Proceedings of OMAE 2002:

st
21 International Conf onProceedings
Offshore Mech ofandOMAE’02
Arctic Eng.
st
21 International Conference on Offshore Mechanics
June 23 – 28, 2002. Oslo, Norway.
and Arctic Engineering
June 23-28, 2002,Oslo, Norway

OMAE2002-28350

INFLUENCE OF HEAVE PLATE GEOMETRY ON THE HEAVE RESPONSE OF

CLASSIC SPARS

KRISH P THIAGARAJAN INDRA DATTA

Centre for Oil & Gas Engineering, CSO Aker Engineering, Inc.
The University of Western Australia, Houston TX 77079, USA
Crawley, WA 6009, AUSTRALIA

ALEX Z RAN LONGBIN TAO JOHN E HALKYARD

CSO Aker Engineering, Inc. School of Engineering, CSO Aker Engineering, Inc.
Houston TX 77079, USA Griffiths University, Houston TX 77079, USA
QLD 9726, AUSTRALIA

ABSTRACT
A production spar designed for West African (WA) offshore conditions
must consider possible resonance with long period swell, which might
result in large amplitude heave oscillations. Preliminary study of a
classic spar with diameter of 39 m (128 ft) and draft 198 m (650 ft) for
a WA application led the authors to believe that excessive heave
response of 5.2 m (17 ft) may occur at the natural period of 28 seconds.
This led the team to investigate the possibility of adding a heave plate
(circular disk) at the base of the spar to control the response to within
3.1 m (10 ft), which is the limit set by a typical compensation system.
Important design issues arose with regards to the geometry of the plate,
i.e. diameter and thickness.
Numerical simulations and model testing were used to identify the
influence of a heave plate on the heave response of the spar. Heave
response for various diameters and thickness were investigated.
Comparison of added mass and damping values were found to be in
reasonable agreement. Issues such as effect of a centerwell and
moorings, plate cutouts for ease of transportation were also
investigated. Discussion of the experimental results and comparison
with numerical simulations are presented in this paper, and some
recommendations are made on optimum heave plate geometry.
BACKGROUND AND INTRODUCTION
As a precursor to our discussion, let us note from elementary
dynamics, the heave natural period of a floating cylinder is given
by:
m + ma
T3 = 2π …………………………..………..(1)
ρgAwp + k m
where m and ma denote the mass and added mass in heave, Awp
is the area of water plane, and km is the mooring stiffness.
Subscript 3 denotes the heave mode of motion. For a freely
floating cylinder of uniform diameter (without mooring
effects), the expression simplifies to
hC m
T3 = 2π …………………………………….…….(2)
g
Here, h is the draft of the spar, and Cm is the inertia coefficient
which is equated to 1 + Ca, the added mass coefficient.
Classic spars have inherently long heave natural periods
due to the deep draft. Typically a spar has a natural heave
period above 25 seconds, which in most circumstances is
sufficiently outside the prevailing wave frequency range and
thus heave motion is generally insignificant. This is considered
one of the great advantages of a spar concept. Deployment of
such spars in the Gulf of Mexico (GOM) has proven
successful for supporting rigid risers with dry wellheads. In
this environment, the long periods prevent any serious
occurrence of heave resonance, and thus induce very favorable
heave response. However, extension of spar application to
environments such as the West African offshore should be
done with caution. One of the unique environmental features
confronting a floating platform offshore West Africa is the
long swell condition that may persist for a considerable portion
of the year. The swell waves, with peak period lying in the 23-
25 second range, will have appreciable energy even at up to 30
seconds. By contrast, the usual range of wave periods in a
storm condition is between 5 to 20 seconds. A production spar

