Mooring Line Dynamics Volume V, Phase III: Irregular Wave Tests, Report VM-V-5 V

(1)

M

aT

SNetherlands

Marine Technological Research

7

MOORING LINE DYNAMICS

Phase III: Irregular wave tests

MaTS -report VM-V-5 V

November 1984

L

P1984-1

VOL.5

Industriele Raad voor de Oceanologie

.4110 Netherlands Industrial Council for Oceanology

(2)

The Netherlands Industrial Council for Oceanology (IRO) and its Marine Technological Research (MaTS)

From the start in the early sixties Dutch industry was involved in the development of the oil and gas resources of the North Sea. The first platforms on the southern part of the UK Continental Shelf were

constructed and installed by the Dutch. From then on the Dutch industry has been building up its name and reputation in all activities related to design, construction and installation of equipment for exploration and development of oil and gas.

Soon the need was felt for a co-ordinating body to further the interests of the Dutch offshore industry.

To this end the Netherlands Industrial Council for Oceanology (IRO) was founded in 1971. In this context the term oceanology referred to coastal engineering, underwater technology, sea-mining, shipbuilding, energy

production, equipment manufacture, offshore supply, fishery and recreation and related advisory and supervisory activities amongst which pollution

control.

The activities of IRO were, however, soon focussing on the production of oil and gas offshore. By now some 250 companies involved in

above-mentioned activities have become member of IRO. Through the years the IRO has grown to the following set of tasks:

it forms a platform for all people involved in offshore activities in

the Netherlands;

it provides information on offshore activities in the world. One of the channels of information is formed by the 'IRO-Journal' a weekly which gives a short overview of up-to-date information;

it provides information on its members to interested parties. Amongst others the IRO is present on the main offshore exhibitions in the world representing its 240 members. Furthermore IRO publishes the Netherlands Offshore Catalogue, in which it gives descriptions of its member

companies and their activities;

it takes care of contacts with government authorities, taking a seat in scientific committees and other consultative bodies;

it stimulates and draws attention to new possibilities in the field of oceanology which might become of economical importance;

it co-ordinates combined efforts of groups of several companies to operate on foreign markets;

it initiates, co-ordinates and desseminates results of applied research in the offshore field through its Marine Technological Research (MaTS)

efforts.

MaTS projects are jointly financed by government and industry. They are meant to raise the standard of Dutch offshore technology and they are aimed at satisfying the need for knowledge on middle long term. It is the responsibility of the MaTS organisation to sort out strategic research fields within the offshore context and to develop relevant projects in these fields; futhermore to promote and manage these projects and to disseminate the results.

(3)

c_\1

Netherlands Ship Model Basin

The VVadenincleniEde Laboratories of Maritime Research Institute Netherlands

(MARIN)

2. Haacsteez P.0 Box 26. 6700 AA

Wagege-The Netnelands

Telepnone + 31 8370 93911, Telex 45148 nsmb n1

Ede Laboratory. 10. Niels Bonrstraat, 8718 AM Ede

Te:ephone + 31 8380 37'177

Report No. 45064-5RD

Phase III: Irregular Wave Tests

(4)

Report No. 45064-5-RD

Phase III: Irregular Wave Tests

N.S.M.B. Order No. Z 45064

HOREE3

Ordered by: Industriele Raad voor de Oceanologie Marien Technologisch Speurwerk (MaTS)

Project VM-V-5 Postbus 215

2600 AE DELFT

Reported by: Ir H.J.J. van den Boom Approved by: Dr Ir G. van Oortmerssen

Netherlands Ship Model Basin

(5)

-1-Report No. 45064-5-RD

HOal

-2-CONTENTS Page INTRODUCTION ₃ MODEL TESTS ₄ SIMULATIONS ₇ DISCUSSION ₉ CONCLUSIONS ₁₃

NOMENCLATURE _{00000004700000 ***** 0 OOOOOO 0 OOOOOOO 0 OOOOOOOO 00 OOOOOO} ₁₄

Tables (17)

(6)

1. INTRODUCTION

-3-As part of the MaTS program, MARIN performed _{a research project on} "Dynamics of mooring lines" which comprised the development _{of a} computer program, named DYNLINE, for the prediction of the dynamic behaviour of anchor chains and wires. The development of the

com-puter program and the correlation between results from this program and harmonic oscillation model tests were reported in MARIN Reports No. 45064-2-RD through 45064-4-RD.

This report describes the results of a correlation study which

in-volved two floating structures, _{a semi-submersible and a barge,}

moored in realistic sea conditions by means of several types of

mooring lines. The line tension records as measured during the mod-el tests were compared deterministically with predictions made by DYNLINE on a basis of the measured fairlead motions.

The semi-submersible had a displacement of 46,000 tons, the barge

measured 88,000 tons. The main dimensions and stability _{data of}

these vessels are given in Table 1 while the general arrangements are presented in Figures 1 and 2. The water depth corresponded to 292 m. The length of the mooring lines corresponded _{to 2100 m.}

For each vessel model tests have been carried out with 76 mm and 152 mm chains as well as 76 mm steel wire. The particulars _{of these}

wires are given in Table 2. Each mooring situation _{was tested in}

two wave spectra, representing an operational and a survival condi-tion respectively.

In addition to the irregular sea conditions used in _{the test} pro-gram, theoretical simulations were carried out for the combination of 2 exciting harmonic motions ("bi-harmonic" _{- excitation) to} in-vestigate the effect of the mooring line dynamics on the mean posi-tion and the low frequency moposi-tions of the _{moored structure.}

(7)

2. MODEL TESTS

HOMM

-4-All tests were carried out in accordance with Froude's law of si-militude at a scale of 1:76 in the Basin for Unconventional Mari-time Structures. The dimensions of this basin are 220 in x 4 m with a water depth of 3.84 m representing 292 m at full scale.

Prior to the model tests two irregular wave trains were adjusted in the basin. One train represented a so-called operational wave spec-trum with a significant wave height of 5.0 m and a mean period of 9.8 seconds. The other train corresponded to a survival type wave spectrum featuring a 13.0 m significant height and a 15.8 seconds

mean period.

Results of the statistical and spectral analysis of both wave

trains, which were measured at the position of the floating struc-ture, are presented in Figures 3 and 4.

The semi-submersible was tested in head waves. Two identical moor-ing lines were attached to the starboard and port forward columns, just above the floaters, by means of 2-component strain gauge force transducers (Figure 5). At the other end each line was attached to

an anchor by means of a ring type strain gauge force transducer.

The position of the anchor was chosen such as to ensure a symmetri-cal test set-up in the basin.

During the model tests the surge, heave and sway motions of the

vessel were measured by means of a 3-D optical tracking system

following a light source attached to the model's deck. Pitch was

measured by means of

a gyroscope. From the strain gauge force transducer the line tension at the anchor and the vertical and

horizontal components of the upper-end tension were obtained. The tension of mooring line No. 1 (starboard) was used for the analysis

while forces in mooring line No. 2 _were _measured to verify

symmetry. After a preliminary on-line statistical analysis and an

(8)

HOU

-5-wave elevation were recorded on magnetic tape at a sampling rate of

2.865 per second for further analysis. The duration of each test was at least 2000 seconds real time.

