Proceedings of the ASME 2011 30th International Conference on Ocean, Offshore and Arctic Engineering
OMAE2011
June 19-24, 2011, Rotterdam, The Netherlands
INFLUENCE OF HEAVE PLATE ON HYDRODYNAMIC RESPONSE OF SPAR
S. Sudhakar
Research Scholar
Department of Ocean Engineering
Indian Institute of Technology Madras,
Chennai, Tamilnadu, INDIA 600036
ABSTRACT
Spar technology has been used in offshore oil and gas
exploration successfully for number of years for drilling,
production and storage in deepwater. The motion response of
floating structures especially the heave response in particular, is
very important to the selection of suitable drilling and
production equipments. Reduction of heave response can be
achieved by attaching a heave damping plate to the keel of a
Spar. This has been used in the past. Experimental and
numerical studies on such devices of various diameters under
regular waves has been carried out and presented. The
experiments were conducted on a 1: 100 scale model of Spar
designed for a water depth of 245m with a payload of 10000
tonnes and the numerical analysis was carried out using ANSYS
AQWA software. Numerical and experimental values of RAOs
for surge, pitch and heave compares reasonably well. Measured
and numerical results of RAOs for surge, pitch and heave and
the effect of diameter ratio, wave steepness, and mooring line
pretension were presented and discussed. An optimum heave
response is achieved when the heave plate diameter is 20% to
30% larger than the diameter of the spar.
INTRODUCTION
The Spar platform concept is being considered as one of
the most favourable options for the development of deepwater
oil and gas fields. The classic Spar is a deep draft, large
diameter, hollow cylindrical vessel which can support drilling
and production facilities in addition to provision for storage of
substantial quantity of crude oil in its hull. One of the main
advantages of this Spar concept is that the system undergoes
relatively low heave and pitch motions even in extreme
environment. As a variation upon Spar theme, a second
generation truss-Spar has been developed with a shorter hull
length and a series of horizontal damping plates are fitted across
the truss bays. The truss arrangement helps to reduce weight
and fabrication cost. The heave plates increases the heave added
mass and damping of the platform. A third generation Spar
known as cell Spar, where the cylindrical hull of previous two
Downloaded From: http://proceedings.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/ on 11/25/2014 Terms of Use: http://asme.org/terms
OMAE2011-49565
S. Nallayarasu
Associate Professor
Department of Ocean Engineering
Indian Institute of Technology Madras,
Chennai, Tamilnadu, INDIA 600036
generations is replaced by configurations of cells. The cells are
buoyant cylindrical tubes and are simpler and therefore even
cheaper to fabricate compared to the large and complicated
cylindrical structure of the classic and truss Spars. However, the
classic Spar platform possesses low damping and long natural
period. These two characteristics, together with long period
swell, may produce linearly excited heave resonant motion of
the Spar. These large amplitude heave oscillations may cause
damage to both risers and mooring systems.
In order to enhance the damping mechanism, during the
resonant oscillation of the Spar in the vertical direction,
additional damping devices are introduced externally. A typical
example of these damping devices is a heave plate, which is
attached to the keel of the Spar as shown in Figure 1. The two
major effects of adding heave plate at the bottom of the Spar are
(i) increase in heave added mass (ii) increase in viscous
damping. The additionally introduced heave plate “traps” a
large mass of water, which is forced to accelerate vertically in
phase with the platform. This “added mass” (Refer to Figure 8.)
increases the heave natural period well beyond the predominant
wave period. This additional plate at the bottom also enhances
the flow separation and vortex shedding process. This process
will introduce additional non linear viscous damping in the
heave direction, thus providing a more effective means of
limiting the motion. This results in efficient working of floating
Spar platform as well as rigid risers.
Figure 1. Classic Spar with heave damping plate
1 Copyright © 2011 by ASME
 LITERATURE REVIEW (L/Dd), geometry, porosity of the plate and type of vortex
Till date many researchers have investigated the extreme shedding regimes around the damping elements.
motion responses of the Spar and various methods to control the The present experimental work is intended to provide
response within the desired limit. Experimental studies by an understanding on the influence of heave plate diameter, wave
Downie et al. (2000) show that at any specific frequency, large steepness and pretension in the mooring line on responses of
