You are on page 1of 10

Comparative of Hydrodynamic Effect between Double Bodies to Single Body in Tank

C.L.Siow, Jaswar, Efi Afrizal, Hassan Abyn, Adi Maimun, Mohamad Pauzi
Department of Aeronautic, Automotive and Ocean Engineering Faculty of Mechanical Engineering Universiti Teknologi Malaysia (UTM) Skudai, 81300 Johor Bahru, Johor, MALAYSIA Phone/Fax.: +60-7- 5534644 E-mail: or

Hydrodynamic interaction between floating offshore structures are affecting structures’ motion. Large motions between floating bodies would cause the damage on moorings, offloading system and may colloid to each other. The experiment tests were carried out with and without the influence of TLP in regular waves in the Universiti Teknologi Malaysia (UTM) Towing Tank using semi-submersible GVA 4000 type. In this paper, experimental results of the hydrodynamic interaction effect of surge, sway, heave, roll, pitch and yaw motion for Semi-Submersible (Tender Assisted Drilling (TAD)) were presented. As primarily study, the experiments were conducted without TLP in the system and then with the exist of TLP. The wave height in full-scale ranges from 5.8 m – 11 m and separation distance of the models is 21.7 m (actual length). The results show that the influence motions response amplitude is located at a frequency around 0.514 Hz where close to the frequency of the sending wave. (10 TNR)

Keywords: Tension Leg Platform, Tender Assisted Drilling, Floating Semi Submersible, Hydrodynamic Interaction

1. Introduction
Multiples floating structures currently are used in offshore industries and coastal application. Offshore oil and gas industry, floating structures such as a spar, semi-submersible, tensional leg platform (TLP) and ship shape floating production storages and off-loading structure (FPSO) is a popular type of structure uses in deep water oil and gas exploration. In coastal application, the floating structures applied currently such as floating terminal, floating airport and floating storages are developed by many countries in the world. Either in oil and gas industry or coastal application, the floating bodies are often placed near to each other to complete as a system. To ensure the floating bodies is arranging safely in open water, hydrodynamic interaction between floating bodies is one of the important criteria must be evaluated to ensure it is safe before start operate. Hydrodynamic force and moment due

to wave can cause accidents on floating bodies such as crashing between each other or causing damage of riser system. One of the noticeable features of deep water moored structures is a need of multi body operation which should be paid attention, because it requires more accurate analysis of hydrodynamic interactions between closely moored vessels [6]. This research is aimed to study the hydrodynamic interaction between TLP and semisubmersible and characteristic of the multi floating bodies when placed near to each other in regular waves. At this situation, the hydrodynamic force created from wave will affect the motion of the floating bodies by scattering wave causes by the bodies itself. The wave height in full scale ranges from 5.8 m – 11 m and separation distance of the models is 21.7 m. The analysis of the floating bodies’ motion was focus of this paper.

