ANALYTICALdd A

2nd Reading
February 4, 2013 11:56 WSPC-255-IJAM S1758-8251 1250044
International Journal of Applied Mechanics

Vol. 4, No. 4 (2012) 1250044 (20 pages)
c Imperial College Press
DOI: 10.1142/S1758825112500445
ANALYTICAL MODEL TO DETERMINE RESPONSE

AMPLITUDE OPERATOR OF A FLOATING BODY
FOR COUPLED ROLL AND YAW MOTIONS
AND FREQUENCY-BASED ANALYSIS
M. BAGHFALAKI∗ , SAMIR K. DAS†,§ and S. N. DAS‡

∗Department
by FLINDERS UNIVERSITY LIBRARY on 01/21/15. For personal use only.
Int. J. Appl. Mechanics 2012.04. Downloaded from www.worldscientific.com
of Mathematics, University of Pune

Pune 411007, India
†Defence Institute of Advanced Technology
Girinagar, Pune 411025, India

‡Central Water and Power Research Station
Khadakwasla, Pune 411024, India

§samird@isquareit.ac.in
Received 3 February 2012

Accepted 27 June 2012
Published 2 February 2013
The paper deals with the mathematical modeling of response amplitude operator (RAO)
and frequency-based analysis for coupled roll and yaw motions in regular waves. Prior to
obtaining the RAO expressions for linearly coupled conditions, hydrodynamic coefficients
are computed by using the strip theory formulation. We consider sinusoidal wave with
frequency (ω) varying between 0.3 rad/s and 1.2 rad/s acts on beam to the floating body
for zero forward speed. Two limiting cases corresponding to ω → 0 and ω → ∞ are
considered and general expressions of RAO for intermediate frequencies are derived.
Analytical result shows that the norm of RAO is maximum when ω ≈ ωn ≈ 0.74 for
coupled roll and yaw motions. The asymptotic convergence of real part, imaginary part
and norm of uncoupled yaw transfer functions are noticed with the increase of wave
frequency. Using the normalization procedure and frequency based analysis; group based
equations are formulated for each case. To understand the relative importance of the
hydrodynamic coefficients, analytical solutions are obtained. The sensitivity analysis
with respect to the initial conditions is investigated for roll and yaw motions. This study
could be useful to model the floating body dynamics and corresponding wave loads in
the design stage.
Keywords: RAO; roll; yaw; hydrodynamic coefficient; Froude–Krylov force; added mass;
damping.
1. Introduction
Precise prediction of motions of a floating body in waves is one of the foremost
problems in ship–wave interaction studies. To determine the wave loads to any
marine vessel or floating structures, the common practice is to apply set rules and
§ Corresponding author.
1250044-1
2nd Reading
M. Baghfalaki, S. K. Das & S. N. Das
standards. However, for unconventional marine vessel, general standards and rules
can be sometimes difficult to apply due to complex structural design. Determi-
nation of response amplitude operator (RAO) at the design stage allows a ship
manufacturer to make appropriate modifications to a design that may be required
for safety purpose or to improve the performance [Clauss et al., 1992]. Usually,
RAO is determined in the frequency domain with frequency-dependent excitation
forces. This requires frequency-dependent values of hydrodynamic coefficients (HC)
to solve governing equations in the frequency domain. To calculate the response of a
ship in regular waves, potential theory is used and the effects of viscosity are usually
neglected [Newman, 1970]. The forces acting on the body are usually of two types:
(i) Froude–Krylov force and (ii) Diffraction force. Both these forces are basically
pressure force wherein Froude–Krylov force can be obtained by integrating over the
wetted surface of the ship for undisturbed condition and the diffraction force arises
due to disturbed condition [Faltinsen, 1990]. Cummins [1962] formulated linearized
equations of motion of a ship in transient seaway using impulse response function.
Newman [1977, 1978] provided mathematical formulation of wave effects on body
response with the definitions of RAO using two-dimensional and three-dimensional
theories of ship–wave interaction. Bishop and Price [1979] studied ship response
using the theory of linear nonconservative systems for sinusoidal excitation by con-
sidering constant hydrodynamic coefficients. Ursell [1981] investigated the motion
of a floating horizontal cylinder in a uniform invicid fluid for irregular wave fre-
quencies. Newman and Sclavounos [1988] computed wave loads on large offshore
structures by using the panel method. This method is based on the application of
Green’s function to obtain velocity potential on the body surface. Xing and Price
[2000] developed nonlinear mathematical models to describe dynamical interaction
between a moving or fixed elastic structure for incompressible or compressible fluid.
Lee [2000] provided analytical expression for the GZ value and computed roll motion
for an inclined ship moving in a longitudinal wave. Das and Das [2005, 2006, 2008]
developed analytical and numerical models in time domain corresponding to sway-
roll (2-DOF) as well as for sway-roll-yaw (3-DOF) motions by considering zero or
nonzero forward speed. Their approach provides some physical insight to obtain
floating body motion characteristics while the degrees of freedom are increased
gradually. Kukkanen [2010] investigated hydrodynamic response of waves in marine
structure. In this paper, we determine RAO or transfer function for uncoupled and
coupled roll and yaw motions in frequency domain and establish frequency-based
groupwise analysis by extending the approach of Das et al. [2010]. We consider
that the incoming wave acts beam to the floating body with frequency range vary-
ing between 0.3 rad/s and 1.2 rad/s. To compute the hydrodynamic coefficients and
the wave force exerted on the floating body, strip theory formulation of Salvesen
et al. [1970] is applied. We discuss asymptotic cases corresponding to very small
and large frequencies and for intermediate frequency ranges, we compute RAO to
obtain system frequency in real and complex planes. The governing equations of
1250044-2
2nd Reading
Analytical Model to Determine Response Amplitude Operator
motion are derived for group-based wave frequencies and corresponding analytical
solutions are presented. The present study suggests that using the similar proce-
dure one can compute the wave load for a known frequency range and can derive
the model equations accordingly.
2. Mathematical Formulation
A right-handed Cartesian co-ordinate system (x, y and z) fixed with respect to the
mean position of the floating body is considered with origin O at the still water
level and the z-axis is positive in vertical upward direction (Fig. 1). The floating
body is assumed to be rigid and slender, symmetric about x−z plane and rests
on undisturbed free surface. A floating body can exhibit motions of six degrees of
freedom (6-DOF) under the action of waves. The wave induced motions of the body
can be described as: (i) translatory displacements along x, y and z directions, which
are known as surge (η1 ), sway (η2 ) and heave (η3 ) respectively, and (ii) angular
displacements about the same set of axes are known as roll (η4 ), pitch (η5 ) and
yaw (η6 ) respectively. With reference to 6-DOF, only three motions, i.e., heave,
roll and pitch are purely oscillatory in nature because of the restoring force. The
following assumptions are taken while constructing the governing equations: (i) the
responses are linear and harmonic, (ii) the floating body has lateral symmetry,
(iii) incident wave is sinusoidal in form, (iv) force components generated by the
propeller, wind and current are not considered. The equations of motion in frequency
domain representing linearly coupled conditions can be written as [Tick, 1959]
[−ω 2 {[Mjk ] + [Ajk (ω)]} + iω[Bjk (ω)] + [Cjk ]]Xk (ω)eiωt
= Dj [Fj (ω)]eiωt , (j, k = 1, . . . , 6) (1)
Fig. 1. Schematic diagram of a floating body with sign convention.
1250044-3
2nd Reading
where ω is the wave frequency; [Mjk ], [Ajk (ω)], [Bjk (ω)] and [Cjk ] are the matrix
representation of the coefficients for mass, added-mass, damping and restoring,
respectively; Xk (ω) is the displacement in the kth mode; [Fj (ω)] is the matrix
for wave force/moment acting on the body and Dj is the wave amplitude for jth
mode of motion. The added-mass and damping are determined by integrating the
respective two-dimensional sectional coefficients along the length of the body using
new strip theory approach (Fig. 2) presented by Salvesen et al. [1970]. Rearranging
Eq. (1) we get,
[Hjk (ω)][Xk ] = Dj [Fj (ω)], j, k = 1, 2, . . . , 6 (2)
where
[Hjk (ω)] = −ω 2 ([Mjk ] + [Ajk (ω)]) + iω[Bjk (ω)] + [Cjk ] (3)

