OFPSISORE TECHNOUJGP CONFERENCE 6200 North Central Expressway Dallas, Texas 75206 THIS IS A PREPR7NT

PAPER NUMBER

OTC 7 6 2 7

---

SUBJECT TO CORRECTION

M o t i o n O p t i m i z a t i o n o f Semi-Submersibles

H. L. Minkenberg and M. F. van Slui.js, Netherlands Ship Model Basin

O Copyright 1972

Off shore Technology Conference on behalf of t h e American I n s t i t u t e of Mining, Metallurgical., Petroleum Engineers, Inc., American Association of Petroleum Geologists, American I n s t i t u t e of Chemical Engineers, American Society of C i v i l Engineers, American Society of Mechanical Engineers, I n s t i t u t e of E l e c t r i c a l and Electronics Engineers, Inc., Marine Technology Society, Society 02' Exploration Geophysicists, and Society of Naval Architects & Marine Engineers. This paper was prepared f o r presentation a t t h e F o w t h Annual Offshore Technology Conference held in Houston, Tex., May 1-3, 1972. Permission t o copy i s r e s t r i c t e d t o an a b s t r a c t of not more t h m 300 words. I l l u s t r a t i o n s may not be copied. Such use of an a b s t r a c t should contain conspicuous acknowledgment of where and by whom t h e paper i s presented.

ABSTRACT
Offshore operations have been performed successfully during t h e l a s t decades, in which time period it was established t h a t semisubmersibles a r e superior t o conventional ship-shaped barges in view of minimum down-time requirements. To meet t h e s e requirements it i s necessary t o reduce t h e motions, which can be a t t a i n e d by optimization of t h e dimensions o r t h e shape of t h e underwater h u l l s . For optimization purposes t h e r e i s a need f o r t h e o r e t i c a l methods in order t o reduce c o s t l y and time-consuming model experiments. Such a method has been developed a t N.S.M.B., which makes it possible t o c a l c u l a t e wave forces, moments and t h e r e s u l t i n g motions of semisubmersible platforms of a r b i t r a r y shape. The paper o u t l i n e s t h e fundamentals of t h e method.

INTRODUCTION Because of an increased demand f o r energy and minerals, t h e search f o r n a t u r a l resources i s i n a phase of g r e a t expansion, U p t o 193&, o i l , gas and minerals were searched f o r on land o r a t M a n d waters.

I n t h e l a s t decades, however, t h e s e a c t i v i t i e s were extended t o offshore areas. From t h e start, exploration and production was r e s t r i c t e d t o r a t h e r shallow water in which one could operate from f i x e d platforms, using conventional shore-based f a c i l i t i e s . The performance of f i x e d platforms i s only t o a minor degree affected by waves, wind and current; t h e r e s u l t i n g d e f l e c t i o n s a r e t o o small t o be detrimental. A t present, a c t i v i t i e s a r e successfully performed f u r t h e r offshore 5x1 deeper water and rougher seas where only f l o a t A comparison has been made between computed i n g s t r u c t u r e s can be used. heave a n d model heave measurements f o r four cross-section types of lower h u l l s of a U t i l i z a t i o n of conventional equipment has simplified platform in beam waves. Both r e s u l t s diminished, since it became impractical in v2ew show a very good agreement. The r e s u l t s indiof i t s l i m i t a t i o n s i n storm seas. The more cake t h a t heave w i l l be strongly influenced by expensive equipment and t h e higher c o s t s f o r t r a n s p o r t a t i o n of t h e products, necessitated t h e cross-section of t h e lower h u l l s i n designing f l o a t i n g units from a point of view of p a r t i c u l a r with respect t o wave period. The m i n i m u m down time. The l i m i t i n g f a c t o r s f o r paper concludes with a motion comparison f o r an a c t u a l platform, which will be optimized f o r two platform performance are, i n general, t h e motions of t h e s t r u c t u r e induced by combined operational a r e a s where prevailing weather e x t e r n a l forces. conditions d i f f e r substantially. References and i l l u s t r a t i o n s a t end of paper.
A

