OTC 14308

Small-Scale Testing of Damaged Synthetic Fiber Mooring Ropes

Jerry G. Williams, University of Houston - CEAC; Akira Miyase, University of Houston - CEAC; Donghui Li, University of
Houston - CEAC; and S. S. Wang, University of Houston - CEAC

Copyright 2002, Offshore Technology Conference

over 1½ dozen platforms so anchored and there is
This paper was prepared for presentation at the 2002 Offshore Technology Conference held in considerable interest emerging in using the synthetic fiber
Houston, Texas U.S.A., 6–9 May 2002.
mooring rope in other parts of the world including the Gulf
This paper was selected for presentation by the OTC Program Committee following review of
information contained in an abstract submitted by the author(s). Contents of the paper, as
of Mexico.
presented, have not been reviewed by the Offshore Technology Conference and are subject to
correction by the author(s). The material, as presented, does not necessarily reflect any
position of the Offshore Technology Conference or its officers. Electronic reproduction, The American Petroleum Institute has prepared guidelines for
distribution, or storage of any part of this paper for commercial purposes without the written
consent of the Offshore Technology Conference is prohibited. Permission to reproduce in print
the design, manufacture, installation and maintenance of
is restricted to an abstract of not more than 300 words; illustrations may not be copied. The synthetic fiber mooring ropes2. The Minerals Management
abstract must contain conspicuous acknowledgment of where and by whom the paper was
presented. Service (MMS) recently approved the use of FPSO systems in
central and western Gulf of Mexico regions3 and two MODU
drilling platform have recently been given approval to use
Abstract
polyester mooring rope in Gulf of Mexico deepwater drilling
Synthetic fiber mooring rope is an important emerging
programs. The MMS is interested in the durability of
technology helping enable the economical exploration and
synthetic fiber mooring ropes and has been proactive in
production of petroleum from offshore deepwater reservoirs.
sponsoring research and testing to characterize handling and
Polyester moorings have been used successfully for years in
installation damage4 and to assess the effects of damage.
Brazil and were recently approved by the MMS for use by two
Damage can result from handling the rope during installation,
MODU drilling operations in the Gulf of Mexico. One of the
be the consequence of wear experienced during service, or be
unknown issues associated with the use of synthetic fiber
caused by ingress of sand or marine growth. The integrated
mooring ropes is how to account for damage and the
program involves testing small-scale rope components (the
associated lifetime and reliability predictions. The MMS has
focus of the current paper), analytical modeling, and a large-
sponsored research to address the damage tolerance issue
scale test program. Results from the current study will be
including the activity reported in the current paper. This paper
used in subsequent validation of an analytical model. The
describes the results of controlled, damage-tolerance, static
ultimate goal of the program is to develop guidelines for
tension tests on elements and subrope components taken
addressing safety and reliability issues associated
directly from representative polyester mooring rope products.
with damage.
The results should serve as a foundation for further research
into the behavior of ropes with damage including more
Material Background
sophisticated analytical modeling.
Although fiber manufacturers routinely provide typical yarn
properties as a form of product data sheet, deformation
Introduction
behavior, such as stress-strain curves are not generally
Considerable emphasis is being placed worldwide on the
available. Tensile stress-strain behavior of polyester single
economical recovery of petroleum resources from deepwater.
fiber, and 1000 denier yarn and 20 ply 1000 denier yarn have
The definition of deepwater has expanded in the last decade to
been reported in references 5 and 6, respectively. The
now include depths as great as 10,000 feet and deeper. Many
materials tested were in pristine condition and not taken from
different concepts have been proposed for deepwater
a mooring rope. Manufacture of a rope with complex
platforms including FPSO’s SPAR’s, and TLP’s. Each
construction may introduce surface damage due to abrasion
concept depends on the use of a mooring line or tether to keep
between the fibers/yarns which could degrade the
on station. The taut leg mooring line concept in which
corresponding mechanical properties. Bending of the rope in
multiple light-weight synthetic fibers such as polyester are
which the fibers are laterally constrained can also introduce
used as a rope suspended from the platform to the seabed at an
kinking. Consequently, the mechanical properties of fibers
angle of approximately 45-degrees from vertical is a very
and yarns taken from ropes may deviate from their “as
attractive candidate and the concept is growing in popularity.
manufactured” properties.
Petrobras has made a major commitment to this concept1 with
2 J. WILLIAMS, A. MIYASE, D.I LI, AND S. WANG
Subrope And Element Construction
Candidate rope construction architecture are primarily of two
types, parallel lay or wire rope construction. Parallel lay may
have all the fibers or yarns laid parallel to the axis of the rope
or the rope may be composed of multiple subropes which are
laid parallel to the axis of the rope. Each subrope is
constructed of elements which may have twisted or braided
architecture and subropes may or may not have a jacket. The
elements are composed of strands which may also be twisted.
The entire assembly of subropes is normally encapsulated in a
braided jacket to maintain continuity and subropes and
elements may or may not have a braided jacket depending on
the preference of the manufacturer. Some ropes are not being