During all tests underwater video recordings were made of a line mark at approximately 170 m from the upper-end of line No 2. For

this purpose a video camera was positioned perpendicular _{to this} mark at a distance of approximately 2.0 m (model scale). In order to quantify the recorded motions a wire grid with a mesh width of 0.15 m was placed parallel to line No. 2 at _{a distance of 0.30 m.}

In order to generate large amplitude high frequency oscillations at the upper-ends of the mooring lines, the moored barge was tested in beam waves. The mooring configuration of the barge was similar to the mooring of the semi-submersible (Figure 6). _{It should be noted} that the system of co-ordinates was tank-bounded _{as shown in Figure}

6.

The pre-tensions in the mooring lines were adjusted by means of a weight device as shown in Figures 5 and 6. Prior to the tests, the pre-tensions were adjusted to such a value that the ultimate maxi-mum quasi-static tension (including the effects of wave drift

mo-tions) amounted to approximately 30 per cent of the breaking load. However, no iterations on this pre-tension have been _{carried out.}

The static load-excursion characteristics of each mooring configu-ration were determined by varying the pre-tension weight and mea-suring the vessel's offset. For one line the results of these tests are given in Figures 7 through 12.

The natural periods of the vessels _{were determined in both}

free-floating and moored condition by means of still water motion decay tests. The results are given in Table 3.

A review of all model tests is given in Table 4.

(9)

HOME3

-6-the fairlead position of line No. 1 were derived from the measured surge, heave and pitch motions. Moreover the measured vertical and

horizontal line force components were combined to the upper-end

tension (FT1). Results of the statistical analyses of these signals are presented in Tables 5 _{through 16. The spectral densities are}

given in Figures 13 through 24. It should be pointed out here that

the duration of the tests was insufficient to assess the spectral densities of the low frequency motions and tensions reliably.

(10)

3. SIMULATIONS

The instantaneous upper-end positions of mooring line No. 1

required by DYNLINE at each integration time step _{were found from} linear interpolation of the X1 and Zl records derived from the mod-el tests. Simulations of the dynamic behaviour of the mooring lines were carried out for selected sections of the derived fairlead

mo-tion records. Because of the deterministic comparison the duramo-tion of the simulations was only 490 seconds real time.

The line discretizations, which are presented in Figure 25, and all

other input data, given in Table 17, corresponded to the input used in Phase II of this study (Report No. 45064-3-RD). The _integration

time step was 0.10 seconds for the anchor chain simulations _and

0.02 and 0.01 seconds for the steel wire simulations.

It should be noticed that the water depth amounted to 292 m while the mean upper-end position was approximately 280 m above the sea

floor.

Upper-end tension records and the motions of the node at the video line mark obtained from the simulations _{were plotted together with} the wave elevation, the fairlead motions and the line tension de-rived from the model tests. These plots _{are presented in Figures 26} through 34. Note that in Figures 29 and 30 _{erroneously tension at}

node 12 and

motions at node 11 were plotted. Since correlation with

the video recorded line motions was difficult _{anyway, this was not}

corrected for.

In the plots the effect of the dynamic behaviour of _{the line on the} line tension is elucidated by the results of a DYNLINE simulation for a virtual reduction of line diameter by 80 per cent resulting

in a reduction of drag (80 _{per cent) and added inertia (95 per}

cent).

HOEM

(11)

Sequentially the following records are plotted in Figure 26-34

"wave" "Xl" "Zl" "T-NODE 17" "reduced dynamics"

-Netherlands Ship Mod& Basin

: measured wave elevation

: horizontal fairlead motion (model test) : vertical fairlead motion (model test) : measured line tension at fairlead

-' computed line tension at fairlead for reduced drag and inertia (DYNLINE)

-8-It should be emphasized that for these _{"reduced dynamic" runs the} line mass was not reduced. Hence possible dynamic effects caused by the inertia of the line are still present.

"T-NODE 17" : line tension at fairlead (DYNLINE)

"X-NODE 15" : horizontal line motion at video mark (DYNLINE)

(12)

4. DISCUSSION

Irre2ular waves

Since the measured fairlead motion records were used as input for

DYNLINE the time records of the measured tension ("FT].) and com-puted tension ("T-NODE 17") may be compared directly.

From the results of model tests _No. 7328 and 7335 it appears that the response of the semi-submersible in the wave frequency region is negligible. Hence no dynamic amplification (defined as the maxi-mum dynamic tension devided by the maximaxi-mum quasi-static value) in line tension occurs in the operational _{wave spectrum. In case of}

the barge a reasonable correlation between measured and computed

tensions was found (Test _No. _{7359 and 7360, Figures 32 and 33). The} simulations with reduced drag and added inertia yielded a 10 to 20

per cent decrease in tension for these situations. From the

mea-sured tension in lines No. 1 and 2 (FT1 and FT2) it appears that

some yaw motion, occurred in the model test. It should be pointed

out that yaw and sway motions were not taken into account _when

deriving the input motions X1 and Zl for _DYNLINE.

In the survival type wave spectrum the wave frequency motions of

both barge and semi-submersible were significant.

For the _{76 mm chain attached to the semi-submersible} _(Test _No.

7329) a perfect deterministic agreement between simulated and mea-sured line tensions was found.

Two sections of the time records (Figures 26 and 27) showed _tension peaks in-phase with combinations of large vertical and _horizontal motions. In these simulations the maximum dynamic _{tensions exceeded} the "reduced dynamic " values by some 70 per cent. The "reduced dy-namic" tension records were characterized by a large mean value and small wave frequency components. The so-called parasitical "second-ary" tensions due to the line discretization, _{already discussed in} Phase I (Report No. 45064-2-RD), _{were more pronounced by the drag}

reduction.

HOREM

(13)

HOEll

-lo-The barge responded to the same wave spectrum with larger low and high frequency motions, resulting in higher tension peaks (Figure

34). The variation in tension and the dynamic amplification _were

similar to test No. 1329.

The 152 mm chain showed only small dynamic amplifications for the

barge in 9.8 seconds waves (Test No. _{7359, Figure 32). The 15.8}

second waves, however, generated dynamic effects up to 80 per cent for the barge (Test No. 7358, Figure 31). An important feature

oc-curring in both model test and simulation for this condition was

the large tension fall following each tension peak. Slack condition was reached during this simulation. The same effects could be

ob-served for the semi-submersible in this condition, although the

dynamic amplification was only 30 to 40 per cent (Test No. 7336,

Figure 28). The vertical motion at the fairlead _{seems to have a}

dominant role in case of the barge, while surge is of more impor-tance for the semi-submersible. This effect may be explained by the

higher mean tension in case of the semi-submersible which

corre-sponds to a more horizontal catenary.

For the 76 mm steel wire mooring a dynamic amplification of _{some 50} per cent was observed in case of the semi-submersible in operation-al waves (Test No. 7343). Over 200 per cent amplification was found

in the survival wave spectrum (Test No. 7342). The secondary ten-sion peaks in these two simulations were large when compared to the

chain tests. The integration time step used in DYNLINE had to be reduced from 0.10 seconds, used in the other simulations, _{to 0.01} seconds to ensure convergence.

