EXPRO-CFD: Progress in Fluid Structure Interaction Peter Woodburn & Paul Gallagher Atkins Process Epsom, UK

INTRODUCTION
The chief objective of this paper is to provide an overview of the activities being undertaken in the EXPRO-CFD FP5 project. EXPROCFD is a collaborative project aimed at making substantial improvements to techniques for the prediction of non-linear and extreme wave loads and responses of offshore floating production systems. The project is supported by the European Commission as part of its Fifth Framework programme Growth2000, and has been running for just over two years of its three year planned duration.

1. 2.

The coupling of wave diffraction (linear and non-linear) with turbulent viscous flow effects (CFD). Further integration with vessel/riser/mooring FE response models (Fluid structure interaction).

The first of these areas relates to the compatibility of general purpose finite volume RANSE methods with the requirements of offshore fluid loading problems. Traditionally, RANSE approaches have been developed to provide time averaged solutions for velocity, pressures, temperatures etc., for compressible and incompressible, turbulent flows. General purpose codes are also able to run in transient mode in order to solve the so-called unsteady RANSE problem. However, issues relating to the compatibility of the timescales involved are still the subject of discussion [1]. The main question then, is to what extent can unsteady RANSE methods, or indeed LES methods (since their solution of the fluid momentum equations follow the same approaches as in unsteady RANSE), represent classical hydrodynamic problems, and would some form of hybrid approach would be more appropriate or in some way optimal? The main areas of interest in this respect are unsteady turbulence modelling and the resolution of the free surface the near-field of the vessel or structure. The second area concerns the practical application of the developed flow solvers. In many offshore engineering applications, fluid-structure interaction is important, even at the level of rigid b ody motions of a single vessel or coupled systems. A number of well established commercial packages exist to provide wave loading and response predictions for linear, and certain non-linear, problems in vessel response. In all cases, viscous effects are added empirically, and lifting effects largely ignored. The use of CFD offers a replacement for these empirical terms and the ability to include missing effects. The main areas of interest then are whether these viscous or lifting effects can be modelled with sufficient accuracy, and whether CFD methods can at he same time give accurate results for inertial loads. The computational systems have been developed with a defined set of important design problems in mind, including; slow drift damping and viscous drag, extreme or steep wave loads with viscous effects in the

The partnership consists of 13 organisations and research institutions

from the UK, Norway, The Netherlands, France and Spain. It includes 2 oil companies (BP and Statoil), three design contractors (Aker, SBM and LMG Marin), three consultants (Atkins, Sirehna and CIMNE), one classification society (DNV), a model basin (MARIN) and three Universities (Imperial College London, University College London and Ecole Centrale de Nantes, who also have access to a model basin). The Coordinators of the project are Atkins. The key themes of EXPRO-CFD are integration, validation and delivery systems. Integration. A novel but pragmatic approach has been adopted to provide integrated hydrodynamic and fluid-structure interaction analysis systems. No new software tools have been developed. Instead, existing and reliable methods in diffraction, CFD and Finite Element analysis, have been adopted and the means to allow them to communicate or run in parallel investigated. This allows the integrity of existing software tools to be retained along with all of the built-in knowledge and experience gained in their development and application. Their integration however opens up many new capabilities, opportunities to clear away uncertainty and conservatism, and improvements in the prediction of design loads, but at significantly lower cost. The two main areas for integration through co-processing investigated in this project are:

MARNET-CFD Final Meeting, 20 th-21st March 2003

Page number

trough to crest region, impact, vortex shedding and interactions, air-gap and wave run-up, and tether ringing and springing. Validation. One of the over-riding issues in the development of CFD methods is always that of validation. During the development of ideas for this project it was clear that very little three dimensional flow field data is in existence for this purpose. One objective of the work was therefore to generate such data. The systems developed in EXPRO-CFD are being validated at a number of levels as follows: Scientifically. Particle Image Velocimetry (PIV) measurement techniques have been applied to a vertical cylinder in waves to provide flow velocity and turbulence 3D field data for validation of the coupled CFD and wave diffraction computational system. This data will also be a valuable deliverable from the project. A similar programme has been carried out for an FPSO in simulated, slow, unsteady drift motions in waves. These PIV measurements are supplemented with data on surface pressure distributions, loads and responses. As a practical design analysis methodology. The integration of the diffraction, CFD and FE models will be carried out by reference to a series of benchmarking exercises based on FPSO, SPAR and TLP forms. Practical techniques in mesh building, integration of boundary conditions and data exchange between computational models will be established. Working methods which maximize the cost-benefit of using the new methodologies within project teams will also be defined. Through case studies. The simulation systems will be tested by application in concept design case studies on FPSO, SPAR/CALM and TLP systems. Results for key design load cases relevant to each platform type are to be compared between the partners, and experiments on the SPAR and FPSO carried out to validate the end results. Delivery systems. The project is also developing a working software environment, again based on an existing pre-and post-processor. This working environment will be used to build models, analyze results and launch applications i.e. automatically control the progress of the interactive computations. This will be provided as an additional capability rather than to supersede existing systems, but is expected to add to the efficiency of the analysis process. The intention is that this software environment is not limited to hosting the CFD and dynamics tools used in the project, but is general. This will allow future users of the system some choice in which software tools are most appropriate, perhaps because they are already in use in that organization or have been specifically validated for the flow of interest.

The key element of the investigation involves the development of methods to couple together hydrodynamic loads calculated using CFD, with the responses (displacements, velocities and accelerations) of the floating structure or system. The investigation has included a review and testing of methods to achieve this aim, from simple file transfer techniques to full co-processing using systems such as MPccI. The development of methods to deal practically with potentially widely differing time and length scales has also been a key feature of the work, along with various theoretical and numerical issues in accuracy and stability. The two groups are using different CFD approaches, one being based on a structured multi-block algorithm, and the other is using unstructured grids. The intention is that these two methods be compared with respect to computational and practical efficiencies, given that the prime intention is that they achieve broadly comparable results in terms of validation. This work has been based around 2 representat ive test cases, an FPSO and a vertical circular cylinder (fixed, freely-floating and moored or tethered) each of which is being worked though systematically to iron out bugs and ensure efficient integration. The group working on the FPSO has initially concentrated on the fluid domain beneath the wave zone in order to focus on the viscous flow-field around the hull and is role in affecting slow drift damping. The partners concentrating on the vertical circular cylinder or SPAR-like geometry, have chiefly been concerned with issues relating to the free surface, inertial loads and fluid structure interaction. WP2. Supporting technical studies. In the early development of ideas for the project, it was considered important that some time should be spent on the fundamentals of fluidstructure interaction, numerical stability, turbulence modeling and nonlinear wave modeling. Work package 2 was set up to address some of these issues, and for its participants (Imperial College London, University College London and Ecole Centrale de Nantes) to advise on specific problems that may arise within work package 1. It was felt that, if the range of models or numerical schemes available within general purpose CFD packages proved to be less appropriate for reasons of either accuracy, or stability, then the bespoke flow and fluid structure interaction models developed in this element of the project would serve as valuable benchmarks and diagnostic tools. The two Universities from the UK have worked together, combining experience in non-linear f ree surface potential flow modeling and viscous turbulent flows. This group is chiefly concerned with examining viscous effects in waves for tanker-like FPSO hull forms, but has also provided modeling results for the vertical circular cylinder. ECN have a combined non-linear potential flow boundary element method (BEM) with a finite volume CFD code, capable of both unsteady RANSE (using a variety of turbulence models) and LES simulations. This group has chiefly been interested in modeling loads on the fixed vertical cylinder used in the experimental programme, and in the comparison between Volume o f Fluid (VOF) free surface modeling and alternatives derived from coupling the BEM with the RANSE solver. In addition to providing support in the area of theoretical developments and results for benchmarking, the members of WP2 were asked to attempt the grand-challenge calculation of a coupled non-linear wave

THE WORK PROGRAMME

The project is comprised of 6 work-packages, which are as follows: WP1. Integration of fluid loading and response tools This work package involves two of the partners, Atkins and DNV, developing the means to integrate CFD software, in the form of 3D general purpose Navier Stokes solvers (with a range of turbulence models) with commonly available offshore engineering dynamics tools. A third partner (CIMNE) is charged separately with developing a graphical-user interface and platform for control of the simulations.

