Leichtweiß-Institute for Hydraulic Engineering and Water Resources

Department of Hydromechanics and Coastal Engineering

Dynamic Response of Jacket Structures to Breaking and Non-

breaking Waves: Yesterday, Today, Tomorrow

Arash Khansari, Hocine Oumeraci

22 February 2017 | Leichtweiß-Institut für Wasserbau
Contents

 Practical position of the problem (Yesterday)

 Application of jacket structures in offshore industry
 Available prediction models for breaking wave loads on jacket structures
 Physical modelling of wave loads on jacket structures

 Contribution of the PhD study to enhance knowledge (Today)

 Motivation and objectives
 Slamming load formulae for breaking waves on jacket structures
 Total breaking and non-breaking wave loads on jacket structures
 Dynamic response of a full-scale jacket structure to breaking waves

 Need for further research and development (Tomorrow)

 No theory to predict breaking and broken wave characteristics
 Applicability and validity range of Morison equation
 Wave slamming loads on moveable/deformable slender piles
 Effect of neighbouring members on the wave loading of a member of the jacket

22 February 2017 | Leichtweiß-Institut für Wasserbau | Khansari, Oumeraci | Slide 2

Jacket platforms in oil and gas industry

• Offshore jacket platforms are successfully used in oil and gas industry
• Jacket platforms are widely installed in the Persian Gulf, the Gulf of Mexico,
Nigeria, and California shorelines (Sadeghi, 2012)

California
shorelines
Gulf of Mexico
Persian Gulf

Nigeria

• 150 template platforms belonging to Iran and more than130 template

platforms belonging to Arabian countries are installed in the Persian Gulf

22 February 2017 | Leichtweiß-Institut für Wasserbau | Khansari, Oumeraci | Slide 3

 Jacket structures in offshore wind industry
Most operating wind farms have been built using gravity based and monopile foundations:

Increasing the water

depth

Shallow water
depth Intermediate
water depth

Deep water

22 February 2017 | Leichtweiß-Institut für Wasserbau | Khansari, Oumeraci | Slide 4

Fixed-bottom offshore structures for higher water depth
Comparative study of different fixed-bottom offshore structures for fabrication
costs and their dynamic response to non-breaking waves (Føreland et al., 2012)

Tri-pile with
piles
Jacket with
piles
Monopile

Monopile
Tri-pile with
piles
Jacket with
piles

(Føreland et al., 2012)

22 February 2017 | Leichtweiß-Institut für Wasserbau | Khansari, Oumeraci | Slide 5
Breaking wave on a jacket platform
Jackets structures are frequently under extreme loads caused by breaking waves

22 February 2017 | Leichtweiß-Institut für Wasserbau | Khansari, Oumeraci | Slide 6

Breaking wave on the FINO jacket structure

(Germanischer Lloyd, 2009)

Extreme wave loads might cause considerable damage to the structure members
and endanger the overall stability of the structure
22 February 2017 | Leichtweiß-Institut für Wasserbau | Khansari, Oumeraci | Slide 7
 Laboratory tests on a truss structure under breaking waves
Front View of the Truss Structure

Impact area
125.8 cm 125.8 cm

FTLF01 FTLF05
15 cm 15 cm
FTLF02 FTLF06
15 cm 15 cm
FTLF03 FTLF07
FTLF04 8.7 cm 8.7 cm FTLF08

106.5 cm 106.5 cm
SWL

Water depth
a) wave generation in the large scale wave flume b) Incident wave approaching the truss structure 200 cm

Total Force
Transducers

CM01 (+4.15)
Velocity meters CM02 (+3.4)
CM03 (+2.65)

11 Wave Gauges WG1 to WG11

Braces
c) The model set-up in the large scale wave flume
FTs

GWK Tests: large scale model tests in Hannover in frame of the WaveSlam project (2013)

22 February 2017 | Leichtweiß-Institut für Wasserbau | Khansari, Oumeraci | Slide 8

Large scale laboratory tests (GWK tests) – Front View

(WaveSlam project, 2013)

22 February 2017 | Leichtweiß-Institut für Wasserbau | Khansari, Oumeraci | Slide 9

Contents
 Practical position of the problem (Yesterday)
 Practical use of jacket structures in industry
 Available prediction models for breaking wave loads on jacket structures
 Physical modelling of wave loads on jacket structures

 Contribution of the PhD study to enhance knowledge (Today)