−1
[Xk ] = Dj [Hjk (ω)] [Fj (ω)] (4)
Now we define,
[Xk (ω)]
Zj (ω, θ) = = [Hjk (ω)]−1 [Fj (ω)], j, k = 1, 2, . . . , 6 (5)
Dj
where Zj (ω, θ) is the complex amplitude of the body motion in the jth mode in
response to an incident wave of unit amplitude, frequency ω, and direction θ. This
ratio is known as the transfer or the response amplitude operator (RAO). The
governing equations for coupled roll and yaw are

[−ω 2 (Mjk + Ajk (ω)) + iωBjk (ω) + Cjk ]Xk (ω)
k=4,6
= Dj (ω)Fj (ω), (j = 4, 6) (6)
where [Mjk ], [Ajk (ω)], [Bjk (ω)], [Cjk ] are the coefficient matrices. [Xk (ω)] and
[Fj (ω)] are displacement matrix and wave force/moment matrix, respectively. These
Fig. 2. Schematic diagram of strips of a floating body.
1250044-4
2nd Reading
can be defined as

I4 −I46 A44 A46 B44 B46
[Mjk ] = , [Ajk (ω)] = , [Bjk (ω)] = ,
−I64 I6 A64 A66 B64 B66

C44 0 X4 (ω) F4 (ω)
[Cjk ] = , [Xk (ω)] = , [Fj (ω)] = (7)
0 0 X6 (ω) F6 (ω)
Ij is the moment of inertia in the jth mode of motion, and Ijk is the product of
inertia for the kth mode of motion coupled with the jth mode of motion; Ajk and
Bjk are the frequency-dependent added mass and damping coefficients respectively;
C44 is the hydrostatic restoring coefficients due to roll, and Fj (ω) are the external
exciting forces or moments due to waves. For the computation of the hydrodynamic
coefficients, it is assumed that the ship is divided into several two-dimensional (2D)
transverse sections or strips along its length. These strips are assumed not to inter-
act with each other. Using the formulation of new strip theory given by Salvesen
et al. [1970], the two-dimensional sectional hydrodynamic coefficients are integrated
over the length of the body to obtain total hydrodynamic coefficients. These are
expressed as

A44 = a44 dξ

A46 = A64 = ξa24 dξ

A66 = ξ 2 a22 dξ
(8)
∗
B44 = b44 dξ + B44

B46 = B64 = ξb24 dξ

B66 = ξ 2 b22 dξ
where (a22 , b22 ) and (a44 , b44 ) are the 2D sectional added mass and damping coeffi-
cients in sway and roll, respectively, (a24 , b24 ) are the 2D sectional added mass and
∗
damping coefficients due to cross-coupling between sway and roll; the term (B44 ) is
responsible for viscous damping.
The roll restoring coefficient C44 is given by
C44 = ρg∇ GM (9)
where ∇ is the displaced volume of the floating body in calm water, ḠM̄ is the
meta-centric height and ρ is the mass density of water. The wave exciting moments
1250044-5
2nd Reading
Fj (ω) are expressed as:

Fj (ω) = FjA sin(ωt + ε), j = 4, 6 (10)
where F4A and F6A are the amplitudes of the roll and yaw exciting moment corre-
sponding to the wave encountering frequency ω and phase angle ε. The amplitudes
of roll and yaw exciting moments are obtained as [Salvesen et al., 1970]

F4A = αρ (f4 + h4 )dξ
(11)
F6A = αρ [ξ(f2 + h2 )]dξ
The integration has been performed over the length of the body; α is the ampli-
tude of the incident wave; fi and hi represent the sectional Froud–Krylov force
and sectional diffraction force respectively corresponding to the wave encountering
frequency (ω).
3. Determination of RAO for Roll and Yaw Motions

We consider the response of a vessel to any individual regular wave component to
be a linear function of the amplitude and the effect of any individual wave force
component is independent of its response to any other wave component. Using the
definitions given by Eq. (6), the RAO for uncoupled roll and yaw motions (1-DOF)
can be expressed as
Xk (ω) Fk (ω)
Zk (ω) = = ; k = 4, 6 (12)
Dk −ω 2 (Akk (ω) + Mkk ) + iωBkk (ω) + Ckk
where X4 (ω) and X6 (ω) are the roll and yaw motions in frequency domain and D4
and D6 are the corresponding wave amplitudes, respectively. For coupled system
(2-DOF), Eq. (6) can be written as

−ω 2 (M44 + A44 ) + iωB44 + C44 −ω 2 (M46 + A46 ) + iωB46 X4
−ω 2 (M64 + A64 ) + iωB64 −ω 2 (M66 + A66 ) + iωB66 X6