MARNET-CFD Final Meeting, 20 th-21st March 2003

Page number 2

diffraction and large eddy simulation (LES) CFD for a fixed vertical circular cylinder as part of their studies into turbulence modeling. In the same spirit, a coupled unsteady RANSE and non-linear diffraction model for an FPSO will be built in the second task. These results are being used in conjunction with experimental data to tune and validate the commercial models used in WP1. WP3. Validation experiments:

A smaller range of tests have been carried out for the FPSO, owing to the increased difficulty of working with a freely floating body. An outlines sketch of the test set-up, showing wave direction and PIV laser sheet orientation is shown in Figure 3 below, with Figure 4 showing the in-situ geometry.

Camera housing y

The research programme includes two sets of experiments aimed at providing detailed flow, loading and response data for CFD validation. Particle Image Velocimetry (PIV) techniques have been applied to two geometries key of interest: A fixed, vertical circular cylinder (diameter 0.508m) in regular and bi-chromatic waves, 5m water depth. A floating FPSO model in regular waves.
x

PIV FoV

For the vertical cylinder, PIV has been supplemented with laser sheet measurements of wave surface elevation in the near-field of the cylinder, surface pressure measurements, and overall load components. A total of 10 sets of wave conditions have been used. Figure 1 below shows vertical cylinder as assembled by Sirehna and Ecole Centrale de Nantes.

Incoming waves FPSO at 135

FPSO at 90

Fig. 3 Plan view of FPSO experimental set-up.

Fig. 1 - Vertical cylinder test rig at ECN Fig. 4 In-situ view of laser sheet and FPSO at MARIN.

WP4. Tuning and validation of the hydrodynamic tools. The experimental data and results from WP3 are being used to improve the technical performance of the coupled diffraction/unsteady RANSE CFD models. Inter-comparison of the models developed by the relevant partners are also to be carried out to ensure consistency, and the development of best practice procedures for using these new systems. The initial comparisons will be made using the load and pressure distribution data for both geometries. Later, detailed flow field data will be compared with CFD predictions. For the vertical cylinder, it is hoped that the data will be suitable for the tuning of the turbulence models, or at very least, as a means to identify the most suitable formulations. Fig. 2 Laser sheet as set up by Sirehna on the ECN cylinder On completion of this work-package, the general purpose software used

MARNET-CFD Final Meeting, 20 th-21st March 2003

Page number 3

within the co-processing system will have been tuned to be capable of producing the most accurate possible results for the key problems of interest cited above. WP5. Design evaluation case studies. In this part of the project, the newly developed computational methodologies and systems will be applied to concept design case studies generated by the offshore design contractors within the partnership. These should allow the work-out of the methodologies and ensure that practical techniques for their application are developed. The three case studies currently envisaged involve a S PAR or CALM buoy concept, an FPSO, and a TLP. The resulting design analyses will be critically reviewed, a process involving the oil company partners, and recommendations developed for the optimal use of these new technologies with offshore engineering design. WP6. Benchmark tests. Forming part of the evaluation process, further tank testing of two of the concept designs will be undertaken. Measurements of pressures, loads and overall responses will be carried out and these data compared with predictions made using the new co-processing technologies. This work-package will be run along the same lines as a commercial test programme, providing realistic benchmarking of the new methodologies. METHODOLOGY USED AT ATKINS The modeling system and data exchange . The key elements that comprise the coupled computational model at Atkins are: A linear or non-linear potential flow based diffraction model An unsteady RANSE model based on 3D finite volume methods Dynamical models for the motions of floating bodies in waves, with attached mooring and riser systems.
Potential flow solver RANS solver

