0 _.
>
b
MEAS. = 1.73 COMP. = 1,69
0 
w u z w m
d
! I
In d
l\ \ \
o 0.3 0; 6 (
)
0.3 (Hz
0,6
FREQUENCY
FIGURE 3.59
I
LOXAD VAL. . MEAS. = 1.29
SIG.
Q
\ \
I
r,
SIG.
LOXAD b , \,
w
VAL .
F.
COMP =1.35
ml
0,3
0.6
0.9
FREQUENCY
2
I / ( Hz)
0.3
0.6
FIGURE 3.60
MEASURED .
g
COMPUTED
SLOPE
= 0
o
Ii /\ l\ I I
0,0
/ I
0.3
14
FR;:UENCY
(VZ)
FIGURE 3.61
distribution.
Thus , if the
forces
measured
on the
cylinder
are
strictly
inertial then these random force amplitudes may be described distribution function. From the earlier force correlation it is found that
by the Rayleigh
the
drag
force
cylinder force
distribution
inline
double amplitudes
(heights) are shown in Figs. 3.62 and 3.63, respectively. function as good
It is found that the forces follow the Rayleigh distribution as or better than the wave heights. the high end of the distribution
The wave heights show some departure at function. The inline response has a in
seems satisfactory
of view of the extreme value analysis. The transverse force, on the other hand, while small in magnitude, shows Note that the lift
(3.371)
i.e., the lift force is proportional expression, assumption However, frequency, if the is value of CL is
In the
time. is
above
This
assumed
not
strictly
correct
because force
force
the
most
predominant
lift
frequency
is twice
this assumption
is reasonable.
Langley
(1984) showed that for a wave drift force, the of the drift force profile for a narrow band For a wider band spectrum, the Bergman (1972) has shown amplitudes regular follow may an be
initial distribution
distribution is sharper depending on the value of q. that on a narrow band assumption, The lift the drag
force to
exponential
distribution.
force
due
waves
(3.372)
142
H if HFIMS
WRVE
N13.2
H I
HRMS
FIGURE
3.62
CORRELATION
OF
WAVE
HEIGHT
DISTRIBUTION
WITH
RAYLEIGH
DISTRIBUTION FUNCTION
CN
HRVE
l:U
2!1
2:0
3:5
U12
Bt3TTElM 5EETICIN
HRVE N13.1
,
I 0.7 I:u
2; i 2: a 3:5 4! 2 0:7 l:U 2:1 2: a 3.5
u! 2
f/f ~*
f/fm5
FIGURE
3.63
CORRELATION DISTRIBUTION
OF
INLINE
FORCE
DISTRIBUTION
WITH
RAYLEIGH
FUNCTION
regular waves is given by 2 Lm = L m Following a method similar to Bergmans the lift force amplitudes may be
(3.373)
the
exponential
distribution at least on a narrow band spectrum assumption. may then be given by . L P(;L) = 1 exp[r]=lexP L
A
This distribution
* [= L
1
of the water
(3.374)
where fL = velocity
amplitudes
and
of
The correlation
force amplitudes and the exponential distribution is shown in Fig. 3.64. this correlation
the lift forces do not follow the exponential distribution well, especially at the intermediate profile, range of the it is found independent the variable. On examining of the the lift force
force
that
frequency
contents
lift
correspond to the wave and the inline force frequencies as well as twice these frequencies. the Rayleigh Thus, the distribution distribution of the lift force amplitudes distribution is between and may
function
The forces measured on the instrumented section of the inclined cylinder in the inline (X) and normal (Y) directions with respect to the cylinder axis are mostly inertial. Therefore the random force amplitudes function. components be are described by
At the smallest gap, however, the normal at twice to the frequencies the Rayleigh of the wave
frequencies
may
expected
follow
distribution When
function well.
the second harmonic is small, e.g., for larger gaps, the distribution will be closer to the Rayleigh distribution.
143
The
cumulative
distribution
of
the
wave
heights,
inline
and
normal
force amplitudes for random wave runs with a 0 slope and gaps of 2.5 in. and 0.25 in. are presented in Figs. 3.65 and 3.66, respectively. and inline forces are found to follow the Rayleigh wel 1 even though the departure from the The wave heights reasonably is not The
distribution curve
theoretical
insignificant.
normal force for the larger cylinder/boundary correlation. with the However, the normal
force at the 0.25 in. gap compares The distribution of the measured
Rayleigh
amplitudes
rises more
the Rayleigh
curve
and corresponds
distribution. may
band width
Langley (1984) for the initial drift force distribution. Additional test runs were recently made with a 2.5 inch diameter vertical cylinder with a 1 ft. instrumental section submerged 1 ft. below the still at the Two
water level
(SWL).
but
slightly
different
peak
frequency
3.67)
probability
density
and horizontal
velocity
for these
runs is compared with the Gaussian distribution 3.69. The probability density of the
inline
distribution of its amplitudes are shown in the middle along with Gaussian and Rayleigh correlated probability with respectively. The transverse (or 1ift) of the force is
the exponential
distribution
at the bottom
figures.
profiles
even though
for linearplusquadratic
terms by Kate, et al. (1987) in Fig. 3.51. The transverse and sharply peaked force probability density function is generally symmetric compared to the Gaussian density function. This is,
however, expected as there are numerous small peaks due to higher harmonics
144
HRVE N13.1 e /
%:0
0:7
1.4
2:1
2:8
S.5
U.2
0:7
I:u
2:1
2! B
3; 5
u!2
L/(fL)m~
FIGURE
3.64
CORRELATION
OF TRANSVERSE
FORCE DISTRIBUTION
WITH EXPONENTIAL
DISTRIBUTION FUNCTION
o ~
o
me
o
RAYLEIGH
GAP = 2.5 q I
INCHES
o m b 00
I
lHrms
o

o
~o y
o
0 0 o
ml
0
o
,
Ow
0 o
0.4 0.8 1.2 1.6
f/(f y)rms i
2.0 2.4
FIGURE 3.65
w q m m
CIJMMULATIVE
0 I .0
PROBABILITY
0.6
0.8
0.2
0.4
t.o
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
y
r o ~ * _< * x 2 u) y o
.,
E N
E R G Y D
E N
FR
FR 1.!50
SIG. 8.
NT
e.m
N=
l~M=~~=@.16
s +
Y
Uc
NH 1
p 10 *
x z s
E
c o N
r).
0 0.0
I 0.2
I 0.4
m E&w
I e.a
I I.@
i
1.2
E N E R
25
FR O.w
20 N=
FR 1.=
SIG.
NT
G Y
8.4247
i>lII=m
DT=O. i6
15
s x x
2
lg 10
s E c o
N D
0.9
e.z
0.4 Fmdk%kE
0.s
I.e
1
1.2
FIGURE 3.67
WAVE
ENERGY
DENSITY
SPECTRA
OF
RANDOM
WAVES
EXPERIENCED
BY
0; 00
no
tlORIZDNlil
g
; m : d @ ~ ~. o
0 N
o
c!
0 c1
& a
M!7XIS LORD /
%.00
0.50
1.00
LWID
1.50
2.00
2.50
i! 00
XFIXIEt
RHPLITUDE
FiHS LORD
YflXIS
LORD
RHPLITUDE
RIIS
L13flD
FIGURE
3.68
CORRELATION
OF
WAVE
ELEVATION,
HORIZONTAL
PARTICLE
VELOCITY,
ANDTRANSVERSE LOAD
0:00
NFIVE ELEVFIT1ON .. /
RIM
lthb1.00
2.00 s. 00 Ww
0:00
V14LUE
HdRIZONT!AL
VELOCIT7
f RMS WILUE.
XfiX15
LIYFID
i3MPLITUDE
RMS
LINID
VRKIS
%0
3.20
/
U:OD
u!80
!4MS LORD
FIGURE
3.69
CORRELATION
OF
WAVE
ELEVATION,
HORIZONTAL
PARTICLE
VELOCITY,
INLINE ANDTRANSVERSE LOADS WITHGAUSSIAN DISTRIBUTION AS WELL AS INLINE LOAD AMPLITUDES WITH RAYLEIGH
ANDTRANSVERSE LOAD
present Because
in the of the
lift
force
which of
provides. a
bias
towards
its mean
value. the
presence
multiple
harmonics,
correlation
with
exponential distribution is not satisfactory. Additional test runs were made in the presence of uniform current. velocity was measured as well
In
these
cases,
the
horizontal
particle
at the
section.
The random wave run was repeated with an The horizontal the Gaussian current current
inline and an opposing current having a strength of y = 1.0. velocity and the inline load histograms The top are correlated with
in Fig. bottom
3.70.
plots to the
without
ones
correspond
opposing
The horizontal velocity and inline loads follow the absence of current. mean, While positive current is
present,
represents
a nonzero
or negative
the histograms to be skewed towards the zero value with respect to the mean. This skewness is more pronounced for the inline load in the opposing current. The distributions of the transverse forces are shown in Fig. 3.71. The
lefthand sides show the correlation of the force histograms with the Gaussian distribution while the righthand side plots represent the cumulative
probability distribution of the force amplitudes with the theoretical Rayleigh distribution evident force function. The departure from the Rayleigh distribution in the adverse current case. compared to the Gaussian is quite
peaked
particularly for the opposing current case. a zero mean in all cases.
3.4.2 Response of an Articulated Tower An articulated tower was tested in random waves in which the inline
oscillation angle of the tower at the bottom as well as the horizontal load at the universal joint were measured modified PM spectrum. The tower (Fig. 3.72). was The random wave represented a to a steady load from the
subjected
The histograms of the wave elevation, horizontal Ujoint load are compared mean with the Gaussian latter distribution two cases due in to Fig. the
oscillation the
Note
nonzero
values
in the
The amplitudes
of these measurements
145
\
J
E u
E
a Q
Y=o
L
HORIi?ONTRL VELOC ITT /
2.00
3.00
% w
FIMS VRLUE
i
XRXIS LORD /
2.
no
3.00
4.00
RMS VIWLIE
:
&
:
0
!
HOFil ZCINTllL VEL13C
RtiS VRLUE
1.50
0.s0
Xflxls
LORD
MS
L,
Y=
3.00 v. 00 5.00 8.00
+1.0
VRLUE
HORIj!LINTRL
FIGURE 3.70
CORRELATION LOADS ON A
OF HORIZONTAL VERTICAL
WATER PARTICLE
CYLINDER
PRESENCE
OF,
INLINE
DISTRIBUTION
1
TRX 1S
Q m o 0 m e 0 w o
+1.0
00
TRX 15 LORD / B RMS VRLIIE
00
0.50 YtlXIS
TRXIS
FIGURE
3.71
CORRELATION
OF
TRANSVERSE
LOADS
WITH
GAUSSIAN
AND RAYLEIGH
1.0 0. s 0.0
0.5
1.0 1.5
s 4 z 0 2 4 90
IIWl~
lm
W@
HARTIW
110
1= INCEES .
13
140
FIGURE
3.72
SAMPLE TOWER
DATA
RECORDED
UIWE :
ELEVI
llik0
2.00
3.50
S.oo
RHS V9LUE
RHS VRLUE
HUFIIZWNTFiL
UJIJIN
L
0.00
1.5D 9.00
IN /
RHS VllLUE
FIGURE 3.73
CORRELATION LINE
OSCILLATION
TOWER
AND
RAYLEIGH DISTRIBUTIONS
distribution
The correlation
of the tower
with the Gaussian and Rayleigh distributions load, however, show some deviation.
horizontal
The dimensions
buoyant tower relative to the wave were such that some drag dependence of the load may be expected.
3.4.3 Response of a Moored Tanker A tanker model moored by catenary anchored lines was tested in the wave tank. The tanker model represented a 100,000 dwt displacement tanker class, The Fig.
was similar to the one shown in Fig. 2.30. of the catenary system are shown in
characteristics
During the test in random waves, the surge of the tanker as well as the tension in the forward mooring line were measured. The tanker was
ballasted at 50 percent and was subjected to a steady wind load. included a steady current load. The results for the line tension filtered and tanker
here.
oscillations
The histograms and cumulative distribution of and tanker surge are correlated with the
Gaussian and Rayleigh distribution runs correspond to two different steady current as well. nonzero function. mean value,
These
random waves and wind; the second one having are somewhat asymmetric about the to the Gaussian distribution
close
3.4.4 Response of a Barge A conventional barge model was tested in the CBI wave tank. The barge
was 12.5 ft. long, 3.25 ft. wide and had a draft of 0.42 ft.
It was moored in
head seas by a linear spring fore and aft such that it had a natural period in surge of approximately have been 30 seconds. The details of the barge characteristics (1982). The mooring line load and surge
reported by Chakrabarti
motion of the barge were measured in random waves. The data was filtered as before to remove the high frequency oscillations using a high pass filter with a cutoff frequency of 0.2 Hz. The results are
146
BJ
8 L
%.DO
, Do
FIGURE
3.74
CORRELATION
OF
LOWFREQUENCY
SURGE
MOTION
AND
CORRESPONDING
7.00
LINE
TENSIi3N
/ RMS VFILUE
m .
m u m
Q
a
L
.00
FIGURE 3.75
CORRELATION OF LOWFREQUENCY
LINE TENSION OF A
SURGE
MOTION
AND CORRESPONDING
WIND AND
SPREADMOORED
TANKER
IN WAVES,
presented
in Figs.
3.76
and
3.77.
There
that
can
be
First of all, the length of data runs was It has been shown by Pinkster, et al. should be unstable for short duration
Moreover, the number of components used to generate waves were also These limitations are evidenced in Figs. 3.76 and 3.77. While the
3.4.5 Response of a Semisubmersible A model of a semisubmersible wave tank. pipelay barge design was tested in the CBI
The major dimensions of the semisubmersible were 8.1 ft. long and The barge was composed of twin hulls and six legs supporting a It was ballasted at the legs to a draft of 0.78 ft. The
box superstructure.
fore and aft sides of the model were identical with a spring constant of 0.49 lbs/ft. each. The spring constants were chosen so that the translational The mooring lines were
natural period of the moored system was about 30 sec. instrumented with load cells. pressure in the freestream
also recorded. The results for these measurements are shown in Fig. 3.78 for a PM wave The data for the line loads.
load was likewise filtered as before to retain only the lowfrequency Thus, the correlations correspond pressure to the with the Gaussian distribution wave as well as
highfrequency
and lowfrequency
line load.
3.5
LONGTERM RESPONSE PREDICTION The longterm refers to the desired During this period lifetime of a marine system or an experiences a
ocean
structure.
of time,
the structure
large number of seas from very small to very large. seastates is a shortterm phenomenon and may be
nonlinear excitation
depending
on its size.
