Ecole Centrale Nantes

Experimental Hydrodynamics

Lab Work

Station-keeping of a
Floating Offshore Wind Turbine

Álvaro Rodrı́guez Mateo, Rea Vickovic, Fiacha McCrudden,

Mridul Mehra

M-TECH HOE
2023-2024
Contents
List of Figures 4

List of Tables 5

1 Introduction 7

2 Methods 8
2.1 Presentation of the test campaign . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
2.1.1 Wave tank . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
2.2 Studied model . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
2.3 SIL : Software -In-the-Loop method . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
2.4 Measurements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
2.5 Tests to be conducted . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
2.5.1 Perform and analyse decay test . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
2.5.2 Estimation of platform motions transfer functions . . . . . . . . . . 12
2.5.3 Influence of the rotor loads . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14

3 Results 15
3.1 Decay tests . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15
3.1.1 Actuator with a force of 8N . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15
3.1.2 Actuator with a force of 25N . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17
3.2 Estimation of the platform transfer functions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18
3.3 Regular waves . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19
3.3.1 Transfer functions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20
3.3.2 Calculation of the Kc number . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21
3.3.3 Linear and Non-linear Motions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22
3.4 Irregular waves . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23
3.4.1 Obtaining the RAOs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25
3.4.2 Irregular waves RAOs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27
3.5 Influence of rotor loads . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 28
3.5.1 Computed Spectra . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 29
3.5.2 Irregular waves + Wind RAOs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31

4 Discussion 33
4.1 Decay tests . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 33
4.1.1 Non-linear damping . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 33
4.1.2 Surge-Pitch coupling . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 33

2
 4.2 Platform transfer function . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35
4.3 Irregular Waves . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 37

5 Conclusion 38

3
List of Figures
1 Hydrodynamics and Ocean Engineering tank . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
2 Wave Tank . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
3 Main elements of the NREL 5MW DeepCWind semisubmersible FOWT . . 9
4 Bird-eye view of the wind turbine model in the wave tank. . . . . . . . . . 10
5 CAD view of the nacelle assembly, with the three thrusters, the masses and
the Qualysis tracking balls . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
6 Pitch decay test for an imposed force of 8N by the actuator . . . . . . . . . 15
7 Frequency domain of the pitch decay test for an imposed force of 8N by
the actuator . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16
8 Pitch decay test for an imposed force of 25N by the actuator . . . . . . . . 17
9 Frequency domain of the pitch decay test for an imposed force of 25N by
the actuator . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17
10 Theoretical pitch transfer function . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18
11 Theoretical pitch transfer function with frequency in Hz . . . . . . . . . . 18
12 Regular Wave 1- Pitch Amplitude . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19
13 Regular Wave 2- Pitch Amplitude . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19
14 Regular Wave 3- Pitch Amplitude . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19
15 Regular Wave 4- Pitch Amplitude . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19
16 Amplitude of the surge transfer function . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20
17 Amplitude of the heave transfer function . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20
18 Amplitude of the pitch transfer function . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21
19 Amplitude of the bending moment transfer function . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21
20 Bending moment in terms of ω and 2ω . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22
21 Motions in pitch in terms of ω and 2ω . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23
22 Motions in surge in terms of ω and 2ω . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23
23 Motions in Heave in terms of ω and 2ω . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23
24 Wave Spectrum . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24
25 Wave Spectrum - Log scale . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24
26 Pitch Spectrum . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24
27 Pitch Spectrum - Log scale . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24
28 Surge Spectrum . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24
29 Surge Spectrum - Log scale . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24
30 Heave Spectrum . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24
31 Heave Spectrum - Log scale . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24
32 Bending moment Spectrum . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25
33 Bending moment Spectrum - Log scale . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25

4
 34 Pitch Coherence . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26
35 Heave Coherence . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26
36 Wave-Pitch Spectrum . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26
37 Wave-Pitch Spectrum - Log scale . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26
38 Wave-Heave Spectrum . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27
39 Wave-Heave Spectrum - Log scale . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27
40 Pitch RAO . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27
41 Surge RAO . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27
42 Heave RAO . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27
43 Bending moment RAO . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27
44 Wind Speed . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 28
45 Thrust . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 29
46 Wind Spectrum . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 29
47 Wind Spectrum - Log scale . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 29
48 Thrust Spectrum . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 29
49 Thrust Spectrum - Log scale . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 29
50 Surge Spectrum with wind . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 30
51 Surge Spectrum with wind - Log scale . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 30
52 Pitch Spectrum with wind . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 30
53 Pitch Spectrum with wind - Log scale . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 30
54 Heave Spectrum with wind . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 30
55 Heave Spectrum with wind- Log scale . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 30
56 Bending moment Spectrum with wind . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31
57 Bending moment Spectrum with wind - Log scale . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31
58 Surge RAO with wind . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31
59 Heave RAO with wind . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 32
60 Pitch RAO with wind . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 32
61 Bending moment RAO with wind . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 32
62 Surge motion for an imposed force of 25N by the actuator . . . . . . . . . 34
63 Surge RAO for different waves . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35
64 Pitch RAO for different waves . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 36
65 Bending moment RAO for different waves . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 36
66 Heave RAO for different waves . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 37