GiD launcher

Control box

Motions solver

Moorings

Risers

Figure 5: S chematic view of the method for coupling software tools via a systems control box managed through a GUI. The demands on the systems with respect to coupling potential flow BEM diffraction models with RANS calculations were reduced by assuming explicit or weak coupling in all cases. For single-phase calculations, the BEM method transfers coordinates and velocities of the free surface grid locations only; these are used as moving grid boundary locations, with either zero pressure or zero normal velocity imposed. Should the vessel be in motion, its response is fed into the BEM solver at the next time step. For VOF methods, the potential flow free surface solution is used only as a grid refinement tool. The system still allows for the modeling of risers and mooring systems using 1D FE approaches, but at present assumes that their hydrodynamic influence is small on the scale of the structure as a whole. Thus a one-way data exchange of fluid velocities, acceleration and pressure gradients is all that is required for given nodal locations. Similarly, items of structure which are considered to be too small to include in the CFD model, but which might contribute to hydrodynamic forces, can be added to the overall model as additional sub-grid scale elements. They may contribute to (for example) drag through empirical equations, and their effect on the flow modeled as momentum sinks and turbulence sources. All communication takes place via the control box. Codes communicate with the control box rather than w ith each other to maintain the modular basis of the system. The main advantages of this approach were seen as: Flexibility in principle any combination of CFD models and offshore engineering dynamics codes can be used. Simplicity minimal data exchange requires little additional programming, and can be accessed at the CFD code user defined sub-routine level. Speed - Parallel processing is still available to reduce computational times.

The intention was to employ generally available software tools since they would bring the benefits of practicality, robustness, existing validation data and known working methodologies. A number of possible approaches exist for coupling or co-processing between the various software tools. They range from simple data exchange through live backing files combined with a logical sequence of program run wait states, to the coupling of software at the object module level and the sharing of common memory space. The latter requires extensive sharing of information between software developers and vendors and was not felt to be appropriate or feasible for this project. An alternative system design was developed based upon a more flexible computational model in which the individual software tools remain separate, run separately, and communicate through backing files and a system control unit accessed through a graphical user interface (GUI). This was possible largely due to the objective of the project to look only at rigid body motions for the floating systems, and hence the requirement for interaction at the 3D field data level is replaced by simpler integrated loads and overall body motions.

Free-surface modeling One objective of the project was to investigate the advantages and disadvantages associated with the use of Volume of Fluid (VOF) methods to represent the free surface. VOF techniques are common where more than one fluid, or a combination of a fluid and a gas, is to be modeled. The volume fraction F (of water in this case) in each grid cell is stored as a scalar variable. If its value is 1, the cell is full, if 0 it is empty, and if 0<F<1, then the cell contains the free surface. The exact location and orientation of the surface must be re-constructed from the 3D field data for F geometrically. For some problems, this can be important (for example where local stresses due to surface tension need to be applied

MARNET-CFD Final Meeting, 20 th-21st March 2003

Page number 4

to the fluid). However, in most general purpose solvers, a single set of momentum and turbulence equations are solved throughout the computational domain, including the air layer above, with a consistent set of equations for volume fraction transport, and no special treatment is provided at the interface. In such cases the approximate location of the free surface is commonly found by plotting the surface contour of F = 0.5. This approximate method has the advantages of simplicity and robustness. It can cope with overturning waves or re-entrant jets without numerical instability. However, a significant amount of care is required in order to achieve accurate and non-diffusive results. In this project and related research by the authors [3], a number of strategies to improve resolution of the free surface have been investigated and developed such as: 1. 2. 3. So-called compressive numerical schemes aimed generally at providing improved resolution of sharp interfaces. Mesh adaptation schemes. Combinations of 1 and 2.

center of the cylinder with an additional beach region of length 3m positioned downstream of it. The domain was the same depth as in the ECN experiments (5m) and extended 1.5m above the mean water level. The grid (shown in Figures 6 & 7) contains 64 cells around the circumference of the cylinder. For the initial calculations which used a k-e turbulence model and wall functions, the minimum spacing next to the wall was 5mm.