and solid plates generally have a lower heave response than the Spar platform. The numerical studies were carried out for Spar
perforated plates attached with truss Spar whereas the converse with and without heave plate using hydrodynamic software
is true with regard to the force. Magee et al. (2000) investigated package called ANSYS AQWA.
the effectiveness of heave plates in the performance of truss
Spar. The assessment of performance was based on both EXPERIMENTAL INVESTIGATION
experimental and numerical analysis with and without heave Model
plates. It was concluded that the heave plates offer considerable The experiments were conducted to investigate the
reduction in the heave response. Kim et al (2001) carried out influence of diameter of the heave plate and pretension in the
non linear coupled dynamic analysis of a truss Spar in the time mooring line on hydrodynamic response (heave, surge and
domain and compared the results with those obtained from pitch) of Spar. The experiments were conducted on a scale
uncoupled analysis and experiments. It was concluded that the model of Spar designed for a water depth of 245m with a
response of a taut-moored truss Spar obtained from coupled payload of 10000 Tonnes. The details of prototype and scale
analysis compares very well with model tests. Rho et al (2002) model of proposed Spar including dimension, payload and its
carried out an experimental study on heave and pitch motions of hydrostatic properties are summarized in Table 1. The Spar
various Spar configurations with a model scale of 1:400 and model was fabricated to 1:100 scale using Acrylic material. The
investigated the effect of moon pool, strakes and damping plate. details of mooring system for the proposed prototype and scale
It was concluded that, spiral strake and the damping plate are model are summarized in Table 2. The heave damping plate is
effective in reducing the resonant heave motions by about 25% fitted to the Spar at the bottom as shown in Figure 1.
and 50% respectively. Tao et al. (2004) investigated the Experiments were conducted to measure the response with
hydrodynamics of heaving vertical cylinder with a single disk heave plates with five different diameter ratio (Dd/Ds) of 1.1,
attached at the keel. Numerical studies showed that the disk 1.2, 1.3, 1.4 and 1.5, where Ds is the Spar hull diameter and Dd
extension should be at least four times typical heave amplitude is the diameter of heave plate. The floating model is moored to
to achieve the optimum drag effect. Hong et al. (2005) carried the floor using four mooring wires attached to the Spar.
out model tests on four types of Spar models in order to
understand the influence of heave augmentation devices on Table 1. Details of Spar prototype and scale model
response characteristics. The positive effects of strake and Description Prototype Scale model
heave damping plates were confirmed. Chakrabarti et al (2006) Water depth 245m 2.45m
carried out wave resonant tests on a model truss-pontoon Material Steel Acrylic
semisubmersible with heave plates to understand the effect of Unit weight 78.5 kN/m 3
12 kN/m3
hydrodynamic damping over heave and pitch response. The Deck size 35x35x1 m 0.35x0.35x0.01 m
separated flow damping induced by the heave plates near Topside weight 98100kN 98.1N
resonance, is about five times larger than the free-decay Draft 110m 1.1 m
damping for heave and nine times for pitch. This will limit the
Free board 15m 0.15 m
amplitude of peak heave and pitch motions. Molin et al. (2007)
Diameter 25m 0.25 m
carried out numerical simulations using finite difference
Self weight 71613 kN 71.62 N
approach to investigate the span-wise length L/Dd (L-distance
Weight due to ballast 357055 kN 357.1N
between the disks, and Dd-the diameter of the disks) effects on
the hydrodynamic properties, such as added mass and damping Downward force 526768 kN 526.82N
coefficients in a heaving vertical cylinder attached with two Buoyancy force 542944 kN 543N
circular disks. The results showed that the damping ratio KG 49.99m 0.5001 m
increases with increase in span wise length due to strong KB 55m 0.55 m
interaction between the vortices of different disks, up to the GM 5.38m 0.0535 m
critical limit of relative spacing (L/Dd). Dray et al. (2008) Wall thickness 95mm 5mm
investigated the hydrodynamic characteristics of oscillatory Ratio of pretension to - 2.98% & 1.63%
solid or porous disks using model scale experiments. For a disk buoyancy force(T/B)
with 20% porosity yields approximately 30% increase in Heave natural period 22s 2.26s
damping compared to the solid disk at f=0.1Hz and KC=0.2. Pitch natural period 42 s 4.2 s
From the literature, it is concluded that, the effectiveness of
damping plate in reducing the resonant heave response of Spar
system depends upon diameter ratio (Dd/Dc), span wise length