constructed with a filter material inside the rope braid to help
prevent the ingress of sand or mud. Field terminations are
primarily of two types, eye splice and potted with the eye
splice termination being the most widely used.
The current investigation focused on two different designs of
parallel lay ropes described below as Mooring Ropes 1 and 2.
The test section of laboratory load machines available could
not accommodate the long length specimen needed with eye
splice type terminations; so alternative load introduction
fixtures were used including spike and cone fixtures and
potted terminations. For small-scale specimens, these
terminations were expected to provide good representation of
near ultimate strength capability.
Data reported in the present paper includes tests on yarns,
strand, elements and subropes for Mooring Rope 1 and on
elements for Mooring Rope 2.
Mooring Rope 1. Mooring rope 1 is a parallel lay rope
comprised of 28 subropes as shown in Figure 1. Each subrope
has three elements twisted in either clock-wise or counter-
clock-wise directions with a period of approximately 5.94-
inch (151 mm). Elements are constructed from nine strands
each with twenty yarns of 2000 denier. Strands in elements
have a period of approximately 6.4-inch (162 mm). The
polyester fiber in the rope is designated Doilen® 855 TN
Oceanic with marine finish by Acordis Industrial Fibers.
Strands have a twist of about 24 turns per meter in either
clock-wise or counter-clock-wise directions. The rope was
manufactured by Marlow Ropes who indicates the rope has a
strength of approximately 470,000 lb and the subrope a
strength of approximately 17,300 lb. The diameter of the rope
is approximately 3.3-inches, the subrope approximately 0.54-
inch and the strand approximately 0.30-inch. Illustration of
the definition of yarns, strands and elements for Mooring
Rope 1 is presented in Figure 2. Mooring Rope 1 is similar to
rope used in the DeepStar mooring rope field test program7.
Mooring Rope 2. Specimens designated “Mooring Rope 2”
is composed of seven parallel laid subropes encapsulated in a
braided jacket with a braid angle of approximately 65 to 70
degrees measured from the longitudinal axis of the rope (see
Fig. 3). The nominal diameter of the rope including braided
OTC 14308
jacket is approximately 2.9 inches and the diameter of the
subropes is approximately 1.01-inch. Subropes are composed
of four elements twisted in a right-hand lay wire rope type
construction around a smaller-diameter, axially-oriented
center core element. Elements including jacket have a
diameter of approximately 0.41 inches and the pitch of
elements in the subrope is approximately 4.1-inches. The
small central core element is constructed of polypropylene
fiber and has a diameter including braided jacket of
approximately 0.25-inches. The subrope is designed to
achieve a predetermined torque similar to a steel wire rope.
Elements of the subrope are composed of 39 strands of Type
68 DuPont polyester fiber. Strands are composed of 16 yarns
with a nominal 2000 yarn denier. Total element cordage is
thus approximately 1,248,000 denier. Elements are
encapsulated in a braided jacket with braid angle of
approximately 45-degrees relative to the axis of the element.
The measured period of the twist of yarn within the element
was 8.6-inches. The rope was supplied by Whitehill
Manufacturing Corporation with the designation VETS 351
Great White Rope. Tensile tests conducted on the rope by the
manufacturer indicate a tensile strength of approximately
251,000 pounds for the rope and 39,250 pounds for
the subrope8.
Material and Specimen Preparation
A detailed description is presented below of tensile tests on
yarns, strands, elements and subropes.
YarnTests. First, yarn size was checked by weighing 12-in.
long 20 individual yarns taken from four different strands of
Mooring Rope 1. Average yarns were found to be 2020 denier
with a coefficient of variation of 1 percent versus the nominal
2000 denier description by the manufacturer. Little or no twist
was observed in the yarns.
Yarn tensile specimens were prepared using a technique
similar to the one described in ASTM-D 3379 for single-
filament test9. Individual yarns were carefully separated and
mounted 1-inch apart on picture-frame shaped cardboard with
7 inch long by 8 inch wide opening using masking tape.
Epoxy adhesive was applied between the yarn and cardboard
to form 1.5 inch long grip regions.
Strand Tests. Preparation of strand specimens was made using
the same technique used for yarn specimens. The original
twist was preserved during the preparation. After the epoxy
adhesive hardened, the cardboard support was cut to make
individual strand specimens. The grip region of the strand
specimen was inserted into a 1.5 inches long 0.25 inch outer
diameter copper tubing. After squeezing the copper tubing at
one end, the gap between copper tubing and strand specimen
was filled with epoxy resin.
Element Tests. Rope element tensile specimens were prepared
using commercially available aluminum cone and spike (or barrel
and spike) terminations illustrated in Figure 4. Element and
OTC 14308 SMALL-SCALE TESTING OF DAMAGED SYNTHETIC FIBER MOORING ROPES
subrope specimens had a nominal length of 24-inches between the
end terminations. Preliminary experiments indicated premature
failure due to the abrasion of the fibers between the aluminum cone
and steel spike within the grips in the contact area which was
resolved by inserting a thin piece of paper or tape between the fiber
and metal. Data recorded included axial load and strain and for a
limited number of test, the change in the diameter during loading.
The rotation of the termination at the end of the test was
also measured.
Subrope Tests. Subrope specimens were tested using a
conical metal receptacle into which the fibers were inserted
and a room temperature cure epoxy potting material was used
to secure the polyester rope material (see Fig. 5). The
elements within the subrope were separated into their yarn
