You are on page 1of 12

Proceedings of the ASME 2011 30th International Conference on Ocean, Offshore and Arctic Engineering

OMAE2011
June 19-24, 2011, Rotterdam, The Netherlands

OMAE2011-490
EXPERIMENTAL COMPARISONS TO ASSURE THE SIMILARITY BETWEEN VIM
(VORTEX-INDUCED MOTION) AND VIV (VORTEX-INDUCED VIBRATION)
PHENOMENA
Rodolfo T. Gonçalves1
(rodolfo_tg@tpn.usp.br)

César M. Freire2
(cesar.freire@usp.br)

Guilherme F. Rosetti1
(guilherme.feitosa@tpn.usp.br)

Guilherme R. Franzini2
(gfranzini@usp.br)

André L. C. Fujarra1
(afujarra@usp.br)

Julio R. Meneghini2
(jmeneg@usp.br)

1

TPN – Numerical Offshore Tank
Department of Naval Architecture and Ocean Engineering, Escola Politécnica – University of São Paulo
São Paulo, SP, Brazil
2

NDF – Fluid & Dynamics Research Group
Department of Mechanical Engineering, Escola Politécnica – University of São Paulo
São Paulo, SP, Brazil
ABSTRACT
Vortex-Induced Motion (VIM) is another way to
denominate the Vortex-Induced Vibration (VIV) in floating
units. The main characteristics of VIM in such structures are the
low aspect ratio (L/D < 4.0) and the unity mass ratio (m* = 1.0,
i.e. structural mass equal water displacement). The VIM can
occur in MPSO (Monocolumn Production, Storage and
Offloading System) and spar platforms. These platforms can
experience motion amplitudes of around their characteristic
diameters. In such cases, the fatigue life of mooring and riser
systems can be greatly reduced. Typically, the VIM model
testing campaigns are carried out in the Reynolds range
between 200,000 and 400,000.
VIV model tests with low aspect ratio cylinders (L/D =
1.0, 1.7 and 2.0) and unity mass ratio (m* = 1.0) have been
carried out at the Circulating Water Channel facility available at
NDF/EPUSP. The Reynolds number range covered in the
experiments was between 10,000 and 50,000. The characteristic
motions (in the transverse and in-line direction) were obtained
using the Hilbert-Huang Transform method (HHT) and then
compared with results obtained in experiments found in the
literature.

The aim of this investigation is to definitely establish the
similarity between the VIM and VIV phenomena, making
possible to increase the understanding of both and, at same
time, allowing some analytical models developed for VIV to be
applied to the VIM scenario on spar and monocolumn
platforms, logically under some adaption.
1. INTRODUCTION
From the earliest evidence in spar platforms, the VIM
phenomenon has shown close similarity to the
phenomenological aspects of VIV on remarkably slender
structures, such as risers.
In fact, small-scale experiments on a truss spar platform
performed by van Dijk et al. (2003) already showed that,
despite the strong susceptibility to geometric aspects of the
hull, in general terms, the VIM phenomenon clearly presents
both the self-excitation and the self-controlled characteristics,
similar to VIV on risers. Moreover, despite focused on
mitigating the effects of VIM on such a type of platform by
adding strakes, the authors also showed that without those
suppressors the maximum response amplitude occurs in a range
of reduced velocities between 5 and 9, making explicit mention