Normally motions of floating structures are analyzed by using strip theory and potential theory. A number of notable studies were carried out to solve the problem of hydrodynamic interactions between multi bodies by Ohkusu (1974) [12]. Van Oortmerssen (1979) [14] and Loken (1981) [9] studied on non-lifting potential flow calculation about arbitrary 3D objects. Al. Clauss et al. In that study. Since demand for oil and gas is growing up. Choi and Hong (2002) [2] applied HOBEM to analysis hydrodynamic interactions of multibody system. Literature Review The vertical plane motions induced by heaving. current and wave. the moored semi-submersible was modeled as an externally constrained floating body in waves. peak frequency and peak amplitude for all motion increase. R. Plane quadrilateral source elements were used to approximate the structure surface and the integral equation for the source density is replaced by a set of linear algebraic equations for the values of the source density on the quadrilateral elements. (1997) [15] studied on the motion of a moored semisubmersible in regular waves and wave induced internal forces numerically and experimentally. wave potential for incident wave and scattering wave were ignored. They developed and employed two different time domain techniques due to mooring stiffness. They used panel method TiMIT (Time-domain investigations. Yilmaz and Incecik (1996) [16] analyzed the excessive motion of moored semisubmersible. The simulation showed that hydrodynamic interaction between floating structures can cause . Zhu et. An important requirement in determining drilling capabilities of the structure is the low level of motions in the vertical plane (motions induced by heave. Matos et (2006) [17] applies numerical methods to study the effect of gap in the multiple structural system. One of the manners to improve the hydrodynamic behavior of a semi-submersible is to increase the draft. the flow velocity both on and off the surface was calculated. risers and umbilical pipes and other important facilities use in oil production [11]. so investigating reliability of numerical analysis method for hydrodynamic interaction is worthwhile (Hong et al.2. The low frequency forces computation has been performed in the frequency domain by WAMIT a commercial Boundary Element Method (BEM) code. the accurate motion prediction of two bodies including all hydrodynamic interactions is important [8]. They used strip theory to analysis of hydrodynamic interaction problem between two structures positioned side by side. Hess and Smith (1964) [5]. roll and pitch motions. Wu et al. the water depth is becoming deeper and deeper. Newton’s second law of approaching equations of motion was used in the research to develop numerical techniques of nonlinear equations for intact and damaged condition in time domain. The operability and safety of floating bodies operation are greatly influenced by the relative motions between them. pontoon of the floating piers is connected to each other by hinge. (2011) [11] numerically and experimentally investigated second-order resonant of a deepdraft semi-submersible heave.C. rolling and pitching should be kept adequately low to guarantee the safety of the floating structure. mean drift forces are used to calculate slowly varying wave forces and simulation of slow varying and steady motions. 2005) [6]. The theory behind TiMIT is strictly linear and thus applicable to moderate sea condition only. The code can generate a different number of meshes on the structure and calculated pitch forces. viscous drag forces and damping. roll and pitch). and Fang and Kim (1986) [4]. So. In the research. By solving this set of equations. The motion of the structures is assumed only affected by radiated wave. and chance of multi body operation increasing. Zahra Tajali et. In their mathematical formulation. first-order wave forces acting on a structure which considered as a solitary excitation force and evaluated by using Morison equation. developed at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology) for wave/structure interactions in time domain. and derived the linearized equation of motion. The research found that when the number of pontoons increases. In the second technique. (2011) [18] studied hydrodynamic characteristic of multi-body floating pier under the wave action by numerical method. there are strong nonlinearities in the system. They utilized a source density distribution on the surface of the structure and solved for distribution necessary to lake the normal component of the fluid velocity zero on the boundary. Kodan (1984) [7]. In the first technique. (2002) [3] analyzed the sea-keeping behavior of a semi-submersible in rough waves in the North Sea by numerical and experimental method. Söylemez (1995) [13] developed a technique to predict damaged semi-submersible motion under wind.