constituents to achieve maximum resin penetration and
adhesion. In the makeup of element and subrope specimens,
the original twist resident within the rope configuration was
marked and maintained to maintain the original twist and pitch
of yarns and elements. Special handling techniques were used
to achieve near equal length of fibers within the test section to
insure near equal load sharing at the onset of loading.
Data recorded for subropes included the test machine load cell
response, axial strain, and the change in diameter experienced
during loading. Strain was measured using two LVDT
instruments connected to the test rope using polyester sewing
thread and secured to the rope using a rubber band. Small
pulleys allowed the LVDT’s to be mounted remote from the
rope. This arrangement allowed a long gage length up to 24-
inches resulting in greater accuracy. Most tests were
conducted with using a gage length of three periods of twist.
For tests involving cut strands, the string for both LVDT’s was
secured to the same uncut strand or element. Torque
generated during the test was measured using a load cell
mounted on a lever arm attached to the conical metal fixture at
one end and restrained by the test machine column on the
other. The test arrangement is shown in Figure 6.
Preparation of Damaged Specimens. The damage mechanism
inflicted on element and subrope specimens was to cut yarns or
strands with scissors or a sharp razor blade. The procedure for
Mooring Rope 1 involved cutting complete strands of the elements
after the specimen was mounted in the test machine as illustrated in
Figure 7. The procedure for Mooring Rope 2 was to place a shrink
tubing around the element to circularize it and to carefully cut
through the tubing and element to the desired depth as shown in
Figure 8. Insulation was placed around the rope element during
heating the shrink tubing to insure that adverse heating effects did
not occur. The shrink tubing was longitudinally cut following
cutting the element cross-section to a prescribed depth to insure no
unintended constraint.
Experimental Procedures
Tensile tests on yarn, strand and elements specimens were
conducted using a servo-hydraulic test machine. Flat face gripes
were used for yarn and strand specimens, and clevis and pin
3
arrangement for element specimens. All tensile tests were run
under a displacement-controlled mode at a strain rate of
approximately 4 percent per minute. Strain measurements were
carried out using a strain-gauge extensometer with 0.5-inch gage
length for yarn and strand tests, and a strain-gauge extensometer
with 2-inch gage length and an in-house built LVDT extensometer
with variable gage length up to 24-inch for element and subrope
specimens. For selected element and subrope tests, an in-house
built diametrical extensometer was used to measure lateral
dimensional changes (see Fig. 9). During tensile tests, force and
strain measurements were recorded using a computer data
acquisition system. Specimens were tested dry at ambient
conditions in the as-received condition without environment or load
preconditioning. The original orientation (twist) of the strand,
element or subrope within the rope architecture was maintained
when the specimen was mounted in the loading test machine.
The lower piston of the servo-hydraulic test machine has almost
negligible resistance to torque. Because elements are not torque
balanced, they experienced rotation during loading and the final
rotation angle was recorded. A few subrope tests were also
conducted without torque restraint, however, the rotations were so
great as to interfere with strain measurements. A torque restraint
was then installed which incorporated a load cell, thus allowing a
record to be made of the torque generated as a function of load and
strain (see Fig. 10).
Results And Discussion
Mooring Rope 1 Yarn. Stress-strain relationships of 2000 denier
yarns are shown in Fig. 11. Initially, the slope of the curve
decreases with increasing strain, and then a gradual increase in the
slope is followed by another region with decreasing slope prior to
final failure. The observed stress-strain relationships of yarns taken
from different strands show very similar characteristics in
deformation behavior and failure strength, as shown in Figure 11.
Cumulative failure of individual fibers within the gage section
was observed.
The stress-strain curve of the yarn is compared in Figure 12 with
that of 1000 denier ENKA 855TN reported in reference 4.
Although overall deformation behavior of the Mooring Rope 1
yarn is very similar, noticeable differences in failure strain and
strength can be observed.
Mooring Rope 1 Strands. The stress-strain curves for Mooring
Rope 1 strands are shown in Figure 13. The initial sigmoidal
behavior is mainly due to the presence of the twists and subsequent
geometrical nonlinear deformation in the specimen. Thereafter, the
stress-strain relationship follows similar behavior as those of yarn.
Variations in load-strain curves with specimens are more noticeable
than yarns because of the differences in the initial geometrically
induced strains in the specimens. The observed failure mode was
cumulative within the gage section as shown in Figure 14.
Since element specimen has a relatively long twist pitch length, the
effect of gage length in strain measurements was checked. Strain
4 J. WILLIAMS, A. MIYASE, D.I LI, AND S. WANG
measurements taken from a strain gauge extensometer with 2-inch
gage length and an LVDT extensometer with 16-inch gage length
are compared in Figure 15. Despite the differences in number of
pitches covered by the extensometers, the measured strains show
good agreement.
Mooring Rope 1 Element Data.
Undamage Element Tests. Tensile test results for undamaged
Mooring Rope 1 elements are shown in Figure 16 and ultimate
properties are summarized in Table 1. General characteristics of
the load-strain behavior are very similar to those of strand. The
initial sigmoidal region in rope elements is more pronounced due to