D4 F4
= . (13)
D6 F6
Using the definitions of Eq. (5), one can write
 
[−ω 2 (M66 + A66 ) + iωB66 ]F4
  
X4  + [ω 2 (M46 + A46 ) − iωB46 ](D6 /D4 )F6 


    |S|


Z4c D 
=  4 =  

 (14)
Z6c  X6   [ω 2 (M + A ) − iωB ](D /D )F 
 64 64 64 4 6 4 
D6  + [−ω 2 (M44 + A44 ) + iωB44 + C44 ]F6 
|S|
1250044-6
2nd Reading
where
|S| = ω 4 [(M44 + A44 )(M66 + A66 ) − (M46 + A46 )(M64 + A64 )]
− iω 3 [B66 (M44 + A44 ) + B44 (M66 + A66 ) − B64 (M46 + A46 )
− B46 (M64 + A64 )] − ω 2 [C44 (M66 + A66 ) + B44 B66
− B46 B64 ] + iω[B66 C44 ] (15)
is the determinant. For unit wave amplitude, the RAO for coupled roll (Z4 ) and
yaw (Z6 ) motions become
[−ω 2 (M66 + A66 ) + iωB66 ]F4 + [ω 2 (M46 + A46 ) − iωB46 ](D6 /D4 )F6
Z4c = (16)
|S|
[ω 2 (M64 + A64 ) − iωB64 ](D4 /D6 )F4 + [−ω 2 (M44 + A44 ) + iωB44 + C44 ]F6
Z6c =
|S|
(17)
3.1. Asymptotic cases of RAO

We focus our attention to analyze extreme behavior of RAO through limiting cases
corresponding to small and large wave frequencies. Using Eq. (13), following limiting
cases are obtained for uncoupled roll and yaw:
Case I: When ω → 0
For uncoupled roll and yaw motions, from Eq. (12), we obtain
Lim Z4 = 1 and Lim Z6 = 1 (18)
ω→0 ω→0
For coupled roll and yaw motions, transfer functions are evaluated from Eqs. (16)
and (17), respectively
lim Z4c = 1 and lim Z6c = ∞ (19)
ω→0 ω→0
Since
lim F6 = C66 = 0 (20)
ω→0
This indicates that as the wave frequency approaches to zero, the transfer function
for roll becomes unity and the corresponding transfer function for yaw becomes
infinity.
Case II: When ω → ∞
From Eqs. (12), (16) and (17), we get
lim Z4 = lim Z6 = lim Z4c = lim Z6c = 0 (21)
ω→∞ ω→∞ ω→∞ ω→∞
This shows that as the wave frequency approaches to a large value, the transfer func-
tions for roll and yaw becomes zero. The order of exciting force/moment becomes
|Fi (ω)| = O(ω (3−2n)/2 ) for n-D (dimension) case; n = 2, 3 (22)
1250044-7
2nd Reading
The order of transfer function can be obtained from Eqs. (12) and (14), for uncou-
pled and coupled case (3-DOF) by making use of the order relation |S| ≈ O(ω 4 )
from Eq. (15), yields
(3−2n)/2
ω
|Zj (ω)| = O
ω2
= O(ω −(2n+1)/2 ); for uncoupled n-D, n = 2, 3, j = 4, 6 (23)
4 (3−2n)/2
ω ·ω
|Zjc (ω)| = O
ω6
= O(ω −(2n+1)/2 ); for coupled n-D, n = 2, 3, j = 4, 6 (24)
The order of analytical expression obtained in Eq. (23) becomes identical with the
Newman’s formulation [1977] for uncoupled case. However, it can be noted that the
order of the analytical expression for coupled condition also remains unchanged.
3.2. Determination of system frequency

To determine the system frequency, we consider transfer function for intermediate
frequencies. Return to Eq. (15), if |S| = 0, we can get a unique solution for the sys-
tem of Eq. (14). But if |S| = 0, we obtain the characteristics equation. Decomposing
into real and imaginary parts, we can write
|S| = Re|S| + i Im|S| = 0 (25)
√
where i = −1, is imaginary unit and
Re|S| = ω 4 [(M44 + A44 )(M66 + A66 ) − (M46 + A46 )(M64 + A64 )]
− ω 2 [C44 (M66 + A66 ) + B44 B66 − B46 B64 ] (26)
Im|S| = −ω 3 [B66 (M44 + A44 ) + B44 (M66 + A66 )
− B64 (M46 + A46 ) − B46 (M64 + A64 )] + ωB66 C44 (27)
Equations (26) and (27) are obtained from Eq. (15). Now if |S| = 0, we must have
Re|S| = 0 and Im|S| = 0. Since ω = 0, this yields
1/2
C44 (M66 + A66 ) + B44 B66 − B46 B64
ωnR = (28)
(M44 + A44 )(M66 + A66 ) − (M46 + A46 )(M64 + A64 )
 1/2
 
 B66 C44 
ωnI =   (29)
 B66 (M44 + A44 ) + B44 (M66 + A66 ) 
− B64 (M46 + A46 ) − B46 (M64 + A64 )
where ωnR and ωnI are the natural frequencies corresponding to the real and imag-
inary parts. To determine the system frequency, we consider transfer function for
1250044-8
2nd Reading
intermediate frequencies. When the damping coefficients are zero in the character-
istic equation (15), i.e., Bjk = 0, the resonant response at the natural frequency
can be derived in the absence of restoring force and virtual mass. Hence, either
ω 2 = 0 or
ω 2 [(M44 + A44 )(M66 + A66 ) − (M46 + A46 )(M64 + A64 )] − C44 (M66 + A66 ) = 0.
(30)
From Eq. (30), one can obtain system frequency for roll coupled with yaw as
1/2
C44 (M66 + A66 )
ωn = (31)
(M44 + A44 )(M66 + A66 ) − (M46 + A46 )(M64 + A64 )
Equation (31) can also be obtained by cancelling damping, putting Bjk = 0 in
Eq. (28). Here, the system frequency (ωn ) depends on cross-coupled coefficients of
added mass and roll restoring coefficient. Now, from Eq. (12), mathematical expres-
sions for intermediate frequencies for uncoupled roll and yaw can be obtained as
1/2
Ckk
ωnk = ; k = 4, 6 (32)
Mkk + Akk
The expression obtained in Eq. (32) is identical with the Newman’s expression
[1977].
4. Frequency-Based Analysis
We define, Xk (t) = Xk (ω)eiωt and f (t) = F (ω)eiωt and substitute in Eq. (1), and
after dividing by their corresponding leading coefficients (added mass/moment), the
following equations for roll and yaw motions are obtained
Ẍ4 + b44 Ẋ4 + c44 X4 + a46 Ẍ6 + b46 Ẋ6 = D4 f4 (33)
a64 Ẍ4 + b64 Ẋ4 + Ẍ6 + b66 Ẋ6 = D6 f6 (34)
where
B44 C44 M46 + A46
b44 = , c44 = , a46 = ,
M44 + A44 M44 + A44 M44 + A44
B46 F4 M64 + A64
b46 = , f4 = , a64 = , (35)
M44 + A44 M44 + A44 M66 + A66
B64 B66 F6
b64 = , b66 = , f6 =
M66 + A66 M66 + A66 M66 + A66
We first compute hydrodynamic coefficients (HC) from Eq. (35) and assign various
cases based on their relative order of magnitude. The computed values of added mass
(Aij ) and damping (Bij ) are shown in Table 1 and natural frequency for coupled
motion with and without damping is shown in Table 2. The relative magnitude
of HC and their classification is shown in Table 3. In this procedure where the
respective term does not appear, we mark as “Absent”.
1250044-9
2nd Reading
Case A: HC > 1.0