1 Copyright © 2002 by ASME

Downloaded From: http://proceedings.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/ on 02/01/2016 Terms of Use: http://www.asme.org/about-asme/terms-of-use

 designed for West African offshore conditions must consider
possible resonance with long period swell, which might result in
large amplitude heave oscillations. This is a serious concern
since the spar is inherently a lightly damped system.
Haslum and Faltinsen (1999) describe the mechanics of first
and second order heave excitation of a spar, and means of
reducing it. From a design point of view, the heave response of a
spar might be reduced by one of the following ways:
1) Detuning - moving the natural heave period outside the
range of wave energy
2) Increasing the damping of the system.
The natural heave period of a spar can be changed by changing
the draft, mass and the added mass of the structure or decreasing
the water plane area (Eq. 1). However, increasing the draft
implies increase in the system mass, which would subsequently
affect many other considerations in design, leading to higher
cost. Addition of an appendage such as a disk or a step change
to the spar diameter at the keel (schematically shown in Figure 1)
can result in an increase in the damping, and added mass.
Before proceeding further, it is useful to introduce two
operational parameters that influence the hydrodynamic
performance of heave plates attached to spars. These are:
2πa
1. Keulegan – Carpenter number KC =
D recommended drag coefficient for plates was between 2 and 3.
D2
2. Beta parameter β=
νT
where a and T are the amplitude and period of heave oscillation,
D is the diameter of the spar and ν is the kinematic viscosity.
Thiagarajan and Troesch (1994, 1998) describe the two
main mechanisms of creation of drag by plates at low KC.
Friction drag: the classical damping term obtained by
integration of shear stress over the wetted area of the body.
It is dependent on viscosity and hence on Reynolds number
or Beta number. For oscillating plates this damping is
negligible except at very small KC numbers.
Form drag: the term obtained by integration of normal
stresses, and is strongly influenced by the shape of the body.
Significant features of this mechanism are flow separation,
vortex formation and shedding. It was shown that this is the
dominant mechanism for realistic KC numbers in the range
0.1 –1.
Experiments by Thiagarajan and Troesch (1994, 1998) and
followed by axisymmetric Navier-Stokes solvers of Tao et al.
(2000) have shown that the damping ratio of oscillating cylinders
and disks follows a linear trend with KC. The drag coefficient
for a disk was shown to approximately double the value for a
bare spar cylinder. These papers have explored the relationship
of the damping force with the oscillation parameters, and have
developed formulations for calculating this
2 Copyright © 2002 by ASME
Downloaded From: http://proceedings.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/ on 02/01/2016 Terms of Use: http://www.asme.org/about-asme/terms-of-use
(a) (b)
Figure 1. a) A classic spar column, b) with a step change in
diameter or an added disk.
relationship. However, a systematic variation of disk geometry
and the corresponding influence on damping and added mass
was not explored (Thiagarajan, 2001). Further, previous
simulations were conducted at low Beta numbers and the
behavior in realistic Beta numbers of 107 is not clearly known.
Prislin et al. (1998) recommend that special precautions to be
taken when analyzing model test results for a spar with heave
plates. There could be a significant difference in drag
coefficient between model test results and prototypes. The
However, if form drag is the main mechanism of energy
dissipation, then one could argue the influence of Reynolds
number (and consequently Beta number) to be a minimum.
Some light on this issue is shed in this paper.
A disk or a plate can also result in an increase in added
mass. In fact, this is the primary effect for deployment of
plates in truss spars and the consequent detuning of the truss
spar (see e.g. Magee et al. 2000, Prislin et al. 1998,
Thiagarajan, 2001). Prislin et al. (1998) have developed
formulations for added mass coefficient for square plates,
based on experiments. Datta et al. (1999) and Magee et al.
(2000) have done several numerical simulations to identify
optimum spacing of the plates of a truss spar so that the added
mass effect is maximised. It was clear that as the spacing of
plates increased, the individual added mass contribution
approached the value of a single plate. When the plates were
spaced approximately one length dimension the added mass of
each plate is about 0.45 ρL3, approximately equal to half the
volume of water contained in the gap. Molin (2001) presents a
theoretical solution, based on matched eigenfunction
expansions, for the potential flow past oscillating solid and
porous disks. Added mass and damping (due to head loss at
disk edge) coefficients are presented as functions of relative
spacing between two disks, disk diameter and porosity.
In this paper, we consider a spar of diameter 39 m (128
ft), and draft 198 m (650 ft). Its heave natural period is
estimated as 28 seconds. Thus, one environmental response
condition to be considered is resonant heave response at 28
seconds. Preliminary global response simulation showed
undesirable heave response of 5.18 m (17 ft) at 28 sec. It is
 desired to limit the heave motion to within 3.1 m (10 ft) using
heave plates in the form of disk(s) at the keel of the spar. A
screening study was performed using numerical simulations,
followed by model tests to assess the influence of various
geometrical parameters of a heave plate on the behavior of the