147
BOW MLI13RING
LINE
LClflD
RMS
VF!LUE
c1
5UTIGE
IIOTIDN
IL
2.00 3.00
u. 00
RHS
VHLUE
2L.00
SURGE MOTI13N / RMS VRLUE
FIGURE 3.76
CORRELATION
OF MOORING
LORD
L
2.00
llHS
3. m U.oo
V9LUE
Bi3w
MOORING
LINE
LORD
RtlS
VRLUE
SUFiGE
t10TI13N
RMS
VRLUE
FIGURE 3.77
CORRELATION
OF MOORING
hlb00 Z.uu
3.00
9.00
VRLUE
RMS VRLUE
DTNRMIC
PFIESSURE
/ BHS V9LUE
VRLUE
BOW LINE
LORD
RtiS
V9LUE
FIGURE
3.78
CORRELATION
OF
MEASURED
WAVE,
PRESSURE
AND
LINE
LOAD
: 1
DTNRHIC
PRESSURE
/ RM5 VRLUE
B13U LINE
LBRO /
FN4S V~LUE
FIGURE
3.79
CORRELATION DISTRIBUTIONS
OF
MEASURED WITH
WAVE,
AND
LINE WAVE ON
LOAD A
GAUSSIAN
SEMISUBMERSIBLE
linear
or
nonlinear that
depending
on the type
Thus,
it is
longterm
response statistics
response
parameters.
individual
from
analysis,
severe seas will produce parameters involving a nonlinear system. There are two types of information statistics generally of waves. One is the sea useful in the study of the longterm severity. The wave severity of sea is
expressed
in terms
of the significant
height
or significant
zerocrossing
distribution Tz .
of Hs and
The distributions
significant wave heights have been compared with known distribution in order to examine their suitability. Of the available ones
distribution most
functions,
e.g., described
in Section
3.1, the
common
considered
and lognormal
distribution.
Correlations
have shown
[Ochi (1982)] that the Wiebull distribution lognormal distribution underestimates seems to be Hs, at the large better,
is poor at small Hs values while values in of Hs. The and lognormal certain
slightly
general,
has
advantages, as well. The zerocrossing wave periods have also been found to follow lognormal distribution lognormal quite well. Since it may both height and period individually follow
distribution,
be shown [Ochi
combined
statistical properties follow bivariate lognormal probability law. A longterm probability defines events and extreme value statistics for a period on the order of 20100 years, term probability. waves for The concept an offshore as opposed to a few hours for the shortis associated with that of
design
148
probability
of wave
heights,
site are
If
information
is available
for numerous
shortterm
statistics
of the
wave heights then the longterm probability of wave heights may be obtained by the following simple method of order statistics. are ranked in the order of higher wave heights. The shortterm wave heights
wave heights over a longterm period such that TL is the longterm period and TS is the shortterm period, then L ~ also termed the return period
TL
is
wave.
of the
is given by
(3.376)
P(Hm) =+
Q(Hm) = 1  &
.
(3.377)
theoretical formulas
probability as
distribution discussed in
There
are
such
available
Suitability
of these
formulas to a particular
instance may be
Since little or no
data are usually available at the upper tail of the probability distribution, fitting different distributions difficult task. and choosing the most suitable one is always a
149
3.5.1 3.5.1.1
Bivariate
Short
spectra
spectral model of modified PM, he showed wave height and peak properties of
frequency combined
lognormal and
statistical a
height
wave
follow
bivariate
lognormal
probability distribution.
TO IHs ] (3.378) To
exp [~ ~
refers
to
given
Hs,
U. = 21T/ To
correlation coefficient
TOIHs
~T~
()
TO (ln Hs
HsuH) s
(3.379)
Analyzing the recorded North Atlantic wave data, Ochi (1978) obtained the expressions for the most probable as well as the upper and lower values of the peak period. The most probable peak period is given by
To(m) exp[uT+~ o
T. (ln
HsuH)~
aTo]
(3.380)
Hs
while the upper and lower values of the peak period for a given confidence, y, is written as
150
TO p (In H~  ~H)Ax~uT H~ s
] o
(3.381)
4(X) = ~
(et2/2dt
(3.382)
In particular, the values of x are x 1.96 1.44 1.15 0.67 4 0.95 0.85 0.75 O*5O
If x is set equal to 1 in Eq. 3.381, then the most probable value Of To (Eq. 3.380) is obtained. From the mean North Atlantic data the peak period for
various confidence coefficients are shown as functions of the significant wave heights. * The equations for the peak frequency for the various confidence
values are given in Table 3.6. An extreme example of how this family of spectra may be used to predict the
for the most probable extreme value and the The design extreme value of a
in which
number of encounters
the most probable value, ~n, in the above equation, R = 1, and N = 1. Ochi submersible (1978) presented results of a numerical analysis on a semiThe
extreme values of the transverse forces for various seastates are shown in
151
The most probable as well as upper and lower extreme values for PM spectra are given in the figure. In the computation, the
beam seas are assumed to be exposed a quarter of the assumed 20 year life.
3.5.1.2 Long Term In contrast to the shortterm prediction, the longterm prediction This is The long
term predictions also deal with the extreme of the response in the lifetime of the structure.
In order to evaluate the longterm extreme response, the longThis may be accomplished in the form of
the frequency of occurrences of all possible seastates or the longterm joint probability distribution of wave height and wave period. The frequency of occurrence for the seastates in the North Atlantic was The product of this and may be obtained as the
obtained by Ochi (1978) and is shown in Table 3.7. the shortterm probability of a family of seastates
The shortterm probability will depend on whether the The probability function for the nonlinear
or nonlinear.
system depends
P5(X) = 1  exp(x/ ~2
(3.384)
where spectra
~ and
varies linearly with wave amp itude, and is est mated from wave transfer Thus, the functions statistical by means of the linear superposition of a response
principle.
shortterm
distribution
variable is completely defined by one single parameter, E, for given structure size, heading angle, forward speed and seastate (~, He ). For nonlinear
systems, E will not vary linearly with H, but a single ~esponse value may be obtained for a given seastate.
and additional
152
TABLE3*6 mDAL FREQUENCIES FORTIiE (HEAN) NORTH ATLANTICmvE SPECTRA AS FUNCTIONS OF SIGNIFICANTHAVEHEIGHT[OCHI (1978)1
VALUE OF ~ 0.048 (8.75  tn H~) 0.054 (8.44  An H~) 0.061 (8.07  ~nH~) 0.069 (7.77  In H~)
Lower UO
Most Probable
Upper ~
NOTE :
win
rps
IIs in meters
IN FT. I50 I 1
o c)
MOST PROBABLE ,
x & 3.0
z F
2.5
z &
{//
10
12
14 IN M.
16
SIGNIFICANT
WAVE HEIGHT
FIGURE
3.80
PROBABLE
EXTREME
VALUES
OF
TRANSVERSE
FORCE
IN
VARIOUS
TABLE3.7
FREQUENCY OF OCCURRENCE OF VARIOUS SEASTATES
<1 1 2
23
91o 10  11 11  12
12  13
0,2603
0.1757
0.0029
0.0016 0.00074 0.00045 0.00012 0.00009
3 4 45 5 6 6 7 7 8
0.1014
13
14
0.0589 0.0346
0.0120
15  16
16  17
> 17
~ 
30
CONFIDENCE WEIGHTED
DOMAIN SEA
APPROACH
APPROACH
20
15
10
1.5
5678
FIGURE
3.81
DESIGN
EXTREME
VALUE
OF
TRANSVERSE
FORCE
EVALUATED
BY USING
TWOPARAMETER
The longterm
nonstationary
response process
is written
as a sum of a
Therefore,
(3.385)
where PL is the longterm probability. The Likewise, longterm distribution of ~ is sometimes assumed ognormal.
the longterm
distribution
of response amplitudes
is assumed log
normal [Jasper, et al. (1956)]. Nordenstrom, et al. (1973) obtained a longterm distribution from data They
from seven different ships by formal integration of the above equation. grouped Beaufort the measured ~values (of longitudinal bending moments)
of within
The integration
was carried
out separately for each Beaufort group and the final longterm distribution of amplitudes was obtained as a weighted sum of longterm distributions for
Beaufort groups. Lewis (1973) made a similar analysis for ship bending stress. stress (trough to peak) in any record were Rayleigh distributed. The actual The total
weather system was divided into n weather groups. mean square values of stress, fi from many
distributed. Nordenstrom between capable the (1973) and investigated lognormal, a distribution but closer . to function the which one was in
normal
normal
and was
of describing
the entire
range of ~
P(n)
= 1  exp [  ( ~/a)m
(3.386)
based on 1577 full scale recordings of longitudinal ships, as well as other published data.
153
P(x) = 1 exp
(3.387)
b and k are functions of m. and the values of the A method of obtaining this involved has been
parameters
described by Nordenstrom. The longterm response depends at least on the following quantities each having an assigned weighting factor: (a) sea severities, (b) spectral shape, Considering these
~ @) = i
Ns pi
Pj
P(X)
J z z
ij
Ns pi pj
(3.388)
where
p(x) N5 Pi Pj
density .
function
= number of shortterm responses = ~? = weighting factor for sea condition (state) = weight factor for wave spectrum shape
number
of
response expected
of the structure
is
N =
X Z ij
Ns pi pjTL
(3.389)
where TL is lifetime in seconds. Ochi response (1978) of the utilized the above loads approach in beam in sea. computing the longterm methods
semisubmersible
Two different
produced two probability functions from which the extreme values are shown in Fig. 3.81. Note that the extreme values estimated by the two methods of long
3.5.2
Time and Frequency Domain LongTerm Predictions When the longterm probability density function for a response is not
154
in terms of probability level for the pair of wave parameters, Hs and Tz, then the shortterm response due to long or shortcrested waves are computed
first. wave
It is then extended to a longterm distribution based on the available This method is applicable in the frequency domain for a linear
data.
system [e.g., Fukuda (1968)]. Assuming that the response, e.g., the bending moment of a ship addressed by Fukuda is a linear function of the regular wave amplitude, the shortterm distribution distribution. of the bending moment in a shortterm sea follows the Rayleigh
Jm n
Je o
[H(M, 0
(3.390)
9 = angle angle
between
wave
90 = ship transfer
heading
with
respect
to
direction,
function, H, corresponds to the heading angle, O.. assumed to be given by the cosine square law
:5(U) COS26,
s(b), e) = { o, .
:<0+
(3.391) elsewhere
sea is given by
22 0.==
Ill
II
lT/2 = / f Tr/2 0
[H(u,
0
%)]* u
S(U)
COS2e
dude
.
(3.392)
~~
where S(U) is a theoretical or measured spectral energy density. noted here that for is the not longterm important; response only the prediction variance the of
response
spectrum
the
shortterm
response is needed. Once the shortterm the probability response parameter, IS, for a linear system is known, of the
of exceedance
155
Assuming
that the
probability
density
function
longterm probability of exceedance is obtained from the integral 2 QL(M>MI) = Jm ~ 1 exp [ v] 20 p(~)do (3.394)
which is evaluated by replacing the integral by a summation. Let pij denote the longterm frequ@ncY of occurrence of a short term wave given by the significant wave height, Hi, and the average period, Tj. let
Uijk
AIso,
denote the short term response Parameter for this wave and for a wave Then the
angle of ek where k is the kth equal interval between Ir/2 and m/2. probability for all waves at this heading an91@, Gk is 9iven by c1
Qk(M> Ml) =
zxexp(~lpij 1 ij ijk
(3.395)
If
it
heading angles between O and 2w, then the total probability is obtained from
Q(M>M1)=f;
where N6 is the total
Qk(M>M1)
number of intervals
(3.395)
IT/2 to
lT/2. Usually a 1015 increment of heading angle is sufficient calculation for the shortcrested waves. The above method is applicable which the response function linear fashion such that only to linear systems,
for response
doubled
amplitude also increases by a factor of two. the wave and the response does not exist,
analysis, sometimes termed total system analysis, may be used. noted that this method routinely
It should be
is extremely time consuming and is prohibitive to use It may be used as a benchmark for
other more efficient albeit approximate methods. The time domain analysis is applied to the shortterm response
prediction.
156
parameters, Hi and Tjz a time history of the wave is generated by one of the methods such as outlined in Chapters 2 and 3. From the relationship wave force given by the between the Morison response and the regular wave in terms of the water (e.g.,
equation
particle
velocity and acceleration), the time history of the response due to the shortterm wave (Hi, Tj) may be computed. finitedifference analysis methods or a The method of computation may include a scheme 2. and may involve one of the
finiteelement in Chapter
outlined
Considering
the variability
of the
Hoffman and Walden (1977) that a family of wave energy density spectra be used in place of a single spectral model. the response are generated,
wave direction is an important consideration for the response, then a response time history for each increment of wave direction is needed. From these shortterm time histories, may be constructed. a histogram of the extreme values
of the response from which the expected value and variance of the response may +, be computed. It is sometimes possible to consistently fit a known theoretical
distribution through these histograms. is much system simpler earlier. as illustrated all the by the
Once
shortterm
conditions are known by this method, the long term prediction of the response may be carried out by the ordinary statistical method outlined earlier.
In order to cover all wave conditions over the entire service life of a
structure and obtain statistically reliable response predictions, particularly the extremes, one should choose a period much longer than the period of wave measurements, generally encountered in literature. Thus, extrapolation of the
the sea states that is at least ten times the service life of the structure. This will provide a much better sea states. value for the average occurrence of various
157
A simple method
to a period that is long compared to the structures service life. achieved in the following steps [Inglis, et al. (1985)].
1.
Plot the cumulative probability distribution of the significant wave height, P(H~) for the available observations on Weibull scales.
2.
P(Hs) = l.exp(.
~)c
(3.397)
3.
Calculate P(HS) for a range of values of Hs in excess of the largest H~ in the observations using the above Weibull distribution.
4.
Assuming
one
observation
every
hours,
the
total
number
of
(3.398)
(3.399)
where 6 is half the difference between two adjacent HS* values. all numbers of occurrences N(Hs*) for Hs* values exceeding
Sum the
5.
The
number
of occurrences
with an estimated
mean wave period, Tz, such as, assuming a constant wave steepness.
6.
158
2921940  NT Na
where Na is the actual number of observations. number of observat ons in 1000 years to the
(3.400)
This gives the total required total of
2921940.
3.6 Extreme Value Statistics The extreme value is defined as the largest value expected to certain specified period of time. of Since number may the specified occur in a may be
time
equivalently under
expressed
in terms extreme
of observations refer to a
of the
variable of
investigation,
value
specified
number
min.
duration,
which
is
considered
statistically
invariant. structure.
Alternately, it could be long term in terms of the lifetime of the The distribution function, P(.) of the shortterm wave heights, as for extremeis the
a random variable, is called the initial cumulative distribution value initial statistics. probability Similarly, density the corresponding On the density
function
function.