Group I: ω = 0.3, 0.4

Ẍ4 + a46 Ẍ6 = D4 f4
(36)
Ẍ6 = D6 f6
Group II: ω = 0.5, 0.56, 0.6

Ẍ4 + a46 Ẍ6 + b46 Ẋ6 = D4 f4
(37)
Ẍ6 = D6 f6
Group III: ω = 0.7, 0.74, 0.8, 0.9, 1.0, 1.1

Ẍ4 + a46 Ẍ6 + b46 Ẋ6 = D4 f4

(38)
Ẍ6 + b66 Ẋ6 = D6 f6
Group IV: ω = 1.2

Ẍ4 + b44 Ẋ4 + c44 X4 + a46 Ẍ6 + b46 Ẋ6 = D4 f4
(39)
b44 Ẋ4 + Ẍ6 + b66 Ẋ6 = D6 f6
Case B: HC > 0.1

Group I: ω = 0.3

Ẍ4 + c44 X4 + a46 Ẍ6 + b46 Ẋ6 = D4 f4
(40)
Ẍ6 = D6 f6
Group II: ω = 0.5, 0.56, 0.6

Ẍ4 + c44 X4 + a46 Ẍ6 + b46 Ẋ6 = D4 f4
(41)
Ẍ6 + b66 Ẋ6 = D6 f6
Group III: ω = 0.7, 0.74, 0.8, 0.9

Ẍ4 + b44 Ẋ4 + c44 X4 + a46 Ẍ6 + b46 Ẋ6 = D4 f4
(42)
Ẍ6 + b66 Ẋ6 = D6 f6
Group IV: ω = 1.0, 1.1, 1.2

Ẍ4 + b44 Ẋ4 + c44 X4 + a46 Ẍ6 + b46 Ẋ6 = D4 f4
(43)
b64 Ẋ4 + Ẍ6 + b66 Ẋ6 = D6 f6
The corresponding two initial conditions are considered following Das and Das
[2005]:

X4 (0) = 0, Ẋ4 (0) = 0 X4 (0) = 0.5, Ẋ4 (0) = 0.5
Case I : Case II : (44)
X6 (0) = 0, Ẋ6 (0) = 0 X6 (0) = −0.3, Ẋ6 (0) = 0.05
1250044-10
2nd Reading
5. Results and Discussions

A floating body of length 150 m, beam 20.06 m, draught 9.88 m and mass of
19,190 tons for which beam–draught ratio is nearly equal to two is considered. The
z-coordinate of ship’s center of gravity (Zc) and meta-centric height (ḠM̄ ) is consid-
ered at −3.83 m and 4.0 m, respectively. Sinusoidal waves of frequencies 0.30 rad/s
to 1.20 rad/s with 1.0 m wave height act perpendicular to the longitudinal axis of
the floating body. We first compute the added mass, damping and wave forces of the
floating body using the strip theory formulation [Salvesen et al., 1970]. The coeffi-
cients related to sectional added mass, sectional damping, and sectional wave excit-
ing forces were used from the experimental results of Vugts [1968] and close-fit curve
of Frank and Salvesen [1970]. From Table 1, one can notice that with the increase
of wave frequencies that is up to 0.5 rad/s, the coefficient of added mass increases
and then decreases with the increase of wave frequency whereas the magnitude of
the damping coefficient increases steadily except in roll. Figures 3(a) and 3(b) show
the wave exciting moments corresponding to roll (F4 ) and yaw (F6 ) at t = 8.49 s.
The yaw exciting moment is found to be much higher in magnitude than the roll
exciting moment. The corresponding time domain plots for frequencies 0.74 rad/s
are shown in Figs. 3(c) and 3(d). As the transfer function is a complex quantity,
we compute real part, imaginary part and norm for uncoupled roll [Eq. (12)]. In
this case, imaginary part determines the order of norm and their profiles are almost
similar except the directionality [Fig. 4(a)]. However, it is interesting to observe that
for coupled case [Eqs. (16) and (17)], roll and yaw transfer functions are maximum
for real part, imaginary part and also for norm at the wave frequency ω = 0.74 rad/s
[Figs. 4(c)–4(d)]. At this frequency, wave frequency and system frequency becomes
identical, i.e., ω = ωn = 0.74, leading to maximum transfer of wave load, leading
to resonance. Das and Das [2005] studied coupled roll and yaw motions through
Table 1. Added-mass and damping coefficients.
Frequency ω Added-mass Damping

Roll Roll-yaw Yaw Roll Roll-yaw Yaw
A44 A46 = A64 A66 B44 B46 = B64 B66
0.30 846026 −0698750 343192500 123045 −229500 2295000
0.40 873396 −11629150 371598800 107055 −1380375 47025000
0.50 902012 −12559500 400005000 92280 −2755125 91687500
0.56 887082 −12093750 371013800 138420 −3565125 143325000
0.60 839804 −10698750 286953800 159960 −5106375 180675000
0.70 777597 −6977250 173913700 184560 −6670125 217912500
0.74 659402 −6046875 156521200 230085 −7245000 229387500
0.80 590973 −4186125 92756250 246090 −7360875 229387500
0.90 528765 −3024000 57971250 246090 −6808500 217800000
1.00 466559 −1860750 23186250 246090 −6210000 206437500
1.10 447896 −1534500 17392500 209175 −5704875 190350000
1.20 435455 −1163250 11598750 184560 −5175000 172012500
1250044-11
2nd Reading
15000000 8E+09
Wave exciting moment (N-m)

