Ocean Engineering 266 (2022) 112589

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Ocean Engineering
journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/oceaneng

A power series method for static and dynamic analysis of offshore mooring
lines
Kabutakapua Kakanda a,f , Narakorn Srinil e , Zhaolong Han a,b,c,d ,∗, Yan Bao a , Mbako Dibu a ,
Haojie Ren a , Dai Zhou a,b,c,d
a
School of Naval Architecture, Ocean and Civil Engineering, Shanghai Jiao Tong University, Shanghai 200240, PR China
b State Key Laboratory of Ocean Engineering, Shanghai Jiao Tong University, Shanghai, 200240, PR China
c Key Laboratory of Hydrodynamics of Ministry of Education, Shanghai Jiao Tong University, Shanghai, 200240, PR China
d Shanghai Key Laboratory for Digital Maintenance of Buildings and Infrastructure, Shanghai Jiao Tong University, Shanghai, 200240, PR China
e
School of Engineering, Newcastle University, Newcastle upon Tyne, NE1 7RU, United Kingdom
f
Faculté Polytechnique, Université de Kinshasa, Kinshasa, DR Congo

ARTICLE INFO ABSTRACT

Keywords: The mooring line response is described by the nonlinear partial differential equations (PDEs). The nonlinearity
Mooring line arises from the cable geometry through the drag force and the geometric compatibility condition. This
Power series method paper develops a power series method (PSM) and applies this semi-analytical approach to solve the PDEs of
Nonlinear PDEs
moorling line motion, which often have been dealt with fully numerically. This technique permits solutions for
Polynomial approximation
some differential equations through approximation with polynomial series. Besides being less computationally
intensive, PSM-based analyses are straightforward to implement. For the present model, vector components
are approximated with infinite polynomial series being functions of spatial and temporal variables. The paper
addresses a two-dimensional mooring line model with a fixed bottom end and subject to hydrodynamic and
hydrostatic forces. A harmonic excitation at the top end is approximated by a local polynomial approximation
enabling the inference of wave parameters. The analysis highlights the effects of pretension, mass per unit
length, and offset on the mooring line response. The dynamic analysis enables the evaluation of dynamic
tensions for various polynomial orders of temporal and spatial coordinates. It is noticed that the numerical
convergence occurs when increasing the degree of polynomials to be up to at least the seventh degree.

1. Introduction assumptions have been employed. The equations of motion describing

Over the years, the ocean and offshore engineering research has
grown significantly and alongside the development of underwater cable
technologies. A particular category of underwater cables is constituted
of mooring lines employed in various maritime applications, such as oil
and gas exploitation and production, and renewable energy (e.g., wave
energy converters, offshore floating wind and tidal turbines), where
they play an important role for the station keeping capabilities of float-
ing vessels and platforms. The mooring line research primarily focuses
on the dynamic and static analyses and mathematical formulations for
solving their equations of motion in order to understand the overall
mechanical behaviors and develop appropriate design techniques.
The first stage of the mooring line analysis is the derivation of
the equations of motion. This topic has been the main focus of nu-
merous studies (Aamo and Fossen, 2000, 2001; Triantafyllou, 1990;
Yang, 2007) in which a variety of mathematical formulations and
the mechanical behavior of a mooring line under the combined effects
of hydrodynamic and hydrostatic forces are nonlinear PDEs whose
solution techniques have been extensively investigated.
There is no generic analytical or numerical method for most of the
nonlinear PDEs. All distinct methods require simplifying assumptions,
and the choice of different assumptions distinguishes them. For in-
stance, we consider herein the Adomian decomposition method, which
is adopted under the assumption of the so-called weak nonlinearity
and small perturbations (Adomian, 1988), and the homotopy analysis
method, in which it is assumed that the solution of a nonlinear PDE
may be obtained by means of continuous deformations from the so-
lution of a linear equation to be chosen, to the solution of the given
nonlinear equation (Liao, 2012). For more complex problems, the most
common procedures involve using the computerized implementation of
numerical algorithms.

∗ Corresponding author.
E-mail address: han.arkey@sjtu.edu.cn (Z. Han).

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.oceaneng.2022.112589
Received 31 May 2022; Received in revised form 30 August 2022; Accepted 13 September 2022
Available online 10 October 2022
0029-8018/© 2022 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
K. Kakanda et al.
The finite difference method and finite element method (FDM and
FEM) (Aamo and Fossen, 2000, 2001; Chen et al., 2018) are the two of
most computer-implemented approaches. For mooring lines, the cate-
nary solution is the key basic method (Molins et al., 2015; Figueiredo
and Brójo, 2017) for describing the cable configuration profile and
performing the cable tension static analysis. To account for the coupled
static-dynamic effects, there is a need for an improved method where
the catenary solution takes a secondary role since this is frequently
utilized as a starting point to initialize a numerical analysis algo-
rithm (Khan and Ansari, 1986). The FDM is one of the most commonly
used methods for dynamic analyses of mooring lines (Kurian et al.,
2013; Hall and Goupee, 2015). Numerous iterative approaches based
on this numerical method are found in the literature. Studies based
on FDM have been widely conducted for two- and three-dimensional
(2D and 3D) cases, leading to the development of models and software
packages. Among these studies, a 3D model developed in Chatjigeor-
giou and Mavrakos (2010) serves as a valuable reference for the 3D
dynamic analysis of mooring lines, and a 3D coupled model presented
in Chen et al. (2018) emphasizes the importance of the ocean current
profile. The FEM-based models found in Aamo and Fossen (2000, 2001)
aimed at addressing the global conditions that guarantee the existence
and uniqueness of the solution of the mooring line PDE under the
assumption of a drag-dominant behavior. Other FEM-based studies
have been carried out in Matulea et al. (2008) where a 3D configuration
of the mooring line was considered; in Vineesh et al. (2014), a 2D case
was investigated to highlight the influence of a body attached to the
cable.
Numerical approaches for mooring line analyses are deemed to
provide more accurate results, mainly when dealing with the dynamic
effects. However, this may be computationally expensive owing to
the number of degrees of freedom or unknowns to be simultane-
ously solved. To overcome this challenge, a simplified model may
be introduced, involving some physical assumptions. Nevertheless, in
some circumstances, parameters that significantly contribute to the
computational cost cannot be omitted due to their importance in the
mathematical formulation. As a result, it becomes difficult to perform
such analyses without incurring a substantial computational cost. Even
though the results of numerical methods are satisfactory, some issues
remain. For example, in the lumped mass method (LMM), the cable ge-
ometric compatibility criterion may not be fully defined, despite being
a fundamental condition for the mooring cable analysis. Additionally,
besides the potential concern about the computation cost, successive
iterations may not produce results consistent with all the boundary
conditions, necessitating a frequent adjustment of the initial–boundary
values to address this issue.
Under some approximations based on the use of fewer degree-of-
freedom polynomials, the PSM may be more computationally efficient
than FEM, FDM and LMM, depending also on the robustness of numer-
ical algorithms to be implemented and accuracy of the discretization
enabling the ensuing mass, stiffness and damping matrices. Neverthe-
less, FEM, FDM and LMM can be applied to solve a broader range
of problems under various scenarios than the PSM which is herein
limited to a harmonic wave excitation consideration. The present paper
will develop and apply the PSM to address some of the computational
concerns in the framework of mooring cable analysis. The PSM is a
semi-analytical technique that relies on a simple polynomial approx-
imation of the solution of a PDE or an ODE. The use of polynomials
provides flexibility and ease in accounting for various parameters and
considerations as in this study that incorporates the efficient boundary
conditions and the influence of the cable pretension at the anchor.
These enable a straightforward determination of the tension variation
along the cable by calculating the first derivatives of the position vector
components.
The PSM has been initially used to solve ODEs (Biazar et al.,
2005; Fairén et al., 1988; Filipich and Rosales, 2002) and subsequently
nonlinear ODEs, linear and nonlinear PDEs (Kurulay and Bayram, 2009;
2
Ocean Engineering 266 (2022) 112589
Nuseir, 2012). Among the reliable PSM-related engineering studies, one
may mention the study conducted in Qaisi (1997), which used the PSM
to tackle nonlinear free vibrations of beams. In addition, satisfactory
results were obtained using the PSM to analyze a forced, strongly
nonlinear two degree-of-freedom system (Qaisi and Abu-Hilal, 2001),
and to derive the dynamic stiffness matrix of non-symmetric thin-
walled beams (Kim et al., 2005). Attention of this study is placed on
solving semi-analytically a strongly nonlinear system of PDEs, by also
introducing some simplifying assumptions and techniques to derive the
equation to be solved in a form suitable for the PSM. Hence, the primary
contribution of this study will be the modification of the mooring line
equation of motion through the use of appropriately chosen simplifying
assumptions and techniques, to provide a detailed solution procedure
based on the PSM.
This paper is organized as follows. Section 2 introduces the PSM and
details the derivation of the nonlinear PDEs of mooring line motion as
well as the detailed procedure for applying the PSM to the generated
equations of motion. Sections 3 and 4 present numerical examples and
result illustrations. The paper ends with the concluding remarks in
Section 5.
2. Mooring line model and PSM solution
2.1. Brief overview of numerical methods
This section provides a brief overview of the commonly used meth-
ods for the mooring line analysis prior to developing the PSM model.
The first numerical method is the LMM, which discretizes the mooring
line into a finite number of equally sized elements. The continuous
line is then represented as a collection of discrete elements, mod-
eled as massless springs and connected by nodes where the effects
of mass, external forces, and internal reactions are assumed to be
concentrated (Hall and Goupee, 2015). The LMM algorithm generates
a diagonal mass matrix, which has the advantage of reducing the
computation cost.
The second numerical method is the FDM, in which the mooring
line is discretized into infinitesimally small elements to perform the
spatial derivatives algebraically. Several FDM-based approaches have
been described in the literature: forward, backward, and central FDM,
the so-called box-approximation, etc.
The FEM is the third commonly used numerical method for moor-
ing line analyses. The mooring cable is discretized, and the internal
variables associated with each element are determined using interpo-
lation functions through numerical integrations. The FEM differs from
the FDM in that the former uses the integral form of the governing
equation, whereas the latter uses the differential form. In contrast to the
LMM, the mass in the FEM is integrated throughout the entire element.
2.2. Force components
The equations of motion of the mooring line are developed through
the virtual work principle and by also accounting for the well-known
Morison equation for slender submarine bodies subjected to hydrody-
namic and hydrostatic forces including the gravitational effect.
The mooring cable depicted in Fig. 1 is considered to be subjected
to a group of distributed external forces 𝐹⃗ and the cable internal axial
force 𝑇⃗ . If 𝑑𝑠 and 𝑑𝑠∗ denote the unstretched and stretched lengths of
the element, respectively, we have the relationship:
𝑑𝑠∗ = (1 + 𝜀)𝑑𝑠 (1)
where 𝜀 is the cable extensional strain.
K. Kakanda et al. Ocean Engineering 266 (2022) 112589

Fig. 1. Two-dimensional model of a mooring line.