2 Copyright © 2011 by ASME

Downloaded From: http://proceedings.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/ on 11/25/2014 Terms of Use: http://asme.org/terms

 Table 2. Mooring Line Properties

Parameter Prototype Scale

model
No. of mooring lines 4 4
Pretension in one mooring line
4044 kN 4.05 N
(T/B=2.98%)
Diameter of the mooring line 203.2 mm 2.5 mm
Length of the mooring line 265 m 2.65 m
(a). Plan
Weight of the mooring rope in
151.42 Kg/m 20 gm/m
water(IWRC rope)
Axial stiffness (AE/L) 9281. 3 kN/m 94.6 Kg/m
Breaking strength 26531.4 kN 26.5 N
Ratio of pretension to breaking
strength (%) 14.7 14.7

Experimental setup
The experimental investigations were carried out in a
laboratory wave flume at the Department of Ocean Engineering,
Indian Institute of Technology Madras, India. The wave flume
(90 m long, 4m wide and 3 m deep) is equipped with twin flap (b). Elevation
wave maker capable of generating regular and random waves. A
beach with an average slope of 1:6 at the far end of the wave Figure 2. Schematic view of experimental setup
flume absorbs the waves. The Spar model is installed at the
center position of the wave flume with a mooring system
comprising of four taut mooring lines, 90 degrees apart, is as
shown in Figure 2. One end of each mooring line is connected
to the fairleader points (exactly in between center of gravity and
center of buoyancy) on the Spar model and the other end to a
rigid concrete block placed at floor. Water depth of 2.45m was
maintained constantly throughout the experimental
investigation.
The measurement of surge, heave and pitch accelerations is
carried out using accelerometers mounted at the deck of Spar
model, as shown in Figure 3. Four ring-type load cells were
attached to the mooring lines to measure the mooring line
forces. A resistance-type wave probe was placed at a distance
of 1m from the model on the seaside to measure wave surface
elevation. The measured responses and mooring line forces
were recorded with a digital computer via A/D converter. The
sampling rate of data acquisition was set to 25Hz in regular
wave test.
A series of regular wave tests were carried out by varying
the diameter of the heave plate (Dd) for different wave periods
with different wave heights. The scaled model was fixed at a
distance of 25m from the wave paddle. The test was repeated at
non-dimensional pre-tensions viz. T/B=2.98% and T/B=1.63%
(where T is the pretension in the mooring line and B is
Buoyancy force on the floating system), with the constant
payload at two pretension levels. The adjustment mechanism
provided at the upper end of the steel wire rope permitted Figure 3. Top view of Spar model
increase in pretension thereby permitting a corresponding draft
change in the Spar platform.

3 Copyright © 2011 by ASME

Downloaded From: http://proceedings.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/ on 11/25/2014 Terms of Use: http://asme.org/terms