spar. The results from this study are described in this paper.
NUMERICAL SIMULATIONS AND EXPERIMENTS
In the computational technique used, forced heave oscillation of
the spar (without mooring) is considered. The added mass and
damping are computed for a specified amplitude and frequency
of oscillation, i.e. for certain values of KC and β. The numerical
technique employed for the present purpose is well described in
Tao et al. (2000) and only a brief description is given here. The
basic equations for numerical calculation are the Navier-Stokes
equations for unsteady incompressible viscous flows in
cylindrical polar coordinate system. The no-flux and no-slip
velocity boundary conditions are imposed along the oscillatory
spar surface. On the bottom open boundary, the velocity
gradients in the horizontal direction are assumed negligible.
Non-linear free surface conditions are not included in the present
numerical modeling due to the large draft of spar structures, but
instead a free stream flow boundary condition is assumed. On
the spar and disk surfaces, where the velocity components are
specified, Neumann pressure boundary conditions are obtained
by applying the normal momentum equation on the wall
boundaries. At boundaries sufficiently far from the oscillating
cylinder, static pressure is assumed. The theoretical formulations
are implemented by using finite difference method based on
curvilinear coordinates on a non-staggered grid. The spatial
terms in the governing equations are discretized with a finite
difference method in the transformed plane. A third-order four-
point upwind scheme is used to discretize the non-linear
convection terms and central differencing is used for all the other
spatial derivatives. The Navier-Stokes equations are marched
forward in time by using a second-order fully implicit scheme.
The momentum equations and the pressure equation are solved
alternatively using a successive over-relaxation or under-
relaxation iterative procedure to get the velocity and pressure
fields. The numerical procedure has been extensively validated
against experimental data (see Tao et al. 2000).
Results for the non-linear viscous problem are calculated
using a mesh size of (134 x 120) with the node points being
concentrated near the surfaces of the cylinder and disk, and
stretched out gradually in a physical domain of (11R x 20R) in
radial and vertical direction respectively. Here R is the radius of
the spar. The minimum mesh spacing and time step used in the
∆rmin ∆y min
calculations are = = 0.0005
R R
∆t
= 0.0002 respectively based on mesh independence study.
T view of the optical tracking system without affecting either the
Downloaded From: http://proceedings.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/ on 02/01/2016 Terms of Use: http://www.asme.org/about-asme/terms-of-use
Table 1. Test matrix for the computational study
Configuration 1 2 3 4
Spar diameter (ft) 128 128 128 128
Total draft (ft) 650 650 650 650
Disk diameter (ft) No disk 138 148 168
Disk thickness (ft) No disk 1.56 1.56 1.56
Period (sec) 28
Beta parameter 4.57 x 107
Amplitude (ft) 3, 9, 15
KC number 0.15, 0.44, 0.74
Preliminary simulations (not discussed in detail here) were
conducted with a 3.1 m (10 ft) thick disk and three different
disk diameters of 45.1 m (148 ft), 51.2 m (168 ft) and 57.3 m
(188 ft). One motion amplitude of 3.1 m (10 ft) at 28 sec
period was simulated. The corresponding KC and β numbers
were 0.49 and 4.6 x 107. Based on this study, a more realistic
computational test matrix to compare with model tests was
developed (Table 1). Four configurations comprising of the
bare hull and three different disk diameters, oscillating at three
different amplitudes of oscillation at a constant period of 28
sec were considered. These conditions are also shown in
Table 1.
Model tests on a 1:75 model of a classic spar for a typical
West African location were conducted at the Offshore
Technology Research Center, College Station, Texas. The
primary objective of the tests was to get an insight into
consequences of varying a number of geometric parameters.
Figure 2 shows various disk configurations tested. The
spar+disk setup is shown schematically in Figure 3, and
explained in Table 2. Free decay tests in heave were
conducted for the hull both with and without mooring. The
tests were conducted by pushing down on the center of the
model by up to 5 m full scale, and immediately releasing it.
Two sets of tests at high and low amplitude were conducted.
The motion of the spar was measured using a 6-DOF optical
tracking system. The heave natural period and equivalent
linear damping were estimated by a least squares fit of an
exponentially damped sine wave to selected portions of the
time series record. The damping coefficient is presented as a
fraction of critical damping.
For the tests without the model mooring, the model was
restrained with two horizontal strings fastened to the deck.
and The strings were anchored to opposite sides of the basin
through very soft extension springs. The strings and springs
were in the air. This arrangement kept the model in the field of
heave natural period or the hydrodynamic damping.
3 Copyright © 2002 by ASME
 RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
Most of the discussion utilizes the definition of the linear
damping coefficient Z as the ratio of system damping to
critical damping. However, Fourier averaged Morison drag
and added mass coefficients Cd and Ca are also used. It is to
be noted that the added mass coefficient is normalized with the
displaced mass of the spar. The inertia coefficient is defined
as 1 + Ca. Results for various configurations are presented in
terms of the ratio disk to spar diameters.