1

Copyright © 2011 by ASME

(2005) started experiments considering VIM and free surface waves simultaneously.00 1.00 2. the most important aspect in the VIM mitigation was the aspect ratio.5. By focusing on operating conditions and at the same time aware of the VIM susceptibility to other hydrodynamic mechanisms. in 2005 the research group from USP – University of São Paulo together with Petrobras started an intensive experimental research on VIM of monocolumn platforms.50. In general. (2007) and Gonçalves et al. being one of the earlier initiatives in establishing a direct relationship between VIM and VIV. Through these results. by using two .80. Unlike all previous works.50 1.40 and by 2 Copyright © 2011 by ASME . by using as a benchmark the aspect ratio / .000 elastic base Stappenbelt & Lalji (2008) 2. called monocolumn platforms as presented and discussed in Gonçalves et al. as well latter one with as Freire & Meneghini (2010) considering a rigid cylinder 2.50 2. typical characteristic of a coupling between in-line and transversal motions. Additionally. As a result. etc).36 and / 94.45 2. Roddier et al. (2010b) 1. in Gonçalves et al. Pioneer in developing such a type of platform.36 94.00 and the cylinders. Later.000 elastic base Gonçalves et al. The distinct elastic supports and different mass ratios.00 2. (2009) 1. (2006). Sanchis et al. supported with 1. As interesting as the results from spar platforms was the similar occurrence of the VIM phenomenon on platforms with even smaller aspect ratios.00 1.00 Moreover. (2010a) the USP research group carried out intensive and preliminary comparison work between results from both VIM on monocolumn platforms and VIV on smooth cylinders. the results obtained in the present work were also compared to those from VIM experiments by Wang et al. However. Wang et al.to eight-shaped trajectories.80 e / 21. Stappenbelt & Lalji (2008) and Blevins and Coughran (2009) both based on elastically mounted rigid 2. (2009) in floating rigid cylinders with / 2.36 and / 17.62 1. those authors found that the waves have a mitigating effect on the VIM phenomenon by reducing its response amplitude.00 1. highlighting the correlation between towing tests and those performed at water channels. Therefore. L / D)..62 10.36 8. including concerns about the restoring system in small-scale. In fact. its results will be presented later in the comparisons of this work.40 1. In order to definitively confirm the similarity between VIM and VIV phenomena.000 floating cylinder Blevins & Coughran (2009) 1. among them: Pesce & Fujarra (2000) by means a cantilevered flexible 2.39 1. the former with 1. the coexistence of waves and the damping promoted by risers. such as the presence of appendages on the hull (stairs. (2009) conducted a study to verify the influence of the Reynolds number on VIM.00. umbilicals and mooring lines. (2008) 1.305 cantilevered bar Jauvtis & Williamson (2004) 2. Fujarra et al. (2003) established a direct relationship between hull geometry and VIM response. Recently.00 2. Even for very small aspect ratios. Cueva et al. (2009a) established experimental procedures for VIM experiments on monocolumns.88.80 21. investigated by means of the draft variation of the smallscale monocolumns. experiments by Finn et al.291 pivoted pendulum Present work 1. comparison between results from different apparatus ensures the reliability for subsequent comparison with similar results reported in the literature.291 pivoted pendulum Present work 1. i.305 cantilevered bar 2. Finnigan et al.70 1. (2009) focused on testing models without appendices (smooth cylinder with low aspect ratio.00 or 2.62 e / 10. they have maximum amplitudes of motion greater than those observed in full scale. For comparing the experiments described as follows. L / D 0.00 1.00 1.000 elastic base Wang et al. according to which tests carried out at lower values of Reynolds are found to be conservative.88 1. further experiments were carried out with cylinders of small aspect ratio in water channel. a formal procedure for testing VIM on spar-type platforms is presented in Irani & Finn (2004).04 6.000 elastic base Sanchis et al. fairleads.8 1. mounted in a pivoted beam with Table 1 – Results compared in the present work ⁄ Work Apparatus Pesce & Fujarra (2000) 2. in Gonçalves et al.00 0. Jauvtis & cylinder with Williamson (2004) through a rigid cylinder elastically 2.000 floating cylinder Freire & Meneghini (2010) 2.56 17. some results of VIV with two degrees of freedom were used. (2009b).00.04 (2008) by means a spring mounted cylinder with and / 6. simply affected by the consequences of modifying the emission pattern of vortices in a given aspect ratio.36 and / 8. the authors reaffirmed the hypothesis that the VIM and VIV phenomena are essentially the same. those researches showed that VIM on monocolumns is very similar to the phenomenon action on spars with large amplitudes of transversal oscillation at reduced velocities above 4.00 1. (2010b) studied many mitigation aspects.00 1.e. as well as proposed a more accurate technique for analyzing those experiments.