11-132

MOTION OPTIMIZATTON O F f3EKtSUBMERSIBLES OTC 1627 I l m e forces acting upon f l o a t i n g s t r u c t u r e s operational areas, where environmental c o d t i o n s d i f f e r appreciably t o d e t e c t mutual merits. can be s p l i t i n t o a s t a t i c part caused by steady wind, current and wave-drif t i n g forces, F U N D A M E N T A L S O F THE m O R Y and a dynamic p a r t r e s u l t i n g from wave action. The consequencss of t h e s t a t i c f o r c e s can be The motions of column-stabilized semisubcounteracted by a well designed multipoint mooring o r a dynamic positioning system, Oscil- mersible platforms could formerly o d y be predicted by performing model experiments, e i t h e r l a t o r y motions, which a r e induced by t h e i n confused i r r e @ a ~ - seas o r i n r e m m dynamic p a r t of t h e wave forces, can o d y be held within permissible W t s by an approI r r e g u l a r wave t e s t r e s u l t s give d i r e c t p r i a t e s e l e c t i o n of t h e platform submerged information about what i s t o be expected when hulls. t h e f u l l - s i z e platform operates under i d e n t i c a l circumstances. From regular wave model t e s t s , Since minimum downtime i s of prime import h e response of the s t r u c t u r e t o each individual tance, a platform should be designed wLth long wave i s obtained which may be used f o r c o m p d n a t u r a l motion periods t o avoid o r minimize son purposes of various platforms or t o p r e d i c t resonance phenomena. Long n a t u r a l motion t h e behavior in i r r e g u l a r seas. Therefore a periods, outside t h e range of t h e dominant wave s t a t i s t i c a l method introduced by St. Denis and periods, can s o l e l y be r e a l i z e d by f l o a t e r s pierson4 f o r ship-motion theory i s used. Two having a s m d . 1 r a t i o between waterplane area assumptions a r e made: (1) an i r r e g u l a r sea i s and displacement, Column-stabilized semicomposed of an a r b i t r a r y number of regular s i n e submersibles meet this requirement. Roll and waves, each with d i f f e r e n t length and height, p i t c h a r e s m a l l , except in t h e region of and with random phase ( p r i n c i p l e of superposiresonance. Heave, o r v e r t i c a l motion, response t i o n ) and (2) motions i n regular waves a r e has a hump i n important short-period waves, defined by amplitude and phase with respect t o which contain most energy when i r r e g u l a r seas t h e wave. When wave height increases, t h e a r e considered. Therefore, minimization of motion w i l l increase l i n e a r l y i n proportion, t h i s hump w i l l d i r e c t l y improve performance; a whereas i t s phase w i l l be not changed ( l i n e a r i t y f a c t which can be substantiated by optimization p r i n c i p l e ) . of t h e dimensions and cross-section of t h e submerged lower hulls. I n t h i s paper t h e influI f an i r r e g u l a r sea can be decomposed t n t o ence of t h e lower-hull cross-section on t h e a l a r g e number of regular waves, t h e response of v e r t i c a l motions of f l o a t e r s w i l l be considered a semisubmersible can a l s o be assumed t o be cosand discussed. prised of t h e response t o each of these regular waves. Thus t h e s t a t i s t i c a l method f o r isreguI n previous years t h e motions of ocean l a r seas can be used f o r predicting i r r e g u l a r platforms could only be predicted from model motion c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s . Performing model t e s t s t e s t s ; theory now permits approximation of f o r optimization purposes i s c o s t l y and time t h e i r behavior. consuming, Nevertheless, optimization i s , in most cases, a must since t h e r e i s a l a c k of A t N.S.M.B. a calculation method has been s t a t i s t i c a l d a t a about t h e influence of t h e developed, which enables t h e estimation of underwater h u l l shape upon platform motions. wave e x c i t a t i o n f o r c e s and motions .l The Therefore, mathematical methods have r e c e n t l y method assumes t h a t t h e platform can be s p l i t been developed t o p r e d i c t motions of f l o a t i n g i n t o representative elements f o r which t h e structures. wave e x c i t a t i o n f o r c e s a r e calculated. AddiF u j i i et al.5 prepared computer programs t i o n r e s u l t s i n t h e t o t a l f o r c e experienced by f o r t h e calculation of t h e hydrodynamic f o r c e s t h e platform from which i t s motions follow. a c t i n g upon marine s t r u c t u r e s , using experimenThese l a t t e r check well t h motion measuret a l l y obtained added mass and damping. ments i n t h e model basin.

I n t h i s paper t h e fundamentals of t h e theory w i l l be checked against model t e s t results of simplified platforms. The influence of t h e cross-section of various lower h u l l s on t h e v e r t i c a l motion w i l l be considered f o r t h e case of beam seas. P a r t of t h e model t e s t r e s u l t s under discussion has been published.3 The knowledge derived from t h i s comparison w i l l be applied t o a comparative study between an exist& semisubmer~ibleand a l t k r n a t i v e designs, with various lower-hull cross-section. I n p a r t i c u l a r , t h e heave motions w i l l be reviewed f o r regular waves a s well a s f o r i r r e gular seas, which a r e representative f o r two
'

Ochi e t al.6 and Tasai e t al.? have presented a method t o estimate wave f o r c e s using a s t r i p theory. The method used i n t h e present paper was developed by ~ o o f t l assuming t h e following

1. The f l o a t i n g s t r u c t u r e can be subdivided i n t o s m a l l elements, f o r each of which t h e wave-excited and hydrodynamic f o r c e s a r e determined.
2. Calculation of these q u a n t i t i e s i s based upon p o t e n t i d theory f o r ' s m a l l bodies. Thus t h e f l u i d i s inviscid, incompressibLe and irrotationd.