 The details of the various variables and non dimensional The viscous damping is determined using the following
parameters used in the present study are listed in Table 3 & 4. expressions:
Heave damping:
Table 3. Wave Parameters =b33 ζ 3 2 ( ( M 33 + a33 ) ωHeave ) (6)
Parameters Prototype Scale Model
Wave Height 3m & 5m 3cm & 5cm Pitch damping:
Wave period 12s to 28s 1.2s to 2.8s with an increment =b55 ζ 5 2 ( ( M 55 + a55 ) ωPitch ) (7)
of 0.1s
where b33 and b55 are the damping of the Spar in heave and
Table 4. Non dimensional parameters for the experiments pitch, M33 and M55 are the mass of the floating body in heave
and pitch, a33 and a55 added mass of the Spar in heave and
Parameters Range pitch.
Disc diameter ratio (Dd/Ds) 1.1-1.5 The estimated natural period using free decay tests (a) as
Pretension to Buoyancy force(T/B) 1.63% & 2.98% explained above and simulated using AQWA (c) is presented in
Wave steepness(H/L) 0.0025-0.032 Table 5. Further, the calculated natural period using uncoupled
equation of motion for heave is also given in Table 5 for
Free decay tests comparison purpose. The natural period (b) is calculated using
Free decay tests were conducted to obtain natural period the following formula.
and damping ratio for the heave and pitch motions. Heave
m + A33
oscillation test was done by giving a push at the center of the T = 2π (8)
Spar model and the response was observed using an ρ gAw
accelerometer. Pitch oscillation test was done by placing a
where m and A33 are mass and added mass of the system, Aw is
weight at one end of the model and the pitch motion was
measured using an inclinometer. The measured displacement the water plane area, g is the acceleration due to gravity, ρ is the
history of the Spar with and without heave plate (Dd/Ds=1.5) in density of water and the added mass calculated is taken from
heave and pitch is shown in Figure 4. Table 6.
Logarithmic decrement method is used to find the damping
ratio of an under damped system in the time domain. The Table 5. Variation of natural period for Spar with and
logarithmic decrement is the natural log of the amplitudes of without heave plate
any two peaks: Diameter Heave natural period(s)
1  x0  ratio (Dd/Ds) Exp. Calc. AQWA
δ = ln   (1) (a) (b) (c)
n  xn  1.0 2.26 2.17 2.18
where x0 is the greater of the two amplitudes and xn is the 1.1 2.28 2.19 2.20
amplitude of a peak n periods away. The damping ratio is then 1.2 2.34 2.21 2.23
found from the logarithmic decrement: 1.3 2.39 2.24 2.26
1 1.4 2.43 2.29 2.30
ζ = (2) 1.5 2.49 2.34 2.34
 2π 
2

1+  
 δ  It can be seen from Table 5 that the estimated natural heave
The damping ratio can then be used to find the undamped period and the theoretical calculation matches reasonably well.
natural frequency ωn of vibration of the system from the The AQWA results match very well with that of the theoretically
damped natural frequency ωd: calculated values of natural period.
The natural period in heave motion is 2.2 sec and the
2π
ωd = (3) natural period in pitch motion is 4.2s for Spar without heave
T plate, which is 1.86 times the heave natural period. The heave
where T, the period of oscillation, is the time between two natural period of Spar with heave plate (Dd/Ds=1.5) is 2.48s,
successive amplitude peaks. The natural frequency and natural and is larger than that for other Dd/Ds ratio. It may be due to
time period can then be easily found: increase in total mass due to larger size heave plate. The
ω 2π increase in pitch period from 4.2s to 4.49s can be attributed to
ωn = d
Tn (4) & (5) increase in total mass.
1− ζ 2 ωn The heave damping ratio of Spar with heave plate
(Dd/Ds=1.5) increased about 1.93 times of Spar without heave

4 Copyright © 2011 by ASME

Downloaded From: http://proceedings.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/ on 11/25/2014 Terms of Use: http://asme.org/terms

 (a) Heave decay of Spar
(a) Natural period

(b) Heave decay of Spar with heave plate

(b) Damping ratio
Figure 5. Variation of natural period and damping ratio
with diameter ratio (Dd/Ds).

plate, (i.e. from 4.3% to 8.3%,). This shows that heave damping
plates are very effective in reducing the heave motion by
increase in damping. Further, there is an increase in pitch
damping ratio which mean that the heave damping plate can
also reduce the pitch motions to a certain extent.

NUMERICAL INVESTIGATION
Governing Equation
(c) Pitch decay of Spar
The governing equation of motion of a floating body can be
described by the following equation in six degrees of freedom.

{} {}
 
[ M + A] ξ + [ B ] ξ + [C ]{ξ } =
{F } (9)
where M is the displaced mass matrix of the floating structure,
A is added mass of the floating structure; B is the damping; C is

the restoring force; F is the Hydrodynamic force; ξ is the
acceleration; ξ is the velocity and ξ is the displacement.


