You are on page 1of 13

UDC 629.5.015:629.


Šime MALENICA2 Methodology of Ship
Smiljko RUDAN1 Hydroelasticity Investigation
Original scientific paper
The importance of hydroelastic analysis of large and flexible container ships of today is
pointed out. A methodology for investigation of this challenging phenomenon is drawn up and
a mathematical model is worked out. It includes definition of ship geometry, mass distribution,
structure stiffness, and combines ship hydrostatics, hydrodynamics, ship motion and vibrations.
Based on the presented theory, a computer program is developed and applied for hydroelastic
analysis of a flexible segmented barge for which model test results of motion and distortion in
waves have been available. A correlation analysis of numerical simulation and measured response
shows quite good agreement of the transfer functions for heave, pitch, roll, vertical and horizontal
bending and torsion. Such checked tool can be further used for reliable hydroelastic analysis of
ship-like structures.
Keywords: container ships, flexible barge, hydroelasticity, mathematical model, numerical
simulation, model tests

Metodologija istraživanja hidroelastičnosti brodova

Izvorni znanstveni rad
Authors’ addreses: Naglašena je važnost provođenja hidroelastične analize velikih suvremenih kontejnerskih bro-
University of Zagreb, Zagreb, dova, koji su vrlo elastični u pogledu uvijanja. Opisana je metodologija istraživanja ovog izazovnog
Croatia; problema. Razrađen je matematički model, koji uključuje definiranje geometrije broda, raspodjele
e-mail: masa, krutosti konstrukcije, i objedinjuje hidrostatiku, hidrodinamiku, njihanje i vibracije broda. Na
Bureau Veritas, Paris, France; osnovi prikazane teorije razvijena je odgovarajuća programska podrška, koja je primijenjena za
e-mail: hidroelastičnu analizu vrlo elastične segmentne barže, za koju postoje rezultati modelskih ispiti- vanja njihanja i deformiranja na valovima. Usporedbena analiza numeričke simulacije i izmjerenog
odziva pokazala je relativno dobro slaganje prijenosnih funkcija poniranja, posrtanja, ljuljanja, te
Received (Primljeno): 2007-02-07 vertikalnog i horizontalnog savijanja i uvijanja broda. Ovako provjereno sredstvo može se nadalje
pouzdano upotrijebiti za hidroelastičnu analizu brodskih konstrukcija.
Accepted (Prihvaćeno): 2007-03-29
Open for discussion (Otvoreno za Ključne riječi: kontejnerski brodovi, elastična barža, hidroelastičnost, matematički model,
raspravu): 2008-06-30 numerička simulacija, modelsko ispitivanje

1 Introduction body [1]. The obtained wave load is then imposed to the elastic
3D FEM model of ship structure in order to analyse global lon-
Sea transport is rapidly increasing and larger fast merchant gitudinal and transverse strength, as well as local strength with
ships are built. Large ships are relatively more flexible and their stress concentrations related to fatigue analysis [2].
structural natural frequencies can fall into the range of the en- The above approach is not reliable enough for ultra large ships
counter frequencies in an ordinary sea spectrum. Therefore, the due to mutual influence of the wave load and structure response.
wave induced hydroelastic response of large ships becomes an Therefore, a reliable solution requires analysis of wave load and
important issue especially for improving the classification rules ship vibration as a coupled hydroelastic problem [3]. This is
and ensuring ship safety. especially important for impulsive loads such as ship slamming
For ships with closed cross-section and ordinary hatch ope- that causes whipping.
nings such as tankers, bulk carriers, general cargo vessels etc., The methodology of hydroelastic analysis is shown in
the lowest natural frequencies are usually associated with the Figure 1 according [4]. It includes definition of the structural
vertical bending. On the other hand, for ships with open cross- model, ship and cargo mass distributions, and geometrical mo-
section, such as container ships, the lowest elastic natural modes del of ship surface. First, dry natural vibrations are calculated.
are those of coupled horizontal and torsional vibrations. This Then modal hydrostatic stiffness, modal added mass, damping
coupling is highly pronounced due to the fact that the torsional and wave load are determined. Finally, wet natural vibrations
(shear) centre is below the keel. are obtained as well as the transfer functions (RAO-response
The classical approach to determine ship motions and wave amplitude operator) for determining ship structural response
loads is based on the assumption that the ship hull acts as a rigid to wave excitation.

58(2007)2, 133-145 133


Note that generally the first six natural frequencies Ωi are

zero with corresponding eigenvectors representing the rigid
body modes. As a result, the first six diagonal elements of [k]
are also zero, while the first three elements in [m] are equal to
structure mass, the same in all directions x, y, z, and the next
three elements represent the mass moment of inertia around the
coordinate axes.

3 Geometrical model of wetted surface

3.1 Strip mesh

Figure 1 Methodology of hydroelastic analysis

Slika 1 Metodologija hidroelastične analize

2 Structural model
The hydroelastic problem can be solved at different levels of
complexity and accuracy. The best, but highly time-consuming
way is to consider 3D FEM structural model and 3D hydrody-
namic model based on the radiation-diffraction theory [5]. Such
an approach is recommended only for the final strength analysis.
However, in the preliminary strength analysis it is more rational
and convenient to couple 1D FEM model of ship hull [6] with
3D hydrodynamic model. Figure 2 Panel of wetted surface
In both cases of the FEM approach the governing matrix Slika 2 Panel oplakane površine
equation of dry natural vibrations yields [7]
For determining pressure forces acting on the wetted surface
([ K ] − Ω [ M ]) {δ } = {0}
(1) it is necessary to specify panels and their position in space. Wet
surface is given by offsets of waterline ordinates at body plan
where stations, bik. If the strip method is used for pressure calculation,
[K] - stiffness matrix then the panels bounded with two close stations, i and i + 1,
[M] - mass matrix and waterplanes, k and k + 1, can be used, Figure 2. Arcs of the
ΩΩ - dry natural frequency panel yield
{δ} - dry natural mode
s1 = li + bx j , s 2 = bz j + dk (4)
As solution of the eigenvalue problem (1) Ωi and {δ}i are
obtained for each the i-th dry mode, where i = 1,2...N, N is total where
number of degrees of freedom. Now natural modes matrix can bx = bi+1,k - bi,k , bz = bi,k+1 - bi,k
be constituted l - station distance
d - waterplane distance
[δ ] = ⎡⎣{δ }1 , {δ }2 ...{δ }i ...{δ }N ⎤⎦ (2)
The panel normal vector is
and the modal stiffness and mass can be determined [8]
S s1 × s 2
n= = = n x i + n y j + nz k (5)
[ k ] = [δ ] [ K ][δ ] , [ m] = [δ ] [ M ][δ ]
(3) S s1 × s 2
with components
Since the dry natural vectors are mutually orthogonal, ma-
trices [k] and [m] are diagonal. Terms ki and Ω2i mi represent dbx ld lb
nx = , n y = − , nz = z (6)
deformation and kinetic energy of the i-th mode respectively. S S S