As discussed in Report No. 45064-3-RD it should be _{borne in mind}

that the material elasticity of steel wire increases proportionally with the scale ratio which results into stiff lines. Therefore the

steel wire tests cannot be considered to be _{realistic. For this}

reason no simulations for test No. 7351 and 7352 were carried out. In conclusion it may be assessed that the program DYNLINE

(14)

accurate-Report No. 45064-5-RD

HOE

ly reproduces the measured mooring line tensions on a basis of the upper-end position records. The correlation tests do not show any

direct influence of the waves on the mooring line dynamics.

Secondary tension components due to discretization effects do not affect the global tension records. Comparing the results of the dy-namic simulations with those from the "reduced dydy-namic" runs, it is

evident that the hydrodynamic drag dominated the dynamic behaviour in the situations investigated here. The same conclusions may be drawn from the phase shifts between tension and upper-end motion.

No direct relation between the results of the irregular wave tests and the harmonic oscillation tests reported in Report No. 45064-3-RD (Figures 33-37), can be found. This may be explained by the

def-inition of the "dynamic amplification factor" "which incorporates the mean tension. Moreover the relation between dynamic behaviour and the amplitude of motions is non-linear. This may be illustrated by the semi-submersible which exhibits lower dynamic amplifications

at higher wave frequencies due to a reduction of first order mo-tions.

Bi-harmonic oscillations

An important aspect in the behaviour of moored floating _structures is the possible influence of the dynamic tensions _{on the motions of} the structure. In general the motions of the structure in the wave frequency region will be governed by the first order wave forces. For the low frequency motions which are excited by environmental

forces of small amplitude, the mooring line dynamics may be of in-terest. Such effects are indicated by the results of model test No.

7342 showing a negative mean surge motion.

Detailed information on this subject was obtained from several ad-ditional simulations for bi-harmonic _{oscillations. A typical low} frequency oscillation with a period of 100 seconds and 10 m

(15)

HOMO

l2-Simulations were carried out for wave frequencies of 0.50, 0.75 and 1.00 rad/second. The upper-end tension from the simulation was

com-pared with the "reduced dynamic" value discussed in Section 3. The low frequency energy in the bi-harmonic result was studied by

re-moving the high frequency tension components by means of low-pass filtering. This result was compared to the tension due to low fre-quency oscillation only. The time traces of these signals are pre-sented in Figures 38, 39 and 40.

The change of the mooring stiffness felt by the moored structure is the difference in maximum-minimum value of the filtered tension and the tension due to the low frequency oscillation only. For the

con-ditions simulated here (76 mm chain at 280 m water depth) this

stiffness increased with 30 to 50 per cent due to the wave frequen-cy oscillation. Though the combinations of amplitude and high

frequencies are not realistic this information clearly shows that

the dynamic behaviour of mooring lines may also affect the mean

(16)

5. CONCLUSIONS

HOE13

-13--From the deterministic correlation between the results of the model tests and simulations for a semi-submersible and a barge moored in irregular waves, the following conclusions can be drawn:

The computer program DYNLINE accurately predicts tension records for given upper-end line motions.

The operational wave spectrum generated small dynamic amplifica-tion in mooring line tension. This is mainly due to the small

re-sponse of the floating structure in the range of the wave

fre-quencies. For the barge dynamic effects were found of 20 per

cent.

In the survival waves both the semi-submersible and the barge in-duced 50 to 90 per cent increase of chain tension due to dynamic

effects.

For the steel wire lines extreme amplifications of tension were found. Due to the large stiffness of the model wire these values cannot be considered to be representative for full scale

situa-tions.

From simulations for bi-harmonic excitations it may be concluded that the dynamic behaviour of mooring lines may affect the mean position and the low frequency motions of the moored structure.

Wageningen, September 1984. NETHERLANDS SHIP MODEL BASIN

Dr Ir M.W.C. Oosterveld

Head Research and Development Division

(17)

Report No. 45064-5-RD NOMENCLATURE beam, width breaking strength depth, diameter volumetric diameter

product of line elasticity and cross-section area line tension at fairlead (measured)

line tension at anchor (measured metacentric height

centre of gravity above base = radius of gyration in air = length

= mass

= draft, period, tension

T + = maximum dynamic tension

To+ = maximum quasi-static tension

T1 = mean wave period

T-NODE 15 = tension at node No. 15 (computed) = weight minus buoyancy

XA = amplitude of motion

X1 = horizontal motion at fairlead (Figure 5, 6) (model

test)

X-NODE 15 = horizontal motion at node No. 15 (DYNLINE)

Zl = vertical motion at fairlead (Figure 5, 6) (model test)

Z-NODE 15 = vertical motion at node No. 15 (DYNLINE)

Ca = wave elevation

cw = wave height (crest-trough value)

A _{= model scale}

a = standard deviation

= wave frequency

HOMM

-14-= BS = = dc = EA = FT = FX-A = GM = KG =

(18)

HOE

Mooring Line Dynamics

MAIN DIMENSIONS AND STABILITY DATA OF SEMI-SUBMERSIBLE AND BARGE

Model No. 6348 (semi-submersible) Model scale 1 to 76

Table 1

Designation Symbol Unit

Magnitude Semi-sub Barge Length L m 117.0 230.0 Beam _B _m _85.0 _57.5 Depth D m 64.7 26.5 Draft T m 22.8 7.6 Displacement weight A _t _46,360 _87,750

Centre of gravity above base KG in 21.5

-Transverse metacentric height

GMT in 4.4

Transverse gyradius in air

kXX m 36.0

Longitudinal gyradius in air

kYY in 38.0

Natural heave period

Tz s 23.0

Natural roll period T

(1)

s 50.9 _10.4

Natural pitch period

(19)

Report No. 45064-5-RD

PARTICULARS OF ANCHOR CHAINS Chain type: DIN 766

PARTICULARS OF STEEL WIRES

HOREM

Table 2

Model chains _{Prototype chain}

D mm B mm L mm M kg/m W N/m dcm EA N*105 _ A M kg/m W N/m dcm EA N*109 1.0 2.0 4.2 6.8 7.9 12.0 0.021 0.080 0.177 0.690 0.0019 0.0036 0.03 0.11 76 76 124 472 1048 4085 0.144 0.274 1.19 4.36 Model wires Prototype wire . D mm M kg/m W N/m d mc EA N*105 A M kg/m w N/m d c m EA N*1010 1.0 _0.00401 _0.034 _0.001 _0.5 76 23.2 204 0.076 2.3

(20)

NATURAL PERIODS SEMI-SUBMERSIBLE

HOM

D

Table 3 Situation No. Chain type DIN 766 D in m Natural periods in s Surge Tx Heave Tz Roll ci) Pitch 0 12 0.076 217.0 23.0 46.9 38.4 13 0.152 104.0 22.9 47.9 35.1 Steel wire 14 0.076 123.0 23.0 49.2 38.2 Free-floating _23.0 _50.9 _39.9

NATURAL PERIODS BARGE

Situation Chain type Natural periods in s

No. DIN 766 Sway Heave Roll Pitch

D in m Tx Tz 15 0.076 357.0 _10.4 16 0.152 173.0 _10.3 Steel wire 17 0.076 223.0 10.5 Free-floating _10.4

(21)

