Ocean Engineering 30 (2003) 12691282 www.elsevier.

com/locate/oceaneng

Hydrodynamic design of a TLP type ofoading platform

Muhittin Soylemez a,, Oguz Ylmaz b
b

Department of Ocean Engineering, Istanbul Technical University, Ayazaga Kampusu, 80626, Istanbul, Turkey Department of Mathematics, Abant Izzet Baysal University, Golkoy Kampusu, Bolu, 14280, Bolu, Turkey Received 9 April 2002; accepted 24 July 2002

Abstract The hydrodynamic aspects of a design study of a TLP type ofoading platform, that will operate in the north-east of Marmara Sea are presented in this paper. The main scope of the paper is to discuss the general properties of the platform and environmental conditions prior to the calculation of hydrodynamic forces based on Morisons equation and the resultant motion responses. The non-linear quasi-static effect is taken into account due to set-down phenomenon in the calculation of surge responses. Comparisons between the designs with two different drafts and the results of their spectral analysis are presented. With decrease in the draft of the platform, surge responses increase in the low frequency region. Since the differences between the surge responses of two different designs are not signicant, the shorter platform has been adopted for the location due to its low cost. The non-linear set-down effect is not found to be signicant because this platform has relatively short taut chains compared to those of conventional type. 2002 Elsevier Science Ltd. All rights reserved.
Keywords: Ofoading platform; Hydrodynamic design; Non-linear quasi-static effect

Corresponding author. Fax: +90-212-285-6508. E-mail address: soylemez@itu.edu.tr (M. Soylemez).

0029-8018/03/$ - see front matter 2002 Elsevier Science Ltd. All rights reserved. doi:10.1016/S0029-8018(02)00107-5

1270

M. Soylemez, O. Ylmaz / Ocean Engineering 30 (2003) 12691282

1. Introduction

This paper presents some results of a hydrodynamic analysis of a TLP type ofoading platform. This platform is designed to operate nearshore of Ambar, which is a suburb located west of the city of Istanbul. The platform is intended to serve the tankers in the severe sea conditions to ofoad their cargo to the storages on land without any trouble to manouvre to board to the pier. Tension leg platforms (TLPs) are of great interest to offshore researchers in broad areas. One of the areas investigated in TLPs is their surge motion either induced by wave or current. Lee et al. (1999) studied the effect of material properties of strained elastic tethers on the surge motion of the platform. Jain (1997) presented a motion analysis method of TLPs non-linearly coupled in the restoring force matrix in six degrees-of-freedom. Paik et al. (1996) applied quadratic transfer functions to predict and compare responses of a TLP with those obtained with a linear transfer functions only. A wide range of different aspects of research studies on TLPs is widely presented in a review paper by Adrezin et al. (1996). In this paper, the platform is analysed for the conditions that are obtained for the north of Marmara Sea. The conguration of the platform is unique in its own operational conditions. However, it is much like a TLP type of structure except the tendons are made of chains instead of cables. The main oating body of the structure is also longer than any conventional TLP conguration comparing to its lateral dimensions. This main body of the structure is shortened in the second phase of the project in order to minimize the initial building cost. The fundamental purpose of constructing a oating ofoading platform for the location having shallow water characteristics is to keep the construction and material cost of the platform low. The reason for deciding on a TLP type of conguration is mainly due to almost no heave response during the ofoading process and that TLPs have also better response characteristics in surge and sway motions than other type of offshore platforms. The motion of the platform is analyzed using both single-wave prediction and spectral methods. In storm conditions, surge motions could be quite large causing non-linear effects in the motion responses of the platform. Therefore, the non-linear quasi-static effect is also included due to set-down occurring in the surge motion. Wave forces are calculated using Morisons equation since the platform has all slender cylindrical members. The motion characteristics of the platform are derived and found to be appropriate for this type of structure to operate as an ofoading platform. The motion responses estimated by spectral analysis are more favorable than those by the single-wave prediction method. The emphasis is shown by including the set-down behavior due to non-linear stiffness, which comes into effect during large surge motions. The paper starts with dening the geometry of the platform and the environmental conditions. General particulars of the platform are presented in Section 2. Natural frequencies and the mean displacement due to current are given in Section 3. Methods of calculating the hydrodynamic forces and motions are briey introduced in Section 4. Results for the single-wave prediction method are presented in Section

M. Soylemez, O. Ylmaz / Ocean Engineering 30 (2003) 12691282

1271

5. The non-linear quasi-static set-down effect is described in Section 6. Finally, Section 7 summarizes the results of spectral analysis.

