Proceedings of the ASME 27th International Conference on Offshore Mechanics and Arctic Engineering OMAE2008 June 15-20, 2008,

Estoril, Portugal

OMAE2008-57487
PIPELINE-LAYBARGE INTERACTION MODEL FOR THE SIMULATION OF S-LAY INSTALLATION PROCEDURES

Danilo Machado Lawinscky da Silva

Mauro Henrique A. de Lima Jr.

Breno Pinheiro Jacob

LAMCSO Laboratory of Computational Methods and Offshore Systems PEC/COPPE/UFRJ Rio de Janeiro, RJ, Brazil

ABSTRACT The most common method of pipeline installation in shallow water is the S-Lay method. In this method, the welded pipeline is supported by rollers on the vessel and the stinger, forming the over-bend. Then it is suspended in the water all the way to seabed, forming the sag-bend. The over-bend and sagbend form the shape of an S. This work focus in modeling the interaction between pipeline and lay barge on the over-bend region, considering not only the contact between the pipeline and the launching structure, but also the tensioner behavior. Two numerical models are proposed: (a) a rigorous contact model that provides important information related to the consequences of impact between pipeline and rollers. These consequences can be dents to the pipe or tearing of the coatings; and (b) a model for the simulation of the tensioner behavior. This latter includes a delay between the instant that the tensioner is activated until it effectively starts working. It also considers how fast the tensioner can recover the desired tension level in the pipeline. Several simulations of actual operations are shown, in order to illustrate the application of the proposed model.. INTRODUCTION The installation of pipelines and flowlines and their connection to platforms constitute some of the most challenging offshore operations. Many methods of pipeline installation have been employed, such as S-Lay, J-Lay and Reel-Lay. These methods are selected on the basis of environmental conditions during installation, availability and cost of equipment, length and size of line, and constraints of adjacent lines and structures [1,2]. Alternative installation procedures have also been proposed [3]. The most common method of pipeline installation in shallow water is the S-Lay method. This method is so called because the pipeline assumes an S shaped curve as it moves from the laybarge to the sea-bed as schematically shown in Figure 1.

Figure 1 Schematic representation of S-Lay method. In a S-Lay installation, the pipes are welded to each other in the horizontal position on the barge and the pipeline then passes over an inclined ramp and stinger which gradually lowers the pipeline into the water. This region of the S curve is known as the overbend and as the pipeline leaves the overbend region it is inclined almost vertically as it descends to the sea bed, close to the sea-bed it once again returns to the horizontal position so that it eventually rests on the sea-bed. This region is known as the sag bend region. Usual pipelaying operation by S-Lay procedures in offshore Brazil employ the BGL-1 barge (Figure 2) owned by Petrobras. The BGL-1 is a second-generation laybarge that performs installation operations by moving forward using its own mooring lines. Basically, tug boats drop anchors at some predefined positions; then the barge winches release the stern mooring cables, and collect the mooring cables located at the bow.

Copyright 2008 by ASME

Pipelines in S-Lay installation operations are not easy to simulate numerically, since the contact mechanism between the pipeline and the launching structure is complex, specified only in some points of the ramp and stinger.

Figure 2 The BGL-1 Pipeline Launching Barge In order to prevent the pipe from buckling in the regions of maximum bending, the bend radius is controlled by keeping the pipe under tension, so that the pipe actually follows a lazy S shape. The tension is applied to the pipe by tensioners on the barge which are usually arrays of rubber wheels or belts which surround the pipe and apply an axial force to the pipe through the friction generated between the tensioner and the pipe external coating as shown in Figure 3.