 Motivation and objectives
 Slamming load formulae for breaking wave on jacket structures
 Total breaking and non-breaking wave loads on jacket structures
 Dynamic response of a full-scale jacket structure to breaking waves

 Need for further research and development (Tomorrow)

 No theory to predict breaking and broken wave characteristics
 Applicability of Morison equation
 Wave slamming loads on moveable/deformable slender piles
 Effect of neighbouring members on the wave loading of a member of the jacket

22 February 2017 | Leichtweiß-Institut für Wasserbau | Khansari, Oumeraci | Slide 10

Objectives

Generation of a knowledge base for a better understanding of the physical

processes associated with non-breaking, near-breaking and breaking
waves on jacket support structures of wind turbines and the associated
dynamic response:

• Provide simple formulae for the prediction of wave loads caused by

breaking waves on the front and rear faces of jacket structures as well
as on the entire structure
• Improve the understanding of the process involved in the pile-soil
interaction for jacket structures under extreme breaking and nonbreaking
wave load events.

• Identify the most relevant parameters affecting the dynamic response of

jacket structures under breaking and non-breaking wave loads
considering pile-soil interaction.

22 February 2017 | Leichtweiß-Institut für Wasserbau | Khansari, Oumeraci | Slide 11

 Analysis of GWK tests

Two Impacts on
the structure
First Impact:
Breaking wave on
the front face

Second Impact:
Broken wave on
the rear face

 Provide formulae to predict both impact loads on the

front and rear faces

22 February 2017 | Leichtweiß-Institut für Wasserbau | Khansari, Oumeraci | Slide 12

Classification of breaking waves on the truss structure
Incipient wave
breaking location:

Total Force
Response TFR:

22 February 2017 | Leichtweiß-Institut für Wasserbau | Khansari, Oumeraci | Slide 13

Methodology for formulae to predict slamming forces by
breaking/broken waves on entire jacket structure

Front Face Side Brace Rear Face

22 February 2017 | Leichtweiß-Institut für Wasserbau | Khansari, Oumeraci | Slide 14

Breaking wave on the front face of the truss structure
Maximum slamming forces on the front face of the truss structure are calculated
Maximum slamming Maximum
Wave crest Impact
Slamming force model force on the front face slamming Impact duration
height 𝜼𝒃 (m) area λ (m)
(kN) coefficient
Present study 0.66 12.0 1.63 0.0209
Goda (1966) 0.58 21.6 Π 0.0135
Wienke & Oumeraci
1.44 0.66 49.7 2π 0.0055
(2005)
Campbell-Weynberg
0.72 44.3 5.15 0.135
(1980)

Wave Breaking Point

Incident

Front face

Rear face
Breaking Wave

Front face

Breaking wave approaches jacket structure (snapshot from GWK test)

22 February 2017 | Leichtweiß-Institut für Wasserbau | Khansari, Oumeraci | Slide 15

 Breaking wave on side braces of the truss structure
(i)The area of impact on the side braces is much
smaller compared to the area of impact for the front
and the rear faces

Area of impact
Inclined side
braces
subjected to the
Legs and braces breaking wave
subjected to the
breaking wave

Front view Side view Side view

a) Plan view b) Section A-A c) Section B-B

a) t = 67.12 s b) t = 72.72 s
(ii)The inclination of the side braces
Force (kN)

Force (kN)

Front brace
Side brace

c) t = 72.28 s d) t = 100.55 s
Force (kN)

Force (kN)

a) b)
(modified from Wienke &
(iii) Sheltering effects Oumeraci, 2001)

22 February 2017 | Leichtweiß-Institut für Wasserbau | Khansari, Oumeraci | Slide 16

 Broken wave on the rear face of the truss structure (Dropping
Effect)
(i) Dropping effect: After incipient wave breaking location, the wave crest height
decreases gradually

t/T =0.1 t/T =0.12 t/T =0.14

a) Breaking wave in shallow water depth

t/T =0.16 t/T =0.18 t/T =0.2

Dropping Coefficient:
𝜂𝑅
𝛾𝐷 =
𝜂𝐹

where ηF and ηR are respectively

the breaking and broken wave
b) Breaking wave in deep and intermediate water depth crest heights at the front and the
rear faces of the truss structure
22 February 2017 | Leichtweiß-Institut für Wasserbau | Khansari, Oumeraci | Slide 17
 Broken wave on the rear face of the truss structure (Sheltering
Effect)
(ii) Sheltering effect: Sheltering coefficient:
𝐶𝑠𝑅
𝛾𝑠ℎ =
𝐶𝑠𝐹
Where 𝐶𝑠𝑅 and 𝐶𝑠𝐹 are maximum
slamming force coefficient on the
rear and the front faces of the
truss structure, respectively