134 58(2007)2, 133-145


where Torsional vibration

S = (dbx )2 + (ld )2 + (lbz )2 = Sx2 + Sy2 + Sz2 (7) h t = ψ ( Z − zS ) j − ψ Y k (13)

is the panel area. where w is hull deflection, ψ is twist angle, Y and Z are coordi-
nates of the point on ship surface, and zN and zS are coordinates
3.2 Rational mesh of neutral line and shear centre respectively.
If strong coupling between horizontal and torsional vibra-
If 3D radiation-diffraction theory is used for hydrodynamic tion occurs, as in the case of container ships, the coupled mode
pressure determination, the wetted surface mesh can be created yields
in such a way that panels of more regular shape and refined
subdivision in the area of the free surface are achieved [9]. Such ⎛ d wh dψ ⎞
a rational mesh is shown in Figure 3, where the panel rows fol- h ht = ⎜ − Y+ u ⎟ i + [ wh + ψ ( Z − zS )] j − ψ Y k (14)
low the ship body diagonals similarly to the structural elements ⎝ dx dx ⎠
of ship outer shell. In this way, efficiency and accuracy of the
hydrodynamic calculation is increased. where u = u ( x, Y , Z ) is the cross-section warping function
reduced to the wetted surface [10], [11].

5 Hydrodynamic model
Harmonic hydroelastic problem is considered in frequency
domain and therefore we operate with amplitudes of forces and
displacement. In order to perform coupling of the structural and
hydrodynamic models, it is necessary to express the external
pressure forces in a convenient manner [12]. First, the total
hydrodynamic force Fh has to be split into two parts: the first part
FR depending on the structural deformations, and the second one
FDI representing the pure excitation
Figure 3 Rational mesh of wetted surface
Slika 3 Racionalna mreža oplakane površine F h = F R + F DI (15)

Furthermore, the modal superposition method can be used.

Concerning the normal vector, let us consider a triangular Vector of the wetted surface deformations H (x, y, z) can be pre-
panel, which is defined by three position vectors from the origin sented as a series of dry natural modes hi (x, y, z)
of the coordinate system x, y, z
ri = xi i + yi j + zi k, i = 1, 2, 3 (8) H( x, y, z ) = ∑ ξi hi ( x, y, z ) =
i =1
The panel arcs are N
= ∑ ξi ⎡⎣ h ( x, y, z ) i + h ( x, y, z ) j + h ( x, y, z ) k ⎤⎦
a = r2 − r1 , b = r3 − r1 (9) i =1

and the panel normal vector yields where ξi are unknown coefficients. Vectors hi (x, y, z) related to
wetted surface are obtained from the structural dry modes as
S a×b explained in the previous section.
n= = = n x i + n y j + nz k (10)
S a×b The potential theory assumptions are adopted for the hydro-
dynamic part of the problem. Within this theory the total velocity
where S is double value of the triangular panel area. potential ϕ, in the case of no forward speed, is defined with the
Laplace differential equation and the given boundary values
4 Dry modes of wetted surface
∆ϕ = 0 within the fluid
As mentioned in Section 2, structural dry modes can be de-
termined by 1D or 3D FEM analysis. If 1D analysis is used, the ∂ϕ
−νϕ + = 0 at the free surface, z = 0 (17)
beam modes are spread to the ship wetted surface as follows. ∂z
Vertical vibration ∂ϕ
= −iω H n on the wetted body surface, S
d wh ∂n
hv = − ( Z − zN )i + wv k (11)
dx where ν is the wave number, ν = ω 2 g , ω is wave frequency,
Horizontal vibration n is the wetted surface normal vector, and i is the imaginary
unit [13].
d wh Furthermore, the linear wave theory enables the following
hh = − Y i + wh j (12)
dx decomposition of the total potential [5]

58(2007)2, 133-145 135


N mic forces, i.e. inertia, damping, restoring and excitation ones

ϕ = ϕ I + ϕ D − iω ∑ ξ j ϕ Rj (18) are taken into account. Time independent forces are included
j =1 in still water strength analysis as a separated static problem.
where Dynamic analysis is performed by the modal superposition
gA ν ( z +ix ) method. Modal forces represent work of actual forces on modal
ϕ I = −i e (19) displacements. Modal restoring forces consist of time dependent
modal pressure forces and gravity forces. They include effect of
ϕI - incident wave potential large displacements.
ϕD - diffraction potential
ϕRj - radiation potential Pressure forces
A - wave amplitude
Concerning the hydrostatic part of the total pressure in (21),
Now, the body boundary conditions (17) can be deduced for
ρgz, it is necessary to determine the change of the modal hydro-
each potential
static force as the difference between its instantaneous value
∂ϕ D ∂ϕ ∂ϕ Rj and the initial value for the vibration mode hi of the body wetted
=− I, = h jn (20)
surface Z = Z (x, y) [14]
∂n ∂n ∂n
It is necessary to point out that the diffraction and radiation
Fi H = − ρ g ∫∫ Z hi n d S + ρ g ∫∫ Z hi n d S (26)
potentials should also satisfy the radiation condition at infinity.
Once the potentials are determined, the modal hydrodyna-
mic forces are calculated by pressure work integration over the
wetted surface. The total linearised pressure can be found from ~ Each of the above quantities can be presented in the form
(...) = (...) + δ (...) , where δ denotes the variation. By neglec-
Bernoulli’s equation ting small terms of higher order, one can write for the modal
hydrostatic force (26)
p = iωρϕ − ρ gz (21)

First, the term associated with the potential ϕ is considered Fi H = − ρ g ∫∫ (δ Z hi n + Z δ hi n + Z hi δ n)d S (27)
and subdivided into excitation and radiation parts (18) S