Figure 4 Scheme of S-lay installation: Pipeline Loads; Propagating Buckle from a Local Bending Buckle It is recognized that deepwater offshore oil exploitation activities requires the use of sophisticated computational tools to predict the behavior of floating offshore systems under the action of environmental loads. These computational tools should be able to perform coupled dynamic analyses, considering the non-linear interaction of the hydrodynamic behavior of the platform with the structural/hydrodynamic behavior of the mooring lines and risers, represented by Finite Element models. The implementation of such analysis tools considers the coupling of the equations of motion of the FEM model of the lines with the 6-DOF equations of motion of the platform hull. The use of such a sophisticated computational tool becomes mandatory not only for the design of production platforms, but also for the simulation of offshore installation operations. For instance, in the installation of submarine pipelines, the wall thickness design may not be governed by the pressure containment requirements of the pipeline during the operation, but by the installation process, specifically the combined action of bending, tension and hydrostatic pressure acting on the pipeline, that is also submitted to the motions of the laybarge (Figure 4). Therefore, to predict the behavior of such offshore operations it is very important to use a computational tool that not only considers the coupling of the pipeline with the motions of the barge, but also that rigorously consider the contact between the pipeline and its supports (laybarge, stinger, seabed). Therefore, the objective of this work is to present a tool that improves the coupled analysis model described above. Such tool represents, during the dynamic analysis, the contact of the pipeline and the laybarge, as well as the tensioner behavior during installation procedures.

Figure 3 BGL-1s tensioner. The force on the pipeline is reacted at the sea-bed end of the pipeline by the dead weight of the pipeline and friction between it and the sea-bed. Obviously the larger the force applied by the tensioners to the pipeline, the more gradual will be the bending radius in the S portion of the laying curve. Also, as the pipe weight increases it is necessary to apply a greater force to the pipe to maintain the desired bend radius and so prevent buckling, particularly in the sag bend portion of the curve as schematically shown in Figure 4. As individual pipe lengths are welded onto the growing pipeline, the barge is winched forward and the new section of pipeline passes over the stinger towards the sea-bed. In the case of anchor positioned barges tugs are used to continuously reposition the anchors ahead of the barge so that it can keep moving forward.

Copyright 2008 by ASME

CONTACT MODEL A contact problem is an initial-boundary-value problem in which two bodies A and B interact according to the principles of the mechanics of continuous media. The domains of the bodies are AW0 and BW0 respectively, at a reference time t = 0, A t W and BWt at a time t. Thus the primary kinematic axiom of a contact problem is that configurations AWt and BWt of AW0 and B 0 W , respectively, do not penetrate each other, i.e. Wt BWt = (1) The equation (1) is called the impenetrability condition. The intersection of the two bodies is the null set. In other words, the two bodies are not allowed to overlap, which can also be viewed as a compatibility condition. The impenetrability condition is highly nonlinear for large displacements problems, and in general cannot be expressed as an algebraic or differential equation in terms of the displacements. The difficult arises because in an arbitrary motion it is impossible to anticipating which points of the two bodies will contact [4]. The boundaries of the bodies are denoted by AGt and BGt respectively and are defined as
A t A

t t t sij = Cijkl kl in Wt

(5)
0

(7) F t t t t Where s , x , b , r a , q i, u , Cijkl, kl are the Cauchy stress, material coordinates, body force, material density, acceleration, surface force, displacement, constitutive tensor and strain, respectively; n1tj are the components of the outward surface normal. Overbarred quantities mean prescribed values. A variety of methods for the treatment of contact constraint conditions have been introduced [6,7,8,9]. Traditionally, the numerical simulation of pipelines in S-Lay installation operations considers contact models based on generalized scalar element. This element consists of two nodes linked by a non-linear gap spring [10,11]. The contact model proposed here combines Finite and Discrete Element methods. Its formulation is described as follows.
D t ij t j t i t t i

u(x,0) = u0 e v(x,0) = v0 in W ut on G t ; stnt = q t on G t ut =

(6)

FEM DEM FORMULATION

G = G

t D

t F

G ; G = G
t C

B t

t D

t F

t C

(2) (3)

The well-known finite element equation for dynamic problems is

t t t t t t t + Fp + FC - FD - Fint = Fext - Fint M at = Fb t

and
A t A t B t B t GD GF = ; GD GF = t t Where Gt is the total boundary, GD and GF are regions where displacements and surface forces are prescribed, respectively, t GC is the region where the contact interactions occur.