Much of this effort is reported elsewhere [3], but the main conclusions are as follows. The compressive schemes due to Peric et al. [4] show much improved free surface resolution, consistently capturing the location of the interface within the space of two grid cells. However, free surface orientation relative to the grid can influence accuracy, which can be degraded if not aligned. Mesh adaptation, i.e. the refinement of the CFD grid local to the interface, also improves the solution in the region of the free surface. In this project, it has been found that using a potential flow diffraction solution for the free surface elevation to guide the location of regions of high grid refinement is an effective way to improve accuracy, particularly in wave propagation problems. This can be shown to be the case even for quite crude VOF numerical schemes. Combining both compressive numerical schemes and some degree of mesh adaptation to align the grid with the combined incident, radiated and diffracted wave field as described has proven to be a successful and flexible strategy for offshore engineering problems. The following figures show results for wave propagation using a number of the strategies described

Figure 6: Grid at mean water level

COMPUTATIONAL RESULTS FROM ATKINS MODELS

Fixed vertical cylinder diffraction solutions First, we consider the diffraction of a regular wave from the experimental cases run at ECN. The case chosen has the following properties (all model scale): Cylinder Diameter Water Depth Wave Amplitude Wave Period 0.508m 5.0m 0.127m 1.8 s Figure 7: Grid through cylinder centre-plane Figure 8 below shows typical CFD plot of the water surface surrounding the cylinder and velocity vectors on a plane 0.5m below the MWL carried out using the coupled system. The specification of both vertical and horizontal components of the velocity at the inlet (left side) is clear. These velocity components and the elevation of the free surface are obtained from a pre-calculation based on linear theory; consistency between the velocity components and free surface elevation is essential if the wave is to be correctly propagated into the domain.

The extent of the domain was deliberately kept small to allow short run times and rapid development of the system. An exercise to determine the minimum size of domain for which the extent of the domain has negligible effects on the results will be completed shortly. The domain used for thses tests consisted of a square of side 2m centred on the

MARNET-CFD Final Meeting, 20 th-21st March 2003

Page number 5

CFD data - pressures - l2a20ld10 6000 5000 Pressure (Pa) 4000 3000 2000 1000 0 -1000 0 2 4 Time (s) 6 8 10 p1 p3 p4 p5 p6 p7 p8 p9 p10 p11 p12 p13 p14 p15

Figure 10: Case l2a20ld10, pressures at pressure tappings on the leading edge of the cylinder, simulations . Pressure gauges were fitted throughout the wave-zone and extend below the free surface to a depth greater than that of the wave troughs. Hence the lowest pressures recorded are intermittent, being those of the partially wetted pressure gauges. The highest pressures are shown as having a mean hydrostatic component with time varying amplitude which decreases with increasing mean (decreasing depth), as would be expected. It can be seen that for the fully submerged pressure gauges, agreement is good in terms of both mean and amplitudes. For pressure gauges nearing the wave zone, the experimental data shows truncation effects before those of the computations. Whilst the maxima (submerged peaks) remain in reasonable agreement, the computational results differ from experiment by showing smoother, non-truncated time histories. However, for pressure gauge locations above the surface, wetted intermittently, the CFD results do show the correct behavior qualitatively. We have concluded that the cause of these differences is primarily due to the VOF algorithm and that the partially full cells that contain the free surface are not at zero pressure. We expect that these results can be improved considerably by increasing vertical grid resolution near to the free surface. Results with fluid structure interaction The next set of computational results illustrates the fluid-structure interaction capability and numerical stability of the computational system. They were carried out using the general purpose CFD code CFX 4.3 coupled to a 1 degree of freedom dynamics model. The diameter of the cylinder is 0.508 m as before, but on this occasion the draft is 1.0m. The cylinder is considered as free floating, but with additional stiffness in chosen degrees of freedom such as might be supplied by tethers or moorings. In the model, the cylinder is considered as a simple point mass (203 Kg) with additional stiffness of 4000N/m in translational modes (surge and sway). Its general equation of motion is therefore that of a simple un-damped mass spring system. All other forces and moments are generated from normal pressure and shear force integration over the wetted surface of the CFD model of the cylinder. The first set of results illustrates the use of simple motion extinction tests to check natural period, added mass and damping.