. However. . ) (1) { ( . . g : gravity acceleration : incident wave amplitude : motions amplitude : incident wave potential : scattering wave potential : radiation wave potential due to motions : direction of motion From the above equation. Also. The linear potential theory in time domain was used to describe fluid motion. temporal curve of the simulated wave becomes stable after three to four waves generated. . the research also found that reductions of distance between floating bodies will cause deviation of pressure distribution increase. Y. surge. In addition. then two peak wave force will occur in two different frequencies compare to one peak wave force in two body system. In comparison. the wave interaction theory is able to compute integrated force and pressure distribution if the condition satisfied the Bessel Function and mathematic limitation of the theory. )} ( . The Navier-Stokes equation is discretized by using three-step finite element method. In addition. it is shown that total wave potential in the system is contributed by potential of the incident wave. According to Lin Lu et. ) (2) Where. sway and heave. pitch. Sun (2012) [22] was studied the method to simulate wave and flow based on the Navier-Stokes equation and Computational Lagrangian-Eulerian Advection Remap-Volume of Fluid (CLEAR-VOF).W. The study is proposed to establish the wave and fluid for two dimensional numerical methods. larger breadth of the body will lead to higher wave force especially vertical wave force on the body. Concept of interaction floating bodies The regular wave acting on floating bodies can bedescribedg by velocity potential. that study also obtained that the increase of gap width caused the resonance amplitude for added mass and damping coefficients decrease significantly. the phase and amplitude for both the incident wave and scattering wave is assumed to be the same. however. increase of body draught will cause the increase of wave force on the body. Third. Forth. ) = ( .al (2011) [19]. The research found that peak force response on floating bodies at resonance frequency is same between frequency domain technique and time domain technique. Zhu et. This finding proved that the linear potential theory in the time domain can be an alternative to solve a problem related to hydrodynamic interaction between floating bodies in small gap.surge. radiation wave potentials are affected by each type of motion of each single floating body inside system. )= Potential for diffraction wave +∑ Potential for Radiation wave ( . if three floating bodies in the system. where the total potential for radiation wave for the single body is the summation of the radiation wave generates by each type of body motion such as roll. From the simulation. yaw. . ) + ( . Second. the only sway motion shows strong interaction effect in certain resonance wave number. potential theory and viscous fluid theory are able to predict fluid characteristic in the narrow gaps between floating bodies. Results from their numerical method were showed that increases of the gap between floating bodies lead to reduces of wave force. The regular wave’s simulation result has compared to theoretical wave in the study. The velocity potential normally written in respective to the flow direction and time as below: Φ( . HOBEM. the diffraction wave potential ∅( ) must be satisfied with boundary conditions as below: ∇ ∅( ) = 0 0≤ ≤ℎ (3) ∅( ) + ∅( ) =0 ( = ) (4) ∅( ) ~ ∅( ) =0 √ ℎ =ℎ 0 ∞ (5) . . sway and heave motion. 3. The objective can be achieved by analyzing the effect of wave force act two floating bodies. scattering wave and radiation Masashi Kashiwagi (2010) [20] was carried out a numerical investigation to compare Wave interaction Theory with the Higher Order Boundary Element Methods. Besides. (2008) [21] was carried out a research on hydrodynamic resonance phenomena of three dimensional multiple floating structures by using time domain method.

) To convert the data in time domain to the frequency domain. ) ( . the coordinate for source point in the structures label as (a. y. i = 2b is the number of data require by Fast Fourier Transform method where b can be any integer number larger than or equal to 1. . the velocity potential for the radiated wave is given as follows: ∅ 2 ( ) (8) 1 4 ( . . . ) = −4 (10) The field coordinates label as (x. . discretely frequency (Fs) for signal data must be at least twice to the highest continuous signal frequency (F). b. . b. . . . . . . ) The boundary conditions for the radiated wave potential same as the boundary conditions for incident wave. ) ( . ) Is the source strength function which can calculate by the following equation ( . . . . . c) is the coordinate for source point which located on the body. f (t) and frequency domain F (f) can be related by the equation below: ( )= ( ) ( ) ( ) = + = ( . Let the discrete sample of the continuous signal have the magnitude of x(k). the discrete data can be written in complex number form as follows: = () + () (17) and. ) (11) Also. Fourier Transform For Time Domain To Frequency Domain Transformation According to sampling theorem.3. . z) is the coordinate for field point and (a. . . for the variable j. f(t) can be reconstructed back from the discrete sample by the equation below: ( )= ( ) ( × − ) (13) (14) Also. . 1/Fs. phase and frequency of the signal can be calculated by following equations: () = ( ) × sin 2 (19) .n and period between the sample is 1/Fs than a function of a continuous signal. . SB in the equation above is the wet body surface of the floating structure. the scattering wave potential due to the continuous surface of fluid can be explained by the equation below: ( . The relationship between function in the time domain. ) is represented the Green’s function (x. .2. the magnitude. ) is Where the part representing Green’s function and the part of ( . ) ( . The continuous signal frequency should discrete by the rate follow the sampling frequency. c) For radiated wave. y. the wave potential is related to the body’s motion. .The radiated wave potential due to each floating body can be developed from equation (12). it represents the square root of (-1) for the natural exponential function. z). .∅( ) The velocity potential for the incident wave as follows = − cosh[ ( + ℎ)] cosh ℎ ( ) =− ∅ ℎ (7) 4. Finally. (12) And. . . ) 2 − ( .…. . ) ( . . . . = cos( ) + sin( ) (16) Therefore. . ) (9) Where. . () = ( ) × cos 2 (18) (15) ( . ( )= sin( ) ( . ) ( . ) = ( . . k=1. . ) ( ) ( ) ( . . Fast Fourier Transform method can be applied. Where the part ( .