6E+09
10000000
4E+09
50000000
2E+09
0 0
Roll Yaw
0.30
0.36
0.42
0.48
0.54
0.66
0.72
0.78
0.84
0.96
1.02
1.08
1.14
0.60
0.90
1.20
0.30
0.36
0.42
0.48
0.54
0.60
0.66
0.72
0.78
0.84
0.90
0.96
1.02
1.08
1.14
1.20
-2E+09
-5000000
-4E+09
-1E+08
-6E+09
-1.5E+08 -8E+09
Frequency (rad/sec) Frequency (rad/sec)
(a) time t = 8.49 s (b) time t = 8.49 s
15000000 8E+09

6E+09
10000000
4E+09
50000000
2E+09
0 0
Roll Yaw
13
19
25
31
37
43
49
55
61
67
73
79
85
91
97
1
7
1
7
13
19
25
31
37
43
49
55
61
67
73
79
85
91
97
-2E+09
-5000000
-4E+09
-1E+08
-6E+09
-1.5E+08 -8E+09
Time, t (sec) Time, t (sec)
(c) ω = 0.74 rad/s (d) ω = 0.74 rad/s

Fig. 3. Comparison of roll and yaw wave exciting moments in frequency and time domain.
0.6 0.2
0.15
0.4
Uncoupled yaw motion
Uncoupled roll motion
0.1
Transfer function
Transfer function
0.2
0.05
Real part Real part
0 0
Imag part Imag part
1
0.56
0.74
0.3
0.4
0.5
0.6
0.7
0.8
0.9
1.1
1.2
0.3
0.4
0.5
0.6
0.7
0.8
0.9
1.1
1.2
0.56
0.74
-0.05
-0.2 Norm Norm
-0.1
-0.4
-0.15
-0.6 -0.2
frequency (rad/sec) frequency (rad/sec)
(a) (b)
60 2
50 1.5
Coupled yaw motion
Coupled roll motion
40
Transfer function
Transfer function
1
30
Real part Real part
20 0.5
Imag part Imag part
10 Norm
Norm 0
0.56
0.74
0.3
0.4
0.5
0.6
0.7
0.8
0.9
1.1
1.2
1
0
-0.5
0.3
0.4
0.5
0.6
0.7
0.8
0.9
1
1.1
1.2
0.56
0.74
-10
-20 -1
frequency (rad/sec) frequency (rad/sec)
(c) (d)
Fig. 4. Real part, imaginary part and norm of transfer function for uncoupled and coupled roll
and yaw motions.
1250044-12
2nd Reading
Table 2. Wave frequency and natural frequency.
Frequency ω Natural frequency without Natural frequency with damping (Bij = 0)

damping (Bij = 0) ωn Real Imaginary Norm
part ωnR part ωnI ωnRI
0.30 0.722 0.722 0.195 0.748
0.40 0.723 0.726 0.611 0.949
0.50 0.723 0.724 0.712 1.015
0.56 0.726 0.735 0.690 1.008
0.60 0.737 0.742 0.728 1.039
0.70 0.722 0.712 0.726 1.017
0.74 0.742 0.742 0.741 1.049
0.80 0.746 0.754 0.744 1.060
0.90 0.752 0.790 0.748 1.088
1.00 0.759 0.858 0.754 1.142
1.10 0.760 0.827 0.757 1.121

1.20 0.759 0.811 0.756 1.109
1.2
1.2
1
1
0.8
0.8
0.6
0.6
0.4
Roll amplitude
Roll amplitude
0.4
0.2
I.C.1 0.2 I.C.1
0
I.C.2
0 3 6 9 1215182124273033363942454851545760 0 I.C.2
-0.2
-0.4 -0.2 0 3 6 9 1215182124273033363942454851545760
-0.6 -0.4
-0.8 -0.6
-1 -0.8
Time, t(sec) Time, t(sec)
(a) ω = 0.3 rad/s (b) ω = 0.5 rad/s
1.2 1.5
1
1
0.8
Roll amplitude
Roll amplitude
0.6
0.5
0.4 I.C.1 I.C.1
I.C.2 0 I.C.2
0.2
0 3 6 9 1215182124273033363942454851545760
0
0 3 6 9 1215182124273033363942454851545760 -0.5
-0.2
-0.4 -1
(c) ω = 0.7 rad/s (d) ω = 1.2 rad/s

Fig. 5. Roll amplitude for Case B.
1250044-13
2nd Reading
0.5 1.2
0.45 1
0.4
0.8
0.35
0.6
Roll amplitude
0.3
Roll amplitude
0.4
0.25 w=0.60 w=0.60
0.2 0.2
w=0.74 w=0.74
0.15 0
w=0.80 w=0.80
0.1 -0.2 0 3 6 9 1215182124273033363942454851545760
0.05
-0.4
0
-0.6
-0.05 0 3 6 9 1215182124273033363942454851545760
-0.8
(a) I.C.1 (b) I.C.2
1.2
0.6
1
0.5
0.8
0.4 0.6
Roll amplitude
Roll amplitude
0.4
0.3 w=0.60 w=0.60
0.2
w=0.74 w=0.74
0.2 0 w=0.80
w=0.80
0 3 6 9 1215182124273033363942454851545760
-0.2
0.1
-0.4
0
-0.6
0 3 6 9 1215182124273033363942454851545760
-0.8
(c) I.C.1 (without damping) (d) I.C.2 (without damping)