(8)

Where M a are the inertia forces, M is the mass matrix, at t t are the body forces, Fp are the is the acceleration vector, Fb t t surface force, FC are the contact forces, FD are damping forces, t Fint are the internal forces. Each vector contains the assembly of all elements contribution in the finite element mesh. The only term in equation (8) that is not trivial is the vector t of contact forces FC . Here, this vector is assembled according to the discrete element formulation. The discrete element modeling is a Lagrangian numerical technique used to solve problems that can be represented as a set of discrete bodies or particles. Such discrete elements can be rigid or deformable and interact with one another through normal and shear contact forces [12,13]. At the proposed model the elements are the rollers supporting the pipeline over the laybarge ramp and singer and their positions in space and time are associated to the rigid body motion of the laybarge.
Evaluation of Contact Forces

Figure 5 Contacting bodies. The governing equations for a multi-body contact problem are the same as for a single body system, equations of motion, constitutive equations, initial conditions, boundary conditions, with the addition of the contact conditions [5]. Thus the problem formulation is
t sij + bti = rtati in Wt xtj

Once contact between a pair of elements has been detected, the forces occurring at the contact point are calculated. The interaction between the two interacting bodies can be represented by the contact forces Aqt and Bqt, which by the Newtons third law satisfy the following relation:
A t

q = - Bqt

(9)

Taking qt = Aqt and decompose qt into the normal and t t and qT , respectively. tangential components, qN
t t t t qt = qN + qT = qN n + qT

(4)

(10)

Copyright 2008 by ASME

Where n is the unit vector normal to the contact surface at the contact point. Several models that describe contact forces are found in the literature. The model used combines the linear ForceDisplacement Law (Hookes Law) with a viscous dumping force which is proportional to the relative velocities of particle t elements in contact. Then the normal contact force qN is t decomposed in two components: the elastic component, qNe and t . the damping component, qNd
t t t qN = qNe + qNd t Ne

eN is the coefficient of restitution in the normal direction. In a similar way CT can also be obtained.
Normal Stiffness

(11)

The elastic component q is proportional to the normal stiffness kN and to the interpenetration g
t qNe = - kN g

(12)

If g > 0, the equation (12) holds, if g 0, there is no interpenetration and the normal component is zero. The damping component reduces the oscillations of contact force and dissipates kinetic energy during collision [14]. This component is assumed viscous and is given by:
t = CN vN qNd

The discrete elements, the rollers of ramp and stinger, are assumed to be rigid. This means that the normal stiffness need to be chose large enough to prevent any interpenetration during the dynamic analyze. Thus the normal stiffness should be, in principle, an arbitrarily large number. However, for computer calculations, it should be large enough to enforce the constraint condition, but not so large that the governing equations become illconditioned. On the other hand, too small a normal stiffness parameter results in an unacceptable penetration of the pipeline into the rollers and the overall response is disturbed. In fact, the choice of the normal stiffness is a crucial part in contact-impact calculations. The normal stiffness here is chose to be approximately the same order of magnitude as the stiffness of the degree of freedom normal to the contact interface.
CONTACT DETECTION

(13)

Where CN is the viscosity coefficient at normal direction and vN is the relative velocity at normal direction. Normal force magnitude is given by
t = - kN g + CN vN qN

(14)

The tangential component has a critical value, following the Coulomb friction Law, allowing sliding between elements. The tangential force magnitude is given by

t t t = min mqN , kT vT dt + CT vT qT i t

(15)

