Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Asymmetric FPSO Roll Response Due To The in Uence of Lines Arrangement
Asymmetric FPSO Roll Response Due To The in Uence of Lines Arrangement
net/publication/267606569
CITATIONS READS
8 530
4 authors, including:
SEE PROFILE
Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:
AUV model-based control for near free surface operation View project
All content following this page was uploaded by Mauro Oliveira on 22 April 2016.
OMAE2012-83097
CENPES/PDEP/TEO, CENPES/PDEP/TEO,
Petrobras Research Center, Petrobras Research Center,
RJ 21941-915, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil, RJ 21941-915, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil,
Email: marcos.donato@petrobras.com.br Email: mauro@petrobras.com.br
ABSTRACT INTRODUCTION
During the last 30 years there was a steady increase in the
In the development of the mooring design of FPSOs in oil activities in offshore Brazil. Technological improvements re-
spread mooring system (SMS) configuration, it was observed that garding the available materials to be used for the mooring lines
the utilization of asymmetric riser arrangement in deep waters allowed the mooring of production units in water depths close to
might lead to an asymmetrical roll response of the FPSO. In 3000m, using either a Turret or a Spread Mooring configuration.
particular, concentrating all riser connections on the portside, One major technological breakthrough was the use of composite
it could be observed that roll and heave coupling under the in- materials as mooring lines segments, lowering the total weight
fluence of the riser dynamics might lead to a much lower roll re- of the lines to avoid spending most of their resistance supporting
sponse associated with waves coming from portside than from the only their own weight. Another important contribution was the
starboard direction. Simulations were carried using an in-house development of new materials on the configuration of flexible ris-
time domain simulator, where the ship hydrodynamic behavior ers layers, able to operate at larger water depths, though we still
was represented through the use of impulse response functions
and the lines dynamic through the use of non-linear finite ele-
ment method, using an explicit integration scheme and a lumped 0 The fourth author wishes to express his satisfaction in participating as co-
mass approach. Non-linear viscous effects could be easily asso- author of a paper presented at the Symposium in honor of Ron Yeung and to have
ciated to the ship and line velocities. Measured motion responses been invited by the organizers of OMAE 2012 to co-coordinate the Symposium.
of an actual FPSO in operation in Campos Basin are compared It is with great pleasure that he remembers the period from 1987 to 1991 when he
was at Berkeley and had the opportunity to develop joint research projects with
with the computations.
Ron Yeung and since then to maintain a strong friendship with him.
1 Copyright
c 2012 by ASME
have to live with strong restrictions on the FPSO excursions on
the plane (due to the action of wind, currents and low frequency
wave effects), and also on the oscillatory FPSO motions due to
the first order wave action.
Recently, there has been some discussion about the consider-
ation of mooring lines and risers during the motion computation
of FPSOs, mainly due to the additional damping effect that this
structures may provide. The conclusion is that there is no defi-
nite rule, and for each case the designer will have to check these
contributions. The longer the lines and the larger the pre-tension
applied on them, the impact on the overall ship motion will tend
to increase. It is easy to notice that this situation will happen nat-
urally as we design the mooring system at deeper water depths.
For the given design aspects that we are going to discuss in
this article, the water depth is 2200m just below the FPSO unit
location (it may vary up to some dozens of meters at each anchor
location or riser touch down point, depending on the floor incli-
nation). Another characteristic of the Production Units operating
in Offshore Brazil is the use of flexible risers, in general up to
three connected to each wet well head, leading to the possibility FIGURE 1. SYSTEM OF COORDINATES USED THROUGHOUT
of having more than sixty risers attached to each FPSO. For FP- THIS ARTICLE.
SOs anchored using a spread mooring system (SMS) approach,
the risers are connected to a balcony on the side of the hull (and
only one of the sides, in order to leave the other side for cargo plane. Xlocal is positive to bow, Ylocal to portside and Zlocal up-
wards, as we can see in Fig. 2. Line numbers and azimuths are
handling and the approximation of supply vessels). This leads to
clockwise oriented from bow and North, respectively.
an asymmetrical roll response of the FPSO to beam waves com-
ing from each board, which we will discuss on the next sections.