2.2.1. Hydrodynamic forces If 𝐹⃗𝑏 is the buoyant force which is equal to the weight of the
Hydrodynamic forces considered in the present study are drag and displaced water, the apparent weight is derived as follows:
inertia forces. For a stretched cable unit length, the total hydrodynamic
𝑊 ⃖⃖⃖⃖⃗ − 𝐹⃗𝑏
⃖⃖⃖⃖⃗𝑎𝑝𝑝 = 𝑊 (8)
force is written as
The number 𝑘 is given by
𝐹⃗ℎ𝑑 = 𝐹⃗𝑑 + 𝐹⃗𝑖 (2)
𝜌
𝑘=1− 𝑤 (9)
where 𝐹⃗𝑑 and 𝐹⃗𝑖 are the vectors for the drag and inertia forces per 𝜌𝑐
unit length of the stretched cable, respectively. The drag force per unit with 𝜌𝑐 being the cable material density.
length of a stretched cable is given by
1 2.3. Virtual work principle
𝐹⃗𝑑 = 𝜌𝑤 𝐷𝐶𝐷 ‖𝑉⃗ ‖𝑉⃗ (3)
2
where 𝑉⃗ is the relative velocity of the cable given by The resultant applied force per unit length of a stretched cable is
2
𝜕⃗𝑟 𝐹⃗ = 𝐹⃗ℎ𝑑 + 𝑊⃖⃖⃖⃖⃗𝑎𝑝𝑝 − 𝑚̄ 𝜕 𝑟⃗ (10)
𝑉⃗ = 𝑢⃗ − (4) 𝜕𝑡2
𝜕𝑡
The inertia force per unit length of the stretched cable is given where 𝑚̄ is the mass per unit length of the stretched cable. The cable
by (Balzola, 1999; Ćatipović et al., 2021) configuration at a fixed time is taken to be a function of the arc length
[ ] for unstretched and stretched conditions. If a virtual displacement 𝛿⃗𝑟
𝜌 𝜋𝐷2 𝜕⃗𝑢 𝜕 2 𝑟⃗𝑛 is introduced in the cable, the virtual work principle is expressed as
𝐹⃗𝑖 = 𝑤 𝐶𝑀 𝑛 − 𝐶𝐴 (5)
4 𝜕𝑡 𝜕𝑡2 follows
where 𝜌𝑤 , 𝐷, 𝐶𝐷 , 𝐶𝑀 , and 𝐶𝐴 are the water fluid density, the stretched 𝐿 ( ) 𝜕(𝛿⃗𝑟) ∗ 𝐿
𝐴0 𝜏⃗ 𝑠∗ ⋅ 𝑑𝑠 = 𝐹⃗ ⋅ 𝛿⃗𝑟𝑑𝑠∗ + 𝐹⃗0 ⋅ 𝛿⃗𝑟(0) + 𝐹⃗𝐿 ⋅ 𝛿⃗𝑟(𝐿) (11)
cable diameter, the drag coefficient, the inertial coefficient, and the ∫0 𝜕𝑠∗ ∫0
added mass coefficient, respectively; 𝑢⃗ is the fluid velocity and 𝑢⃗𝑛 is
where 𝜏⃗ is the resultant stress vector normal to the cable cross-section;
its normal component; 𝑟⃗ is the position vector of a considered point of
𝐴0 denotes the cross-sectional area of the unstretched cable, and the
the cable and 𝑟⃗𝑛 is its normal component. The inertial coefficient and
vectors 𝐹⃗0 and 𝐹⃗𝐿 represent boundary forces.
the added mass coefficient are linked through The integration of Eq. (11) by parts yields
𝐶𝑀 = 1 + 𝐶𝐴 (6) 𝐿( ) ( ) ( )
𝜕 𝜏⃗
− 𝐹⃗ + 𝐴0 ∗ .𝛿⃗𝑟𝑑𝑠∗ = 𝐹⃗0 + 𝐴0 𝜏⃗(0) ⋅𝛿⃗𝑟(0)+ 𝐹⃗𝐿 − 𝐴0 𝜏⃗(𝐿) ⋅𝛿⃗𝑟(𝐿)
In Eq. (5), the first part of the inertia force represents the force ∫0 𝜕𝑠
due the fluid motion around a fixed segment of the cable, whereas the (12)
second part is related to the motion of the cable segment when the
surrounding fluid is assumed to be stationary. setting the following conditions
( )
𝐹⃗0 + 𝐴0 𝜏⃗(0) ⋅ 𝛿⃗𝑟(0) = 0
2.2.2. Hydrostatic forces
( ) (13)
Buoyancy and gravity effects are combined, and the resultant force 𝐹⃗𝐿 − 𝐴0 𝜏⃗(𝐿) ⋅ 𝛿⃗𝑟(𝐿) = 0
derived is the apparent weight. The cable is assumed to be completely
⃖⃖⃖⃖⃗𝑎𝑝𝑝 is a portion of the cable
surrounded by water; its apparent weight 𝑊 and considering that the virtual displacement is taken arbitrarily, we
weight in the air. arrive at
𝜕 2 𝑟⃗ 𝜕 𝜏⃗
⃖⃖⃖⃖⃗𝑎𝑝𝑝 = 𝑘𝑊
𝑊 ⃖⃖⃖⃖⃗ (7) 𝑚̄ = 𝐴0 ∗ + 𝐹⃗𝑑 + 𝐹⃗𝑖 + 𝑊
⃖⃖⃖⃖⃗app (14)
𝜕𝑡2 𝜕𝑠