the presence of twists within element and strands, and subsequent
geometrical nonlinear deformation. Significant variations in load-
strain behavior with specimens are attributed to the difference in the
initial degree of twist and to uneven loading on each strand due to
unequal length strands unintentionally introduced during specimen
preparation. A very small variation in failure strength is found
when initial failure occurred within the gage region.
The failure mode observed in undamaged Mooring Rope 1
elements is shown in Figure 17. Failure is cumulative in nature with
participation in failure both within the specimen and in
the terminations.
Measurements of the lateral displacement of undamaged elements
as a function of the applied axial strain are shown in Figure 18. A
clip-on diametrical extensometer exerted a small compressive force
against a rope element specimen. Due to the lateral compression,
the cross section of a rope element specimen deformed under very
low applied tensile load. The shape of the cross section became
more axisymmetric with increasing tensile load which imposes an
apparent lateral dimension increase. Once the tensile load became
large enough to counteract lateral compressive force by the
extensometer, lateral displacement continuously decreased with
applied tensile force. The discontinuity in diametrical changes is
probably caused by relative movement at the contact point between
the specimen and extensometer contact arm due to rotational
movement in the specimen.
A comparison of the representative stress-strain curves for
undamaged yarns, strands and elements are presented in Figure 19.
Although initial deformation behavior is similar for all three levels
of rope scale, noticeable differences in global strain hardening
characteristics in higher stress region can be seen in the figure.
Failure strengths also depend on specimen size. Yarn specimen
shows the highest strength. Strand strength is somewhat lower than
yarn, and the rope element exhibits significantly lower strength than
yarn and strand. With increasing numbers of fibers, it becomes
more difficult to load all the fibers uniformly. Therefore, it is very
likely that fiber stress variations in rope elements are largest and
cumulative fiber breakage may commence at lower global tensile
load. Rope element specimen also experiences higher degree of
geometrical nonlinear deformation due to the presence of the twists
within the element and the strands. Subsequently, the rope element
specimen exhibits the lower strain hardening and lower strength.
OTC 14308
Damaged Element Tests. The stress-strain response for
specimens with 1, 3, and 5 of the 9 strands cut of Mooring Rope 1
are plotted in Figures 20, 21, and 22 and representative curves from
each of these damage cased compared on Figure G17 with the
undamaged specimen. Ultimate response characteristics are
summarized in Table 1 and 2. The architecture of the element is
such that one strand is centrally located and surrounded by the eight
other stands. The test data included several variations of cutting
symmetry and asymmetry relative to this pattern. There is a
noticeable difference for symmetric and asymmetric cutting the
same number of strands as indicated in the comparison of ultimate
parameters listed in Tables 3 and 4. The failure strength of the
asymmetric cut elements is lower than that of symmetric cut
elements with same degree of damage. The eccentricity raised from
the cut asymmetry makes the load difficult to be distribute evenly
in the spike and cone terminations resulting in premature failure.
Factors such as differences in the twist of strands, initial
misalignment within the termination, and slippage of fibers within
the termination will cause variation in the stress-strain response.
Considering the complicated factors involved, the variation in the
response is reasonably well bounded. The response of the cut
strands at the center of the specimens was to freely displace
longitudinally as the specimen was loaded as illustrated in the two
photographs of Figure 23 taken before and during loading. Strands
which were cut were also seen to be relatively slack at the entry into
the terminations. The cut strands do no have sufficient lateral load
imposed on them for this configuration to permit load sharing to be
transferred into them. It should be expected therefore, that the
effect of cut strands will be a net area effect and although there is
some variation in response from test to test, the basic similar
signature in stress-strain curves with and without cuts would seem
to validate this hypothesis.
Mooring Rope 1 Subrope Data. A description of the results for
tests conducted on the subrope of Mooring Rope 1 is
summarized below.
Undamage Subrope Tests. The stress-strain response for the
undamaged Mooring Rope 1 is presented in Figure 25 and ultimate
response characteristics are listed in Table 3. Four different
specimens exhibit almost identical responses. Also plotted on
Figure 24 is a second load cycle for one of the specimens
previously loaded to a stress level of 105 ksi and unloaded prior to
conducting the second cycle to failure. The response illustrates the
stiffening effect which occurs due to the high preload.
Damaged Subrope Tests. The stress-strain response for Mooring
Rope 1 subrope specimens with 5, 9, and 13 strands cut is
presented in Figures 25, 26, and 27, respectively. Values of
ultimate parameters measured are listed in Table 3. Within the data
set for damage there is no clear trend that there are any differences
in trend for the response or differences with the undamaged case.
Considering all the variables which affect the response, the data for
all cases would seem to suggest very little change from a net
area response.
OTC 14308 SMALL-SCALE TESTING OF DAMAGED SYNTHETIC FIBER MOORING ROPES
All specimen failures to some extent were influenced by the less
than 100 percent efficiency of the terminations, but failures did in
many cases also involve failures in the test section. A photograph