(WaveSlam project, 2013)

When the breaking wave strikes members of the
jacket structure on the front face, the water
splashes. The breaking wave reaches the rear face
of the structure as a broken wave causing a second
impact. In general, the second impact is significantly
affected by the first impact.
(Bonakdar, 2014)
22 February 2017 | Leichtweiß-Institut für Wasserbau | Khansari, Oumeraci | Slide 18
 Slamming formulae for breaking waves on jacket structures
Breaking
Broken
wave on
wave on
the front
the rear
face
face
Slamming Force

Time

Zone 1: Zone 2:
Zone 3: Zone4: Time Zone 5: Zone 6: Zone 7:
Time Successive
Time required required for Time Successive Time required
required for impacts caused
for the impact the broken required for impacts caused for the impact
the impact by local impact
force to wave to travel the impact by local impact force to
force to rise forces on the
decrease (fall) from the front force to rise forces on the decrease (fall)
from zero to front face of the
from its max face to the from zero to rear face of the from its max
its max value truss structure
value to zero rear face its max value truss structure value to zero
22 February 2017 | Leichtweiß-Institut für Wasserbau | Khansari, Oumeraci | Slide 19
CFD and CSD models for the GWK tests
CSD model CFD model

Discretized Imported
a) Discretization of the b) Defined Nodes c) Importing the Nodes in the
CSD model CFD model

22 February 2017 | Leichtweiß-Institut für Wasserbau | Khansari, Oumeraci | Slide 20

 Response
Resp
10000

Total Force Respo

10000

Application of developed approach to reproduce selected

Force
5000

Force
5000
wave tests on the GWK truss structure

Total
Total
0

Non-breaking Waves -5000

106 Breaking
106.5 Waves
107 107.5
Time (s)
Time (s)
a) Test no. 2013061709a)
(H=0.75 m,no.
LC1: Test T=4.9 s, d=4.3m)
2013061807 (H=1.9; T=5.2s)
4 c)b)LC2:
LC1: Test
Test no.no. 2013061708
2013061424 (H=1.7;
(H=1.7; T=4.6s)
T=5.55s)
x 10
(TFR) (N)

15000
Measured 16000

(N)
Measured

Response(N)
Measured
Response

15000 Calculated 3 Calculated

Total Force Response (N)

Calculated 14000

ForceResponse
2.5
Response

10000 12000
10000 2
10000
Force

1.5
5000 8000

TotalForce
Force

50001
6000
Total

0.5
Total

0 4000

Total
0
0 2000
-5000 -0.5
106 106.5 107 107.5 70 70.5 71 71.5 0
Time (s)
Time (s) 128 128.2 128.4 Time
128.6 (s)128.8 129 129.2 73.5
Time (s)
b) Test no. 2013061818 4 c) LC2:
(H=1 m,Test no. s,
T=4.0 2013061424
d=4.3m) (H=1.7; T=5.55s) d) LC3: Test no. 2013061402 (H=1.5; T=4.6s)
x 10
16000
Total Force Response (N)

3 Measured Measured

Total Force Response (N)

Calculated 14000 Calculated
2.5
12000
2
10000
1.5
8000
1
6000
0.5
4000
0
2000
-0.5
0
128 128.2 128.4 128.6 128.8 129 129.2 73.5 74 74.5 75
Time (s) Time (s)

22 February 2017 | Leichtweiß-Institut für Wasserbau | Khansari, Oumeraci | Slide 21

 Application of developed slamming formulae to a full scale
jacket
• A CSD model for OC4 jacket structure with pile
foundation model in 50m water depth
• A CFD model for different waves approaching the OC4
jacket structure
Dynamic response of the OC4 jacket structure
with pile-soil foundation to breaking wave loads

Wave breaking far in front of the structure

Decreasing distance between the incipient wave breaking location

Wave Pile and soil Structure Breaker tongue impinges the structure
LC1 when reaching the trough
→broken wave at the structure

