Documenti di Didattica
Documenti di Professioni
Documenti di Cultura
Until recently, offshore industry has mainly used uncoupled quasistatic analysis or semi-coupled dynamic analysis for the design of
floating offshore platforms with mooring and risers. In the former,
mooring lines and risers are modeled as massless linear or nonlinear
springs in calculating hull responses. Subsequently, the mooring
tensions are estimated from the static-offset curve. In the latter, the
first step is the same but the mooring and riser tensions are obtained
from line dynamics program, in which the body motions at fairlead
(top mooring point) are prescribed. However, as water depth
increases, the mass portion of mooring lines and risers cannot be
neglected and the dynamic interactions between vessels and slender
members are expected to become increasingly important. Therefore,
the reliability of the conventional uncoupled or semi-coupled
methods cannot be guaranteed for deep or ultra deep compliant
platforms.
Furthermore, there exists no wave basin in the world, which can test
ultra deepwater platforms in full length with reasonable scale. In
this regard, the need of very reliable hull/mooring/riser fully
coupled analysis tools cannot be emphasized too much in the
coming years. The hull/mooring/riser coupled analyses
automatically account for the inertia and damping effects of
mooring lines and risers and their dynamic interactions with hulls,
and thus can more accurately include their coupling effects.
During the past decade, several companies and research institutes
have tried to develop fully coupled dynamic analysis computer
programs for turret-moored FPSOs in deepwater. For example,
Wichers (1988) and Lee and Choi (2000) proposed simplified
uncoupled methods to solve the hull motion and mooring dynamics
separately. Later, Wichers and Ji (2000) further developed their
analysis tools by including coupling effects between the vessel and
slender members and also numerous empirical-based wind and
current forces and hull viscous damping coefficients. So far, only
Newmans approximation, approximating the off-diagonal terms of
difference-frequency wave force quadratic transfer functions
(QTFs) by mean drift forces (diagonal terms), has been used to
avoid the complicated and time-consuming computation of the
whole set of second-order difference-frequency wave forces in the
bi-frequency domain.
In the present study, the global performance of 6000-ft FPSO with
taut chain-polyester-chain lines and steel catenary risers in a noncollinear 100-yr Hurricane is investigated. The vessel motions and
slender-member dynamics are solved simultaneously in a combined
matrix to fully account for their dynamic interactions. The use of
ABSTRACT
A taker-based FPSO using 12 chain-polyester-chain taut mooring
lines with 13 steel catenary risers designed for 6000-ft water depth
is numerically simulated to investigate the characteristics of
nonlinear behaviors and hull/mooring/riser dynamic coupling. The
coupled dynamic analysis is conducted in time domain by using the
newly developed program, WINPOST-FPSO. The first-order wavefrequency and second-order difference-frequency wave loads, fluid
added mass and radiation damping for the hull are calculated in the
frequency domain from the second-order diffraction/radiation
program WAMIT. The computed hydrodynamic coefficients and
wave forces for vessels are then converted to proper forms in the
time-domain equation of motion. The wave-current induced forces
on slender members are calculated from Morison formula. An 100yr Hurricane with non-parallel wind, wave, and current is used as
environmental condition. The wind and current forces are calculated
from the empirical data provided by OCIMF (Oil Company
International Marine Forum, 1994). Three different cases; (1) fully
coupled system with Newmans approximation, (2) system (1) with
mass-less riser modeling, (3) fully coupled system with full QTF,
are studied to assess the effects of risers and Newmans
approximation in the global motion/tension analysis of turretmoored FPSOs.
INTRODUCTION
Tanker-Based FPSO(Floating Production and Storage Offloading)
units have been regarded as a promising concept for an economic
oil production in deep and remote areas since they have more
storage capacity (no pipelines) and wider deck space giving better
layout flexibility. Recently, Minerals Management Service (MMS)
has approved the use of double-hull FPSOs in the Gulf of Mexico.
Therefore, more FPSO units are expected to be installed in the
GOM in the coming years by offshore industry. In this regard,
reliable design and analysis tools for the global performance of
FPSOs are essential to insure the safe installation and operation.