of the failure of a subrope with 9 strands cut (5 in one element and
4 in another) is presented in Figure 28. Failure involved separation
of the remaining 4 elements in the strand with 5 cut strands and
additional damage in the other elements. An interesting
phenomenon observed in many tests was the melting of fibers in
the vicinity of breaks and even bonding to adjacent strands
removed from the break as illustrated in Figure 29. Apparently,
the friction generated at break when the fibers slide relative to one
another and the strain energy released is sufficient to melt
the fibers.
Torque Response. The first few experiments on subropes of
Mooring Rope 1 were conducted without torque restraint and the
bottom unrestrained load fixture rotated greater than 90-degrees. A
torque measurement instrument was then installed and a summary
of torque measurement for both undamaged and damaged
specimens is presented in Figure 30. The magnitude of torque
generated could be approximately as linear with applied load or
strain. The maximum torque measured was approximately 350 in-
lb. Specimens with 9 or 13 cut strands have a fairly consistent
response from test to test while there is more variation exhibited in
the undamaged subrope and specimens with 5 cut strands. It is
suspected that handling the specimens during their preparation for
test can create changes in the exact geometric architecture which
can affect the torque response.
Diameter Change. Measurement of the change in diameter which
occurred as a function of the applied axial strain is presented in
Figure 31. After an initial seating in at low loads, the diameter
reduction for the two specimens reduces approximately linearly
with very similar slope.
Mooring Rope 2 Element Data. Tension strain-strain data
for undamaged elements of Mooring Rope 2 are presented in
Figure 32. Also plotted on Figure 32 is yarn data provided by
the polyester fiber manufacturer. The difference in stiffness
indicated by the displacement of the curves is a measure of the
kinematic strain characteristic of the architecture of the
element due to twist and other non-axial alignments. The
response for all but two of the specimens seem to fall in a
fairly narrow band considering the variables in alignment and
twist. Ultimate parameters measured in these tests are
presented in Table 4.
Data for knife cuts resulting in severing approximately 15 and
50 percent of the cross-sectional area along with data for
undamaged elements is presented in Figure 33. Detailed
examination of the specimens following failure such as shown
in Figure 34 were used to accurately measure the amount of
cross-sectional area cut. Most of the curves fall within the
narrow upper undamaged band, however, the response for four
of the specimens (2 undamaged and 2 damaged) fell in the
lower band. Discussions with the manufacturer revealed no
manufacturing reason for the two distinct responses in the
5
elements from Mooring Rope 2 as all elements used in the
rope were made in a single run and cut to make subropes.
Examination of the fibers within untested elements revealed
that there was considerable kinking of yarn as illustrated in
Figure 35 which seemed to be imposed by bending the rope as
evidenced by the predominance of kinks on one side of the
rope cross-section. Twists in the rope should distribute kinks
to all fibers, just at different locations along the rope axis.
Relatively high ultimate loads were obtained in these tests,
however, failure almost always involved some influence of the
terminations. Although some yarns failed within the test
section, at loads near ultimate, yarns would begin to
progressively fail at the terminations. It was observed during
the test that the cut ends translated as a unit within the braided
jacket as indicated by the neck down in cross-section shown in
Figure 36. The loose condition of the cut ligaments at the
entry into the end fittings also indicated that there was
essentially no load transfer through shear into the cut
ligaments under these test conditions. These observations and
the data of Figure 34 therefore indicate that the effect of the
cut for this test condition was essentially a net area effect.
Summary And Conclusions
An experimental data base has been established for typical
polyester mooring rope constructions which should serve as a
resource for the validation of proposed analytical models.
The limited distance between the cross-heads for test machines
available for this study necessitated using spike and cone or potted
terminations. Using these types of terminations and with careful
specimen preparation and handling, it is possible to achieve
reasonably consistent test data for small-scale elements and
subropes. There will usually be some reduction in ultimate
response characteristics for any termination concept including the
eye termination typically used in large rope field installations.
The architecture of rope is complex and any experimental
study is impacted by subtle changes in the rope geometry
introduced by handling and inefficiencies in terminations.
Considering these variables, the test data had relatively
consistent results under identical test conditions. Because of
these differences, however, average properties should not be
considered an accurate measurement of ultimate values.
Rather, the highest values achieved are probably more
representative and higher values may still be possible with
even better terminations and procedures.
The similarity of stress-strain plots for data from these tests would
indicate that the basic response of the elements and subropes is a
net area effect with minor variations for the realignment of fibers
within the element or subrope. The lateral constraint imposed
during tension tests on damaged yarn, strands, element and
subropes is minimal and therefore there is little, if any, load transfer
back into cut ligaments because of the lack of shear between cut
and uncut fibers. One should not conclude that this is the same
6 J. WILLIAMS, A. MIYASE, D.I LI, AND S. WANG OTC 14308