Obviously. Two values of aspect ratio. 𝐿 𝛾={ ∫0 𝜑 2 (𝑧)𝑑𝑧 1/2 } 𝐿 ∫0 𝜑 4 (𝑧)𝑑𝑧 Where the 𝜑(𝑧) is the mode shape function and max{ 𝜑 (z)}=1. In the case in which the structural element is a rigid pivoted rod. (2010) whereas the latter was described in Freire & Meneghini (2010). beyond those presented in Table 1. Further details concerning the Water Channel can be found in Assi et al. the results with 2DOF are fairly recent and thus. Two values of 4𝑚 mass ratio parameter 𝑚∗ = were considered. as presented in detail. (2010b) in small-scale platforms with 𝐿/𝐷 = 0. The value of 𝛾 is given by the following equation.39. Among them Fujarra et al. The channel has a 0. Sanchis et al.Gonçalves et al. Jauvtis & Williamson (2003). The dimensionless mode factor 𝛾 is obtained from the solution of the wake oscillator problem. consequently. in Blevins (1990). for example. By means of this arrangement. The base allows the model to rotate around the Cardanjoint axis at the top of the rigid bar. Flemming & Williamson (2005). 𝑚∗ = 1.5 and 2.70 x 0. For both arrangements. Importantly. The experimental setup of the former was presented in Gonçalves et al. time series of displacement were obtained by using two laser position sensors (LEUZEODSL 8/V4 model). in both cases the mass ratio is equal to one. free to oscillate in two degrees-of-freedom. selected in order to adjust the reduced velocity range to the water channel capability. the mass ratio (𝑚∗ ) was kept constant equal to unity by adding small lumped masses to it. presents a very low level of turbulence (less than 1%) and can operate at well-controlled free-stream velocity 𝑈 up to 0. were tested by changing the water level in the channel. The structural damping coefficient 𝜁𝑠 is very low with this apparatus. 𝜑 (z) = z/L and 𝛾 = 1. EXPERIMENTAL SETUP As commented above. Leong & Wei (2008). then the mode factor is 𝛾 = 1.00.70 and 2.60m/s. For a flexible element. many other deserve to be mentioned. namely a cantilevered bar and a pivoted pendulum cylinder. 2. since those are floating cylinders. NONDIMENSIONAL RESULTS All the model displacements were measured and then transported to the tip of the model by employing a factor that is a function of the base geometry. (2010a) and Franzini et al. 𝐿/𝐷 = 1. pivoted pendulum elastic base cantilevered bar Figure 1 – Example of different apparatus for VIV study. 1. (2001). the mode shape function is constant and equal to 1. see example in Figure 1. The base presents the same natural frequency in both in-line and cross-flow directions. 𝐿/𝐷 = 1.0. Pivoted pendulum The same vertical rigid cylinder with 125mm in diameter was also mounted in a pivoted pendulum base with two degrees of freedom. the experiments herein presented were performed making use of two different experimental apparatus.1%. Table 1 summarizes all the important parameters for the comparisons and conclusions presented later in this paper. the mode factor depend on the oscillation 3 Copyright © 2011 by ASME . Brazil. Cantilevered bar A vertical and rigid cylinder with 125mm in diameter was attached to the end of a cantilevered bar. Furthermore. The stiffness of the system is defined by the length of the cantilevered bar. the acquisition time employed in the experiments was 180 seconds and the time between consecutive acquisitions was 120 seconds so that the water channel had its current velocity stabilized.50m test section.62 (where 𝑚𝑠 is the oscillating structural mass).45.291. (2008) and Sanchis (2009) should be quoted. 𝜌𝜋𝐷 2. three aspect ratios were considered in the experiments. a factor 𝛾 was employed on the amplitudes values.70 x 7. In all the experiments.00. In order to compare the results from different experimental facilities. This equation is valid if the linear mass is constant along the span. see example in Figure 1. approximately 𝜁𝑠 = 0. since they have served as source of discussion herein. (2006). For a rigid cylinder mounted on an elastic base. 3. the mode function and. cross-flow and in-line directions. Source: Flemming & Williamson (2005). Both tests were performed at the Water Channel facility available at NDF (Fluid & Dynamics Research Group) at the University of São Paulo.