2 Springs and connectors for mooring system simulation Soft lateral springs are attached to the TLP and Semi-submersible to give horizontal restoring force to prototype TLP tendons and Semisubmersible moorings. For this purpose. Water-proof load cells are attached to the springs at the model fairlead locations to measure applied tension force on the model from the mooring springs directly. Firstly. . Table 1 Principal particular of Models Character TLP Semi Length 57. Both the semi-submersible and TLP model were scaled down with ratio 1:70.73 Displacement 23941 14921 Water Plan Area 715 529. swing frame test. the optical tracking system was used as the master. The measured mooring line tensions are recorded by Dewetron Data Acquisition System (DAQ).15 separation Columns longitudinal 45. few tests were carried out to obtain the model particulars. The dimension for the models were summarized as in table 1. KG value and gyration radiuses at planer (horizontal) and vertical axis. 5.59 unit m m m m3 m2 m m m m m m 5. The spring pretension and spring stiffness applied in the test was same as horizontal stiffness required for the system to match the natural periods of the horizontal motion (surge. All parameters for wave and semi-submersible structures are constant for both the experiments. Data recorded from different data systems were synchronized to obtain phase information.75 66.78 Pontoon depth 7. The experiment was carried out at UTM’s towing tank. sway) for the TLP and Semi-submersible. Anchor locations for the springs were proper selected to ensure mooring lines of the model make 45 degree angle with respect to the fairlead attachment points on the model.1 Instrumentation for motion test The floating bodies were assumed to experience six degrees of freedom during the experiment. decay test and bifilar test were carried out to identify the hydrostatic particular for both the semi-submersible and TLP.3 Pontoon width 9. The external sync pulse is recorded on the DAQ thus enabling synchronized simultaneous data recording on both systems. The purpose of this setup is to avoid any losses in force. The experiments were conducted for the conditions where semi-submersible structure alone in the tank and the semi-submersible arranged behind the TLP structure. Lightweight ring gauge load cells used here are sufficiently sensitive to provide a good signal for small mooring line tensions.1 Models Particulars In this experiment. One Side of the soft lateral spring was clamped to the mooring posts attached to the carriage and other side of the ends was connected to load cells at model side to measure the spring tension forces at the model.6 Number of Columns 4 4 Pontoon length 31 66. The semi-submersible model was constructed based on GVA 4000 type model. The results obtained from inclining test.58 spacing (centre) Column diameter 10. 5. Besides.= () () () 2× () = = ‖ ( )‖ + () 5.73 13. inclining test. The TLP and Semisubmersible are connected between each other by Upon the model complete constructed. oscillating test. model experiment was carried out to study the hydrodynamics interaction effect for the floating structures arranged in small gap. oscillating and bifilar tests are GM value. The six DOF motions of the models when moored on springs are measured by optical tracking system (Qualisys Camera) that uses a set of infrared cameras attached to the carriage to capture the positions of the reflective optical tracking markers placed on the model. semi-submersible model and tension leg platform was selected to study hydrodynamics interaction between multi floating bodies system.75 58.45 Draft 21 16.2. natural periods for the motions also obtained from decay test.3 Pontoons centerline 45. Model Experimental In this paper.78 Width 57.2. = × () () (20) (22) (21) swing frame test.28 6.2 Motion Tests 5.