If
the
initial
probability
distribution
is
known,
e.g.,
Rayleigh
distribution
of wave heights
in a shortterm
sea, then the extreme value is On the other hand, the knowledge of initial
distribution
if the measured
or maxima
In the
latter
case,
an asymptotic extremevalue distribution As mentioned from the earlier, initial the probability
extremes
is
different
distribution.
probability
density
q(Yfl) = n [p(x)
[P(x)nllx
=y n
(3.401)
Q(Yn) = [ [p(x)]n lx = y
(3.402)
n
159
From
the
above
two
equations,
the
probable
extreme
wave
height,
~n
, is
derived as
+
dYn) n
= o
(3.403)
which gives
p (Yn) P(yn) +
(n  1) [P(Yn)]2
= O
(3.404)
LonguetHiggins
2~[nexp rms
(~
Y*
)][exp rms ($ rms
) 1]
= o
(3.405)
Yn=J2
In n Xrms
(3.406)
are, therefore,
highly correlated.
of maxima may
be included through
In this method,
the magnitude of a maximum point depends on the immediately previous one, but not any other prior ones. two successive maxima In this case, the joint probability distribution of This is illustrated and derived by Ochi
is needed.
(1982).
obtain extremes.
probability paper as
160
1
P(x) = +
(3.407)
and extended for extremes over a certain return period. may not be satisfactory not be very reliable.
.
161
0!
w
m 03 m
ml ol
1%
w
.
L
3*
UP Om
h p
40
in
qX b
II
m=ib=
n
II
X
I
ml ml ml
II
ml
qX 1
3
3
al w E>
NONLINEAR TERM
POLYNOMIAL APPROXIMATION
REMARKS
SOURCE
Iuil(u
i)
[ 4: u ];
au
IU+
(ui)
C(ui);
7 c=zJyav; R
vR=ui
VR is Harmonic u is Harmonic
Iuij
(ui)
U:E
am cosm~t+2J;
2
uOk
am = Fourier Coefficients
NOTE:
u(t) and i = k(t) are random functions of time, t, and the current U is steady.
4.0
Several (Chapter 3)
different in
methods
have
in the
previous of
chapter extreme
handling
nonlinear
prediction
These methods are evaluated here regarding their assumptions Limiting values of their application are prescribed wherever
4.1
DISCUSSION OF LINEARIZATION TECHNIQUE One of the common methods of handling the the stochastic terms. description Sometimes of
nonlinear
responses
is to
linearize
nonlinear
it is
convenient to retain the first few terms of the polynomial approximation thus maintaining some of the nonlinearities description of the in the system. is
probabilistic specially
responses
simple
if the
sea surface
is assumed
to be a Gaussian
somewhat more complex but is still solvable in a number of cases. Different Section 3. methods us of linearization the limits have of already been of presented these in
Let
discuss
applicability
various
linearized terms.
of several common
relate to the drag term of the Morison formula or its modified form including damping and relative velocity terms. the analysis of marine and offshore As such, they have wide applications in structures for both the evaluation of
a jacket
surfaces and sharp corners where flow experiences wavecurrent floating drag is important. experience On moving
structures,
structures
that
resonance
the hydrodynamic
damping term
may be significant.
the relative velocity drag term should be included. On large floating structures moored with soft springs, e.g., singlepoint mooring system, catenary anchored ships and semisubmersibles, slowdrift
In this case,
162
as
nonlinear
mooring
line
characteristics.
Floating
structures springing
that
are
tethered with taut vertical lines, e.g., TLP, experiences their tendons that are nonlinear.
force in
contribution from the nonlinear damping term may be important. The most common form of nonlinearity that is often linearized for
convenience equation.
wave drag term and the corresponding are shown in Fig. 4.1.
According to this figure, the linear approximation of up to about two standard deviations.
term is good for u = 30U while the quintic term is close for the velocity up to about 4 standard deviations.
cubic term has been shown to give rise to a triple convolution of the velocity spectrum. Similarly, the quintic term will yield a fifth convolution integral computations. damping will provide a
and, thus, will require more timeconsuming The linear approximation of the
hydrodynamic
similar plot as for the linear term in Fig. 4.1. order term. polynomial approximation may be written
for the
of motion by several approximate methods of solution, e.g., the RayleighRitz averaging technique. A general . be written in terms of the power of the a = 1 .
absolute
velocity
= O refers to the
4.24.3 terms or and showing for
a
Coulomb
friction.
a = 2 is the velocitysquared
term.
the
=
nonlinear nonlinear
and term to
damping
2 and 3.
constant exact.
positive term
corresponds
linear
correlations for a = 2 and 3 is similar. When current the relative is present in waves the drag force is written the waves and current. in terms of case, the
velocity
between
In this
linearization strength of
involves a constant term plus a linear term and depends on the the current given by y (= Ulou) in addition to the two
coefficients
163
RI
0.8
1.6
u/uu
2. u
3.2
u. o
..
POLYNOMIAL APPROXIMATIONS
A LINEAR
&
u
AA
3.2
Y c1
%Yx
FIGURE 4.2
0 IUrx I a (%x
A LINEAR APPROXIMATION
P Q D Q m w m (5 m m m
o UJ m
c1
0.8
1.6
2. 4!
3. 2
u. c)
,8
X/ux
FIGURE
4.3
LINEARIZATION (a = 3)
OF
HIGHER
ORDER
NONLINEAR
DAMPING
TERM
in terms
The correlation
the linearization
for different
and 0.3 are shown in Figs. 4.7, 4.8 and 4.9, respectively. correlation seems to be good for u/uu values of about 2.
4.2
DISCUSSION OF NONLINEAR EXCITATION STATISTICS The linearization of nonlinear systems is only possible when the non
linearity
in the
system
is relatively
small.
In Chapter
5, the limits of
arguments of nonlinear systems for which linearization technique is applicable without serious errors will be discussed. For predominantly nonlinear
methods outlined for nonGaussian systems is applicable. The nonGaussian several available random waves found, for example, in shallow waters have of distribution theory functions. These take the
representations
in the probability
When waves are nonlinear with sharper peaks than throughs, the series
expression in Eq. 3.62 provides one representation for the probability density for the wave heights. banded waves of weak This expression nonlinearity. is easy to apply, but assumes narrowAnother representation of the wave repre
amplitudes
In this case, computation of the probability density of the joint probability of crests and troughs.
in terms
and occurs slightly ahead of the Rayleigh distribution. The nonGaussian functions represented series. probability by the theory for waves provided the distribution series, Edgeworth series and
GramCharlier
LonguetHiggins
164
t.
d
I c) A IYVUUI LINEAR
I (Yvuu) APPROXIMATION
(1
u /uu
FIGURE 4.4
LINEARIZATION OF Y= 0.1
OF WAVECURRENT
I
~
lYwqJ
(Ywcru)
APPROXIMATION
A LINEAR
u/uu
FIGURE 4.5
LINEARIZATION OF Y= 0.5
OF WAVECURRENT
~
A
1
IYVUUI (Y%u)
LINEAR I APPROXIMATION ! I o
c
c1
IJ7
J.44
A
A

A AA A i AA
I
1
Uluu
I
2
I
3
FIGURE 4.6
LINEARIZATION OF y= 1.0
OF WAVECURRENT
I.
d
C)lvad
A LINEAR
fr
(9
&
o
1

2
u /uu
FIGURE 4*7
= 0.1
m.
m%ml.
A LINEAR
7
1
u)
i9
m
I
I
2
FIGURE 4.8
C)l%u
A LINEAR
N
d
CD
m.
I
L
2!
Upu
FIGURE 4.9
representation does not necessarily improve with added terms, but in fact may deteriorate. For example, the first three terms of the GramCharlier series
that it produces negative density values at large negative wave troughs. Edgeworth and LonguetHiggins the skewness and flatness compute. sufficient. For the series suffer from the same drawback.
Moreover, to are
Edgeworth
Another
interesting
second hump indicating a preferred range in the density function near the mean wave amplitude. For a strong nonlinear system, The FokkerPlanck equation may be applied in which case the degree of nonlinearity may be left as arbitrary. For a
single degree of freedom motion system, the equation may be written in terms of a joint probability the density function of displacement the and velocity density (Eq. of
3.88).
Once
numerical
solution
is known,
probability
displacement
is obtained.
For a practical
system, it
is quite involved
Moreover,
uses a white noise spectrum as the input for the excitation force. The probability density functions for nonlinear thirdorder Stokes waves
in deep water as well as in finite water depth are known. the probability density values are always positive. The
obtained
density
distribution
Gaussian distribution.
4.3
DISCUSSION OF NONLINEAR RESPONSE STATISTICS There are basically three types of nonlinearities that are encountered in
of an offshore stages
structure. they
These nonlinearities
are
according
at which
appear:
165
The
incident
waves
based
on nonlinear
wave theories
characteristics
waves, some of which are included in Chapter 3 and discussed in Section 4.2. However, they have found limited use thus far in the extreme value analysis. While some attempts have been made in developing nonlinear wave spectra, these have not found applications in the extreme value analysis. The exerted height nonlinear external forces may appear in the form of drag forces
member
or may form
be due to the time varying wetted for the nonlinear drag forces is
general
included
in the Morison
formula
(including
inertia
and its
Some of these modifications discussed in Section 2 are relative velocity model, etc. The nonlinear drift terms. The
effect,
exciting force for TLP springing has the same origin. The nonlinear responses may arise from the responses at frequencies other than the imposed wave frequencies (e.g., secondorder frequencies, low
frequency drift, etc.) or nonlinear offshore properties offshore structure or system. The
geometric
nonlinearities Two
components the
present
structure
system.
of these,
namely
catenary
system
flexible structures, are included in Section 2. Some attempts have been made in examining all these areas of nonlinearities. Because the extreme value analysis in of the complex nature of the
nonlinear problem, it may be solved numerically on a computer which is timeconsuming The other approach in obtaining values
obtained in a closedform or a semiclosed form expression. are discussed 4.2. As can in Chapter 3 and summarized the table, by nonlinear
be seen from
chosen as Gaussian. For the nonlinear drag force, a polynomial approximation developed by
The second term of the force spectral estimate gives rise integral of the velocity spectra. Similarly, the
convolution
third
a quintic
convolution
integral
and so on.
166
TABLE 4.2 SUMMARY OF METHODS OF NONLINEAR RESPONSE PREDICTION NONLINEAR TERM 1. Nonlinear Drag
REMARKS May be extended with mathematical complexity Effect of superharmonics in load spectrum shown on displacement response of a fixed platform
2.
Nonlinear Drag
ZeroMean Gaussian
Triple Convolution Polynomial; Kinematics are unidir,, Velocity Spectra ectional & Gaussian t & water particle velocity substantially larger than structure velocity Narrow Band Spectrum Transformation from the distribution of wave height, H, to force amplitude, f.
3.
Morison Formula
ZeroMean Gaussian
Two expressions for the inertta (Rayleigh) & drag predominance (exponential) are obtained
Bergman
(1972)
4.
Morison Fornwla
ZeroMean Gaussian
Moments of the velocity spectrum upto 6th order are needed for computation 2nd & 4th derivatives of force only required for computation Extreme value is based on peak rate density whose expressions are derived
Tickel 1 (1977) From .ioint distribution function of force and its second derivative Force & its 1st time derivative are statistically independent Tickell (1977)
5.
Morison Formu 1a
ZeroMean Gaussian
6.
Morison Formula
ZeroMean Gaussian
Separate expresMoe (1979) sions for inertia, drag & Morison force
REMARKS
SOURCE
Expressions for Naess (1983) total force as well as drag force Effect of current Tung & tiuang (19721973) on wave in deep water accounted for Expressions for the probability density given Expressions for the peak rate density given Mean & standard deviation of peak drag force Presented actual distribution of force Moe & Crandall (1978)
8.
ZeroMean Gaussian
ZeroMean Gaussian
First approximation to the relative velocity Based on extreme rate density related to pdf Based on extreme rate density related to pdf Linearized method
9.
Narrow Band Small current; Y = U/au <1 Wide band but large extreme force
ZeroMean Gaussian
ZeroMean Gaussian
Gaussian
force
Grigoriu
(1984)
ZeroMean Gaussian
Exact form
Numerical solution
Grigoriu (1984)
Zerohlean Gaussian
Cubic Polynomial; relative velocity term is assumed to be Gaussian with zero mean
Triple convolution of relative velocity spectra; simplified by Gaussian closure amroach; iterative method of solution due to relative velocity
Dunwoody & Finite wave Vandiver (1981) height effect ignored as is almost always done
14.
Nonlinear Damping
15.
Nonlinear Damping
Gaussian
Asymptotic approximation for expected extreme From joint pdf of force and derivative of phase function. For narrow band, reduces to exponential function Generalized Markov process
Brouwers
(1982)
16. Slow
Drift
ZeroMean
GaussIan
Langley (1984)
17. Linear & Quadratic Damping & Linear & Cubic Stiffness 18. Low Frequency Force and Motion
Zero1lean Gauss an
Stochast c averaging
Roberts
(1987)
ZeroMean Gaussian
Square of response vector assumed to have exponential distribution Positive and Negative Eigenvalues are used in the Series
Langley (1987)
ZeroMean Gaussian
Gamma distribution
Kato (1987)
Therefore, in principle, as many terms of the polynomial expression as desired may be added. The complexity and computer time consumption for the evalution In general, the inclusion of the second term a reasonable estimate unless the drag
An example in Fig. 3.25 shows that for a near on the significant wave height and modal
frequency and the relative drag contribution second term contributes about 16% of the
parameter, K, of about 117, the first term and about 10% of the
maximum total force. There structures frequencies is another effect of these modal higher order of terms on offshore are at
(e.g.,
jackets)
whose
frequencies
vibration higher
frequency.
Since these
components
appear at higher harmonics of the load spectrum and since damping is small at the natural frequency of the jacket structures, displacement, etc.) are amplified the responses (e.g., stress,
at these frequencies.
An example of this
the same order of magnitudes as those at the first harmonic. Besides the Gaussian assumption if the wave heights are assumed to follow Rayleigh maximum the distribution (narrow band assumption) then the distribution of the
wave
(1972)].
taken
(1977) in which force spectrum, instead, was assumed to be narrow banded. a wideband spectrum, expressions are obtained
procedure was developed by Naess (1983) for the The expressions for the
expected extreme values are given for the compound inertia and drag terms and are obtained in terms of the level upcrossing frequency. For the wavepluscurrent drag or the relative velocity drag, a similar In these cases, a
force spectrum may be obtained including inertia and drag term of the modified Morison equation. This was shown by Tung and Huang (19721973) drag and by Dunwoody and Grigoriu for the
167
the
incident
wave
as well
through
the kinematic
interaction.
Only
linear
terms of the polynomial were used in these analyses. method was forces used by Moe and Crandall presence
in the
of small current
and wideband
In the latter case, the expressions for the extreme forces were by an asymptotic formulation. An exact form was solved
drag.