(2008) in which / 6. It is likely that the tip of the cylinder disturbs the flow in a three-dimensional manner in such a way that the correlation is smaller for smaller aspect ratios. Integrating the mode shape function. (2010b). On the other hand.50. indeed. higher peak amplitudes correspond. This effect may easily be noticed when the smallest and largest aspect ratios are compared. due to the smaller Strouhal number. when comparing the results for different aspect ratios and mass ratio equal to unity. in which tests with the monocolumn platform are reported. Furthermore. tranverse and in-line directions frequencies of response. the synchronization occurs later. due to the low mass classical definition of lock-in. there is coupling due to the “in-line resonance”. namely platforms in model scales with appendages and bare cylinders on the other hand. 1.00 and amplitudes.g.00 case. Regarding the aspect ratio effect. it can be noticed that to higher aspect ratios.00 and 1. RESULTS The results presented in this section are twofold. there is a distinct behavior of the highmass ratio case. e. / 1.62 and 1.39 and other by Sanches et al.39 by Gonçalves et al.10 for ⁄ 2.00 and 1.00. Consistently with the transverse results. Sanchis et al. whereas for different mass ratios. the in-line ones show 4 Copyright © 2011 by ASME . with slightly lower amplitudes and a shift in the curve to the right. As a general trend observed in all results. the experimental results performed with the cantilevered bar and pivoted pendulum cylinder are presented. For the largest.45 1. ones for (2009).305.00 for ⁄ 1. the mode shape function is: sin cos . the range of 5. both transverse and in-line For the case of 1. the value of for the condition described above is 1. It can also be noticed that there is a smaller peak of 2. ⁄ 1. Figure 3 presents the nondimensional in-line amplitudes for the same experiments. since the mass and aspect ratios are common.50 bar results of / 2. Gonçalves et al. is observed not to imply the increasing amplitudes. are noticed at the same range of as the transverse direction. it is equally interesting and important to notice that. For between transverse and in-line motions and the double frequency pattern is observed between in-line and transverse corresponding to frequencies. Also. On the one hand. In general. as a result of higher correlation. Firstly. we refer to the comparison between pendulum and 1.frequency.50. the curves are very similar in trend and in values.8 Blevins & Coughran (2009) there is an early synchronization as for “infinite” cylinder results. even though the results are from different experimental apparatus. (2010b).45/1. The higher amplitudes.00. Firstly. in which bare cylinders are tested. ⁄ 1. essential for establishing a common base for comparison of results from different experimental apparatus. On the other hand. One notices that the amplitudes and trends are and very similar as expected. one can perceive two aspects. looking at different mass ratios. The literature results are from Wang et al.50. Firstly. the variability of Strouhal number highly influences the amplitude results by shifting the curves to the right for smaller aspect ratios (and smaller Strouhal numbers). showing that laboratory experiments may well be used in some practical situations. see Figure 5. there is a more subtle aspect related to a small shift in the curves to the right.00. Figure 4 and Figure 5 present. / 17.62. made nondimensional by the system transverse natural frequency in still water and transverse response frequency.00. Specifically. in which the authors report tests with a spar platform. that higher aspect ratios tend to present higher ⁄ 1. The literature result used for comparison is the one presented in Gonçalves et al. which is due to “in-line resonance” as amplitude in previously mentioned by Blevins & Coughran (2009). one cannot identify an indication of a lower branch as a result of the low mass ratios. e. Thus. respectively. Comparison with the literature results Figure 6 presents our results compared to the literature 1.00. there is an unexpected increase in amplitudes with the larger mass ratio. ⁄ ratio.10. Cantilevered bar and pivoted pendulum results Figure 2 presents nondimensional transverse amplitudes for the experiments with the cantilever bar and pivoted pendulum apparatus. one notices that the factor is. In Figure 4. where: is the wavelength and 3. 4. for the smallest / 0. Also. respectively.00 both transverse and in-line In the region frequencies are very similar to the system transverse natural frequency and one notices that in-line motions are predominant 3. owing to the stability of the flow. the comparison is very good between these cases. Also. as a result of the synchronization of the motions in the transverse and in-line directions. (2010b) in which / 0.00. as result of the later synchronization. 3.g. there is no indication that the synchronization is near an end. 2. Then these results are compared with the literature results of similar aspect and mass ratios. ⁄ 2. no great difference is verified between the results from different cases. Figure 7 presents the in-line amplitude results for the same 1. consistent frequencies synchronized later than for with the amplitudes results. however.52 is the natural frequency.. as commented before. (2008) and Blevins & Coughran (2009). which is related to the change in the Strouhal number for different aspect ratios.00. For a cantilevered cylinder with bending stiffness and mass per unit length vibrating in its first eigenmode.