TEST REVIEW WITH SEMI-SUBMERSIBLE

TEST REVIEW WITH BARGE

D in m Chain type Test Situation DIN 766 No. No. 4)/m

HOMM

Table 4

Irregular seas Initial condition

Chain type Test Situation

DIN 766Fz0

No. No. x0 0 a0 4imc0 in in in in in in kN kN kN deg Fz0 To a0 7328 12 0.076 5.03 9.79 870 767 1160 41.4 7329 12 0.076 13.03 15.77 870 767 1160 41.4 7335 13 0.152 5.03 9.79 3786 3159 4931 39.8 7336 13 0.152 13.03 15.77 3786 3159 4931 39.8 Steel wire 7343 14 0.076 5.03 9.79 1107 389 1173 19.4 7342 14 0.076 13.03 15.77 1107 389 1173 19.4 D in m 0 in in in kN in kN in kN in deg 7360 15 0.076 5.03 9.79 662 678 948 45.7 7361 15 0.076 13.03 15.77 662 678 948 45.7 7359 16 0.152 5.03 9.79 2869 2869 4057 45.0 7358 16 0.152 13.03 15.77 2869 2869 4057 45.0 Steel wire 7351 17 0.076 5.03 9.79 846 339 911 21.8 7352 17 0.076 13.03 15.77 846 339 911 21.8

(22)

REPORT Na 45064-5-RD

NETHERLANDS SHIP MODEL BASIN

RESULTS OF TEST NO 7328 WAVES : SIGNIFICANT HEIGHT 5.03 M MEAN PERIOD T1 9.79 S DIRECTION 180 DEC

MOORING LINE DYNAMICS SITUATION NO 12 CHAIN TYPE DIN 766-D=0.076 M

STATISTICAL ANALYSIS *************************************************************************************************** NOTATION DIM. MEAN ST. DEV. A 1/3 + A 1/3 -2A 1/3 A MAX. + A MAX. -2A MAX. NO L:3 X 1 M 2. 18 1. 62 4. 42 -. 15 1. 76 7. 04 -2. 13 2 43 188 Z 1 M . 83 . 61 1. 97 -. 27 1. 83 2. BO -1. 09 3. 89 201 PITCH DEC -2. 10 . 76 -. 76 -3. 43 1. 89 . 33 -4. 71 2 73 214 FT 1 KN 1212. 07 51.75 1300.90 1132.47 107.06 1391.20 1073.27 204.27 249 CD FXA 1 KN 10, 14 21.20 40.91 -21.22 20. 11 51.95 -45.09 41. 70 371 CD

(23)

REPORT NO

45064-5-RD

STATISTICAL ANALYSIS *************************************************************************************************** NOTATION DIM. MEAN ST. DEV. A 1/3 + A 1/3 -2A 1/3 A MAX. + A MAX. -2A MAX. NO X 1 M 3.24 4.27 10.64 -3.72 9.20 15. 13 -9. 10 11.82 128 Z 1 M -. 32 2. 16 3. 73 -4. 68 7. 92 6. 71 -7. 97 12. 28 125 PITCH DEG -. 35 1. 23 I. 95 -2. 77 4. 48 3. 12 -4. 60 6 72 143 FT 1 KN 1223.63 289.37 1860.00 592.50 1178.57 2805.35 256.48 2529.51 120 2 CD FXA 1 KN 80.68 146.29 280.21 -80.71 133.57 1113.66 -315.06 1420.72 211 CD RESULTS OF TEST NO. 7329 WAVES : SIGNIFICANT HEIGHT 13. 03 M

MEAN PERIOD Ti 15. 77 S SITUATION NO 12 DIRECTION 180 DEG

(24)

REPORT NO. 45064-5-RD

STATISTICAL ANALYSIS *************************************************************************************************** NOTATION DIM, MEAN ST. DEV. A 1/3 + A 1/3 -2A 1/3 A MAX. + A MAX. -2A MAX NO X 1 M .95 .78 2.32 -.35 1.82 3.58 -1.23 3 55 234 Z 1 M -1.02 .5e . 10 -2. 03 1. 75 . 82 -2. 55 2. 83 241 PITCH DEG .60 56 1. 55 -. 52 1. 81 2. 09 -1. 50 2 BO 267 FT 1 RN 4998. 59 120. 13 5222. 07 4785. 12 352. 02 5358. 32 4604. 17 646. 05 316 CD FXA 1 RN 14.52 19.84 42.33 -10.94 19.71 49.40 -29.41 28 05 492

7

CD

RESULTS OF TEST NO.

7335

WAVES

:

SIGNIFICANT HEIGHT

5.03 M

MEAN PERIOD Ti 9.79 S SITUATION NO 13 DIRECTION 180 DEG

(25)

REPORT NO

45064-5-RD

STATISTICAL ANALYSIS *************************************************************************************************** NOTATION DIM. MEAN ST. DEV. A 1/3 + A 1/3 -2A 1/3 A MAX. + A MAX. -2A MAX. NO oo 0. X 1 II 1. 18 3. 16 7.44 -4.63 10.24 11.75 -8.05 17.45 172 Z I II -. 58 2. 06 3. 47 -4. 66 7. 71 8. 36 -6 73 14. 45 176 PITCH DEC . 30 1. 51 3. 01 -2. 61 5. 37 4. 94 -7. 76 12 66 196 FT 1 KN 5042.33 693.25 6488.26 3508.33 2829.17 7777.38 983.71 6793.67 181 FXA 1 KN 741.34 362.97 1133.78 269.28 232.43 1927.97 -1381.91 3281.68 cD

RESULTS OF TEST NO.

7336

WAVES

:

SIGNIFICANT HEIGHT 13.03 M

MEAN PERIOD Ti 15.77 S SITUATION NO 13 DIRECTION 180 DEC

(26)

RESULTS OF TEST NO.

7343 WAVES : SIGNIFICANT HEIGHT 5.03 M MEAN PERIOD T1 9.79 S DIRECTION 180 DEC

MOORING LINE DYNAMICS SITUATION NO 14 STEEL WIRE-D=0. 076 M

STATISTICAL ANALYSIS *************************************************************************************************** NOTATION DIM. MEAN ST. DEV. A 1/3 + A 1/3 -2A 1/3 A MAX. + A MAX. -2A MAX. NO X 1 M 1. 17 .76 2.45 -.15 1.89 4.33 -1.07 3.01 252 2 i M -1.09 .64 . 12 -2. 20 1.83 1. 12 -2. 98 2. 60 252 PITCH DEC .63 .65 1. 70 -. 67 2. 04 2. 34 -1 83 3. 14 268 FT 1 KN 1240. 05 272. 89 1863. 48 726. 40 1087. 59 2819. 17 199. 55 2583. 83 267 CD FXA 1 92. 95 264.64 717. 19 -404.69 1075.88 1665.64 -941. 52 2552.01 256 7 CD

(27)

RESULTS OF TEST NO.