List of Tables
1 Main characteristic of the studied FOWT at full scale . . . . . . . . . . . 10

5
2 Summary of the measurements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
3 Regular waves . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13
4 Regular waves . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13
5 Pitch natural period and frequency . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15
6 Platform motion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20
7 Kc Number . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22

6
1 Introduction
Floating Offshore Wind Turbines (FOWT) are becoming a more and more mature tech-
nology, and the first commercial floating wind farms have been installed in the past few
years. Most rotors are multi-MW horizontal axis rotors, and several platform concepts
are studied today for deployment at commercial scale:

• The Semi-submersible platform

• The spar platform platform

• The Tension Leg Platform

Each of these concepts are stabilised by either a large water plane area, a low centre of
gravity or taught mooring lines. Their behaviour at sea can be very different one from
another.

The aim of this lab work is to study the station-keeping performances of a 5 MW FOWT
supported by a semi-submersible platform in realistic environmental conditions. The
considered wind turbine is the NREL 5 MW turbine. The floater was designed during the
DeepCWind Consortium. The model used in the experiments is designed at scale 1:32.
The model respects the Froude similarity on:

• The hydrodynamic loads;

• The aerodynamic loads;

• The mass, inertias and position of the centre of gravity;

• The rigid response (in particular, the natural frequencies in surge, sway, heave, roll,
pitch and yaw);

Therefore, the objectives of this experimental lab-work is to:

• Characterise the model and its natural periods

• Characterise the global response of the wind turbine in regular and irregular waves

• Include and study the effects of the aerodynamic loads on the response of the FOWT

7
2 Methods

2.1 Presentation of the test campaign

2.1.1 Wave tank

These experiments will take place in the Hydrodynamics and Ocean Engineering tank of
the LHEEA lab in Centrale Nantes, as seen in Figure 1.

Figure 1: Hydrodynamics and Ocean Engineering tank

In the following Figure 2. one can observe the dimensions of the tank, where the tank
has a 5 m depth, 30 m width and approximately 50 m long.

Figure 2: Wave Tank

8
2.2 Studied model
For the following lab we are going to study a 5 MW semi-submersible Floating Wind
Turbine, which has been designed at scale 1/32. The wind turbine specifications is based
on the NREL 5 MW Reference Wind Turbine, where the main dimensions at said scale
are given in Figure 3.

A floating wind turbine consists of various components, such as:

• The Floater:

❏ Hull

❏ Ballast

❏ Transition piece between the foater and the wind turbine tower.

• The wind turbine:

❏ Tower

❏ Nacelle

❏ Rotor (Hub + Blades)

• The mooring system:

❏ Fairleads

❏ Anchors points

❏ Mooring lines

Figure 3: Main elements of the NREL 5MW DeepCWind semisubmersible FOWT

9
The model is installed at 17.33 m from the wave maker. One can observe in the following
table 1. important parameters for the floating wind turbine at full scale.

Table 1: Main characteristic of the studied FOWT at full scale

Mass 1.39 × 107 kg

Draft 20 m
Freeboard 10 m
Distance inter upper columns 50 m
Distance mainupper column 28.9 m
Diameter main column 6.5 m
Diameter upper column 12 m
Diameter base column 24 m
Diamater braces 1.6 m
Length upper column 26 m
Length base column 6m
Hub height over MSL 90 m

Further, the mooring system aims at limiting horizontal motions, such as Surge, Sway and
Yaw, and also it is originally composed by three catenary main lines in steel chains. This
mooring setup is not reproduced in the wave tank where a simpler aerial mooring made
of four lines (spring, rope and load cell) is used. This setup produces similar stiffness in
the horizontal plane, for surge and sway motions.

One can observe a bird-eye view of the layout in Figure 4. Here the wavemaker is on the
left and the absorbing beach is on the right. Also, origin of the coordinates is located at
17.33 m from the wavemaker.

Figure 4: Bird-eye view of the wind turbine model in the wave tank.

10
2.3 SIL : Software -In-the-Loop method
Regarding the experiment the rotor is not physically present: a thruster is employed to
represent the aerodynamic loadings, which in this case a set of drone thrusters rotating
at high RPM and it is located on top of the wind turbine tower. The aerodynamic thrust
imposed by the thruster is computed in real time by a numerical solver, based on:

• A numerical model of wind fields and of the rotor reaction (aerodynamics, blades
bending, generator control, . . . )

• The measurements of the turbine motions, induced by the waves and the rotor
action.

This hybrid method allows to avoid issues with the scaling of the aerodynamic loads.