3
K. Kakanda et al. Ocean Engineering 266 (2022) 112589

The resultant stress vector is given by surge motion power spectrum denoted by 𝑆𝑥̇ 𝑥̇ . In Fig. 2 where a curve
of the surge motion power spectrum is presented, the zeroth spectral
𝜏⃗ = 𝐸𝜀⃗𝑡 (15) moment is the area of the surface under the curve.
where 𝐸 denotes the Young’s modulus of the cable material, and ⃗𝑡 is The zeroth spectral moment is computed for the surge motion in
the unit vector in the tangential direction given by the 𝑥 direction of the global Cartesian coordinate system. A coordinate
transformation is needed for the computation of the tangential and
⃗𝑡 = 𝜕⃗𝑟 = 1 𝜕⃗𝑟 (16) normal linearization coefficients, and this is achieved by using the angle
𝜕𝑠∗ 1 + 𝜀 𝜕𝑠 (𝛼) between the horizontal and tangential directions at the cable top
The tension is expressed as end. Linearization coefficients in the tangential and normal directions
𝐸𝐴0 𝜀 𝜕⃗𝑟 are the absolute values of the components of the vectors calculated with
𝑇⃗ = (17) Eq. (24) below
1 + 𝜀 𝜕𝑠
( ) ( )( ) (√ )
The drag force has two components for a 2D problem: tangential 𝐾𝑡 𝐶𝐿𝑡 0 cos 𝛼 sin 𝛼 𝑚0𝑥̇
= (24)
and normal components. They are respectively given as follows 𝐾𝑛 0 𝐶𝐿𝑛 − sin 𝛼 cos 𝛼 0
1 1 In Tang (2017), the coefficients 𝐶𝐿𝑡 and 𝐶𝐿𝑛 are both assumed to
𝐹⃗𝑑𝑡 = 𝜌𝑤 𝜋𝐷𝐶𝐷𝑡 ‖𝑣⃗𝑡 ‖𝑣⃗𝑡 = 𝜌𝑤 𝜋𝐷𝐶𝐷𝑡 ‖(𝑣⃗ ⋅ ⃗𝑡)⃗𝑡‖(𝑣⃗ ⋅ ⃗𝑡)⃗𝑡 √
2 2 (18) be equal to 2∕4 for the following reasons:
1 1 √
𝐹⃗𝑑𝑛 = 𝜌𝑤 𝐷𝐶𝐷𝑛 ‖𝑣⃗𝑛 ‖𝑣⃗𝑛 = 𝜌𝑤 𝐷𝐶𝐷𝑛 ‖𝑣⃗ − (𝑣⃗ ⋅ ⃗𝑡)⃗𝑡‖(𝑣⃗ − (𝑣⃗ ⋅ ⃗𝑡)⃗𝑡)
2 2 • The factor 2 comes from√ √the significant surge velocity ampli-
𝐶𝐷𝑡 and 𝐶𝐷𝑛 denote the tangential and normal drag coefficients, respec- tude, which is equal to 2 𝑚0𝑥̇ ;
tively; v⃗t and v⃗n are the tangential and normal components of the cable • In the factor 1∕4 = 1∕2 × 1∕2, the first 1∕2 is adopted in order to
relative velocity, respectively. The inertia force is given by obtain the average value of the velocity amplitude of each node
[ ( 2 ( 2 ) )] of the mooring line. The second one is introduced when, for a
𝜋𝐷2 ( ) 𝜕⃗𝑢𝑛 𝜕 𝑟⃗ 𝜕 𝑟⃗ ⃗ ⃗
𝐹⃗𝑖 = 𝜌𝑤 𝐶 𝐴 + 1 − C𝐴 − ⋅𝑡 𝑡 (19) periodic cycle, the velocity amplitude at each node needs to be
4 𝜕𝑡 𝜕𝑡2 𝜕𝑡 2
averaged.
If the water particle velocity is assumed to be constant, the inertia force
is simplified as 2.5. Modified equation of motion of a mooring line
[ ( 2 ) ]
𝜋𝐷2 𝜌𝑤 𝐶𝐴 𝜕 2 𝑟⃗ 𝜕 𝑟⃗ ⃗ ⃗
𝐹⃗𝑖 = − − ⋅𝑡 𝑡 (20) One of the main contributions of the present work is the modi-
4 𝜕𝑡2 𝜕𝑡2 fication of the equation of motion of a mooring line based on the
The relationships between the diameters and between the masses of aforementioned simplifying assumptions and techniques to make it
unstretched and stretched lengths can be written as suitable for applying the power series method.
1 The substitution of all forces with their expressions in Eq. (14) yields
𝐷 = (1 + 𝜀)− 2 𝐷0 the following equation
(21)
𝑚̄ = (1 + 𝜀)−1 𝑚̄ 0 𝑚̄ 0 𝜕 2 𝑟⃗ 𝐴0 𝜕 𝜏⃗ 𝜌𝑤 𝜋𝐷0 𝐶𝐷𝑡
= + ‖(𝑣⃗ ⋅ ⃗𝑡)⃗𝑡‖(𝑣⃗ ⋅ ⃗𝑡)⃗𝑡
1 + 𝜀 𝜕𝑡2 1 + 𝜀 𝜕𝑠 1
2.4. Simplifying assumptions and techniques 2(1 + 𝜀) 2
𝜌𝑤 𝐷0 𝐶𝐷𝑛 ( )
+ 1
‖𝑣⃗ − (𝑣⃗ ⋅ ⃗𝑡)⃗𝑡‖ 𝑣⃗ − (𝑣⃗ ⋅ ⃗𝑡)⃗𝑡 (25)
Due to the complexity of the problem, the solving approach requires 2(1 + 𝜀) 2
several simplifying assumptions and techniques. Simplifications are [ ( 2 ) ] ( )
𝜋𝐷02 𝜌𝑤 𝐶𝐴 𝜕 2 𝑟⃗ 𝜕 𝑟⃗ ⃗ ⃗ 𝑚̄ 0 𝜌
required due to the nonlinearities of PDEs being solved. The two main − − ⋅𝑡 𝑡 + 1 − 𝑤 𝑔⃗
factors are (1) the drag force components, which are the products of the
4(1 + 𝜀) 𝜕𝑡2 𝜕𝑡2 1+𝜀 𝜌𝑐
velocity and its norm, and (2) the cable’s stretching, which is defined by which may be rearranged as
the strain given by the relationship below, referred to as the geometric ( )
𝜕 2 𝑟⃗ 𝐸𝐴0 𝜕 𝜀 𝜕⃗𝑟
compatibility condition. =
𝜕𝑡2 𝑚0 𝜕𝑠 1 + 𝜀 𝜕𝑠
‖ 𝜕⃗𝑟 ‖
𝜀=‖ ‖ 1
‖ 𝜕𝑠 ‖ − 1 (22) 𝜌𝑤 𝐷0 (1 + 𝜀) 2 [ ]
‖ ‖ + 𝜋𝐶𝐷𝑡 ‖(𝑣⃗ ⋅ ⃗𝑡)⃗𝑡‖(𝑣⃗ ⋅ ⃗𝑡)⃗𝑡 + 𝐶𝐷𝑛 ‖𝑣⃗ − (𝑣⃗ ⋅ ⃗𝑡)⃗𝑡‖(𝑣⃗ − (𝑣⃗ ⋅ ⃗𝑡)⃗𝑡)
2𝑚0
The cable strain is assumed to be very small in order to allow for certain [ ( 2 ) ]
standard approximations. Thus, the geometric compatibility condition 𝜋𝐷02 𝜌𝑤 𝐶𝐴 𝜕 2 𝑟⃗ 𝜕 𝑟⃗ ⃗ ⃗
− − ⋅ 𝑡 𝑡 + 𝑘𝑔⃗
can be approximated as 4𝑚0 𝜕𝑡2 𝜕𝑡2
𝜕⃗𝑟 𝜕⃗𝑟 (26)
. ≈ 1 + 2𝜀 (23)
𝜕𝑠 𝜕𝑠 The first stage of the equation simplification procedure involves
The first strategy aims to eliminate the drag force contribution to eliminating the drag force contribution to the nonlinearity by introduc-
the nonlinearity. Numerous researchers employed a variety of method- ing the linearization factors.
ologies and produced some valuable results for the frequency do- ′
𝜋𝐶𝐷𝑡 ‖(𝑣⃗ ⋅ ⃗𝑡)⃗𝑡‖ ≈ 𝜋𝐾𝑡 𝐶𝐷𝑡 = 𝐶𝐷𝑡
main analysis. Among these is Borgman (1967), who developed a (27)
′
stochastic method for simplified formulations of hydrodynamic forces. 𝐶𝐷𝑛 ‖𝑣⃗ − (𝑣⃗ ⋅ ⃗𝑡)⃗𝑡‖ ≈ 𝐾𝑛 𝐶𝐷𝑛 = 𝐶𝐷𝑛
In Housseine et al. (2015), an analytical model developed based on Then, the modified form of the equation of motion of a mooring line is
Borgman’s results enables the vector operation rule to linearize the
drag force acting on a cylindrical body, and is therefore useful for the ( )
𝜕 2 𝑟⃗ 𝐸𝐴0 𝜕 𝜀 𝜕⃗𝑟
multidirectional flow. (1 + 𝜇) =
𝜕𝑡2 𝑚0 𝜕𝑠 1 + 𝜀 𝜕𝑠
An additional technique, that uses the idea of the stochastic analysis ( )
1 ⎡ ′ ′ ( ) ⎤
and is adopted in the present work, is given in Tang (2017) for 𝜌𝑤 𝐷0 (1 + 𝜀) 2 ⎢ 𝐶𝐷𝑡 − 𝐶𝐷𝑛 𝜕⃗𝑟 𝜕⃗𝑟 ′ ⎥
the frequency domain analysis. For this technique, the drag force is + ⎢ 𝑣⃗ ⋅ + 𝐶𝐷 𝑣⃗⎥ (28)
2𝑚0 2 𝜕𝑠 𝜕𝑠
⎢ (1 + 𝜀)
𝑛
⎥
regarded as a Gaussian random process, and the linearization factor 𝐾 ⎣ ⎦
depends on the zeroth spectral moment of the surge velocity spectrum ( 2 )
𝜇 𝜕 𝑟⃗ 𝜕⃗𝑟 𝜕⃗𝑟
denoted by 𝑚0𝑥̇ , which in turn depends on a suitable equation of the + ⋅ + 𝑘𝑔⃗
(1 + 𝜀)2 𝜕𝑡2 𝜕𝑠 𝜕𝑠