response when elements and subropes are resident in a rope, Acknowledgements

particularly in the interior of a rope. In a large diameter rope there
can be generated considerable lateral force, particularly in the
interior of the rope, and load redistribution back into the damaged
material can occur. This transfer of load back into cut material
away from the cut will increase the rope stiffness over a net
area effect.
The authors wish to express appreciation to the Minerals
Management Service for sponsoring this research activity and
to Acordis Industrial Fibers, Marlow Ropes and Whitehill
Manufacturing Corporation for providing fixtures and
specimen material.

References
1. Del Vecchio, C.; Costa, L. C. Souse; and Meniconi, L. C.:
“Petrobras Experiences With Deep Water Polyester
Moorings”, Composite Materials for Offshore Operations
– 3, S. S. Wang, J. G. Williams, and K. H. Lo, Eds.
University of Houston – CEAC, 2001, pp. 495-502.
2. API RP 2SM: “Recommended Practice for Design,
Manufacture, Installation, and Maintenance of Synthetic
Fiber Ropes for Offshore Moorings”, First Edition,
American Petroleum Institute, March 2001.
3. U.S. Federal Register. December 31, 2001.
4. Ayres, Ray: “Characterizing Polyester Rope Mooring
Installation Damage”, Stress Engineering Services, Inc.
report to Minerals Management Service.
November 2001.
5. Backer, S.; Seo, M.H.; Wu, H.C.; and Misra, L.: “Fiber
and Yarn Properties as Related to Rope Development in
Deep Sea Mooring”, MIT Sea Grant College Program
Final Report, MITSG 91-26, 1991. Review of Fiber Rope
for Offshore Mooring Applications, National Engineering
Laboratory, Offshore Technology Report –OTO 1999
005. April 1999.
6. Mandell, J.F.; Steckel, M.G.; Chung, S.S.; and Kenney,
M.C.: “Fatigue and Environmental Resistance of
Polyester and Nylon Fibers”, Polymer Engineering and
Science, Vol.27, No.15, 1987, pp.1121-1127.
7. Devlin, P.; Flory, J.; Fulton, T.; and Homer, S.:
“DeepStar’s Polyester Taut Leg Mooring System Test”,
ISOPE-99; 1999.
8. Huntley, Mark; Veselis, Todd; and Whitehill, Sim Sr.:
“Technical Assurance Testing of Polyester Rope for Deep
Ocean Mooring Lines”, Proceedings of the 10th Offshore
Symposium, Houston, Texas, February 20, 2001.
9. “Standard Test Method for Tensile Strength and Young’s
Modulus for High-Modulus Single-Filament Materials”,
ASTM D 3379, Annual Book of ASTM Standard,
Vol.15.3, 1995, pp. 127-130.
OTC 14308 SMALL-SCALE TESTING OF DAMAGED SYNTHETIC FIBER MOORING ROPES 7

Table 1.- Test Data From Damaged Element Tests of Mooring Rope 1 (symmetric cut).