2. Geometry of the structure and environmental data The general conguration and the coordinate system with the geometrical drawing details are depicted in Fig. 1 and Fig. 2, respectively. Structure consists of fairly slender cylindrical members with 1/20 column diameter and length ratio. The platform is moored with taut vertical chains to restrict the vertical heave motions. Main particulars of the platform is given in Table 1. The environmental data are listed for operational and 50-year storm conditions in Tables 2 and 3, respectively. As seen in Fig. 2, x and z axes are placed on the free surface of the sea while y axes is taken vertically upward. Motions in x direction is dened as surge; in z direction as sway and in y direction as heave.

Fig. 1.

General conguration of TLP.

1272

M. Soylemez, O. Ylmaz / Ocean Engineering 30 (2003) 12691282

Fig. 2.

Denition of the coordinate system.

Table 1 Main particulars of the platform Properties Column Diameter (D, R = D/2) Column Length (L) Water Depth (h) Distance between the centres of columns (xc = zc) Chain length (l) Chain diameter (d) Proof load for chain Breaking load for chain Minimum weight Cross sectional area (Ac) Initial tension (T0) Values 1.016 m 20 m and 24 m 40 m 7m 20 m and 16 m 0.06 m 1383 kN 1942 kN 0.801 kN/m pd2/4 71 kN

3. Natural frequencies and mean displacements Hydrodynamic analysis consists of two parts; in the rst part natural frequencies and mean displacements due to current are calculated and given in this section. In the second part, oscillations about the mean displacements are predicted using a frequency-domain analysis, which is presented in Section 5.

M. Soylemez, O. Ylmaz / Ocean Engineering 30 (2003) 12691282

1273

Table 2 Operational conditions for the Marmara Sea Properties Maximum wave height (Hmax) Wave period (Tz) Current speed (Vc) Values 1m 4s 0.5 m/s

Table 3 50-year storm conditions for the Marmara Sea Properties Maximum wave height (Hmax) Wave period (T-Z) Current speed (Vc) Values 8.7 m 8s 1 m/s

Natural circular frequencies and periods are calculated using the following equations, respectively: wni ki and Tni Ai 2p wni (1)

where i = x stands for the surge motion; i = y for the heave motion and i = z for the sway motion. The stiffness in surge direction is calculated as 14.23 kN/m using the formula kx = 4 (To/l). The stiffness in heave direction is calculated as 113130 kN/m using the formula ky = 4 (gp R2 + AcE/l) where E is the Youngs Modulus. The total of mass and added mass in surge direction is 1196.8 kN using the formula Ax = 4 (R2L + R2L). The total of mass and added mass in heave direction is 539.55 kN using the formula Ay = 4r (pR2L + 4/3R3). Undamped heave natural period (Tny) and the frequency (wny) is calculated as 0.138 seconds and 45.36 rad/s, respectively. The natural surge period (Tnx) and the frequency (wnx) is calculated as 18.41 seconds and 0.34 rad/s, respectively. Considering the environmental data, it is easily seen that resonance is not possible in the operational site and this will be more clear when we consider the wave spectrum and the spectral response of the platform in Section 7. Using the static calculations due to the mean current velocity, mean horizontal displacement is calculated as 0.42 m for the operational conditions based on the current force given by Fc = 4 (1/2 Cd D L V2c). Similarly, Fc and the mean displacement for the 50-year storm condition are calculated as 24 kN and 1.69 m, respectively and seems to be quite reasonable for the operational site. Since the wind exposed area of the superstructure is quite small, the wind forces and the mean displacement due to wind are ignored.

