51

Ch ina Qua" En g ineering . VoU ] . N o .1, pp.SI - 92.

Chi na Ocean Press. 1999. Printed in P.R . Ch ina .

The Behaviour of LNG Carrier Moored to a Jetty Exposed to

Waves, Swell, Unsteady Wind and Current

JI Chunqun " and J . E. W. WICHERS' •

Abstract - M ost term inals for ta nkers a re piers and sea isla nds. wh ile other types inclu de sing le point
moorings a nd multiple-bu oy mo or ings. The LN G a nd LP G carrier moored to the jetty is a very commo n
termi na l for tran sfer of gas in ope n seas . It is im po rta nt to estimate the m otions and line tension s of the
LNG carrier when it moor s to a jetty in metccean en viron ment. Norm ally, the moti ons of the Lf';G carrier
would be restricted b y the load ing a rm. which is co nnect ed to LN G carrier's manifold . A n exa mple of
125,000 003 LN G carrier mo ored to a jetty exp osed to a set of environment co nditio ns is given. A
mat hem ati cal model which is ba sed on th e equations of mot ion in the: tim e dom ain is use d to the.a nalysis
of LNG moor ed to an ofTs hore jetty exp osed to wa ves. swell, wind an d cu rrent. By mea ns of a time do-
main computer program T ERM SIM computations are ca rried out to determ ine and op timi ze the lay-out
a nd / or orienta tio n of the jet ty an d mooring gear in term s of forces in moo ring lines a nd fend ers and the
en velope of mot ions of the loading arms. The purpose of thi s study is to det ermine the sensitivity o f the mo-
oring system a nd ca rrier mot ion s to the com bina tion s of wind waves with an d without swell. stea dy wind
an d wind spectra . T he results can be: co nsulted by the designe r in the design of jett ies.

Key words: mooring sys tem; dynam ic response; rim e domain analysis; f UY

I. Introduction

-- The worldwide increasing demand for liqu id natural gas (LN G) and liquid pet roleum gas
(LPG) results in exten sive transport from gas plants to receiving countries, th us. new jellies are
being designed or buill. Existing jellies are sometimes converted to receive carriers . For the de-
sign of jellies computations ha ve to be carried out so that the se carriers can be moored safely to
a jetty exposed to wind waves a nd curre nt . By means of the time do ma in co mputer program
TERMSIM computations can be carried out to determine an d o ptimize the lay- o ut and I or
orientation of the jelly and mooring gear in terms of forces in mooring lines and fenders and the
envelope of motions of the loading arms. In this paper a 125,000 m 3 LNG carrier is assumed to
be m oored to a jelly and exposed to a set of environmental condition s. The pu rp ose of this
st udy is to det ermine the sensitivity of the mooring system and carrier moti on s to th e combina-
tions of wind wa ves with and without swell. steady wind and wind spectra.

2. Calculation Model of Carrier and Jetty

The carrier will be a 125,000 m 3 LNG carrier with spherical cargo tanks. T he principal di-
mensions of the carrier ar e derived from OCIMF (1985). The particulars and sta bility dat a of
the carrier are given in Table I. The general arra ngement of the carrier is shown in Fig. 1. The
carrier is moor ed to a jell y in wat er depth of 16 m. The lay-o ut o f the jelly and the mo oring

, Associate Pro fessor. State Key La bo ra tory of Ocea n Engineer ing. Shan gha i Jiaoto ng U nive rsity, Sha nghai 200030.
P. R . China
Vice President and General Ma nag er of MARI ~ USA Inc. M ari time Resea rch Institu te Net herland s.
The Nether la nds
 82 11 Chunq un and J. E . W. WI CHERS

system is also given in F ig. I . T he stern an d stern breasting lines are connected to bo llards
I'" a nd 2=. The spring lines a re connected to bollards 3= and 4= and the b ow brasting lines
( are connect ed to b ollards 5= and 6= . The lines arc connected to the bollards at an elevati on o f 6
m above still wat er level. T o bollards 3= and 4= fenders are attach ed . On each bollard two
fenders are positioned 5 m a part from the centerline o f the bollard a t an elevati on of 4 m ab ove
still water level. Ea ch mooring line is a combi-Iine. A cornbi -Iine con sist s of a steel wire (56 mm
in di ameter) and a 20 m long nylon double br aid ed ta il (l05 mm in d iame ter). In tot a l 14 lines
a re emp loyed . T he posi tions of the fair lcad s and the manifold on the ca rr ier a re given in T able
2. T he p ositions o f th e release hook s on the bo llard s an d the po sition of the fenders are given in
Fig . I.