In Figure 5. one can observe a CAD view experimental wind turbine Rotor-Nacelle-
Assembly (RNA).

Figure 5: CAD view of the nacelle assembly, with the three thrusters, the masses and the
Qualysis tracking balls

2.4 Measurements
Finally, in Table 2. below we have the measured data that will be used in this lab work.

Table 2: Summary of the measurements

Measurand Sensor
Free surface elevation Resistive wave gauges
Platform motion Qualysis tracking
Nacelle motion Qualysis tracking
Mooring tensions 1-component load cell
6D force at the tower base 6-component load cell

11
2.5 Tests to be conducted
The experiment is divided into 4 parts starting with a decay test, estimation of platform
motions transfer functions, influence of the rotor loads and scaling up the results.

2.5.1 Perform and analyse decay test

The main objective of this test is to estimate the natural period in pitch and hydrodynamic
damping of the system.

The test is conducted on 2 load conditions with 8N and 25N of force. Rotary drone
actuators are run for a very short while and stopped to produce the load. This makes the
system moves at its natural period for the selected degree of freedom restricted by the
mooring arrangements. By doing the decay test, one can obtain estimations of natural
periods, damping and added mass.

Therefore one can calculate δ and ξ from the coefficients of the fitted exponential:

f (t) = Aexp · eBexp ∗t (1)

One can obtain the natural period and for the structure by using the following equation:

√
s · Tm = Tr (2)

where:

• s is the scale of the model (1/32)

• Tm is the natural period of the model

• Tr is the natural period of the real structure.

2.5.2 Estimation of platform motions transfer functions

Objectives of this part was to determine the platform motions transfer functions to the
wave elevation and to determine the sensitivity of the computed motions RAOs to different
wave elevation signals (regular waves and irregular waves).

In order to test accurately the motions of the platform, we need to set wave parameters
that match the ones of waves encountered in the real scale. Usually gravity waves have
periods between 2 and 25 seconds. In our case, we are going to test 4 different waves of
periods 6.5s, 9s, 11.5s and 15.5s at full scale.

12
The input given to the wavemaker will be the wave periods and the amplitude of the wave.
This will of course be in model scale, meaning that we need to calculate the different wave
parameters for the 4 waves. Equation 2. will be used to obtain the period of the wave in
model scale. In the Table 3. one can observe the obtained values.

Table 3: Regular waves

Period
Real Scale Model Scale
T1 6.5 s 1.15 s
T2 9s 1.59 s
T3 11.5 s 2.03 s
T4 15.5 s 2.74 s

Following this, one can obtain the wavelength using Eqt.3.

g · T2
λ= (3)
2π

Finally we can obtain the wave amplitude by using Eqt.4; in our case, the steepness of
the wave will be 3%.

λ·ϵ
A= (4)
2

In the Table 4. one can observe all the calculated parameters for the model scale that
will be used in order to conduct the experiment.

Table 4: Regular waves

Model Scale
Wave Length Wave Height Wave Amplitude
λ1 2.06 m H1 0.06 m A1 0.03 m
λ2 3.95 m H2 0.12 m A2 0.06 m
λ3 6.45 m H3 0.19 m A3 0.10 m
λ4 11.72 m H4 0.35 m A4 0.18 m

Once the values were set, we could proceed to input the corresponding values of Wave
Height and Wave Amltiude from Table 4. into the wavemaker, for regular waves.

13
After each of the 4 wave types were done, we had to let the tank rest between the tests, in
order to identify any surge natural motion. We could proceed with the next experiment
when the platform surge motion had an amplitude less then 2 mm.

After the 4 regular waves were tested, an irregular sea state was created with the help of
the wave-maker. Storm conditions were applied with an Hs=5m and Tp=13s.

This allowed us to do the comparison in the transfer function for different sea states.

2.5.3 Influence of the rotor loads

Objective for this part of the lab was to use the Software-In-the-Loop method, called
SoftWind, to include he aerodynamic thrust in the analysis of the response of the FOWT.
We also had to check the influence of the rotor loads on Floating wind turbine motions
and on tower base loads.

For the experimental procedure, the same irregular waves tested before were set to interact
with the structure and the rotor was switched on. The rotor created then wind with a
speed of about 12.5 m/s. This test allowed us the check the effects induced by the thrust
to the structure.

14
3 Results

3.1 Decay tests

As said before, a decay test will be performed, where the actuator will be activated with
an imposed force of 8N for the first test and 25N for the second. From the motion of the
model one can obtain the pitch natural period.

Once this is done the post-processing of the data will allow us the plot the behaviour of
the structure.

3.1.1 Actuator with a force of 8N

In Figure 6. one can see the evolution of the pitch through time. With the use of Eqt.(still
to put) one can apply an exponential fit which will represent the linear damping (ξ). It
can be seen that the decay will match quite accurately the linear damping function.