Numerical simulation of hydrodynamic response of Spar

(d) Pitch decay of Spar with heave plate
Figure 4. Comparison of Time histories of heave
and pitch decay
with and without heave plates of various diameter ratios from
1.1 to 1.5 has been carried out in frequency domain using
hydrodynamic software package called ANSYS AQWA. This
software uses three dimensional panel methods to solve the
linearized hydrodynamic radiation and diffraction problem in
frequency domain. The AQWA program considers only

5 Copyright © 2011 by ASME

Downloaded From: http://proceedings.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/ on 11/25/2014 Terms of Use: http://asme.org/terms

 radiation damping and the effect of viscous damping is not
automatically generated. Hence to include the effect of viscous
damping, the external damping values obtained from free decay
tests are included as an external input. The surface profiles of a
floating body is simulated accurately through a 3D modeling
software called “Design modular”, which uses solid modeling
technique. The simulated 3D surface is shown in Figure 6. The
simulated surface is exported to frequency domain program
called AQWA FER to obtain recalculated RAO (considering
mooring line stiffness) together with significant tensions in the
mooring line. A mooring line is modeled as a linear elastic
weightless spring, with constant line stiffness in AQWA FER.
The properties of the mooring lines attached to the system are
specified in the input file as their outstretched lengths, end
nodes on respective bodies and their load/extension
Figure 7. Variation of heave added mass (for all periods)
characteristics.

Figure 6. Numerical Model in AQWA Figure 8. Heave added mass of Spar with heave plate

Numerical simulation of response and mooring line forces for

the Spar with and without heave plate has been carried out for Table 6. Variation of added mass and coefficient for Spar
various diameter ratios from 1.1 to 1.5. with and without heave plate

Variation of heave added mass Diameter Theoretical AQWA

The heave added mass obtained from the numerical ratio (Dd/Ds) A33 Ca A33 Ca
simulation for the Spar without heave plate (diameter ratio of 1.0 4111.07 0.076 4010.2 0.075
1.0) and Spar with heave plates with diameter ratio from 1.1 to 1.1 4645.94 0.086 4854.8 0.090
1.5 is presented in Figure 7. The added mass expressed in terms 1.2 5260.06 0.097 6084.7 0.112
of percentage of the Spar without heave plate is also shown in 1.3 7213.95 0.133 7703.1 0.142
Figure 7. The heave added mass for the Spar with heave plate 1.4 9595.32 0.176 9806.2 0.181
can be calculated theoretically (see Figure 8.) using the 1.5 12428.50 0.228 12360.0 0.227
following relationship.
1 
ma = A33 = ρ Dd3 −  ρ Dd3 − ( Dd2 − Ds2 ) Dd2 − Ds2  (10)
1 It can be observed from the Figure 7, that the increase in
3  6  added mass is steep beyond the diameter ratio of 1.2. It is
The calculated added mass coefficient using the results from observed that by increasing value of Dd/Ds from 1 to 1.2 the
AQWA and calculated from the above equation is presented in heave added mass increases by 50%; when Dd/Ds was increased
Table 6. to 1.5, the induced added mass shoots up by 200%. Hence the
heave added mass increases four-fold when the diameter ratio
increases from 1.2 to 1.5. This shall be noted as increase in

6 Copyright © 2011 by ASME

Downloaded From: http://proceedings.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/ on 11/25/2014 Terms of Use: http://asme.org/terms