000. 1:70th. almost horizontal springs set considered for compensation of horizontal forces (Figure 1). Due to limitation in generating wave height and period by wave making system. The setup is generally unique to a particular type of floating system and may not be appropriate for others.two connectors to control the gap between the floating bodies. At the . 1/40 and 1/60 to get an acceptable motion to record [1].2. if Re bigger than 10.000. In the arrangement. The tank length was sufficient to assure enough oscillations were recorded for each tested before reflection occur. risers and moorings are not actually presented in the model tests. For this paper. the model was carefully held to prevent large offsets due to sudden wave exciting forces which could damage the mooring springs. but this would impose significant scale effects because when Reynolds number.7 m in full-scale or 300mm in model scale. However. Therefore. the water depth is less than required depth to include full length of the tendons and mooring for the experiment. Wave particulars for the experiment were shown in Table 2. the tendons. the set-down would be greatly exaggerated. Figure 3 TLP and Semi-Submersible set up into towing tank. Re less than 10. An alternative option would be used a very small 1-200th scale model without truncation. the discussion will only focus on the wave slop 1/40 and the separation distance of the models is 21. A similar philosophy is followed here as well. the vortex shedding is mostly independent of Reynolds number since the flow separates close to the column corners at both model scale and full scale (Magee et al. start and end of these tests. some periods were chosen to cover natural period of models and also wave slope are considered 1/20. this model setup was expected had less damping compared to the prototype and caused larger motion amplitude at model scale compared to the prototype. tendons and risers in floating structure tests in order to obtain conservative response estimates at the design stage. For bluff bodies. progressive wave firstly attached TLP model before semi-submersible. Measurement data commenced when the model had settled at a constant incident wave was coming. 2011). the vortex shedding pattern around the body may be changed and unduly affected the results. If truncated tendons were used by following the model scale. Hence. Hydrodynamic interaction between floating structures model test between TLP and Semisubmersible was set up as shown in Figure 2. it is common practice to neglect damping from mooring. 5. Due to the limitation of this tank. Figure 1 Model test set-up in available water depth The models were attached to tow carriage on springs and regular waves generated by wavemaker at the end of towing tank (Figure 3). TLP Semi submersible Figure 2 Layout TLP and semi-submersible model experimental set up (Dimension is in model scale).3 Experiment setup As mentioned.

