3.linear Wave

WAVE EXCITATION FORCES AND MOTIONS
INTRODUCTION

In this lecture, three different approaches used to predict the linear wave forces
and resulting motion responses and loads on floating offshore platforms will be
discussed. The results of various international co-operative studies to investigate the
correlation between the different methods will be summarised. Finally the recent
advance in various techniques will be highlighted.

MOTION RESPONSE PREDICTIONS USING THE MORISON APPROACH

Since the early 1970s various investigators have adopted the Morison
approach to predict wave exciting forces and the resulting responses and loads on
various types of floating and compliant offshore platforms. The features common in
the linear analysis tools developed and described in References 1, 2 and 3 can be
summarised as follows:

a) Airy wave theory is adopted. Amplitudes of wave and platform motions are
assumed to be small. This assumption permits the linear superposition of the
wave forces acting on the restrained structure due to the wave particle motions and
hydrodynamic forces acting on the structure due to rigid-body oscillations of the
platform in calm water.

b) The platform can be divided into several volume elements. If the sectional
dimensions of these elements are less than about 1/5
th
of the wave length, the
wave and motion induced forces can be assumed to be concentrated in the centre
of these volume elements. If one of the dimensions of these volume elements is
large compared to the wave length, the two or three dimensional source
distribution methods which are discussed in the next sections should be adopted.

c) The wave and motion induced forces are calculated on each volume element,
assuming that the rest of the structure is no present. In other words, the
interference between the elements of the structure is not taken into account. The
total force acting on the structure is obtained by summing the forces on each
volume element.

d) Hydrodynamic forces due to rigid body velocity are linearised and the wave forces
due to wave particle velocities are neglected.

In the following a brief summary of the Morison approach and the application
of this method to predict wave exciting forces and response will be discussed.

WAVE INDUCED FORCES

The wave induced force on each member of an offshore structure is assumed
to consist of the following force components:

WAVE EXCITATION FORCES AND MOTIONS - A. INCECIK

2
a) Dynamic Pressure Force: This force is due to the hydrodynamic pressure
change below the surface of a wave train while the wave is proceeding. It is
assumed that the presence of the member does not interfere with the flow field.
The pressure forces can be calculated in the following form:

ds n t x k e g H ds n p F
ky
W
S
) cos( 5 . 0 = =

(1)
where n : Unit normal vector
ds : Area element of surface S

When the sectional dimensions of the volume element (say height, H, and
beam B) in the wave field are small compared to the wave length, i.e. H / <<1 and
B/<<1, it can be shown that the pressure force vector components given with the
above surface integral equation can be calculated as:

S X Px
A a F =
[Force/unit length] (2)

S y Py
A a F =

where: A
S
: Cross-sectional area
a
X
: Horizontal wave particle acceleration at the centre of A
S

a
Y
: Vertical wave particle acceleration at the centre of A
S

b) Acceleration force: The presence of the volume element in the wave field
causes disturbance of the pressure field and this results in the acceleration forces
on it. These forces can be calculated as follows:

S X Mx Ax
A a K F =

S Y My Ay
A a K F =

where: K
Mx
= Added-mass coefficient in horizontal mode of oscillation
K
My
= Added-mass coefficient in vertical mode of oscillation

When the pressure and acceleration forces are summed, the following terms of
total wave inertia force equation is obtained:

) 1 (
Mx S X Ax Px lx
K A a F F F + = + =
(6)

) 1 (
My S Y Ay Py ly
K A a F F F + = + =
(7)

) 1 (
Mx
K +
and
) 1 (
My
K +
can be replaced with the horizontal inertia coefficient C
M,x

and the vertical inertia coefficient C
M,y
resectively.


3
c) Drag Force: Viscous effects existing in the real flow domain give rise to
drag forces. Drag forces mainly result from turbulent flow of body downstream.
These forces can be calculated as follows:

X X Dx Dx
U HU C F 2 / 1 =

Y Y Dy Dy
U BU C F 2 / 1 =

where: C
Dx
: Drag coefficient in X direction
C
Dy
: Drag coefficient in Y direction
U
X :
Horizontal wave particle

velocity at the centre of A
S

U
Y :
Vertical wave particle

velocity at the centre of A
S

The wave particle kinematics for deep water and added mass and damping
coefficients for various geometrical shapes are given in Tables 1 and 2 respectively.