The case of nonlinear damping in the differential equation of motion for an offshore structure has been considered in an approximate way by Brouwers
(1982) on the assumption that the damping is small and the motion response is extremely structure. narrowbanded in the area of the natural frequency of the
In this case, any motion of consequence is from the resonance at If the excitation is considered to be
by Roberts used for
a white noise having nearly equal amount of energy at all frequencies over the narrow band of interest, then a method of solution was developed (1977) based on the Markov envelope method.
Most ocean structures are inherently In these cases, plus mass (or
designed to have natural periods away from the wave periods. the responses are generally some combination of resonance separate
stiffness)
controlled this
response. is not
When
both of these
significant, resonance
method
applicable.
However,
in cases
oscillating surge drift motion of a ship or the high frequency springing load on a TLP tendon, the method of Brouwers and Roberts is suitable. work by Roberts modifying The to the (1987), the limitation process and using
In a recent
averaging: compared
Markov
revised theory produced higher values of cumulative probability Rayleigh distribution as well as the earlier results. The
new theory
seemed to match the experimental data on ship roll well. The slow drift force is nonlinear being proportional to the square of the wave height. reduces to For a narrowband spectrum the initial distribution of the force an exponential distribution function. However, Langley (1984)
obtained an expression
for a wideband
spectrum which
is markedly
different
168
In a numerical motion,
recent
important
study
by
Pinkster
and
Withers
(1987)
through
and experimental
simulation
e.g., surge
frequency surge motion follows Gaussian distribution quite well. a nonlinear mooring characteristic, is large. The expressions for
the deviation from the normal distribution the probability density function (1987). for the
secondorder obtained by
forces contour
by Langley
It is of the
and expressed
in terms
of eigenvalues
matrix equation of motion as a series expression. is equal to the number of wave components
in the irregular
characteristics
by high values
(>5).
However,
the motion
probability
density
that it is close to Gaussian. The total secondorder response including the first and secondorder
by Kate, et al. (1987), and an expression for the It is expressed as a series of Gamma functions showed that the addition of linear term
Numerical examples
169
5.0
CONSISTENT METHODOLOGY
The response of an offshore structure to random wave excitation is
stages.
stresses,
@tC. due to
linear with respect to the wave amplitudes, then the relationship between the force linear. and the wave and that between the response and
The nonlinearities
two steps.
The excitation may be nonlinear from higher order effects in the On the other hand,
wave loading, e.g., the drag force, the drift force, etc. the responses may be nonlinear even if forces
are linear
due to nonlinear
damping or restoring force etc. It is clear from the for discussion all types in of the previous sections that that appear one in
methodology the of
nonlinearities
In
in
predicting assumptions
extreme that
nonlinear upon
based
simplified of
dependent
the
characteristic
that have been dealt with using the extreme value analysis.
nonlinearity that appears in the marine structure design is in the calculation of the exciting e.g., forces. This takes the form of the nonlinear drag force,
formula.
formula these
of the also
presence
motion. response
areas
investigated
predicting
In all these formulations, the sea has been invariably assumed to be zero
mean Gaussian.
responses then the crests are higher than the troughs and sea surface in all likelihood will
distribution. be known.
In these cases, the nonGaussian properties of the waves should distribution is usually represented in a series
The nonGaussian
170
wave theory, e.g. , Stokes higher order theory or series. These theories show that the
waves generally have a nonzero negative mean and higher skewed density than Gaussian. The distribution of wave heights similarly have higher density than sea on a nonlinear response is of several has been .
Rayleigh. However, the effect of nonGaussian generally not known. specific presented. Because of the above limitations nonlinear
and various
simplified
approximations
involved in nonlinear extreme value analysis a cookbook method for an engineer to follow is not possible at this stage of the development. The stateoftheNone of these case several Then an extreme
art is such that various simplified methods may be recommended. techniques methods may be applicable be tried to to a particular find be the used problem in which in the the
should
differences in choosing
results. appropriate
engineering values.
judgment
should
5.1
EXTREME VALUE PREDICTION FOR NONLINEAR SYSTEMS A simple flow chart for the evaluation of the extreme responses of a
value that is sought for in the design, the computation may be stopped at the shortterm level or continued to obtain longterm statistics or extreme and a fatigue analysis. The process is similar whether the response is a linear or input variable, which is the waves
For a linear system, the rms value of the response defines the shortterm statistics of the response. term statistics if the This may then be extended directly to the longprobability of the shortterm waves is
longterm
known. only
For a nonlinear
system, the
is generally Other
that determines
statistical
are needed to complete the description Therefore, of in the longterm the shortterm
of the short
dependence
171
TABLE5.1
FLOliCHART FOR EXTRE~ RESPONSE VALUE ANALYSIS
I NONLINEAR I RESPONSE
I I IwAVE SPECTRUM [ MODEL AND STATISTICAL PARAMETERS h v RESPONSE SPECTRUM AND SHORT TERM STATISTICS Y v LONGTERM RMS RESPONSE v STATISTICS OF LONGTERM RESPONSE * WAVE SCATTER DIAGRAM
* FATIGUE ANALYSIS
TABLE 5.2
PARAMETER
Different
approximation
in
Chapters 3 and 4 are summarized here in a logical order. analysis for the design to of a a marine structure, distribution. the
customarily
assumed
have
Gaussian
suitable
spectrum
model, e.g., PM, JONSWAP, etc., is chosen as the wave model to represent the seastates for a longterm prediction depending is suitable. on the sea severity.
waves may follow a PM model while the JONSWAP model may be suitable for the higher seastates. Once the wave environmental model is chosen, the next step of the environmental forces on the offshore
If the forces are linear, then the forces may be obtained in the form of
a force similar forces force. spectrum. approach is given may For a linearized be taken. approximation of a nonlinear common system a One of the most forms of nonlinear
representing
If current is
is measured in
with
validity
terms of the strength of the current as well. given in the table. Higher order terms
based on the
The extreme values are difficult to obtain from of the force maxima
these spectrum extimates without knowing the distribution which is not generally Rayleigh. However, spectrum the additional terms in the spectrum
produce
peaks
in
the
in the higher
frequency
range which
the structural damping is small, the response may be peaked at this frequency leading to a narrow band spectrum. as Rayleigh distributed so that This response spectrum may then be treated the response extremes may be easily
determined.
172
If
the
force
spectrum
is narrow
banded,
force extremes may be given in terms of inertia or drag dominance. inertiadominated Rayleigh region, the For force maxima the are distributed area, the according
distribution.
dragdominated
distribution
exponential. For a wideband dragdominated additional wave force model, similar separate expressions for the
and inertiadominated E.
areas are known but now in terms of an are, however, only valid for the K, namely, K = O and K + . assumption
parameter,
These expressions
parameter,
narrowband
overpredicts for the same probability level at both the limiting values of K. The extreme value analysis for a wideband terms of the expected use the appropriate process. rate of occurrence frequencies spectrum was also provided in These expressions involved in the
corresponding
The expected
expressions by integration. Similar analysis + have been made for wavecurrent of large force. force. The latter was for narrow
Separate expressions
band and wideband process have been given. the Morison equation is used. that only the terms in the
expressions
are valid
for current
of the order
of 1020%
rms water
particle velocity. The expression for the expected extreme value for the component of the is shown in Eq. 3.317. The
of a finite current
damping
then
response may
be treated
narrowband
process.
Then,
the
input
as a white
noise process for which the solution tool for these derivations
process
is a powerful
and a
generalized method has been derived to waive the requirement of white noise.
173
5.2
problem is linearized by one of many means, square error ted nique, Taylor series
least
expansion, etc. Table 4.2 includes the polynomial approximations of various forms of
nonlinear terms that appear in the structure response ca culations. begeneralized in the following way. Let
These may
f = f(x)
(5.1)
Let x be a variable that follows a zero mean law. Thus, x could be such quantities as the
The problem
(5.2)
Q =
(5.3)
is minimized.
The values of Cn (n = 1, 2, . . .) may be obtained by differentiating respect to Cn and setting the result equal to zero. Thus, depending
number of terms desired in the polynomial, an equal number of equations in the unknowns Cn may be obtained. The values of Cn are then obtained by setting up For example if
f(x) = 1X1X
(5.4)
c1
= 4:
ax
(5.5)
174
This is then a generalized method that can be used for any nonlinear function f(x) as long as the function f(x) is explicitly known as a function of x where x is an independent variable. Many of the nonlinear response terms for a
marine structure have already been worked out and the results are tabulated in Table 4.1. Once the problem is linearized then the usual procedure of a shortterm Gaussian process is applicable. For example, in the case of wave drag
f(u) = kDlulu
(5.6)
Once the right hand side is linearized through the formulation in Eq. 5.3, we have T f(u) =kD4Youu
(5.7)
Since
u(t)
is assumed
to follow
Gaussian
distribution
with
a zero mean
so
Thus, the amplitudes of force, f, will follow Rayleigh values may be predicted. This linearization
will apply only for small nonlinearity. The nonlinear adequacy of assuming Gaussian response statistics of a linearized
problem depends
along with all the other nonlinear terms included in Table 4.1 are summarized for convenience in Table 5.1.
5.3
In
spectral
some or
cases
of
nonlinearity, averaging
more
exact
solution may
is
possible
by
stochastic between
technique,
This
provide
relationship area
the wave
spectrum
and force
spectrum
depending
of nonlinearity. is also
a probabilistic because of
description
response
possible.
simplification
structure, etc. in these analyses, the practical application is quite limited. For a linear system the response may be related to the waves by a
175
x(t) = H(u)n(t)
(5.8)
where x = response function, n = wave profile, t = time, and H = a function of the frequency, u. This relationship can be directly converted from the time method. Thus, taking
to the frequency domain through the autocovariance lagged product of both sides and integrating
the
j x(t)
o
or
(5.9)
(5.10)
relationship
between the wave spectrum and the response spectrum for a linear system
~m
o or
~wRn(T)
eiUTd~
(5.11)
SX(LII) =H2(u)
S@
(5.12)
Here, H(u) is called the transfer response. Since the wave profile
function between the wave profile and the is assumed to follow the Gaussian distri
bution and wave height, the Rayleigh distribution and since the transforrnation is linear, the response amplitudes also follow the Rayleigh distribution which the extreme values are easy to determine. This approach may be extended to nonlinear systems as well, if the from
nonlinear functional
relationship
is expressed
in a polynomial
form as shown
f = kDlulu
(5.13)
176
In
written,
this
the
case,
after
the
function
for
the
force
is
right hand
side
in a series
+ . . .
(5.14)
where Hi(f) = 8/~kD2uu2, H2(f) = 4 kD2/(3 mou2) and H3(f) = kD2/(151TOu4). By taking the Fourier transform may be related to the velocity appear of both sides, the drag force spectrum Note that domain the powers of the
spectrum. in the
function
frequency
as the
convolution
~mRu3(T) o This
eUTd~=
~= ~=$(u) 00 easy to
S(W1
u)
S(kl  w) dm dm
(5.15)
integral
is
evaluate
numerically
even
though
it
is
time be
consuming. included in
Thus, in principle as many terms in the series in Eq. 5.14may the evaluation of Sf(w) even though in the practical
sense
Moreover, even though the response spectrum is known and its significant value may be calculated, the computation of the extreme value is not
$ince the relationship is nonlinear the force amplitudes do follow Rayleigh Therefore, distribution even though the velocity
The importance of this analysis, however, may be stated in the following way. Let us examine Eq. 5.14.
If
the
produces the first harmonic frequency of the force, the second term will have a peak on. at the third higher harmonic, order terms the third will term at the fifth harmonic be have reduced natural and so in of
These
generally
succession. vibrational
However, modes
many
fixed
structures
at frequencies
range.
One of these vibrational modes may coincide with this higher frequency in the force spectrum in which case an amplification of the response, e.g., stresses, etc. may be generated. Moreover, if the structural and hydrodynamic damping
177
are
small
in this
region
the
response,
will
distribution
force
values may be derived for the responses due to this nonlinear excitation.
5.4
linear systems, no general methodology exists for nonlinear system analysis. For a class of nonlinear systems, however, a consistent method exists for deriving the initial distribution Gaussian. information nonlinear system. While the initial of the response if the excitation is assumed of the response does not provide it may give some insight into the from the linear
distribution values,
nature
Thus, it may help provide, and evaluate the validity of an approximate The following
method of the extreme value analysis of the nonlinear system. analysis is according to Bendat (1985). Let ergodic random us consider that with the excitation function, x(t), is
stationary
value
x = x(t)
has
firstorder
function
p(x) =
1 ox m
EXP ($) x
(5.16)
where the mean value, Ux, and the variance, ox of x are given by
= E[x] = O lx
(5.17)
2 = E[x2] x
(5.18)
For the pair of random variables xl = x(t) and x2 = x(t + T), the joint probability density function is given by the secondorder Gaussian form
178
{ exp
1
2CIX2 (1  P2)
[ x;  2p xl x2 +x;]} (5.19)
(5.20)
RxX(T)
= E[x(t)
x(t
+ T)]
= EIx1
X21
(5.21)
(5.22)
RxX(T) (5.23)
The expected value of the response and its moments can be obtained from g(x) * and p(x) as follows:
E(y) = E[g(x)] =
~rn g(x)
m m
P(X)
dx
E(yn) = E[gn(x)] =
Y If
2= E[y2]
 (E[Y])2
the
response
g(x)
is a zero memory
nonlinear
system
that
is
singlevalued
P2(Y) =&
(5.27)
expressed in terms of y.
P2(Y) =*
(5.28)
179
Whenever p(x) is Gaussian and g(x) is nonlinear, the resulting p2(y) will be nonGaussian.
Example:
nonlinear
mooring
line
may
be approximated, slopes
sometimes,
by two range of
straight
forx<A x>A
Then
= b
1x1 > A
at 1x1 = A.
fory<A
(5.29)
=+{r@+[(H)/ b])}
= + { P[A + [Y + A]/b]
y>h
(5.30)
y<
11
(5.31)
If
it
is
assumed
that
the
excitation
follows
the
normal
(Gaussian)
p(x) =~ m
exp (x2/2)
(5.32)
180
P~(Y) =
1 E 1
b~ 1 b~
IYI <A
y>A
(5.33)
(5.34)
y<
A
(5.35)
It is
clear
from
that
there
is a
discontinuity
function
Depending
on the
case of clipping for O < b < 1 or hardening for b > 1, the quantity P2(A+) is either greater than or less than p2(A).
Example:
SquareLaw System
The secondorder
wave
force, e.g., the wave drift force follows Let us consider a response
y = g(x) = X2
Then
gy=g,
(x)=zx
dx
and
X=*G
(5.36)
P2(Y) =*
fory>O
(5.37)
p(fi)=ox m Hence
exp (y/20x2)
fory>O
(5.38)
P2(Y) =
1 ax my
exp ( y/20x2)
fory>O
(5.39)
181
Note that
E[yn] = E[x2n] = 1, 3, 5,
. . . (2n  1) ax2n
(5.40)
= E[y] = ax2
(5.41)
(5.42)
(5.43)
Example:
Cubic System
The loadelongation
= g(x) =X3
Hence
$=
3X2
and
x=yl/3
(5.44)
P(Y
1/3
(5.45)
for p(x)
P2(Y) =
exp (y2/3/2ux2)
(5.46)
In this case, P2(Y) = P2(Y) and p2(0) approaches infinity. E[y] = E[x3] = O
Note that
Y =
(5.47)
(5.48)
182
Example:
The wave
drag
force
is expressed
as the square
law with
sign in
Y = g(x) = 1X1X
i.e.