Where the integral of the relative velocity during the time of contact represents the elastic tangential energy stored. CT is the viscosity coefficient at this direction. The total tangential force is limited by Coulombs friction Law. When this force reaches t its maximum value of mqN , with m being the friction coefficient, there is relative sliding and tangential elastic energy storage is ceased. The physical parameters CN and CT reflect energy dissipation during collisions, which is hard to evaluate directly. They can be taken as a fraction of the critical damping for the system of two rigid bodies i and j with mass mi and mj. CN = 2 g and g=ln(eN) p + ln2(eN)
2

The first stage in a contact algorithm consists in checking if the bodies have interpenetrated. The algorithm works by monitoring the position of finite elements of pipeline mesh and comparing these to the instantaneous location of discrete elements of ramp and stinger at each solution iteration. Of course to check all discrete elements of ramp and stinger against every finite element of the pipeline mesh is not of interest. Therefore, the discrete domain is split into cells as the scheme shown in Figure 6. Then the contact search is only among elements belonging to the same cell. This procedure has a very low cost and eliminates a lot of unnecessary computations.

Figure 6 Roller Box into a sub-cell. In order to turn more efficient and to refine the search for the collision points, a cell hierarchy is created. This is made putting the whole discrete domain into a first level cell, which is subdivided into sub-cells at each roller box. Those sub-cells are verified independently, with that, when the contact is detected in a sub-cell the other cells do not need to be verified. A cell hierarchy scheme for a ramp and stinger configuration is shown in Figure 7.

mij kN

(16)

(17) (18)

mi mj mij = m + m i j

Copyright 2008 by ASME

Others characteristics of the tensioner behavior are also incorporated to this model: Operational Range defines a range in which the tensioner is not activated. This means that the tension level is near to the desired tension; Response Delay after the tension level leave the operational range the tensioner is activated but there is a delay until it effectively starts working; Response Velocity once effectively working, it is necessary to set how fast the tensioner is capable of restore the tension level; Figure 7 Cell hierarchy Scheme (first level cell). TENSIONER MODEL The tensioner model is based on a generalized scalar element that consists of two nodes linked by a nonlinear gap spring. Force-displacement or stiffness-displacement functions associated to each local direction are defined, and the local coordinates systems can also be actualized at each step during simulation. In the tensioner case, the objective is to control the tension level in the pipeline during the pipelaying operation. It should keep the tension level in an operational range. The tensioner model is schematically shown in Figure 8. Displacement Limit there is a limit in which the tensioner can move the pipeline ahead and back in order to compensate its tension level. OUTPUT DATA Some output data are of particular interest in pipelaying operations, such as support separation and reactions. These data are automatic calculated and printed.
SUPPORT SEPARATION

The separation is the distance, measured between the pipeline and the roller of the support. This distance is calculated at the middle point of each discrete element of all roller boxes on the laybarge and stinger as schematically shown in Figure 9.

Figure 9 Points for Separation Distance Output. There is a plan for the three points at each roller level in a roller box. The support separation and reactions are calculated on this plan at the point of the pipeline that crosses it. This point is easily determined by simple vector calculation, as shown in Figure 10.

Figure 8 Tensioner Model. An additional element is created at the pipeline top and to simulate the tensioner behavior its axial stiffness varies keeping the tension level at the defined range. Varying the axial stiffness implies change the scalar element length moving the pipeline top back and ahead. This behavior simulates the movement of the pipeline induced by the tensioner.

Figure 10 Pipeline crossing the roller level plan.

Copyright 2008 by ASME

If n1 ( v1 v2 ) > 0 and n2 ( v1 v2 ) 0 then the finite element crosses the plan of this roller level. The relation between the lengths of vectors n1 and n2 define the point in the finite element. Then distances are given by the follow equations: (19) D1 = d1 n1 rPipe D2 = d2 n2 rPipe D3 = d3 n3 rPipe (20) (21)