0% 1627

H. L. MINKENBEEG and M. F. van SLUIJS

11-133
t

3. Each element i s not affected by t h e presence of others.

Added mass and t h e mass coupling coe f f i c i e n t s a r e only influenced by t h e crosss e c t i o n and shape of t h e body and not by t h e frequency of o s c i l l a t i o n which only holds t r u e a t low frequeneies.i, 7

m a b l y discussed in t h i s paper, i s described by

2

(I)V + m y z ) =

N~~

dZ

'CZZ

z
~

4.

dt2 F,,
COS

( w t +

).

. . . . . . . . (2)
~
cos f & t

*EFJ

The v e r t i c a l wave-excited force, F,, ) , can be generally w r i t t e n a s

F,, C05 ( w t + F , c
)

5. The e f f e c t of damping i s small outside t h e resonance region and can be neglected.2 A t resonance, t h e damping can be taken account by using Hooftls approximation.

Pto

C L 1mzz

dt2

6. The wave-excited f o r c e s a r e dLvided i n t o an undisturbed wave-pressure force (~roude-Kriloff hypothesis) and an i n e r t i a force, being i n phase with t h e wave o r b i t a l acceleration. Fundamentally, t h e contribution of t h e dampin t o t h e wave-excited force should be inc1uded;l a contribution which is, however, s m a l l and can henceforth be neglected.lt7

where 6 1 ,112 and p 3 a r e correction f a c t o r s f o r t h e v e r t i c a l wave o r b i t a l motion, which can be deducted from t h e v e l o c i t y p o t e n t i a l of t h e undisturbed wave.

Eqs.

When t h e damping influence i s neglected, and can be

(pV
F,,

+mzz ) d z dt2
COS (

C,,

I n order t o be informed of t h e r e s u l t s of t h e various c a l c u l a t i o n methods, Fig. 1 has been compiled, where a comparison i s given with experimental data. It shows t h e v e r t i c a l wave force a c t i n g upon a f l o a t , consisting of a sphere attached t o a v e r t i c a l cylinder. Ochi uses s t r i p theory and takes i n t o account t h a t damping and added mass a r e dependent upon frequency. Hooft takes t h e added mass f r e e quency independently and approximates i t with t h e following relation:
=
1 ' K R 3p 3 4

Wt

E F z b ),

. . . . . . . . . (4)
=
d2 5 111 r n ~ z 7 Pg
+

and
F,,

cos ( W t

EFZ

Czzc

. . . . , . . . . . . . . . . . . . . (5)
The solution of Eq. L, can be w r i t t e n a s

dt

= Z,

coscwt + E ~ ) L

- . . . . . . . . (6)
,

('+~'"~)f

'

(l)

s u b s t i t u t i o n o f Eq. 6 i n t o E q . 4 g i v e s
Fza

where mZ, = added mass in v e r t i c a l d i r e c t i o n R = sphere r a d i u s P = mass density of f l u i d a ! = Fig. 1

Eq. 1 i s derived from p o t e n t i a l theory, ignoring t h e wave pressure contribution of t h e i n t e r s e c t i o n between sphere and column. Fig. 1 c l e a r l y shows t h a t differences up t o 25 percent may r e s u l t i n t h a t frequency region where most waves carry energy, viz, CJ > 0.5 rad./sec. Generally, Ochi overestimates t h e v e r t i c a l wave-excited f o r c e s f o r t h i s case, whereas Hooft's r e s u l t s l i e within t h e r e s u l t s of t h e and experiments conducted by Motora e t Mercier. 9 OF
LOWER-HULLS IN WAVES

From Newtonls law of dynamics, it follows t h a t t h e motions of a r i g i d body of a r b i t r a r y shape can be described by s i x coupled d i f f e r e n t i a l equations of t h e second order with cons t a n t c o e f f i c i e n t s ; see f o r instance Refs. 10 and 1 1 . If t h e semisubmersibLe i s assumed symmetrical i n l o n g i t u d i n a l and transverse

.4-(7) w2 1 which i s t h e heave response outside of resonance. Resonance response should be estimated by introduction of t h e hydrodynamic damping, for the theory does not take it into account. The hflrodynamic damping patential. damping, which is proportional to the velocity of oscillation and (2) viscous damping, which i s proportional t o t h e v e l o c i t y of o s c i l l a t i o n squared. Since t h e viscous damping dominates t h e p o t e n t i a l one, damping primarily depend upon platform motions and thus upon wave height. A t resonance, t h e hydrodynamic mass force cancels t h e r e s t o r i n g force. Therefore, t h e energy i n t h e v e r t i c a l wave-excited force can only be absorbed by t h e viscous damping force; Eq. 2 r e s u l t s i n

5,

Za

La 1 czz - ( P V
+

Z ) Z

a.,,

= Fz,c~~(WZt+EFz~)

. . . (8)

The t o t a l energy over a wave period a t resonance is

direction, the vertical motion, which w i l l be

fizz 1 2 1 % -$0

l '
= / F ~ ~ cosIwt

dt

11-134

MOTION OPTIMIZATION O F SEMIS-SIUS

OTC 1627

I
From Eqs. 6 and 9 follows heave response a t resonance: periods and added mass, computed and derived from the model measurements. The t h e o r e t i c a l natural periods follow from Eq. 7.