Figure 6: Pitch decay test for an imposed force of 8N by the actuator

Using this plot, one can also obtain the pitch natural period of the model, and subse-
quently of the real structure, by using Eq. 2.

The value of interest obtained through this are displayed in the next table:

Table 5: Pitch natural period and frequency

Model Scale Real scale

Period 4.48 s 25.34 s
Frequency 0.22 Hz 0.04 Hz

From Figure 6. we could see how the structure moves mainly at one period, but there
is also movement at a different and larger period. A Fast Fourier Transform can be

15
applied in order to change from a time domain to frequency domain. Here we can see the
frequencies at which the model is moving.

Figure.7 illustrates the fourier modulus of the signal obtained from pitch in the decay
test. It can be seen that this investigation determines that the natural frequency of the
system is at 0.22Hz, determined from the frequency at which the peak in the modulus is
observed. A point to note is that a secondary peak is present at a lower frequency than
that of the natural frequency.

Figure 7: Frequency domain of the pitch decay test for an imposed force of 8N by the
actuator

16
3.1.2 Actuator with a force of 25N

The same plots can be obtained for the second test performed, when the force imposed
by the actuator is 25N.

In Figure 8. one can see how the pitch will move will have the same period as before,
confirming that the natural period was correctly obtained. As expected, the motions
are bigger since more force was applied. The main difference in this case is that the
exponential fit is much less accurate, meaning that the damping is clearly not linear.

Figure 8: Pitch decay test for an imposed force of 25N by the actuator

If we apply the Fast Fourier Transform (Figure 9.) one can see how again the model
moves mainly at one frequency. In this case the spike at lower frequency is bigger and it
might impact the behaviour of the structure.

Figure 9: Frequency domain of the pitch decay test for an imposed force of 25N by the
actuator

17
3.2 Estimation of the platform transfer functions
In the next part of the lab we are going to obtain the platform transfer functions to the
wave elevation as well as determine the sensitivity of the computed motions RAOs to
different wave elevation signal. In order to accomplish this we are going to test a number
of regular and irregular waves.

In order to evaluate the quality of the results obtained from the experimental setup, the
theoretical pitch transfer function over a range of frequencies.

Figure 10: Theoretical pitch transfer function

It can be seen that the transfer function of the FOWT is maximum at a ω = 1.4 rad.
This corresponds to a frequency of 0.22 Hz, which is observed as the natural frequency
of the FOWT from the decay test. This plot can be compared to the results from other
tests. Another interesting point to see from this plot is the fact that the transfer function
is non zero at ω = 0, the theoretical equation derived from theqequation of motion obtains
x0
a transfer function of f0
= k1 . The peak also occurs at ω0 = k
m
.

Figure 11: Theoretical pitch transfer function with frequency in Hz

18
As mentioned before the peak of the theoretical transfer function occurs at the natural
frequency of the FOWT. Figure.11 makes it easier to see that this peak occurs at the 0.22
Hz determined to be the natural frequency.

3.3 Regular waves

As said before, 4 regular waves were tested. The parameters used can be seen in Tables
3 and 4. From each of these waves one can do a Fourier analysis for the each degree of
freedom. Since the waves only move in the x-direction, we will only obtain motions for
the surge, heave and pitch. A Fourier analysis for the bending moment of the tower and
the generated wave will also be computed.

This will give us the amplitude spectrum, here only the pitch is shown, but it will be
obtained for all the motions commented before. The numerical values for all the spectrum
are available in Table 6.

Figure 12: Regular Wave 1- Pitch Amplitude

Figure 13: Regular Wave 2- Pitch Amplitude

Figure 14: Regular Wave 3- Pitch Amplitude

Figure 15: Regular Wave 4- Pitch Amplitude

19
From figure.12-15 it can be seen that the Fourier analysis results in a single frequency
obtaining a non-zero amplitude. In this case it is the frequency of the incoming wave.
As said before, this will be obtained for all the degrees of freedom. The values can be
observed below:

Table 6: Platform motion

Wave Surge Heave Pitch Bend. Mom.

A.(m) ϕ(rad) A.(m) ϕ(rad) A.(m) ϕ(rad) A.(deg) ϕ(rad) A.(N.m) ϕ(rad)
Wave 1 0.032 -0.88 0.005 1.88 0.001 -2.19 0.119 1.71 10.53 1.64
Wave 2 0.058 0.054 0.016 -1.86 0.008 -0,27 0.599 2.64 11.66 2.33
Wave 3 0.098 0.024 0.054 -1.65 0.027 -0.15 0.991 1.64 3.73 1.99
Wave 4 0.18 0.54 0.14 -1.05 0.09 -0.47 1.254 -0.16 17.17 -0.24

3.3.1 Transfer functions

From this one can obtain the amplitude of the transfer function for each regular wave.
This is done by dividing the amplitude of the motion by the amplitude of the wave,
meaning that the transfer function will be different for each degree of freedom. The phase
of the transfer function is obtained by subtracting the phase of the wave to the phase of
the motion.