Table J Particul ars and sta bility data

D esignation Magnitu de
Length between perpendiculars (m ) 274 .0
L"
Breath B (m} 44.2
D epth mou ld D (m} 25.0
D raft T [m] 11.0
Di splace men t volum e yo 1m' ) 93253
Center of gravity above kee l KG (m) 10.2
M etacentric height GM (m) 10.4
Longitudinal rad ius of gyrat ion in air Kyy (m) 68 .0
Transverse radius of gyra tio n in air Kn (m} 15.9
Vertical radius o f gyration in air K zz (m} 69.0
Roll period T. (s) 11.9
W ind area frontal A, (m ' ) 1300
Wind area side As (m') 6600

Ta ble 2 Fai rlea ds and manifold position (corresponding to Fig. I)

De signa tion I X ,· (m) y'

s (m) z; · {m)
Fairleads
F, - 140 9.5 13.0
fi - 126 14.5 13.0
F, I - 90 21.5 13.0
F, 100 21.5 13.0
F, I 115 17.5 I 13.0
F, 130 10.0 13.0
M anifold 19.1 19.1 15

Notes: • - W. f. t. m idship cross sec tion and center; • • - w . r. L w ater line .

3 . Environm ental C o nditinns in the S imulation

Fo r this study a combination of weather conditions is ap plied. T he purpo se is to study the

sensitivity of the carrier ' s moti ons to th e given environm ental conditions , T he definition s of the
 The Behaviour of L~G Carrier M oored to a Jetty 83

r.<
I ! I I !
" -x '0
f
tOO
f
60
f
'0 60
1I '0
i
90'
"
! f

81 8
+" 180· o·
frb 85 8'

~lf
. . +;1( E
1.2 270·
' 1,12
'0
.,; 13 .104
~

Curren I

AP FP
dimensions in meter
140 .&5

Fig. 1. Lay-out of jetty and mooring system.

{",."
.-- wave, wind and current direction with regard to the carrier are also given in Fig. I. As a stand-
ard case the foll owing weather ca se is taken: JONSW AP wave spectrum with H, = 2.5 m and
T, = 9 s (I35 0), a steady 15-second wind speed of 25 .2 m I s (I35 0 ) and a steady current ve-
locity of 1.5 m I s (I 80 With respect to the sta nda rd case the foll owing parameters are ap-
0 ) .

plied:
• Mean period (T, = 7 to II s) with H, = 2.5 m;
• The APi-wind spectrum with a mean hourly wind speed of 20 m I s instead of a steady
15 s wind speed;
The JONSWAP spectrum with H , = 2.0 m and T, = 9 s in ass ociation with a
Gaussian swell spectrum with H, = 0 .5 m and T, = 17 s;
• Computations (with the mean period T , = 9 s) are repeated , whil e the wind direction is
changed to 225 0 •
In sim ulatio ns the API wind spectrum, JONSWAP wave spectru m and Gaussian swell sp ec-
trum are used as the input of environment condition. The corresponding formulas are given as
follows . A rev iew of the computer simulations is given in Table 3.
- A PI wind spectrum:
2 -~
S (£0) = (j v [I +.!.2 + ~] J ( I)
V 2" . f p 2" fp

in which OJ - frequen cy in rad I s of wind oscillation; S v - spectral den sity of wind speed in
m' l s; V - hourly mean wind speed; J; - average fact or: 0_00 25 V; U v - turbulence
intensity. (jv = 0.164 V.
 84 II Chunqun and J. E. W . WICHERS

- JONSW AP wave spectrum:

(2)

in which: y - peak parameter (y = 3.3); (J = 0.07 for OJ .; OJm • and (J = 0.09 for OJ > rom; OJm
- M oda l frequency; " = 0 .076 (g ' d / U2) - 0 12; U = mean wind speed (knots); g -
acce lera tion of gravi ty (m / S2) .
- Ga ussia n swell spectrum :

(' wi )' w, - u'

• e - stJ(-"'-
S (OJ) = ---'4_ _--,~-_ (3)
( O. IOJ p -J 27<

in which ' I - sign ifica nt wave heigh t in m; OJp = 27< / T,;. T p - peak period in s.
"')

Table 3 Review of computations

Wave Swe ll Wind Current

R un
H, T, H, T, V.. Vc
case "WA
( . ) (m) (5) (
"s
.) (m) (5)
"WI
( . ) (m I 5)
VII' API

(m I 5) (m I 5)

I 135 2.5 II 135 25.2 J.5

2 135 2.5 9 135 25 .2 J.5

3 135 2.5 7 135 25.2 J.5

4 135 2.5 9 135 20.0 J.5

5 135 2.0 9 135 0.5 17 135 25.2 J.5

6 135 2.0 9 135 0.5 17 135 20.0 J.5

7 135 2.5 9 225 25.2 J.5

8 135 2.5 9 225 20.0 J.5

9 135 2.0 9 135 0 .5 17 225 25.2 1.5

10 135 2.0 9 135 0.5 17 225 20.0 J.5

The wind spee d as a function of heigh t above the mean water level and average time inter -
val is approximated by the following power la w:

V .. ( I , z ) =" V .. ( 10
Z)6 (4)

in which V.. ( I , z) - wind speed averaged over a time interval I as defi ned by" and p, z meter
above the mea n water level; V.. - wind speed averaged over one hour , 10 m ab ove sea level; "
- guest fac to r referen ced to V w ; P- height exponent.
T he factors in the power la w for the wind p rofi les are shown in Table 4.
 The Behavio ur o f LNG Carrier Moo red to a Jetty 85

Table 4 Fact ors in the pow er law o f wind profiles

Avcrage time interval

F actors
I bour 10 min . I min 15 s 5s 3s

• 1.000 1.060 1.180 1.260 1.310 1.330

P 0.150 0.130 0.113 0.106 0.102 0 .100

4. Description of Computer Program TERMSIM

F or computation s the time domain program TERMSIM (TERMinal SIMulation) is used.

For the combined equations of wave frequency and low frequency motion reference is made by
W ihcers (1988). Th e program is well validated with model tests (Oo rtmerssen et al ., 1986). The
carrier can be exposed to arbitrary weather conditon s. The frequency domain computed linear
first order RAO 's (added mass, damping and wave forces) and the matrix of the quadratic sec-
ond order wave d rift force RAO's (incl. wave set- down in shallow water) are the input for
convolution integrals and retardation fun ction (Oortrnerssen, 1976; Pinker, 1980). The
hydrodynamic data, i. e. the matrices of the added ma ss and damping, the RAO's of the wave
forces and the matrix of the quadratic transfer functi on of the wave drift forces, a re computed
by means of the 3-D pote nti al theory pr ogr am DIFFRAC.
Since for moored carriers the low frequency motions ar e resonance motion s, the value s of
the low frequency hydrodynamic reactive force s I moment are important. In order to predict
correctly these motions, an experimentally determined database is used which contains the low
frequency hydrodynamic viscou s (non-linear) coefficients for a large number of carriers, loading
co nditions and water depth I draft ratio (Wichers, 1988).
Further different wind spectrum formulation s can be applied. F or the wind and current
loads the OCIMF data as given in Re ferences (OCIM F, 1985 and 1994) can be used .
Besides the non-linear load-elongation of the synthetic lines , the load-compression curve of
the fenders is taken into account. Especially for the low frequency motions of the carrier the fric-
tion between the shiphull side and the fenders is important. For the friction a Colomb friction
coefficient k = 0.1 is taken int o account. Th e computations are carried o ut in the time domain.
For a carrier moored to a jett y the yaw an d sway moti ons ca n be con sidered to be relat ively
sma ll; th is is in contradiction with carriers moored for instan ce by a haw ser to a bu oy (SPM) o r
in a spread moor ing system. For a carrier moored to a jetty the equ at ion s of moti on ca n be sim-
plified as follows:

m x I + L, a "
,-
x , + L
,-, JR Ix (I - e) x , (r) d i I

= F ""ind
+ r '"I + F dyn + F .... ave + F m oof
• (5)
I I I I '

m X 2 +
,L
-, a ll
x , + L,
,- J R ll (I -r)x , (d dt
 86 JI Ch unqun and J. E. w . WICH ER S

= F,
W1nd
, +
+ r '" r:. , +
+ r '"" F;oor; (6)

Tn X ) +
.-L, a" x , +
,.L, S R ,. (t - r) x , (r ) dr+c" x , + c 3S x :3

,
= F ...·ave
,
+ F IDoor .
.

/ . x . + L a.,
.-, x It + L
,-, S
-
R"
~
(t - r) x , (r) dt: + c .. x . + b . .x

ffi oo r
= r?" + F • • (8)
• •

/" x , + .L-, a" < , + L

' -I -
S R"
¢
(t - t) x , (r) di + c " x s +b " x ,

= F . . .ave
s
+ F ,moo r .
. (9)

I ", x • + L a"" x , + L S R ""