The v e r t i c a l wave-excited force amplitude, Fza, and the viscous damping coefficient, Qzzl are calculated i n accordance with Ref. 1. A r e a l i s t i c value of 2.5 m f o r wave amplitude was taken, which was used f o r comparison purposes between the various lower-hull shapes so a s t o maintain consistency. The lower h u l l s considered, a r e connected t o two c i r c u l a r cylindrical surface-piercing columns with a diameter of 6 m. The over-all length i s 60 m. The distance between column centerline i s 45 m. Displacements of 2,520 cu m and 2,990 cu m are considered, corresponding t o d r a f t s of l 9 and 27 m., respectively, measured t o the centerline of the lower hulls. The lower h u l l crosssection was varLed a s follows. Variant I Variant 1 1 Variant 1 1 1 Variant I V

Model natural heave periods were dertved from motion decay records. Added mass of the various configurations was calculated by substitut i o n of the measured natural period, T , i n t o Eq. 1 1 . It appears from Table 1 t h a t goth the calculated and model values of added mass of Variants I1 and I V agree well. Added mass of Variants I and I11 are apparently overestimated by theory, which r e s u l t s i n a s h i f t of resonance and minimum heave t o longer waves. This i s clearly demonstrated by Figs. 3, 5, 7 and 9. For deeper d r a f t s , v e r t i c a l wave forces w i l l be obviously reduced, a f a c t , which d i r e c t l y follows from Eq. 3. Hence, heave response also decreases outside of resonance f o r deeper drafts, when added mass and restoring forces are assumed t o be constant,

-.

6.0 m diameter
X
X

- @ - 8.0
@

E !

- 5.3

5.3 m
4.0 m 8.0 m.

- 4.0

For these configurations, model t e s t s were conducted by Wahab and Van ~ l u i j s 3 i n the Seakeeping Laboratory of t h e Netherlands Ship Model Basin. Model dimensions and the t e s t arrangement are shown i n Fig. 2. The model data p l o t s are compared with the r e s u l t s of the computation t h a t are shown in Figs. 3 through 10. O n the whole, a satisfactory agreement e A s t s . Differences, originating only a t minimum heave frequency, may be attributed t o the following three reasons.
1. Due t o l i t t l e heave motions, model measurement r e s u l t s must be interpreted with reserve f o r this frequency.

Eq. 1 1 suggests t h a t longer natural heave periods can be attained a t l a r g e r displacem e n t ~ ,which i s confirmed by the data given i n Table 1. This does not mean, however, t h a t heave w i l l also be l e s s a t resonance f o r deeper d r d t , because wave forces a t longer periods can be larger. Nevertheless, a comparison of Figs. 3 t o 6 with Figs. 8 t o 10, indicates t h a t , in general, heave response decreases when d r a f t i s increased. From Eq. 5 it follows t h a t t h e heave force can be s p l i t in a FrodeKriloff component dependent on the wave elevation, and an added mass component t h a t depends upon the wave o r b i t a l acceleration. I f the wave elevation varies a s

L,

COS

w t , then

d2t;
dt

-=-w25

becomes

Thus Eq. 5

2 . Theory ignores damping influence on the wave and hydrodynamic forces because of i t s insignificant e f f e c t outside of resonance. A t minimum heave response, however, where added mass cancels the pressure p a r t of the wave force, motions are solely determined by the damping, which i s , a s e a r l i e r stipulated, neglected by theory.

The v e r t i c a l wave force w i l l be zero f o r one p a r t i c u l a r frequency. This excitationless frequency i s

3. Theory has overestimated the added mass in p a r t i c u l a r cases, which makes minimum heave response s h i f t t o lower wave frequencies. Table 1 gives a comparison of natural heave

It depends only upon the waterplane area and the added mass. For the investigated configurations, having a constant waterplane area, t h e e f f e c t of lower-hull section on the waveexcited force i s i l l u s t r a t e d in Fig, 1 1 . The v e r t i c a l wave-excited force i s considerably lower f o r the v e r t i c a l e l l i p t i c a l section,

OTC 1627

H. L. M I N K E N B E R G and M. 'F. van SLUIJS

11-135

owing t o i t s Lower added mass, a t wave frequencies higher than 0.5 rad,/sec. Fig. 12 demonstrates t h a t then heave i s low also. Variant 1 1 1 , with a horizontal e l l i p t i c a l sect i o n , experiences the highest wave forces due t o i t s l a r g e s t added mass. However, f o r wave frequencies smaller than 0.35 rad./sec, the wave force i s smallest. Thus, f o r waves with > 0.5 rad./sec, heave response i s l a r g e s t f o r Variant III ( ~ i g .12).

observed wave period =

9

From Eqs. 1-5, 16 and 14, i t follows t h a t COe f f i c i e n t s A and B are related t o significant wave height and mean wave period.