MOTION INDUCED FORCES

a) Acceleration Force: When the volume element is subjected to sinusoidal
acceleration in calm water, the forces on it induced by fluid can be calculated as
follows:

S Mx HAx
A X K F

=

S My HAy
A Y K F

=

b) Drag Force: When the volume element is subjected to sinusoidal velocity in
calm water, the forces acting on it can be written as follows:

X X H C F
Dx HDx

2 / 1 =

Y Y H C F
Dy HDy

2 / 1 =

In order to linearise the drag force equations,
X X C
Dx

and
Y Y C
Dy

can
be replaced by C
DL,x
X
and C
DL,y
Y
respectively. The linearised drag coefficients can

be given as:
C
DL,x
= C
D
(8/3) X (14-A)

C
DL,y
= C
D
(8/3) Y (14-B)

As seen from equation (14), C
DL
is dependant on motion amplitudes. The
solution must therefore involve an iteration procedure in which a value of resultant
velocity is assumed and C
DL
is computed as the motion equation is solved. A new
value of the rigid body velocity is calculated using the first computed C
DL
and

4
compared with the measured velocity. Iteration is continued until the last two
velocity values are close to each other within an acceptable limit.

c) Restoring Force: Restoring forces occur when the platform is displaced from its
equilibrium position in calm water. The restoring forces can arise due to change in
the underwater geometry of the platform and/or system which connects the platform
to earth. The restoring force vector can be expressed as:

} { ] [ X K F
R
= (15)

MOTION RESPONSE EQUATION

When the offshore platform is considered is an oscillating rigid-body having
six degrees of freedom, the motion equation of the platform can be derived from
Newtons second law as follows:

} { ] [ X I F
T

= (16)

where F
T
is the total force/moment vector, [I] mass matrix and } {X

acceleration
vector of the platform. In this equation the total force vector, F
T
can be replaced by
the sum of the force and moment components which has been derived in the
preceding sections.

F
I
+ F
D
+ F
HA
+ F
HD
+ F
R
= [I] } {X

(17)

When the force/components are rearranged as motion dependant terms on the
left hand side and time dependant forcing terms on the right hand side, the following
form of six linear, second-order differential equations can be obtained:

| |{ } | |{ } | |{ } { }
W
F x K X C X M = + +

(18)

where:
| |
i
i
M
V K I M

+ =
Mass + added mass matrix
| |
i DL
i
C C
,
= Hydrodynamic damping matrix
[K] Re storing coefficient matrix

{F
W
} Wave force / moment vector

{ } { } { } X X X , ,

Acceleration velocity and displacement
vectors

It is assumed that there is no coupling between the different modes of motion.
Equation (18) reduces to six uncoupled linear second order differential equations, for
which the standard solution can be written as:


5

5 . 0 2
2
2 2
, ,
) ) ( /(
j j j o j o j
C M K F X + =
(19)

where X
j,o
and F
j,o
are motion and force/moment amplitudes respectively.

Equation (19) can also be written in terms of frequency ratio, r
j
, and damping ratio, d
j
,
as:

( ) ( )
5 . 0
2
2
2
, ,
) 2 1 ( /
j j j j o j o j
d r r K F X + =
(19)

where:
r
j
= /
n,j
= (Forcing frequency)/(Natural Frequency) in (j) mode of
oscillation
n,j
= (Kj/Mj)
0.5

d
j
= C
j
/(2(MjKj)
0.5
) = (Damping/Critical damping)

EXAMPLES

1. Determine the total wave exciting forces on the structure shown in the following
figure; What should be the ratio between column separation B and the wave length
so that there will be no wave force acting on the structure. Calculate the surge
response.

Horizontal wave forces on column (1)

Dx Ax Px T
F F F F + + =
1 ,

+ =
0
1 , 1 ,
0
1 , 1 ,
2 / 1
d
x x D
d
s x M T
dy D U U C dy A a C F

where 4 / , 6 . 0 , 025 . 1 , 2
2
D A C C
s D m
= = = =


6

( )
( ) t kB e H U
t kB e H a
ky
w x
ky
w x

=
=
2 / cos 5 . 0
2 / sin 5 . 0
1 ,
2
1 ,

( )
( ) ( ) ( )
+
=
0
2 2
0
2
2
1 ,
2 / cos 2 / cos 5 . 0
2
1
2 / sin 5 . 0
4
d
ky
w D
d
ky
w M T
dy e t kB t kB H D C
dy e t kB H
D
C F

or
( )
( ) ( ) ( ) ) 1 )( 2 / 1 ( 2 / cos 2 / cos 5 . 0
2
1
2 / sin ) 1 )( / 1 ( 5 . 0
4
2 2
2
2
1 ,
ky
w D
kd
w M T
e k t kB t kB H D C
t kB e k H
D
C F
+
=