Variation of the particular quantity can be determined by ap-

Fi DI = iωρ ∫∫ (ϕ I + ϕ D )hi n d S (22) plying the notion of directional derivative H—, where H is given
with (16) and — is Hamilton differential operator
Fi R = ρ ω 2 ∑ ξ j ∫∫ ϕ Rj hi n d S (23) N N
⎛ ∂ ∂ ∂⎞
j =1 S
H∇ = ∑ ξ j h j ∇ = ∑ ξ j ⎜ hxj + hyj + hzj ⎟ (28)
j =1 j =1 ⎝ ∂x ∂y ∂z ⎠
Thus, (22) represents the modal pressure excitation. Now one
can decompose (23) into the modal inertia force and damping
force associated with acceleration and velocity respectively As a result
Fi a = Re( Fi R ) = ω 2 ∑ ξ j Aij , Aij = ρ Re ∫∫ ϕ Rj hi n d S (24)
δ Z = (H∇ )Z = Hk, δ hi = (H∇ )hi , δ n = (H∇ )n (29)
j =1 S
N Determining the variation of the body surface normal
Fi v = i Im( Fi R ) = iω ∑ ξ j Bij , Bij = ρ ω Im ∫∫ ϕ Rj hi n d S (25) vector, δn, according to (29) is a rather difficult task. Therefore,
j =1 S a relatively simpler procedure, taken from [14], is shown in
where Aij and Bij are elements of added mass and damping ma- Appendix A.
trices respectively. By using Eqs. (28), (29) and (A12), the modal hydrostatic
Determination of added mass and damping for rigid body force (27) can be presented in the following form:
modes is a well-known procedure in ship hydrodynamics [1]. N
Now the same procedure is extended to the calculation of these Fi H = − ∑ ξ j CijH (30)
quantities for elastic modes. j =1

The hydrostatic part of the total pressure, – ρgz in (21), is where

considered within the hydrostatic model.
CijH = CijHp + CijHh + CijHn (31)
6 Hydrostatic model
is the i,j-th element of the hydrostatic stiffness matrix, composed
6.1 Elastic modes of static pressure, surface mode and normal vector contributions,
General respectively

In dynamic analysis a structure vibration is considered with CijHp = ρ g ∫∫ hzj (hxi nx + hyi ny + hzi nz )d S (32)
respect to the static equilibrium position. Therefore, only dyna- S

136 58(2007)2, 133-145


By employing (29) and further (28) one can write

⎡⎛ ∂h i ∂h i ∂h i ⎞
CijHh = ρ g ∫∫ Z ⎢⎜ hxj x + hyj x + hzj x ⎟ nx + N
⎣⎝ ∂x ∂y ∂z ⎠ Fi m = − g ∫∫∫ (H∇ )hzi d m = − ∑ ξ j Cijm
S (37)
⎛ ∂hyi ∂hyi ∂hyi ⎞ V j =1

+ ⎜ hxj + hyj + hzj ny + (33)

⎝ ∂x ∂y ∂z ⎟⎠ where
⎛ ∂h i ∂h i ∂h i ⎞
⎛ ∂h i ∂h i ∂h i ⎞ ⎤ Cijm = g ∫∫∫ ⎜ hxj z + hyj z + hzj z ⎟ d m (38)
+ ⎜ hxj z + hyj z + hzj z ⎟ nz ⎥ d S V ⎝
∂x ∂y ∂z ⎠
⎝ ∂x ∂y ∂z ⎠ ⎦
Restoring stiffness
⎧⎪ ⎡⎛ ∂h ∂h j ⎞
∂h j
∂h j ⎤ Finally, the complete restoring coefficients read
CijHn = ρ g ∫∫ Z ⎨ ⎢⎜ + z ⎟ nx − ny − z nz ⎥hxi +
y y

S ⎪⎩ ⎢⎣⎝ ∂y ∂z ⎠ ∂x ∂x ⎥⎦
Cij = CijH + Cijm (39)
⎡ ∂hxj ⎛ ∂hxj ∂hzj ⎞ ∂hzj ⎤ i
+ ⎢− nx + ⎜ + ny − nz ⎥ hy + It is important to point out that the above expressions for the
⎣ ∂y ⎝ ∂x ∂z ⎟⎠ ∂y ⎦ hydrostatic and gravity coefficients are general and therefore valid
⎡ ∂h j ⎛ ∂h j ∂hyj ⎞ ⎤ i ⎪⎫ not only for the elastic modes but also for the rigid body modes
+ ⎢ − x nx − ny + ⎜ x + nz ⎥ hz ⎬ d S as well as for their coupling.
⎢⎣ ∂z ∂z ⎝ ∂x ∂y ⎟⎠ ⎥⎦ ⎪

6.2 Rigid body modes
Note that the wetted surface coordinate Z is measured from the In this special case, the modal restoring stiffness can be de-
waterplane. Based on the constitution of the above coefficients, it termined in direct, simpler and physically more understandable
is evident that the hydrostatic stiffness matrix is not diagonal. manner. It can also be used for checking the previously developed
In the literature various definitions of hydrostatic stiffness general method.
matrix can be found. Somewhat simple formulae are derived A free ship exhibits rigid body motion with six degrees of
in [15] using a slightly different approach. Those formulae lead freedom around its centre of gravity. The first three rigid body mo-
to the same result as the more classical method in which some des are unit translations in direction of the coordinate axes, while
integral transformations are applied in order to simplify the final the other three are unit rotations around these axes. The modal
expressions [16], as elaborated in [15]. Quite different expres- restoring stiffness is equal to the restoring force or moment per
sions are presented in [17]. unit displacement respectively. According to the ship hydrostatics
The advantage of the present method is that the derived only three degrees of freedom have restoring force [1]
formulae are general and applicable for a complex body as
well as for its parts. This is important for determining the local Heave:
hydrostatic action as internal loads, transfer of load to a FEM
structural model, etc. C33 = ρ g AWL (40)
If 1D structural model is used together with the strip mesh,
the integration over the body wetted surface in determining the Roll:
hydrostatic stiffness (32), (33) and (34) can be split into two
steps C44 = ρ g [ IWLX + V ( zB − zG )] (41)

∫∫ F ( x, y, z)d S = ∫ f ( x ) ∫ g( x, s)ds dx (35) Pitch:

C55 = ρ g [ IWLY + V ( zB − zG )]
S 0 s
where f(x) is modal function, g(x, s) is function of modal coeffi-
cients and s is circumference coordinate of body station. where

Gravity forces AWL - waterplane area

IWLX - transverse moment of inertia of waterplane area
The above expressions represent only the action of the hydro- IWLY - longitudinal moment of inertia of waterplane area
static pressure, and the gravity part has to be added in order to V - volume of displacement
complete the total restoring coefficients. Similarly to the pressure zB, zG - coordinate of centre of buoyancy and centre of gravity
part, Eqs. (26) and (27), a change of the generalised modal gravity respectively (from base line).
force associated with a particular mode yields [14]
When rigid body modes are in question, it is also necessary
to determine modal ship mass. For the translations, modal
Fi = − g ∫∫∫ δ hi k d m
masses are equal to the total ship mass, while for the rotations,
modal masses represent ship mass moments of inertia around
where V is body volume and dm is differential mass. coordinate axes.