1274

M. Soylemez, O. Ylmaz / Ocean Engineering 30 (2003) 12691282

4. Hydrodynamic forces and motions 4.1. Wave forces Since the structure consists of slender cylindrical members, Morisons equation (Morison et al., 1950) is suitable to calculate the wave forces acting on the structure. The added mass (Cm) and the drag (Cd) coefcients are chosen to be 1.5 and 0.6, respectively. These values of Cm and Cd are also suitable for the storm conditions (Sarpkaya et al., 1981). The horizontal and vertical velocities and the accelerations and the pressure are given by the following formulas: u j ,v x j ,u y u ,v t v ,p t j r t (2)

where is the velocity potential is dened as follows: j g acosh[k(y h)] sin(kx wt) w cosh[kh] (3)

where g stands for the gravitational constant; a for the wave amplitude; for the circular wave frequency; k for the wave number; h for the water depth and t for the time. Using the above equations, total heave and surge forces on the structure can easily be calculated by summing the forces acting on the individual members of the platform. There will be some cancellations due to phasing. The total heave force is written in the following form: Fy Asinwt Bcoswt (4) in which B = 4(Apy + Aay) cos (kxc/2) and A = 0 and where Apy rg
a

cosh[k(h L)] 2 pR and Aay coshkh

4 3 rR 3

w2

sinh[k(h L)] sinhkh

(5)

The phase angle for the heave force can be written as Jheave = tan-1 (A/B), that equals to zero. The total surge force can be given in a similar manner as follows: Fx Csinwt Ecoswt (6) in which C = -4Apx cos (kxc/2) and E = 4Adx cos (kxc/2) where Apx and Adx are denotated by the following equations: Apx Adx rg aCmpR2 sinh(kh) sinh[k(h L)] cosh(kh) sinh(2kh) sinh([2k(h L)] 2k (7) (8)

2 1 81 aw L rCdD 2 sinh(kh) 3p2

From the above equation the phase angle for the surge force can be dened as Jsurge = tan-1 (C/E).

M. Soylemez, O. Ylmaz / Ocean Engineering 30 (2003) 12691282

1275

4.2. Motion responses Uncoupled heave motion and phase angle are predicted using the following equation of motion in the frequency domain, Ayy cyy|y| kyy Fy (9)

in which Ay is the mass+added mass of the structure in heave mode; cy is the viscous damping force coefcient and ky is the restoring force coefcient due to the geometry and the chains. The non-linear viscous damping term is linearized (see Chakrabarti, 1987) as follows: y|y| 8 (wy )y 3p est (10)

Hence Eq. 9 can be rewritten as follows: Ayy clyy kyy Fy (11) where cly is the linearized viscous damping coefcient dened as cly = cy 8/3 (wyest) and cy is given as cy 4 1 / 2 rCdpR2. The standard solution of a second order differential equation with harmonic forcing function on the right hand side is written as follows: y where y1 A(ky Ayw2) (ky Ayw2)2 Bclyw and y2 (clyw)2 B(ky Ayw2) (ky Ayw2)2 Aclyw (clyw)2 (13) y1sinwt y2coswt (12)

The phase angle for the heave motion is dened as Jheave = tan-1 (y1/y2). In order to obtain the solution an initial estimation of yest is used, and after few steps iteration gives the desired result. The equation of motion for the surge motion is similar to the heave motion except the restoring forces are due to the moorings only, namely: Axx cxx|x| kx Fx (14)

in which Ax is the mass+added mass in surge direction; cx is the viscous damping force coefcient and kx is the restoring force due to the mooring. Viscous damping is linearised by the following formulation. x|x| Axx 8 (wx )x 3p est clxx kx Fx (15) (16)

where clx is the linearized viscous damping coefcient dened as clx = cx8/3(wxest) and cx is given by cx = 41/2rCdLD. The solution of Eq.16 can be written as follows: x x1sinwt x2coswt (17)

1276

M. Soylemez, O. Ylmaz / Ocean Engineering 30 (2003) 12691282

where x1 C(kx Axw2) (kx Axw2)2 Eclxw and y1 (clxw)2 E(kx Axw2) (kx Axw2)2 Cclxw (clxw)2 (18)

The phase angle for the surge response can be written as Jsurge = tan-1 (x1/x2). In order to obtain the surge motion, two iterations have to be performed; rst, the iteration for the linearized damping term as was done in the heave motion and, second, the iteration to take the non-linear quasi-static effects into account as explained in Section 6.