4
K. Kakanda et al. Ocean Engineering 266 (2022) 112589

where the parameter 𝜇 is given in Eq. (B.2). Hence, the system of nonlinear PDEs to be solved are
At the second stage of the simplification procedure, the fact that [( ) ( )2 ] 2
2
the cable strain is assumed to be very small and appropriate standard ⎧(1 + 𝜇) 𝜕 2 𝑟1 + 1 𝜂 𝜕2 𝑟1 + 𝜁 𝜕𝑟1 = 𝜁 𝑢 + 𝑘𝑔 + 1 𝜂 𝜕𝑟1 + 𝜕𝑟2 𝜕 𝑟1
1 1
⎪ 𝜕𝑡 2 2 𝜕𝑠
[ (
2 𝜕𝑡
) (
2 𝜕𝑠 𝜕𝑠
)]
𝜕𝑠2
approximations of expressions involving the binomial (1 + 𝜀) are used. ⎪ 2
𝜕 𝑟1 𝜕𝑟1 2
𝜕 𝑟2 𝜕𝑟2 2
𝜕 𝑟1 𝜕𝑟1 2
𝜕 𝑟2 𝜕𝑟2 𝜕𝑟1
⎪ + 𝜂 𝜕𝑠2 𝜕𝑠 + 𝜕𝑠2 𝜕𝑠 + 𝜇 𝜕𝑡2 𝜕𝑠 + 𝜕𝑡2 𝜕𝑠
The first term on the right-hand side of Eq. (28) is developed and ⎪ ( ) 𝜕𝑠
𝜕𝑟 𝜕𝑟 𝜕𝑟 𝜕𝑟 𝜕𝑟 𝜕𝑟 𝜕𝑟
modified as ⎪ − 𝜉 𝜕𝑡1 𝜕𝑠1 + 𝜕𝑡2 𝜕𝑠2 − 𝑢1 𝜕𝑠1 − 𝑢2 𝜕𝑠2 𝜕𝑠1
⎨ [( ) ( )2 ] 2
( ) ( 2 ) 2 2 2
𝜕 𝜀 𝜕⃗𝑟 𝜕 2 𝑟⃗ 1 𝜕 𝑟⃗ 1 𝜕(1 + 𝜀) 𝜕⃗𝑟 ⎪(1 + 𝜇) 𝜕 𝑟22 + 1 𝜂 𝜕 𝑟22 + 𝜁 𝜕𝑟2 = 𝜁 𝑢2 + 𝑘𝑔2 + 1 𝜂 𝜕𝑟1 + 𝜕𝑟2 𝜕 𝑟2
= − − ⎪ 𝜕𝑡 2 𝜕𝑠 𝜕𝑡 2 𝜕𝑠 𝜕𝑠 𝜕𝑠2
𝜕𝑠 1 + 𝜀 𝜕𝑠 2 1 + 𝜀 𝜕𝑠 2 1 + 𝜀 𝜕𝑠 𝜕𝑠 [ ( 2 ) ( )]
𝜕𝑠
( ) ⎪ 𝜕 𝑟1 𝜕𝑟1 𝜕 2 𝑟2 𝜕𝑟2 𝜕 2 𝑟1 𝜕𝑟1 𝜕 2 𝑟2 𝜕𝑟2 𝜕𝑟2
⎪ + 𝜂 + + 𝜇 +
( ) 2⃗
−1 𝜕 𝑟 𝜕 ln(1 + 𝜀) 𝜕⃗𝑟 ( 𝜕𝑠2 𝜕𝑠 𝜕𝑠2 𝜕𝑠 𝜕𝑡2 𝜕𝑠 ) 𝜕𝑡2 𝜕𝑠 𝜕𝑠
= 1 − (1 + 𝜀) + (1 + 𝜀)−1 (29) ⎪ 𝜕𝑟 𝜕𝑟 𝜕𝑟 𝜕𝑟 𝜕𝑟 𝜕𝑟 𝜕𝑟
𝜕𝑠2 𝜕𝑠 𝜕𝑠 ⎩ − 𝜉 𝜕𝑡1 𝜕𝑠1 + 𝜕𝑡2 𝜕𝑠2 − 𝑢1 𝜕𝑠1 − 𝑢2 𝜕𝑠2 𝜕𝑠2
𝜕 2 𝑟⃗ 𝜕𝜀 𝜕⃗𝑟 (36)
≈𝜀 + (1 − 𝜀)
𝜕𝑠2 𝜕𝑠 𝜕𝑠
The partial derivative of the strain with respect to the arc length is Let 𝐿 be the linear differential operator given by
derived as 𝜕2 1 𝜕2 𝜕
𝐿 = (1 + 𝜇) + 𝜂 +𝜁 (37)
( )1∕2 𝜕𝑡2 2 𝜕𝑠2 𝜕𝑡
𝜕𝜀 𝜕 𝜕⃗𝑟 𝜕⃗𝑟 𝜕 2 𝑟⃗ 𝜕⃗𝑟 𝜕 2 𝑟⃗ 𝜕⃗𝑟
= ⋅ = (1 + 𝜀)−1 ⋅ ≈ (1 − 𝜀) ⋅ (30) The system of PDEs given by Eq. (36) can now be rewritten in the
𝜕𝑠 𝜕𝑠 𝜕𝑠 𝜕𝑠 𝜕𝑠2 𝜕𝑠 𝜕𝑠2 𝜕𝑠
following reduced form
Finally, we obtain [( ) ( )]
( ) ( 2 ) ( ) ∑ 2
𝜕 2 𝑟𝑗 𝜕𝑟𝑗 𝜕 2 𝑟𝑗 𝜕𝑟𝑗 𝜕𝑟𝑗 𝜕𝑟𝑗 𝜕𝑟𝑗 𝜕𝑟𝑖
𝜕 𝜀 𝜕⃗𝑟 𝜕 2 𝑟⃗ 𝜕 𝑟⃗ 𝜕⃗𝑟 𝜕⃗𝑟 𝐿 𝑟𝑖 = 𝜂 +𝜇 −𝜉 − 𝑢𝑗
≈𝜀 + (1 − 2𝜀) ⋅ (31) 𝜕𝑠2 𝜕𝑠 𝜕𝑡2 𝜕𝑠 𝜕𝑡 𝜕𝑠 𝜕𝑠 𝜕𝑠
𝜕s 1 + 𝜀 𝜕s 𝜕s2 𝜕s2 𝜕s 𝜕s 𝑗=0
2 ( )2 2
Incorporating Eq. (31) into Eq. (28) yields 1 ∑ 𝜕𝑟𝑗 𝜕 𝑟𝑖
+ 𝜂 + 𝜁 𝑢𝑖 + 𝑘𝑔𝑖 , 𝑖 = 1, 2
2 𝑗=0 𝜕𝑠 𝜕𝑠2
[ 2 ( 2 ) ]
𝜕 2 𝑟⃗ 𝜕 𝑟⃗ 𝜕 𝑟⃗ 𝜕⃗𝑟 𝜕⃗𝑟
(1 + 𝜇) =𝜂 𝜀 + (1 − 2𝜀) ⋅ (38)
𝜕𝑡2 𝜕𝑠2 𝜕𝑠2 𝜕𝑠 𝜕𝑠
1 [( ) (( ) ) ( )]
𝜌𝑤 𝐷0 (1 + 𝜀) 2
′
𝐶𝐷𝑡 − 𝐶𝐷𝑛′ So far, the groundwork for the application of the PSM has been laid.
𝜕⃗𝑟 𝜕⃗𝑟 𝜕⃗𝑟 ′ 𝜕⃗𝑟
+ 𝑢⃗ − ⋅ + 𝐶𝐷𝑛 𝑢⃗ − Further discussion will involve the overall solution procedure.
2𝑚̄ 0 (1 + 𝜀)2 𝜕𝑡 𝜕𝑠 𝜕𝑠 𝜕𝑡
( 2 )
𝜕 𝑟⃗ 𝜕⃗𝑟 𝜕⃗𝑟 2.6. PSM description
+ 𝜇(1 − 2𝜀) ⋅ + 𝑘𝑔⃗
𝜕𝑡2 𝜕𝑠 𝜕𝑠
(32) 2.6.1. Overview
For a given system of nonlinear PDEs 𝐹𝑖 (𝑖 = 1, 2, … , ℎ) where
where the parameter 𝜂 given in Eq. (B.1) represents the ratio of the unknowns 𝑢𝑖 (𝑖 = 1, 2, … , ℎ) are functions of independent variables
elastic stiffness of the cable to the mass of unstretched cable per unit 𝑥𝑗 (𝑗 = 1, 2, … , 𝑛), one may express
length. After incorporating usual approximations of the binomial (1+𝜀),
𝜕 𝑘1 𝑢1 𝜕 𝑘ℎ 𝑢ℎ
Eq. (32) becomes 𝐹𝑖 (𝑢1 , … , 𝑢ℎ , 𝑟 𝑟 ,…, 𝑟 𝑟 , … , 𝑥1 , … , 𝑥𝑛 ) = 0
𝜕𝑥111 … 𝜕𝑥𝑛1𝑛 𝜕𝑥1ℎ1 … 𝜕𝑥𝑛ℎ𝑛
′ (2 + 𝜀)
𝜌𝑤 𝐷0 𝐶𝐷𝑛
𝜕 2 𝑟⃗ 𝜕 2 𝑟⃗ 𝜕⃗𝑟 (39)
(1 + 𝜇) − 𝜂𝜀 + = ∑
𝑛
𝜕𝑡2 𝜕𝑠2 4𝑚̄ 0 𝜕𝑡 𝑟𝑙𝑗 = 𝑘𝑙 , 𝑙 = 1, … , ℎ
[ ( 2 ) ( 2 )] 𝑗=1
𝜕 𝑟⃗ 𝜕⃗𝑟 𝜕 𝑟⃗ 𝜕⃗𝑟 𝜕⃗𝑟
(1 − 2𝜀) 𝜂 ⋅ +𝜇 ⋅
𝜕𝑠2 𝜕𝑠 𝜕𝑡2 𝜕𝑠 𝜕𝑠 By using the PSM to solve the above PDEs, the solutions are approx-
( ′ ′
) ( )
𝜌𝑤 𝐷0 𝐶𝐷𝑡 − 𝐶𝐷𝑛 (2 − 3𝜀) 𝜕⃗𝑟 𝜕⃗𝑟 𝜕⃗𝑟 imated by infinite polynomial series as
− ⋅ (33)
4𝑚̄ 0 𝜕𝑡 𝜕𝑠 𝜕𝑠 ∑
∞ ∑
∞
( ′ ′
) ( ) 𝑢𝑖 (𝑥1 , … , 𝑥𝑛 ) ≈ ... 𝑎𝑖𝑚
𝑚 𝑚
𝑥1 1 ...𝑥𝑛 𝑛 , 𝑖 = 1, … , ℎ (40)
𝜌𝑤 𝐷0 𝐶𝐷𝑡 − 𝐶𝐷𝑛 (2 − 3𝜀) 𝜕⃗𝑟 𝜕⃗𝑟 1 ...𝑚𝑛
+ 𝑢⃗ ⋅ 𝑚1 =0 𝑚𝑛 =0
4𝑚̄ 0 𝜕𝑠 𝜕𝑠
′ (2 + 𝜀) The unknown functions and their partial derivatives in the equation
𝜌𝑤 𝐷0 𝐶𝐷𝑛
+ 𝑢⃗ + 𝑘𝑔⃗ of motion are substituted in the system of PDEs with their approx-
4𝑚̄ 0 imations to build a system of equations whose unknowns are the
The final form of the equation is obtained by neglecting the strain. coefficients of the polynomials.
This widely employed assumption allows for the present analysis, to Let 𝐼 be the set of independent variables, x𝑗 (𝑗 = 1, 2, … , 𝑛), and
consider a subset 𝑆 of 𝐼 whose elements are x𝑆𝑚 (𝑚 = 1, 2, … , 𝑘). The
reduce the size of equations derived with the PSM procedure. By
partial differentiation of 𝑢𝑖 with respect to all elements of 𝑆 is
combining this assumption and the simplification given by Eq. (23),
Eq. (33) becomes ∑
∞ ∞ [(
∑ ) ( )]
𝜕 𝑝 𝑢𝑖
( ) 𝑟 𝑟 ≈ … 𝑚𝑠1 + 𝑟1 … 𝑚𝑠1 + 1
𝜕 2 𝑟⃗ 1 𝜕 2 𝑟⃗ 𝜕⃗𝑟 1 𝜕⃗𝑟 𝜕⃗𝑟 𝜕 2 𝑟⃗ 𝜕𝑥𝑠11 … 𝜕𝑥𝑠𝑘𝑘 𝑚1 =0 𝑚𝑛 =0
(1 + 𝜇) + 𝜂 +𝜁 = 𝜁 𝑢⃗ + 𝑘𝑔⃗ + 𝜂 ⋅ [( ) ( )]
𝜕𝑡2 2 𝜕𝑠2 𝜕𝑡 2 𝜕𝑠 𝜕𝑠 𝜕𝑠2
[ ( 2 ) ( 2 ) ( )] (34) … 𝑚𝑠𝑘 + 𝑟𝑘 … 𝑚𝑠𝑘 + 1 𝑎𝑚1 ,…,𝑚𝑠 +𝑟1 ,…,𝑚𝑗 ,…,𝑚𝑠 +𝑟𝑘 ,…,𝑚𝑛
𝜕 𝑟⃗ 𝜕⃗𝑟 𝜕 𝑟⃗ 𝜕⃗𝑟 𝜕⃗𝑟 𝜕⃗𝑟 𝜕⃗𝑟 𝜕⃗𝑟 1 𝑘
𝜂 ⋅ +𝜇 ⋅ −𝜉 ⋅ − 𝑢⃗ ⋅ 𝑚 𝑚
𝜕𝑠2 𝜕𝑠 𝜕𝑡2 𝜕𝑠 𝜕𝑡 𝜕𝑠 𝜕𝑠 𝜕𝑠 × 𝑥1 1 … 𝑥𝑛 𝑛
where the parameters 𝜁 and 𝜉 are given in Eqs. (B.3) and (B.4). (41)
For a 2D problem, the position vector at each point of the cable is The entire procedure of the PSM may be summed up in the com-
written in the Cartesian coordinate system as putation of coefficients 𝑎𝑖𝑚 ...𝑚 . Unknown functions and their partial
𝑛
( ) 1
𝑟⃗(𝑠, 𝑡) = 𝑟1 (𝑠, 𝑡), 𝑟2 (𝑠, 𝑡) (35) derivatives in the system of PDEs are replaced by Eqs. (40) and (41).