In the following figures, one can look at the amplitude of the transfer function for surge,
pitch and the bending moment. The phase, while computed, it is not shown in the report.

Figure 16: Amplitude of the surge transfer function

Figure 17: Amplitude of the heave transfer function

20
 Figure 18: Amplitude of the pitch transfer function

Figure 19: Amplitude of the bending moment transfer function

The transfer function shows us how the structure responds to different wave frequencies.
As one can see, the surge response will be higher, as the waves grow bigger. For the pitch
we observe a similar behaviour for the first two waves, after that the response decreases
for the higher frequency waves. Lastly, for the bending moment, the response is very big
for the first two tests, after that it reaches a minimum for T=2.03s; after this we can see
a low increase. As expected, the heave transfer function increases almost in a linear wave.

This transfer function will be later compared with the ones obtained in the following
experiments, and shown in the conclusion.

3.3.2 Calculation of the Kc number

This difference in behaviour of the body is something that we expect when the wave
height increases. The size of the structure always remain the same, meaning that for the
different waves amplitudes it will act as a small or big body. As we have learned over the
semester, this will create change in the response of the sea structure being studied.

The KC number is the parameter that will help us identify the behaviour of the floater.
It can be computed with the following formula:

A
Kc = 2π · (5)
D

Knowing that the base column has a diameter of 12 meters in real scale, this is easily
calculated.

21
 Table 7: Kc Number

Wave amplitude Kc number

Wave 1 0.03m 0.50
Wave 2 0.06m 1.00
Wave 3 0.10m 1.68
Wave 4 0.16m 3.02

As can be seen from the table above, for each wave tested the FOWT falls under the case
of large body assumptions according to the KCs determined

3.3.3 Linear and Non-linear Motions

The linear and non-linear motions of the FOWT is investigated for the case of each wave
tested. It is generally seen that the non-linear effects will be small, but increasing with
the period of the waves.

As we saw in the decay test, the non-linearities will occur when the motions are big,
which is not this case. To study these non linear effects we compute the second harmonic
response for 2ω as well. In the figures the results for ω and 2ω are plotted together.

Figure 20: Bending moment in terms of ω and 2ω

Figure.23 illustrates an increasing trend with frequency. all values of the 2ω response are
not present in this plot.

For the Second harmonic response the bending moment show a negligible effect as the
frequency of the interacting waves lies away from the natural frequency of the module but
due to irregularities induced by the small moments under pitch movement and some non
linear interaction, there is a small bending moment at 1.6s and 2.8s. Non rigidness of the
tower can also induce strain on the module at these specific periods of wave.

22
 Figure 21: Motions in pitch in terms of ω and 2ω

For the case of pitch an increasing trend is seen in the ω and 2ω. However, the order of
magnitude of 2ω is negligible compared to the ω results.

Figure 22: Motions in surge in terms of ω and 2ω

The same can be said for the case of surge as in the case of pitch. The main difference is
the shape of the curve obtained for the ω data. Again the 2ω is negligible relative to the
ω.

Figure 23: Motions in Heave in terms of ω and 2ω

3.4 Irregular waves

As explained before, an irregular wave set was also tested. The parameters of the wave
are visible in the methods section. From these simulations, we will compute the transfer
functions for the platform and compare it with the obtained for the regular waves.

23
Before obtaining this, we will need to compute the Power Spectral Density for the motions
of interest. This will through the Welch method, and one will obtain the following results:

Figure 24: Wave Spectrum Figure 25: Wave Spectrum - Log scale

Figure 26: Pitch Spectrum Figure 27: Pitch Spectrum - Log scale

Figure 28: Surge Spectrum Figure 29: Surge Spectrum - Log scale

Figure 30: Heave Spectrum Figure 31: Heave Spectrum - Log scale

24
 Figure 33: Bending moment Spectrum - Log
Figure 32: Bending moment Spectrum
scale

This figures will give us some important information, especially concerning the sea state.
In Figure 24, one can see which will be the main frequencies of the irregular waves. Clearly
most of them will have frequencies between 0.4 and 0.7 Hz.

For the pitch spectrum (Figure 26), the plot is very similar to the one obtained in the
decay test. We can see that the energy will be mainly located at its natural frequency
(0.22Hz). Between 0.4Hz and 0.7Hz we also see a small increase in energy, this is clearly
due to the waves. Finally there is a small peak at a frequency of 0.05Hz; as it will be
explained in the discussion, it comes from the surge motion.

Figure 28, shows the surge spectrum. The higher peak is located at around 0.05 Hz which
is it’s natural frequency. Then we also see small energy distributed at the waves and pitch
natural frequency.

Figure 30, shows the heave spectrum. The heave motion show 3 peaks as differ from other
motions. The position of the three peaks are 0.1Hz, 0.3Hz and 0.5Hz with the max heave
at the 0.3Hz which is the heave natural frequency.