By using the equation from 13 to 22. The motions detected by the motion captive camera are surge. pitch and yaw. in this research. RESULT AND DISCUSSION Figure 4 EreTransUTM Software interface Data are collected from the experiment by using an optical tracking system (Qualisys Camera) with sampling frequency 120frame/s. The radiated wave generated by the structures itself only separate out from the system and no influence to the body motion in single body system. the magnitude of heave motion also increases around 80% from 30.0mm where the magnitude of the motion increased around 39% compared to the single body system.71 rad/s and increase 22% to 0.Table 2 Incident wave particulars Wave Particular Wave Period (s) Wave Length (cm) Wave Slope Wave height (cm) Wave Direction Semisubmersible 1. Figure 7 shows the comparison of pitch motion for semi-submersible when interact with TLP and when semi-submersible alone in the system. In addition. The effect of hydrodynamics interaction between the floating structures caused both the heave and surge motion for semisubmersible increased. Same result can be obtained from the frequency domain analysis and time domain analysis according to Zhu et. the surge and heave motion are shown to increase significantly.032.2mm for multiple body system. the magnitude of the motion is increased from 55. heave. the effect of the . the gap between the structures setup for this experiment is around 30cm where the ratio of gap to length of TLP and semisubmersible are 0. Besides.86 rad/s when interact with TLP.4 1800 Semi-sub. The same result shown that the radiation wave force in small gap can cause significant effects for the motion. a set of Discrete Fourier Transform’s programming code name as ExReTransUTM (Experiment Result Domain Transformation The figure 5 and 6 were shown the comparison of the surge and heave motion for the semi-submersible when it alone in the tank and existed of TLP. For the surge motion. the motion of the structure will only contribute by the force of incident wave. However. [21]. 2012) was developed to convert the data to frequency domain. This is because the wave force contributes to the surge and heave motion is influenced by the TLP and then increase the force magnitude. In this situation. roll. The software will able to read discrete data in time domain and return in frequency domain with a simple click on execution bottom. However. The interface of this software was shown in figure (4) Figure 5 to figure 10 shows a comparison between the motions of semi-submersible when it is alone in the tank without interaction between other floating body and effect of existing of TLP in the tank. it is explained that the extra wave force acting to the semi-submersible can be generated by radiation wave from the TLP.037 and 0.3mm to 77. The data were recorded in time domain by the measurement device before it converted to frequency domain for further analysis.7mm for single body system to 55. From the potential equation (2). From the experiment. Zhu [17]. The amplitude for pitch motion also increase in interaction situation where the pitch motion at single body system measured is 0. With TLP 6. the frequency domain analysis is preferred because this method is easier to compare the different between the motion of semi-submersible when alone in the system and interact with other body. The experiment result also agrees with the numerical result which studied by R.C. sway. it was predicted that the hydrodynamic interaction between the structures is large.85 534 1/40 13. For the single body system.

1 Interaction Single Body Magnitude.8 0.2 0 0 -20 0 0. Hz Figure 6: Magnitude of heave motion for semisubmersible with and without influence of TLP. Interaction 80 Single Body experiment is the wave resonance is occurring at the incident wave frequency and this causes the maximum motion magnitude occur at the same frequency.5 1 1. mm 30 20 10 0 0.5 -10 0 Frequency. The combination of the scattering wave and radiation wave generated by TLP become the disturbance to the three motions in interaction condition. Besides.541 Hz or period 1. As shown in figure 8 (roll motion). the change of motions amplitude and the behavior of semi-submersible’s motions can be caused by the scattering wave and radiation wave generated from TLP which placed near to the semi-submersible. figure 9 (sway motion) and figure 10 (yaw motion).4 0.5 1 1. These were proved that the hydrodynamic interaction occurs when the structures placed close to each other as study by other researchers by using numerical methods. mm 60 40 0. sway and yaw. This is shown that the motion of the semi-submersible is following the incident wave frequency. the equation (10) and equation (12) also explained that both the scattering wave and radiation wave generated are affected by the hull form design. rad 20 0. the peak magnitude occurs at frequency 0.5 Frequency. Another finding from the . Besides.85sec. Hz 1. The scattering wave which can contribute to the motion may not have enough distance separate after passing through the TLP in two body system. pitch and surge motion. In general. In addition. the radiated wave causes by the structures motion can also contribute to roll. the reason for lower effect for pitch motion may be caused by the arrangement of semisubmersible behind TLP in the experiment. For the heave. Magnitude. Hz Figure 5: The magnitude of surge motion for semi-submersible with and without influence of TLP. the design of semi-submersible which has small water plane area at column may reduce the wave load for pitch motion. Different travelling direction of the scattering wave causes the semi-submersible to roll.2 0 -0. In this case. The period for peak motion magnitude is same to the wave period. Interaction 60 50 40 Single Body Magnitude.5 1 Frequency.5 Figure 7: Magnitude of pitch motion for semisubmersible with and without influence of TLP.6 0. motion for roll. the direction of this wave travel after it passes through the structures will effect by the shape of hull according to equation (10). The radiation wave generated will travel in the direction normal to the structures surface and it magnitude is in the function of structure’s motion. frequency of peak magnitude for these three motions is same either the semisubmersible alone in the tank or existed of TLP and semi-submersible in the tank. Besides. sway and yaw is relatively small and can be ignored compared to interaction condition. sway and yaw although the structure is heading the incident wave. the motions which no exist on single body systems had increased and existed in interaction condition.hydrodynamic interaction for pitch is lower compare to surge and heave motion. At single body system. For the scattering wave.