.-,
(t - r) x , (r) dr
' a' - ¢

= F ",i.nd drn + F v,avc +

• + r"•
moo r
+F F (10)
• • •
in which. m . I - tanker mass and moment o f inertia: a" - matrix of the freq uency-indepen -
dent added mass coefficients fo r i = I to 6 and k = I to 6; b.. - viscou s roll damping
coefficient: R" - matrix of the retarda tion fun ctions; c" - m atri x of the hydr ostati c restoring
force coefficients: F ' = d - rela tive wind force in i d irecti on : F,e" - rela tive cu rre nt forc e in
• •
i direction ; F ~YU -
W c
dynamic current fo rce contributions in i directio n; F - first and sec- . "
• •
moo
on d order wave force registrat ions in i direction: F , - mooring force d ue to fende rs a nd mo -
•
o ring lines in i direction (i = I. 2. 6).
Eac h co mp uta tio n sta r ts with a tra nsien t lime of ha lf an ho ur fo llowed by the period of 3
h ou rs. for which the statistical result s a re derived . As an exa m p le time registra tions of the forces
in fender 3'" as co mp u ted during the ru ns of weather cond itions 5 a nd 9 are pr esent ed in Figs. 2
a nd 3. During each sim u lation th e following signa ls are compu ted an d ana lyzed :
moti on s of manifold in surg e direct ion X,,,:
moti ons o f manifold in sway direction r eel;
moti ons of manifold in heave direction Z,el:
roll moti on of carrier:
pitch motion o f ca rri er:
 T he Behavio ur of L ~ G Carrier Moored to a Jetty 87

( c
0
~.

I
'"
II 1 I rl
I
-e . I j I . . -\ - j
T .J I I i· I: rf'\
!l ··t!1 I i
c ! r Ii f
I 'I, 1. 1 ~ .I
-; I II I I' i I f ' I
~ ,,
-e
~
ii
I!"
~
.,
o... c~
...s M
M

c::
0
.;:: 0
o -;
ee
......'"'" "
N

'"c:: -;
"0 0

~'" :='"
r'1
~

c
-;
M
ec

0
-;

( -
.~ 0 1200 2400 3600 4800 6000 7200 8400 9600 10800
Time (s)

Fig. 2. Fender force in weather condition case 5.

yaw motio n of carrier;

forces in lines I;± th rou gh 14;±;
forces in fenders I"" thro ugh 4"".

5. Discussion of Result s

The resu lts of comp utations in terms of mean, sta ndard devia tion and the maximum values
are given in Tables 5 and 6. Some discussion s are given through a pplication o f parameters of
weather conditions.

5.1 Weather Conditions Case I , Case 2 and Case 3

Under weather cond itions ca se I, case 2 a nd case 3 the mean wave pe riod of the spectra is
va ried . Referring to the valu es as given in Tables 5 and 6, noti ce the resu lts of the signa ls of the
surge mo tion s o f the manifold , the forces in mooring lines an d the fo rces on the fen der s. The
mag ni tude of the mea n stand ard deviation (a) and the maximum, except for the fender forces,
clearly sh ow tha t th ey incr ease with the incr ease of wave period . T he rea son for th e increase of
the sur ge motion a nd the line forces is the va lues of the matrix o f the quadratic tr ansfer function
(QT F ) of the wave drift forces I m oment. As an example, the QTF of the mian dia gon al of the
 88 JI Chun qun and J . E . W . WI CH ER S

'"
g I
'"
M ....... " ... .. .. .. .. .. .. .. ... .. ..
j
... .. ....
..
.. ... ..... - . .. ..
.. .. ... « • •••
.. .. ...
. '.
II .. ...
....
.. .... .. .. .
I ,
.. . .. ....... ... .. ...... ... .. ... ... .. I .......... .... .. .. .....
.. ... . - .., .... . ' - ... .. .... ..
f
... .. ... ... . .. . ••1.. . ..- .- .
!

.. ..... ... .... .. . .. ' --. - . .. ... ..

I .. ... .. .. .. .... ...... .. .... .... .. j

" j
.. .. .. .... .. ... .. .. .. .. ..... . .... ...... .I
!
II
!
.. . .. .... .. . .... r, .. .. .
.. .. . ... .... ....... j I
.. ..... I j
.. .... .. .. ... .. ..
f I
!
.. ... ..
I .. .. ... ..
!
...., . ...
I
I .. .. . ..... ... .. ... . ... ...
.. ., . .. .. .. ... .. .. ,, .
'.

.... . ....
'1 .. .. ..
.. .. .. .. .
j i ... .... ..
jIIItj
l:
... .....
I, ..
i! . .. ...... I

,i I
. '. I ..

I...· .. .
I'
.. I- [ .. .. .. .. ... .j .

cs
ei
I~
j
r
- -
I' i I
.. . .
.. . .. ..
[
I
. .. . ..
r ..
I .. ..
-.
J;
U
o 1200 2400 3600 4800 6000 7200 8400 9600 10800
Time (s)

Fig. 3. Fender force in weather condition case 9.