Y=X2
forx<O
= x 2 Then
X=+iy
forx<O
fory>O
=
4 y
fory<O
Also
*=9(X)
=2X
r
forx>O
= 2x
Hence, the response probability density function
X<
o.,.,
fory>O
fory<O
AISO
= O
(5.49)
183
(5.50)
The
above of
theory a
provides
simple
method to
in
obtaining
the
initial As
distribution
nonlinear
system
subjected
Gaussian
excitation.
mentioned before, an initial distribution does not indicate the extreme values
for the
examining the nonlinear system against any approximation extreme value of the nonlinear system.
5.5
RESPONSE EXTREMES BY ORDER STATISTICS The extreme value of the maxima order of a Gaussian (linear) response may be value defined in this
derived
by
applying
statistics.
The extreme
respect is the largest value of the maxima that will occur in N observations in a short interval of time (of the order of a few hours). If the known, then value of the bandwidth the probability parameter, E, for a random of the variable may is be
density
function of the
variable e.g.,
estimated.
For example,
if the
spectrum
response,
the force
spectrum derived in a previous section, is known, the bandwidth parameter, c, may be estimated band spectrum from its moments. The distribution normal,
E = 1,
is then known from Eq. 3.67. For a random sample, xl, X2, . . ., xN of size N which are the observed maxima cl, C2, of a random process,
q q q
values,
probability
density
from
3.63).
For
p[~N >
;N]=a
(5.52)
[p(~N)]N = 1
(5.53)
184
where
P(GN) is given by Eq. 3.67 for F1 = LN. The problem then is to * compute ~N for a given valu@ of u. This is a difficult task from an equation
of the type of Eq. 5.53. However, considerable simplification may be made if the following two
e o
q
All
these
assumptions
are
reasonable
from
practical
standpoint
since
most
response spectra will lie in the range of O < E < 0.9 and the extreme values will generally be sought from large number of observations with the cumulative probability of 99% or more. Under the above assumptions the error
ValUe, ~N,
functions
is derived
(5.54)
Note that Eq. 5.54 is a peak factor applicable to a Gaussian process. also that ~N is normalized
Note
response (as a random process) is obtained by multiplying this value by ~. The number of observations, N, is difficult to work with, but it can be For practical purposes, it is more
(5.55)
where TR is given in seconds. Ochi (1973) worked out examples for extreme values from data from a wave basin. The examples include various random waves generated in the tank and The results are
the recorded pitching motion of a ship model in random seas. summarized in Table 5.3. spectrum value, lN, computed from
The predicted values are based on the moments of the the to the recorded value data. at which The the most probable extreme is
corresponds
probability
density
185
TABLE 5.3 COMPARISON OF PREDICTED AND OBSERVED EXTREHE VALUES FROM tWDEL TESTS
[Ocw
(1973)]
RESPONSE
BAND TEST WIDTH NO. OF TIME PARAMETER MAXIMA (E) OBSERVED EST. (rein)
N
22.3 32.0 48.7 18,9 11*2 1.78 20.6 33.3 45.1 16.3 12,1 1.75
a=O.10
24.8 39.6 54.2 19.7 14.4 2.07
a=O.05
26.0 41.3 56.6 20.6 15.1 2.16
a=O.01
28.4 45.0 61.9 22.5 16.5 2.35
ft ft ft deg deg deg
UNIT
5 6 7 7 6 7 10 15 10
WAVE FREQUENCY SWAY ONLY Short term most probable maximum in 10 year seastate Long term maximum with a 10% probability of being exceeded
9.lm
11.5m
at least
once in 1 year
9*8M
12*9M
maximum.
exceedance values of a = 0.1, 0.05 and 0.01. The agreement between the predicted most probable extreme values and the observed this extreme is values is satisfactory. (about 0.63 But the probability for s = O ). to a = Therefore, 0.01 or so of exceeding for design are more
value
high
purposes
the
values values
appropriate. values.
are
higher
probable
is no
universally nonlinear
theory either
general
probabilistically
amplitude
conditions, however, solutions may be obtained in a few cases. discussed earlier are secondorder drift force along with
NN z
Ci
Cj
Qij
Sin
{(wi
uj)t +
(Ei
Ej)}
i=l j=l
high frequency terms (5*55)
where
components force
independent setting ~i =
functions.
The
secondorder
(5.56)
186
F2(t) = 2
(5.57)
where S(u) dw = ~ G2 and L is the wave amplitude. The spectral density of the low frequency components of the force is
SF(M) =8
m) du
(5.58)
where
T2(w+
u,u) = P2(M+
w,w) + Q2(u+
(1),u)
(5.59)
and T = amplitude of the quadratic transfer function. The motion ~ response spectrum may be obtained from the force spectrum if
the system is considered to be a single degree of freedom system having linear damping. For a catenary moored system, this approximation usually provides a
Assuming that the system is lightly damped, as oscillation, the motion response spectrum
frequency
the force spectrum follows a nonGaussian process, force being proportional to the square of the wave amplitude, the probability distribution of the resonant response is almost independent of the probability distribution of the
excitation.
function between
the motion response can be well represented by a Gaussian process. response spectrum describes motion response. the short term probability
assumed to be statistically independent, the two response spectra can be added together. Once the shortterm
wave scatter diagram to generate the longterm response. The shortterm estimates are made in terms height, of a storm with a 10 year .
a significant wave
187
is experienced
1 year) with a given probability level. The cumulative probability of a response exceeding a particular value, M, is Q(M). Assuming Then the probability of not exceeding this value is 1
Q(M).
a period of L years
of the structure)
and the
number of peaks, N, in a year, the probability of not exceeding the prescribed value M in L years is (1  Q(M) )N*L.
If it
QI(M) = 1
(1 Q(M))N*L
(5.60)
An
acceptable
probability
of exceeding
the design
value of M is chosen
as
lo%. The shortterm most probable value for a 10 year storm and the long term
response for a 10% probability of being exceeded once a year are shown in
Table 5.4. In the above example, the difference between the shortand longterm
response extremes
is quite small.
on the basis of exceedance in one year as opposed to the 10 year storm for the shortterm response.
EXAMPLE 2  EXTREME FORCE BY MORISON FORMULA The Morison formula describing force on a vertical cylindrical member of an offshore structure is given by
f = kM ; + kD IUIU
(5.61)
where kM = CM P IrD2/4, kD = 1/2 CD P D, u = horizontal water particle velocity and ; = horizontal acceleration.
f=kM6+4~kDuuu
(5.62)
188
where Uu = standard deviation of the water particle velocity. seastate height. is known, Uu is known and force is strictly
depend on the seastate under consideration. For a shortterm response prediction, the transfer function can be used However, for a with
the transfer
has to be modified
made by choosing
used to derive of for all seastates. Using the narrow band solution, the probability normalized force amplitude, ~, is given by density function of the
p(~) =
(~K2
+l)Yexp(
$K2+1 ~
* 7)
for~<h (5.63)
~K p(T) = (
3 2+ 1)1*
~ exp ( 
~ K2 + 1)1/2 K
T (~~))for~>h (5.64)
where h=
1
K(; K2 + 1)12
(5.65)
and T=
(5.66)
Thus, the peak force amplitude distribution depends on of and K. The standard deviation for the force using the Morison equation is
(5.67)
189
o
A m +
100 YR.SEASTATE
w d 4 <~ z * z Q E z ~ u Yw so 2 1/ o ~8 ~ /
8 o
q 0 0.0
0.3
0.6
Q9
~,
1.2
1.5
1.8
2.1
2.4
ml/see
.
FIGURE
5.1
TRANSFER
FUNCTIONS
FOR
THE
MORISON
FORCE
FOR
DIFFERENT
SEASTATES [INGLIS,
ET AL. (1985)]
TABLE 5.5 EXTREME VALUE FORCES ACTING ON 1 m ELEMENT OF PILE AT 13 m BELOM SEA LEVEL BY HORISON FORMULA
TZ = 13.6
sec.
Long Term
in each
14.3
Single transfer function linearization in lyear sea state Single transfer function linearized in 10 year sea state Single transfer function linearized in 100 year sea state Linearization sea state in each
12.8
NonGaussian K = 0.00579 * Hs * Tz
14.4
NonGaussian K = 0.00578 * Hs * Tz
16.0
7.0
f
Then
2 .8 ~kD2
(5.68)
ratio of drag to inertia
the error
force components is of the order of 8%. the present given by example the dependence
In
of K to Tz is found to be linear
in Tz
(5.69)
These formulations were used to predict longterm extreme are given for in Table 5.5.
In the example,
nonGaussian process general wideband
both
the
peak
distribution (Rice)
a narrowband for a
exponential
distribution
while the longterm prediction assumed a 10% probability of exceeding once in a year. The factors for the extremes for the shortterm prediction are used
as 7.7 times the standard deviation for the nonGaussian process and 3.7 times the standard deviation the for it the is Gaussian seen the process [Brouwers and Verbeek than
(1983)].
From
table
nonGaussian
response
more
in this case
190
6.0
CONCLUDING REMARKS
The nonlinear analysis for various responses of an offshore structure and the extreme value prediction of those responses are reviewed in this report. Different classes of offshore structures are introduced and the applicability of the nonlinear systems of to these complexity of structures of is discussed the only Various wherever
Because a
determining responses,
general extreme
nonlinear
in the
analysis
is possible.
approximating nonlinear systems and the limitations in their application iman offshore structure design are discussed. Nonlinear problems leading to the from a Gaussian techniques of
distribution are
investigated.
extreme
responses
for marine
structures that are consistent within the particular methods are given. The discussions included in this report warrant the following
conclusions:
1.
For
nonlinear
system,
the
response
parameter
is
nonlinearly
related to the wave elevation through nonlinear elements in the wave force excitation either method case, the or in the structures response a by becomes system. system characteristics. No
In
nonGaussian.
consistent
approximations
procedure.
Sometimes filter,
act as a linear
even when force excitation is nonlinear in wave elevation. of such possible Thus, systems even if is the force finelytuned probability springing distribution
tendon.
2.
response time history for a single degree of freedom between latter uncoupled, the coupled is and about linearized 20% drag
is similar In the
case,
error
for large
For random waves, the mean square values are similar, but
the 1inearized method produces considerably lower (60% at Hs/D > 20)
191
extreme
values
of
response.
The
nonlinear
drag
also
alters
the
frequencies.
the
3.
The expected extreme responses of members of offshore the nonlinear equivalent predominant. drag forces exceed methods, significantly when those drag
linear
particularly
fatigue damage computed when for a significant of the structure the total force. members the drag forces constitute Typical of jacket example
a significant
diameter
structures
surface, conductors and risers in areas of severe wave action. extreme value analysis, the effect of drag nonlinearity may
4.
If a linearized method
the effect of the nonlinear probability distribution account in the analysis easy task, in a limited should be corrected. number of cases,
a reasonable
factor may be achieved by the comparison of results presented in the report. For example, Fig. 3.47 shows the amount of deviation in the of exceedance of a lowfrequency surge motion from
probability Gaussian.
5.
The
surge
periods
of
large
compliant
structure
catenary
anchored) wave
is very long, of the order of one minute. forces based on difference frequencies
secondorder
component waves excite the structure at its natural frequency giving rise to large anchor loads. On the other hand, a compliant
structure held by taut cables, such as a tension leg platform has a high frequency order wave natural period sum in the vertical frequencies direction. Secondwaves can
forces
at the
of component
vertical direction
introducing large
192
tendon
loads
which This
is important phenomenon,
consideration known as
for
fatigue
damage is
evaluation.
springing
load,
proportional to the square of wave amplitude and, thus, has similar characteristics as the wave drift load. The response probability is
6.
The
deterministic
design
wave
and
the
probabilistic maximum
shortterm responses
procedures in a
structures method
longterm
distribution
is far more
appropriate.
Wave data
method, however, are rather lacking in many sites particularly long term basis.
form of a uniform chance that a given response level is exceeded in the lifetime of the structure as opposed to the nonuniformity
7*
as well
prediction, been
a specified
advocated.
based on (or,
even
level
equivalently, reliable in
significant extreme
is more
predicting height
responses.
twoparameter
period were
found to follow
lognormal probability
computed for a series of spectra, the upper and lower bounds as well as standard deviation of shortterm responses may be obtained.
8.
For estimating shortterm extreme values of the responses for design consideration, various factors such as operation (or exposure) time,
frequency of encounter with seas, speed (in the case of a ship), and risk parameter should be considered.
In the longterm
response
prediction, factors such as seas of various severities, a variety of wave spectral shapes, various speeds (in case of a moving vehicle), various headings to waves; and the expected number of cycles of the response should be included in the prediction routine.
193
9.
For
nonGaussian
waves,
popular
time
method
of
obtaining
the
distribution
series available
function
for the
history
of waves
is to use a
representation
in the probability
theory.
A common series
nonlinear responses generally based on linear waves is characterized by the eigenval ueeigenvector approach. This is particularly response. true ~
Examples of such
responses are slow drift oscillations, drift force, springing force, etc. forms Several by this probability method. density Once the functions initial are derived distribution in series is known,
194
7.0
RECOMMENDATION
means either
and those too only after certain linearization or other approximations. on the present review the following recommendations
1.
Various
energy
spectral
models to describe
are
known. They do an adequate job of describing particular site for a given set of wave
statistical
i.e., a suitable form of the spectral model may be chosen based on the statistical parameters that match the energy distribution
Since the extreme values (including higher moments of spectra are highly dependent on this upper tail, care Therefore, more research
work is needed to study this area in terms of reliable field data in the area and the corresponding mathematical description.
2.
Most
of
the
probability
methods
start
with
the
of
Gaussian waves.
In
fact,
high
waves
values
seldom
Gaussian.
The distribution
received some attention in the past several years. have been presented here that deal with
excitation. is
responses
relatively of
and
description marine
nonGaussian should
behavior
more
structures
be developed.
Such developments
195
3.
The interaction of waves and currents and the resulting influence on the responses should be thoroughly investigated. The influence of type loading
currents
on the
4.
of simultaneous occurrence of waves (with parameter (with parameter U, 60 and profile with
5.
The
formulation
of the wave
longterm and
distribution is limited.
height
longterm
possible.
6.