Mooring System configuration and properties
In the mooring system design, carried according to [1] a total
PROBLEM DESCRIPTION of 24 lines were used. Each mooring line consists of a mix of
In this section we are going to describe the coordinate sys- studless chain (R4 and R3S) and polyester ropes. The fairlead
tem, the analyzed vessel main characteristics, as well as its moor- positions are described in Table 2, together with the azimuth of
ing system and attached risers. each mooring line departing from the respective fairlead.
The axial stiffness of the polyester rope was assumed
as 183000 kN (1̃5 times mean break strength (MBS)) in or-
The coordinate system der to perform the static analysis (mean offset) and equal to
Our coordinate system will be defined as shown in Fig. 1, 0.25Tmean + 19 to perform the dynamic analysis, where Tmean
which can also be described by: is the mean tension in percentage of MBS and the unit of the re-
sult of the expression for axial stiffness is to be multiplied by the
X: Origin at Midship; Positive Forward, Negative Aft.
MBS.
Y: Origin at Centerline; Positive Portside, Negative Star-
The pretension of each line, the fairlead-seabed chain emer-
board.
gence distance, and the vertical load at the equilibrium position
Z: Origin at Baseline; Positive Upward, Negative Down-
without environmental loads are given in Table 3.
ward.
2 Copyright
c 2012 by ASME
TABLE 2. MOORING SYSTEM FAIRLEADS LOCATION.
FIGURE 2. VIEW OF THE GLOBAL AND LOCAL AXES FROM L10 -96.47 23.80 9.55 130
THE TOP. L11 -99.30 22.94 9.55 132
L12 -102.81 21.90 9.55 134
TABLE 1. MAIN PARTICULARS OF THE FPSO L13 -102.81 -21.90 9.55 226
Length between perpendiculars (m) 315.50 L15 -96.47 -23.80 9.55 230
Rxx (m) (wrt CoG) 21.69 L24 138.80 -22.65 9.55 314
3 Copyright
c 2012 by ASME
TABLE 3. PRE-TENSION APPLIED ON EACH MOORING LINE points in the ship balcony in the local coordinate system, and the
required tension applied on the top of each riser.
Fairled to
FPSO loading condition
Line seabed chain T0 TV TH
The loading condition of the FPSO in the assumed draft of
Number embedment point (kN) (kN) (kN) 14.7m which is an intermediate operational condition that hap-
distance (m) pens very often while the unit loads their tanks with oil and be-
fore the oil offloading operation, will not be listed here describing
L1 2400.00 2199.94 1754.65 1327.00 each tank or compartment load, but defined by its Inertia Matrix.
The Inertia Matrix will be defined with respect to a reference
L2 2400.00 2192.37 1749.20 1321.66 system located over the Local System, with the origin of the ver-
L3 2400.00 2187.23 1745.43 1318.12 tical coordinate located on the mean free surface plane, and by
Equation 1 and its non zero elements are given on Table 6 below.
L4 2400.00 2182.09 1741.67 1314.58
L5 2400.00 2180.55 1740.41 1313.69
L6 2400.00 2183.31 1742.15 1315.96 M 0 0 0 M.zg −M.yg
0 M 0 −M.zg 0 M.xg
L7 2802.00 2005.61 1555.56 1265.98
0 0 M M.yg −M.xg 0
Iij =
(1)
L8 2802.00 2004.26 1554.45 1265.21 0 −M.zg M.yg Ixx Ixy Ixz
M.zg 0 −M.xg Iyx Iyy Iyz
L9 2802.00 2003.17 1553.51 1264.63 −M.yg M.xg 0 Izx Izy Izz
L10 2802.00 2002.10 1552.58 1264.08
L11 2802.00 2001.02 1551.65 1263.51 where M represents the mass of the ship, (xg , yg, zg ) is the lo-
cation of the center of gravity with respect to the Inertia Matrix
L12 2802.00 1999.35 1550.33 1262.48 reference system, and Iij are defined in terms of the correspond-
L13 2372.00 2103.41 1670.27 1278.49 ing radii of gyration rij , by the relation Iij = M.rij|rij |, with the
coefficients i and j being substituted by x, y and z.