Fig. 6. Roll amplitude for wave frequency ω = 0.6, 0.74, 0.8 rad/s (Case B).
analytical model and also obtained roll resonance at ω = 0.74. Close to this reso-
nant frequency, the floating body will experience large motion amplitude and phase
shift. The real part of uncoupled roll is found to be maximum close to the fre-
quency 0.6 rad/s as evident from Fig. 4(a). Figure 4(b) shows that uncoupled yaw
transfer functions of real, imaginary parts and norm decreases with the increase of
frequency. The asymptotic convergence of these transfer functions is evident from
Figs. 4(a)–4(d). However, for coupled yaw transfer functions similar resonant charac-
teristics is observed but with lesser magnitude, close to the frequency ω = 0.74 rad/s
[Fig. 4(d)]. Apart from intermediate frequencies, we also consider two limiting cases
corresponding to ω → 0 and ω → ∞ for roll and yaw transfer functions. We notice
that as frequency approaches zero (ω → 0), the uncoupled (Z4 ) and coupled (Z4c )
roll transfer function becomes unity whereas yaw transfer function for uncoupled
(Z6 ) and coupled (Zc6 ) cases become unity and infinity respectively. By setting
|S| = 0, we obtain natural roll frequency under coupled condition. One can notice
that the natural frequency of the system does not change significantly with the
increase or decrease of ω (Table 2). After decomposing the characteristic equation
into real and imaginary parts, corresponding natural frequencies are obtained. This
has been shown in Table 2. To carry out frequency-based analysis and study relative
1250044-14
2nd Reading
25 1.4
1.2
20
1
0.8
Yaw amplitude
Yaw amplitude
15
0.6
10 I.C.1 I.C.1
0.4
I.C.2 I.C.2
5 0.2
0
0
-0.2 0 4 8 12 16 20 24 28 32 36 40 44 48 52 56 60
0 3 6 9 1215182124273033363942454851545760
-5 -0.4
(a) ω = 0.3 rad/s for the Cases: A and B (b) ω = 0.7 rad/s for the Cases: A and B
3
25
2.5
20
2
Yaw amplitude
Yaw amplitude
15
1.5
10 I.C.1 I.C.1
1 I.C.2
I.C.2
5
0.5
0 0
0 3 6 9 1215182124273033363942454851545760 0 3 6 9 1215182124273033363942454851545760
-5 -0.5
(c) ω = 0.5 rad/s for Case-A (d) ω = 0.5 rad/s for Case-B
0.4 0.4
0.3 0.3
0.2 0.2
Yaw amplitude
0.1 0.1
Yaw amplitude
0 I.C.1 0 I.C.1
0
-0.1 0 I.C.2 I.C.2
-0.1 3 6 9 1215182124273033363942454851545760
3 6 9 1215182124273033363942454851545760
-0.2 -0.2
-0.3 -0.3
-0.4 -0.4
(e) ω = 1.2 rad/s for Case-A (f) ω = 1.2 rad/s for Case-B
Fig. 7. Yaw amplitude for the Cases A and B.
importance of the HC based on normalization procedure [Eq. (35)], we primarily

consider three cases: (i) Case A, HC > 1.0, (ii) Case B, HC > 0.1, and (iii) Case C,
HC > 0.01. The frequency range is considered between 0.3–1.2 rad/s and we classify
them under four groups based on HC values. In the present analysis, only Cases A
and B are discussed. It can be noted that the governing equations (36)–(43) are
formulated using frequency-based groups for which HC is unchanged. Since Case C
indicates the full form of the governing equation, the solution is not mentioned here.
The analytical solution for Case C can be obtained from the investigations of Das
and Das [2005]. The solution for the Cases A and B and initial conditions are given
in the Appendix. It may be noticed that the yaw equation is mostly uncoupled
1250044-15
2nd Reading
Table 3. Normalized coefficients.

Frequency Roll Roll Roll- Roll- Roll Yaw- Yaw- Yaw Yaw
ω damping restoring yaw yaw exciting roll roll damping exciting
b44 c44 added damping force added damping b66 force
mass b46 f4 mass b64 f6
a46 a64
Case A 0.30 Absent Absent −6.07 Absent 0.01 Absent Absent Absent 0.01
(HC 0.40 Absent Absent −6.50 Absent 0.02 Absent Absent Absent 0.01
> 1.0) 0.50 Absent Absent −6.91 −1.52 0.03 Absent Absent Absent 0.01
0.56 Absent Absent −6.71 −1.99 0.04 Absent Absent Absent 0.01
0.60 Absent Absent −6.09 −2.93 0.04 Absent Absent Absent 0.01
0.70 Absent Absent −4.11 −3.96 0.04 Absent Absent 1.04 0.02
1.20 Absent Absent Absent −3.86 0.03 Absent Absent 3.69 0.02
Case B 0.30 Absent 0.43 −6.07 −0.13 0.01 Absent Absent Absent 0.01
(HC 0.40 Absent 0.42 −6.50 −0.78 0.02 Absent Absent 0.12 0.01
> 0.1) 0.50 Absent 0.42 −6.91 −1.52 0.03 Absent Absent 0.21 0.01
0.56 Absent 0.42 −6.71 −1.99 0.04 Absent Absent 0.35 0.01
0.60 Absent 0.43 −6.09 −2.93 0.04 Absent Absent 0.56 0.01
0.70 0.11 0.45 −4.11 −3.96 0.04 Absent Absent 1.04 0.02
0.74 0.15 0.48 −3.82 −4.63 0.04 Absent Absent 1.20 0.02
0.80 0.16 0.50 −2.76 −4.92 0.05 Absent Absent 1.79 0.02
0.90 0.17 0.53 −2.06 −4.75 0.05 Absent Absent 2.34 0.03
1.00 0.18 0.55 −1.31 −4.53 0.04 Absent −0.11 3.55 0.03
1.10 0.15 0.56 −1.09 −4.22 0.04 Absent −0.11 3.63 0.02
1.20 0.14 0.56 −0.82 −3.86 0.03 Absent −0.11 3.69 0.02
Case C 0.30 0.07 0.43 −6.15 −0.13 0.01 −0.03 0.00 0.01 0.01
(HC 0.40 0.06 0.42 −6.58 −0.78 0.02 −0.03 0.00 0.12 0.01
> 0.01) 0.50 0.05 0.42 −6.99 −1.52 0.03 −0.03 −0.01 0.21 0.01
0.56 0.08 0.42 −6.78 −1.99 0.04 −0.03 −0.01 0.35 0.01
0.60 0.09 0.43 −6.17 −2.93 0.04 −0.03 −0.02 0.56 0.01
0.70 0.11 0.45 −4.19 −3.96 0.04 −0.03 −0.03 1.04 0.02
0.74 0.15 0.48 −3.91 −4.63 0.04 −0.03 −0.04 1.20 0.02
0.80 0.16 0.50 −2.84 −4.92 0.05 −0.03 −0.06 1.79 0.02
0.90 0.17 0.53 −2.15 −4.75 0.05 −0.03 −0.07 2.34 0.03
1.00 0.18 0.55 −1.40 −4.53 0.04 −0.03 −0.11 3.55 0.03
1.10 0.15 0.56 −1.18 −4.22 0.04 −0.03 −0.11 3.63 0.02
1.20 0.14 0.56 −0.92 −3.86 0.03 −0.03 −0.11 3.69 0.02
for Case A, except in Group IV. Figures 5(a)–5(d) show the plots of roll ampli-
tude for the frequencies 0.3 rad/s, 0.5 rad/s, 0.7 rad/s and 1.2 rad/s, respectively
corresponding to the four groups given by Eqs. (36)–(39) under Case A. The profiles
of roll amplitude show sinusoidal behavior [Figs. 5(a)–5(d)]. This can be attributed
due to the presence of restoring term in roll equation for all groups considered under
Case B. At the frequency 0.3 rad/s, the roll amplitude decreases in the positive side
of the axis while increasing toward negative side [Fig. 5(a)]. In the absence of any
roll damping term in Eq. (41), roll amplitude increases continuously. However, at
the frequency 0.5 rad/s, steady damping is noticed for both the initial conditions
1250044-16
2nd Reading
[Fig. 5(b)]. Although Eq. (41) does not contain any roll damping term, the absence
of upwardly trend is due to the presence of damping term in the yaw equation.
The effect of significant damping is noticed in Fig. 5(c) for both the initial con-
ditions due to presence of damping term in Eq. (42). The sensitivity of the initial
condition for frequency 1.2 rad/s has been obtained through numerical computation
of Eq. (39) as seen in Fig. 5(d). The zero initial condition shows almost no effect
of damping in the roll amplitude where as nonzero initial condition show moderate
damping. Further, we focus our attention to Groups II [Eq. (41)] and III [Eq. (42)] of
Case B to understand the roll behavior close to the resonance frequency 0.74 rad/s
[Figs. 6(a)–6(d)]. It can be noticed that the effect of damping is evident for the
frequencies 0.74 rad/s and 0.8 rad/s for both the initial conditions and when the
damping term is set to zero, this result agrees well with the roll transfer function
[Fig. 4(c)]. Since at the frequency 0.6 rad/s roll motion does not have the damping
effect and falls under Group II, the roll amplitude remains insensitive to initial con-
dition. Figures 7(a)–7(f) show the effect of yaw amplitude for two initial conditions
corresponding to Cases A and B. At the frequency 0.3 rad/s and 0.7 rad/s, the pro-
files of yaw moment become nonlinear and linear, [Groups I and III] respectively
and remain unchanged for both the cases [Figs. 7(a)–7(b)]. However, marginal dif-
ference in yaw moment profiles is noticed with respect to the initial conditions for
frequency 0.5 rad/s in both the cases [Group II]. In Group IV, as the frequency
increases (1.2 rad/s) the difference in yaw profiles becomes significant with respect
to the variations of initial conditions [Case A, Fig. 7(e)]. To solve Eq. (43), numerical
computation has been performed to obtain yaw amplitude for frequency 1.2 rad/s
[Group IV, Case B]. At this frequency, the effect of nonzero initial condition man-
ifests oscillatory behavior while the yaw profiles for zero initial condition remains
unchanged [Fig. 7(f)].
6. Conclusion
The objective of the present study is to develop generalized mathematical for-
mulation to determine RAO for uncoupled and coupled roll and yaw motions in
the frequency domain. The behavior of RAO at the intermediate as well as extreme
frequency range has been discussed. The time domain analysis shows the relative
importance of the hydrodynamics coefficients through the group-based classifica-
tion. Accordingly, separate governing equations are derived and corresponding solu-
tion are also sought. This group-based classification not only manifests the mechan-
ics of the problem but also signifies under what conditions which model equations
are to be applied. This investigation also indicates that the solution of full governing
may not be always necessary and one can neglect relevant terms without losing the
essential physics and mechanics of the problem. This modeling approach can prove
to be a useful theoretical tool for the determination of wave load of a floating body
in the design phase and also for obtaining frequency-based solution.
1250044-17
2nd Reading
Appendix
We consider two initial conditions by general form (A.1) and get the solution for
Eqs. (36)–(43) for both the Cases A and B.