Similarly, horizontal wave exciting forces on column (2) can be written as:

( )
( ) ( ) ( ) ) 1 )( 2 / 1 ( 2 / cos 2 / cos 5 . 0
2
1
2 / sin ) 1 )( / 1 ( 5 . 0
4
2 2
2
2
2 ,
ky
w D
kd
w M T
e k t kB t kB H D C
t kB e k H
D
C F
+
=

and the total horizontal wave force on the structure becomes:

2 , 1 , 1 , T T T
F F F + =

or
( )
( )
} ) 2 / cos( ) 2 / cos(
) 2 / cos( ) 2 / ){cos( 1 )( 2 / 1 ( 5 . 0
2
1
) 2 / ( ) 2 / ( ) 1 )( / 1 ( 5 . 0
4
2 2
2
2
t kB t kB
t kB t kB e k H D C
t kB Sin t kB Sin e k H
D
C F
ky
w D
kd
w M T

+ + +
+
+ =

The following trigonometric relationships can be used to simplify the total
wave force equation given above:

) 2 / sin( ) sin( ) cos( ) 2 / cos( ) 2 / cos(
) 2 / sin( ) sin( ) cos( ) 2 / cos( ) 2 / cos(
) 2 / cos( ) 3 /( 8 ) 2 / cos( ) 2 / cos(
) 2 / cos( ) sin( ) cos( ) 2 / sin( ) 2 / sin(
) 2 / cos( ) sin( ) cos( ) 2 / sin( ) 2 / sin(
kb t t kb t kb
kb t t kb t kb
t kb t kb t kb
kb t t kb t kb
kb t t kb t kb

+ =
= +
=
+ = +
=


7
Total wave force expression becomes

( ) ) cos( )) 2 / cos( 2 )( 3 /( 8 ) 1 )( 2 / 1 ( 5 . 0
2
1
) sin( )) 2 / cos( 2 )( 1 )( / 1 ( 5 . 0
4
2 2
2
2
wt kB e k H D C
t kB e k H
D
C F
kd
w D
kd
w M T

+
=

Before we calculate B/ for zero horizontal surge force, let us determine the
relative importance of drag and inertia forces by calculating the ratio of drag to inertia
forces:

D e H C
D e H C
force drag
force inertia
ky
w D
ky
w M
2 2
2 2
) 5 . 0 ( 2 / 1
4 / 5 . 0

= =

ky
w D
M
e H C
D C
=

Assuming, C
M
= 2, C
D
= 0.6, H
w
= 10m., y = 0 and D = 10m

= (2 10) / (0.6 x 10 x 1) = 10

and taking y = - 10 m and = 0.6 rad/sec

= (2 10) / (0.6 x 10 x e
-k10
) = 15

where k =
2
/ g = (0.6)
2
/ 9.81 = 0.03669

If we neglect the drag forces on the structure, the total horizontal wave force
expression becomes:

) sin( ) 2 / cos( ) 1 )( / 1 ( 5 . 0
4
2
2
2
t kB e kd H d
D
C F
kd
w M T

=

The physical meaning of each term in the above equation can be explained as follows:

d
D
4
2
2
= volume of the structure

d
D
4
2
2
= mass of the structure

Cos(kB/2) = spacing dependent term

) 2 / cos( ) 1 )( / 1 ( 5 . 0
4
2
2
2
kB e kd H d
D
C
kd
w M
= wave ext. force amplitude


8
In order to arrive at zero horizontal wave force on the structure, the spacing
dependent term should be set to zero. Thus

Cos(kB/2) = 0

kB/2 = /2(2n+1) , n=0,1,2,3,..

since k = 2/ and B/ = (2n+1)/2

surge motion equation
(M + M
AVM
) ) sin(
0
wt F X k X C X
s
= + +

Where:

( ) ( ) ( )
( )d D C
d D K d D K d D M M
M
M M AVM
4 / 2
4 / ) 1 ( 2 4 / 2 4 / 2
2
2 2 2