L14 2372.00 2103.65 1670.46 1278.63 The final configuration of the FPSO with the mooring lines
L15 2372.00 2104.09 1670.80 1278.92 and risers attached can be seen in Fig. 3, and from Fig. 4 it is easy
to notice that the attachment point for all the risers are located
L16 2372.00 2104.31 1670.98 1279.04 on the portside of the ship, and therefore vertical displacements
L17 2372.00 2103.60 1670.52 1278.47 of the FPSO will induce not only an opposite force but also a
moment will be applied on the ship hull.
L18 2372.00 2102.55 1669.83 1277.64
L19 2660.00 1966.62 1534.37 1230.16
L20 2660.00 1973.38 1539.03 1235.16
L21 2660.00 1974.11 1539.58 1235.64
L22 2660.00 1974.87 1540.15 1236.15
L23 2660.00 1975.63 1540.71 1236.67
L24 2660.00 1976.39 1541.26 1237.19
Risers configuration and properties FIGURE 3. OVERVIEW OF THE FPSO WITH THE MOOR-
The main characteristics of the risers are presented in Table 4 ING LINES AND FLEXIBLE RISERS ATTACHED. THIS IS THE
and Table 5, including the azimuth of each riser, their connection GRAPHICAL INTERFACE OF THE DYNASIM SOFTWARE.
4 Copyright
c 2012 by ASME
TABLE 4. RISERS CONNECTION POINTS IN THE LOCAL SYS- TABLE 5. RISERS CONNECTION POINTS IN THE LOCAL SYS-
TEM AND PRE=TENSION (PART A) TEM AND PRE=TENSION (PART B)
Local Local
Riser Axis Local Local Local Top Riser Axis Local Local Local Top
Number Angle Axis X Axis Y Axis Z Tension Number Angle Axis X Axis Y Axis Z Tension
(deg) (m) (m) (m) (KN) (deg) (m) (m) (m) (KN)
R1 300.8 102.19 31.5 2.3 610.22 R28 258.9 11.23 31.5 2.3 609.90
R2 297.8 99.37 31.5 2.3 1849.75 R29 101.5 7.84 31.5 2.3 612.05
R3 60.6 93.72 32 15 1682.56 R30 256 5.01 31.5 2.3 1143.86
R4 294.8 88.07 31.5 2.3 1649.94 R31 104.5 2.19 32 15 1667.09
R5 62.8 85.24 31.5 2.3 1157.40 R32 253.1 -3.47 31.5 2.3 1651.74
R6 291.8 82.42 31.5 2.3 610.11 R33 107.5 -6.29 31.5 2.3 1794.63
R7 64.6 79.59 31.5 2.3 616.87 R34 250.3 -9.12 31.5 2.3 609.61
R8 288.7 76.77 31.5 2.3 2346.76 R35 110.2 -11.94 31.5 2.3 611.09
R9 68.6 71.12 32 15 1679.40 R36 247 -14.77 31.5 2.3 1143.19
R10 288.3 68.29 31.5 2.3 1790.88 R37 113.4 -20.42 32 15 2363.94
R11 74.6 65.47 31.5 2.3 614.76 R38 244 -26.07 31.5 2.3 1650.64
R12 283 62.64 31.5 2.3 609.99 R39 116.5 -28.89 31.5 2.3 1145.86
R13 77.7 59.82 31.5 2.3 1801.76 R40 241.2 -31.72 31.5 2.3 609.19
R14 279.9 56.99 31.5 2.3 609.96 R41 119.4 -34.54 31.5 2.3 611.03
R15 80.7 54.17 31.5 2.3 1149.03 R42 238.2 -37.37 31.5 2.3 1142.42
R16 276.9 51.34 31.5 2.3 4091.81 R43 122.3 -43.02 32 15 1665.49
R17 83.6 48.52 31.5 2.3 611.83
R18 274.1 45.69 31.5 2.3 1790.34
R19 86.8 40.04 32 15 2366.32
R20 270.9 37.22 31.5 2.3 609.87
R21 89.5 34.39 31.5 2.3 1147.92
R22 267.9 31.57 31.5 2.3 1790.26
R23 92.7 28.74 31.5 2.3 612.24
R24 264.9 25.92 31.5 2.3 609.89
R25 95.5 23.09 32 15 1668.49
R26 262.1 17.44 31.5 2.3 1652.34
R27 98.5 14.62 31.5 2.3 1148.31
M 268159.7 t
Ixx 112368176.0 t.m2
Iyy 1675104090.5 t.m2
Izz 1702868894.1 t.m2
Ixy -1409074.4 t.m2
Ixz -24355234.3 t.m2
Iyz 2733189.3 t.m2
M.xg 3851020.6 t.m
M.yg 41.7 t.m
M.zg -430627.7 t.m FIGURE 5. MESH USED FOR THE FPSO MODEL REPRE-
SENTED AS LOW ORDER PANELS. 1490 ELEMENTS WERE
USED TO REPRESENT ONE HALF OF THE HULL, USING SYM-
METRY WITH RESPECT TO THE Y=0 PLANE.