The the
description zone is
particle
kinematics is
in
Further
work
needed,
particularly through experiments with high waves, to collect data in this area so that a better understanding of the free surface effect
7.
treatments exciting
of nonlinear forces
wave
in the
regarding nonlinear
structural responses , more work is needed to determine the effect of nonlinear nonlinear) values. forces on the structural responses (both linear and
The value
areas of nonlinear
extreme
analysis
future years
stateoftheart
may be extended to the point where it may be incorporated in These investigations are Because of the routinely that by the
the design of marine structures in a routine manner. complicated limited offshore and will in require this considerable area for this
knowledge design
technique
engineers
nonlinear
systems.
hoped
196
strengths
and limitations
of various methods
described
design engineer to attempt to use these methods more often where appropriate. However, additional work may be performed to make this report more
approximate
simplified methods outlined do not need complicated numerical computation and simple expressions relatively above. have been included in many cases, such an analysis will be compared practical to the work under along Recommendations with their 17
structures
design
parameters may be chosen for the design calculation will be kept simple so that the calculation
purposes.
The structures
process is not too involved and The design computations will responses will be not applicable
comparison of various methods is not difficult. be made in a systematic predicted for each manner and extreme Where
method
chosen.
are
because of inherent assumptions it will be so stated. as a cookbook by a designer in his own design. engineering judgment on the extreme
regarding the choice of a suitable method and its effect prediction. Any necessary correction to this value
value
197
8.0 REFERENCES
REVIEWS ON STATISTICS 1. Cramer, H., Mathematical Methods of Statistics, Press, Princeton, New Jersey, 1946. Princeton University
2.
3.
Ochi, M.K., Stochastic Analysis and Probabilisitc Prediction of Random Seas, Advances in Hydroscience, Vol. 13, 1984, pp. 217375. Tobias, P.A. and Trindade, D., Applied Reliability , Van Nostrand Reinhold Company, New York, 1986.
NONLINEAR ANALYSIS
1.
Burns. G.E.. Calculating Viscous Drift of a TLP. Proceedings of Second International Offshore M~chanics and Arctic Engi~eering Sympbsium, ASME, New York, 1983. Chakrabarti, S.K., Inline Forces on Fixed Vertical Cylinder in Waves, Journal of the Waterway, Port, Coastal and Ocean Division, ASCE, Vol. 106, May 1980. Chakrabarti, S.K., Impact of Analytical, Model and Field Studies on the of Offshore Structures, Symposium on Ocean Design International Engineering Ship Handling, SSPA, Gothenburg, Sweden, September 1980. Chakrabarti, S.K. and Frampton, R.E., Review of Riser Techniques, Applied Ocean Research, Vol. 4, No. 2, April 1982. Analysis
2.
3.
4.
5*
Chakrabarti, S.K. and Cotter, D.C., First and Second Order Interaction of Waves with Large Offshore Structures, Second International Symposium on Offshore Mechanics and Arctic Engineering, ASME, Houston, Texas, February 1983. Chakrabarti, S.K., Nonlinear Wave Effects on Large Offshore Structures, Second International Symposium on Ocean Engineering and Ship Handling, Gothenburg, Sweden, March 1983. Chakrabarti, S.K. and Cotter, D.C., Hydrodynamic Coefficients of Mooring Tower, Proceedings of Fifteenth Annual Offshore Technology Conference, Houston, Texas, May 1983. Chakrabarti, S.K., Cotter, ficients of a Harmonically Vol. 5, No. 4, 1983. D.C. and Libby, A.R., Hydrodynamic CoefOscillated Tower, Applied Ocean Research,
6.
7.
8.
9.
Chakrabarti, S.K. and Cotter, D.C., Nonlinear Wave Interaction with a Moored Floating Cylinder, Proceedings of the Sixteenth Annual Offshore Technology Conference, Houston, Texas, May 1984.
198
VS.
11*
Chakrabarti, S.K., Moored Floating Coefficients, Presented at the Ocean Corvallis, Oregon, September 1984.
Stuctures Structural
12.
Chakrabarti, S.K., Hydrodynamic Coefficients Journal of Waterway, Port, Coastal and Ocean No. 1, January 1985, pp. 123127.
13.
Cotter, D.C. and Chakrabarti, S.K., Wave Force Tests on Vertical and Inclined Cylinders, Journal of Waterways, Ports, Coastal and Ocean Division, ASCE, Vol. 110, February 1984, pp. 114. Dahong, Q., and Quihau, Z., The Dynamic Response of an Underwater Column Hinged at the Sea Bottom Under the Wave Action, Proceedings on Behavior of Offshore Structures, MIT, Boston, Vol. 2, 1982, pp. 523531. Dalrymple, R.A., Waves and Wave Forces in the Presence of Currents, Proceedings on Conference on Civil Engineering in Oceans III, Delaware, Vol. 2, 1975, pp. 9991017. Dao, V., V., and Penzien, J., Comparison of Treatments of Nonlinear Drag Forces Acting on Fixed Offshore Platforms, Applied Ocean Research, Vol. 4, No. 2, 1982. Dean, R.G., Stream Function Representation of Nonlinear Ocean Waves, Journal of Geophysical Research, Vol. 70, 1965, pp. 45614572. Dean, R.G., Relative Validities of Water Wave Theories, Journal of Waterways, Harbors and Coastal Engineering Division, ASCE, Vol. 96, No. WW1, 1970, pp. 105119. and Tan, P.$.G., Motion and Tether Force DeBoom, W.C., Pinkster, J.A., Prediction for a TLP, Journal of Waterway, Port, Coastal and ocean Division, ASCE, Vol. 110, No. 4, November 1984, pp. 472486. (Also, 15th OTC, Houston, Texas, May 1983. ) Elgar, S., Guza, R.T., and Seymour, R.J., Wave Group Statistics from Numerical Simulations of a Random Sea, Applied Ocean Research, VO1. 7, No. 2, 1985, pp. 9396. Faltinsen, O.M,,and Loken, A.E., Drift Forces and Slowly Varying Forces on Ships and Offshore Structures in Waves, Norwegian Maritime Research, No. 1, 1978. Hallam, M.G., Heaf, N.J., and Wootton, L.R. , Dynamics of Marine Methods of Calculating the Dynamic Response of Fixed Structures: Structures Subject to Wave and Current Action, CIRIA Underwater Engineering Group, London, Report UR8, 1977.
14.
15.
16.
17.
18.
19.
20.
21.
22.
199
23.
Hearn, G.E., Tong, K.C. and Ramzan, F.A., Wave Drift Damping Coefficient and Motions of Predictions Their Influence in the Moored Proceedings $emisubmersibles, of the Nineteenth Annual Offshore Technology Conference, Houston, Texas, OTC 5455, 1987, pp. 297331. Wave Force Predictions from Hudspeth, R., Simulations, Proceedings on Seventh Offshore Houston, Texas, OTC 2193, 1975, pp. 471485.
!hu,
24.
Nonlinear Technology
25.
F.H., and Blenkarn, K.A., Analysis of Peak Mooring Forces Caused by Slow Vessel Drift Oscillations in Random Seas, Offshore Technology Conference, OTC, 1159, Houston, Texas, May 1970.
26,
Isaacson, M. de St. Q., Nonlinear Wave Effects on Fixed and Floating Bodies, Journal of Fluid Mechanics, Vol. 120, 1982, pp. 267281. Iwagaki, Y., Asano, T., and Nagai, F., Hydrodyanmic Forces on a Circular Cylinder Placed in WaveCurrent Coexisting Fields, Memoirs of the Faculty of Engineering, Kyoto University, Japan, Vol. XLV, Part 1, January 1983, pp. 1123. Garrison, C.J., Comments on the CrossFlow Principle and Morisons Equation, Journal of Waterway, Port, Coastal and Ocean Engineering Division, ASCE, Vol. 111, No. 1, 1985.
27.
28.
29.
Jain, R. K., and Kirk, C.L., Dynamic Response of a Double Articulated Offshore Loading Structure to NonCollinear Waves and Currents, Preprint Proceeding of the Energy Technology Conference, ASME , No. 80PET56, New Orleans, Louisiana, February 1980.
Kinsman, 1965. B., Wind Waves, PrenticeHall, Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey,
30.
31.
Kobsyashi, M., Shimada, K., and Fujchira, T., Study on Dynamic Response of a TLP in Waves, Proceedings of the Fourth International Offshore
Mechanics and Arctic Engineering Symposium, ASME, Vol. 1, February 1985, pp. 2935.
32.
Larsen, C.M., et al., Nonlinear Static and Dynamic Behavior of Tension Leg Platform Tethers, Proceedings of the Third International Offshore Mechanics and Arctic Engineering Symposium, New Orleans, Louisiana, ASME, 1984, pp. 4150. LeM&haut4, B., An SpringerVerlag, D~ Introduction to Hydrodynamics and Water Waves,
33.
34.
35.
Lighthill, M.J., Waves and Wave Loading, Proceedings on Second Conference on Behavior of Offshore Structures, BOSS 79, London, Vol. 1, 1979, pp. 140. LonguetHiggins, M.S., and Stewart, R.W., The Changes in Amplitude of Short Gravity Waves on Steady NonUniform Currents, Journal of Fluid Mechanics, 1981.
200
36.
Lyons, G.J. and Patel, M.H., Comparisons of Theory with Model Test Data for Tensioned Buoyant Platforms, Journal of Energy Resources Technology, Transactions ASME, Vol. 106, 1984, 426436. Moe, G., and Verley, R.L.P., Hydrodynamic Damping of Offshore Structures in Waves and Currents, Proceedings of the Twelvth Offshore Technolow . Conference, Houston, Texas, OTC 3798, May 1980, pp. 3744. Morison, J.R., OBrien, M.P., Johnson, J.W., and Shaaf, S.A., The Forces Exerted by Surface Waves on Piles, Transactions AIME, Vol. 189, 1950, pp. 149154. Nakamura, S., Saito, K., and Takagi, M., On the Increased Damping of a Moored Body During LowFrequency Motions in Waves, Proceedings of the Fifth International Offshore Mechanics and Arctic Engineering Symposium, Vol. I, ASME, Tokyo, Japan, 1986, pp. 281288. Nichols, J.D., and Hirt, C.W., Nonlinear Hydrodynamic Forces on Floating Bodies, Proceedings on Second Conference on Numerical Ship Hydrodynamics, Berkeley, 1977, pp. 3!32394. Nordgren, R.P., Analysis of HighFrequency Vibration of Tension Leg Platform, Proceedings of the Fifth International Offshore Mechanics and ASME, Tokyo, Japan, 1986, pp. Arctic Engineering Symposium, Vol. III, 149156. Patel, M.H. and Lynch, E.J., The Coupled Dynamics of Tensioned Buoyant Platforms and Mooring Tethers, Journal of Engineering Structures, Vol. 5, 1983, pp. 299308. Petrauskas, C. and Liu, S.V., Springing Force Response of a Tension Leg Platform, Proceedings of the Nineteenth Annual Offshore Technology Conference, Houston, Texas, OTC 5458, 1987, pp. 333341. Pinkster, J.A., Low Frequency Second Order Wave Exciting Forces on Floating Structures, Publication No. 650, Netherlands Ship Model Basin, Wageningen, 204 pages. Pinkster, J.A., and Oortmerssen, G., Computation of the First and Second Order Wave Forces on Bodies Oscillating in Regular Waves, Second International Conference on Numerical Ship Hydrodynamics, University of California, Berkeley, 1977. Pinkster, J.A., Mean and Low Frequency Wave Drifting Forces on Floating Structures, Ocean Engineering, October 1974. Qi, X.Y., Fang, Y., and Zhang, J.L., LowFrequency Surge Motion of TLP in Survival Sea State, Proceedings of the Fifth International Offshore Mechanics and Arctic Engineering $ymposium, Vol. III, ASME, Tokyo, Japan, 1986, pp. 120125. Roberts, J.B., Nonlinear Analyis of Slow Drift Oscillations of Moored Vessels in Random Seas, Journal of Ship Research, 1980.
37.
38.
49.
50.
41.
42.
43.
44.
45.
46.
47.
48.
201
49.
Rye, H., Rynning, S. and Moshagen, H., On the Slow Drift Oscillation of Moored Structures, Proceedings of the Seventh Annual Offshore Technology Conference, OTC 2366, 1975, pp. 299310. Salvesen, N., Meinhold, M.J., and Yue, D.K., Nonlinear Motions and Forces on Tension Leg Platform, U.S. Coast Guard, Washington, DC., USCGM844, May 1984. Salvesen, N., von Kerczek, C.H., Yue, D.K., and Stern, F., Computations of Nonlinear Surge Motions of Tension Leg Platforms, Proceeding of Fourteenth Offshore Technology Conference, Houston, Texas, OTC 4394, May 1982, pp. 199215. Sarpkaya, T., and Isaacson, M. de !jt. Q., Mechanics of Wave Forces on Offshore Structures, von Nostrand Reinhold, New York, 1981. Sarpkaya, T., Bakmis, C., and Storm, M.A., Hydrodynamic Forces from Combined Wave and Current Flow on Smooth and Rough Circular Cylinders at High Reynolds Number, Proceedings of the Sixteenth Offshore Technology Conference, Houston, Texas, OTC 4830, 1984, pp. 455462. $arpkaya, T., Collins, N.J. and Evans, S.R., Wave Forces on RoughWalled Cylinders at High Reynolds Numbers, Proceedings on the Ninth Offshore Technology Conference, Houston, OTC 2701, May 1977. Skjelbreia, L., and Hendrickson, J.A., Fifth Order Gravity Wave Theory, Proceedings on the Seventh International Coastal Engineering Conference, The Hague, 1960, pp. 184196. Tucker, M.J., Challenor, P.J., and Carter, D.J.T., Numerical Simulation of a Random Sea: A Common Error and Its Effect Upon Wave Group Statistics, Applied Ocean Research, Vol. 6, No. 2, 1984, pp. 118122. Vandiver, J.K., Prediction of the DampingControlled Offshore Structures to Random Wave Excitation, Society Engineering Journal, 1980, pp. 514. Response of of Petroleum
50.
51.
52.
53.
54.
55.
56.
57.
58.
Vugts, J.H., and Bouquet, A.G., A Nonlinear, Frequency Domain Description of Wave Forces on an Element of a Vertical Pile in Random Seas, Proceedings on the Behavior of Offshore Structures, Amsterdam, Elsevier Science, July 1985, pp. 239253. Withers, J.E.W., on the LowFrequency Surge Motions of Vessel Moored in High Seas, Proceedings on the Fourteenth Annual Offshore Technology Conference, OTC 4437, 1982, Houston, Texas. Withers, J.E.W. and Huijsmans, R.M.H., On the Low Frequency Hydrodynamic Damping Forces Acting on Offshore Moored Vessels, Proceedings of the Sixteenth Annual Offshore Technology Conference, OTC 4813, 1984, Houston, Texas. Wiegel, R.L., A Presentation of Cnoidal Wave Theory for Practical Application, Journal of Fluid Mechanics, Vol. 7, 1960, pp. 273286.
59.
60.
61.
202
1.