A t resonance, heave i s predicted from the v e r t i c a l wave force and the damping, a s indicated by Ref. 1, The v e r t i c a l wave force was approximately the same f o r the configurations considered, Variant I V has l i t t l e damping a t resonance, while the damping f o r Variant I1 i s large, which i s confirmed by the model t e s t results. For semisubmersibles the resonance heave frequency i s of importance f o r operation in irregular seas, For instance, the r e s onse of Variant I V t o waves with w > 0.5 r a d . z e c i lowest. Due t o a small added mass, however, the resonance frequency l i e s in the range of actual wave frequencies; also i t s response a t resonance i s large. Therefore, 1 p g e heave motions w i l l be encountered in i r r e g u l a r seas with a large average period, t h i s in contrast t o the behavior of Variants II and 1 1 1 ,
MOTIONS O F SINGLE LOWER HULLS I N I R R E G U SEAS Based upon the superposition and l i n e a r i t y principle, the significant motfons of a platform in i r r e g u l a r seas can be predicted from the response t o regular sine waves, The i r r e g u l a r seas a r e assumed t o be long-crested, i n which case t h e b energy spectra can be described by

The values of significant wave height and mean period used apply t o conditions a t the North Sea and south of Australia. They were taken from information gathered by ~ e t r i l 3 and Hogben and Lumb. l k The m a i n difference of weather i n these areas i s t h a t dominant periods of the waves a t the North Sea are shorter than those a t South Australia. The significan& wave height was held the same f o r both areas. The spectra a s formulated above are i l l u s t r a t e d by Figs. 13 and 14. The r e s u l t s of the i r r e g u l a r heave calcul a t i o n s f o r the various lower-hull configurat i o n s a r e given i n Fig. 15. To t h i s purpose, use was made of responses given in Fig. 12 a s follows :

Eq. l 9 i s the sigrdficant heave motion, double amplitude, which i s the mean of t h e one-third. highest up and down values. As the North Sea, thus i n r e l a t i v e l y short waves, the v e r t i c a l e l l i p t i c a l cross section oi the lower h u l l w i l l be favorable up t o wave heights of about 4 m. I n rougher seas heave increases considerably. The horizontal -pt i c a l cross-section i s the most unfavorable regarding heave, while the difference of heave motion between the c i r c u l a r and square crosssection i s negligibly small. For the South Australia area, an opposite trend appears t h a t i s caused by the l a r g e r amount of energy i n the long waves of the spectrum having frequencies i n the v5cinity of heave resonance. This r e s u l t s i n l a r g e vertic a l motions f o r t h e vertical, e l l i p t i c a l crosssection, the more so a s i t s damping i s very small.

where
S

I :

(W) =

dw

do,

45.

Apart from the values of A and B, Eq. l 4 depicts spectra similar i n shape t o the pierson-~oskowitzl~ formulation f o r f u l l y developed seas. When the wave energy spectrum i s related t o actual observations a t sea, it follows t h a t t h e average observed wave height conforms generally t o the calculated mean of the onet h i r d highest waves (= significant wave height) and t h a t the observed period corresponds t o the calculated mean wave period, Thus f o r a narrow band spectrum observed wave height =

Summarizing, f o r sea areas with r e l a t i v e l y short wave periods such a s the North Sea, Configuration I V with a v e r t i c a l e l l i p t i c a l crosssection w i l l heave l e s s , whereas i n longer

1 14-36
I

MOTION OPTIMIZATION O F ~SUBMERS1BL;ES

I

OTC 1627

l
model experiments.2 Roll response i s shown i n Fig. 17. Apparently Alternative I1 r o l l s l e s s , which must primarily be ascribed t o a difference of s t a b i l i t y . For t h e e l l i . p t i c a l shape of t h e lower h u l l s , t h e d r a f t was 3.4 m deeper, r e s u l t i n g i n a lower p o s i t i o n of t h e c e n t e r of buoyancy while, a s already said, t h e c e n t e r of g r a v i t y was held constant. Since t h e waterplane area and t h e displacement a r e t h e same f o r a l l corrfigurations, t h e height of t h e metacenter above t h e c e n t e r of buoyancy remains constant. This makes t h e metacentric height of Alternative I1 lower, r e s u l t i n g in a smaller r o l l r e s t o r i n g force, a l a r g e r r o l l period and a lower response t o high-frequency waves. The difference in r o l l c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s between t h e o r i g i n a l v e s s e l am Alternative I i s negligible. Their s t a b i l i t y i s t h e same. I r r e g u l a r heave i s given in F'ig, 1 8 . It shows t h e same trend a s was observed f o r t h e s i n g l e lower h u l l motion calculatFon. With North Sea waves of up t o 4 m, a v e r t i c a l e l l i p t i c a l shape i s superior. I n higher seas t h e v e r t i c a l motion w i l l increase appreciably since t h e longer wave components e x c i t e t h e platform in i t s n a t u r a l period. N o p r a c t i c a l preference regarding heave e r d s t s between t h e o r i g i n a l design and i t s Alternative I f o r t h e investigated North Sea conditions, For t h e South Australian a r e a a square lower-hull shape i s favorable; a v e r t i c a l e l l i p t i c a l section o r i g i n a t e s cons i d e r a b l e heaving. From Fig. 19 it follows t h a t t h e smallest r o l l angles a r e experienced by Alternative I1 because of i t s s t a b i l i t y data. The difference h r o l l i n g c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s f o r t h e or2ginal semisubmersible and Alternative 1 i s hsignificant. The magnitude of r o l l i n g f o r a l l conf i g u r a t i o n s i s considerably l e s s than t h a t of s h g l e - h u l l conventional barges, a f a c t which i s one of t h e g r e a t advantages in using semisubmersibles f o r operations t h a t a r e t o be performed when on s t a t i o n . CONCLUDING REMARKS I n t h e paper a comparison has been made between v e r t i c a l motion d a t a derived from model experiments on s i n g l e lower h u l l s of various cross-sections and those calculated by a l i n e a r i z e d theory, It i s shown t h a t a s a t i s f a c t o r y agreement e l d s t s between t h e measured and calculated motions so t h a t t h e fundamentals, upon which t h e theory i s based, a r e sound. The e f f e c t of v a r i a t i o n of t h e lower h a cross-section shape on t h e motion