=
+ = + = +

and assuming that

( )
( )
( ) t X X
t X X
t X X
C

sin
cos
sin
0
2
0
0
0
=
=
=
=

The surge motion equation becomes:

( ) ( ) ( ) ( ) t F t X k t X M M
s AVM
sin sin sin
0 0
2
0
= + +
Or
( ) ( )
0
2
0
F M M k X
AVM s
= +

and X
0
from the above equation can be calculated as

( ) ( ) ( ) ( ) ( )
2
0
2
0 0
/ 1 / / /
n s AVM s
k F M M k F X = + =
where:

AVM
s
n
M M
k
+
=

2. Determine the heave response of the simplified structure shown in the following
figure:

9

Vertical Forces on the horizontal cylinder:

( ) ( ) t e H L D C F
kd
w M VH
cos 5 . 0 4 /
2 2
1
=

Vertical Forces on the vertical cylinder:

( ) ( ) ( ) ( ) ( ) t e H D t D e H g F
kd
w
kd
w VV
cos 5 . 0 2 / 3 / 4 cos 4 / 5 . 0
2 3
2
2
2

=

Total force on the structure:

VV VH TV
F F F + =
or

( ) ( ) ( ) ( ) ( ) t D D g L D C e H F
M
kd
w TV
cos 2 / ) 3 / 4 ( 4 / 4 / 5 . 0
2 3
2
2
2
2 2
1
+ =

Assuming that:

D
1
= 10 m, D
2
= 5 m, L = 50 m, = 0.5 rad./sec, C
M
= 2, g = 9.81

Hull pressure + acceleration dependent term = 2 x ( x 10
2
/4) (0.5)
2
50 = 1963.5 kN
Vertical column pressure dependent term = 9.81 x x 25 / 4 = 192.6 kN
Vertical column acceleration dependent term = 125 x (0.5)
2
/ 6 = 5.20 kN

The above calculations show that the acceleration forces on the vertical
column can be neglected and the total heave force on the structure can be rewritten as:

( ) ( ) | | ) cos( / 1 4 / 5 . 0
2
2
2
1
2 2
2
t g D L D C D g e H F
M
kd
w TV
=

In order to have zero heave force on the structure, the term in the bracket
should be set to zero:

10

0 1
2
2
2
1
2
=
g D
L D C
M

or
4 /
4 /
2
1
2
2
2
1
2
2
L D C
g D
L D C
g D
M M
= =

or

H M
w
V C
A g
=

A
w
: water plane area of the vertical cylinder = (D
2
2
/4)

V
H
: volume of the horizontal cylinder = (D
2
2
L / 4)
Heave response equation:

( )
TV s AVM
F Y k Y C Y M M = + + +

where

( ) ) ( 4 / D 4 / D
2
2
2
1
d A V d L M
w H
+ = + =

) 8 / D ( ) 3 / 4 (
3
2
+ =
H M AVM
V K M where K
M
= 1 for circular cylinders

C = 0

K
s
=
w
A g

and the solution of heave response equation may be written as

( ) ( ) ( )
2
/ 1 / /
N s TV
k F Y =

where

AVM
s
N
M M
k
+
=

( )
( )
|
|
.
|
\
|
(
+ +
(
=

6
2 1
cos 1 5 . 0
3
2 2
2
D
d A V A g
t
g A
V
C g A e H
Y
w H w
w
H
M w
kd
W


11

and the R.A.O. for the heave motions can be determined
as

( )
(
+ +
(
= =

6
2 1
1
5 . 0
. . .
3
2 2
2
D
d A V
g A
V
C e
H
y
O A R
w H
W
H
M
kd
w

3. Simplified Heave Response Predictions for Design Optimisation of
Semisubmersible

In the following simplified design equations for predicting the heave response
of a semisubmersible comprising twin hulls with multi columns are given. (see also
the following figure). The course participants are recommended to derive these
equations following the Morison approach described in this section and the
calculation procedures illustrated in the above examples.