rad Frequency. the large increase of pitch. Large increase of surge motion and exist of sway and yaw motion in the interaction condition will increase the possibility of the floating body to crash with the nearest floating body. September 3-4. M.5 1 1. Allan Magee from Technip during the test and also would like to gratefully acknowledge their gratitude to the Marine Technology Center staff for their assistance in conducting the experiment. Magee. exist of second body in the system will causes the hydrodynamic interaction to happen in the system. Bodagi. the hydrodynamic interaction between the structures can cause safety problems to the system because amplitude for each type of motion was increased significantly if the structures are placed close to each other as the arrangement in this experiment.25 0. A. 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 -2 0 Interaction Single Body 0.05 0 -0. Hz Figure 9: Magnitude of sway motion for semisubmersible with and without influence of TLP. Maimun.05 0 -0. Magnitude.05 0 Interaction Single Body 0.2 0. Model Test of Hydrodynamic Interactions of Floating Structures in Regular Waves.1 0. Hz Figure 10: Magnitude of yaw motion for semisubmersible with and without influence of TLP. heave and roll motion will give the significant problem to riser system and increase the possibility of system damage or leakage. Jaswar. sway and yaw are occurring at 0.5 1 1..3 0.5 ACKNOWLEGMENT The authors are very grateful for guidance of Dr. 0.. Second. Hz Figure 8: The magnitude of roll motion for semisubmersible with and without influence of TLP.5 Magnitude. As the result..05 0 Interaction Single Body 0.Frequency.2 0.5 accepted because the scattering wave generated when the incident wave pass through the TLP and the speed of travel is constant before and after scattered.. This assumption can be logically 0.35 0. rad Conclusions This paper was presented the comparison study for semi-submersible motion in single body system and interaction condition by using experimental methods. Pauzi. From the comparison. the TLP places in front of the semi-submersible should vibrate with the same frequency as the incident wave frequency. 2012. M. References [1] Abyn. Rafiqul Islam. However. In addition. H.541 Hz where the motions periods are same as the incident wave frequency. Proc.1 0.35 0. B. A.15 0. the radiation wave is assumed generated by the motion of neighbor floating body and take the frequency of the motion.. This phenomenon will cause amplitude of all six types of structures motion increase. mm Frequency.3 0.. Another observation obtained from the experiment result is all peak motion for roll.5 1 1.25 0.15 0. In this experiment. of The . the radiation wave generated from TLP and progress to semi-submersible was expected have the same frequency as the incident wave. Magnitude. These three motions are mostly influenced by scattering wave and radiation wave compared to incident wave and this phenomenal show that that the scattering wave and radiation wave frequency were same as the frequency for incident wave.