 added mass will change the response characteristics drastically. between the results obtained from the experiment and the
Refer to Figure 5, the increase in heave damping ratio for radiation damping obtained from the numerical analysis. The
diameter ratio from 1 to 1.2 is about 50% (from 4.3% to 6.5%). increase in total damping for the Spar without heave plate to
However, the increase in damping ratio beyond diameter ratio Spar with heave plate of diameter ratio of 1.2 is approximately
of 1.2 is only 27% (from 6.5% to 8.3%). In order to verify the 50% and for diameter ratio of 1.5 the increase is about 100%.
added mass generated by the numerical analysis, an attempt was This signifies the presence of heave damping plate and can
made to verify the same using theoretical calculation as shown increase the damping considerably.
in Table 6. The added mass for the cylinder with closed end can
be taken as =
A33 2.09ρr 3 (r-radius of the cylinder) and the RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
The results of the motion response (pitch, surge and heave)
added mass for the Spar with heave plate is calculated using the obtained from experiments and numerical analysis are presented
geometry as shown in Figure 8. The simulated added mass and and discussed in this section. The experimental results were
coefficient closely match with the proposed method. converted to prototype and compared with the numerical
results.
Variation of heave radiation damping
The heave radiation damping obtained from AQWA for the Comparison of experimental and numerical results
Spar with heave plates is presented in Figure 9. It is observed The measured heave RAO for the Spar without heave plate
that the heave radiation damping for the heave plates of size 1.2 is compared with that obtained using numerical simulation is
Ds and 1.5 Ds increases by 14% and 19% with respect to the shown in Figure 10(a). It is observed that, measured heave
Spar without heave plate. RAOs found to be in good agreement with that obtained from
numerical simulation. The difference between peak heave
responses is about 8%.
The surge RAO obtained from experimental investigation
is about the top of the Spar. It is shifted to the center of gravity
(VCG) of the system since the responses were obtained in the
centre of gravity incase of numerical simulation. A comparison
of surge RAO obtained from numerical simulation and
experimental results is presented in Figure 10(b). Comparison
indicates that the numerical results were satisfactory for lower
wave periods. For higher wave periods, the average difference
between the experimental and numerical results is found to be
around 11.5%.
The comparison of pitch RAO obtained by numerical and
experimental measurement is presented in Figure 10(c). It is
Figure 9. Variation of heave radiation damping.
observed that the experimental results are marginally higher for
larger wave periods, including the peak value. The maximum
Table 7. Variation of damping for Spar with and without
difference in peak responses is found to be 9%. At lower wave
heave plate
period range, the numerical results are more than the
Diameter Total Damping Radiation External
experimental results. Similar trend can also be observed for
ratio (%) damping Damping input
pitch, surge and heave response of the Spar with heave plate
(Dd/Ds) Experiment(a) (%) to AQWA (%)
(Dd/Ds=1.5) as shown in Figure 11.
AQWA(b) (c)
1.0 4.30 0.096 4.20
Variation of RAO with period
1.1 5.65 0.101 5.55 The variation of pitch, surge and heave RAO for Spar with
1.2 6.42 0.112 6.30 wave period with and without heave plate is shown in Figure 12
1.3 7.00 0.112 6.88 (a), (b) and (c) respectively. The variation of pitch RAOs for the
1.4 7.68 0.113 7.57 Spar with heave plates of various Dd/Ds ratios obtained from the
1.5 8.30 0.115 8.19 experiments is shown in Figure 12 (a). The experimental results
shows that the pitch RAO increases with increase in wave
Table 7 summarises the damping ratio (%) obtained from period to a peak value of 0.132rad/m for Spar without heave
free decay tests for various heave plate diameter ratio along plate and a peak value of 0.104 rad/m for Dd/Ds ratio of 1.5. It
with the radiation damping obtained from numerical analysis can be observed that the decrease in pitch RAO is about
using AQWA. In order to match the damping in the numerical 21.33% for the increase of plate size by 50%.It is also observed
analysis, the viscous part of the damping is input into numerical that the peaks of pitch RAO occur at different wave periods.
analysis as an external input (c). This is taken as the difference

7 Copyright © 2011 by ASME

Downloaded From: http://proceedings.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/ on 11/25/2014 Terms of Use: http://asme.org/terms

 (a)Heave (a) Heave

(b) Surge (b) Surge

(a) Pitch (a) Pitch

Figure 10. Comparison of experimental and numerical Figure 11. Comparison of experimental and numerical
results of pitch, surge and heave RAO of Spar without results of pitch, surge and heave RAO of Spar with heave
heave plate plate (Dd/Ds=1.5)

8 Copyright © 2011 by ASME

Downloaded From: http://proceedings.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/ on 11/25/2014 Terms of Use: http://asme.org/terms