Influence of disk geometry on the added mass

We present here the results for added mass from the
computational study only, since this was not explicitly
measured in the experiments. The added mass coefficient
Figure 2. Disk geometry for experimental configurations (Fig. 4) is nearly linear with diameter ratio cubed for the range
Configuration A: Lower Right – 20’ Plate of KC tested, showing a weak influence of KC. The
Configuration B: Upper Right – Truncated 20’ Plate theoretical expression for heave added mass of a disk can be
Configuration C: Upper Left – 10’ Plate obtained from textbooks such as Sarpkaya and Isaacson
Configuration D: Upper Left and Lower Left – Two 10’ (1981). Assuming that only half the disk is active for our
Plates x 30’ Apart problem we can obtain the theoretical added mass as
Configuration F: Center Capped Centerwell 1 1 3
ma 3 =  ρDd  ……………………………………….(3)
23 
where Dd is the disk diameter. The added mass coefficient
thus obtained (= Eq. 3/ displaced mass) is compared with the
*For config. C only
average computed values for each diameter in Table 4. The
correlation is not very good. It is noted that Eq. (3) is obtained
650 ft draft
from the added mass of an isolated disk accelerating in infinite
fluid. Hence, its applicability in the present context may be
questioned.
As an alternative, one can consider the added mass of a
disk attached to a spar as being equal to the displaced mass of
30ft a hemisphere with the same diameter, i.e.
DDCV 1.56 ft thick
1 π 3
ma 3 =  ρDd  ………………………………………(4)
Keel Plate(s)
2 6 
DDCV The computed added mass coefficients also shown in Table 4
10/20 ft
D =128 ft shows excellent agreement with computed values. This
equation is recommended for calculating added mass for
Figure 3. Details of experimental configurations classic spars.