5. Results for the single-wave prediction method The heave response amplitudes of the platform are found to be negligible and are not presented here. The surge response amplitude and the phase angle for the 50year design wave conditions are presented in Figs. 3 and 4. The surge response amplitude for the storm conditions is estimated as 2.7 m and seems to be quite reasonable. For this condition the total mooring force per chain is calculated as 85.8 kN and it is well below the anchor holding power. For the operational conditions the surge response is obtained as 0.06 m and the mooring force per chain is 49 kN (Fig. 5). The surge response of the structure reaches to a peak of about 8 m amplitude in the very low region of the frequency of 0.2 rad/s (Fig. 3). In Fig. 6 comparison of surge amplitudes of the designs with two different drafts

Fig. 3.

Surge response (50-Year Storm).

M. Soylemez, O. Ylmaz / Ocean Engineering 30 (2003) 12691282

1277

Fig. 4.

Surge response phase.

Fig. 5.

Surge Response (Operational Sea State).

are shown. Draft of the platform was shortened 4 meters in the second phase of the project in order to keep the initial constructional cost low without a signicant cause to the chain loads and changing the signicant surge response characteristics of the structure. As it is seen in Fig. 6, there is not any change in the surge response of

1278

M. Soylemez, O. Ylmaz / Ocean Engineering 30 (2003) 12691282

Fig. 6.

Comparison of two different designs with two different drafts.

the platform above the frequency of 0.35 rad/s. However, below that frequency only, there is an increment reaching to 33% in the surge response due to 4 m decrease in the draft of the platform. However, the frequency range where the surge response increment occurs does not effect the operation of the platform since the dominant wave frequency for the operational and storm conditions is well outside this range of frequencies.

6. Non-linear quasi-static effect Since the surge motion of the platform will be quite large in storm conditions, the non-linear effects arising due to the stiffness in the horizontal direction should be taken into account. The draft of the platform will increase with large surge motions and this will result in increased tension in the chains (Fylling and Larsen, 1989). Also due to the increase in the angle between the chains and the vertical axis, the restoring force in the horizontal direction will be non-linear. According to the moment equilibrium for the chain the non-linear stiffness will be as follows, 1 wl x 2 0 4 l0cosq Tx

H(x)

(19)

in which T = T0 + yKwp and y = l0 (1 - cos ) and Kwp = gpR2, where H(x) stands for the non-linear restoring force; T for the tension in the vertical direction in the displaced position of the platform; T0 for the initial tension; y for the set-

M. Soylemez, O. Ylmaz / Ocean Engineering 30 (2003) 12691282

1279

down due to surge motion; w for the weight of chain per meter; l0 for the initial length of the chain and q for the angle that the chains make with the vertical. Relation between the surge motion x and the set down y is not linear and can be given as follows (Fylling and Larsen, 1989):
2

x2

y(T0 EA (l l0 0

Kwpl0) Kwp y)

l0

(l0

y)2

(20)

y) (T0

In order to include this non-linear effect into the frequency-domain calculations, the Newton-Raphson and bisection iteration methods are used (Press et al., 1992). The effect of set-down phenomena due to quasi-static non-linear stiffness is shown in Fig. 7. The non-linear set-down phenomenon comes into effect around the low frequency range that is smaller than 0.2 rad/s. The difference between the linear and the non-linear modelling is quite signicant in the lower range of frequencies as seen in the gure. The difference reaches to its maximum about 0.1 rad/s. There is an almost 50% reduction in the surge response estimation by employing the nonlinear set-down modelling in the calculations. This nonlinear behavior is not so important for the operational conditions since the dominant wave frequencies for both environmental conditions are well outside this region.

Fig. 7.

Comparison of the nonlinear quasi-static effect with the linear model.