The heave forces in head seas for a semisubmerisble with 4 columns per hull:

( ) ( ) ( ) ( ) ( ) { }
2 2 1 1
cos cos 1 4 5 . 0 kp Aw kp Aw z k K kV e H g F
h M
kz
w TV
h
+ + + =

Where:

( ) ( )
volume total V
kL kL
=
= 2 / / 2 / sin

The heave response in head seas:

( ) ( )( ) ( ) { }
( )
H
H h
kz
k k
Aw V k k k kp C kp C kz h e O A R
/ 1
/ 1 / / ) cos( ) cos( 1 . . .
2 2 1 1
+ + + =

Where:

( )
AVM n H
M M Aw g k + = = / /
2


12
C
1
= 4 Aw
1
/ Aw

C
2
= 4 Aw
2
/ Aw

The heave response amplitude operator given above may be modified for 3
and 2 per column per hull semisubmersible configurations by modifying C
1
and C
2
as
follows:

For 2 columns C
1
=1, C
2
=0.0

For 3 columns C
1
=4 Aw
1
/ Aw, C
2
=2 Aw
2
/ Aw, p
2
=0

The heave forces in beam seas for a semisubmersible with N columns per hull

( ) ( ) { } ) cos( 1 1 5 . 0 kb Aw z k N K kV e H g F
h M
kz
W TV
h
+ + =

The heave response in beam seas:

( ) ( ) { } ) cos( / 1 / 1 . . . kb k k z k e O A R
H h
kz
h
+ =

MOTION RESPONSE PREDICTIONS USING THE SOURCE
DISTRIBUTION METHODS

In the source distribution methods the wave acceleration and rigid-body
motion induced forces are calculated from the solutions of scattering and radiation
potentials respectively. In two or three dimensional source distribution methods the
unknown potentials of scattering and radiation are represented in terms of the Greens
function. The solutions of these potentials can be obtained from the kinematic
boundary conditions. The Greens function integral equation can be solved by
dividing the three dimensional underwater geometry into N panels and assuming that
source strengths remain constant over each panel (3-D Source Distribution Method).
Alternatively, the underwater geometry is first divided into M number of two
dimensional strips and each strip is subdivided into L segments on which source
strengths are assumed to be constant. It is also assumed that there is no interaction
between the strips (2-D source distribution Method). Once the potential functions are
determined the pressure due to wave scattering or rigid-body motions can be
calculated from Bernoullis equation. The forces and moments can be obtained from
the surface integrals, as in equation (1).

The derivation and solution of motion response equations in source
distribution methods are identical to those given in the Morison approach.

The two dimensional source distribution method to calculate wave and motion
induced forces on floating structures has been described in detail in Refs. 4, 5 and 6.
The three dimensional source distribution procedures for hydrodynamic load and
response calculations have been detailed in Refs. 7, 8 and 9.


13

COMPARATIVE STUDIES ON MOTION RESPONSE PREDICTIONS

The 17
th
ITTC Ocean Engineering Committee carried out an extensive study
to compare the different methods employed in predicting the motion response of a
semi-submersible. The study was performed using 34 programs from 28 different
organisations and a summary of the committees work has been published in Ref. 10.
The methods implemented in the computer programs included the Morison approach,
as well as two or three dimensional source distribution techniques. This study
concluded that motion response predictions from most of the programs correlate well
for surge and sway motions and they are also in good agreement with the
experimental measurements. However heave, roll, pitch and yaw response predictions
show large scatter. The study also concluded that the three dimensional source
distribution technique does not yield better predictions than the Morison approach.

The 9
th
ISSC initiated a case study to compare different diffraction/radiation
analysis methods of predicting wave and motion induced forces acting on a tension
leg platform. The resulting first-order motion and mean drift forces were compared.
Seventeen organisations took part in the study and most of the organisations
employed the three dimensional source distribution or boundary element methods to
perform the task. The results of this study have been published in Ref. 11 The results
revealed that there is a good correlation in the prediction of surge, sway and yaw
motions. However, the other modes of motion, as well as wave and motion induced
forces, show large scatter.

A recent comparative study of computer programs for floating systems was
sponsored by the Royal Norwegian Council for Scientific and Industrial Research as
part of a larger study on floating production systems for oil and gas FPS 2000
(Ref.12) Twenty three Institutions worldwide took part in the study and predicted first
and second order forces and resulting motions of a ship and a deep draught floater
(semi-submersible).