7342

WAVES

:

SIGNIFICANT HEIGHT 13.03 M MEAN PERIOD Ti

15.77 S

DIRECTION

180

DEC

STATISTICAL ANALYSIS *************************************************************************************************** NOTATION DIM. MEAN ST. DEV. A 1/3 + A 1/3 -2A 1/3 A MAX. + A MAX. -2A MAX. NO L-A X 1 M -2. 68 3. 43 2. 94 -9. 48 10. 96 6. 38 -14. 49 17 97 177 Z 1 Fl -.66 2.07 3.34 -4.69 7.52 5.97 -6. 59 11. 14 183 PITCH DEC .03 1. 27 2. 34 -2.52 4.54 3.39 -5. 10 8. 11 199 FT 1 RN 1350. 06 1791. 47 7103. 45 215. 52 7025. 86 17804. 09 -69. 01 17825. 09 174 FXA 1 RN 193.61 1777. 34 5995. 61 -1250. 00 7092. 11 16603. 20 -1356. 27 17810. 44 171

(28)

REPORT NO, 45064-5-RD

STATISTICAL ANALYSIS *************************************************************************************************** NOTATION DIM. MEAN ST. DEV. A 1/3 + A 1/3 -2A 1/3 A MAX. + A MAX. -2A MAX. NO 0. X 1 M 30. 20 6. 50 40. 15 20. 95 7. 26 49. 87 14. 85 21. 18 256 Z 1 II 2. 61 3. 56 9. 35 -3. 29 9. 93 14. 70 -6. 43 13. 09 285 PITCH DEG -. 15 4. 99 9.03 -9. 59 18. 51 11.97 -13. 05 25. 02 283 FT 1 N 2220. 41 759, 14 3762. 81 1077. 08 2056. 25 5553. 18 402. 25 4892. 09 361 FXA 1 N 826. 76 622. 84 2379. 00 10. 45 1724. 00 3995. 96 -694. 89 4541. 99 200 5 .(t

RESULTS OF TEST NO.

7360

WAVES

SIGNIFICANT HEIGHT

5.03 M

MEAN PERIOD T1 9.79 9 SITUATION NO 15 DIRECTION 180 DEG

(29)

REPORT NO.

45064-5-RD

RESULTS OF TEST NO.

7361

WAVES

:

15.77 S

DIRECTION

180

DEG

MOORING LINE DYNAMICS SITUATION NO 15 CHAIN TYPE DIN 766-D=0. 076 11

STATISTICAL ANALYSIS *************************************************************************************************** NOTATION DIM. MEAN ST. DEV. A 1/3 + A 1/3 -2A 1/3 A MAX. + A MAX. -2A MAX. NO L:) X 1 M 20. 60 7. 64 34. 13 8. 36 15. 27 45. 88 -2. 77 22. 24 199 Z 1 m 1. 85 3. 85 9. 51 -4. 80 12. 07 17. 14 -8. 48 17. 96 238 PITCH DEG -. 14 5.70 11.00 -11.21 21, 55 17.43 -18.02 32.02 239 FT 1 KN 1731.02 1119.88 4184.00 180.00 3574.00 8463.49 -29.48 8326.41 250 CD FXA 1 KN 278. 54 937. 67 2879. 72 -875. 00 3412. 74 6673. 32 -1092. 39 7765. 71 159 7 CD U

(30)

REPORT NO.

45064-5-RD

RESULTS OF TEST NO.

7359 WAVES : SIGNIFICANT HEIGHT 5. 03 M MEAN PERIOD T1 9. 79 S DIRECTION 180 DEG

MOORING LINE DYNAMICS SITUATION NO 16 CHAIN TYPE DIN 766-D=0.152 M

STATISTICAL ANALYSIS ************************************************************************************************** NOTATION DIM. MEAN ST. DEV. A 1/3 + A 1/3 -2A 1/3 A MAX. + A MAX. -2A MAX. NO X 1 M 10. 68 6. 43 20. 79 2. 01 8. 27 31. 82 -8. 35 27. BO 256 Z 1 M -.06 3.20 6.06 -5.81 11. 75 8.83 -8.29 16. 38 288 PITCH DEG -. 14 5. 05 9. 22 -9. 52 18. 60 12. 88 -13. 53 25. 06 282 FT 1 KN 5352. 65 1348. 82 8297. 69 3261. 53 3812. 14 12748. 47 2257. 21 7776 43 346 FXA 1 KN 760. 70 764. 71 2595. 10 96. 43 1293. 66 7035. 99 -662. 08 6884 82 209

(31)

REPORT NO

45064-5-RD

STATISTICAL ANALYSIS *************************************************************************************************** NOTATION DIM. MEAN ST. DEV. A 1/3 + A 1/3 -2A 1/3 A MAX. + A MAX. -2A MAX. NO X 1 M 5.44 7.08 17.98 -5.69 14,42 30.44 -18.31 24.59 195 Z 1 M . 20 4. 29 8. 75 -7. 91 15. 76 14. 94 -16. 61 30. 33 223 PITCH DEG -. 15 5 30 10. 30 -10. 55 20. 35 17. 04 -18. 10 34. 94 238 FT 1 RN 4690.20 1556.50 7963.50 2155.45 4781.02 15943. 94 319.02 13747. 73 274 CD FXA 1 RN -166.02 1097.30 2332.136 -1619.32 2832.86 9870.93 -3456.30 11131. 00 175 7 CD

RESULTS OF TEST NO.

7358

WAVES

:

SIGNIFICANT HEIGHT 13.03 M

MEAN PERIOD Ti 15.77 S SITUATION NO 16 DIRECTION 180 DEG

(32)

REPORT NO.

45064-5-RD

RESULTS OF TEST NO.

7351 WAVES : SIGNIFICANT HEIGHT 5. 03 M MEAN PERIOD Ti 9. 79 S DIRECTION 180 DEC

STATISTICAL ANALYSIS ************************************************************************************************** NOTATION DIM. MEAN ST. DEV. A 1/3 + A 1/3 -2A 1/3 A MAX. + A MAX. -2A MAX. NO X 1 M 10. 52 2. 43 14. 98 6. 35 6. 57 17. 56 4. 26 8. 69 266 2 1 M . 05 3.04 5. 94 -5. 41 11.20 8. 45 -7. 54 15. 17 286 PITCH DEC -.35 4. 53 8. 00 -8.87 16.69 11. 12 -12. 47 23. 59 284 FT 1 KN 2233.78 2373.83 9106. 18 222.01 9079. 15 22159. 11 -113.70 22204. 47 259 FXA 1 IAN 1317.22 2355,83 8187.26 -569,50 8986.49 21227.11 -1035.92 22114.59 259

(33)

RESULTS OF TEST NO.

7352

WAVES

15.77 S

DIRECTION

180

DEG

MOORING LINE DYNAMICS SITUATION NO 17 STEEL WIRE-D=0.076 M

STATISTICAL ANALYSIS ************************************************************************************************** NOTATION DIM. MEAN ST. DEV. A 1/3 + A 1/3 -2A 1/3 A MAX. + A MAX. -2A MAX. NO X 1 M -2.79 11.40 9.51 -16.53 16.28 21. 13 -71.14 66.84 200 Z 1 M . 44 4. 53 9. 41 -8. 29 16. 79 16. 79 -13. 39 28. 32 225 PITCH DEG -.28 5.66 10.68 -11.30 21.24 14.72 -17.24 28.99 238 FT 1 RN 2039.16 4717.27 17387.72 -267.86 17522.46 82678.54 -1354.78 84033.32 167 FXA 1 RN 1026.52 4665.93 16354.79 -1294.91 17252.99 80828.37 -2560.61 83388.98 167

(34)

DYNLINE INPUT DATA

HOHM

Line discretization _{according to Figure 25}

Line data _{according to Table 2}

Normal added inertia coefficient _1.60

Tangential added inertia coefficient 0.20

Normal drag coefficient _1.30

Tangential drag coefficient _0.40

Tension tolerance in Newton-iteration 1.0

Static deflection of sea floor 0.15

Time increment chain _0.10

Time increment wire _{0.02/0.01 s}

Starting time ₁₂

Duration of simulation 490

(35)