Figure 8. Example of the water surface profile and velocity vectors on a plane 0.5m below the MWL at one instant during a simulation.

Figures 9 and 10 below show the time histories of fluid pressure along a vertical line facing the on-coming waves provided by the experiments and computations respectively.
ECN data - pressures - l2a20ld10 p1 6000 5000 Pressure (Pa) 4000 3000 2000 1000 0 10 -1000 Time (s) 12 14 16 18 20 p3 p4 p5 p6 p7 p8 p9 p10 p11 p12 p14 p15 p16 p17

Figure 9: Case l2a20ld10, pressures at pressure tappings on the leading edge of the cylinder, experimental measurements.

MARNET-CFD Final Meeting, 20 th-21st March 2003

Page number 6

1DoF surge extinction

Displacements - surge only - k = 1000n/m

0.15 0.10
Displacement (m)
radiation only

0.10 0.08 0.06 Displacement (m) 0.04 0.02 0.00 -0.02 0 -0.04 -0.06 -0.08 -0.10 -0.12 Time (s)
-0.15 -0.10

0.05 0.00 0 -0.05 5 10 15 20 25 30

Coupled System

Coupled system diffraction / radiation

Figure 11 - Surge e xtinction test In surge the added mass was calculated as 95% of the mass of the cylinder, for the same structure AQWALINE calculated 92%. The damping obtained from the coupled system was 6.8% critical, compared to the radiation-only damping of 3.8% (obtained from AQWA). In heave the added mass was 17% of the mass displacement of the cylinder and a damping ratio of approximately 0.027. For this case, radiation damping alone gives a damping ratio of 0.01. Empirical estimates of viscous heave damping can be s hown to make up the balance although it should be noted that the latter quantity is difficult to estimate with confidence. The next two sets of results show the computed response of the cylinder in surge to a regular wave train of period 1.3 seconds and amplitude 0.127m. In the first case the additional surge stiffness is 4000N/m (natural period is approximately 2.2 seconds), and in the second case the surge stiffness is reduced to 1000N/m (natural period approximately 4 seconds). Both cases are compared with the motion calculated using AQWA (NB only the radiation damping was considered in the AQWA simulation, no empirical models for viscous damping were applied.). In both cases, an initial transient involving a response at the natural period can be observed in combination with the forced response of the cylinder. As expected, the case with lower additional stiffness endures a longer and more lightly damped transient. Similarly , the amplitude of response to the incident wave following the transient compares well with conventional radiation/diffraction theory and the response was lower than in the radiation/diffraction only case, as would be expected from the addition of viscous damping.
Displacement - surge only - k = 4000n/m
0.20 0.15

Time (s)

Figure 13: Response in surge with 1000N/m additional stiffness.

TECHNICAL SUMMARY To date, the control and communications architecture has been developed, the free surface capabilities in CFX4 enhanced. A boundary conditions generator for the CFD code, based on linear wave theory, has been developed and implemented. The coupled system has been extensively tested against experimental data for fixed cylinders and in single degree of freedom tests on moving cylinders against conventional radiation/diffraction theory. While only single degree of freedom motion has been studied so far, the results are encouraging in terms of the robustness of the system and its ability to reproduce the behavior expected. For testing purposes the structures studied up to the present have been simple cylindrical bodies at model scale. This has allowed both rapid model development and testing against detailed experimental data to isolate particular aspects of the problem. Many of the cases modeled have therefore been inertial dominated, and at practically laminar Reynolds numbers. However, they have illustrated the non-negligible effects of viscosity on the motions of this type of structure and it is expected that these effects will be further increased when more complicated structures such as SPARs with skirts, TLPs etc are studied. The detailed pressure measurements have illustrated the clear need for care in the definition of CFD grid near to the free surface if the intermittency caused by wetting and drying is to be modeled accurately. Work is continuing to ascertain the minimum grid resolution required to reproduce the correct behavior. Finally, it has been demonstrated that time accurate and stable solutions can be produced from a simple explicit coupling of rigid body motions and CFD solutions. Inertial loads and reactions, implicit within the pressure field of a CFD solution and therefore difficult to identify explicitly, are nevertheless calculated with sufficient accuracy for engineering purposes. Conclusions This paper has described the authors work in the EXPRO-CFD collaborative project into CFD based fluid loading and response computations. This project is on-going, but some preliminary results and conclusions have been described. First, it should be noted that the project has successfully generated significant new experimental results using detailed PIV and pressure