X4 (0) = p0 , Ẋ4 (0) = p1
(A.1)
X6 (0) = q0 , Ẋ6 (0) = q1
Case A
The solution of Eq. (37) can be obtained as

X4 = (−1/6)b46 D6 f6 t3 + 0.5(D4 f4 − a46 D6 f6 − b46 q1 )t2 + p1 t + p0
(A.2)
X6 = 0.5D6 f6 t2 + q1 t + q0
The solution of Eq. (36) can be obtained by setting b46 = 0 in (A.2). The solution
of Eq. (38) can be obtained as


 b46 −b66 t 1 D6 f6 2
X4 = b − a46 c4 e
 +
2
D4 f4 −
b66
t + c1 t + c2
66
(A.3)

 D f

X6 = (q0 − c4 ) + c4 e−b66 t + 6 6 t
b66
where

b46 1 D6 f6
c1 = p1 + (b46 − a46 b66 )c4 , c2 = p0 + a46 − c4 , c4 = − q1
b66 b66 b66
(A.4)
The solution of Eq. (39) can be obtained by putting a46 = 0 in (A.3) and (A.4).
Case B


 √ √ b46 D6 f6

 X4 = c1 cos( c44 t) + c2 sin( c44 t) − t

 c44

D4 f4 − a46 D6 f6 − b46 q1 (A.5)
 +

 c44



X = 0.5D f t2 + q t + q
6 6 6 1 0
where

b46 D6 f6 √
c1 = p0 − (D4 f4 − a46 D6 f6 − b46 q1 )/c44 , c2 = p 1 + c44 (A.6)
c44



b
− 44 t 1 2 1 2

X4 = e 2 c1 cos 4c44 − b44 t + c2 sin 4c44 − b44 t + xp
2 2
(A.7)

 D f

X6 = (q0 − c4 ) + c4 e−b66 t + 6 6 t
b66
1250044-18
2nd Reading
where

(b46 b66 − a46 b266 ) −b66 t D4 f4 b46 D6 f6
xp = c 4 e + −
(b266 − b44 b66 + c44 ) c44 b66 c44

b46 b66 − a46 b266 D4 f4 b46 D6 f6
c1 = p 0 − 2 c4 − −
b66 − b44 b66 + c44 c44 b66 c44