Figure 13 Pipeline Support. NUMERICAL EXAMPLE: S-LAY INSTALLATION The proposed contact model has been incorporated into the SITUA-Prosim system, a computer program that performs the coupled static and dynamic analysis of floating offshore systems. The SITUA-Prosim system has been developed since 1997 [15], in cooperation by Petrobras and LAMCSO (Laboratory of Computational Methods and Offshore Systems, at the Civil Eng. Dept. of COPPE/UFRJ, Federal Univ. of Rio de Janeiro). A module for pipeline installation simulation is incorporated into SITUA-Prosim. This module, called PETROPIPE, integrates a graphic interface to the numerical tools proposed here. It can easily generate numerical models for pipeline installation procedures. Several small preliminary problems have been run to test the validity of the algorithms. A variety of examples involving complex configurations and nonlinear boundary conditions were also analyzed.
BGL-1 DATA

Where Di, di and ni are shown in Figure 11, and rPipe is the pipeline external radius.

Figure 11 Separation Distance.

SUPPORT REACTIONS

The support reaction is the force exerted on the pipeline by the roller boxes in the laybarge and stinger. The horizontal, vertical and lateral support reactions are also calculated for each discrete element of all roller boxes on the laybarge and stinger. The reactions are the perpendicular components of the force on the roller box surface. Their values come from the contact model at the end of the iterative process in each time step. The resultants are printed at the same points as the support separation distance, Figure 12. In ideal situations all rollers components make contact with the pipe reducing/redistributing the applied local forces. In real situations, under dynamic loading conditions some of the rollers may miss the pipe contact, resulting in more concentrated forces on a fewer number of rollers, as schematically shown in Figure 13. These situations are easily identified in the proposed model.

Figure 12 Reactions on the pipeline.

The basic operations of the laybarge during pipelaying can be outlined as it follows: (a) The laybarge is positioned on its 8 anchors holding it aligned with the pipeline route; (b) The anchors are progressively moved forward as the laying takes place. Each anchor is lifted clear of the bottom and set in its new position. The laybarge is restrained from lateral motion by the mooring lines and it is moved periodically one pipe length ahead. The mooring lines are kept under tension by the winches. These tension varies cyclically due to the long-period sway plus surge built up by the waves, storing energy in the wire lines as the barge gradually moves to one extreme of its lateral range. The mooring lines must provide the horizontal restraint against wave drift, wind drift, and current drift. They also react against one another and especially must counter the tension on the pipe, which in effect is like a mooring line of relatively equal tension, leading directly astern. The simulations performed here do not consider the laybarge mooring line system. Since the focus is on the pipeline-laybarge interaction, the units are represented simply by motion RAOs. The geometrical and hydrodynamics characteristics of BGL-1 were provided by Petrobras and are summarized below.

Copyright 2008 by ASME

PIPELINE DATA

The physical and geometric properties of the pipeline are presented in Table 4. Table 4 16 Pipeline data
Parameter Outside Diameter Wall Thickness Yield Stress Modulus of Elasticity of steel Axial Stiffness (EA) Flexional Stiffness (EI) Poisson Coefficient Density of steel Corrosion Coating Thickness Corr. Coating Weight Density Concrete Coating Thickness Concrete Coating Weight Density Hydrodynamic Diameter Tube Length Field Joint Length Joint Fill Weight Density Weight in Air Weight Submerged ENVIRONMENTAL LOADS Value 0.40640 0.011125 414000 207000 2859694.14 55894.90 0.3 77 0.0032 9.32 0.0381 21.974 0.489 12 0.6 10.065 2.255935 0.368493 Unit m m kN/m2 MPa kN kN*m2 kN/m3 m kN/m3 m kN/m3 m m m kN/m3 kN/m kN/m

Figure 14 BGL-1 Geometry Table 1 Main geometric characteristics of BGL-1

Propriety
Drought Height Beam Length

Values (real scale)

5.182 m 9m 30 m 120 m

Ramp and Stinger Data

The local ramp-stinger coordinates system has its origin on the stern shoe, X-axis positive direction from bow to stern and Z-axis is vertical with positive direction upwards, Figure 15. The geometric data of ramp and stinger are presented in Tables 2 and 3.