waves such a s t h e South Australian area, preference must be given t o t h e square o r t h e horizontal e l l i p t i c a l cross-section.

a HULL OPTCMIZATION F O R A SENISUENERSIBLE

The howledge gained from t h e study about t h e e f f e c t of lower-hull s e c t i o n a l shape upon t h e v e r t i c a l motion in beam waves w i l l be adopted t o optimize heave f o r an a c t u a l semisubmersible. The semisubmersible under cons i d e r a t i o n i s intended t o be used f o r l a y i n g pipes on t h e seabed. It c o n s i s t s of two submerged l o n g i t u d i n a l c i r c u l a r c y l i n d r i c a l h u l l s , each of wkich i s connected t o f i v e surfacepiercing v e r t i c a l columns f o r s t a b i l i t y . Deck and h u l l s a r e connected by bracings such t h a t a f u l l symmetry e x i s t s with regard t o a v e r t i c a l plane through t h e c e n t e r l i n e and through t h e midship section. M a i n p a r t i c u l a r s a r e given in Table 2 f o r an operating d r a f t of 63 f t . This barge has been used by Van S l u i j s and an^ f o r making t h e i r experimental and t h e o r e t i c a l motion c o r r e l a t i o n , For t h e optimization study, two lower-hull sections were chosen; being t h e v e r t i c a l e l l i p t i c a l shape which i s favorable at t h e North Sea and t h e square section, which i s a r e a l i s t i c a l t e r n a t i v e f o r t h e North Sea a s well a s t h e South A u s t r a l i a area. The shape of t h e lowerh u l l sections was a l t e r e d while t h e a r e a had been kept constant and equal. t o t h e o r i g i n a l design. C h a r a c t e r i s t i c s of t h e weight d i s t r i bution were kept constant throughout;. I n Figs. 16 and 17 t h e calculated heave and r o l l response t o regular beam waves a r e shown. For wave frequencies l a r g e r than 0.5 rad./ sec, heave,response of Alternative I1 i s considerably smaller with respect t o t h a t of t h e other configurations. Due t o a s m a l l added mass, about 50 percent of t h a t of t h e o r i g i n a l design, resonance occurs i n t h e a r e a of t h e longer waves. This p a r t i c u l a r section shape has l i t t l e damping, which r e s u l t s i n l a r g e response a t resonance estimated by Eq. 10 f o r a wave height of 5 m. The magnitude of these values might be a r b i t r a r y f o r comp&son purposes; however, they serve well. I n short period waves, t h e difference i n heave between t h e o r i g i n a l design and Alternat i v e I a r e small. The response a t resonance of Alternative I i s smaller, which i s mainly a t t r i b u t e d t o a Large viscous damping of t h e square cross-sections. Also i t s added mass i s somewhat l a r g e r , r e s u l t i n g i n a longer n a t u r a l heave period. Calculated n a t u r a l periods f o r heave and r o l l a r e shown i n Table 3. The computed values f o r t h e o r i g i n a l design agree very well with t h e d a t a from t h e

0% 1627

H. L. M G -I

and M. F. van SLUIJS

11-13?