58(2007)2, 133-145 137


7 Hydroelastic model
After the structural, hydrostatic and hydrodynamic models
have been determined, the hydroelastic model can be constituted.
For that purpose, let us impose modal hydrodynamic forces (23),
(24) and (25) and hydrostatic and gravity forces (30), (36) to the
modal structural model, Section 2.

([ k ] − ω [ m]) {ξ} = {F}

2 DI
+ {F} + {F} + {F} + {F}
a v H m

Furthermore, all terms dependent on unknown modal am-

plitudes, ξi, can be separated on the left hand side. Thus, the
governing matrix differential equation for ship motions and
vibrations is deduced Figure 4 Barge cross-section
Slika 4 Poprečni presjek barže
{[ k ] + [C] − iω ([ d ] + [ B(ω )]) − ω ([ m] + [ A(ω )])} {ξ} = {F}
The main characteristics of the prismatic barge are the fol-
where all quantities are related to the dry modes lowing [4], [12]:
[k] - structural stiffness Young’s modulus of rod: E = 2.1 · 1011 N/m2
[d] - structural damping Shear modulus of rod: G = 0.808 · 1011 N/m2
[m] - structural mass Moment of inertia of rod a4
[C] - restoring stiffness cross-section: Iy = Iz = = 8.33 · 10-10 m4
[B(ω)] - hydrodynamic damping
Polar moment of inertia a4
[A(ω)] - added mass
of rod cross-section: It = = 16.67 · 10-10 m4
{ ξ} - modal amplitudes 6
{F} - wave excitation Bending stiffness of rod: EI = 175 Nm2
ω - encounter frequency Torsional stiffness of rod: GIt = 135 Nm2
Length of barge
Structural damping can be given as a percentage of the critical (pontoons + clearances): L = 2.445 m
value based on experience. As it is well-known, added mass and Total mass
hydrodynamic damping depends on the frequency. The solution (pontoons + equipment): M = 171.77 kg
of (44) gives the modal amplitudes ξi and displacement of any Distributed mass: m = M/L = 70.253 kg/m
point of the structure obtained by retracking to (16). Radius of gyration in roll: ix = 0.225 m
The wet natural modes can also be determined by solving the Polar moment of inertia
eigenvalue problem extracted from (44) of distributed mass: J t0 = mix2 = 3.556 kgm
Distance of gravity centre
{[ k ] + [C] − ω ([ m] + [ A(ω )])} {ξ} = {0}
(45) from torsional centre: c = – 0.144 m
Polar mass moment of inertia
Now damping is neglected since its influence on the eigenpair about torsional centre: J t = J t0 + mz 2 = 5.013 kgm
is very small. The solution of (45) gives natural frequencies
of ship motion and vibration in water and the corresponding Radius of inertia: r= = 0.267 m
so-called wet natural modes. Since added mass is a frequency m
dependent function, it is evident that an iteration procedure has
to be employed to solve (45). Therefore, the wet modes are not 8.2 Dry vibrations
orthogonal. Also, there are no more zero natural frequencies Dry vertical natural vibration and coupled horizontal and
and pure rigid body modes due to their coupling with the elastic torsional vibrations are performed by a general computer program
modes [12]. developed for this purpose [18]. The program is based on the
theory presented in [6]. As a result of dry vibration calculation
8 Hydroelasticity of a flexible barge the modal stiffness and modal mass in (44) are obtained. The first
two natural modes are shown in Figures 5 and 6.
8.1 Barge characteristics
Natural vibrations for a prismatic pontoon can be also deter-
The experimental model of a flexible barge, consisting of mined analytically as elaborated in [19].
12 pontoons, is considered [4], [12]. The front pontoon No. 12 Vertical vibration, -l ≤ x ≤ l, l=L/2
differs somewhat from the others. The pontoons are connected by Symmetric modes
a steel rod somewhat above the deck level, as shown in Figure 4.
So, the deformation centre is above the gravity centre. This is 1 ⎛ chβ n x cosβ n x ⎞
wn = + , n = 0, 2, 4.... (46)
the opposite situation to the one in the case of container ships, 2 ⎜⎝ chβ n l cosβ n l ⎟⎠
but anyway strong coupling between horizontal and torsional
vibrations is achieved. β0l = 0, β2l = 2.365, β4l = 5.497

138 58(2007)2, 133-145


8.3 Hydrostatic and hydrodynamic parameters

Restoring stiffness matrix in (44) is determined by the deve-
loped program [18] based on the theory considered in Section 6.
However, for better understanding of the physical meaning, the
calculation procedure is illustrated in Appendix B for the case
of vertical vibration of the prismatic barge.
Added mass, hydrodynamic damping and wave excitation
in (44), depending on dry modes and wave frequency, are de-
termined by program Hydrostar [20]. Structural damping of the
pontoon joints to the rod, and of the rod itself is quite low in
the considered case. The mesh of the wetted surface used in the
calculation is shown in Figure 7.

Figure 5 The first dominant flexural mode of coupled barge vibra-

tions, ω2 = 5.727 rad/s
Slika 5 Prvi pretežno fleksijski oblik spregnutih vibracija barže,
ω2 = 5.727 rad/s

Figure 7 Geometrical model of barge wetted surface

Slika 7 Geometrijski model oplakane površine barže

All necessary vibration parameters are determined for a set of

dry modes consisting of 6 rigid body modes, the first 5 vertical
elastic modes and 5 coupled horizontal and torsional modes. The
chosen number of elastic modes is sufficient to describe accurately
enough the barge response in waves.