5
K. Kakanda et al. Ocean Engineering 266 (2022) 112589

Fig. 2. Power spectrum of a surge motion (Tang, 2017).

This leads to the construction of a system of recurrence relationships and the right-hand side (RHS) is transformed as below
by equating the coefficients of each PDE of the system of equations.
For simple recurrence relationships, hand computations may be ∑
2 ∑
∞ ∑
∞ ∑
𝑚 ∑
𝑛 ∑
∞ ∑
∞
𝑅𝐻𝑆 = 𝐹 (𝑚, 𝑛, 𝑝, 𝑞, 𝑢, 𝑣, 𝑖, 𝑗)𝑠𝑚 𝑡𝑛 + 𝜎𝑖𝑚,𝑛 𝑠𝑚 𝑡𝑛 + 𝑘𝑔𝑖
performed, while relatively complex ones will require a powerful com- 𝑗=1 𝑚=0 𝑛=0 𝑝=0 𝑞=0 𝑚=0 𝑛=0
putation tool.
(46)
2.6.2. PSM applied to the modified equation of motion where 𝐹 (𝑚, 𝑛, 𝑝, 𝑞, 𝑢, 𝑣, 𝑖, 𝑗) is given in Eq. (A.11).
To employ the PSM for solving the mooring line equation of motion, Computations are conducted by equating the coefficients of Eqs.
a solution to a 2D case problem is proposed. Each component of the (45) and (46). By equating the constant terms ((𝑚, 𝑛) = (0, 0)), one
position vector is approximated by a bivariate polynomial as obtains
∞ ∑
∑ ∞
2 (
∑ )2
𝑟𝑖 (𝑠, 𝑡) ≈ 𝑎𝑖𝑚,𝑛 𝑠𝑚 𝑡𝑛 , 𝑖 = 1, 2 (42) 2(1 + 𝜇)𝑎𝑖0,2 +𝜂𝑎𝑖2,0 + 𝜁 𝑎𝑖0,1 = 𝑘𝑔𝑖 + 𝜎𝑖0,0 + 𝜂 𝑎𝑗1,0 𝑎𝑖2,0
𝑚=0 𝑛=0
𝑗=1
First and second order partial derivatives with respect to 𝑠 and 𝑡 are (47)
2 [ (
∑ ) ]
also approximated as + 2 𝜂𝑎𝑗2,0 + 𝜇𝑎𝑗0,2 − 𝜉𝑎𝑗0,1 + 𝜉𝜎𝑗0,0 𝑎𝑗1,0 𝑎𝑖1,0
𝑗=1
𝜕𝑟𝑖 (𝑠, 𝑡) ∑ ∑
∞ ∞
≈ (𝑚 + 1)𝑎𝑖𝑚+1,𝑛 𝑠𝑚 𝑡𝑛 and the remaining coefficients ((𝑚, 𝑛) ≠ (0, 0)) are equated as follows
𝜕𝑠 𝑚=0 𝑛=0
∑
∞ ∑
∞ 1
𝜕 2 𝑟𝑖 (𝑠, 𝑡) (1 + 𝜇)(𝑛 + 2)(𝑛 + 1)𝑎𝑖𝑚,𝑛+2 + 𝜂(𝑚 + 2)(𝑚 + 1)𝑎𝑖𝑚+2,𝑛
≈ (𝑚 + 2)(𝑚 + 1)𝑎𝑖𝑚+2,𝑛 𝑠𝑚 𝑡𝑛 2
𝜕𝑠2 (48)
𝑚=0 𝑛=0
(43) ∑∑
2 𝑚 ∑ 𝑛

𝜕𝑟𝑖 (𝑠, 𝑡) ∑ ∑
∞ ∞ + 𝜁(𝑛 + 1)𝑎𝑖𝑚,𝑛+1 = 𝐹 (𝑚, 𝑛, 𝑝, 𝑞, 𝑢, 𝑣, 𝑖, 𝑗) + 𝜎𝑖𝑚,𝑛
≈ (𝑛 + 1)𝑎𝑖𝑚,𝑛+1 𝑠𝑚 𝑡𝑛 𝑗=1 𝑝=0 𝑞=0
𝜕𝑡 𝑚=0 𝑛=0
𝜕 2 𝑟𝑖 (𝑠, 𝑡) ∑
∞ ∑
∞
≈ (𝑛 + 2)(𝑛 + 1)𝑎𝑖𝑚,𝑛+2 𝑠𝑚 𝑡𝑛 2.7. Boundary and initial conditions
𝜕𝑡2 𝑚=0 𝑢=0

All products of partial derivatives appearing in the system of PDEs Regarding the boundary conditions, researchers have made different
are also derived and given in Appendix A. choices for various analysis conditions and requirements. In the present
Each component of the water particle velocity can also be written study, the cable is assumed to be fixed at the bottom end point (BEP) as
as an infinite bivariate polynomial adopted in Balzola (1999) and Choi et al. (2016). Assuming the cable
∑
∞ ∑
∞ to be fixed at the BEP has been adopted by many authors and this is a
𝑢𝑖 (𝑠, 𝑡) ≈ 𝜎𝑖𝑚,𝑛 𝑠𝑚 𝑡𝑛 (44) suitable condition for the sake of analytical–numerical treatment. The
𝑚=0 𝑛=0 top end point (TEP) is considered to be dragged along by the floater
The left-hand side (LHS) of Eq. (38) is developed as follows motion. However, to observe the static behavior of the mooring line,
∑ ∞ [
∞ ∑ ] the TEP is assumed to be initially fixed.
𝐿𝐻𝑆 = (1 + 𝜇)(𝑛 + 2)(𝑛 + 1)𝑎𝑖𝑚,𝑛+2 + 𝜁(𝑛 + 1)𝑎𝑖𝑚,𝑛+1 𝑠𝑚 𝑡𝑛
∑
∞
𝑚=0 𝑛=0
(45) 𝑟𝑖 (0, 𝑡) = 𝑟𝑖0 = 𝑎𝑖0,0 + 𝑎𝑖0,𝑛 𝑡𝑛
1 ∑∑
∞ ∞
𝑛=1 (49)
+ 𝜂 (𝑚 + 2)(𝑚 + 1)𝑎𝑖𝑚+2,𝑛 𝑠𝑚 𝑡𝑛
2 𝑚=0 𝑛=0 𝑎𝑖0,0 = 𝑟𝑖𝑜