(i) Breaking wave load Effect of: Wave breaking in front of the structure

and the rear face of the jacket structure

cases (Load cases 1,
2, 3, 4 & 5) *
(ii) Wave slamming force
models (e.g. Wienke,
(i) Soil type (Clay &
Sand)**
(ii) Soil non-linearity
(Linear & nonlinear
soil models)**
Effect of:
(i) Legs and braces LC2 Breaker tongue inclined
→breaking wave at the structure
diameter *
(ii) Geometry of the Wave breaking just at the structure
structure (x and z LC3 Breaker tongue formed at the front face 3m

Pile penetration length = 45m

Goda, Armand, braces)* →partial breaking wave 2m
5m
Campbell, etc.) * (iii) Scour ** (iii) Top side mass (RNA 5m
(iv) Pile group ** and concrete block Wave breaking within the structure
Breaker tongue formed between the rear
masses) * LC4 and the front face of the jacket structure 30 m

** Comparative Study →partial breaking wave

* Parameter Study Wave breaking behind the structure

a) P-S.type1 b) P-S.type2
Breaker tongue formed
c) P-S.type3 d) P-S.type4
(Uniform soft clay) (Uniform sand) (Layered sand) (Uniform hard clay)
LC5 behind the structure
→non-breaking wave

22 February 2017 | Leichtweiß-Institut für Wasserbau | Khansari, Oumeraci | Slide 22

 Jacket under breaking wave loads

Dynamic response
of the OC4 jacket
structure to a
breaking wave
H=10 m
T=10 s
d=50 m

Impact on the front

face at t=2.66s

Impact on the rear

face at t=3.9s

22 February 2017 | Leichtweiß-Institut für Wasserbau | Khansari, Oumeraci | Slide 23

Contents
 Practical position of the problem (Yesterday)
 Practical use of jacket structures in industry
 Available prediction models for breaking wave loads on jacket structures
 Physical modelling of wave loads on jacket structures

 Contribution of the PhD study to enhance knowledge (Today)

 Motivation and objectives
 Wave slamming formulae for breaking wave on jacket structures
 Total breaking and non-breaking wave loads on jacket structures
 Dynamic response of a full-scale jacket structure to breaking waves

 Need for further research and development (Tomorrow)

 No theory to predict breaking and broken wave characteristics
 Applicability of Morison equation
 Wave slamming loads on moveable/deformable slender piles
 Effect of neighbouring members on the wave loading of a member of the jacket

22 February 2017 | Leichtweiß-Institut für Wasserbau | Khansari, Oumeraci | Slide 24

 Need for further research and development (1)

(i) Wave characteristics of breaking and broken waves

Lack of reliable model for the prediction of water surface elevation and
wave kinematics of the breaking, broken and post-breaking waves

(reef3d.wordpress.com)

(ii) Validity range and applicability

of Morison Equation

It is not fully clear when the Morison equation

can be applied for the calculation of wave loads
on jacket structures. The applicability and the
validity range of the Morison equation become
questionable with increasing wave non-linearity

H=1.1m, T=4s, d=4.3m

22 February 2017 | Leichtweiß-Institut für Wasserbau | Khansari, Oumeraci | Slide 25

Need for further research and development (2)

(iii) Wave slamming force on flexible/moveable piles

the available slamming models for the prediction of

slamming forces on single piles (e.g. Wienke &
Oumeraci, 2005; Goda, 1966; etc) are developed with
the assumption that the structure is rigid. Consideration
of moveable/flexible/deformable slender piles might
affect the process involved in the interaction of breaking
wave and slender piles (Wienke & Oumeraci, 2005)

Moveable body???
Deformable body???
(iv) Effect of neighbouring members on the wave loading of a member of the jacket
The lack of a proper understanding of the effect of neighbouring members on the wave
loading of a member of the jacket structure. Since the members of the jacket structures are
closely spaces, the wave load on a single slender pile is significantly affected by the
neighbouring piles and can thus not be calculated by the commonly applied formulae for a
single isolated pile.

22 February 2017 | Leichtweiß-Institut für Wasserbau | Khansari, Oumeraci | Slide 26

 Thank You
for Your
Attention
Arash Khansari, MSc.
a.khansari@tu-braunschweig.de

Prof. Dr.-Ing. Hocine Oumeraci

h.oumeraci@tu-braunschweig.de

Leichtweiss-Institute for Hydraulic

Engineering and Water Resources
Braunschweig University of Technology

22 February 2017 | Leichtweiß-Institut für Wasserbau | Khansari, Oumeraci | Slide 27