169
.(MOORING LINES)
Designation
Water depth
Pre-tension
Number of lines
Degree between the 3 lines
Length of mooring line
Radius of location of chain
stoppers on turn table
Symbol
Unit
bpd
bbls
kDWT
Quantity
120,000
1,440,000
200
Lpp
ft
1017
B
H
T
L/B
B/T
ft
ft
ft
154.8
92
62
6.57
2.5
240,869
0.85
ton
Cb
FB
ft
21.65
A
Cw
ft2
144,239
0.9164
FA
ft
3.28
KG
ft
43.7
MGt
ft
18.96
MGl
ft
1324.9
Kxx
ft
48.46
Kyy
ft
254.17
Kzz
Af
Ab
ft
ft2
ft2
260.17
10,890
40,600
ft
208.5
ft
ft
52
Unit
ft
kips
deg.
ft
Quantity
6,000
320
4*3
5
8,700
ft
23
ft
in
lb/ft
lb/ft
kips
kips
400
3.75
127.17
110.64
205,044
1,698
ft
in
lb/ft
lb/ft
kips
kips
8,000
6.3
11.56
3.02
42,000
1,670
ft
in
lb/ft
lb/ft
kips
kips
300
3.75
127.17
110.64
205,044
1,698
(RISERS)
Designa
tion
The particulars of the mooring lines and risers are given in the next
tables. The FPSO has 12 chain-polyester-chain mooring lines and
13 steel catenary risers. The polyester lines may have a range of
stiffness under different loading conditions but they are assumed to
be elastic in this study with a representative Youngs modulus. The
170
OD
AE
EI
W
(dry/
wet)
kips
in
kips
Kips
ft2
Ibs/ft
Cdn
Liquid
producti
on risers
500
17.5
4.12E+06
667
132/71
Gas
produc
tion
risers
275
15.2
2.43E+06
274
117/36
910
20.9
4.18E+06
542
192/130
1.414
610
11.3
7.06E+05
155
124/80
1.414
205
13.5
1.94E+06
172
93/
29
Water
injection
risers
Gas
injection
risers
Gas
export
risers
Total
length
of risers
Top
tensi
on
12000 ft
The wind and current force coefficients on the vessel are read from
OCIMF data. The dynamic wind loading was generated from the
wind velocities obtained from API wind spectrum. The yaw wind
moments are increased by 15% considering the effects of
superstructures.
12 mooring lines are arranged in four groups. Each group is 90degree apart and consists of 3 legs 5-degree apart. In the dynamic
analysis of slender members, tangential drag forces are neglected.
The seafloor is modeled as elastic bed with quadratic spring.
The particulars of hull, mooring lines, and risers are almost identical
to those of the standard case set up by DEEPSTAR Offshore
Industry Consortium (Wichers and Devlin, 2001) except the two
cases. The first one is the angle of mooring lines at the fairlead; here
43 degrees were used instead of 48.8 degrees. The second difference
is the angle of riser top connection; 77 degrees were used here
instead of 80.9 degrees
Full draft
(with risers)
Full draft
(w/o risers)
Surge
Heave
Roll
Pitch
209.8 s
18.7 s
13.0 s
18.6 s
225.9 s
18.7 s
13.4 s
18.6 s
Full draft
(with risers)
Full draft
(w/o risers)
Surge
11.0 %
(-97.5 ~
-12.2 m)
5.8 %
(-96.7 ~
-32.7 m)
TIME-DOMAIN
CONDITION
Heave
6.5 %
(10.9 ~
3.2 m)
6.1 %
(10.4 ~
3.3 m)
SIMULATION
Roll
0.86 %
(5 ~ 4.2
deg)
0.68 %
(5 ~ 4.4
deg)
FOR
Pitch
6.7 %
(5 ~ 1.4
deg)
6.0 %
(5 ~ 1.6
deg)
HURRICANE
171
Surge
(m)
Sway
(m)
Heave
(m)
Roll
(deg.)
Pitch
(deg.)
Yaw
(deg.)
Newmans
Approx.
(with risers)
Newmans
Approx.
(w/o risers)
Full QTF
(with risers)
Newmans
Approx.
(with risers)
Newmans
Approx.
(w/o risers)
Full QTF
(with risers)
Newmans
Approx.
(with risers)
Newmans
Approx.
(w/o risers)
Full QTF
(with risers)
Newmans
Approx.
(with risers)
Newmans
Approx.
(w/o risers)
Full QTF
(with risers)
Newmans
Approx.
(with risers)
Newmans
Approx.
(w/o risers)
Full QTF
(with risers)
Newmans
Approx.
(with risers)
Newmans
Approx.
(w/o risers)
Full QTF
(with risers)
Mea
n
-13.9
-13.9
Lowfreq.
Rms.
Wave
-freq.
Rms.