Ser. Choo. Maimun. Incecik. [18] Tajali. Sheikh. [4] Fang. Y. J.a. N. .. C.. 2008.. Ocean Engineering. H. 2002. of International Symposium on Hydrodynamics in Ocean Engineering. [3] Clauss.. 1925-1933. Application of CLEAR-VOF method to wave and flow simulations. Ser.H. S. Water Science and Engineering. Sphaier. and H. 526-531.-p. Proc.. Proc.. B. of International Conference on Behavior of Offshore Structure.S. [21] Zhu. B. KitaKyushu..-c. et al. S. Murray.. Second-order resonant heave. K. Zhu.. 593-603. The Netherlands. 38(17–18): p. S. Miao. Hydrodynamic interaction between several floating bodies of arbitrary form in Waves. [8] Koo.. of the 30th International Conference on Ocean. Modelling of multibodies in close proximity under water waves—Fluid forces on floating bodies. Shi. 38(13): p. 1997. An analysis of hydrodynamic interaction of floating multi-body using higher-order boundary element method.. 27(6)... Shafieefar. 18(5): p. The radiation problem of multiple structures with small gaps in between. H. M. J.. Journal of Hydrodynamics. 2011. 611-616. Offshore and Arctic Engineering OMAE. Ocean Engineering. 1974. F. A.. S.. 67-78. Hydrodynamically coupled motions of two ships advancing in oblique waves.. 38(17–18). J. 2002. M. June 19-24. [7] Kodan. G.H.. R.. The motions of adjacent floating structures in oblique waves. [15] Wu. [6] Hong. 30 (3). 5(1): p.. June 23-28. Journal of Ship Research. O. Proc. Cho.. H.. Ship motions in vicinity of a structure. Kim. [13] Söylemez. G. 2005. M. London. and Q.. 20(5): p. G. of the 21st International Conference on Offshore Mechanics and Arctic Engineering. 1981.-g.. Motion tests of a twinhulled semi-submersible. Applied Ocean Research... 24(7).. 32(7). 2012. K. H. UTM. [17] Zhu. Kim. Journal of Hydrodynamics. Proc. A. A. S. 2011. M. L.. [19] Lu.-w. 1996. Trondheim. C. 2005. R. 22(6). Ocean Engineering. Simos. G.. Second International Conference on Behavior of Offshore Structures. NIT. 783-801. of BOSS ‘79. 2010. New Orleans.. Kim. 2227-2243..-r. 520-526. Hydrodynamic interaction between two structures of floating in waves.T. Y.H. S. Numerical and experimental study on hydrodynamic interaction of side-by-side moored multiple vessels. A. [20] Kashiwagi. A.. J. of Third Offshore Mechanics and Arctic Engineering OMAE. Trondheim. Kim.Y. J. Ocean Engineering. B.. and G. Extreme motion response analysis of moored semisubmersibles. V. Ocean Engineering. Y. M. NIT. H. Oslo. Ser.-p. Ocean Engineering. S. 23(6). K.-q. 1995. Stutz. 1979.. L. M. F. H.. Pressure distribution computed by wave-interaction theory for adjacent multiple bodies. Y. Calculation of Nonlifting Potential Flow About Arbitrary 3D Bodies.-r. 1403-1416. Hydrodynamic analysis of multi-body floating piers under wave action. Guan. 1986. Model Test for VIM of Multi-Column Floating Platforms. A.. 2011. [10] Magee. Supplement 1): p. N. 1964. Time-Domain Investigation of a Semi Submersible in Rogue Waves. Choi. 2011. J. 292-310. O. Malaysia [2] Choi. Zhu...-c. [22] KANG. Y. 497-517. 1984. C. R. L. Journal of Ship Research. Z. Journal of Hydrodynamics. 2006. The motions and internal forces of a moored semi-submersible in regular waves. Hydrodynamic interactions and relative motions of two floating platforms with mooring lines in side-by-side offloading operation. A Time Domain Investigation on the Hydrodynamic Resonance Phenomena of 3D Multiple Floating Structures. Ocean Engineering. Hong. M. Schmittner.. [12] Ohkusu. Y. Proc. Proc. B. of 12th ISOPE. [5] Hess. 159–171. Pauzi. R. [11] Matos. and M. Proc. roll and pitch motions of a deep-draft semisubmersible: Theoretical and experimental results. Virk.. [9] Loken.6th Asia-Pacific Workshop on Marine Hydrodynamics . Norway. Abyn. Rotterdam.22(5. Miao. 643-660. [16] Yilmaz. [14] Van Oortmerssen. R. Smith.. E.