FREQUENCY DOMAIN FPSO MOTION COMPUTATION
Hydrodynamic analysis
A frequency domain linear analysis was first conducted for
the computation of the RAO of the ship in the free floating con-
dition, meaning that the influence of the riser or mooring system 00 0 0 00
would not be accounted for. The purpose of this analysis was 0 0
0 0 0 0
two-fold: 0 0 0 0 0 0
Bi j =
0 0
(2)
0 B440 0 0
1. Provide information (diffraction and radiation potentials) for
0 0 0 0
0 0
the computation of Impulse Response Functions (IRF) for 00 0 0 00
posterior time domain simulations with a code known as DY-
NASIM/TPN.
2. Compute first order linear motions using linearized roll where B440 is the additional linearized external roll damping
damping coefficients in order to stand as a reference for value, meaning that it is added to the potential damping of the
comparisons with roll amplitudes computed by non-linear unit, and in this analysis it could not represent the riser reaction,
time domain simulations. which would be asymmetrical.
As an example, we show in Fig. 6 below, the analysis us-
The panel code Wamit [2] was used for the computation of ing a linearized roll damping B440 equal to 5.0 × 106 KN.s/rad,
the linear ship motions, exciting forces and hydrodynamic coef- representing 6.92% of the roll critical damping.
ficients. The FPSO was represented by the mesh shown in Fig. 5, We can see in Table 7 how the peak roll amplitude varied
and the considered water depth for the simulations was 2200m. with the amount of external damping considered for our FPSO,
as a percentage of the critical roll damping. In general during the
mooring and riser design, the computation of FPSO roll motions
Uncoupled ship motion responses
considers the damping effects only through the coefficient B440 .
For the analysis of FPSO roll motions the viscous damping
coming from the hull, bilge keel and lines (including mooring
lines and risers) are usually important to be considered, as the Asymmetric risers influence
damping that comes from the radiated waves is in general small As the ship has all risers connected to portside, a vertical
(less than 2% of the critical roll damping). This external damping velocity of the hull on the positive z (vertical) direction would
can be included in the Wamit computation through the use of generate a damping reaction force from the risers to the hull on
an external roll damping matrix, which has to be linearized. In the −z sense, and also an applied damping moment on the −x
general this external damping matrix will look like: direction. Noticing that the distance between the ship centerline
6 Copyright
c 2012 by ASME
TABLE 7. ROLL PEAK RESPONSE AS A FUNCTION OF EX-
TERNAL ROLL DAMPING CONSIDERED (PEAK PERIOD EQUAL
TO 15S.)
4% 8.68
6% 5.32
8% 3.79
10% 3.06
12% 2.44
14% 2.07
7 Copyright
c 2012 by ASME
FIGURE 8. DETAIL OF THE JOINT MOTION OF THE HEAVE
AND ROLL DEGREES OF FREEDOM AND HOW THEY WILL IN
GENERAL LEAD TO DIFFERENT VERTICAL DISPLACEMENTS
OF SYMMETRICAL POINTS WITH RESPECT TO THE PLANE
FIGURE 7. ROLL RESPONSE IN REGULAR WAVES, FRE- Y=0.