While first-order force and motion predictions carried out for the ship
geometry by different institutions correlated well with each other, there were
significant differences between the predictions carried out for the semisubmersible
and for the second order force and motions of the ship. The typical variations in
results are summarised in the following table :

STANDARD DEVIATION IN PER CENT OF THE MEAN VALUES

QUANTITY SHIP SEMISUBMERSIBLE
First-order Forces 3 15
Added-Mass 3 15
Damping 30 25
Steady Surge 40 50
and Sway Force
Steady Heave Force >50 >50
Steady Roll, Pitch and
Yaw moments
>50 >50
Slowly varying second- >50 >50

14
order forces

The 20
th
ITTC Conference Ocean Engineering Committee undertook another
comparative study by correlating the first-order wave exciting force and resulting
response values as well as wave drift force and moment coefficients predicted for a
semisubmersible by about twenty different organisations using their computer
programs. The predictions will also be correlated with the measurements.

Although the comparative studies undertaken to-date show generally poor
correlations when the results are closely examined one may that the spread in results
from different computer programs based on identical hydrodynamic theory was just as
large as that from programs based on different theories. This may lead us to conclude
that the problem of disagreement in the first-order motion response predictions
reduces to a problem of validation of computer software and accurate modelling
rather than inaccuracy of the underlying hydrodynamic theory.

ADVANCES IN FIRST ORDER WAVE FORCE AND RESPONSE
CALCULATIONS

ZERO SPEED UNSTEADY FLOW PROBLEM:
This problem has almost reached the most advanced state in its reduction to a
computationally efficient and reliable form. Therefore it is of interest for direct
application to vessels without forward speed, but also as a model to provide guidance
for the more difficult cases involving steady and unsteady forward motion.

A substantial number of computer programs have been developed to solve this
problem for arbitrary three dimensional floating or submerged bodies, in water which
is infinitely deep or of constant depth. These programs were widely used in the design
of offshore platforms. However the limitations of the first generation programs were
apparent when various comparative studies were carried out (Refs. 10,11)

In order to improve this unsatisfactory situation the second generation
panel programs have been developed with various numerical refinements. These
include fast algorithms for evaluating the free surface Green function with controlled
accuracy, and the use of an iterative solver for the linear system of algebraic equations
leading to the value of the unknown potential on each panel. The use of these
programs have made it possible to increase the maximum number of panels from a
few hundred to several thousand, and to establish convergence of the solution as this
number is increased. Comparisons of the first-order wave and rigid-body induced
forces and motion responses obtained for a deep water floater and a ship using the
second-generation panel programs show significant improvements. Full details of
the comparative study are given in Ref.12

THE FORWARD-SPEED STEADY PROBLEM:

One of the most difficult problems in ship hydrodynamics involve steady or
unsteady motion with forward speed. The difficulties are associated with the
analytical formulation and the numerical problems in developing solutions. The
uncertainties regarding the analytical formulation are associated with the issue of

15
linearization of the free-surface. Well known integral expressions exist for the
steady free-surface Green function, with forward velocity included. However these
functions, and presumably also the exact solution of the linearised problem, contain
subtle and very complicated mathematical singularities.

An approximate linearization of the free-surface condition, without restricting
the geometry or Froude Number, is known as the Kelvin Neumann approach in
wave resistance theory. Several computer programs have been written utilising the
Kelvin Neumann approach and excluding the short-wave component of the
spectrum in evaluating the Green function. However, due to numerical convergence
problems the routine use of these programs is not as yet practicable. Of course this
situation could change if fast algorithms are used for the Green function, and if
effective numerical filtering of the short wave length singularity can be
implemented in a rational manner.

THE FORWARD-SPEED UNSTEADY PROBLEM:

The same techniques used for the steady problem can be extended to unsteady
ship motions in waves. Having developed and validated computer programs based on
3-D source distribution technique for zero forward speed Chan (Ref. 9) extended the
formulation of Greens function to determine the wave loading on a marine vessel
travelling with a forward speed in deep and shallow water. The Green function
formulation developed by Chan represents a translating and oscillating source in
infinite and finite water depths. Newman (Refs.13 and 14) and Telste and Noblesse
(Ref.15) have developed algorithms for the computation of a Green function
representing an oscillating source or translating source for infinite water depth.
However, the oscillating source potential or translating source potential cannot satisfy
the undisturbed free surface condition for the unsteady forward motion problem.
Inglis and Price (Ref. 16) and Wu and Eatock Taylor (Ref. 17) have independently
modified the expression for Greens function representing a translating and pulsating
source which satisfies the undisturbed free-surface condition for the unsteady forward
motion problem. However, these modified expressions of the Green function are only
applicable to deep water. The formulations derived in Ref. 9 are also applicable to
finite and infinite water depths and allow for the interaction between steady waves
(Kelvin Waves) and the unsteady waves (Radiation Waves) and satisfy the
undisturbed free surface conditions.