Report No. 45064-5-RD

GENERAL ARRANGEMENT OF SEMI-SUBMERSIBLE Dimensions are given in metres

28.5 28.5

k9.4

HOE3

28.5

117.0

gzr

(36)

Report No. 45064-5-RD

= 2.0

= 1.5

GENERAL ARRANGEMENT OF BARGE

Dimensions are given in metres

BODY PLAN

HOK1

(37)

Report No. 45064-5-RD 25.0 12.5 0.0 -5.0 5.0 2.5 0.0-0.0

HOMM

0.0 ELEVATION IN M 5.0 0.5 _1.0 WAVE FREQUENCY IN R90/S Fig. 3

WAVE ELEVATION _{WAVE NO. 7327}

ac - 1.29 m C a max+ - 4.25 m C a max C - 8.11 m w max C _{- 4.59 m} o . ,

.-\

N \ -, / \ , ..--.,--.. /r . ._.

\\

WAVE SPECTRUM ( P.M.) ;41/;---c0 5.03 m ; Ti - 979 s 5.47 5.47 m ; Ti - 8.30 s Measured Theoret;,caL ;4V c0 , . / \ \ \\ 1 I / IA \ \ \ \ 7

II

I I 'I 'I

II

I \ \ , \ \ \ \_, \ \

'I

I , , , , "'s...

(38)

Report No. 45064-5-RD 25.0 12.5 0.0 -10.0 50.0 25.0 0.0 0.0

HOMM:

0.0 ELEVATION IN M

Fig. 4

10.0

0.5 _1.0

WAVE FREQUENCY IN RAO/S

WAVE ELEVATION _{WAVE NO. 7314}

a

_{- 3.35 m}

c 10.8 m a max C

- - 11.2 m

a max C _{- 21.8 m} w max C w 1/3

- 12.7 m

. . . , , _. . ,

,,

'

/ . . , .. \ . , -1 ' _1----, WAVE SPECTRUM Mecsu^ed

ThecretcoL

( P.M.)

130

13.0 m

; Ti - 15.6 s

13.4 m ;

Ti - 15.0 s

;4V c0

;4'f-c0 ,, / , / 1 1 1 1 1

;,

111 1 1 1 1

\

1 , % 1 1 t , , 1 k 'k / / \ k, \ \ N

..,

....,

(39)

Report No. 45064-5-RD

Waves

TEST SET-UP WITH SEMI-SUBMERSIBLE

Dimensions are given in metres

Force transducer 42.75 Pitch X1 Heave Force transducer

HOED

_{Fig. 5}

Surge Measuring point t.11 1 I I I 1 I 1

II

11 I I Z1 I I It 1 I I 1 It I I Weight L.

(40)

Report No. 45064-5-RD

r--Mooring Line Dynamics TEST SET-UP WITH BARGE Dimensions are given in metres

Z1 T=7.

I

Heave

x//

Force transducer

+Sur e Measuring point

HOaDg

Weight Fig 6 Chain 1 Waves co, Chain 2

(41)

Report No. 45064-5-RD

4000 3000

3

c

-

4 2000

p

1000 0

Mooring Linc Dynamics

STATIC LOAD TEST NO. 7318

Chain type DIN 766

D = 0.076 m

Situation No. 12

HOME3

Fig.

7

_

(42)

Report No. 45064-5-RD

20000

15000

5000

0

Chain type DIN 766

D = 0.152 m

Situation No. 13

HOH

DS

_{Fig. 8}

0

x in m

(43)

Report No. 45064-5-RD

Steel wire D = 0.076 m

Situation No. 14

HOEL3

_Fig.

9

-30

-20

-10 0 10 20 30

x in a

4000 3000 c ₂₀₀₀ 1000 0

(44)

Report No. 45064-5-RD

4000 3000 2000 1000 0

STATIC LOAD TEST

Chain type DIN 766 D = 0.076 m

Situation No. 15

x in m

RI'

al

E3

10 20

Fig. 10

30

(45)

Report No. 45064-5-RD 20000 15000 10000 5000 0

STATIC LOAD TEST

Chain type DIN 766

D = 0.152 m

Situation No. 16

HOYEL3

Fig. 11

-30 _-20 _-10

(46)

Report No. 45064-5-RD

0

-30

STATIC LOAD TEST

Steel wire D = 0.076 m

Situation No. 17

HOME3

Fig. 12

-20 -10 0 10 20 30 x in 13 4000 3000 2000 1000

(47)

r.]

Report No. 45064-5-RD

15.0

0.0

MOOR IN LINE DYNAMIC'..;

HOEM

WAVE FRECUENCY IN R9S/S u Fig. 13 _ , ,N

/

/ / \ \ \

SPECTRA OF X

1 7326 IRR.SEAS- 5.0 M-SITUFTION NO 12 TEST NC.

TEST NO. 7335 IRR.SERS- 5.0 M-SITURTION NO 13

7343 IRR.ERS- 5.0 M-SITUATION NO 14

TEST NO.

10.0

(48)

Report No. 45064-5-RD 200.0 150.0 100.0 50.0 0.0

MOCRING LINE DYNAMICS

HOME

f\

r

J

WAVEo.FREQUENCY IN RAD/S

Fig. 14

SPECTRA OF X

1

TEST NO. 7329 _{IRR.SERS- 13.0 M-SITUATION NO 12} TEST NO. 7336 _{IRR.SEAS-13.CM-SITUATION NO 13} NO. 7342 IRR.SERS- 13.0 M-SITUATION NO 14 TEST

(49)

Report No. 45064-5-RD

crr r

jJJ.J

BOO.0 400.0 200.0 0.

-MOORING LINE DYNAMICS

H0M13

IRR.SERS- 5.0 M-SITUATION NO iS IRR.SERS- 5.0 M-SITUATION NO 19

IRR.SEAS- r

JJ

.r

_{M-SITLIATION NO 17}

r

J.J

WAVE FREGUENCY IN RAD/S

LO

Fig. 15

SPECTRA OF X

73A0 TEST NO. TEST NO. 7353 731 TEST NO.

(50)

Report No. 45064-5-RD

000.0

500.0

400.0

200.0

MOOING LINE ONAMICS

r,

WAVE FREOUENCY IN RAD/S

HOM33

1 . 0

Fig. 16

SPECTRA OF X

1

7361 _{IRR.SEAS-13.0 M-SITUATION NO 15} TEST NO.

TEST NO. 73",6 IRR,0EAS-13.S M-SITUATION NO 16 7352 _{IRR.5EAS-13.0 M-SITUATION NO 17}

(51)

J.. 5

1.0

0.0

HZ,It13

0.0

WAVE FREQUENCY IN RAD/S

r

1.0 Fig. 17 . 5 .

I

1 1 7\ , I I 1 i ,

\

( \

l /

\

i

1 II i I / / I II / / \ , \

\\

1

;.-.

/ / _/ / / --..._ \ 1 \

,

SPECTR

OF Z

1 7326 IRR.SERS- 5.0 M-SITUATION NO 12 TEST NO.