Displacement (m)

0.10 0.05 0.00 0 -0.05 -0.10 -0.15 5 10 15 20 25 30 Coupled system diffraction / radiation

Time (s)

Figure 12: Response in surge with 4000N/m additional stiffness.

MARNET-CFD Final Meeting, 20 th-21st March 2003

Page number 7

gauge instrumentation. These results are being processed but will provide an excellent database for future validation exercises. Next, the project has demonstrated that, with care in application, general purpose CFD codes are capable of calculating the net excitation forces and moments on floating offshore structures in waves. When coupled to suitable dynamics software, calculated responses are also in line with expectations. It has also been shown that VOF techniques can be used with confidence so long as both compressive schemes and some form of mesh adaptation is used to ensure both accurate wave propagation and near-field resolution in the wave splash zone. In any event, vertical mesh resolution near the free surface has a strong influence on accuracy on the wave zone pressure field. Further validation exercises within the EXPRO-CFD project are expected to result in greater understanding and confidence in the use of CFD particularly in the area of viscous force and moment prediction, where CFD offers many advantages over conventional approaches. Acknowledgements

References 1. P.A Durbin, A Perspective on Recent Developments in RANS Modelling, Proceedings in Engineering Turbulence Modelling and Experiments 5, Eds. Rodi and Fueyo, Mallorca, Spain 2002. I. Robertson, M. Graham, S.Sherwin and T. Kendon, Computation of Viscous Separated Flow around a Body in Waves, Applied Mathematics for Industrial Flows (AMIF), Portugal, 2002. Woodburn, P., Gallagher. P, Letezia. L, Fundamentals of Damaged Ship Survivability, Trans RINA, May 2002. Muzaferija, S. and Peric, M. 1999,`` Computation of free-surface flows using interface-tracking and interface-capturing methods," Nonlinear Water Wave Interaction, Advances in Fluid Mechanics series, edited by Mahrenholtz, O. and Markiewicz, M. WITpress, UK., Vol. 24, pp.59100 Borleteau, J.-P., Ferrant, P., Martingny, B., Pettinotti, B., Measurements and Analysis of Loads, Wave profiles and Velocity Patterns about a Vertical Cylinder in Waves, ISOPE 2003. J. Dalheim, S. Fynne, A. Nestegard, M. Ronaess, G. Skeie Numerical models for SPAR platform dynamics, ISOPE 2003. Hu, P. Wu, G.X. Ma, Q.W. Numerical Simulation of Non-Linear Wave Radiation by a Moving Vertical Cylinder. Ocean Engineering, 2002.

2.

3. 4.

5.

6. The author gratefully acknowledge the many partners in the EXPROCFD project, who, in addition to the current authors are: Dr. Joar Dalheim and Dr. Arne Nestergard (DNV), Dr. Rene Huismanns (MARIN), Julio Garca (CIMNE), Dr. Ing. Per Teigen (Statoil), Dr. Richard James (BP), Dr. Mamoun Naciri (SBM), Dr. Ragnvald Borresen (AKER), Prof. Mike Graham and Dr. Spencer Sherwin (Imperial College), Dr. Guo Xiong Wu (University College London, and Prof. Michel Vissoneau (ECN). 7.

MARNET-CFD Final Meeting, 20 th-21st March 2003

Page number 8