6
K. Kakanda et al. Ocean Engineering 266 (2022) 112589

The BEP is also considered as the origin of the adopted coordinate Table 1
Input data for deep-water mooring analysis.
systems. This leads to
Parameters Values
𝑎𝑖0,𝑛 = 0 ∀ 𝑛 ∈ {0, 1, 2, 3, …} (50) Cable length 𝐿 2400 m
Cable elastic stiffness EA 2 × 108 N
As already mentioned, the TEP is assumed to be initially fixed in Cable diameter 𝐷𝑜 100 mm
order to derive the static part of the cable response. Mass per unit length 𝑚̄ 0 20 kg∕m, 30 kg∕m
Cable density 𝜌𝑐 5500 kg∕m3
∑
∞
Water density 𝜌𝑤 1025 kg∕m3
𝑟𝑖 (𝐿, 0) = 𝑟𝑖𝐿 = 𝑎𝑖𝑚,0 𝐿𝑚 (51) Water depth 𝑑 1000 m
𝑚=0 Added mass coefficient 𝐶𝐴 1
The cable is assumed to be initially fixed; this is given by the Tangential drag coefficient 𝐶𝐷𝑡 0.03
Normal drag coefficient 𝐶𝐷𝑛 1.5
following condition
Current velocity 0.5 m∕s
𝜕𝑟𝑖 (𝑠, 𝑡) ||
=0 (52)
𝜕𝑡 ||𝑡=0
This initial condition leads to The horizontal and vertical water velocity components are given as
𝑎𝑖𝑚,1 = 0, ∀ 𝑚 ∈ {1, 2, 3, …} (53)
𝑎𝜔 cosh 𝑘(𝑧 + 𝑑)
𝑢(𝑥, 𝑧, 𝑡) = cos (𝑘𝑥 − 𝜔𝑡)
Then, Eq. (47) is simplified as sinh 𝑘𝑑 (61)
𝑎𝜔 cosh 𝑘(𝑧 + 𝑑)
2 (
∑ )2 2 (
∑ ) 𝑣(𝑥, 𝑧, 𝑡) = sin (𝑘𝑥 − 𝜔𝑡)
𝜂𝑎𝑖2,0 = 𝜂 𝑎𝑗1,0 𝑎𝑖2,0 + 2𝜂𝑎𝑗2,0 + 𝜉𝜎𝑗0,0 𝑎𝑗1,0 𝑎𝑖1,0 + 𝑘𝑔𝑖 (54) sinh 𝑘𝑑
𝑗=1 𝑗=1 where 𝑘 is the wave number.
In the current study, the inference technique approximates the
If a static analysis is conducted with the pretension at the BEP (𝑇⃗0 ) water velocity components using pressure data with polynomials. The
or the TEB (𝑇⃗𝐿 ) being known, further conditions may be provided as pressure coefficients 𝑝𝑗 and 𝑃𝑗 (𝑃𝑗 = 𝑝𝑗 𝑐 𝑗 ; c is the dimensionless wave
𝐸𝐴𝜀0 𝑑⃗𝑟(𝑠) || 𝐸𝐴𝜀0 ( ) speed; 𝑗 = 0, 1, … , 𝑀) are estimated using a relationship described
𝑇⃗0 = | = 𝑎11,0 , 𝑎21,0 in Fenton (1987) from a finite number of pressure data 𝑝(𝑡𝑛 ), with
1 + 𝜀0 𝑑𝑠 |𝑠=0 1 + 𝜀0
(∞ ) (55) 𝑛 = 1, 2, … , 𝑁 corresponding to discrete-time points 𝑡𝑛 . Following that,
𝐸𝐴𝜀𝐿 ∑ ∑∞
⃗ 𝑚 𝑚
𝑇𝐿 = (𝑚 + 1)𝑎1𝑚+1,0 𝐿 , (𝑚 + 1)𝑎2𝑚+1,0 𝐿 an iterative technique is employed to determine polynomial coefficients
1 + 𝜀𝐿 𝑚=0 𝑚=0 𝑎𝑗 in order to infer the velocity components. If a quartic polynomial
Computations are performed with truncated forms of infinite poly- is employed as an approximation, the horizontal and vertical wave
nomials given as excitation velocity components are given by
( )
∑
𝑀 ∑
𝑁 𝑢𝑥 = 𝑐 + 𝑎0 + 𝑎1 (𝑥 − 𝑐𝑡) + 𝑎2 (𝑥 − 𝑐𝑡)2 − 𝑧2
𝑟𝑀𝑁𝑖 (𝑠, 𝑡) = 𝑎𝑖𝑚,𝑛 𝑠𝑚 𝑡𝑛 (56) ( )
+ 𝑎3 (𝑥 − 𝑐𝑡)3 − 3 (𝑥 − 𝑐𝑡) 𝑧2
𝑚=0 𝑛=0 ( )
+ 𝑎4 (𝑥 − 𝑐𝑡)4 − 6 (𝑥 − 𝑐𝑡)2 𝑧2 + 𝑧4 (62)
If the focus is narrowed down to the static analysis of a catenary-like ( )
mooring line, position vector components are given as 𝑢𝑧 = −𝑎1 𝑧 − 2𝑎2 (𝑥 − 𝑐𝑡) 𝑧 − 𝑎3 3 (𝑥 − 𝑐𝑡)2 𝑧 − 𝑧3
( )
+ 𝑎4 4 (𝑥 − 𝑐𝑡)3 𝑧 − 4 (𝑥 − 𝑐𝑡) 𝑧3
∑
𝑀
𝑟𝑀𝑖 (𝑠) = 𝑎𝑖𝑚,0 𝑠𝑚 (57) The top end (𝑠 ≈ 𝐿) velocity boundary condition will be deduced
𝑚=0
by replacing 𝑥 and 𝑧 in Eq. (62) with 𝑟1 and 𝑟2 given in Eq. (42),
respectively.
2.8. Dynamic analysis procedure
3. Static analysis
In the dynamic analysis, the upper end of the line is subjected
to an imposed harmonic excitation that represents a wave motion. This section is devoted to establishing the tension distribution and
The present PSM-based work involves the polynomial approximations. cable configuration graphs. Prior to computing the tension compo-
To comply with this, the local polynomial approximation technique nents by means of Eq. (17), 𝑀𝑡ℎ-degree polynomials 𝑟1𝑀 (𝑠) and 𝑟2𝑀 (𝑠)
developed in Fenton (1987) and Fenton et al. (1989) is utilized to need to be constructed. The cable configuration graph to be plotted
approximate the wave excitation parameters. The method enables the represents the variation of 𝑟2𝑀 (𝑠) with respect to 𝑟1𝑀 (𝑠).
inference of specific wave properties using pressure transducer data.
In some instances, the pressure given by the transducer is estimated 3.1. Deep-water mooring line
using a simple analytical formula. If 𝑥 and 𝑧 (measured positive down-
ward) are the coordinates of the location of the transducer, 𝑢 and 𝑣 In Aamo and Fossen (2001) where the FEM was applied to analyze a
are the horizontal and vertical water velocity components, 𝑝𝑎 is the moored vessel system, results related to the cable’s initial configuration
atmospheric pressure, and 𝛷 is the velocity potential. The transducer enabled the construction of the configuration graph, which was consis-
measures the pressure approximately given by tent with the classical catenary theory. This is an essential benchmark
for the present study. The analysis model is tested using the data given
𝜕𝛷 𝑢2 + 𝑣2
𝑝(𝑥, 𝑧, 𝑡) = 𝑝𝑠 + 𝜌𝑔𝑧 + 𝜌 −𝜌 (58) in Table 1.
𝜕𝑡 2
The origin of the coordinate system is located at the line bottom
The velocity potential is such that end; the coordinate of the fixed top end is (2000, 1000). In Fig. 3, the
𝜕𝛷 𝜂𝜔2 cosh 𝑘(𝑧 + 𝑑) cable configuration graphs with increasing polynomial degrees in the
= (59) present study and the FEM model are shown.
𝜕𝑡 𝑘 sinh 𝑘𝑑
with the elevation 𝜂 given as In Fig. 3, it is observed that the convergence occurs for polynomial
degrees greater than five. However, the cable profiles predicted by the
𝜂(𝑥, 𝑡) = 𝑎 cos (𝑘𝑥 − 𝜔𝑡) (60) PSM appear to have a greater sagging than the results of Aamo and

7
K. Kakanda et al. Ocean Engineering 266 (2022) 112589

Fig. 3. Cable configurations with increasing polynomial degree M in comparison with a FEM-based result by Aamo and Fossen (2001): representative graph of 𝑧 = 𝑓 (𝑥); 𝑧 is the
vertical distance between the two end points and 𝑥 the horizontal distance.

Table 2 Table 3
Input data for shallow-water mooring analysis. Input data for influence of pretension.
Parameters Values Parameters Values
Mass per unit length 113.35 kg∕m Cable length 𝐿 100 m
Diameter 0.0766 m Cable elastic stiffness EA 2 × 108 N
Total length 835.5 m Cable diameter 𝐷0 100 mm
Breaking strength 6001 kN Weight per unit length in water 𝑃̄𝑤 296.70 N∕m
Axial stiffness EA 7.54 × 108 N Weight per unit length in air 𝑃̄𝑎 392.24 N∕m
Water density 𝜌𝑤 1025 kg∕m3
Water depth 𝑑 60 m
Added mass coefficient 𝐶𝐴 1
Tangential drag coefficient 𝐶𝐷𝑡 0.03
Fossen’s FEM model. The discrepancy may be partly attributed to the
Normal drag coefficient 𝐶𝐷𝑛 1.5
assumptions adopted. In the FEM model presented by Aamo and Fossen Current velocity 0.5 m∕s
in Aamo and Fossen (2001), the inertia force has been neglected, an
assumption not suitable for mooring lines consisting of light materials.
Nevertheless, Aamo and Fossen’s model is a valuable reference for Table 4
Pretension values and end point coordinates.
the 2D analysis of mooring lines, especially when analyzing deep-sea
Parameters First case Second case Third case Fourth case
cables.
Pretension at anchor 12 kN 10 kN 8 kN 6 kN
BEP coordinates (0, 0) (0, 0) (0, 0) (0, 0)
3.2. Shallow-water mooring line
TEP coordinates (80, 60) (80, 60) (80, 60) (80, 60)

The next test of the PSM is performed by comparing the cable

configuration results with those in Xu et al. (2021), where the mooring
system was analyzed with an emphasis on the ultimate limit design.
One of the system’s mooring lines is characterized by the properties
given in Table 2. The constructed cable configurations are compared
in Fig. 4.
To construct the cable configuration depicted in Fig. 4 for various
polynomial degrees, a pretension of 12 kN is applied to the cable’s
bottom end. The observed deviation between the results of the current
PSM model and the benchmark model is mainly due to the choice of
the pretension value, which was not specified by the referenced model.
In Fig. 5, the discrepancy in numerical results obtained by the
present model versus the benchmark is noticed to become greater with
increasing water depth. This is partly because the results from the
static analysis are more reliable in the shallow water case, and the
error increases with increasing depth. In other words, as the water
depth increases, the static analysis becomes more likely to yield greater
errors. Therefore, there is a need to carry out the dynamic analysis
to incorporate some influential dynamic behaviors enabling the more
realistic prediction of the actual physical model.
3.3. Parametric study
A supplementary test of the model is performed with the parameters
given in Table 3. Here, the focus is on the influence of parameters such
as the pretension at the anchor and the mass per unit length on the
cable configuration and resulting tension.
This example highlights the influence of the pretension 𝑇0 at the
BEP and the mass per unit length. The influence of the pretension is
observed by performing computations with four different values of 𝑇0
given in Table 4. The cable mass per unit length is calculated from the
values of its weight in water and air given in Table 3. The graphs for the
cable configuration and tension variation as functions of the Lagrangian
coordinate are constructed.
The cable configurations and tension variations with the arc length
are presented in Figs. 6 and 7, respectively. As expected for configura-
tion graphs in the static analysis, the line shifts from a relatively slack
to a relatively taut configuration as the pretension increases.

8
K. Kakanda et al. Ocean Engineering 266 (2022) 112589

Fig. 4. Cable configurations with increasing polynomial degree M in comparison with the result based on the ultimate limit state design consideration.

Fig. 5. Tension variations at the top end with the horizontal offset for different water depths.

The influence of the mass per unit length of the mooring line is
observed with computations performed for three cables of different
masses per unit length. Input data are given in Tables 5 and 6.
Cable configurations and resultant tension distributions with respect
to the arc length are shown in Figs. 8 and 9, respectively. With a fixed
value of the BEP pretension, it is possible to construct the cable config-
uration and resultant tension distribution graphs by considering three
cable mass values per unit length. The obtained cable configuration is
consistent with the catenary theory, and the tension varies as expected.
4. Dynamic analysis
A polynomial approximation of the wave excitation velocity at the
cable top end is constructed through data from a pressure probe. For

9
K. Kakanda et al. Ocean Engineering 266 (2022) 112589

Fig. 6. Cable configurations for different pretension 𝑇0 values.