2 b44 b46 b266 − a46 b366 1 D6 f6
c2 = p 1 + c 1 + c 4 , c 4 = − q1
4c44 − b244 2 b266 − b44 b66 + c44 b66 b66
(A.8)
The solution of Eq. (41) can be obtained by considering b44 = 0 in (A.7) and (A.8).
Equation (43) is very close to general form and for which the solution can be
obtained using similar procedure as adopted by Das and Das [2010].
References
Bishop, R. E. D. and Price, W. G. [1979] “An investigation into the linear theory of ship
response to waves,” Journal of Sound and Vibration 62(3), 353–363.
Clauss, G., Lehmann, E. and Ostergaard, C. [1992] Offshore Structures, Vol. 1: Conceptual
Design and Hydrodynamics (Springer-Verlag, London).
Cummins, W. E. [1962] “The impulse response function and ship motions,” Schiffstechnik
9, 102–109.
Das, S. N. and Das, S. K. [2005] “Mathematical model for coupled roll and yaw motions of
a floating body in regular waves under resonant and non-resonant conditions,” Applied
Mathematical Modelling 29, 19–34. doi: 10.1016/j.apm.2004.07.006.
Das, S. K. and Das, S. N. [2006] “Modelling and analysis of coupled nonlinear oscilla-
tions of a floating body in two-degrees of freedom,” Acta Mechanica 181, 1–2, 31–42.
doi: 10.1007/s00707-005-0277-4.
Das, S. K., Das, S. N. and Sahoo, P. K. [2008] “Determination of motion characteristics of
a floating body with respect to the variations in degrees of freedom: Analytical study,”
Ship and Offshore Structures 3(3), 255–262. doi: 10.1080/17445300801990939.
Das, S. N., Shiraishi, S. and Das, S. K. [2010] “Mathematical modeling of sway, roll and
yaw motions: Orderwise analysis to determine coupled characteristics and numerical
simulation for restoring moment’s sensitivity analysis,” Acta Mechanica 213, 305–322.
doi: 10.1007/s00707-009-0278-9.
Faltinsen, O. M. [1990] Sea Loads on Ships and Offshore Structures (Cambridge University
Press, Cambridge, UK).
Frank, W. and Salvesen, N. [1970] “The frank close-fit ship-motion computer program,”
Report 3289, NSRDC, Washington, DC.
Kukkanen, T. [2010] “Wave load predictions for marine structures,” Journal of Structural
Mechanics 43(3), 150–166.
Lee, S. K. [2000] “Stability analysis of an initially inclined ship in following sea,” Journal
of Applied Mechanics 67(4), 717–719.
Newman, J. N. [1970] “Applications of slender-body theory in ship hydrodynamics,”
Annual Review of Fluid Mechanics 2, 67–94.
Newman, J. N. [1977] Marine Hydrodynamics (MIT Press, Cambridge, Massachusetts).
Newman, J. N. [1978] “The theory of ship motions,” Advances in Applied Mechanics 18,
221–283.
1250044-19
2nd Reading
Newman, J. N. and Sclavounos, P. D. [1988] “The computation of wave loads on large off-
shore structures,” in Proceedings of International Conference on Behaviour of Offshore
Structures, Trondheim, Norway, pp. 605–622.
Salvesen, N., Tuck, E. O. and Faltinsen, O. M. [1970] “Ship motions and sea loads,”
Transactions of the Society of Naval Architects and Marine Engineering 78, 250–287.
Tick, L. J. [1959] “Differential equations with frequency-dependent coefficients,” Journal
of Ship Research 3, 45–46.
Ursell, F. [1981] “Irregular frequencies and the motion of floating bodies,” Journal of Fluid
Mechanics 105, 143–156.
Vugts, J. H. [1968] “The hydrodynamic coefficients for swaying, heaving and rolling cylin-
ders in a free surface,” Report 194, in Laboratorium voor Scheepsbouwkunde, Technische
Hogeschool Delft.
Xing, J. T. and Price, W. G. [2000] “The theory of non-linear elastic ship-water interaction
dynamics,” Journal of Sound and Vibration 230(4), 877–914.
1250044-20

ANALYTICALdd A

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

ANALYTICALdd A

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

2nd Reading

February 4, 2013 11:56 WSPC-255-IJAM S1758-8251 1250044

International Journal of Applied Mechanics

ANALYTICAL MODEL TO DETERMINE RESPONSE

M. BAGHFALAKI∗ , SAMIR K. DAS†,§ and S. N. DAS‡

of Mathematics, University of Pune

Girinagar, Pune 411025, India

Khadakwasla, Pune 411024, India

Received 3 February 2012

M. Baghfalaki, S. K. Das & S. N. Das

Analytical Model to Determine Response Amplitude Operator

Fig. 1. Schematic diagram of a ﬂoating body with sign convention.

M. Baghfalaki, S. K. Das & S. N. Das

[Hjk (ω)][Xk ] = Dj [Fj (ω)], j, k = 1, 2, . . . , 6 (2)

[Hjk (ω)] = −ω 2 ([Mjk ] + [Ajk (ω)]) + iω[Bjk (ω)] + [Cjk ] (3)

Fig. 2. Schematic diagram of strips of a ﬂoating body.

Analytical Model to Determine Response Amplitude Operator

C44 = ρg∇ GM (9)

M. Baghfalaki, S. K. Das & S. N. Das

Fj (ω) are expressed as:

3. Determination of RAO for Roll and Yaw Motions

Analytical Model to Determine Response Amplitude Operator

3.1. Asymptotic cases of RAO

M. Baghfalaki, S. K. Das & S. N. Das

3.2. Determination of system frequency

Analytical Model to Determine Response Amplitude Operator

M. Baghfalaki, S. K. Das & S. N. Das

Case A: HC > 1.0

Ẍ4 + a46 Ẍ6 + b46 Ẋ6 = D4 f4

Case B: HC > 0.1

Analytical Model to Determine Response Amplitude Operator

5. Results and Discussions

Table 1. Added-mass and damping coeﬃcients.

Frequency ω Added-mass Damping

M. Baghfalaki, S. K. Das & S. N. Das

Wave exciting moment (N-m)

(a) time t = 8.49 s (b) time t = 8.49 s

Wave exciting moment (N-m)

(c) ω = 0.74 rad/s (d) ω = 0.74 rad/s

Analytical Model to Determine Response Amplitude Operator

Table 2. Wave frequency and natural frequency.

Frequency ω Natural frequency without Natural frequency with damping (Bij = 0)

1.10 0.760 0.827 0.757 1.121

(a) ω = 0.3 rad/s (b) ω = 0.5 rad/s

(c) ω = 0.7 rad/s (d) ω = 1.2 rad/s

M. Baghfalaki, S. K. Das & S. N. Das

(a) I.C.1 (b) I.C.2

(c) I.C.1 (without damping) (d) I.C.2 (without damping)

Analytical Model to Determine Response Amplitude Operator

importance of the HC based on normalization procedure [Eq. (35)], we primarily

M. Baghfalaki, S. K. Das & S. N. Das

Table 3. Normalized coeﬃcients.

Analytical Model to Determine Response Amplitude Operator

M. Baghfalaki, S. K. Das & S. N. Das

Analytical Model to Determine Response Amplitude Operator

obtained using similar procedure as adopted by Das and Das [2010].

M. Baghfalaki, S. K. Das & S. N. Das

You might also like

Frequency ω Natural frequency without Natural frequency with damping (Bij = 0)