characteristics of an actual semisubmersible has been investigated t o detect trends leadlng t o optimum performance under d i f f e r e n t environ mental conditions. I n t h i s respect, the added mass turns out t o be the ruling factor. Theory i s f e l t t o be useful t o calculate platform motions f o r various design configurations t o arrive a t the optimum shape f o r i t s specific operation. I n addition, model t e s t s w i l l be necessary t o check the theoretic a l predictfon and t o obtain information on phenomena t h a t are unpredictable by calculation. N O M E N C L A T U R E
C,,
= restoring force coefficient i n v e r t i

c a l direction F,,

= v e r t i c a l wave-excited force amplitude g = acceleration due t o gravity

wave number h kLa = wave slope amplitude mzz = added mass i n v e r t i c a l direction NZ, = potential damping coefficient in v e r t i c a l direction Qzz = viscous damping coefficient in verti. cal d i r e c t i o n R = sphere radius S g (W) = wave spectral density T = wave period T = mean wave period TZ = natural heave period Z = v e r t i c a l displacement Za = heave amplitude 2GIl3 = significant heave motion (double amplitude) = phase angle between v e r t i c a l wave' 5 excited force and wave phase angle between heave motion and '"= wave X = wave length w t 2T3 = wave c i r c u l a r frequency a o = frequency f o r minimum wave-excited force 2E u'2=F = natural heave frequency p = mass density 5 = wave elevation 6, = wave amplitude = significant wave height 4, = r o l l amplitude = significant r o l l motion (double PTa, amplitude) CL~,~ =correction L~,CL f a~ c t o r s f o r v e r t i c a l wave o r b i t a l motion V = displacement volume.
S

k=2ft =

1
I

I
I

cW

1, Hooft, J. P. : "A Mathematical Method of Determining Hydrodynamically Induced Forces on a Semi~ubmersible~~, paper presented a t the S N A M E Annual Meeting, NOV. 11-12, 1971. 2. van S l u i j s , M. F. and Tan, Seng Gie: "Experimental. and Theoretical Motion Correlation of a P i p e - L a a g Barge", symposium on Publication 375, N.S.M.B., Offshore Hydrodynamics, Wageningen, Aug. 25-26, 1971. 3. Wahab, R. and van S l u i j s , M. F.: "Some Remarks on Model Tests ~ 5 t h Floatirw Platforms in Waves", Marine ~ e c h n o l o m ( ~ c t . , 1968) 5, No. 4. 4. St. is, M.-&I~ Pierson, W. J.: "On the Motions of Ships i n Confused Seas", Trans., S N A M E (19%) 5. hjii, Hitoshi and Tarahaski, Takeski: l1Estimation of Hydrodynamical. Forces Acting on a Marine Structure", Technical eview, Mitzubiski Heavy Industries, Ltd. May, 1970). 6. Ochi, M. K. and Vuolo, R. M, : "Seakeeping Characteristics of a M u l t i - U n i t Ocean Platform", paper presented a t the S E Spring Meeting, May 25-28, 1971. 7. Tasai, F., Arakawa, H. and Kurihara, M,: "A Study on the Motions of a SemiSubmersible Catamaran H u l l in Regular Waves", Reports of Research I n s t i t u t e f o r Applied Mechanics (1970) X V I I I , Ho. 60. 8. Motora, S. and Kogama, T. : "On Wave ~ x c i t a t i o n l e s sship ~ o r m s ~ J.S.N.A., ~, Japan (1969) 3. 9. ~ e r c i e r ,J. A .: llHydr~dynamic Characteri s t i c s of Several ert tic-al Floats in Wavesll, Report SIT-DL-70-1481 Stevens I n s t i t u t e of Technology (1970). 10. V u g t s , J. H. : "The Hydrodynamic Forces and Ship Motions in Waves",. t h e s i s , Delft U. of Technology (1970).. 1 1 . Hanaoka, T., e t al. : "Researches on Seakeeping Q u a l i t i e s of Ships i n Japan", 60th Anniversary Series (1963) 2. 12. Pierson, W. J , and Moskowitz, L.: "A Proposed Spectral Form f o r N l y Developed Wind Seas Based on S i m i l a r i t s Theom of S. A. Kitagarodskiifl, Jour. keophys: Res. ( ~ e c . , 1964) &. 13. P e t r i , 0.: llStatistik der Meereswellen i n der Nordseell, Einzelverof f entlichung Nr. 17, Deutsche Wetterdienst, Seewetteramt, Hamburg. 1.4. Hogben, N. and Lumb, F. E. : "Ocean Wave S t a t i s t i c s " , National Physical Laboratory, Teddington.

61.

P-

TABLE I

- COMPARISON BETWEEN CALCULATED AND MEASURED ADIlED MASS AND NATURAL PERIOD OF HEAVE
Configuration

I Draught

Added mass i n ton. mnaec? !?atufal period i n sec. Calculated Measured

147.0 197.0 273.5 81 .O

I
19.0 m

Calculated
17.2

Keasured
16.7 17 7 l9.l

,
I

27.0 m

Variant I Q Variant E1 - H Variant I11 Variant I V @

-a
-

Variant I - Q Variant I1 Variant I11 Variant I V @

-a
-

172.8 204.6 304.2 76.2 172.8 204.6 304.2 76.2

17.9
19.7

189 277

5 5

1 1 1
15.1

15.3

' l : : : 20.4

' l : : :

16.2

20.0 16.2

TABLE 11
l

- MAIN

PARTICUIARS OF SEMI-SUBMERSIBLE BARGE

Designation Length

Symbol

Unit ft. ft. ft. sh. tons ft. ft. ft.