Fig. 7. Resultant tension variations with the arc length for different pretension values: representative graph of T = f(s).

this purpose, the needed dimensionless pressure graph may be built
from the discrete transducer pressure readings or from calculations
using the formula in Eq. (58).
By way of the first example, experimental results obtained through
a model testing performed in Mavrakos et al. (1996) are adopted as
a benchmark. In the model testing, the top end of the mooring line
is subjected to an in-plane bimodal wave excitation. The time-varying
dimensionless pressure calculated with the formula given in Eq. (58) is
shown in Fig. 10; the graph shows the time variation of the pressure
non-dimensionalized through the product of the water density, gravity,
and the depth at which a transducer is supposed to be localized. The
amplitudes for the horizontal and vertical excitations are 𝐴𝑥 and 𝐴𝑧 ,
respectively; both have the same frequency. The data selected for the
full-scale configuration are given in Table 7; in the computation, they
are affected by a scaling factor 𝑓 of 15 (𝑓 is the ratio of the water
depth in a full-scale configuration to the one in the testing model
configuration).
In the testing model conducted in Mavrakos et al. (1996), a multi-
component mooring line with attached buoys is used, while in the
present study, the cable is assumed to be made of a single material

10
K. Kakanda et al. Ocean Engineering 266 (2022) 112589

Fig. 8. Cable configurations for different masses per unit length 𝑚̄ 0 .

Fig. 9. Resultant tension variations with the arc length for different masses per unit length 𝑚̄ 0 .

without attaching a buoy. This explains the noticeable discrepancies in
tension variations shown in Fig. 11. However, a fair agreement may be
observed for polynomial of 7th and 9th orders in the time and space.
The second example uses data in Table 8 and the non-dimensionalized
pressure graph built from transducer data, given in Fig. 12.
The coefficients 𝑎𝑗 in Eq. (62) related to a quartic polynomial
approximation are computed with the procedure developed in Fenton
et al. (1989), and given in Table 9. According to this procedure, the co-
efficient 𝑎0 is a good approximation of the opposite of the dimensionless
wave speed.
Tension variations are computed over time at the cable ends, and
for different cable top end offsets (see Fig. 15). Variations are observed
for 𝑟1 and 𝑟2 polynomials of three different orders as shown in Fig. 13
for the top end (𝑠 ≈ 𝐿) and in Fig. 14 for the anchor end (𝑠 =
0). These graphs highlight the variation of dynamic tensions whose
functions are constructed from the polynomials of the position vector
components, with the mooring cable subjected to a bimodal harmonic
wave excitation at the top end.
The third example uses the same parameters as given in Table 8
to compute the tension variation shown in Fig. 17, except for the

11
K. Kakanda et al. Ocean Engineering 266 (2022) 112589

Fig. 10. Dimensionless pressure graph: horizontal excitation amplitude 𝐴𝑥 = 40 mm; vertical excitation amplitude 𝐴𝑧 = 120 mm; period 𝑇 = 5.19 s.

Fig. 11. Tension at the top end simulated by PSM with different polynomial degrees in time and space, based on excitation amplitudes 𝐴𝑥 = 40 mm and 𝐴𝑧 = 120 mm; period
𝑇 = 5.19 s.

Table 5 Table 6
Input data for influence of mooring mass. Masses per unit length and end point coordinates.
Parameter Value Parameters First case Second case Third case
Cable length 𝐿 90 m Mass per unit length 40 kg∕m 30 kg∕m 20 kg∕m
Cable elastic stiffness EA 2 × 108 N Diameter 0.10 m 0.10 m 0.10 m
Cable diameter 𝐷0 100 mm BEP coordinates (0, 0) (0, 0) (0, 0)
Cable density 𝜌𝑐 4200 kg∕m3 TEP coordinates (80, 60) (80, 60) (80, 60)
Water density 𝜌𝑤 1025 kg∕m3
Water depth 𝑑 60 m
Pretension 𝑇0 8 kN Table 7
Added mass coefficient 𝐶𝐴 1 Input data for first dynamic analysis example.
Tangential drag coefficient 𝐶𝐷𝑡 0.03 Parameters Chain mooring line Wire mooring line
Normal drag coefficient 𝐶𝐷𝑛 1.5
Current velocity 0.5 m∕s Cable length L (m) 1900 1900
Cable diameter (mm) 130 141
Mass per unit length 𝑚̄ (kg∕m) 362.5 94.5
Elastic stiffness 𝐸𝐴 (kN) 1.61 × 106 1.80 × 106
Water depth d (m) 375 375
pretension whose value is now 1200 kN. For this purpose, a different di-
mensionless pressure graph is adopted as in Fig. 16 with the associated
wave excitation velocity coefficients in Table 10.

12
K. Kakanda et al. Ocean Engineering 266 (2022) 112589

Fig. 12. Dimensionless pressure graph (Fenton et al., 1989).

Fig. 13. Tension variations with time at the top end for different polynomial degrees of the position vector components.

Fig. 14. Tension variations with time at the anchor for different polynomial degrees of the position vector components.

13
K. Kakanda et al. Ocean Engineering 266 (2022) 112589

Fig. 15. Static tension at the top end.

Fig. 16. Dimensionless pressure graph (Bishop and Donelan, 1987).

Table 8 Table 9
Input data for second and third dynamic analysis examples. Wave excitation velocity coefficients for second dynamic analysis example.
Parameters Values Coefficient 𝑎0 = −𝑐 𝑎1 𝑎2 𝑎3 𝑎4
Cable length 𝐿 2000 m Value −1.0669 0.4118 −0.8345 −3.1142 2.0517
Cable elastic stiffness EA 2 × 108 N
Cable diameter 𝐷0 100 mm
Mass per unit length 𝑚̄ 0 84 kg∕m Table 10
Pretension 𝑇0 1000 kN Wave excitation velocity coefficients for third dynamic analysis example.
Water density 𝜌𝑤 1025 kg∕m3 Coefficient 𝑎0 = −𝑐 𝑎1 𝑎2 𝑎3 𝑎4
Water depth 𝑑 1000 m
Added mass coefficient 𝐶𝐴 1 Value −1.0421 −0.2115 0.6635 −2.12141 −2.0553
Tangential drag coefficient 𝐶𝐷𝑡 0.03
Normal drag coefficient 𝐶𝐷𝑛 1.5
Current velocity 0.5 m∕s the nonlinear equation of motion. By employing polynomial series, this
approach permits the approximation of the position vector components
at each point along the mooring cable. The effects of current, water
5. Conclusions depth, material properties, cable mass per unit length, and pretension
have been considered. The dynamic analysis has been conducted by
Applications of the PSM to the static and 2D dynamic analyses of including a wave excitation at the cable’s upper end in the model.
offshore mooring lines have been presented and discussed. Consider- In the framework of the PSM, the needed wave parameters are ap-
ation from a frequency-domain analysis has been utilized to linearize proximated with local polynomial approximation methods. The static

14
K. Kakanda et al. Ocean Engineering 266 (2022) 112589

Fig. 17. Tension variations with time at the anchor and top end for different polynomial degrees of the position vector components.

analysis predicts the resultant tension distribution as a function of the Municipal Education Commission, China (No. 19SG10), The Oceanic
arc length. The cable configuration representative graphs have been Interdisciplinary Program of Shanghai Jiao Tong University, China
constructed with the position vector components, conforming to the (SL2021PT302, SL2020PT201) are gratefully acknowledged.
catenary theory. The dynamic tension variations at the cable’s ends
verify the numerical observations.
Numerical PSM solution converges with the increasing degree of Appendix A. Power series expressions of partial derivative prod-
polynomials. Case studies highlight the influence of the pretension at ucts
the bottom end of the cable, and the mass per unit length. These two
parameters have a considerable impact on the cable configuration and
the tension variation.
Future studies should encompass the cable-seabed interaction and 𝜕𝑟𝑗 𝜕𝑟𝑖 ∑∞ ∑ ∞ ∑ 𝑚 ∑ 𝑛 ∑ 𝑝 ∑ 𝑞

assess the environmental impacts, and also address the case of 𝑢𝑗 = 𝐴1 𝑠𝑚 𝑡𝑛 (A.1)
𝜕𝑠 𝜕𝑠 𝑚=0 𝑛=0 𝑝=0 𝑞=0 𝑢=0 𝑣=0
non-harmonic wave excitations with the PSM. Special topics such as
vortex-induced vibrations, eigenvalue problems, and mooring lines 𝐴1 = (𝑚 − 𝑝 + 1)(𝑝 − 𝑢 + 1)𝑎𝑗𝑚−𝑝+1,𝑛−𝑞 𝑎𝑖𝑝−𝑢+1,𝑞−𝑣 𝜎𝑗𝑢,𝑣 , 𝑖, 𝑗 = 1, 2 (A.2)
with attached bodies should be investigated in future PSM-based ap-
plications. Further, to pave the way for a coupled/uncoupled dynamic
analysis of the line-floater system, a 3D dynamic analysis is required 𝜕𝑟𝑗 𝜕𝑟𝑗 𝜕𝑟𝑖 ∑∞ ∑ ∞ ∑ 𝑚 ∑ 𝑛 ∑ 𝑝 ∑ 𝑞
= 𝐴2 𝑠𝑚 𝑡𝑛 (A.3)
with various practical boundary conditions. 𝜕𝑡 𝜕𝑠 𝜕𝑠 𝑚=0 𝑛=0 𝑝=0 𝑞=0 𝑢=0 𝑣=0

CRediT authorship contribution statement 𝐴2 = (𝑛 − 𝑞 + 1)(𝑝 − 𝑢 + 1)(𝑢 + 1)𝑎𝑗𝑚−𝑝,𝑛−𝑞+1 𝑎𝑗𝑝−𝑢+1,𝑞−𝑣 𝑎𝑖𝑢+1,𝑣 (A.4)