Total
rms
6.98
0.49
7.0
10.32
0.44
Condition
10.3
-34.6
-46.7
-14.7
8.42
0.44
8.4
-39.5
4.7
2.50
0.49
2.5
13.4
4.6
4.8
0
2.84
3.04
0.04
0.45
0.46
3.36
Table 4. The resultant tensions on the mooring lines and risers for
full load (unit: kN)
Max
2.8
3.1
3.4
Mooring Line
#2
13.8
Mooring Line
#8
16.9
10.9
0.03
3.46
3.5
-12.1
0.1
0.07
3.37
3.4
11.1
0.2
0.16
0.98
1.0
3.5
0.2
0.15
1.26
1.3
4.3
0.1
0.38
1.22
1.3
5.5
0.0
0.02
1.33
1.3
-4.3
0.0
0.02
1.39
1.4
4.7
0.0
0.04
1.34
1.3
-4.5
15.3
2.74
0.28
2.6
22.7
13.7
2.57
0.31
2.7
22.3
15.1
3.86
0.28
3.9
24.3
Liquid
production riser
#13
Gas production
riser #20
Water injection
riser #22
Gas injection
riser #23
Newmans
Approx.
(with risers)
Newmans
Approx.
(w/o risers)
Full QTF
(with risers)
Newmans
Approx.
(with risers)
Newmans
Approx.
(w/o risers)
Full QTF
(with risers)
Newmans
Approx.
(with risers)
Full QTF
(with risers)
Newmans
Approx.
(with risers)
Full QTF
(with risers)
Newmans
Approx.
(with risers)
Full QTF
(with risers)
Newmans
Approx.
(with risers)
Full QTF
(with risers)
Newmans
Approx.
(with risers)
Full QTF
(with risers)
Mean
Total
rms
Max
2160
424
3529
2157
583
4252
2201
479
3639
903
249
1860
943
349
2319
901
296
2077
2345
272
4941
2343
262
5393
1253
278
3509
1254
265
3213
4284
403
7629
4383
391
6923
2744
234
4082
2746
227
4054
960
166
1804
961
166
1781
172
CONCLUSION
Ma, W., Lee, M.Y., Zou, J., and Huang, E.W. (2000), Deepwater
nonlinear coupled analysis tool OTC#12085, Houston
The global motions of a turret-moored FPSO with 12 chainpolyester-chain mooring lines and 13 steel catenary risers in a nonparallel wind-wave-current environment are investigated in the time
domain using a fully coupled hull/mooring/riser dynamic analysis
program. This case is similar to the relevant study in DEEPSTAR
Offshore Industry Consortium and the overall comparison looks
reasonable.
Ran, Z., Kim, M.H., Niedzwecki, J.M. & Johnson, R.P. (1995),
Responses of a spar platform in random waves and currents
(experiment vs. theory) Proc. of ISOPE95, Hague, Netherlands
OCIMF 1994 Prediction of wind and current loads on VLCCs. 2nd
ed., Witherby & Co. Ltd., London, England
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
This research was financially supported by the Minerals
Management Service (MMS), Offshore Technology Research
Center (OTRC), and also partly by Joint Industry Project (BPAmoco, Conoco, CSO-Aker, B&R Halliburton, Sea Engineering.).
REFERENCES
173
Y
Z
Z
Y
+x2 (North)
100
80
60
#6 #5 #4
Surge [m]
40
20
0
-20
-40
-60
-80
-100
-120
0
200
400
600
800
1000
1200
1400
1600
1800
Time [sec]
#7
#3
#8
#2
#9
#1
+x1 (East)
15
Heave [m]
10
5
0
-5
-10
0
# 10 # 11 # 12
20
40
60
80
100
Time [sec]
174
120
140
160
180
200
1.8E+07
1.6E+07
1.2E+07
1.0E+07
8.0E+06
Roll [deg]
Surge force
1.4E+07
6.0E+06
4.0E+06
2.0E+06
0.0E+00
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
0
-2
-4
Offset [m]
-6
0
8.0E+06
20
40
60
80
100
120
140
160
180
200
Time [sec]
7.0E+06
6.0E+06
5.0E+06
4.0E+06
3.0E+06
2.0E+06
1.0E+06
0.0E+00
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
Pitch [deg]
Offset [m]
1.6E+06
1.4E+06
1.2E+06
2
0
-2
1.0E+06
-4
8.0E+05
6.0E+05
4.0E+05
20
40
60
80
100
120
140
160
180
Time [sec]
2.0E+05
0.0E+00
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
Offset [m]
175
200