Finally, Figure 32. displays the spectrum for the bending moment. As we can see, the
effects of the wave are important for this parameter, given the high amount of energy
encountered in the waves frequencies. Regardless, the peak will occur at the pitch natural
frequency; which is the expected result, since we are analysing the bending moment around
the y-axis.

3.4.1 Obtaining the RAOs

Before obtaining the transfer function for the different motions, one need to compute the
cross-spectra between waves and motion and the coherence. In order to reduce the size
of the report, only the pitch and heave coherence cross-spectra will be shown.

25
 Figure 34: Pitch Coherence

Figure 35: Heave Coherence

The correlation of pitch motion and waves is understood from the value of coherence
calculated (Figure 34 and 35). The maximum coherence is seen in the range of 0.4Hz to
1Hz for the pitch motion reaching almost 1. The max energy of the incoming waves lies
in the same frequency range.

It is seen that in this range the structure responds strongly to the waves. The main aim is
to study the response of the structure in the frequency range where the motions are more
influenced by the waves in order to prevent resonance and hence the RAOs are computed
for the coherence bigger than 0.7. The Wave-motion cross spectrum is used to calculate
these parameter, and in Figure 36 it can be seen how the response mainly occurs at the
frequency range between 0.4Hz and 1Hz.

From Figure 35, it is seen that there is a high coherence for heave at the range 0Hz-0.2Hz
as well differ from the pitch coherence.

Figure 36: Wave-Pitch Spectrum Figure 37: Wave-Pitch Spectrum - Log scale

Wave pitch cross spectra in Figure 36 shows a dominant response of the waves on the
pitch in the same range where they are highly correlated. A small peak at the natural
pitch frequency can be seen before the motion is influenced by higher energy of waves
distributed in this range.

26
 Figure 38: Wave-Heave Spectrum Figure 39: Wave-Heave Spectrum - Log scale

The figure 38 shows the correlation of the waves and heave motion. It is seen that the
heave has a major response where wave energy is distributed but the peak is achieved
close to 0.5Hz which corresponds to one of the peak as seen in the heave spectra. The
interesting observation in this figure is that the smallest peak in the heave spectra at
0.1Hz can be seen in this cross spectra; as it will be explained in the discussion.

3.4.2 Irregular waves RAOs

With the coherence and the cross spectra obtained the RAOs can now be calculated. In
the following figures the magnitude of the obtained RAOs are visible:

Figure 40: Pitch RAO

Figure 41: Surge RAO

Figure 42: Heave RAO

Figure 43: Bending moment RAO

27
Now that the RAO/transfer functions have been computed, one can see the behaviour of
the floater in a sea of irregular waves. As said before, these motions will only be computed
when the coherence is higher that 0.7.

The values obtained will be compared and discuss further on, yet from an initial analysis,
one can observe that they are quite similar to the ones obtained in regular waves, taking
into account that these are as a function of frequency.

3.5 Influence of rotor loads

The results presented below will describe the behavior observed while investigating the
FOWT model with the rotors engaged. The irregular waves routine will be the same,
meaning that any changes will be caused directly by rotor loads.

The wind tested will fluctuate between 10 and 20 m/s. This velocity will be recorded at
each time step, and can be visualized in Figure 44.

Figure 44: Wind Speed

The wind speed is going to give a thrust to the structure. This is what will act as the
aerodynamic loads that will affect the real structure. This thrust will also oscillate, and
will be closely related to the wind speed, but also influenced by the pitch angle. Equation
6 gives us that relationship.

T = T0 − B θ̇ (6)

where T0 is the baseline thrust, B is the damping coefficient and θ is the pitch angle.

The thrust will also be recorded at each time step, and as seen in Figure 45. it will vary
between 2 and 8 newtons.

28
 Figure 45: Thrust

3.5.1 Computed Spectra

In order to see how this new force will affect the different motions of the body, one can
compute the corresponding spectra. The wind and thrust will also have their correspond-
ing spectrum. As said before the waves won’t change, meaning that the its spectrum will
remain the same.

Figure 46: Wind Spectrum Figure 47: Wind Spectrum - Log scale

Figure 48: Thrust Spectrum Figure 49: Thrust Spectrum - Log scale

In Figure 46. and 48. one can observe the spectrum for the wind and thrust. From
there it is clear that they both operate at very low frequencies. Here we can see how the
wind isn’t affected by the motions of the body, but the thrust is. The wind has a smooth
spectrum that decreases rapidly after it’s peak; while the thrust has small ’bumps’ at the
pitch natural frequency and at the waves frequencies.

29
Further on, the motions of the floater where computed.

Figure 51: Surge Spectrum with wind - Log

Figure 50: Surge Spectrum with wind
scale

Figure 53: Pitch Spectrum with wind - Log

Figure 52: Pitch Spectrum with wind
scale

Figure 55: Heave Spectrum with wind- Log

Figure 54: Heave Spectrum with wind
scale

30
Figure 56: Bending moment Spectrum with Figure 57: Bending moment Spectrum with
wind wind - Log scale

The effects generated by the thrust to the motions of the body are clearly visible in the
obtained spectra.