Ahren, M.K. and Plaisted, R.O., Nonlinear Deformation of SeaWave Profiles in Intermediate and Shallow Water, Oceanological Acts, Vol. 4, No. 2, 1981, pp. 107115. Battjes, J.A., Probabilistic Aspects of Ocean Waves, Report No. 772, Delft University of Technology, Netherlands, 1977. Bitner, E.M., Nonlinear Effects of the Statistical Model of ShallowWater Wind Waves, Applied Ocean Research, Vol. 2, No. 2, 1980, pp. 6374. Bowden, K.F., Some Observations of Waves and Other Fluctuations in a Tidal Current, Proc. Royal Society of London, Vol. A192, 1948, pp. 403425. Statistical Cartwright, D.E., and The LonguetHiggins, M.S., Distribution of the Maxima of the Random Function, Proceedings of Royal Society, London, Series A, Vol. 237, 1956, pp. 212232. Chakrabarti, S.K., and Snider, R.H., Wave Statistics for March 1968 North Atlantic Storm, Journal of Geophysical Research, Vol. 79, No. 24, August 1974. Chakrabarti, S.K. and Cooley, R.P., Ocean Wave Statistics for 1961 North Atlantic Storm, Journal of Waterways, Port, Coastal and Ocean Division, ASCE, Vol. 103, November 1977. Chakrabarti, S.K. and Cooley, R.P., The Stability of Some Currently Used 1, 1977, Wave Parameters  A Discussion, Coastal Engineering, VO1 Ppo 359365. ~ Edgeworth, F.Y., The Law of Error, Trans. No. 1, 1904, pp. 3665. Carob. Phil. Sot., Vol. 20,
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
Forristall, G.Z., On the Statistical Distribution of Wave Heights in a Storm, Journal of Geophysical Research, Vol. 83, 1978, pp. 23532358. Goda, Y., Numerical Experiments Simulation, Report of Port and Vol. 9, No. 3, 1970, pp. 320337. on Wave Statistics with Spectral Harbour Research Institute, Japan,
11.
12.
Goda, Y., Estimation of Wave Statistics From Spectra Information, Proceedings International Symposium on Ocean Wave Measurement and Analysis, ASCE, New Orleans, 1974, pp. 320337. Goodknight, R.C., and Russell, T.L., Investigation of the Statistics of Wave Heights, Journal of the Waterways and Harbors Division, ASCE, Vol. 89, No. WW2, 1963.
13.
203
14.
Huang, N.E. and Long, S.R., An Experimental Study of the Surface Elevation Probability Distribution and Statistics of WindGenerated Waves, J. of Fluid Mechanics, Vol. 101, No. 1, 1980, pp. 179200. Huang, N.E., et al., A NonGaussian Statistical Model for Surface Elevation of Nonlinear Random Wave Fields, J. of Geophysical Research, Vol. 88, No. C12, 1983, pp. 75977606. Jasper, N.H., Statistical Distribution Patterns of Ocean Waves and WaveInduced Ship Stresses and Motions with Engineering Applications, Society of Naval Architects and Marine Engineers, Transactions, Volume 64, 1956. LonguetHiggins, M.S., On the Statistical Distribution of the Heights of Sea Waves, Journal of Marine Research, Vol. 11, 1952, pp. 245266. LonguetHiggins, M.S., The Distributions in the Theory 17(3), pp. 459480. Effect of NonLinearities on Statistical of Sea Waves, J. Fluid Mechanics, 1963,
15.
16.
17.
18.
19.
LonguetHiggins, M.S., On the Distribution of the Heights of Sea Waves: Some Effects of Nonlinearity and Finite Band Width, J. of Geophysics Research, Vol. 80, No. 18, 1975, pp. 26882694. Ochi, M.K. and Whalen, J.E., Estimation of Extreme Waves Critical for the Safety of Offshore Structures, Proc. Offshore Technology Conference, OTC 3596, 1979, 20852090. Ochi, M.K. and Whalen, J.E., Prediction of the Severest Significant Wave Height, Proc. on Seventeenth International Conference of Coastal Engineering, Vol. 1, 1980, pp. 587599. Ochi, M.K. and Wang, W.C., NonGaussian Characteristics Waves, Proceedings of Nineteenth International Conference Engineering, 1984. of on Coastal Coastal
20.
21*
22*
23.
Putz, R.R., Statistical Distribution for Ocean Waves, Transactions American Geophysical Union, Vol. 33, No. 5, 1952, pp. 685692. Tayfun, M.A., NarrowBand Nonlinear Sea Waves, Research, Vol. 85, No. C3, 1980, pp. 15481552. J. of
of
24.
Geophysical
25.
Tayfun, M.A., Distribution of CresttoTrough Wave Heights, Proc. of Waterways, Harbors & Coastal Engrg., ASCE, Vol. 107, No. WW3, 1981, pp.
149158.
26. Walden, A.T., and Prescott, P., The Asymptotic Distribution of the Maximum of N Wave Crest Heights for Any Value of the Spectral Width Parameter, Journal of Geophysical Research, Vo. 85, No. C4, April 1980, pp. 19051909.
204
SHORTTERM PERIOD DISTRIBUTION 1. Buckley, W.H., Climatic Wave Spectra Offshore Platforms, DTCG2385F20014, Maryland, August, 1986, 119 pages. for Use in Design of Ships and David W. Taylor NSRDC, Bethesda,
2.
Epstein, B., The Distribution of Extreme Values in Sample Whose Members are Subject to Markov Chain Condition, Ann. Math, Stat. 20, 1949, pp. 590594. Ezraty, R., et al., Comparison with Observation at Sea of Period or Height Dependent Model, Sea State Parameters from a Theoretical Proceedings of Offshore Technology Conference, OTC 2744, 1977, pp. 149154. LonguetHiggins, M.S., The Distribution of Intervals Between Zeros of a Stationary Random Function, Philosophical Transactions of Royal Society, Series A, Vol. 254, 1962, pp. 557599.
3.
4.
SHORTTERM HEIGHTPERIOD 1.
DISTRIBUTION
Arhan, M.F., Cavanie, A.G., and Ezraty, R.S., Determination of the Period Range Associated to the Design Wave, Offshore Technology Conference, OTC 3643, Houston, Texas, May 1979. Chakrabarti, S.K. and Cooley, R.P., Statistical Distribution of Periods and Heights of Ocean Waves, Journal of Geophysical Research, Vol. 82, No. 9, March 1977. Ezraty, R., Laurent, M., and Arhan, Mm, Comparison with Observation at Sea of Period or Height Dependent Sea State Parameters from a Theoretical Model, OTC 2744, Offshore Technology Conference, May 1977, pp. 149154. Gods, Y., The Observed Joint Distribution of Periods and Heights of Sea Waves, Proceedings on the Sixteenth International Conference of Coastal Engineering, Vol. 1, 1978, pp. 151170. LonguetHiggins, M.S., On the Joint Distribution of the Periods and Amplitudes of Sea Waves, Journal of Geophysical Research, Vol. 80, 1975, pp. 26882694. LonguetHiqqins, M.S., On the Joint Distribution of Wave Periods and Amplitudesin a Random Wave Field, Proceedings of Royal Society of London, Series A, VO1. 389, 1983, pp. 241258.
2* + 3*
4.
5*
6.
1.
Battjes, J.A., LongTerm Wave Height Distribution at Seven Stations Around the British Isles, National Institute of OceanoqraPh.Y, Godalmim, . England, Report No. A44,1970. Bretschnieder, C.L. (Editor), On Wind Generated Waves, Topics in Ocean Engineering, Gulf Publishing Co., Houston, Texas, 1969.
2*
205
3*
Statistics
of
Extremes,
Columbia
University
Press,
New
4.
Isaacson, M.Q. and MacKenzie, Waves, Waterways Harbors and WW2, 1981, pp. 93109.
5.
Krogstad, H.E., Height and Period Distributions of Extreme Applied Ocean Research, Vol. 7, No. 3, 1985, pp. 158165. Phillips, O.M., The Dynamics of Cambridge University Press, 1977. the Upper Ocean, Second
Waves,
6.
Edition,
7.
Price, W.G., and Bishop, R.E.D., Probabilistic Chapman and Hall, London, 1974.
8.
Thorn, H.C.S., AsymptoticExtreme Value Distributions of Wave Heights in the Open Ocean, Journal of Marine Research, Vol. 29, 1971, pp. 19:27. Thorn, H.C.S., Distribution of Extreme Winds Over Oceans, Journal of Waterways, Harbors and Coastal Engineering Division, ASCE, Vol. 99,
9.
1.
Anastasiou, K., Tickell, R.G., and Chaplin, J.R., The Nonlinear Properties of Random Wave Kinematics, Proceedings on Behavior of Offshore Structures, MIT, Boston, BOSS 82, August, 1982, pp. 493515.
2.
Bendat,
J.A., and Piersol, A.G., Spectral Analysis of Nonlinear Systems Journal of Sound and Vibration, Involving SquareLaw Operations, Vol. 81, No. 2, 1982, pp. 199213.
3.
Bendat, J.A., Statistical Errors for Nonlinear System Measurements Involving Square Operations, Journal of Sound and Vibration, Vol. 90, No. 2, 1983, pp. 275302.
4. 5.
Bendat,
Decomposition of Wave Forces into Linear and Nonlinear J.A., Components, Journal of Sound and Vibration, 1986.
Bergman, L.E., Statistical Models for Ocean Waves and Wave forces, Chow, V.T., Editor, Advances in Hydroscience, Vol. 8, Academic Press, 1972, pp. 139181. Bergman, L.E., Wave Forces on Piling for NarrowBand Spectra, Journal Waterways and Harbors Division, ASCE, Vol. 91, No. WW3, 1965, pp. 6590.
6.
of
206
7.
Bergman, L.E., Ocean Wave Simulation for Engineering Design, Journal of and Harbors Division, ASCE, Waterways Vol. 95, No. WW4, 1969, pp. 557583. and Verbeek, P.H.J., Expected Fatigue Damage and Brouwers, J.J.H., Expected Extreme Response for MorisonType Wave Loading, Applied Ocean Research, Vol. 5, No. 3, 1983, pp. 129133. Brouwers, J.J.H, Response Near Resonance of Nonlinearly Damped Systems Subject to Random Excitation with Application to Marine Risers, Ocean Engineering, Vol. 9, 1982, p. 235257. Chakrabarti, S.K., Statistical Properties of WaveCurrent Force, (discussion), Journal of Waterways, Harbors and Coastal Engineering Division, ASCE, Vol. 100, May 1974. Chakrabarti, S.K. and Libby, A.R., Random Forces on Cylinder Near a Boundary, Proceedings on Coastal Hydrodynamics, ASCE, University of Delaware, Newark, July 1987. Chakrabarti, S.K., Forces on a Vertical Cylinder Due to Random Waves, Journal of Waterway, Harbor, Coastal and Ocean Engineering, ASCE, Vol. 114, 1988, (to be published). Dunwoody, A.B., and Vandiver, J.K., The Influence of Separated Flow Drag on the Dynamic Response of Offshore Structures to Random Waves, International Symposium on Hydrodynamics in Ocean Engineering, NIT, Trondheim, Norway, 1981. Eatock Taylor, R., and Rajagopalan, A., Superharmonic Resonance Effects in Drag Dominated Structures, Integrity of Offshore Structures, Edited by D. Faulkner, Cowling and Frleze, Applied Science Publishers, Proceedings of Symposium at Glasgow, July 1981, pp. 85104. Grigoriu, M., Extremes of Wave Forces, Journal of Engineering Mechanics Division, ASCE, Vol. 110, No. 12, December 1984, pp. 17311742. Herfjord, K., and Nielsen, F.G., Nonlinear Wave Forces on a Fixed Vertical Cylinder due to the Sum Frequency of Waves in Irregular Seas, Applied Ocean Research, Vol. 8, No. 1, 1986, pp. 821. Hu, S.J. and Lutes, L.D., NonNormal Descriptions of MorisonType Wave Forces, Journal of Engineering Mechanics, ASCE, Vol. 113, No. 2, February, 1987, pp. 196203. Kate, S., Ando, $., and Kinoshita, T., On the Statistical Theory of Total SecondOrder Response of Moored Floating Structures, Proceedings on the Nineteenth Offshore Technology Conference, OTC 5579, Houston, Texas, 1987, pp. 243257. Langley, R.S., The Statistics of Second Order Ocean Research, Vol. 6, No. 4, 1984, pp. 182186. Wave Forces, Applied
8.
9.
10.
11.
12.
13.
14.
15.
16.
17.
18.
19.
207
20.
Langley, R.S., A Statistical Analysis of Low Frequency SecondOrder Forces and Motions, Applied Ocean Research, Vol. 9, No. 3, 1987, pp. 163170. Larabee, R.D., Extreme Wave Dynamics of Deepwater Proceedings on Third International Conference on Behavior Structures, BOSS 82, MIT, Cambridge, Massachusetts, 1982. Platforms, of Offshore
21.
22.
Moe, G., and Crandall, S.H., Extremes of MorisonType Wave Loadings on a Single Pile, Journal of Mechanical Design, ASME Transactions, Vol. 100, January 1978, pp. 100104. Moe, G., Sack, R.L., Extremes of Morison Type Loading on Complex Structures, Safety of Structures under Dynammic Loading, pp. 752759. Moe, G., Long Term Wave Force Statistics for a Vertical Pile, Coastal Engineering, No. 2, 1979, pp. 297311. Myrhaug, D. and Kjeldsen, S.P., Prediction of Occurrences of Steep and High Waves in Deep Water, Journal of Waterway, Port, Coastal and Ocean Engineering, ASCE, Vol. 113, No. 2, March, 1987, pp. 122138. Naess, A., The Effect of the Markov Chain Condition on the Prediction of Extreme Values, Journal of Sound and Vibration, Vol. 94, No. 1, 1984,
23. 24.
25.
26.
pp. 87103.
27.
Naess, A., Statistical Analysis of SecondOrder Response of Marine Structures, Journal of Ship Research, Vol. 29, 1985, pp. 270284. Naess, A., The Statistical Distribution of SecondOrder SlowlyVarying Forces and Motions, Applied Ocean Research, Vol. 8, 1986, pp. 110118. Naess, A., On the Statistical Analysis of SlowDrift Forces and Motions of Floating Offshore Structure, Fifth OMAE Symposium, Vol. 1, 1986, pp. 317329. Neal, E., Second Order Hydrodynamic Forces Due to Stochastic Excitation, Proceedings of Tenth ONR Symposium, 1974, pp. 517537. Ochi, M.K., Generalization Application, Journal of pp. 259265. of Rayleigh Probability Distribution and Its Ship Research, Vol. 22, No. 4, 1973,
28.
29.
30.
31.
32.