0
wa ve d rift force in x-direction und er 135 wave directions is given in Fig . 4. From Fig . 4 it can
be seen that tbe magnitude of the QTF increases fro m co = 0.75 rad / 5 tr, = 8.4 5) to w =
0.58 ra d / s tr, = 10.8 s) with approximately a maximum va lue at w = 0.48 rad / s tr, = 13.2
s). Th e mea n wave drift force and the spectral density of the wa ve d rift force are responsible for
the mea n and low frequency motions. T hey can be de termined as follows :
~

J F'm~o =2 ' S S( (co) P (w. cot dio

(11)
l SF (II) = 8 · S: S [
o
(ei ) S , (w + II) T ' (w. w + II) dw

in which
, 2 "
T (ill + II . w) = p (w + II . ill) + Q' (w + II . ill );

II - frequency of low frequency secon d order force;

r' (ill + I'. ill). Q' (ill + II . w) - in- phase an d out- phase co mp onen ts of the quadratic tran-
sfer fun ction;
T (ill + II. w ) - amplitude of quadratic transfer function .
 The Behaviour of LN G Carrier M oo red to a Jetty 89

Table 5 Results of co m puta tions of mean va lue

( Weather co nditio ns
Signals Ru n Run Run R un Run Run R un R un Run Run
case case case case case case case case ca se case
I 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
Xrcl (m) - 0. 53 - 0.49 -0.37 I - 0 .37 - 0.4 1 O .~ 9 - 0.42 - 0.37 I -0. 38 - 0.31
r., (m) - 0. 11 I 0.004 0.04 0.03 -0.07 - 0. 10 -0.39 -0 .20 0.46 0.30
2'd (m) 0.006 0.0 1 0.0 1 0 .0 1 0.0 1 0.00 0.03 - 0.02 0.04 I -0.03
R oll ( . ) 0.0 1 0.03 0.04 0.02 0.02 0.00 - 0. 10 -0.07 -0.4 1 -0.09
Pitch ( • ) 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 o.oo ooo 0.00 -0.46 0.00
Y aw ( . ) 0.02 0.02 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.01 - 0.09 0.05 0.00 0.05
Line 1 / 2 (kN) 122 84 78 93 99 108 109 102 I 117 I 118
Line 3 / 4 (kN ) 177 127 109 126 138 137 148 134 156 150
Line 5 (kN) 147 107 94 II I 120 124 135 121 144 138
Line 6 / 7 (k N) 236 214 19 1 190 199 178 210 20 3 201 182
Line 8 / 9 (k N ) 79 62 81 87 78 101 107 113 112 I II
Line 10 (kN } 179 148 135 147 158 160 24 1 194 256 209
Line 11 /1 2 (kN ) 164 125 118 130 144 151 233 183 252 204
Line 13 / 14<kN ) 197 166 152 160 172 168 248 203 259 213
Fender I (kN) 1061 938 839 822 940 8 16 196 342 130 322
F end" 2 (kN) 893 868 1132 740 785 658 140 265 78 226
Fe nd " 3 (k N ) 1085 1107 1182 86 1 11153 8 12 343 135 177 99
F end " 4 (kN} 1280 1213 500 958 1198 954 424 165 283 140

160

/ r-.. ,......,
140

-
c
.E 120
1/
1\ -,
/ i\.. / '"
'c"
. 1\

- -
.E 100
\
..-" 3-:::-
~., '"-
c
'1'
80
/ I'. ./ I'... ./ r-,
----
-.".
.~

-e
60

40 /if I
"
= ,
0-
20 I I I
0
/ I
I
i I
lr)
01
ci
M
C
C,
M
ci
-e-
C '".,. or;
ci
co
cO
'D
ci
io
cc .- '"
ci
e-,
ci '"
'" co
C>
ci
co
0>
C'1
0
~
'n
...;
N '0
OJ
ci ci ci ci 0 0 ~

Frequency (rad!s)
Fig . 4. Quad ratic transfer function o f wave drift fo rce in .r-di rectic n (1 35 0 wa vs: directio n)
 90 JI Cbunqun and J. E . W . WI CHERS

Considering these formulas it is clear tha t the excitation will increase if the peak period of
th e wave spec trum inc rease from T p = 8.4 s to 13.2 s, resulting in higher va lues of motions and
line for ces. At the high load level the compression for ce will be constant over a relatively lar ge
,
(
range . For this reason it can be concluded tha t in most wea ther co ndi tions the ma ximum fender
force will mostly rema in a t the same level.