1280

M. Soylemez, O. Ylmaz / Ocean Engineering 30 (2003) 12691282

7. Spectral analysis The spectral analysis is only performed for the 50-year storm conditions. The short-term wave characteristics are represented by a JonSwap spectrum with 4.4 meters signicant wave height Hs and 8 seconds zero crossing period Tz (Fig. 8). The surge response spectrum is shown in Fig. 9 and the signicant surge response is calculated using the following equation

SS

2
0

Sxx(w)dw

(21)

and is estimated as 1.74 meters. It is seen that spectral analysis gives more favorable results than the single-wave prediction method. When looking at the natural surge frequency of the structure (wnx = 0.34 rad/s) and its surge response spectrum in Fig. 9, it is easy to conclude that the platforms natural surge frequency is well outside the frequency of 0.6 rad/s at which the energy of the wave spectrum is concentrated. Hence, the platform has safe surge response characteristics for the operational site.

8. Conclusions Hydrodynamic analysis of a TLP type of ofoading platform, that will operate in the north-east of Marmara Sea are carried out in a design study. The design study

Fig. 8. JonSwap wave spectrum (50-Year Storm for Hs = 4.7 m, Tz = 8s).

M. Soylemez, O. Ylmaz / Ocean Engineering 30 (2003) 12691282

1281

Fig. 9.

Surge Response Spectrum (50-Year storm condition).

consists of two phases: The draft of the platform was chosen 24 m in the rst phase. Having the hydrodynamic analysis performed for the preliminary design conguration, the draft of the platform was reduced to 20 m in order to lower the constructional cost of the platform. Therefore, all hydrodynamic calculations were repeated for the shorter form of the platform in the second phase of the design and the following results are obtained for the second design of 20 m draft. Under operational conditions, the motion of the platform is negligible particularly for the heave mode. The surge response is 2.7 m according to the single-wave prediction method, and the signicant surge response is found to be 1.74 m using the JonSwap wave spectrum for the 50-year storm conditions with Hs = 4.4 m and Tz = 8 s. The maximum mooring force is calculated as 83.78 kN per chain under the storm conditions. Thus, there is no danger that anchors will move. The motion characteristics of two designs only differ in the very low frequency range which is outside the frequency range of the waves. Hence, there is no expectation for any unsafe surge motion response for the proposed conguration. Moreover, the surge motion calculations are repeated for both linear and the non-linear modelling in order to take into account the set-down effect. The non-linear model gives more favorable results than the linear one does. However, the non-linear setdown phenomenon only comes into effect in the very low region of the frequencies that is outside the frequency range of the waves. We can nally conclude that TLP type ofoading platform designed for the Marmara Sea gives quite good response values and it should be preferred to a xed platform.

1282

M. Soylemez, O. Ylmaz / Ocean Engineering 30 (2003) 12691282

Acknowledgements The authors would like to gratefully acknowledge Professor A. Yucel Odabasi for his kind interest and encouragement for this study, and the nancial support provided by Aygaz A.S.

References
Adrezin, R., Bar-Avi, P., Benaroya, H., 1996. Dynamic response of compliant offshore structures-review. ASCE. Journal of Aerospace Engineering 4, 114131. Chakrabarti, S.K., 1987. Hydrodynamics of Offshore Structures. Springer-Verlag, Berlin. Fylling, I.J., Larsen, C.M., 1989. TLP tendon analysis. In: Demirbilek, Z. (Ed.), Tension Leg Platform A State of the Art Review., pp. 139192. Jain, A.K., 1997. Nonlinear coupled response of offshore tension leg platforms to regular wave forces. Ocean Engineering 24 (7), 577592. Lee, H.H., Wang, P.-W., Lee, C.-P., 1999. Dragged surge motion of tension leg platforms and strained elastic tethers. Ocean Engineering 26 (6), 575594. Morison, J., OBrien, M., Johnson, J., Schaaf, S., 1950. The force by surface waves on piles. Petroleum Transactions 189, 149154. Paik, I., Roesset, J.M., 1996. Use of quadratic transfer functions to predict response of tension leg platforms. Journal of Engineering Mechanics 122 (9), 882889. Press, W.H., Teukolsky, S.A., Vetterling, W.T., Flannery, B.P., 1992. Numerical Recipes in Fortran. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge. Sarpkaya, T., Isaacson, M., 1981. Mechanics of Wave Forces on Offshore Structures. van Nostrand Reinhold, New York, NY.