Figure 50 shows us the surge spectrum, and as we can see, there is no visible difference
between the one computed before. Since the surge and wind natural frequency are very
similar, the behaviour won’t show any discernible change. The magnitude will increase
though, meaning that we can expect the same motion, but with bigger amplitude.

The pitch motion visible in Figure 60 has some changes because of the added wind. The
magnitude of the peak has decreased, but now the energy is more distributed (at the
waves frequencies). One can also see a small peak at a very low frequency, caused by the
wind.

Figure 54 represents the heave motion spectrum and as compared to the case without
wind there is negligible change in behaviour but shows slight decrease in magnitude.

Finally, Figure 56. shows the spectrum of the bending moment. Clearly now it’s going to
be highly affected by the waves generated and the wind. Like it happened with the pitch,
the peak has decrease in magnitude, but the energy is more distributed.

3.5.2 Irregular waves + Wind RAOs

Following this, the RAOs will be computed. As we did previously, the coherence and
cross spectra will need to be computed. In order to reduce the size of the report, only the
RAOs magnitude will be shown.

Figure 58: Surge RAO with wind

31
 Figure 59: Heave RAO with wind

Figure 60: Pitch RAO with wind

Figure 61: Bending moment RAO with wind

As expected, the coherence is very similar for both irregular waves tests, meaning that
we will obtain the RAOs in the same frequencies. This transfer functions will be analysed
and compared with the previous cases in the discussion.

32
4 Discussion

4.1 Decay tests

From the decay tests two main things need to analysed. First is the change in the damping
behaviour when different forces are imposed in the actuator. Secondly, the existence of a
small spike in the frequency domain of the tests.

4.1.1 Non-linear damping

As seen in Figure.6 and 8, the damping is quite different for both cases. Neither of them
have a totally linear damping, but for an imposed force of 8N it is much closer than for
25N. This is something that can happen due to different reasons.

To begin, the structure is located in a fluid medium, the interaction between model and
water can induce some non-linear effects due to turbulence, viscosity or the generation of
waves due to the motion. When the force applied by the actuator increases in the x-axis,
the pitch angle also increases. A larger angle in pitch allows the rotational velocity to
become larger than in the case of a small pitch angle inducing vortex shedding on the base
columns of the structure. This is the reason behind the non-linear damping effects seen
in figure.8 before the pitch angle reduces sufficiently to achieve linear damping affects as
is the case in the 8N test.

Another reason that could be behind the non-linear damping is the structure non-linearities.
As we saw in the lab, the tower connecting the floater with the nacelle, was vibrating a
lot. This could well be affecting the damping and generating the non-linearities.

In order to accurately find the reason why this is happening more test should be performed
with the use of different configurations.

4.1.2 Surge-Pitch coupling

As said before, when we look at Figures 7. and 9. one can clearly see the existence of
a small frequency on the behaviour of the model. This will happen due to the coupling
between surge and pitch.

From this experiment, we can expect that the floater will oscillate in the y-axis, around
its center of gravity. The main issue here is that the imposed force by the actuator will
also generate the structure to move in the x direction (surge). The surge will also oscillate
at its natural frequency, and as expected it will have bigger motion as the imposed force
is bigger. In Figure 62. one can see the x motion for the second test performed (25N).

33
 Figure 62: Surge motion for an imposed force of 25N by the actuator

While not very visible in the plot, this motion will have a natural period of around 20
second, meaning that its natural frequency will be 0.05Hz. If we again look at Figures
7. and 9. we can see how the small spike occurs at around 0.05Hz, which means that is
created by the surge motion.

Another interesting thing we can see from the surge motion plot is that it has small
oscillations inside the big ones. This is due to the position of the sensor in the floater.
Since the pitch will oscillate around it’s center of rotation, the sensor will also move in
the x direction, creating this small oscillations. While this is not a big issue, a way to
address this would be to put the sensor in the center of rotation.

34
4.2 Platform transfer function
As it was shown in the results. through the course of the experiments, we computed the
RAOs for different scenarios. Four regular waves, an irregular sea state and finally the
same irregular sea with additional aerodynamic loads, generated by a rotor.

In order to do this, the amplitude spectrum and the Power Spectral Density of the motions
were used for regular and irregular waves, respectively.

When calculating the theoretical platform transfer functions it was seen that energy con-
centration at w = 0 has non-zero value, this is due to the mean drift and natural frequency
of the platform without influence of ant dynamic load.