8.4 Barge response

The model tests of the considered barge were conducted in
Figure 6 The first dominant torsional mode of coupled barge the BGO-First Basin, Toulon, France. Detailed description of
vibrations, ω3 = 7.884 rad/s
Slika 6 Prvi pretežno torzijski oblik spregnutih vibracija barže,
ω3 = 7.884 rad/s Figure 8 Barge in waves
Slika 8 Barža na valovima
Anti-symmetric modes

1 ⎛ shβ n x sinβ n x ⎞
wn = + , n = 1, 3, 5....
2 ⎜⎝ shβ n l sinβ n l ⎟⎠

β1l = 0, β3l = 3.925, β5l = 7.068

( β n l )2 EI
ωn = (48)
l2 m
Analytical solution of coupled horizontal and torsional
vibrations can be obtained by direct integration of governing
differential equations or by the energy approach. However, in
both cases the solution is rather complicated [19].

58(2007)2, 133-145 139


the barge, equipment, measuring procedure and the obtained Figures 9, 10 and 11 show RAOs (Response Amplitude
results is given in [4, 12]. The barge is constructed to be quite Operator-transfer function) in the wave period domain, T, for the
flexible in order to expose high level of hydroelastic phenome- average value of heave, pitch and roll respectively, measured at
na. The success of this intention can be seen in Figure 8, where the every second pontoon. In Figures 12, 13 and 14, vertical and
the barge distortion follows more or less the wave surface. The horizontal bending and barge torsion are shown. These quantities
model tests were performed in irregular waves generated by are defined as difference of the rotation angles at the last and
JONSWAP spectra. first pontoon.
Numerical calculation of the barge response to waves is
performed for a set of heading angles. For verification of the de-
scribed methodology and numerical simulation only the transfer
functions for χ = 60° are shown and compared to the measured
ones. This particular heading angle was chosen since it includes
complete coupling of the rigid and flexible modes of the vertical
and horizontal and torsional vibrations, which are highly exited
in the case of quartering seas.

Figure 12 Vertical bending transfer function

Slika 12 Prijenosna funkcija vertikalnog savijanja

Figure 9 Average heave transfer function

Slika 9 Prosječna prijenosna funkcija poniranja

Figure 13 Horizontal bending transfer function

Slika 13 Prijenosna funkcija horizontalnog savijanja

Figure 10 Average pitch transfer function

Slika 10 Prosječna prijenosna funkcija posrtanja

Figure 11 Average roll transfer function

Slika 11 Prosječna prijenosna funkcija ljuljanja
Figure 14 Torsional transfer function
Slika 14 Prijenosna funkcija uvijanja

RAOs are related to the wave height spectrum. Thus, the

heave RAO, as translation motion, converges to unity for higher
T values. Contrary, RAOs for all others motions, which are ro-
tational, converge to zero [1].
The relatively large scattering of the measured transfer fun-
ctions is mostly caused by irregular waves. The obtained nume-
rical results agree quite well with the average of the measured
ones. Higher discrepancies between the calculated and measured
values occur in area of the response peaks, i.e. at resonances

140 58(2007)2, 133-145


where damping plays the main role. Figures 9-14 show the final response for this very sensitive non-linear experimental model
calculation results determined by adjusting damping to achieve with large amplitudes of rigid and elastic modes of the same order
minimal discrepancies. is achieved. Thus, one may conclude that the presented methodo-
The modal damping is adjusted in such a way that the value of logy and mathematical model are reliable enough to be applied for
diagonal elements in damping matrix is increased for ca 5%, de- hydroelastic analysis of ship structures for which the amplitude
pending on the type of vibration, i.e. rigid body, vertical vibration ratio of the elastic and rigid modes is somewhat lower.
and coupled horizontal and torsional vibration. This adaptation Application of the developed tool is especially important for
can be physically explained. Namely, in the hydroelastic analysis hydroelastic analysis of large container ships which are very flexi-
the segmented barge is considered as a monohull. The influence ble from torsional point of view, and therefore exposed to the high
of this assumption on restoring forces and water inertia forces is level of coupling between horizontal and torsional vibrations.
negligible. However, additional resistance to the pontoon motion The further development is directed to the investigation of
is induced between their heads, Figure 15. In the case of an elastic the hydroelastic response to impulsive load, i.e. slamming and
vibration mode the pontoons play as a shell family on the string whipping, sloshing, underwater explosions etc. in time domain.
with the jet propulsion. The induced resistance depends on the The final target is to analyse the influence of ship elasticity on wave
relative angular velocity of the pontoon adjacent heads. load in order to check validity and applicability of the present clas-
sification rules for large container ships. In the meantime, direct
strength calculation as a hydroelastic task should be applied.

[1] …:”Principles of Naval Architectures”, SNAME, 1988.
[2] HUGHES, O.F.: “Ship Structural Design”, SNAME,
[3] BISHOP, R.E.D., PRICE, W.G.: “Hydroelasticity of Ships”,
Cambridge University Press, 1979.
[4] REMY, F., MOLIN, B., LEDOUX, A.: “Experimental and
numerical study of the wave response of a flexible barge”,
Hydroelasticity in Marine Technology, Wuxi, China, 2006,
p. 255-264.
motion and sea loads”, Transactions, SNAME, Vol. 70, p.
250-287, 1970.
[6] SENJANOVIĆ, I., GRUBIŠIĆ, R.: “Coupled horizontal and
torsional vibration of a ship hull with large hatch openings”,
Computers & Structures, Vol. 41, No. 2, p. 213-226, 1991.
[7] BATHE, K.J: “Finite Element Procedures”, Prentice Hall,
[8] SENJANOVIĆ, I.: “Finite Element Method in Ship Struc-
tures”, University of Zagreb, Zagreb, 1998. (in Croatian).
matic mesh generation for naval and offshore hydrodynamic
simulations”, SORTA‘04, Plitvice Lakes, Croatia, 2004.
[10] SENJANOVIĆ, I., FAN, Y.: “A finite element formulation
Figure 15 Pump effect of pontoon oscillations of ship cross-sectional stiffness parameters”, Brodogradnja
a – vertical vibration 41(1993)1, p. 27-36.
b – horizontal vibration [11] SENJANOVIĆ, I., FAN, Y.: “A higher-order theory of
Slika 15 Pumpni učinak osciliranja pontona
a – vertikalne vibracije thin-walled girders with application to ship structures”,
b – horizontalne vibracije Computers & Structures, 43(1992) 1, p. 31-52.
9 Conclusion “Hydroelastic response of a barge to impulsive and non-im-
pulsive wave load”, Hydroelasticity in Marine Technology,
The investigation methodology of hydroelasticity of ship Oxford, UK, 2003, p. 107-115.
structures is presented. A mathematical model which combines [13] NAHIN, P.J.: “An Imaginary Tale - The Story of −1 ”,
ship geometry, mass distribution, 1D hull model, dry natural vi- Princeton University Press, 1998.
brations, hydrostatic model and hydrodynamic model is worked [14] MALENICA, Š.: “Some aspects of hydrostatic calculations
out. The numerical procedure and developed computer program in linear seakeeping”, The 14th NAV Conference, Palermo,
are validated for the case of a very flexible barge for which Italy, 2003.
coupling between rigid and elastic modes is highly pronounced [15] MOLIN, B.: “Hydrostatique d’un corps deformable”, Te-
as well as coupling between horizontal and torsional vibrations. chnical note, Ecole Superieure d’Ingenieurs de Marseille,
Quite good agreement between simulated and measured barge Marseille, France, 2003.