5.2 Weather Conditions Ca se 2, Case 4 and Case 6

For wea the r con ditions case 2, case 4 and case 6 the parameters wind spec tra and swell
both are applied . The wind d irection is 135 0 Also notice the results as mentioned above .
•

A comparison of the results for weather cond itions case 2 an d case 4 (constan t wind speed
25.2 m I s versus the mean hour of 20 m I s in co m bination with an API win d spec tru m) shows
th at only the maximum values oCthe manifo ld moti on s a nd the line forces are 10 - 20 % higher
for a wind spec tru m . For th e fend er force the same ca n be co ncl uded as me nti oned earlier. From
a co mparison of th e resul ts fo r wea ther conditions case 2 an d case 5 it can be concluded th at for
the forces in the mooring lines both the sta ndard deviation an d the maxim um values are
significan tly larger. In spi te of the lowerin g of th e sgnifica nt wave heig h t. the effec t of the re-
sulting acti on of the remaining waves. swell and wind coming fr om the same dir ection seems to
ca use the increas e in line forces. A com pa rison of the resul ts fo r wea ther co nditio ns case 5 a nd
case 6 lead s to the sa me co nclusions as dr awn for the results for weather conditions case 2 and
case 4. Fo r the fender force the same ca n be conclude d as me ntioned above.

5.3 Weather Cond itio ns Case 7, Case 8, Case 9 and Case 10

For wea ther co nd itions case 7, case 8, ca se 9 and case 10 the pa rameter s wind spec tra and
swell bo th a re a pplied. T he wind direction, however, is changed to 225 0 In this co ndition the
wind has the effect of push ing the carrier away fro m the jetty.
From the results it can be co ncluded that the standard deviatio n an d maximum values of
both the motions of the manifold and the mo oring line forces are significa ntly lar ger than those
found under weather conditi on s case 2. case 4, case 5 and ca se 6. O wing to the cha nged wind di-
rection , the ca rrier is less hea vily pushed against the fen der s as dem onistr ated in Figs. 2 and 3.
The result is th at th e effect o f the friction between the hull an d the fender will be smaller, re-
su lting in significa ntly larger low frequency mot ion s . The effect of larger mo tions induces higher
va lues of the for ces in th e m ooring lines. especially in the sp ring lines compar ed with wea ther
co ndit ions case 2, cas e 4, case 5 and case 6.
T be effect of the wind spectrum and the swell is not so significan t with regard to the stand-
ard case as fou nd in the case of wind di rect io n 135 0 This shows that it is im porta nt to consid-
•

er wind direc tio n in jetty design.

6 . Concl usions

From the study of the sensitivity of the mooring system and carrier moti ons to the combina-
tio ns of waves with and witho ut swell, steady wind and wind spectra and with the wind direc-
tions of 135 0 and 225 0 the follow ing concl usions ca n be dr awn :
 The Behavio ur of Lr-;G Carrier M o ored to a Jett y 91

Ta ble 6 Res ults o f comp utations of sta ndard dev ia tio n an d maximum value

( Weather conditions
Run Run Run Run Run
Signals
case I case 2 case 3 cas e 4 case 5
a Max . a Max. a M ax. a M ax. a Max.

X~I {m) 0.60 - 3.65 0.26 - 2.27 0.13 - 1.04 0.28 - 2.39 0.21 - 1.57
l"rc: l {m) 0.22 I - 1.23 0.17 - 0.8 0.08 0.35 0.17 - 0.90 0.18 - 0.9
Zn:J (m) 0.16 0.69 0.11 0.5 1 0.26 0.24 0.10 0.47 0.10 0.42
Roll « ) 0.31 - 1.36 0.27 - 1.16 0. 14 0.62 0.28 1.57 0.27 -1. 2
Pitch ( 0 ) 0.25 1.06 0.14 0.6 0.07 - 0.16 0.14 0.60 0.13 - 0.58
Yaw ( . ) 0.35 - 1.2 0.15 0.6 0.07 - 0.26 0.15 0.58 0 .25 - 0.82
Line I 1 2 (kl') 150 1785 63 511 24 180 65 610 92 847
Line 3 14 (kl') 192 1899 75 588 29 222 75 602 115 1066
Line 5 (kN ) 158 1700 67 534 22 188 68 507 99 905
Line 6 / 7 (k N) 156 2385 53 789 23 312 57 871 43 528
Line 8 /9 (kN ) 92 1238 43 268 28 186 49 330 47 32 3
Line 10 (kN) 124 1029 55 465 32 239 56 481 86 588
Line 11 /1 2 (k N) IS:! 1542 64 421 36 246 65 437 105 866
Line 13 /1 4 (kN) 133 1142 56 580 31 263 58 612 85 552
Fender I (kN) 159" 55 22 1228 4948 747 378 1 1150 4945 1318 4948
Fender 2 (kK) 1423 5097 1150 4945 719 3508 1066 4933 1197 4947
Fen der 3 (kN) 1511 4949 1269 4884 1137 4572 1124 4862 1435 4949
Fender 4 {kN ) 1704 4949 1369 4902 1205 4672 1226 4879 1590 4949

Weather cond itions

Run Ru n R un Run Run
Signals
case 6 case 7 ca se 8 case 9 case 10
a Max. a M ax. a Max . o M ax. a Max .