Ochi, M.K., Extreme Values of Waves and Ship Responses Subject to the Markov Chain Condition, J. of Ship Research, Vol. 23, No. 3, 1979, pp. 188197. Ochi, M.K. and Malakar, S.B., NonLinear Response of Ocean Platforms with Single Degree of Freedom in a Seaway, Rep. uFL/coELTR/050, University of Florida, Gainesville, 1984. Ochi, M.K., NonGaussian Random Processes Probabilistic Engineering Mechanics, Vol. 1, No. in Ocean Engineering,
33.
34.
208
35.
Pierson, W.J., Jr. , and Holmes, P., The Forces on a Pile to Irregular Waves , Journal of the Waterways and Harbors Division, ASCE, Vol. 91, No. WW4, Proceeding Paper 4528, 1965, pp. 110. Pinkster, J.A. and Withers. J.E.W., The Statistical Properties of LowFrequency Motions of Nonlinearly Moored Tankers, Proceedings of the Nineteenth Offshore Technology Conference, OTC 5457, Houston, Texas, 1987, pp. 317331. Roberts, J.B., Stationary Response of Oscillators with Nonlinear Damping to random Excitation, Journal of Sound and Vibration, Vol. 50, No. 1, 1977, pp. 145156. with Nonlienar Roberts, J.B., First Passage Time for Oscillators Damping, Journal of Applied Mechanics, No. 45, 1978, pp. 175180. Roberts, J.B., Response of an Oscillator with Nonlinear Excitation, NonWhite Random Softening Spring to Engineering Mechanics, Vol. 1, No. 1, 1986, pp. 4048. Damping and a Probabilistic
36.
37.
38.
39.
40.
Shinozuka, M., Yun, C., and Vaicaitis, R., Dynamic Analysis of Fixed Offshore Structures Subject to WindGenerated Waves, J. Structural Mechanics, Vol. 5, No. 2, 1977, pp. 135146. Sharma, J.N., and Dean, R.G., Second Order Directional Seas and Associated Wave Forces, Proceedings on Eleventh Offshore Technology Conference, Houston, Texas, OTC 3645, May 1979, pp. 25052514. Sigbjornsson, R. and Morch, M., Spectral Analysis of Nonlinear Wave Load vol. 4, Offshore Platforms, Engineering Structures, Effects on January 1982, pp. 2937. SlowDrift Responses, of ~Statistical Analysis Stansberg, C.T., Proceedings on Second International Conference on Offshore Mechanics and Arctic Engineering, ASME, Houston, Texas, 1983, pp. 188197. , Tickell, R.G., Continuous Random Wave Loading on Structural Members, The Structural Engineer, Vol. 55, No. 5, May 1977, pp. 209222. Tickell, R.G., The Probabilistic Approach to Wave Loading on Marine Structures, Mechanics of Wave Induced Forces on Cylinders, (T.L. Shaw, Editor), Pitman, San Francisco, California, 1979, pp. 152178. Tung, C.C., and Huang, N.E., Some Statistical Properties of WaveCurrent Force on Objects, Sea Grant Publication, UNCSG7214, December 1972, 24 pgs. Tung,
Force,
41.
42.
43.
44.
. .
45.
46.
47.
C.C.,
Journal
and
of
Huang,
N.E.,
Waterways,
WaveCurrent
Division,
Properties Journal of Statistical of Wave Force, Tung, C.C., Engineering Mechanics Division, ASCE, Vol. 100, No. EM1, February 1974*
pp.
111.
209
49.
Tung, C.C., Peak Distribution of Random WaveCurrent Force, Journal of Engineering Mechanics Division, ASCE, Vol. 100, EM5, October 1974, Pp. 873884. Vinje, T., Statistical Distribution of Hydrodynamic Forces on Objects in Current and Waves, Norwegian Maritime Research, Vol. 8, No. 2, 1980. Vinje, T., On the Statistical Distribution of SecondOrder vol. 30, International Motion, Shipbuilding Progress, March 1983, pp. 5868. Forces and 343, No.
50.
51.
52.
Vinje, T., and BitnerGregersen, E., Determination of the Statistical Distribution of Maxima of Responses to Narrow Banded Incoming Waves, Report No. 210, A.S. Veritas Research, January 1986, 15 pgs. Vinje, T., On the Statistical Distribution of Maxima of Nonlinear Stochastic Variables, Report SK/t4 27, Division Structures, NIT, Trondheim, Norway, 1974, 95 pgs. Slightly of Ship
53*
54.
Vinje, T., On the Calculation of Maxima of Nonlinear Wave Forces and Wave Induced Motions, I.S.P., Vol. 23, 1987, pp. 393400. Vinje, T., On the Statistical Distribution Report No. 2.6, VERITEC, January 1985, 48 pgs. of Second Order Forces,
55.
56.
Vinje, T., On the Statistical Distribution of Maxima of Nonlinear Stochastic Variables, Report SK/M 27, Division Structures, NIT, Trondheim, Norway, 1974, 95 pgs. Vinje, T., On the Statistical Distribution Report No. 2.6, VERITEC, January 1985, 48 pgs. of Second Order
Slightly of Ship
57*
Forces,
Bergman, L.E., Risk Criteria, Journal of Waterways Division, ASCE, Vol. 89, No. WW3, 1963, pp. 135.
and
Harbors
2.
Fukuda, T., Long Term Predictions of Wave Bending Moment, Journal of the Society of Naval Architects of Japan, Selected Papers, Vol. 5, 1968, pp. 3355. Hoffman, D., Van Hooff, R., and Lewis, W.V., Evaluation of Methods for Extrapolation of Ship Bending Stress Data, Report SSCZX4, ship Structure Committee, Webb Institute of Naval Architecture, Glen Cove, New York, 1972.
and Interpretation of FullScale Hoffman, D., and Lewis, E.V., Analysis Stresses of Dry Cargo Ships, Report SSC196, Data on Midship Bending Ship Structure Committee, Webb Institute of Naval Architecture, Glen Cove, New York, 1969.
3.
4.
210
5*
Hoffman, D., and Walden, D. A., Environmental Wave Data for Determining Hull Structural Loadings, Ship Structures Committee, Report No. SSC 268, U. S. Coast Guard Headquarters, Washington, D. C., 1977. Hoffman, D., and Karst, O.J., The Theory of Rayleigh Distribution and Some of Its Applications, Journal of Ship Research, Vol. 19, No. 3, September 1975. Houmb, O.G., and Overvik, T. Parameterization of Wave Spectra and Long Term Joint Distribution of Wave Height and Period, Proceedings on Behaviour of Offshore Structures, BOSS 76, Trondheim, VO1. I, 1976, pp. 144169. Huntington, S.W., and Gilbert, Seas, Proceedings on Offshore OTC 3595, May 1979. G., Extreme Forces in Short Crested Technology Conference, Houston, Texas,
6.
7*
8.
9*
Jasper, N.H., Statistical Distribution Patterns of Ocean Waves and WaveInduced Ship Stresses and Motions with Engineering Applications, Society of Naval Architecture and Marine Engineers, Transactions, Vol. 64, 1956. Lewis, E.V., Comparison of LongTerm Stress Distributions, Summer Seminar, Webb Institute of Naval Architecture, Glen Cove, New York, 1973. Moe, G., LongTerm
Engineering, Vol. A., 2, WaveForce 1979, pp. Statlstlcs 297311. a Rational Vol. 6, for a Vertical Pile, Coast,al
Naess, Analysis,
Note: On Research,
No.
Approach 3, 1984,
to pp.
Extreme 173174.
Value
An Example of Naess, A., Prediction of Extremes of MorisonType Loading, a General Method, Ocean Engineering, Vol. 10, No. 5, 1983, pp. 313324. Naess, A., Extreme Value Estimates Based on the Envelope Applied Ocean Research, Vol. 4, No. 3, 1982, pp. 181187. Nordenstrom, N., A Method to Predict LongTerm Distributions and WaveInduced Motions and Loads on Ships ~ and Other Structures, Det Norske Veritas, Report No. 81, 1973, pp. 939. Concept,
of Waves Floating
16.
Ochi, M.K., On Prediction of Extreme Values, Journal of Ship Research, March 1973, pp. 2937.
17.
Wave Statistics for the Design of Ships and Ocean Ochi, M.K., Structures, Society of Naval Architecture and Marine Engineers, Vol. 86, 1978, pp. 4776.
FATIGUEANALYSIS
1.
Burrow, R., Expected Value Analysis for the QuasiStatic Response Offshore Structures, Applied Mathematical Modeling, Vol. 7, No. October, 1983, pp. 317328. of 5,
211
2.
Chaudhury, G.K. and Dover, W.D., Fatigue Analysis of Offshore Platforms Subject to Sea Wave Loading, International Journal of Fatigue, Vol. 7, No. 1, January, 1985, pp. 1319. P.H., Probability Based Fatigue Design Chen, Y.N. and Wirsching, Criteria for TLP Tendons, Proceedings on Fifth International Symposium on Offshore Mechanics and Arctic Engineering, ASME, Tokyo, Japan, 1986. Grigoriu, M., Dynamic Response of Offshore Platforms to Environmental Loads, Proceedings of Fourth Specialty Conference on Probabilistic Mechanics and Structural Reliability, ASCE, New York, NY, January, 1984, pp. 115118. Kenegaonkar, H.B. and Haldar, A., NonGaussian Response of Offshore Platforms: Dynamic, Journal of Structural Engineering, ASCE, Vol. 113, No. 9, September, 1987, pp. 18991908. Lutes, L.D., et al., Stochastic Fatigue Damage Accumulation, Journal of Structural Engineering, ASCE, Vol. 110. No. 11, November, 1984, pp. 25852601. Maddox, N.R. and Wildenstein, A.W., A Spectral Fatigue Analysis for Offshore Structures, Proceedings of the Offshore Technology Conference, OTC 2261, May, 1975, pp. 185197. Miner, M.A., Cumulative Damage in Fatigue, Transactions of the American Society of Mechanical Engineers, Vol. 12, 1945, pp. A159165. Winterstein, S.R. and Cornell, C.A., Fatigue and Fracture Under Stochastic Loading, Proceedings of Fourth International Conference on Structural Safety and Reliability, Kobe, Japan, Vol. 3, May, 1985, pp. 745749. Wirsching, P.H. and Light, M.C., ProbabilityBased ~atigue Design Criteria for Offshore Structures, Final Report, Am@rlcan petroleum Institute, Production Research Advisory Committee Project #15, November, 1979. Wirsching, P.H. and Light, M.C., Stresses, Journal of the Structural July, 1980. Fatigue Under Wide Band Random Division, ASCE, Vol. 106, No. ST7,
3.
4.
5.6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
12.
Wirsching, P.H. and Chen, Y.N., Fatigue Design Criteria for TLp Tendons, Journal of Structural Engineering, ASCE, Vol. 113, No. 7, July, 1987, pp. 13981414. Vugts, J.H., and Kinra, R.K., Probabilistic Fatigue Analysis of Fixed Offshore Structures, Offshore Technology Conference, OTC 2608, Houston, Texas, May 1976.
13.
212
CONSISTENT METHODOLOGY
1.
Bendat, J.S., Nonlinear System Dynamic Analysis Using Random Data, Naval Civil Engineering Laboratory, Report No. CR85006, Department of Navy, March 1985, 149 pages. Inglis, R.B., Pijfers, J.G.L., and Vugts, J.H., A Unified Probabilistic Approach to Predicting the Response of Offshore Structures, Includinq the Extreme Response, Pr~ceedingson Behavior of Offshore Structures, 1~85.
2.
213
COMMITTEE
ON
MARINE
STRUCTURES
Commission on Engineering and Technical Systems National Academy of Sciences  National Research Council
The COMMITTEE ON MARINE STRUCTURES has technical cognizance over the interagency Ship Structure Committees research program. Stanley G. Stiansen (Chairman), Riverhead, NY Mark Y. Berman, Amoco Production Company, Tulsa, OK Peter A. Gale, Webb Institute of Naval Architecture, Glen Cove, NY Rolf D. Glasfeld, General Dynamics Corporation, Groton, CT William H. Hartt, Florida Atlantic University, Boca Raton, FL Paul H. Wirsching, University of Arizona, Tucson, AZ Alexander B. Stavovy, National Research Council, Washington, DC Michael K. Parmelee, Ship Structure Committee, Washington, DC
Paul H. Wirsching (Chairman), University of Arizona, Tucson, AZ Subrata K. Chakrabarti, Chicago Bridge and Iron Company, Plainfield, IL
Keith D. Hjelmstad, University of Illinois, Urbana, IL Hsien Yun Jan, Martech Incorporated, Neshanic Station, NJ Jack Y. K. Lou, Texas ~ & M University, College Station, TX Naresh Maniarr M. Rosepblatt & Son, Incorporated, New York, NY Solomon C. S. Yim, Oregon State University, Corvallis, OR ,
(Chairman), Florida Atlantic University, Boca Raton, William H. Hartt Fereshteh Ebrahimi, University of Florida, Gainesville, FL Santiago Ibarra, Jr., Amoco Corporation, Nape?xille, IL Paul A. Lagace, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge, MA John Landes, University of Tennessee, Knoxville, TN Mamdouh M. Salama, Conoco Incorporated, Ponca City, OK James M. Sawhill, Jr., Newport News Shipbuilding, Newport News, VA
FL
SHIP SSC334
STRUCTURE
COMMITTEE
PUBLICATIONS
Influence of Weld Porositv on the Intearitv of Marine Structures by William J. Walsh , Brian N. Leis, and J. Y. 1989 Yung, Performance of Underwater Weldments by R. J. Dexter, 1986 Norris, W. R. Schick, and P. D. Watson Liquid Sloshina in Carao Tanks by N. A. Hamlin 1986 by Karl E. B.
SSC335
SSC336 SSC337
Investigation 1987
SSC337
Part 2  Ship Fracture Mechanisms  A NonEx~erts Guide for InsDectincf and Determining the Causes of Significant Shi~ Fractures by Karl A. Stambaugh and William A. Wood 1987
Fatiaue Prediction Corner Strain Data 1985 Ice Loads C. Dal@y, 1990 Analysis Validation from SL7 Hatch by JenWen Chiou and YungKuang Chen
SSC338
SSC339
SSC340
Ice Forces and ShiD Response to Ice  Consolidation Report by C. Daley, J. W. St. John, R. Brown, and I. Glen 1990 Global Ice Forces and Shi~ J. W. St. John, B. Cowper, Res~onse to Ice by P. Minnick, 1990 and M. Edgecomb
SSC341
SSC342
Global Ice Forces and ShiD Response to Ice  Analvsis of Ice Ramminq Forces by YungKuang Chen, Alfred L. Tunik, and Albert PY Chen 1990 Global Season Ice Forces and ShiD Res~onse to Ice  A Second by P. Minnick and J. W. St. John 1990 of an Onboard Strain A. Wood 1987 Fracture Mechanics Recorder by Eric Greene
SSC343
SSC344
SSC345 SSC346
ElasticPlastic
by T. L. Anderson
1990
and
None
Committee 1983