58(2007)2, 133-145 141


[16] NEWMAN, J.N.: “Wave effects on deformable bodies”,

Applied Ocean Research 16(1994), p. 47-59.
[17] HUANG, L.L., RIGGS, R.R.: “The hydrostatic stiffness of
flexible floating structure for linear hydroelasticity”, Marine
Structures, 13(2000), p. 91-106.
[18] TOMAŠEVIĆ, S.: “Hydroelastic model of dynamic response
of Container ships in waves”, Ph. D. Thesis, FSB, Zagreb,
2007. (in Croatian).
“Coupled horizontal and torsional vibrations of a flexible
barge”, Engineering Structures (accepted).
[20] …: “Hydrostar, User’s manual”, Bureau Veritas, Paris,
MÜHLIG, H.: “Mathematical Handbook”, Golden marke-
ting - Tehnička knjiga, Zagreb, 2004. (in Croatian).
[22] KREYSZIG, E.: Advanced Engineering Mathematics, John
Wiley & Sons, Inc., 1993.
[23] NOVOŽILOV, V.V.: “Thin Shell Theory”, P. Noordhoff
Ltd., Groningen. The Netherlands, 1964. Figure A1 Definition of normal vector variation δ n due to modal
[24] SENJANOVIĆ, I.: “Plate and Shell Theory”, University of deformation h of the parametrically defined body sur-
Zagreb, Zagreb, 1998. (in Croatian). face
Slika A1 Definiranje varijacije normale δ n parametarski zadane
površine tijela uslijed modalne deformacije h
Appendix A
Variation of body surface normal vector If the body surface is deformed by the mode h, the deformed
Parametric body surface surface is represented by the resulting position vector

A body surface can be represented in the x, y, z - space in r=r+h (A5)

implicit, explicit, parametric or vectorial form [21], [22]. In the
considered problem the vectorial representation by position vector The corresponding arcs read
is preferable (widely used in the shell theory [23], [24])
∂r ⎛ ∂ r ∂ h⎞
d su = du = ⎜ + du
r = x (u, v ) i + y(u, v ) j + z(u, v ) k (A1) ∂u ⎝ ∂ u ∂ u ⎟⎠
where u and v are parameters that form coordinate mesh on the ∂r ⎛ ∂ r ∂ h⎞
d sv = dv = ⎜ + dv
surface. Therefore, these parameters are called curved or Gauss ∂v ⎝ ∂ v ∂ v ⎟⎠
It is well-known in the differential geometry that the arcs of and the deformed differential surface
differential surface are, Figure A1
⎡∂r ∂r ∂h ∂r ∂r ∂h ∂h ∂h⎤
d S = d su × d sv = ⎢ × + × + × + × ⎥du dv (A7)
∂r ⎛∂x ∂y ∂z ⎞ ⎣∂u ∂v ∂u ∂v ∂u ∂v ∂u ∂v ⎦
d su = du = ⎜ i+ j+ k du
∂u ⎝ ∂u ∂u ∂ u ⎟⎠ The first product in (A7) is dS, while the last product is a
∂r ⎛∂x ∂y ∂z ⎞ small quantity of higher order and can be therefore neglected.
d sv = dv = ⎜ i+ j+ k dv Thus, one finds for variation of differential surface
∂v ⎝ ∂v ∂v ∂ v ⎟⎠
For differential surface one finds ⎡∂h ∂r ∂r ∂h⎤
δ (d S) = d S − d S = ⎢ × + × ⎥ d u d v = δ N d u d v (A8)
⎣∂u ∂v ∂u ∂v ⎦
d S = d su × d sv = N d u d v (A3)

where components of the normal vector are the following The above vector products take form
∂y ∂z ∂z ∂y ∂ h ∂ r ⎡ ∂ hy ∂ z ∂ hz ∂ y ⎤ ⎡ ∂ hz ∂ x ∂ hx ∂ z ⎤ ⎡ ∂ h ∂ y ∂ hy ∂ x ⎤
Nx = − × = −
∂ u ∂ v ⎢⎣ ∂ u ∂ v ∂ u
i+ −
∂ v ⎥⎦ ⎢⎣ ∂ u ∂ v ∂ u ∂ v ⎥⎦
j+ ⎢ x − ⎥k
∂u ∂v ∂u ∂v ⎣ ∂u ∂v ∂u ∂v ⎦ (A9)
∂ r ∂ h ⎡ ∂ hz ∂ y ∂ hy ∂z⎤ ⎡ ∂ h ∂ z ∂ hz ∂ x ⎤ ⎡ ∂ hy ∂ x ∂ hx ∂ y ⎤
∂z ∂x ∂x ∂z × = −
∂ u ∂ v ⎢⎣ ∂ v ∂ u ∂ v ∂ u ⎥⎦
i+⎢ x −
⎣ ∂v ∂u ∂v ∂u ⎦
⎥ j + ⎢ ∂v ∂u − ∂v ∂u ⎥k
Ny = − (A4) ⎣ ⎦
∂u ∂v ∂u ∂v
∂x ∂y ∂y ∂x
Nz = −
∂u ∂v ∂u ∂v h = hx ( x, y, z ) i + hy ( x, y, z ) j + hz ( x, y, z ) k (A10)