 This may be attributed to the increase in added mass due to the
heave plate as well as the increased damping due to larger plate
size.
The surge RAO of the system was measured using
accelerometer placed at the deck. These measured values were
then translated to the centre of gravity of the system. The surge
RAO of Spar with heave plates (Dd/Ds=1.2&1.5) is shown in
Figure 12(b). The results obtained from experiments exhibits a
reduction in surge RAO with increase in plate diameter ratio.
The maximum surge RAO reduces from 1.35m/m to 1.11m/m
as Dd/Ds increases from 1.0 to 1.5. The decrease in maximum
surge RAO is about 17.8% for the increase of plate size by
50%.
The heave RAO measured from the model tests is shown in
Figure 12(c). The heave RAO increases with increase in wave
period. The trend is similar for Spar with and without heave
plates, except that the peak values of RAO occur at different
wave periods. The shift in peak could be attributed to the
change in added mass for Spar with and without heave plate. It
is also observed that there is significant reduction in the heave
motions of the Spar platform on addition of the heave plate to
the keel of the Spar. The peak heave RAO reduces from
2.18m/m to 1.66m/m as Dd/Ds value increases from 1.0 to 1.5. It
can be concluded that the decrease in peak heave RAO is as
much as 24% for the increase of plate size by 50%. These
reductions in heave motions are partly due to increase in
viscous damping, but also to the fact that the increase in heave
added mass leading to increase in heave natural period on the
addition of the heave plate.
Effect of Diameter ratio (Dd/Ds)
Variation of peak pitch, surge and heave RAO with the
diameter ratio (Dd/Ds) is shown Figure 13. for a range of
diameter ratio from 1.0 to 1.5. The pitch RAO is shown in
Figure 13(a). The peak pitch RAO shows a decreasing trend
with increase in diameter ratio. The reduction of pitch RAO is
approximately 21% for Dd/Ds from 1.0 to 1.5. Similarly, the
variation of surge and heave RAO is shown in Figures 13(b)
and 13(c) respectively.
Similar trend in reduction of surge and heave RAO is
observed but the reduction is steep in the initial increase of
Dd/Ds up to 1.3. The decrease in surge and heave RAO is very
small for Dd/Ds greater than 1.3. This indicates that any further
increase in diameter of the heave plate, the reduction in
response especially the surge and heave will be minimum. This
is due to the fact that beyond this limit, the increase in diameter
ratio increases the added mass considerably but the increase in
damping is minimum. Hence the combined effect of added mass
and the damping shall be considered while deciding on the
diameter of the heave plate. Even the pitch shows the similar
trend. Hence the optimum heave plate size shall be restricted to
20% to 30% larger than the diameter of the Spar to achieve the
optimum response.
Downloaded From: http://proceedings.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/ on 11/25/2014 Terms of Use: http://asme.org/terms
Influence of pretension
The measured heave RAO for mooring pretension ratio T/B
of 1.63% & 2.98% are presented in Figure 14. It can be seen
from the figure that the peak heave RAO occurs at 22s. The
peak heave RAO of the Spar for the specified two pretension
levels in the mooring lines is 2.18m/m and 2.45m/m
respectively. The reduction in peak RAO is about 10% for T/B
of 1.63% to 2.98% and the reduction in RAO at lower wave
period range (10 sec to 20 sec) is less than 5%. Hence it can be
concluded that the effect of pretension on the heave response is
very limited. Further it shall be noted that the reduction in heave
RAO by means of increasing pretension will be at the cost of
reduction in pay load, if the draft has to be maintained. Hence
selection of pretension should be carefully considered together
with the required payload.
Influence of wave steepness
The measured heave RAO for two wave steepness values
of 0.011 & 0.018 are shown in Figure 15. The peak heave RAO
for wave steepness of 0.01 and 0.018 are 2.42m/m and 2.18m/m
respectively. The trend of the RAO indicates that the heave
RAO decreases with increase in wave steepness. The reduction
of peak heave RAO is about 10% for wave steepness of 0.018.
The heave RAO shows a consistent trend of higher wave
steepness with lower RAO values. This can be attributed to
wave breaking near the Spar cylinder, as observed during the
experiments. Hence it can be concluded that the effect of wave
steepness on the heave RAO can be considered marginal.
The measured surge RAO for two wave steepness values of
0.011 & 0.018 are sown in Figure 16. The peak surge RAO for
wave steepness of 0.011 and 0.018 are 1.94m/m and 2.10m/m
respectively. The trend of the RAO indicates that the surge
RAO increases with increase in wave steepness. The increase of
peak surge RAO is about 8% for wave steepness of 0.018. The
surge RAO shows a consistent trend of higher wave steepness
with higher RAO values except for lower wave period. This can
be attributed to wave breaking near the Spar cylinder as
observed during the experiments, which increases the horizontal
force. Hence it can be concluded that the effect of wave
steepness on the surge RAO can be considered marginal.
CONCLUSION
An experimental study was conducted on 1:100 scaled
model of Spar. The influence of size of the heave plate, wave
steepness and mooring line pretensions on motion responses has
been studied. Numerical studies have been carried out using
ANSYS AQWA. The following observations were made from
the experimental and numerical studies.
i. The measured pitch, surge and heave RAO compares
reasonably well with that of the numerical results. The
maximum difference is observed to be 9%, 15% and 8%
for the pitch, surge and heave respectively.
ii. The heave damping increases by 50% and 100% for
increase of diameter ratio from 1.0 to 1.2 and 1.0 to 1.5
respectively.
9 Copyright © 2011 by ASME
 (a) Pitch (a) Pitch