The barge azimuth is 90o (point to east). It means that the current load, Table 5, act obliquely on the system. The wave load is presented in Table 6 Table 5 Current Profile
Depth (m) 0 20 70 84 89 Hs (m) 4.0 Velocity (m/s) 1.02 1.02 0.45 0.39 0.00 Tp (s) 12.9 Going to N N N N N Azimuth (o) 0 0 0 0 0 Azimuth (o) 180

Figure 15 Ramp/Stinger Local Coordinates System. Table 2 Ramp radius 150 m

Element Tensioner Roller Box 1 Roller Box 2 Roller Box 3 Roller Box 4 Roller Box 5 X (m) -48.900 -39.030 -26.860 -18.290 -9.470 -0.452 Z (m) 1.404 1.146 0.762 0.036 -1.240 -3.089 Length (m) 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 2.5

Table 6 Irregular Wave (Jonswap)

Coming from S

S-LAY MODEL

Table 3 Stinger radius 150 m

Element Roller Box 1 Roller Box 2 Roller Box 3 Roller Box 4 Roller Box 5 Roller Box 6 Roller Box 7 Roller Box 8 X (m) 5.230 9.077 12.879 16.363 20.348 24.016 27.643 31.224 Z (m) -4.578 -5.278 -6.995 -8.371 -9.858 -11.454 -13.163 14.780 Offset (m) 0.449 0.456 0.476 0.510 0.555 0.612 0.712 0.861 Length (m) 5.415 4.000 4.000 4.000 4.000 4.000 4.000 4.000

The initial equilibrium configuration of the pipeline is generated using dynamic relaxation techniques as proposed in [16,17]. The top tension in the pipeline is the parameter that defines the s shape. The generated S-Lay configuration is shown in Figure 16. Details of the pipeline on the overbend region are shown in Figure 17.

Copyright 2008 by ASME

Figure 19 Tension (static).

Figure 16 S-Lay Configuration.

Figure 20 Bending Stress (static).

Figure 17 Stinger. The geometry of the initial configuration is plotted in Figure 18. In this Figure, and in the follows, the results are first shown for the whole pipeline and then for the overbend (laybarge-stinger) region.

Figure 21 Von Mises Stress (static).

Figure 22 Von Mises Stress (dynamic). Figure 18 Initial Configuration.

RESULTS TENSIONER

Some results of performed analyses are shown in figures that follow.

The result for an analysis in which the tensioner is activated is shown in Figure 23: blue tenisioner not activated; green tensioner activated. This result is obtained applying a regular wave (H = 1.2m, Tp = 12s, E) to the model previous described. The desired tension is set 250kN and the operational range 240kN to 260kN. It should be noted a transient part of response before the tensiner has been completely activated. This progressive activation of the tensioner element follows the same strategies as the application of environmental loads.

Copyright 2008 by ASME

The pipeline movement due the variation of the tensioner element length is shown in Figure 24.

Figure 23 Tensioner Response.

Figure 24 Pipeline Movement at the Tensioner. FINAL REMARKS This work presented a tool intended to improve the applicability and accuracy of analysis of pipeline installation operations, making the simulations more realistic. Such tool represents, during the dynamic analysis, the contact between the pipeline and the laybarge as well as the tensioner behavior. The generalized contact model presented here avoids some limitations of the computational tools traditionally used for the static and dynamic analysis of pipeline installation. Also, this tool provides the engineer with several relevant information at preliminary design stages. In summary, the presented model was shown to be quite efficient and robust, and comprises an important contribution to the analysis and design of pipeline installation operations. The resulting numerical tool is able to provide valuable knowledge for the design of safe offshore operations. ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS The authors would like to acknowledge the active support of Petrobras, the Brazilian state oil company. Petrobras is internationally acknowledged as pioneer and leader in deep water exploitation activities, and has been boosting research activities in this area and encouraging the use of innovative numerical tools in real-life design situations. REFERENCES [1] GUO, B., SONG, S., CHACKO, J., GHALAMBOR, A., Offshore Pipelines, United States, Elsevier, 2005.