142 58(2007)2, 133-145


one can for instance write

⎛ ∂Z ∂Z ⎞
dS = ⎜− i− j + k ⎟ d x d y = N z d Sz = n d S (A18)
⎝ ∂x ∂y ⎠
∂ hx ∂ hx ∂ x ∂ hx ∂ y ∂ hx ∂ z
= + + (A11)
∂u ∂ x ∂u ∂ y ∂u ∂ z ∂u The corresponding quantities for the third case of body surface
definition are shown in Figure A2.
etc. for the other derivatives of hx, hy, hz per u and v. Furthermore,
by substituting those derivatives of type (A11) into (A9) and
summing up all terms, one finds according to (A8) variation of
the normal vector

⎡⎛ ∂ hy ∂ hz ⎞ ∂ hy ∂ hz ⎤
δ N = ⎢⎜ + ⎟⎠ N x − ∂ x N y − ∂ x N x ⎥ i +
⎣ ⎝ ∂ y ∂ z ⎦
⎡ ∂h ⎛ ∂h ∂h ⎞ ∂h ⎤
+ ⎢− x N x + ⎜ x + z ⎟ N y − z N x ⎥ j + (A12)
⎣ ∂y ⎝ ∂x ∂z ⎠ ∂y ⎦
⎡ ∂h ∂ hy ⎛ ∂h ∂ hy ⎞ ⎤
+ ⎢− x N x − Ny + ⎜ x + Nx ⎥ k
⎣ ∂z ∂z ⎝ ∂x ∂ y ⎟⎠ ⎦
as it is elaborated in [14]. Since

δ Ndu dv = δ ndS (A13)

the same form of expression (A12) is also valid for the variation Figure A2 Definition of normal vector variation (δ n)z due to modal
of the unit vector, δ n, with components nx, ny and nz. deformation h for the explicitly defined body surface
Z = Z(x, y)
Explicit body surface Slika A2 Definiranje varijacije normale (δ n)z eksplicitno zadane
površine tijela Z = Z(x, y) uslijed modalne deformacije h
Body surface can also be represented in one of the following
vectorial forms The deformed body surface by mode h is represented by
r = X ( y, z ) i + y j + z k vector

r = x i + Y ( x, z ) j + z k (A14) r=r+h (A19)

r = x i + y j + Z ( x, y ) k
In the first surface definition (A14) one can write for arcs of
where the second form is conventional in naval architecture, differential element of deformed surface
Section 3.1. Arcs of differential surface in the first case yield
∂r ⎛ ∂ r ∂ h⎞
∂r ⎛∂X ⎞ d sy = dy=⎜ + dy
d s1 = dy=⎜ i+ j⎟ d y ∂y ⎝ ∂ y ∂ y ⎟⎠
∂y ⎝ ∂y ⎠ (A20)
(A15) ∂r ⎛ ∂ r ∂ h⎞
∂r ⎛∂X ⎞ d sz = dz = ⎜ + dz
d s2 = dz = ⎜ i + k⎟ d z ∂z ⎝ ∂ z ∂ z ⎟⎠
∂z ⎝ ∂z ⎠
Differential element is defined as follows
Differential surface reads

⎡⎛ ∂ r ∂ r ⎞ ⎛ ∂ h ∂ r ⎞ ⎛ ∂ r ∂ h ⎞ ⎛ ∂ h ∂ h ⎞ ⎤
⎛ ∂X ∂X ⎞ d S = d s y × d s z = ⎢⎜ × ⎟ +⎜ × ⎟ +⎜ × ⎟ +⎜ × ⎟⎥d ydz (A21)
dS = d s1 × d s 2 = ⎜ i − j− k d y d z = N x d Sx = n d S (A16) ⎣⎝ ∂ y ∂ z ⎠ ⎝ ∂ y ∂ z ⎠ ⎝ ∂ y ∂ z ⎠ ⎝ ∂ y ∂ z ⎠ ⎦
⎝ ∂y ∂ z ⎟⎠

Similarly to the parametric representation of body surface,

where d Sx = dy dz, i.e. orthogonal projection of d S onto y, z the first product in (A21) represents differential element of the
plane, Nx is the corresponding normal vector while n is the unit undeformed surface (A16), the last product is a small negligible
normal vector. quantity of higher order, while the second and third products
In the second and third surface representation (A14) in a are related to the variation of differential element due to modal
similar way one finds deformation. Thus,

⎛ ∂Y ∂Y ⎞ ⎛ ∂ h ∂ r ∂ r ∂ h⎞
dS = ⎜ i− j+ k ⎟ d x d z = N y d Sy = n d S δ (d S) = d S − d S = ⎜ × + × d Sx (A22)
⎝ ∂ y ∂ z ∂ y ∂ z ⎟⎠
⎝ ∂x ∂z ⎠

58(2007)2, 133-145 143


Similar expressions can be derived for the other two defini- The derived expressions are different in spite of the fact that
tions of body surface (A14) they should represent the same quantity. Almost a half of their
terms are common. Due to practical reason, a unified expression
⎛ ∂ h ∂ r ∂ r ∂ h⎞ should be formulated. If we want to keep all essential terms of
δ (d S ) = ⎜ × + × d Sy (A23) formulae (A26), (A27) and (A28) in such a formulation without
⎝ ∂ x ∂ z ∂ x ∂ z ⎟⎠ their repeating, then let us refer to the mathematical logic and
apply the set theory [21], [22]. In that case the unified expression
⎛ ∂ h ∂ r ∂ r ∂ h⎞ for variation of normal vector is represented with the union of
δ (d S ) = ⎜ × + × d Sz (A24)
⎝ ∂ x ∂ y ∂ x ∂ y ⎟⎠ sets (A26), (A27) and (A28)

δ n = (δ n)x ∪ (δ n)y ∪ (δ n)z (A29)