QUENCY DOMAIN. THE COEFFICIENTS B34 AND B43 WERE
CONSIDERED REPRESENTING THE COUPLING BETWEEN
ROLL AND HEAVE DISPLACEMENTS, AND RESPONSES FROM
BEAM WAVES COMING FROM 90 DEGREES (STARBOARD
SIDE) AND 270 DEGREES (PORTSIDE) ARE CLEARLY DIS-
TINCT.
the other at the starboard bilge keel. The wave approaches the
FPSO with a heading of 270 degrees in the local system, and
we can see that in the region where the roll is resonant, it will
induce the portside point to a larger displacement (up to almost FIGURE 9. (A) REPRESENTING HEAVE AND ROLL RAO MO-
4m amplitude) while the starboard point will only have vertical TION OF THE FPSO, AND (B) ILLUSTRATING THE VERTICAL
motion amplitudes of less than 1m. DISPLACEMENT RAO OF TWO POINTS, ONE LOCATED AT THE
STARBOARD BILGE KEEL AND THE OTHER AT THE PORTSIDE
BILGE KEEL
As a consequence of this behavior, when the wave ap-
proaches from the portside region where the risers are connected,
progressing with a local angle of 270 degrees, these riser connec- TIME DOMAIN FPSO MOTION COMPUTATION
tion points will have quite large amplitude motions, and there- Following the approach presented in the previous section,
fore there will be a much larger damping contribution from the one difficulty comes from the estimation of the damping con-
riser system than when the wave approaches from 90 degrees, tribution coming from the risers action. In order to achieve a
when the vertical motions on the portside region will be rela- better estimate of both mooring lines and risers damping con-
tively small. tributions, a computation of the FPSO motions in order to see
8 Copyright
c 2012 by ASME
the roll amplitude response was carried out in the time domain,
using the simulation program DYNASIM/TPN [4], considering
the FPSO motions being simulated with the complete system of
mooring lines and risers modeled as finite elements, and using
the DOOLINES (FE code) method for the computation of the
mooring lines and risers behavior [5]. In this approach the iner-
tia and damping of the lines are included, representing a coupled
analysis of the ship and lines motions.
Time domain analysis with a regular wave coming from
beam seas (90 and 270degrees incidence in the local system)
were performed, and after some cycles (in general 5 to 9 cycles
were enough) a steady state oscillation was achieved. Then we
could plot a pseudo-RAO where each time domain simulation FIGURE 10. RESULTS FROM THE TIME DOMAIN SIMU-
would give rise to one point in the roll amplitude versus incident LATION OF THE FPSO MOTIONS WITH THE RISERS AT-
wave period plot shown in Fig. 10. We used the wave amplitude TACHED REPRESENTED BY FINITE ELEMENTS. FOR THE
as 3.5m and presented the response divided by the amplitude in COMPUTATION OF THESE ”RAOs”, EACH POINT WAS COM-
order to compare the behavior with a frequency domain RAO, PUTED THROUGH A TIME DOMAIN SIMULATION UNTIL
though aware that this response is highly non-linear to be lin- THE RESPONSE WAS A STEADY OSCILLATION WHICH WAS
earized. ACHIEVED ROUGHLY AFTER 5 UP TO 9 PERIODS OF SIMULA-
These results show interesting characteristics. For the inci- TION TIME.
dent wave approaching the FPSO with an angle in the local sys-
tem equal to 90degrees, it can be noticed that the response show
a behavior close to the frequency domain linearized damping be- tions at sea of some of their floating units. Though the campaign
havior, with one peak at the natural period. On the peak region started about two years ago, there are still frequent gaps in the
we can see that the roll response decays faster in the linear anal- supposedly continuous acquisition, and a carefull research in the
ysis than in the time domain. This behavior may occur because data banks would be required to select measured responses rel-
when we linearize the damping in the frequency domain we as- evant to our study, when the wave incidence was close to our
sume the linearized damping at the peak (roll natural period) for target (270degrees in the local system, with a reasonable wave
the whole frequency range, supposing that when we depart from amplitude of at least 1.5m of significant wave height).