16

REFERENCES

1. HOOFT, J.P., A mathematical Model of Determining Hydrodynamically
Induced Forces on a Semisubmersible, Trans. Of SNAME, Vol. 79, 1971.

2. PAULLING, J.R., Elastic Response of Stable Platform Structures to Wave
Loading, Proc. Of the Intl. Symposium on the Dynamics of Marine
Vehicles and Structures, London, 1974.

3. OO, K.M. and MILLER, N.S. Semisubmersible Design: The effect of
different geometries on Heaving Response and Stability, Trans. R.I.N.A.,
1977.

4. FRANK, W., Oscillation of Cylinders in or below the Free Surface of
Deep Fluids, NSRDC Report 2375, 1967.

5. SALVESEN, T., TUCK, E.O. and FALTINSEN, O., Ship Motions and
Sea Loads Trans. SNAME, Vol. 78, 1970.

6. KIM, C.H., CHOU, F-S and TIEN, D., Motions and Hydrodynamic Loads
of a Ship Advancing in Oblique Waves, Trans. SNAME, Vol. 88, 1980.

7. GARRISON, C.J. Hydrodynamic Loading of Large Offshore Structures:
Three-Dimensional Source Distribution Methods in Numerical Methods in
Offshore Engineering, Ed. Zienkiewicz, Lewis, and Stagg, Wiley Series in
Numerical Methods in Engineering, 1978.

8. HOGBEN, N and STANDING, R.G., Wave Loads on Large Bodies, Proc.
Of Intl. Symposium on Dynamics of marine Vehicles and Structures in
Waves, London, 1974.

9. CHAN, H.S., A Three Dimensional Technique for Predicting First and
Second Order Hydrodynamic Forces on a Marine Vehicle Advancing in
Waves, Ph.D. Thesis, University of Glasgow, 1990.

10. TAKAGI, M., ARAI, S.I., TAKEZA, S., TANAKA. K. and TAKARADA,
N., A Comparison of Methods for Calculating the motion of a
semisubmersible, Ocean Engineering, Vol. 12, No. 1, 1985.

11. EATOCK TAYLOR, R. and JEFFERYS, E.R., Variability of
Hydrodynamic Load Predictions for a Tension Leg Platform, Ocean
Engineering, Vol. 13, No. 5, 1986.

12. NIELSEN, I.G., HERFJORD, K. and LOKEN, A., Floating Production
Systems in Waves: Results from a Comparative Study on Hydrodynamic
Coefficients, Wave Forces and Motion Responses, Report of the Workshop
on FPS200, Bergen, Norway, 1989.


17
13. NEWMAN, J.N., Evaluation of the Wave Resistance Green Function: Part
1 The Double Integral, Journal of Ship Research, Vol. 13, No. 2, 1987a.

14. NEWMAN, J.N., Evaluation of the Wave Resistance Green Function: Part
2 The Single Integral on the Centreplane, Journal of Ship Engineering,
Vol. 13, No. 3, 1987b.

15. TELSTE, J.G. and NOBLESSE, F., Numerical Evaluation of the Green
Function of Water-Wave Radiation and Diffraction, Journal of Ship
Research, Vol. 30, No. 2, 1986.

16. INGLIS, R.B. and PRICE, W.G., Calculation of the Velocity Potential of a
Translating, Pulsating Source, Trans. RINA, Vol. 123, pp 163-175, 1981.

17. WU, E.X. and EATOCK TAYLOR R., A Greens Function Form for Ship
Motions at Forward Speed, International Shipbuilding Progress, Vol. 34,
1987.

18. SARPKAYA, T. and ISAACSON, M., Mechanics of Wave Forces on
Offshore Structures, Van Nostran Reinhold Company, New York, 1981.

19. HALLAM, M.G., HEAF, N.J and WOOTTON, L.R., Dynamics of Marine
Structures: Methods of calculating the dynamic response of fixed
structures subject to wave and current action, CIRIA, Underwater
Engineering Group, London, 1978.


18


19


20


21


22


23


24


25


26


27


28


29


30


31


32


33


34


35

3.linear Wave

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

3.linear Wave

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

WAVE EXCITATION FORCES AND MOTIONS

respectively. The linearised drag coefficients can

= wave ext. force amplitude

You might also like