Kabutakapua Kakanda: Writing, Methodology, Data curation, Re-

𝜕 2 𝑟𝑗 𝜕𝑟𝑗 𝜕𝑟𝑖 ∑∞ ∑ ∞ ∑ 𝑚 ∑ 𝑛 ∑ 𝑝 ∑ 𝑞
vision. Narakorn Srinil: Methodology, Revision, Supervision. Zhao- = 𝐴3 𝑠𝑚 𝑡𝑛 (A.5)
long Han: Methodology, Revision, Supervision. Yan Bao: Revision, 𝜕𝑠2 𝜕𝑠 𝜕𝑠 𝑚=0 𝑛=0 𝑝=0 𝑞=0 𝑢=0 𝑣=0
Supervision. Mbako Dibu: Revision. Haojie Ren: Revision. Dai Zhou:
Revision. 𝐴3 = (𝑚 − 𝑝 + 2)(𝑚 − 𝑝 + 1)(𝑝 − 𝑢 + 1)(𝑢 + 1)𝑎𝑗𝑚−𝑝+2,𝑛−𝑞 𝑎𝑗𝑝−𝑢+1,𝑞−𝑣 𝑎𝑖𝑢+1,𝑣

Declaration of competing interest (A.6)

The authors declare that they have no known competing finan- 𝜕 2 𝑟𝑗 𝜕𝑟𝑗 𝜕𝑟𝑖 ∑∞ ∑ ∞ ∑ 𝑚 ∑ 𝑛 ∑ 𝑝 ∑ 𝑞
cial interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to = 𝐴4 𝑠𝑚 𝑡𝑛 (A.7)
2
𝜕𝑡 𝜕𝑠 𝜕𝑠
influence the work reported in this paper. 𝑚=0 𝑛=0 𝑝=0 𝑞=0 𝑢=0 𝑣=0

Data availability 𝐴4 = (𝑛 − 𝑞 + 2)(𝑛 − 𝑞 + 1)(𝑝 − 𝑢 + 1)(𝑢 + 1)𝑎𝑗𝑚−𝑝,𝑛−𝑞+2 𝑎𝑗𝑝−𝑢+1,𝑞−𝑣 𝑎𝑖𝑢+1,𝑣 (A.8)

No data was used for the research described in the article. ( )2

𝜕𝑟𝑗 𝜕 2 𝑟𝑖 ∑
∞ ∑
∞ ∑
𝑚 ∑
𝑛 ∑
𝑝 ∑
𝑞
= 𝐴5 𝑠𝑚 𝑡𝑛 (A.9)
𝜕𝑠 𝜕𝑠2 𝑚=0 𝑛=0 𝑝=0 𝑞=0 𝑢=0 𝑣=0
Acknowledgments

Financial supports from the National Natural Science Foundation of 𝐴5 = (𝑚 − 𝑝 + 2)(𝑚 − 𝑝 + 1)(𝑝 − 𝑢 + 1)(𝑢 + 1)𝑎𝑖𝑚−𝑝+2,𝑛−𝑞 𝑎𝑗𝑝−𝑢+1,𝑞−𝑣 𝑎𝑗𝑢+1,𝑣
China (Nos. 52122110, 52088102, 42076210, U19B2013), Innovation
(A.10)
Program of Shanghai Municipal Education Commission, China (No.
2019-01-07-00-02-E00066), Program of Shanghai Academic/Technology
∑𝑝 ∑ 𝑞 ( )
Research Leader, China (19XD1402000), ‘‘Shuguang Program’’ sup- 1
𝐹 (𝑚, 𝑛, 𝑝, 𝑞, 𝑢, 𝑣, 𝑖, 𝑗) = −𝜉𝐴2 + 𝜉𝐴1 + 𝜂𝐴3 + 𝜇𝐴4 + 𝜂𝐴5 (A.11)
ported by Shanghai Education Development Foundation and Shanghai 2
𝑢=0 𝑣=0

15
K. Kakanda et al. Ocean Engineering 266 (2022) 112589

Appendix B. Some parameters from model formulation Fenton, J., Christian, C., et al., 1989. Inferring wave properties from sub-surface
pressure data. In: Ninth Australasian Conference on Coastal and Ocean Engineering,
1989: Preprints of Papers. Institution of Engineers, Australia, p. 382.
Figueiredo, P.A., Brójo, F.M., 2017. Parametric study of multicomponent mooring lines
𝐸𝐴0 at catenary form in terms of anchoring cost. Energy Procedia 136, 456–462.
𝜂= (B.1)
𝑚̄ 0 Filipich, C.P., Rosales, M.B., 2002. A straightforward approach to solve ordinary
nonlinear differential systems. Mec. Comput. (1), 1549–1568.
𝜋𝐷02 𝜌𝑤 𝐶𝐴 Hall, M., Goupee, A., 2015. Validation of a lumped-mass mooring line model with
𝜇= (B.2) DeepCwind semisubmersible model test data. Ocean Eng. 104, 590–603.
4𝑚0
Housseine, C.O., Monroy, C., Bigot, F., Neuilly-sur Seine, F., 2015. A new linearization
′
𝜌𝑤 𝐷𝑜 𝐶𝐷𝑛 method for vectorial Morison equation. In: 30th International Workshop on Water
𝜁= (B.3) Waves and Floating Bodies, Bristol. UK, pp. 12–15.
2𝑚̄ 0
Khan, N.U., Ansari, K.A., 1986. On the dynamics of a multicomponent mooring line.
( ′ ′
)
𝜌𝑤 𝐷𝑜 𝐶𝐷𝑡 − 𝐶𝐷𝑛 Comput. Struct. 22 (3), 311–334.
𝜉= (B.4) Kim, N.-I., Lee, J.-H., Kim, M.-Y., 2005. Exact dynamic stiffness matrix of non-symmetric
2𝑚̄ 0 thin-walled beams on elastic foundation using power series method. Adv. Eng.
Softw. 36 (8), 518–532.
References Kurian, V.J., Yassir, M.A., Ng, C.Y., Harahap, I.S., 2013. Nonlinear dynamic analysis of
multi-component mooring lines incorporating line-seabed interaction. Res. J. Appl.
Aamo, O.M., Fossen, T.I., 2000. Finite element modelling of mooring lines. Math. Sci. Eng. Technol. 6 (8), 1428–1445.
Comput. Simulation 53, 415–422. Kurulay, M., Bayram, M., 2009. A novel power series method for solving second order
Aamo, O.M., Fossen, T.I., 2001. Finite element modelling of moored vessels. Math. partial differential equations. Eur. J. Pure Appl. Math. 2 (2), 268–277.
Comput. Model. Dyn. Syst. 7 (1), 47–75. Liao, S., 2012. Homotopy Analysis Method in Nonlinear Differential Equations. Springer.
Adomian, G., 1988. A review of the decomposition method in applied mathematics. J. Matulea, I.C., Năstase, A., Tălmaciu, N., Slămnoiu, G., Gonçalves-Coelho, A.M., 2008.
Math. Anal. Appl. 135 (2), 501–544. On the equilibrium configuration of mooring and towing cables. Appl. Ocean Res.
Balzola, R., 1999. Mooring Line Damping in Very Large Water Depths (Ph.D. thesis). 30, 81–91.
Massachusetts Institute of Technology. Mavrakos, S., Papazoglou, V., Triantafyllou, M., Hatjigeorgiou, J., 1996. Deep water
Biazar, J., Ilie, M., Khoshkenar, A., 2005. A new approach to the solution of the prey mooring dynamics. Mar. Struct. 9 (2), 181–209.
and predator problem and comparison of the results with the Adomian method. Molins, C., Trubat, P., Gironella, X., Campos, A., 2015. Design optimization for a
Appl. Math. Comput. 171 (1), 486–491. truncated catenary mooring system for scale model test. J. Mar. Sci. Eng. 3 (4),
Bishop, C.T., Donelan, M.A., 1987. Measuring waves with pressure transducers. Coast. 1362–1381.
Eng. 11 (4), 309–328. Nuseir, A.S., 2012. Power series solution for nonlinear system of partial differential
Borgman, L.E., 1967. Random hydrodynamic forces on objects. Ann. Math. Stat. 37–51. equations. Appl. Math. Sci. 6 (104), 5147–5159.
Ćatipović, I., Alujević, N., Rudan, S., Slapničar, V., 2021. Numerical modelling for Qaisi, M.I., 1997. A power series solution for the non-linear vibration of beams. J.
synthetic fibre mooring lines taking elongation and contraction into account. J. Sound Vib. 199 (4), 587–594.
Mar. Sci. Eng. 9 (4), 417. Qaisi, M.I., Abu-Hilal, M., 2001. Analysis of a forced strongly non-linear two-degree-
Chatjigeorgiou, I.K., Mavrakos, S.A., 2010. The 3D nonlinear dynamics of catenary of-freedom system by means of the power-series method. J. Sound Vib. 241 (4),
slender structures for marine applications. In: Nonlinear Dynamics. INTECH Open 635–642.
Access Publisher, Vukovar, Croatia, pp. 173–198. Tang, S., 2017. Dynamic Analysis of Deepwater Multi-Segment Mooring Lines Using
Chen, L., Basu, B., Nielsen, S.R., 2018. A coupled finite difference mooring dynamics Modal Superposition (Ph.D. thesis).
model for floating offshore wind turbine analysis. Ocean Eng. 162, 304–315. Triantafyllou, M.S., 1990. Cable Mechanics with Marine Applications. Department of
Choi, H.-S., Kim, J.-Y., Ji, D.-H., Son, H.-J., Tran, N.-H., et al., 2016. A study on the Ocean Engineering, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge, MA, USA.
dynamics of marine umbilical cable for underwater vehicle. In: AETA 2015: Recent Vineesh, M., Sabu, N., Manju, P., 2014. Finite element analysis of mooring cable. Int.
Advances in Electrical Engineering and Related Sciences. Springer, pp. 575–588. J. Eng. Res. Appl. (IJERA) 13, 13–18, ISSN, (January).
Fairén, V., López, V., Conde, L., 1988. Power series approximation to solutions of Xu, K., Larsen, K., Shao, Y., Zhang, M., Gao, Z., Moan, T., 2021. Design and comparative
nonlinear systems of differential equations. Amer. J. Phys. 56 (1), 57–61. analysis of alternative mooring systems for floating wind turbines in shallow water
Fenton, J.D., 1987. Polynomial approximation and water waves. In: Coastal Engineering with emphasis on ultimate limit state design. Ocean Eng. 219, 108377.
1986. pp. 193–207. Yang, W.S., 2007. Hydrodynamic Analysis of Mooring Lines Based on Optical Tracking
Experiments. Texas A&M University.

16