Influence of Beta number on damping

Table 2. Heave plate dimensions for experimental
The behavior of Z as a function of the squared of the diameter
configurations
ratio is shown in Figure 5. The solid lines are numerical
Configuration A B C D E F
results for three different amplitudes of oscillation (Table 1)
corresponding to the three KC numbers. Shown in the figure
Disk width 20 20 10 10 0 0 are the experimental values obtained for low amplitudes and
(ft) high amplitudes of oscillation. We note that while the
Disk diameter 168 168 148 148 - - computational problem is for forced heave oscillation, the
(ft) experimental method is based on heave decay oscillations,
Disk thickness 1.56 1.56 1.56 1.56 - - where amplitude changes with time. In spite of this difference
(ft) in approaches, the agreement shown in Fig. 5 is remarkably
Centerwell Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes No good, for both low and high KC regimes. It is further noted
that the computational results were obtained for realistic Beta

4 Copyright © 2002 by ASME

Downloaded From: http://proceedings.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/ on 02/01/2016 Terms of Use: http://www.asme.org/about-asme/terms-of-use

 0.20
(a)
t/T = 4.375

0.15
Ca

10.4

0.10
KC=0.15 10.2

0.05 KC=0.44

y
KC=0.74 10

0.00
1.0 1.5 2.0 3 2.5 9.8

(D disk /D spar )
9.6
2
Figure 4. Ca vs. Dratio for different KC 0.8 1 1.2 1.4 1.6 1.8
r

(b)
Table 4. Added mass coefficients computed vs.
theoretical t/T = 4.375

Diameter Avg. Eq. 3 Eq. 4

ft computed 10.4

128 0.067 0.042 0.066

10.2
138 0.080 0.052 0.082

y
148 0.101 0.065 0.101 10

168 0.156 0.094 0.148 9.8

9.6

0.8 1 1.2 1.4 1.6 1.8

5.0 KC=0.15 r
KC=0.44 Figure 6. Vorticity contours at the edge of a disk, KC =
4.0 KC=0.74 0.15; a) disk diameter 138 ft, b) 168 ft
Z(%)

Z(lowKC)
3.0
Z(hiKC)
It is intuitively obvious that when the disk diameter is not
2.0
significantly larger than the spar diameter, the spar can
interfere with the vortex formation and shedding process.
1.0 Figure 6 shows computed vorticity contours around the disk
edge at KC = 0.15, at one time instant of oscillation. The
0.0 vortices formed with a smaller disk (Fig. 6a) appear
1.0 1.2 1.4 2 1.6 1.8 compressed showing the influence of the spar hull’s presence.
(D disk /D spar )
On the other hand, vortices at higher disk diameter (Fig. 6b)
2
Figure 5. Z vs. Dratio for different KC. are more rounded and appear to move around without the
hull’s hindrance. The consequence of this is that the drag due
numbers typical of prototype values. Such results have not been to a smaller disk is lower. A corollary to this observation is
seen in literature so far. Model test Beta values are normally that any increase beyond a certain diameter would not result in
several orders smaller than prototypes. The agreement seen in appreciable increases in drag. This is clearly seen in Figure 5
Figure 5 indicates support to the notion that Beta effects in for the smallest KC. This can be further substantiated by
estimation of heave damping can be considered negligible, since considering that the disk extension should be sufficient to
most of damping is related to form or geometry. accommodate the core of the vortex ring shed during an
oscillation process. Considering that the core diameter is of
the same order of the oscillation stroke, we find that for KC =
Influence of disk diameter on damping 0.15, an extension of 6 ft (disk diameter of 140 ft) will be quite
The curves in Fig. 5 show a weak nonlinear trend of Z with Dratio2 sufficient. Hence the curve in Figure 5 has flattened beyond
at different KC. Considerable flattening of the curve at the Dratio2 = 1.34 (148 ft diameter). The higher KC curves in
smallest KC of 0.15 is seen when the disk diameter gets larger. Figure 5 show no evidence of flattening. However, based on a
similar argument the KC = 0.44 curve can be expected to