TEST NO. 7335 IRR.SERS- 5.0 M-SITUATION NO 13

7343 IRR.SE9S- 5.0 M-SITUATION NO 14

(52)

cr+ Report No. 45064-5RD 40.0 30.0 20.0 10.0 0.0

-MOORIN:.; LINE DYNAMIC':

WAVE FREOUENOY IN RAD/S

HOMM

_{Fig. 18}

iO

lill

7, \,

1 ;

\\

SPECTRA OF Z

1 7329 IRR.0EAS-13.0 M-SITURTION NO 12 TEST NO.

TEST NO. 7733E _{IRR.'_;ERS-13.0} _{M-SITCATION NO 13} 7342 IRR.SEAS-13.0 M-SITUATION NO 14

(53)

Report No. 45064-5-RD 50.0 90.0 40.0 20.0 0.0

HOREM

i

=1,

r

J. WAVEr r FREOUENCY IN RAD/S Fig. 19

SPECTRA OF Z

1 7360 IRR.SEAS- 5.0 M-SITUATION NO 15 TEST NO.

TEST NO. 7359 'RR:SEAS- 5.0 M-SITUATION NO 19

7351 IRR.SERS- 5.0 M-SITUATION NO 17

TEST NO.

(54)

Report No. 45064-5-RD 50.0 90.0 40.0 20.0 0.0

-M00RING LINE DYNAMICS

HOM73

Fig. 20

A

1 i II\ II \ I, \ 1 \ 1

\

c----,

ri i \ I? III

\

\ \ , .

\

N

./

1

/-\\\

/ 11 1 1 1 11

\

\j

_C I I II 1 h ill II h t 1 \\ 1 1 11 0 I i 1

\\

i i i II

\

SPECTRA OF Z

1 7361 _{IRR.0EA5-I3.0 M-SITUATION NO 15} TEST NO.

TEST NO. 7358 IRR.0ERS-13.0 M-SITUATION NO 16

7352 _{IRR.SERS-13.0 M-SITUATION NO 17}

TEST NO.

n

0.5

(55)

4.0

2.0

1.0

0.

HOMM,

_{Fig. 21}

1 . 0

WAVE FRECUENCY IN RAD/S

i . J

-..-If

I \ I i I I \ r I \ I \ i 1 t I \ 1 1 1 1 1 1 i 1 I \ 1 \

P\

i 1 r i \ i / / \ \ ,--..\\ \ --\ ,

I/

___.--/

/

....- --. //

/

--r-\

\

. --', ..1--- _--...

SPECTRE OF FT

1

NO. 7328 IRR.SEAS- 5.0 M-SITUATION NO 12

TEST

TEST NO. 7335 IRR.SERS- 5.0 M-SITUATION NO 13 NO. 7343 MR-SEAS- 5.0 M-SITUATION NO 14

(56)

CD X

Report No. 45064-5-RD

10.0

r

c-0.0

M00RING LINE DYNAMICS

n

J. J _0.5

WAVE FRECUENCY IN R90/S

HOME3

SPECTRA OF FT 1

EST NO. 7323 EST NO. 7339 tST NO. 7342 1.0 Fig. 22 _ I I I 1 I I \ 1 I I \I I I \\ 1 1

\

I

\

\ I

/

(

_{/ \}

.\ I i

\

i

\

I

\

I

\

_\

I 1 I I

\

_\

\

N\

\ ...," \

NN

_, ,.. ... IRR.SER0-13.0 M-SITUATION NO 12 IRR.5EAS-13.0 M-SITUATION NO 13 IRR.SEA5-13.0 M-SITUATION NO 14

(57)

'D

C.'s]

Report No. 45064-5-RD

4.0

3.0

2.0

1.0 0.

-MSORING LINE DYNAMICS

SPECTRA OF FT

1

J

WAVE FREOUENCY IN RAD/5

HOEM

Fig. 23

A 1 t I I I 1 \ 1

[

I I \ i \ / 1 1

i

i \ 1 ' 1 I I I I I I /

Ilk

/

i 1 \ 1 _

1-\

I I 1 1 \ _____/ /

/

\

\ \_

\

.

___.,----NO. TEST 7350 TEST NO. 7359 7351 TEST NO. IRR.SERS- 5.0 M-SITUATION NO 15 IRR.SERS- 5.0 M-SITUATION NO is IRR.SEAS- 5.0 M-SITUATION NO 17

(58)

Report No. 45064-5-RD 4.0 3.0 2.0 1.0 0. 0

SPECTRA OF FT

1

HOM33

Fig. 24

I / 1

/

I /1\

N\j

I

1

\

1 1 I 1 \ 1 1 r I 1

\

1

\

i

1

\

1

./..\

\\

\

\ \ \ \ \

\

\ -...,,\ \

N

_\

, \ \ \

\

_\

---\

\\,

-.-.

_{--..._}

-TEST NO. 7351 _{IRR.0EA0-13.0 M-SITUATION NO 15}

'EST NO. 7355 _{IRR.SEAS-13.0 M-SITUATION NO 15}

iTL.T NO. 7352 _{IRR.SEAS-13.0 M-SITUATION NO 17}

0.5 _1.0

WAVE FRECUENCY IN RAD/S

a

(59)

Report No. 45064-5-RD

Situation No. 12 Line: 76 mm chain Pre-tension: 1160 kN

Situation No. 13

Line: 152 ram chain

Pre-tension: 4931 kN Situation No. 14 Line: 76 mm wire Pre-tension: 1173 kN Video mark Video mark

Mooring Line Dynamics LINE DISCRETIZATION 300 200 100 300

HOHE3

Situation No. 15 Line: 76 mm chain Pre-tension: 948 kN Fig. 25 1000 X Situation No. 16 Line: 152 mm chain Pre-tension: 4057 kN 1000 X Situation No. 17 Line: 76 mm wire Pre-tension: 911 kN Video mark Video mark Video mark 2000 2000 1000 X 2000

(60)

No. 7329 Mooring Line Dynamics

CORRELATION DYNLINE - MODEL TEST

A WAVE 0 FT 1 KN T-NO0E17 "reduced 0 dynami cs" -10.00 i0.00 T-NOCE17 X-NODF15 SECONn -10.00 _

r

rr

_JJ

0 r rr

,.JJ

-0

-r

J.JJ

rr 1000. _Irrr r_UJJ. i0.00 0 -10.00 5.00

JJ

0 rr ) JJ Z-NODEF..; 0

JJ

[v

i_iiiJIII I

58 100

j\l\'"\VOMT

HOE

DC)

_{Fig. 26}

\i

frw,(\ry\I

1#;(64,v,41000volV44.