[2] KYRIAKIDES, S., CORONA, E., Mechanics of Offshore Pipelines, Volume 1: Buckling and Collapse, Slovenia, Elsevier, 2007. [3] SILVA, D. M. L., BAHIENSE, R.A., JACOB, B.P., TORRES, F.G.S., MEDEIROS, A.R., COSTA, M.N.V., Numerical Simulation of Offshore Pipeline Installation by Lateral Deflection Procedure. Procs of the 26st International Conference on Offshore Mechanics and Arctic Engineering OMAE, June 10-15, San Diego, USA, 2007. [4] BELYTSCHKO, Ted, LIU, Wing Kam, MORAN, Brian, Nonlinear Finite Elements for Continua and Structures. Chichester, John Wiley & Sons, 2000. [5] HUGHES, T.J.R., TAYLOR, R.L., SACKMAN J.L., CURNIER A., KANOKNUKULCHAI W., A Finite Element Method for a Class of Contact-Impact Problems, Comput. Methods Appl. Mech. Engrg., vol.8, pp. 249276, 1976. [6] WRIGGERS, P., Computational Contact Mechanics. Chichester, John Wiley & Sons, 2002. [7] LAURSEN, T.A., Computational Contact and Impact Mechanics. Berlim, Springer, 2002. [8] BELYTSCHKO, Ted, YEH, I.S., The Splitting Pinball Method for Contact-Impact Problems, Comput. Methods Appl. Mech. Engrg., vol. 105, pp. 375393, 1993. [9] HUNK, I., On Penalty Formulation for Contact-Impact Problems, Computers & Structures, vol.48, pp. 193203, 1993. [10] NIELSEN R., PENDERED, J.W., Some Aspects of Marine Pipeline Analysis, Numerical Methods in Offshore Engineering, John Wiley & Sons, New York, 1978. [11] GREALISH, F., LANG, D., CONNOLLY, A., LANE, M., Advances in Contact Modelling for Simulation of Deepwater pipeline Installation, Rio Pipeline Conference & Exposition, October 17-19, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil, 2005. [12] OATE, E, ROJEK, J., Combination of Discrete Element and Finite Element Methods for Dynamic Analysis of Geomechanics Problems, Comput. Methods Appl. Mech. Engrg., vol.193, pp. 30873128, 2004. [13] MUNJIZA, A., The Combined Finite-Discrete Finite Element Method. Chichester, John Wiley & Sons, 2004. [14] MENDES, R.B., ALVES, J.L.D., SILVA, C.E., Simulation of Torpedo Pile Launching by Coupled Discrete and Finite Element Analysis. Procs of the XXVII Iberian Latin-American Congress on Computational Methods in Engineering CILAMCE, September 3-6, Belm, Brazil, 2006. [15] __, SITUA-Prosim Program: Coupled Numerical Simulation of the Behavior of Moored Floating Units User Manual, ver. 3.0 (in Portuguese), LAMCSO/ PEC/COPPE, Rio de Janeiro, 2005. [16] SILVA, D. M. L., Generation of initial stable configurations of flexible lines by Dynamic Relaxation

Copyright 2008 by ASME

Methods (In Portuguese). M.Sc thesis, COPPE/UFRJ, Rio de Janeiro, RJ, Brazil, 2005. [17] SILVA, D. M. L., JACOB, B.P., RODRIGUES, M.V., Implicit and Explicit Implemetation of the Dynamic Relaxation Method for the Definition of Initial Equilibrium Configurations of Flexible Lines. Procs of the 25st International Conference on Offshore Mechanics and Arctic Engineering OMAE, June 4-9, Hamburg, Germany, 2006.

10

Copyright 2008 by ASME