5 Copyright © 2002 by ASME

Downloaded From: http://proceedings.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/ on 02/01/2016 Terms of Use: http://www.asme.org/about-asme/terms-of-use


t=1.56 ft, KC=0.44 t=10ft, KC = 0.49
3.0
y = 3.1495x - 2.7192
2.0
Z(%)
1.0
y = 0.7921x - 0.2946
0.0
1.0 1.5 2 2.0 2.5
(D disk /D spar )
2
Figure 7. Z vs. Dratio for different disk thickness
flatten beyond 168 ft disk diameter. As a general guideline it is
suggested that the disk extension be at least four times the typical
heave amplitude to get the optimum drag effect.
Influence of disk thickness on damping
Damping variation due to two different disk thickness were
studied using the numerical method. This comparison for
KC~0.44 - 0.49 is shown in Figure 7. It is clear that the increase
in damping ratio is steeper when the disk is thinner. This
increase is attributed to strong vortex interaction during the two
cycles of the flow leading to increased shed vorticity. These
interaction processes are generally nonlinear. However, the
behavior of damping ratio with the geometrical parameters
shows a linear trend in Figure 7.
The linear fits in Figure 7 show nearly four-fold increase in
the slope of the curves as the thickness is decreased from 10 ft to
1.56 ft. Generally it can be said that in order to maximize the
damping effects, minimum thickness that satisfies structural and
fatigue strength requirements must be chosen.
Influence of other factors on damping
Several other factors described below were tested during the
study, to ascertain their influence on damping. However, it is
acknowledged that these issues pose tremendous complexity to
the problem, thus meriting further investigation through
systematic computational and/or experimental studies.
Multiple disks
In experimental configuration C, two disks of diameter 148
ft, and spaced 30 ft apart were tested. The goal was to determine
if the drag increased significantly compared to Configuration D,
one disk of same diameter. Results showed that damping did not
change appreciably between the two configurations. This was a
surprising result, as the isolated edge theory developed by
Graham (1980) and later applied to disks by Thiagarajan and
Troesch (1998) would have concluded that the drag coefficient
for Config C would have doubled that of Config D resulting in
an appreciable change of damping values. Further, experiments
6 Copyright © 2002 by ASME
Downloaded From: http://proceedings.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/ on 02/01/2016 Terms of Use: http://www.asme.org/about-asme/terms-of-use
Table 5. Effect of center well on heave damping of a
spar
Z(%)
Center well
Low KC High KC
Open 0.33 0.62
Closed 0.54 0.75
reported by Prislin et al. (1998) showed a significant increased
in drag coefficient per plate when multiple plates were used.
Molin (2001) based on his analysis suggests that to maximize
the drag effect several plates should be installed. This study
could shed no further light on this issue.
Disk cutout
One of practical difficulties with a spar supporting a heave
plate is the difficulty associated with transportation. A cutout
of 90 deg for ease of transportation was considered
(Configuration B). Compared to the complete plate of same
diameter (Configuration A) the damping showed a 40%
decrease at higher KC, but then there was an unexpected 30%
increase at lower KC.
Center well effect
Two sets of tests were conducted with the spar center well
open and closed (Configurations E and F). Closing the center
well in the model led to a mild increase of 10 – 20% in
damping as shown in Table 5. This was an unexpected result,
as it is generally thought that a center well will increase heave
damping by way of larger wetted surface area and enhanced
form drag mechanism. For comparison, Molin’s (2001)
analysis showed that heave damping increases for a porous
plate. For a 20% porous plate, heave damping was expected to
increase by a factor of 4 –5.
Mooring effect
Models in various configurations were tested with and
without mooring. In general mooring increased damping. In
most cases the improvement was small, while in some cases
there was a large increase. Mooring induced damping is an
issue of contention, and for the case of a spar with catenary or
spread mooring, the influence of mooring on damping may be
regarded as small.
CONCLUSIONS
The paper presents results from a study aimed at examining the
influence of various geometrical and other factors of heave
plates on the heave performance of spar platforms. Flows
corresponding to very high Beta values typical of prototype
spar were simulated and show reasonable agreement with low
Beta number experiments. This supports the notion that heave
damping is primarily form drag related, and effect of Beta is
small.
 Other principal conclusions are:
1. Added mass coefficient shows a linear increase with disk
diameter. Dependence on KC is weak.
2. Eq. 4 (displaced mass of a hemisphere) is shown to better
predict added mass of a deep water spar +heave plate, than
Eq. 3 which is normally used.
3. Heave damping ratio generally shows a linear trend with
diameter ratio squared.
4. As a general guideline it is suggested that the disk extension
be at least four times the typical heave amplitude to get the
maximum drag effect.
5. In order to maximize damping effects, minimum disk
thickness that satisfies structural and fatigue strength
requirements must be chosen
6. Several other factors merit further investigation such as:
- multiple disks
- cutouts and center well effect
- mooring induced heave damping
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
The authors gratefully acknowledge the help and
cooperation from ExxonMobil Corp. in making the classic spar
model used in this study available for model tests. The tests
were conducted at the Offshore Technology Research Center
(College Station, Texas). Lastly, thanks are due to CSO Aker
Engineering, Inc. in Houston, Texas, who funded the research
work during a sabbatical there by the first author.
Sarpkaya, T, and Isaacson, M J, Mechanics of wave forces on
offshore structures, van Nostrand Reinhold, 1981.
Tao, L. Thiagarajan, K P, and Cheng, L, “On the parametric
dependence of springing damping of TLP and spar columns”,
Appl. Ocean Res. Vol. 22, Issue 5-6, pp 281-294, Oct 2000.
Thiagarajan, K P, “Contribution to spar Technology: solving a
niche hydrodynamic problem”. Proceedings 10th Offshore
Symposium, Texas Section of Soc. Naval Architects & Marine
Engr. 2001.
Thiagarajan, K P and Troesch, A W, "Effect of Appendages
and Small Currents on the Hydrodynamic Heave Damping of
TLP Columns", J. Offshore Mechanics and Arctic Eng. Vol.
120, no. 1, pp 37-42, 1998.
Thiagarajan, K. P. and Troesch, A. W., "Hydrodynamic
Damping Estimation and Scaling for Tension Leg Platforms",
J. Offshore Mechanics and Arctic Eng., vol. 116, No.2, 70-76,
May 1994.