A4,4

model test DYNLINE

(61)

Report No. 45064-5RD

WAVE SECCNC0 10,00 ._ 0

-10.00

_

5.00

_ 0

-r rr

_J.JJ

5.00

5.00 .JJ

1000 0 1000 _ 0

r rr

Z-NOD515

-r rr

_J.JJ

;;;;

0 50 iCC

Iv

Av\if

W\11,1A4

HOREM

_{Fig. 27}

tAJ

Nv\r,

/\1

model test

(62)

Report No. 45064-5-RD

X 1 0 10.00 _ 10.00 _ _11 1

WAN-P\AA,

z 0

5000.WV\/\,..,.../VV6

FT 1 KN 0 X-NODE15

.r

rr

iu.JJ

10.00 -5000.1, 5.00x T-NOSE17 "reduced 0 dynamics" -5.00 T-N00017 0 1,J.Jt)

rr

MifrMivv\AR1

J\1NVn,

-10.05 5 1.\?\,

1\14

co ._ Z-NOSE1S -10,DS _ `-JECONP3 0 50 100

HOE

D)D

i' Aiy\IV\AVVAI

\I

I r'

\"\ArkiJA\i

V\I\

Fig. 28 model test DYNLINE

(63)

Report No. 45064-5-RD

WF1VE FT 1 KN ₀

-10.00

2.Oxl

T-NCSE12 "reduced 0 dynamics" "2-504<1.1. T-NODE12 0 10.50 _ -NODE11

i0,5

Z-NOSEil

I\

-10.55 J

/

;:iELONDS ! 1 1 - 1 0 . (.7. J`v

'nr

103

HOU:13

Fig. 29

model test

(64)

Report No. 45064-5-RD

Z I fl 0 _ FT I KN T-N50612 "reduced 0 dynami cs" -10-004 10,504 T-N00612 X-NOD611

A

i\AA

V\AA/,/

0

-10.504'

2.50

-2.r.;0 Z-NO5E11 ii SECONO5

P\Ar\fdpfv\Alv,14AR,,,,

-\AA/vv\A

1 \ A

V V\I

\"\i'v\f\s

HOEDs

Fig. 30

\\!

model test

(65)

Report No. 45064-5-RD

No. 7358 _{Mooring Line Dynamics}

WAVE FT 2 FT i KN 1-NODE i75. CO 1.C.1NkNkt,,m400,4,4,4i, , AAolvi,1411 Nes.5,1401 "reduced 0 dynamics" T-NODE17 X-NCOEIS i0.0%01, 0 1\1., r, -10.00 -10.00_ r:COO.rr -5000. C.1 'TOO. Cc 0 -5.004LD r - 1 L.; JO -20.0G. Ar\I\Z-NOOEi5 eJECCNY.,

-20.00..

17777777777

ra-i 100

\l'AVV

V\mwevAf

HOk41

1\f\fiti

A

Fig. 31

DYNLINE

(66)

Report No. 45064-5-RD

kPVE FT 2 nrs. -,...,

-1, rr

_{_} -5005. 55

r000.0T

FT 1 KN Li T-NODE17 S. 00L0 "reduced 0 dynamics" _ r:).00.(1C: T-NCLE17 i0-0C X-NODEAS -10,SO 10-0S L-N0Erl _10.50

J

1.

rvt

[

HOH73

tvPik, t'.11hr frt.( 11(t,,rrif O _ r-CGC). 0 f t f _VOlf\A-v, Atw\AA^,11-' V I, t \11,0, _qL1,.

0,4**04440000k,v

A'Abilirvo4qr'q't1404timptlypiSi

t

f,rAl , ^-Vv tfl A f 11\ 1

i\fgi

PI qr. r,I V V -\ [I 1 t'ilt,,\, q\krAi't,- _{f 1,,l'.,} L

Fig. 32

model test DYNLINE 'NA J\PA'AAN,APf\AA\ EECONn _..111 . so nr

(67)

Report No. 45064-5-RD

WAVE FT KN SECSNC!..) 0

-5.00

0

lr

Cr JJ--20.00

]

10.00

IR!

\ ,9 . / V V Z 1 M 0 , littv (ri td\ 2000 rat,t11 711 t -2000.10 T-NOEE17

AkAii

2' CI° '41C-

_{Iktir'0400MM640111.0"}

NA*

"reduced C dynamics" -2.05Al2(1 2.00 T-NOIDE17

04110/410144941010401(P

4(1d 0 ti,v4 4\1

Aq\tiVvvvkAlAikfAigNIPV\igmAr'kq\I

rtrAq\W-NvertvAilltelpi\iNVI,INI\ili\N'Vvktol

fl

rr

_JU

.nr

_1,3 ivv\701, vN\d

HOREM:

Ifr

#vil\

tvgAVI

Fig. 33 model test DYNLINE

-10.so

PT 7 2000.1. 4A.

(68)

Report No. 45064-5-RD

WAVE FT 2 -20 CC r -,nr-r FT 1 KN 0 -2000-0-; 2,00)(1 T-NODE17 "reduced 0 dynamics" T-NOCE17 -2.000(LI: 2.00sLo. 0 _ X-NO5E1rj Z-NCDEP3 0.00 1 !, rr _ -1C

rr

SECCNE(J -10.00

2000,0rIT\A/LA

r ,.., r0

VM

k'rtf",11 11 I

Af\,1

\lvvvvvv4,A o,t1

opp,j0

/AV

HOMM

_{Fig. 34}

00444,i'OA

)1P(Ov

1-AnA\-\-Tv\-v\f-\,(vJvi'v r A \Ali\ Viv v2\ model test DYNLINE

A A

\'",f\,[V

(69)

\TVrAlv:-Report No. 45064-5-RD

+0 7.5 5.0 2.5 0 0

DYNAMIC RATIO FROM HARMONIC OSCILLATION TESTS

Situation No. 7: water depth = 300 m line: 76 mm chain

HORE113

DYNLINE Measured Oscillation

0 S = 4.0 m 0

0.5

W in rad/s 1.0 Fig. 35 15

(70)

Report No. 45064-5-RD

7.5

5.0

2.5

0 0

HOH13

Situation No. 8: water depth = 300 m

line: 152 mm chain

0.5

Cu in rad/s

Fig. 36

0 S = 4.0 m

0

(71)

aeport No. 45064-5RD

7.5

5.0

2.5

0 0

HOE=

Situation No. 9: water depth = 300 m line: 76 mm steel wire

0 S = 4.0 m 0 0 ₀ 0

0.5

W in rad/s 1.0 Fig. 37 1.5

(72)

Report No. 45064-5-RD D.00 X-NODE17 0 10.00 T-N0DE17 0 10.004 T-N100E17 0 i-10.004C' SECONDS 0 50 100

HZREM

31-HARMONIC DYNLINE TESTS

Test No. 2020

reduced dynamics

dynamic tension

Fig. 38

results for

w1 + w2 after low-pass filtering

results for w1 w Xa (rad/s) (m) 0.063 10.0 0.500 4.0

(73)

Report No. 45064-5-RD ri.00 X-NODE17 10.50-L T-Nair17 0 -10. `3.r.L..0'

rr

1J-JJ

T-NOCr17

-r

J.JJ

rr A, -10.GS,J0

BI-HARMONIC DYNLINE TESTS

Test No. 2011

ihfiM

0

DC 100

--- reduced dynamics dynamic tension

HOREM

Fig. 39

results for

w1 4 w2 after low-pass filtering results for wl w Xa (rad/s) (m) 0.063 10.0 0.750 4.0 SECONDS , I I I I I,

(74)

Report No. 45064-5-RD

X-NDOE1 T-NME17 T-NO0r17 SECONDS 5.00 _ 7 0 -5.00

S

i-10,50-4

0'

Ii4titt

Ite

100

BI-HARMONIC DYNLINE TESTS

Test No. 2030

--- reduced dynamics dynamic tension

HOHM

\

;4;

IWN

Fig. 40

results for

w1 w2 after low-pass filtering

results for w1 w Xa (rad/s) (m) 0.063 10.0 1.000 4.0