the peak at the natural period, the response will be less sensitive Carvalho [6] in her Master Thesis on the calibration of lin-
to the damping and the error will be small. This is an approx- earized roll damping coefficients, researched these data banks,
imation, and as the exciting wave period departs from the roll and found two occasions when the waves were approaching one
natural period, the lower response may indeed reduce the damp- of the instrumented FPSOs, called P-50, and located at a water
ing and make the roll response not to decay as fast as the linear depth of 1240m, which is almost half of the water depth that mo-
approximation. tivated the present study. The main dimensions of P-50 are close
For the incident wave going in the 270degrees direction, but not identical to the main dimensions of the unit that motivated
it may be noticed that the response behavior changed dramati- the present study. The favorable sea conditions were:
cally. We may see from the Fig.8 that the balcony located on 1. Sea state with Significant Wave Height equal to 2.13m, and
the portside side hull will have large vertical motions, and there- Peak Period equal to 11.91s (07/10/2010)
fore the risers will produce a stronger reaction on the connec- 2. Sea state with Significant Wave Height equal to 2.20m, and
tion points and larger moments counteracting the roll and heave Peak Period equal to 8.98s (07/12/2010)
motion combination. We should also notice that at each period
the risers will respond with different structural mode shapes and Figure 11 shows the roll time series response for the first
proper natural periods, presenting distinct added mass and damp- occasion (July, 10th), together with the computed roll response
ing. One interesting fact is that the shape of the response sug- spectrum and the wave elevation measured spectrum.
gests that the riser system may act as an outside attached body, Figure 12 shows the RAOs obtained from the measured roll
performing like a vibration absorber for the FPSO roll motion. motion time series and measured sea conditions, by taking the
ratio between the computed roll response spectrum and the sea
spectrum for the two days, together with the linearized roll re-
MEASURED FPSO RESPONSE sponse (for the P-50) considering an additional linearized damp-
In Offshore Brazil nowadays Petrobras is conducting a cam- ing equal to 8% of the roll critical damping, displayed only for
paign of metocean data acquisition and also measuring the mo- reference.
9 Copyright
c 2012 by ASME
CONCLUSIONS
From the simulations performed, and the comparison with
measured motions of FPSOs in operation, it can be concluded
that:
10 Copyright
c 2012 by ASME
real RAO in design, as the simulations that gave rise to this
approach are strongly non-linear.
Some difficulties associated with the validation and a better
understanding of this coupled analyzes should be highlighted:
1. Model tests present some difficulties in providing models
for this problem, as it is difficult to scale the risers properly
to represent the added mass, damping, and correct stiffness
for the representation of their natural modes, beside the fact
that most basins would not have the required depth to rep-
resent water depths of 2200m, and truncation would not be
acceptable.
2. Full scale measurements present a large number of difficul-
ties, including (but not limited to) the fact that the waves
have some spreading that may be difficulty to represent, the
influence of wind and current on the results, and the required
equipment installation and maintenance.
REFERENCES
[1] ISO, 2005. ISO 19901-7:2005 Petroleum and natural gas
industries - Specific requirements for offshore structures -
Part 7: Stationkeeping systems for floating offshore struc-
tures and mobile offshore units, first ed.
[2] WAMIT I NC ., 2010. Wamit User Manual. Version 6.418.
[3] Ferreira, M. D., 2009. Análise do movimento de roll de fpso
com risers em um bordo. Petrobras Internal Report, RT-MC
084-2009.
[4] U NIVERSITY OF S ÃO PAULO (USP), 2011. Dynasim User
Manual. Version 4.5.7.6.
[5] Oliveira, M. C., 2010. Analysis of the hydrodynamic data of
tupi pilot fpso 1 for riser system design. Petrobras Internal
Report, RT-MC 090-2010.
[6] Carvalho, R. C., 2011. “Influência do estado de mar no coefi-
ciente do amortecimento de jogo em um fpso”. M.sc. thesis,
COPPE / UFRJ (Federal University of Rio de Janeiro), Rio
de Janeiro, RJ, Brazil, May.
11 Copyright
c 2012 by ASME