The obtained RAO are displayed in the following figures:

Figure 63: Surge RAO for different waves

It can be seen from Figure.63 that the surge RAO of the FOWT in the three different
conditions tested for this study have been presented on the same plot in order to compare
the trends for each. For the low frequency range below 0.4 Hz it can be seen that a
damping in the RAO of the wind plus waves test is present relative to the irregular waves
test. This can only be due to the effect of the wind on the FOWT. The effects of irregular
waves compared to regular waves can’t be commented on in this region due to the regular
waves test being performed outside this frequency range.

From f = 0.4 to f = 0.65 Hz the RAO of all three conditions appear to match with a
linear decrease in magnitude as frequency increases. Within the range of f = 0.65 to
f = 0.85 Hz the regular waves condition doesn’t have enough sample points in order
to reliable comment on the difference in behaviour of this test relative to the irregular
wave and wave plus wind conditions. Within this region no damping is seen between the
irregular and wave plus wind RAOs.

35
 Figure 64: Pitch RAO for different waves

In the case of the pitch RAO for different conditions it can be seen that the RAO of
each test illustrates the same shaped curve across the frequencies tested. However, after
f = 0.6 Hz the irregular wave and wave plus wind data begin to increase in RAO relative
to the regular wave RAO. The RAO of the two irregular wave tests also begins to decrease
at a higher frequency than in the case of the regular waves. Finally within the frequency
range in which RAO is decreasing the irregular waves plus wind also obtains a greater
RAO than the case without wind.

Figure 65: Bending moment RAO for different waves

Figure.65 illustrates the RAO of the bending moment in all three cases tested. from
f = 0.5 to f = 0.64 the RAO of each condition demonstrate the same linearly increasing
trend and the values of each case match. Above f = 0.65 Hz the RAO results diverge from
each other. The regular waves RAO remains lower than the other tests. The irregular
waves with no wind is greater than the regular waves suggesting the the irregular waves
introduce greater bending moments in the FOWT than the regular waves. The same is
seen for irregular waves plus wind, this suggests that the wind again increases the bending
moments on the FOWT compared to the cases without wind. However, it can be seen
that this behaviour is switched between with and without wind conditions after f = 0.9.
The wind plus waves test obtains a smaller RAO above this frequency than that of the
case of just irregular waves. This could suggest that the wind at higher frequencies damps
the bending moment on the FOWT.

36
 Figure 66: Heave RAO for different waves

The RAOs for heave motion under all the three different cases tested are illustrated
together in the above figure 66. From f = 0.1Hz to f = 0.19Hz, the response of only
irregular waves with and without shows a similar behaviour as the coherence is above 0.7
for heave motion in this case. The major difference with irregular case is at 0.4Hz where
heave under regular waves has a linear decrease as compared to other cases which has a
small rise and later converging with the regular wave condition to decrease further as the
increment of frequency steps.

4.3 Irregular Waves

Since the coherence of 1 corresponds to a linear relation in all the parameter associated
and if the natural period of the structure is in this range, then can lead to resonance at
the peak energy of waves. Hence the natural period (for example 0.22Hz for pitch motion)
outside the range where most of wave energy is distributed helps to avoid this. The aim
is to study the response where motions are highly correlated hence ROAs are computed
for the frequencies where coherence >[0.7-0.8].

From the motion spectra of pitch and surge, it is seen that the respective natural frequen-
cies are 0.22Hz and 0.05Hz. Each motion has a different frequencies due varied effect of
module structural geometry, hydrodynamic damping, buoyancy and added mass etc. The
module tends to oscillate max at the natural periods while the small peak at range 0.4Hz
to 0.7Hz explains the interaction with the waves where most of the energy is concentrated.

The bending moment in the module is dominated by the pitch motion and will be max-
imum at the same frequency as the pitch motion.Hence the bending moment spectra is
similar to the pitch spectra but last for a wider range which can be due to non rigidness
of the structure as observed during the experiment.

The small peak in the wave-heave spectra corresponds to high coherence within this
range for the heave motion. This shows huge tendency of the module to heave under high
coherence even if the amplitude of the peak in heave spectra is very small. The change
in slope at 0.5Hz corresponds to the highest peak in heave spectra.

37
In the case with the wind it was observed that the wind has influence at lower frequency
which leads to small peak in pitch motion spectra and increase in magnitude for surge.
A very important observation is the considerable decrease in amplitudes of the motions
under the action of the wind which proves that the wind dampens the motions in the
module. The magnitude of the bending strain is also reduced under the action of wind
but the effect due to non rigidness of the structure stays consistent.

5 Conclusion
The goal of this investigation was to study the station keeping performances of a 5 MW
FOWT supported by a semi-submersible platform in various realistic conditions. This
was done through the use of model testing within a wave tank as described above.

It can be seen that various different characteristics have successfully been investigated
in order to asses the performance of the model FOWT. Two decay tests were performed
and the natural period was determined, four different regular waves were investigated
and compared to the performances obtained from irregular wave conditions with and
without wind. From these investigations the RAOs, transfer functions and the influence
of different characteristics of the FOWT have been studied.

38