(b) Surge (b) Surge

(c) Heave (a) Heave

Figure 12. Variation of pitch, surge and heave RAO with Figure 13. Variation of peak pitch, surge and heave
period for different diameter ratio (Dd/Ds) RAO with diameter ratio (Dd/Ds)

10 Copyright © 2011 by ASME

Downloaded From: http://proceedings.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/ on 11/25/2014 Terms of Use: http://asme.org/terms

 iii. The increase in diameter ratio reduces the heave RAO by
19% for the diameter ratio of 1.3 and 24% for the
diameter ratio of 1.5.
iv. Increase in wave steepness reduces the heave RAO and
increases the surge RAO, but the effect is insignificant,
as the measured data shows scatter.
v. The increase in pretension in the mooring line reduces
peak heave response by approximately 10%. However
the reduction in RAO for lower wave periods is
insignificant. Further, due to scatter in the data, the same
cannot be concluded. However, the increase of
pretension will have effect on the payload.
vi. The recommended diameter of the heave plate is 20% to
30% larger than the diameter of the Spar in order to
achieve optimum surge, heave and pitch response where
in the effect of added mass and increased damping has
net positive effect.
Figure 14. Influence of pretension on heave response
REFERENCES
1. Allan Magee., Anil Sablok., Jim Maher., John
Halkyard., Lyle Finn., (2000) “Heave plate
effectiveness in the performance of truss spars”,
OMAE2000/OSU OFT -4230.
2. Downie, M.J., Graham, J.M.R., Hall, C., Incecik, A.,
Nygaard, I., (2000) “An experimental investigation of
motion control devices for truss Spars”, Marine
structures, 13, p. 75-90.
3. Jun B. Rho., Hang S. Choi., (2002) “Heave and pitch
motions of a Spar platform with damping plate”, ISOPE
2002.
4. M. H. Kim., Z. Ran., W. Zheng., (2001) “Hull/mooring
coupled dynamic analysis of a truss spar in time
domain”, ISOPE 2001.
5. Longbin Tao and Shunqing Cai(2004) “Heave motion
suppression of a Spar with a heave plate”, Journal of
Figure 15. Influence of wave steepness on heave response Ocean Engineering 31, p. 669-692.
6. Longbin Tao and Daniel Dray (2008) “Hydrodynamic
performance of solid and porous heave plates”, Journal
of Ocean Engineering 35, p. 1006-1014.
7. Nagan Srinivasan., Subrata Chakrabarti., R. Radha.,
(2006) “Response analysis of a truss-pontoon
semisubmersible with heave-plates”, OMAE2006.
8. Tao, L., Molin, B., Scolan, Y.M., Thiagarajan, K.
(2007) “Spacing effects on hydrodynamics of heave
plats on offshore structures”, Journal of Fluids and
structures 23, p. 1119-1136.
9. Yong-Pyo Hong., Dong-Yeon Lee., Yong-Ho Choi,
Sam-Kwon Hong., Se-Eun Kim., (2005) “An
experimental study on the extreme motion response of a
Spar platform in the heave resonant waves”, ISOPE
2005.

Figure 16. Influence of wave steepness on surge response

11 Copyright © 2011 by ASME

Downloaded From: http://proceedings.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/ on 11/25/2014 Terms of Use: http://asme.org/terms