Test Condition Number of Maximum Maximum Stress, Maximum Rotation

(Symmetric cut if Tests Load, kips ksi Strain, % Angle,
cut) Degrees
Undamaged 3 5.03~5.77 111.52~ 127.99 12.2~13.5 15~25
1 of 9 Strands Cut 3 5.02~5.18 125.65~129.38 10.4~13.8 13~16
3 of 9 Strands Cut 6 3.01~3.83 100.33~127.60 10.6~13.2 2~18
5 of 9 Strands Cut 6 1.79~2.24 89.55~112.33 11.0~15.9 *

Table 2.- Test Data from Damaged Element Tests of Mooring Rope 1 (Non-Symmetric Cut).

Test Condition Number of Maximum Maximum Stress, Maximum Rotation

(Non-Symmetric Tests Load, kips ksi Strain, % Angle,
cut if cut) Degrees
Undamaged 3 5.03~5.77 111.52~ 127.99 12.2~13.5 15~25
1 of 9 Strands Cut 3 4.41~4.60 110.25~114.82 12.7~12.8 15~17
3 of 9 Strands Cut 3 2.22~2.59 71.93~87.00 7.8~11.6 5~9
5 of 9 Strands Cut 3 1.39~1.53 69.44~76.60 9.20~10.6 *

Table 3.- Test Data from Damaged Subrope Tests of Mooring Rope 1.

Test Condition Number Maximum Maximum Maximum Max. Torque,

of Tests Load, kips Stress, ksi Strain, % Lb*inch.
Undamaged 3 10.23~15.46 75.84~114.05 10.3~13.8 189.6~342.0
5 of 27 Strands Cut 3 11.42~13.44 104.0~122.2 13.5~15.4 129.53~253.2
9 of 27 Strands Cut 3 10.95~11.08 121.7~122.74 13.3~15.8 291.6~360.7
13 of 27 Strands 3 7.1~9.27 101.49~132.53 16.1~16.5 97.9~126.43
Cut

Table 4.- Test Data from Damaged Element Tests of Mooring Rope 2.

Test Condition Number of Maximum Maximum Maximum Strain,

Tests Load, kips. Stress, ksi %
Undamaged 8 5.35~8.50 68.68~109.14 10.9~11.9
Approx. 15% Area 3 6.58~7.19 103.57~108.5 11.7~12.8
Reduction
Approx. 50% Area 4 3.81~4.73 88.33~115.87 10.7~15.5
Reduction
8 J. WILLIAMS, A. MIYASE, D.I LI, AND S. WANG OTC 14308

Figure 1.- Mooring Rope 1. Figure 4.- Spike and cone termination.

Mooring Rope 1

Subrope Strand

Element

(a) Insert stands in cone. (b) Epoxy potting.

Figure 5.- Potting subrope specimen.

Figure 2.- Mooring Rope 2 subrope and element.

Mooring Rope 2

Rope

Subrope
Figure 6.- Load Frame and experimental setup.

Figure 3.- Mooring Rope 2 construction.

Mooring Rope 2
OTC 14308 SMALL-SCALE TESTING OF DAMAGED SYNTHETIC FIBER MOORING ROPES 9

Parallel
LVDT
Torque
Force
Gage

Figure 7.- Cut Strands of Mooring Rope 1.

Figure 10.- Torque and LVT instrumentation.

200

150
Stress, ksi

100

50
Figure 8.- Cut element of Mooring Rope 2.

0
0.00 0.05 0.10 0.15
Strain

Figure 11.- Stress-Strain response - Mooring Rope 1 yarn.

200
Axial ENKA 855TN
Gage (1000 denier)
150 [Ref. 4]
Stress ksi

100
Diameter
Mooring Rope 1
Gage 50 2200 denier Yarn
(measured)

0
0.00 0.05 0.10 0.15
Strain
Figure 9.- Axial and lateral extensiometers. Figure 12. Polyester yarn comparison with published data.
10 J. WILLIAMS, A. MIYASE, D.I LI, AND S. WANG OTC 14308

150
200 150
M arlo w R o p e E le m e nt
(2 0 20 x 2 0 x 9 d e nie r)

150
100
100

(K sksi
Stress, ksi

Stress, i)
100

50
50
50

0
0.00 0.05 0.10 0.15 00
0.0
0 .0 0 0.05
0 .0 5 00.10
.1 0 00.15
.1 5 0.20
0 .2 0
Strain
Strain
ε

Figure 13.- Stress-Strain response forMooring Figure 16.- Stress-Strain resonse for Mooring
Rope 1 strands. Rope 1 elements.

Figure 17.-Mooring Rope 1 element failure mode.