in which ⁄ 2. In terms of frequencies. Again. therefore.Pesce & Fujarra (2000). elastically mounted rigid cylinder . consistently with the transverse results. For that aim. the Strouhal numbers are also different. Also present in these results. the higher aspect ratios were found to tend to present higher amplitudes. when comparing the results for different aspect ratios. due to a larger vortex correlation and. for which / 0. 2.15 for ⁄ 0. even though the results are from different experimental apparatus. and pivoted pendulum cylinder . this result confirms the idea of Strouhal decreasing with the ⁄ decreases. In that case. mainly in terms of amplitudes and frequencies of oscillations. Also. for which / 6. comparable peak amplitudes between system with and without end plates with a shift in the curve and an apparent absence of a lower branch were also found. In terms of transverse amplitudes of response.39 and Sanchis et al. The stability of the flow around the system is such that the presence of small appendages may not change the trends of the results.Freire & Meneghini (2010). which is related to the change in the Strouhal number for different aspect ratios. ⁄ with the other results. the inclinations are different and. In this case. the peak amplitude.62. we reported results from the experiments carried out with low aspect and mass ratios cylinders and compared them to literature results. there is a small shift in the curves to the right. Regarding the in-line amplitudes. However. Also. Stappenbelt & Lalji (2008). is consistent same case. large amplitudes occur. when there is coupling between transverse and in-line motions.Jauvtis & Williamson (2004). Figure 11 presents the transverse frequencies of oscillation made nondimensional by the transverse natural 3. One can again notice a lower branch in the results from Jauvtis & Williamson (2004) and Freire & Meneghini (2010) and not in our results due to the end effects. (2010b). for ⁄ 8. 5. the small shift and less sharp inclinations of the curve suggest that 3D effects due to the cylinder tip play an important role. (2008). the comparison is very good between these cases. the in-line results show For the same case with ⁄ 0.39 and lower amplitudes.62. namely comparable peak amplitudes but a shift in the curve and an apparent absence of a lower branch.that for the lower aspect ratio there is a later synchronization ⁄ 0. namely platforms in model scales on the one hand and bare cylinders on the other hand. (2008) discussed the presence of end plates for different ⁄ and in one case without end plate. as commented before. for the former. For the 1. 2.00. Figure 8 presents frequencies of transverse oscillations made nondimensional by the transverse natural frequency in still waters.00.00. a general trend observed in all results is that one cannot identify an indication of a lower branch as a result of the low mass ratios and small aspect ratio (end effects). These are from tests with cantilevered bar . Also. for different aspect ratios. the ratio ⁄ increases in a nearly linear manner.35 not without some a peak amplitude of dispersion. (2010a). our results Figure 9 presents results for are compared with those from the literature. Except for our result. 0. Finally. Again. an important difference between lower and higher aspect ratio results is the shift in this synchronization. Morse et al. Discussion about this effect can also be found in Fox & Apelt (1993) and Stappenbelt & O’Neill (2007). as commented before. Again. Finally. the curves are very similar in trend and values. the in-line ones show that for the lower aspect ratio there is a later synchronization and lower amplitudes. showing that laboratory experiments may well be used in some practical situations.35 for the others. The inclination of the linear curve out of the lock-in is related to the Strouhal number and.00. The same pattern was identified by Morse et al. thus larger force. the difference whereas ⁄ in Strouhal numbers causes the shift in the curve and lower correlation causes smaller forces and amplitudes of oscillation. In the result from frequency in still waters for Jauvtis & Williamson (2004) and Pesce & Fujarra (2000). see Gonçalves et al. Thus. as can be noticed.05. whereas in our results this is not observed. the literature result used for comparison is from Gonçalves et al. however. GENERAL CONCLUSIONS The main purpose was to investigate the VIV of short cylinders and the VIM of floating units drawing a connection between them. there is no indication that the synchronization is near an end and no lower branch can be identified.50. the results resemble classical ones with upper and lower branches. similar behavior was observed. (2008) with the conclusion that the end effect was influencing the system behavior. Blevins & Coughran (2009). there is a shift in the curve due to the smaller Strouhal number. the lower branch is characterized by a nearly constant ⁄ 1. NOMENCLATURE Wavelength Apparatus factor Mode shape function Natural frequency Water density Structural damping ⁄ Characteristic nondimensional motion amplitude in the in-line direction ⁄ Characteristic nondimensional motion amplitude in the transverse direction Characteristic diameter Bending stiffness Natural frequency in the in-line direction in still water Oscillation frequency in the in-line direction Oscillation frequency in the transverse direction Immersed length 5 Copyright © 2011 by ASME .