Magnitude
400 160 63 30,118 45.4 13.9 68.0

L
B T

I izzt even k e e l Displacement weight I Center of g r a v i t y above

I
I

base Transverse metacentric height Kadius of gyration h r o l l direction

I n
m
k4

,TABLE I 1 1

- NATUBAL PERIODS OF THX SEMI-SUBMERSIBLE

liatural period

Original iJternative I

heave

16.1 27.7 16.8 28.8 1%.2 3.6

(15.6)

1 1 I, 1
heave 0 1
1 0

(2q.9)

I1 heave

. ...)

Measured values, derived from [2]

l dlmrnrlonr in m l

.I
W

S.MOTWA

M K.

OCHl

I l HOOFT

cALCuLATEO

FRONT VlFW

.--L

1.20

CROSS SECTION OF -R-HULL

VARIANT VARIANT VARIANT

VARIANT

- 6

- e - e -

OlZOm 01063 x 01063 m OlsQ2xa0796m oomsxolsoa m

FREOUENCY

in n d .

Fig. 1 C a l c u l a t e d and measured waveexcited v e r t i c a l f l o a t e r forces.

F i g . 2 - M o d e l d i m e n s i o n s and t e s t arrangement f o r s i n g l e l o w e r - h u l l s .

VARIANT

I@

T=100m
----C---

CALCULATE0

MEASURED

P 2-

I
I

; i -

.
1-

I I I I

1
I

p---"5 Fig. 3
0.5 ID
W
FREOUENCY in "d.
FREOUENCY FREOUENCY In rad sec.'

in r r d sec-1

Heave r e s p o n s e o f c i r c u l a r l o w e r h u l l , shallow d r a f t .

Fig. 4

Heave r e s p o n s e o f s q u a r e l o w e r h u l l , shallow draft.

Fig. 5 Heave r e s p o n s e o f h o r i z o n t a l e l l i p t i c a l lower h u l l , shallow d r a f t .

VARIANT

H @
CALCULATED

T=100m
"
4

----

MEASURED
. - .

-----

2.

L "

'j-

FREOUENCV

~n

rad. sec;'

FREQUENCY In rad sec;'

FREQUENCI in " d .

F i g . 6 - Heave r e s p o n s e o f v e r t i o a l e l l i p t i c a l lower h u l l , shallow draft.

Fig. 7

- Heave r e s p o n s e o f c i r c u l a r l o w e r h u l l , deep d r a f t .

Fig. 8

Heave r e s p o n s e o f s q u a r e l o w e r h u l l , deep d r a f t .

VARIANT T P70m

CALCULATED

-----4

MEASURED

OO

OS

1.0
FREOUENCV in rad.s.c:'

FREQUENCY in rad.$ec.-l

Fig. 9 Heave r e s p o n s e o f h o r i z o n t a l e l l i p t i c a l l o w e r h u l l , deep d r a f t .

F i g . 10 Heave r e s p o n s e o f v e r t i c a l e l l i p t i c a l l o w e r h u l l , deep d r a f t .

T-l9Om

---VARIANT --- VARIANT

VARIANT

VARIANT

I e n m

m
X

e
8)
4.

19.0m

------p

WRIANT I
VARIANT
VARIANT
VARIANT

e
o
b

m
H

2-

i !
-

,/-'-.N.
0

FREQUENCY

in

r.d.sec:l

1.0 FREQUENCY in n d sec-'

05

1.5 F R E O U E N C Y F i g . 13
in rrd % + c : '

F i g . 11 Calculated wave-excited v e r t i c a l foroe o t the various lower hulls, shallow draft.

F i g . 12 Heave r e s p o n s e o f t h e v a r i o u s lower h u l l s , shallow d r a f t .

N o r t h Sea wave spectra.

SOUTH AUSTRALIA
SEA STATE L V 3 1 n m

( 7

in S=.
6.0
0 0

A B
C
4

1.60
2.50

Ti19Om

3 60
4.00

10.1

10.0

l-

-----

VARIANT

VARIANT
WRIANT

---

m .a

\,

".

FREQUENCY in rad,rcc;l

F i g . 1 4 -. S o u t h A u s t r a l i a n wave s p e o t r a .

F i g . 15

I r r e g u l a r heave o f t h e v a r i o u s lower h u l l s , shallow d r a f t .

ORGINAL ALTERNATIVE I

-.-.-

ALTERNATIVE

--

ALTERNATIVE 1

ALTERNATIVE U

FREOUENCY

10

.r r d sec-l

FREOUENCY in rad. rcs"

Fig. 16 - Heave response o f original platforms and two alternatives.

F i g . 17

- R o l l response of original platform and t w o alternatives.

ORGINAL

0
Q

ORGINAL

I -

ALTERNATIVE I

-.--

ALTERNATIVE

Fig. 18:- lrregular heave of original platform and two alternatives.

Fig. 19 - lrregular r o l l o f original platform and two alternatives.