Figure 14.- Failure mode for Mooring Rope 1 strands. 8

Marlow Rope Element

8
6 Specimen #1
Specimen #2
LVDT
6 (Gage Length =16")
F (Kips)

4
Stress, ksi

4
2
Extensomenter
2 (Gage Length =2")

0
0 -0.02 -0.01 0.00 0.01 0.02

0.00 0.05 0.10 0.15 δ lateral (in)

Strain
Figure 18.- Diameter change during loading.
Figure 15.- Comparison of data from LVDT
and extensometer.
 OTC 14308 SMALL-SCALE TESTING OF DAMAGED SYNTHETIC FIBER MOORING ROPES 11

200 120

100
150 Strand

Stress, ksi
80
Yarn
Stress, ksi

100
Element 60

40
50
20

0
0
0 0.02 0.04 0.06 0.08 0.1 0.12 0.14 0.16
0.00 0.05 0.10 0.15
Strain Strain
Figure 19.- Mooring Rope 1 compasison of stress-strain for Figure 22.- Mooring Rope 1 eement with
yarn, strand, and element. 5 of 9 strands cut.

140

120

100
Stress, ksi

80

60 (a) Initial.
40

20

0
0.00 0.02 0.04 0.06 0.08 0.10 0.12 0.14
(b) During loading.
Strain

Figure 20.- Mooring Rope 1 element with

1 of 9 strands cut. Figure 23.- Cut strand migration during loading.
120

140 2nd Load Cycle

100
120
100 80
Stress, ksi

Stress ksi

80
60
60
40 40

20
20
0
0 0.02 0.04 0.06 0.08 0.1 0.12 0.14 0
Strain 0 0.02 0.04 0.06 0.08 0.1 0.12 0.14 0.16

Strain
Figure 21.- Mooring Rope 1 element Figure 24.- Stress-Strain response for undamaged subrope
with 5 of 9 strands cut. of Mooring Rope 1. (one specimen with 2nd load cycle)
12 J. WILLIAMS, A. MIYASE, D.I LI, AND S. WANG OTC 14308

140

120

100
Stress, ksi

80

60

40

20

0
0 0.02 0.04 0.06 0.08 0.1 0.12 0.14 0.16
Strain
Figure 28.- Failure for Mooring Rope 1 with 5 strands cut
in one element and 4 in another element.
Figure 25.- Mooring Rope 1 with 5 cut strands
in one element.

140

120

100
Stress ksi

80

60

40

20

0
0 0.02 0.04 0.06 0.08 0.1 0.12 0.14 0.16
Strain

Figure 29.- Melting of fibers during break.

Figure 26.- Mooring Rope 1 with 9 cut strands (5 strands
in one element and 4 strands in second element).
450
A
A - No Damage
140 400 B - 5 strands cut C
C - 9 strands cut A
350
120 D - 13 strands cut B
C
300 C
Torque, in-lb

100 A
250 B
Stress, ksi

80
200 A
A
60 150 B
D
40 100 D
D
20 50

0
0
0 0.05 0.1 0.15 0.2
0 0.02 0.04 0.06 0.08 0.1 0.12 0.14 0.16 0.18
Strain
Strain

Figure 27.- Mooring Rope 1 with 13 cut strands (9 in one Figure 30.- Torque measurements for Mooring Rope 1
element and 2 in each of other two elements). subrope with and without damage.
OTC 14308 SMALL-SCALE TESTING OF DAMAGED SYNTHETIC FIBER MOORING ROPES 13

0.14

0.12

0.10

0.08
Axial Strain

0.06

0.04

0.02

0.00
-0.05 -0.04 -0.03 -0.02 -0.01 0 0.01
Displacement Change in Diameter, inch

Figure 31.- Mooring Rope 1 subrope delta change in Figure 34.- Mooring Rope 2 element showing cut and
diameter as a function of the applied axial strain. failed fibers.
180
160 Type 68 Polyester Fiber
(DuPont Data)
140
120
Stress, ksi

100
80
60
40
20
0
0 0.02 0.04 0.06 0.08 0.1 0.12 0.14 0.16
Strain
Figure 32.- Stress-Strain response for undamaged
elements of Mooring Rope 2.
Figure 35.- Polyester yarn kinking.
120
A - A p p ro xim ately 1 5 % area cut
AA B
B - A p p ro xim ately 5 0 % area cut A
100 R em aind er - N o d am ag e
B B

80
Stress, ksi

60

40

20

0
0 0.04 0.08 0.12 0.16
Strain
Figure 33.- Stress-Strain response for Mooring Rope 2 Figure 36.- Mooring Rope 2 element showing neck-down
elements undamaged and damaged respmse comparison. evidence of cut fiber migration during loading.