& Faria. Proceedings of the Royal Society A. 23rd International Conference on Offshore Mechanics and Arctic Engineering.. C. 19. Maher.. Gonçalves. Experimental Investigation of Flow-Induced Vibration Interference Between Two Circular Cylinders. G. 6 Two Degrees-of-Freedom. M. T. M. G.. (2001). J. Jauvtis. Nishimoto. Pesce. P. Meneghini. pp. 2907-2927. D. F. F. K. Two Degrees-of-Freedom Vortex-Induced Vibration of a Circular Cylinder with Low Aspect Ratio. 1012021-1012027.L/D Mass per unit length Mass ratio Oscillating structural mass Aspect ratio Flow velocity Reduced velocity in still water 11. Jauvtis. 17. 0411021-04110216. P. R. T. Symposium on Bluff Body Wakes and Vortex-Induced Vibrations. Cueva. C. & Gupta. Fujarra. Cueva. (2009). A. 16. Non-stationary VIM of Two Mono-Column Oil Production Platforms. 22 . Journal of Fluids and Structures . BBVIV6. Flow-Induced Vibration.. F. A. Gonçalves. (2010). C. R. C. Italy. Fujarra. R. Bearman.. K. Vortex Induced Motion: Model Testing of a Monocoulmn Floater. Journal of Fluids and Structures 7 . Fujarra. (2010). Two-Degree-ofFreedom Vortex-Induced Vibration of a Pivoted Cylinder Below Critical Mass Ratio. N. 132(4). Experimental Investigation of VIV on a Circular Cylinder Mounted on an Articulated Elastic Base with 14. Assi.. M. & Ferreira. & Williamson. H. (2010).. 215-252. (2003). & Nishimoto. (2005). ACKNOWLEDGMENTS The authors would like to acknowledge FAPESP and CAPES for the financial support. C. 8. C. R. VortexInduced Vibrations of a Pivoted Cylinder. A. Flemming. J. Brazil.. R. Fluid-Induced Loading of Cantilevered Circular Cylinders in a LowTurbulence Uniform Flow. Freire. J. C. R. June. (1993).. G.. BBVIV6. Finnigan.. Blevins. L. 651-658. M. (1990). Franzini. L. R. 1. G. (2006). Gonçalves. R. L. Part 3: Fluctuating Loads With Aspect Ratios 4 to 25. M. 9. J. Gonçalves. 21. C. pp. Fifth Conference on Bluff Body Wakes and Vortex-Induced Vibrations. 522.. E. 6. 15. 1227-1239. T. L. D. Copyright © 2011 by ASME . H. OMAE2005-67054.. Cueva. R. The Effect of End Conditions on VortexInduced Vibration of Cylinders. 12. J. C. Proceedings of the 24th International Conference on Offshore Mechanics and Artic Engineering. Symposium on Bluff Body Wakes and Vortex-Induced Vibrations. Aranha. 28th International Conference on Ocean. C. Capri Island. Journal of Offshore Mechanics and Arctic Engineering . M. A. Capri Island. Gonçalves. pp. R. L. & Williamson. Damping. pp. G. C.. T. R. N. 5. Journal of Fluid Mechanics . J. 20. R.. Fujarra. K. T. pp. T. M. J. Quadrante. BBVIV6. C. pp. 72 Krieger. Italy. H.. K. & Meneghini. L. Finn. Experiments of VortexInduced Vibration on Rigid and Inclined Cylinders in Two Degrees of Freedom.. (2007). and Reynolds Number. Truss Spar VIM in Waves and Currents. 131(10). L. & Williamson. (2009). 15. Vancouver. C. (2003). 17. Pesce. A. pp. 509. T. L. (2008). A. 1035-1042. Morse.. Nishimoto. A.. K. L.. Relevant Aspects in Vortex-Induced Motions of Spar and Monocolumn Platforms: A Brief Overview.. Fujarra. Gramado. (2010). Rosetti. FL. Irani. Brazil: COB09-0581. 375-386.. Journal of Fluids and Structures . L.. D. Proceedings of the 25th International Conference on Offshore Mechanics and Artic Engineering. C. The Cell Spar and Vortex Induced Vibrations. Capri Island.. 4.. pp. Bahia. A. & Apelt.. & Coughran. 10. 3.. D. pp. M. F. Model Testing for Vortex Induced Motions of Spar Platforms. Nishimoto.. Mitigation of Vortex-Induced Motion (VIM) on a Monocolumn Platform: Forces and Movements. Fujarra. G. 7. Proceedings of the Offshore Technology Conference. F. Vortexinduced Vibration of a Cylinder with Two Degrees of Freedom. & Williamson. Vortex-Induced Motion of a Monocolumn Platform: New Analysis and Comparative Study. 18. Offshore and Arctic Engineering. K. & Costa. Blevins. L.. F. & Meneghini. E. C. Fox. Leong. A. British Columbia. R.. Rosetti. Symposium on Bluff Body Wakes and Vortex-Induced Vibrations. R. Journal of Fluids and Structures. (2004). (2006). (2009). T. Govardhan.. Fujarra. OMAE2009-79378. Journal of Fluid Mechanics . K. K.... C. Nishimoto. Rosetti. OTC200315244. H. 819-827.. & Meneghini.. V.. Malabar.. & Siqueira. N. 23-62. Journal of Fluids Engineering . 2. Canada: OMAE2004-51315. & Casaprima. C. Irani. BBVIV5. H. K. pp. C. K.. Flemming.. L. Journal of Fluids and Structures . Vortex-induced Vibration of a Flexible Cantilever. S. A. The effect of two degrees of freedom on vortex-induced vibration at low mass and damping. R. R. R. Costa do Sauipe. RS. OMAE2006-92167.. REFERENCES 13. (2008). C.. Italy. pp. Fujarra. & Finn. W. (2005). & Wei. H... (2004). T. & Williamson.. A. 20th International Congress of Mechanical Engineering. Franzini... Experimental Investigation of Vortex-Induced Vibration in One and Two Dimensions With Variable Mass. & van Dijk.