By substituting (A14) into (A22), (A23) and (A24) respecti-
vely and taking into account relation
which is illustrated by Venn diagram in Figure A3. It is intere-
sting to point out that the following relation also exists in the
δ (d S ) = δ n d S (A25)
considered case
and (A10), one finds the following three expressions for the 1
δn= ⎡(δ n)x + (δ n)y + (δ n)z ⎤⎦ (A30)
normal vector variation depending on the body surface definition 2⎣
⎛ ∂ hy ∂ hz ⎞ ⎛ ∂h ∂h ∂h ⎞ Appendix B
(δ n)x = ⎜ + n x i + ⎜ − x n x + z n y − z nz ⎟ j +
⎝ ∂y ∂ z ⎟⎠ ⎝ ∂y ∂z ∂y ⎠ (A26) Barge restoring stiffness for vertical vibration
⎛ ∂ hx ∂ hy ∂ hy ⎞
+⎜− nx − ny + nz k
⎝ ∂z ∂z ∂ y ⎟⎠ As specified in Section 8.3, the barge hydroelastic analysis
is performed by taking into account 6 rigid body modes, 5 dry
vertical modes, and 5 dry coupled horizontal and torsional modes.
⎛ ∂h ∂ hy ∂h ⎞ ⎛ ∂h ∂h ⎞ These modes in three sets are denoted with index i = 1, 2...6;
(δ n)y = ⎜ z nx − n y − z nz ⎟ i + ⎜ x + z ⎟ n y j + 7, 8...11; 12, 13...16.
⎝ ∂z ∂x ∂x ⎠ ⎝ ∂x ∂z ⎠
(A27) Only static pressure acting on the barge bottom and the barge
⎛ ∂h ∂ hy ∂h ⎞ front and aft heads is relevant for the barge hydrostatic stiffness
+ ⎜ − x nx − n y + x nz ⎟ k
⎝ ∂ z ∂ z ∂x ⎠ in the case of vertical vibration. The pressure forces on the bar-
ge sides and the adjacent pontoon heads are in equilibrium and
therefore cancelled. For the bottom panels the normal vector is
⎛ ∂ hy ∂ hy ∂h ⎞ n = k, while for the aft and fore head panels n = ± i respectively.
(δ n)z = ⎜ nx − n y − z nz ⎟ i + The origin of the coordinate system is located at the waterplane
⎝ ∂y ∂x ∂x ⎠
(A28) below the centre of gravity, Figure B1.
⎛ ∂h ∂h ∂h ⎞ ⎛ ∂h ∂ hy ⎞
+ ⎜ − x n x + x n y − z nz ⎟ j + ⎜ x + nz k According to (11) the bottom elastic mode yields
⎝ ∂y ∂x ∂y ⎠ ⎝ ∂x ∂ y ⎠⎟
hiK = ϕ i ( zN + T )i + wi k , i = 7, 8... (B1)

Figure A3 A Venn diagram for variation of unit normal vector in Figure B1 Coordinates of actual points for restoring stiffness
explicitly represented body surface determination
Slika A3 Vennov dijagram varijacije jedinične normale eksplic- Slika B1 Koordinate bitnih točaka za određivanje povratne
itno zadane površine tijela krutosti

144 58(2007)2, 133-145


while at the level of the centre of gravity one finds coupling with elastic modes. The corresponding indexes for rigid
body modes are i, j = 3, 5, while for the coupling modes i = 3, 5
hiG = ϕ i ( zN − zG )i + wi k , i = 7, 8... (B2) and j = 7, 8..., and vice versa i.e. i = 7, 8... and j = 3, 5.
In addition, it is interesting to determine the restoring coef-
where wi is the barge deflection and ϕi rotation of cross-sec- ficients for rigid body modes. Thus, one finds for heave, where
tion. w3 = 1, ϕ3 = 0:
By employing expressions (32), (33) and (34) for hydro-
static stiffness, and (38) for gravity contribution, the following Bottom:
formulae for the elements of the restoring matrix are derived,
where i, j = 7, 8... C33Hp = ρ g LB, C33Hhn = C33
=0 (B10)
l Heads:
CijHp = ρ g B ∫ w j wi d x (B3)
−l C33Hp = C33Hhn = 0 (B11)
Modes and normal vector: It is obvious that the total restoring coefficient C33 = ρ g LB is
∂ϕ j equal to that determined by the ship hydrostatics, Eq. (40), since
CijHhn = − ρ g BT ( zN + T ) ∫ wi d x (B4) LB is waterplane area, AWL.
∂x The pitch mode yields: w5 = x, ϕ5 = 1, where -l ≤ x ≤ l. The
corresponding coefficients are the following:
Gravity, m = ρ BT:
l Bottom:
Cijm = ρ g BT ( zN − zG ) ∫ ϕ jϕ i d x (B5) BL3
−l C55Hp = ρ g
12 (B12)
where l = L/2, and L, B, T are the barge length, breadth and
draught, respectively. C55Hhn = 0
For the barge heads one finds according to (11), (32), (33) C55m = ρ g LBT ( zN − zG )
and (34) Heads:
C Hp
= rp ⎡⎣ w j (l )ϕ i (l ) − w j (−l )ϕ i (−l ) ⎤⎦ (B6)
⎛ T⎞
C55Hp = − ρ g LBT ⎜ zN + ⎟
⎧ ∂ϕ (l ) ∂ϕ (−l ) ⎤ ⎫
⎝ 2⎠

CijHh = rh1 ⎨rh2 ϕ j (l ) i − ϕ j (−l ) i − ⎡ w j (l )ϕ i (l ) − w j (−l )ϕ i (−l ) ⎤⎦ ⎬ (B7)
⎩ ⎣⎢ ∂x ∂x ⎥⎦ ⎣ ⎭ LBT 2
C55Hh = − ρ g (B13)
CijHn = rn ⎡⎣ϕ j (l )wi (l ) − ϕ j (−l )wi (−l ) ⎤⎦ (B8) LBT 2
C55Hn = ρg

⎛ T⎞ Since BL3/12=IWLY is longitudinal moment of inertia of water-

rp = − ρ gBT ⎜ zN + ⎟ plane area and LBT = V is volume of displacement, the restoring
⎝ 2⎠ coefficient yields
BT 2 T2 4
rh1 = ρ g , rh2 = + zN T + zN2 (B9)
2 2 3 ⎡ ⎛T ⎞⎤
C55 = ρ g ⎢ IWLY − V ⎜ + zG ⎟ ⎥ (B14)
BT 2 ⎣ ⎝2 ⎠⎦
rn = ρ g
It is identical to the hydrostatic expression (42), since the
The constitution of the hydrostatic and gravity coefficients coordinate of the centre of buoyancy reads zB = – T/2. The coor-
indicates that the restoring force depends not only on the barge dinate of neutral line, zN, is cancelled in C55 and that is physically
deflection w and cross-section rotation ϕ = dw/dx, but also on correct for rigid body modes.
the curvature κ = d2w/dx2 that is of low effect. Concerning coefficients of mixed modes, w3 and w5, their
The above formulae, derived for elastic modes, are general values are zero since the modes are orthogonal. As a result, the
and therefore applicable for rigid body modes, as well as for their restoring coefficients yield C35 = C53 = 0.

58(2007)2, 133-145 145