REFERENCES
Datta, I, Prislin, I, Halkyard, J, Greiner, W L, Bhat, S, Perryman,
S, and Beynet, P A, “Comparison of truss spar model test results
with numerical predictions”, Proceedings OMAE Conference,
St. John’s, 1999.

Graham, J M R, “The forces on sharp-edged cylinders in

oscillatory flow at low KC numbers”, J. Fluid Mechanics, vol
97, 1, pp. 331-346, 1980.

Haslum, H A and Faltinsen, O M, “Alternative Shape of Spar

Platforms for Use in Hostile Areas”, Proceedings Offshore
Technology Conference, Paper OTC 10953, Houston, 1999.

Magee, A, Sablok, A, Maher, J, Halkyard, J, Finn, L and Datta,

I, “Heave plate effectiveness in the performance of truss spars”
Proceedings OMAE Conference, New Orleans, 2000.

Molin, B, “On the added mass and damping of periodic arrays of

fully or partially porous disks”, J. Fluid and Structures, vol 16,
pp 1 –16, 2001.

Prislin, I, Blevins, R D, and Halkyard, J, “Viscous damping and

added mass of solid square plates”, Proceedings OMAE
Conference, Lisbon, 1998.

7 Copyright © 2002 by ASME

Downloaded From: http://proceedings.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/ on 02/01/2016 Terms of Use: http://www.asme.org/about-asme/terms-of-use