Hawaii. A. Offshore and Arctic Engineering. Wang. Honolulu. USA: OMAE2009-50252. Lisbon.. J. Pesce. USA: OMAE2009-79134. Two Degrees of Freedom VortexInduced Vibrations of a Rigid Circular Cylinder with Varying Natural Frequencies in the X and Y Directions. C. & Lalji.... Stappenbelt. 28th International Conference on Ocean. Sanchis. Influence of the Reynolds Number on Spar Vortex Induced Motions (VIM): Multiple Scale Model Test Comparisons. Perryman. Honolulu. A. 29. Y. 17th International Offshore and Polar Engineering Conference.. 27. Magee. Hawaii: OMAE2009-79991. P. Vortex-induced Vibration Super-Upper Response Branch Boundaries. OTC2003-15242.22. D. C.. Saelevik. (2009). (2008). R. 99-105). A. S. pp. (2000). S. Peng. 28. 24. Model Test Study on Vortex-Induced Motions of a Floating Cylinder. van Dijk.. T. International Journal of Offshore and Polar Engineering . L. A. VortexInduced Vibrations and Jump Phenomenon: Experiments With a Clamped Flexible Cylinder in Water. B.. Model Test Experience on Vortex Induced Vibrations of Truss Spars. & Fujarra. Offshore and Arctic Engineering. International Journal of Offshore and Polar Engineering . L. Portugal. Stappenbelt. Copyright © 2011 by ASME . B. G. 26-33). Sanchis.. 18 (pp. Proceedings of the Offshore Technology Conferece. J. (2007). Vortex-Induced Vibration of Cylindrical Structures with Low Mass Ratio. 10 (pp. & Li. J. (2009). Journal of Fluids and Structures 24 . (2003). F. X. 25. & Gebara. & O'Neill. TwoDegree-of-Freedom Vortex-Induced Vibrations of a Spring-Mounted Rigid Cylinder with Low Aspect 26.. & Grue. (2008). Yang.. Finnigan. Offshore and Arctic Engineering. 23. 907919. Roddier. & Liapis.. R. T.. (2009). 7 Ratio. 28th International Conference on Ocean. Honolulu. Hawaii. 28th International Conference on Ocean.

00 Ax / ( D) 0.00 m* = 2.8 0.00 m* = 1.45 0. ).3 0.62 Bar L/D = 1.00 Pendulum L/D = 1.25 0. aspect ratio ( ⁄ .6 1.2 0 0 5 10 Reduced Velocity (Vr) 15 20 Figure 2 – Nondimensional results for motions in the transverse direction of two degrees-of-freedom VIV in cylinders with low .1.00 m* = 1.2 0.70 m* = 1.00 Pendulum L/D = 1.00 Bar L/D = 2.00 Pendulum L/D = 1.45 m* = 1. aspect ratio ( ⁄ .00 m* = 2.15 0.00 Bar L/D = 2.00 m* = 1.1 0.50 m* = 1.70 m* = 1.05 0 0 5 10 Reduced Velocity (Vr) 15 20 Figure 3 .00 1.4 Pendulum L/D = 2.4 Pendulum L/D = 2.00 m* = 1.00 Pendulum L/D = 1.00 Bar L/D = 2.62 Bar L/D = 1.Nondimensional results for motions in the in-line direction of two degrees-of-freedom VIV in cylinders with low . ).5 0.2 Ay / ( D) 1 0. ) and low mass ratio ( 0.35 0.50 m* = 1.45 m* = 1.4 0. ) and low mass ratio ( 8 Copyright © 2011 by ASME .00 Bar L/D = 2.6 0.

6 0.5 0 0 5 10 Reduced Velocity (Vr) 15 20 Figure 5 .8 St = 0.00 m* = 1.45 m* = 1.4 0. ).00 Pendulum L/D = 1.62 Bar L/D = 1.50 m* = 1.10 Pendulum L/D = 2.00 Bar L/D = 2. degrees-of-freedom VIV in cylinders with low aspect ratio ( ⁄ .Nondimensional results of transverse frequency oscillation and natural transverse frequency in still water for two .00 Bar L/D = 2.05 0.2 0 0 5 10 Reduced Velocity (Vr) 15 20 Figure 4 .00 Bar L/D = 2.70 m* = 1.8 0.00 m* = 1.00 m* = 2.00 1.5 2 fx / fy Pendulum L/D = 2. ).00 Pendulum L/D = 1.00 Pendulum L/D = 1.2 1.00 Pendulum L/D = 1.2 1 St = 0. cylinders with low aspect ratio ( ⁄ .00 fx = 2 fy 1.00 Bar L/D = 2.20 1.6 St = 0.62 Bar L/D = 1.50 m* = 1.5 1 0. ) and low mass ratio ( 3 2. ) and low mass ratio ( 9 Copyright © 2011 by ASME .45 m* = 1.70 m* = 1.00 m* = 1.00 m* = 1.Nondimensional results of in-line frequency oscillation and transverse one for two degrees-of-freedom VIV in .4 fy / f0 1.00 m* = 2.