X", (m ) 0 .23 - 1.65 0.60 - 3. 1 0.69 - 3.45 0 .53 - 2.50 0.37 - 2. 17

Y,., (m ) 0.19 -0.97 0.28 - 1.29 0.23 -1.03 0.26 - 1.38 0.25 - 1.38
z., (m } 0.10 0.40 0.09 0 .34 0.08 - 0.43 0.09 - 0.40 0.09 - 0.36
Roll ( 0 ) 0.28 - 1.26 0.41 1.58 0.38 1.58 0.36 - 1.41 0.33 - 1.43
Pitch ( 0 ) 0.13 - 0.58 0.14 0.6 0.14 0.60 0. \4 - 0.59 0.13 - 0.58
Y aw (. ) 0.24 - 0.88 0.17 - 0.73 0.15 - 0 .62 , 0.20 - 0.73 0 .21 - 0.87
Line I / 2 (kN) 93 962 87 7 11 82 837 92 668 93 1032
Line 3 / 4 (k-'I) 112 1059 91 691 81 677 104 959 III 1129
Line 5 (kN ) 98 964 86 699 I 76 732 94 784 98 1060
Line 6 1 7 (kN) 48 552 128 1132 156 1466 108 I 1016 73 762
Line 8 1 9 (k K) 50 I 394 99 I 802 113 I 1080 91 6 18 I 67 541
Line 10 (kN J 86 630 66 653 I 69 I 769 75 770 84 831
I
Line 11 /1 2 (kN) 106 I 990 80 92 1 72 584 97 845 102 933
Line 13 /1 4 (kN ) I 85 615 75 930 86 1126 79 912 86 865
Fen der I (kN) 227 4946 668 4947 828 4936 I 520 4889 8 11 4769
Fende r 2 (kN ) 1052 4949 554 4948 716 494 1 I 389 4662 649 4570
Fende r 3 (kN) 1250 4949 233 3930 457 4409 I 159 3887 406 4126
Fender 4 (kN) 1417 4949 I 272 I 3988 52 5 4587 I 215 4 110 517 4202
 The Behaviour of LJ'G Carrier M oo red to a Je tty YI

Table 6 Res ults of computations of standard deviation and maximum va lue

'A,. eather conditions

(
Run R un RUD Ru n Run
Signals
case 1 case 2 cas e 3 case 4 case 5
,
o Max. a M a x. a M ax . a Max. a Max.
X.. (m) 0.60 - 3.65 0 .26 - 2.17 I 0.13 I - 1.04 0.28 - 2. 39 0.21 -1.5 7
r~1 (m) 0.21 -1.23 0.17 - 0.8 0.08 0.35 0.17 - O.YO 0 .18 - 0.9
Z~I (m) 0. 16 0.69 0.1 1 0.5 1 0.26 0.24 0. 10 0.47 0.10 0.42
Roll ( 0 ) 0.3 1 - 1.36 0.27 - 1.16 0.14 0.62 0.28 1.57 0 .2 7 - 1.2
Pitch ( 0 ) 0.25 1.06 0.14 0 .6 0.07 - 0.26 0. 14 0 .60 0.13 - 0.58
Yaw ( 0 ) 0.35 - 1.2 0.15 06 0.07 - 0.26 0.15 0.58 0.25 - 0 .82
Line 1 / 2 (kN) 150 1785 63 51 1 24 180 65 610 92 847
Line 3 14 (kN ) 192 18Y9 75 588 29 222 75 60 2 115 1066
Line 5 (k N) 158 1700 67 534 22 188 68 507 99 905
Line 6 / 7 (kN) 156 2385 53 789 23 312 57 871 43 528
Line 8 /9 (k N) 92 1238 43 268 28 186 49 330 47 323
Line 10 (kN) 124 1029 55 465 32 239 56 481 86 588
Line 11 /12 (kl' ) 152 1542 64 421 36 246 65 437 105 866
Line 13 / 14 (kN ) 133 1142 56 580 31 263 58 612 85 552
Fender I (kN) 1590 5522 1228 4Y48 747 378 1 1150 4945 1318 4948
Fender 2 (kN) 1423 5097 1150 4945 719 3508 1066 4933 1197 4947
Fen der 3 (kN) 1511 4949 1269 4884 1137 4572 1124 4862 1435 4949
Fen der 4 (k N ) 1704 4949 1369 4902 1205 4672 1226 4879 1590 4949