2 0.00 m* = 1.50 m* = 1.45 m* = 1.25 0.4 Ax / ( D) 0.4 0.00 Bar L/D = 1.3 0.00 m* = 1.39 m* = 1.15 0. 10 Copyright © 2011 by ASME .00 Pendulum L/D = 1.00 Bar L/D = 2.70 m* = 1.00 m* = 1.00 m* = 1.6 0. (2008) L/D = 6.00 m* = 1.5 0.80 m* = 1.4 1.Comparison between nondimensional results for motions in the in-line direction of two degrees-of-freedom VIV in cylinders with mass ratio approximately equal to the unity (m*=1.00 m* = 1.39 m* = 1.1 0.8 0.00 Bar L/D = 2. 0.00 Blevins & Coughran (2009) L/D = 17.40 m* = 1.70 m* = 1.00 1.05 0 0 5 10 Reduced Velocity (Vr) 15 20 Figure 7 .1.00 Gonçalves et al.00 Pendulum L/D = 1. (2010) L/D = 0.00 Sanchis et al.45 m* = 1.04 Wang et al.6 Pendulum L/D = 2.50 m* = 1. (2008) L/D = 2.00).00 0.00 Sanchis et al.2 0 0 5 10 Reduced Velocity (Vr) 15 20 Figure 6 – Comparison between nondimensional results for motions in the transverse direction of two degrees-of-freedom VIV in cylinders with mass ratio approximately equal to the unity (m*=1.45 Pendulum L/D = 2.00).00 Bar L/D = 1.2 Ay / ( D) 1 0.00 Pendulum L/D = 1. (2008) L/D = 6. (2010) L/D = 0.00 Pendulum L/D = 1.35 0.04 Gonçalves et al.

00 m* = 1.6 1.6 1.62 Pesce & Fujarra (2000) L/D = 94.00 m* = 2.00 1. ).36 Jauvtis & Williamson (2004) L/D = 10.39 m* = 1.80 1.00 Sanchis et al.6 0.00 Pendulum L/D = 1.00 m* = 2.04 Gonçalves et al.00 m* = 1.8 0.45 m* = 1.Comparison between nondimensional results of transverse frequency oscillation and natural transverse frequency in still water for two degrees-of-freedom VIV in cylinders with mass ratio approximately equal to the unity (m*=1.20 St = 0.4 fy / f0 1.4 Bar L/D = 2.00 m* = 2.70 m* = 1.00 m* = 1.2 0 0 5 10 Reduced Velocity (Vr) 15 20 Figure 8 .62 Stappenbelt & Lalji (2008) L/D = 8.2 0 0 5 10 Reduced Velocity (Vr) 15 20 Figure 9 – Comparison between nondimensional results for motions in the transverse direction of two degrees-of-freedom VIV . (2010) L/D = 0.05 0. (2008) L/D = 6.2 1.80 m* = 2.00 Bar L/D = 1.50 m* = 2. 1.8 St = 0.00 Bar L/D = 2.36 Blevins & Coughran (2009) L/D = 17. in cylinders with low mass ratio ( 11 Copyright © 2011 by ASME .6 0.8 0.4 0.2 Ay / ( D) 1 0.50 m* = 1.00).2 1 St = 0.00 Pendulum L/D = 1.56 Freire & Meneghini (2010) L/D = 21.10 Pendulum L/D = 2.88 m* = 2.4 0.

50 m* = 2.15 0.80 0.4 Bar L/D = 2. in still water for two degrees-of-freedom VIV in cylinders with low mass ratio ( 12 Copyright © 2011 by ASME .1 0.35 Bar L/D = 2.4 0.3 0.Comparison between nondimensional results for motions in the in-line direction of two degrees-of-freedom VIV in .25 0.Comparison between nondimensional results of transverse frequency oscillation and natural transverse frequency .62 Freire & Meneghini (2010) L/D = 21.2 0.6 1.00 m* = 2.45 0.8 1.00 m* = 2.2 0 0 5 10 Reduced Velocity (Vr) 15 20 Figure 11 .62 Jauvits & Williamson (2004) L/D = 10.6 0.36 Jauvtis & Williamson (2004) L/D = 10.8 0. ).88 m* = 2.62 Pesce & Fujarra (2000) L/D = 94. cylinders with low mass ratio ( 2 1.4 Ax / ( D) 0.2 1 0.0.05 0 0 5 10 Reduced Velocity (Vr) 15 20 Figure 10 .5 0.00 m* = 2. ).62 fy / f0 1.00 m* = 2.