Weath er co nditions
Ru n R un R un R UD Run
Signa ls
case 6 case 7 case 8 case 9 case 10
a M ax. a M a x. o Max. a M ax. a M ax.
X... (m ) 0.23 - 1.65 0.60 - 3. 1 0.69 - 3.45 0.53 - 2.50 0.37 - 2. 17
Y... {m } 0.19 - 0.97 0.28 - 1.29 0.23 - 1.03 0.26 - 1.38 0.25 -1.38
Z~I (m) 0.10 0.40 0.09 0 .34 0.08 - 0.43 0.09 -0 .40 0.09 - 0.36
Ro ll ( 0 ) 0.28 -1.26 0.4 1 1.58 0.38 1.58 0.36 - 1.4 1 0.33 - 1.43
Piteh (" ) 0.13 -0.58 0.14 0 .6 0.14 0.60 0.14 -0.59 0. 13 - 0.58
Yaw ( 0 ) 0.24 - 0.88 0.17 -0.73 0.15 - 0.62 0 .20 I - 0. 73 0.21 -0.87
Line I / 2 (kN) 93 962 87 7 11 82 837 92 668 93 1032
Line 3 / 4 (kN ) 112 1059 91 69 1 81 677 104 959 I II 1129
Line 5 (kN) 98 964 86 699 76 732 94 784 98 1060
Line 6 / 7 IkN) 48 552 128 1132 156 1466 108 1016 73 I 762
Line 8 1 9 (kN) 50 394 99 802 113 1080 I 91 618 67 I 541
Line 10 (kN) 86 630 66 653 69 769 75 770 84 831
Line 11/ 12 (kN) 106 990 80 92 1 72 584 97 845 102 933
Line 13 / 14 (kN} I 85 615 75 930 86 1126 79 I 912 86 865
Fender 1 (k N} 227 4946 I 668 4947 828 4936 520 4889 I 811 4 769
Fender 2 (kN ) 1052 4949 554 I 4948 716 4941 389 4662 I 649 4570
Fend er 3 ( kN ) 1250 4949 I 233 I 3930 457 4409 159 3887 I 406 4 126
f en der 4 (kN) I 1417 4949 I 272 I 3988 I 525 4587 215 I 41 10 I 517 4 202
 92 JI Ch unq un an d J . E. W. WI CH ER S

In wea ther conditions case I, case 2 and case 3, the va lues of mo tion s of th e manifold,
and the for ces in the mo oring line s a nd fenders increase with th e increase of the mean wave peri-
o d o f th e spec tra. Thi s inc reas es a re ca used by the qua ntita tive fo rm of th e quadra tic tra nsfer
fun ction of the wave drift forces. Since th e load-compression curve is cons tan t o ver a larg e com-
pression range the ma ximum values of th e fender forces mostly remain at the same level.
- From a compari son o f th e results for weather conditions cas e 2 and case 4 it ca n be co n-
cluded that owing to the wind spectrum, the maximum va lues of mani fold motio ns and line
forces a re 10- 20 % high er.
- Fro m a comparison of the resu lts for weather con d itions case 2, ca se 5 an d case 6 it can
be co ncluded that, in sp ite of the lower wave height, th e swell causes a significant increase of
both the sta ndard deviatio n an d th e maximum valu es of forces in the mooring lines.
- For wea ther co ndi tions case 7, ca se 8, case 9 and case 10 it ca n be conclud ed tha t bo th
the m oti ons of the manifold an d the forces in mooring lines a re signifi cantly la rger than tho se
for weather conditions ca se 2, case 4, case 5 a nd cas e 6.
- The wind d irec tions is a n im p orta nt fact or affecting the arrangement of the orienta tion
of the jetty . Th e force in m ooring lines a nd fenders could be affect ed by th e changing of wind di-
rection.
This study sh ows tha t comp utatio ns are necessa ry in the find ing and unde rs tanding of the
sensitivity of resulting forces and mot ion s to weather cond ition s for th e desi gn o f a jett y.

References

OCIM F·Society of Internatio nal Gas Tank ers and Termina l Ope rators Ltd, 1985. Pred iction of wind loads on large lique-
fied gas carriers, Witherby and Co. Ltd.. Lo ndo n. England .
Wichers, J. E. W.. 1988. Simulation M odel jJ r Single Buoy M o ored Tankers. Ph. D . dissertatio n. D elft Uni versity of
Technology, The N etherlands.
Oortm erssen. G . van. J. A. Pinkster and H . H . van de n Boom. 1986. Compute r Simulation o f Moored Ship Behaviou r,
Joumal ofwaterwav, Port, Coast al and Ocea n Engineering , AS CE, 112. 2.
Oortmerssen, G . van . 1976. The M otions ofa .t f cor ed Ship in H' a l·cs. Ph . D . dissertation . Delf Uni versity of Techno logy .
Pink st er, J. A .. 1980. Lo ....· Freq uency Sec ond Or der W a vt' Excit ing Forces on Float ing S tru ctures, Ph. D . dissertation.
D elft Un iversity of Technology.
OCIMF, 1994. Rediction of u,"ind and Current Loads on VLCC s. Seco nd Edition. Wither by and Co . Ltd.. Lo ndon.
England .

i,