Vous êtes sur la page 1sur 53

Ocean Engng, Vol. 12, No. 1, pp. 45-97, 1985.

Printed in Great Britain.

0029-8018/85 $3.00 + ,00


1985 Pergamon Press Ltd.

A C O M P A R I S O N OF M E T H O D S FOR C A L C U L A T I N G THE
MOTION OF A SEMI-SUBMERSIBLE
MATAO TAKAGI and SHIN-ICHI ARAI
Hitachi Zosen Corporation, Technical Research Institute, 1-3-22 Sakurajima, Konohana-ku, Osaka, Japan
SEIJI TAKEZAWA
Yokohama National University, Faculty of Engineering, Department of Naval Architecture & Ocean
Engineering, 156 Tokiwadai, Hodogaya-ku, Yokohama, Japan
KUNIO TANAKA
Ishikawajima-Harima Heavy Industries Co., Ltd, Research Institute (Yokohama), 1 Shin-nakaharacho,
Isogo-ku, Yokohama, Japan
and
NAONOSUKE TAKARADA
Sumitomo Heavy Industries, Ltd, Hiratsuka Research Laboratory, 63-30 Yuhigaoka, Hiratsuka, Japan
Al~traet--The 17th I'I~C Ocean Engineering Committee undertook the comparison of methods
for calculating semi-submersible wave motion, and 34 programs from 28 different organizations
participated in the project. The summary of the results are reported in the Technical Report of
the 17th ITTC (ITTC, 1984).
In this paper, the details of the project are described. Namely, almost all the calculation results
of the 34 programs are shown and examined from the viewpoints of the validity of the program
itself and of the correlation between the differences in the various calculation methods and the
differences in the calculation results. The calculation results are also compared with the
experiments, the details of which are also illustrated.
1.

INTRODUCTION

A SEMI-submersible is utilized in various kinds of ocean structures because its motion in


waves is small compared with a surface ship. Hence it is very important to establish a
m e t h o d for calculating the motions of a semi-submersible from the viewpoint of the
design of this type of ocean structure.
T h e r e are many methods for calculating the wave forces acting upon ocean structures
and, therefore, the motion of semi-submersibles are also estimated by various methods.
The 17th I T T C Ocean Engineering Committee conducted a comparison of semisubmersible wave motion calculation methods in order to examine not only the overall
validity of the various calculation programs but also a correlation between the
differences in the various calculation methods and the differences in the calculation
results.
The semi-submersible used as the calculation model was the same as that used in a
series of experiments performed by Project No. 192 of the Shipbuilding Research
Association of Japan (abbreviated SR192 hereafter). The committee of SR192 kindly
provided the Ocean Engineering Committee with the results of those experiments.
A summary of the results examined above was reported by the 17th I'VFC. H o w e v e r ,
in order to make the results more fruitful, the details are published here with the
45

46

M. TAKAGI et al.

permission of the Ocean Engineering Committee and the editor of Ocean Engineering.
2.

DATA FOR CALCULATION

The shape and principal dimensions of the SR192 model used in the calculations are
shown in Fig. 1 and Table 1. The calculation conditions are also shown in Table 1. The
model was chosen for the investigation of stability in a semi-submersible drilling rig in
SR192. The scale of the model was assumed to be 1/64 and the draft was that for a
survival condition. The experiments in waves were performed in three seakeeping tanks
with a water depth of about three meters. The details of the experiments are illustrated in
Appendix A.
The items requested for the comparison of calculations were the amplitudes and
phases of the 6 modes of motion at the center of gravity of the model freely floating in
regular waves. In order to be able to compare directly the calculation results with those
of the model experiment, the participants were requested to make their motion
predictions for the model scale, and not for the assumed prototype.
The input data of the incident waves are Waves I - III shown in Table 1. For the
wave-induced motions, the response functions with periods of less than 3.5 sec (28 sec in
the prototype) are enough; however some with periods of up to 10 sec are requested for
various references. In order to investigate the effect of wave height, Wave I and Wave II
are specified. The choice of the calculation points in terms of periods is left to the
participants so that they can obtain smooth curves. Wave III is a marginally high wave
for the wave makers in the seakeeping tanks. The coordinate system for the calculations
is shown in Fig. 1.
Z

L0.~36L0.575_I_0.575_~0.575_l~0.5,'361

_035fii_0.575_ _0.575_ _0.375__03~6,

II~

WOVe Elevotion ~ = ~acos (t.dt - kX~)


Motion of Rig X: XAcos(t.0t-Ex)
FIG. 1.

Semi-submersible and coordinate system used in calculation.

47

Methods for calculating semi-submersible wave motion


TABLE 1.

Length

of lower

hull,

DATA FOR CALCULATION

1.797m

0.313m

xG

at the m i d s h i p

YG

at the center

zG

0.273m
(above

Draft
Center

of gravity,

Metacentric

Radius

height,

of gyration,

Water

depth

Wave

direction

Wave

height

(2~ A)

(LGM)

0.037m

Trans.

(TGM)

0.045m

Roll

0.536m

Pitch

0.556m

Yaw

0.634m

130.3kgf

3.0m

and wave

period

(T)

45

line)

90

Waves

- 2~ A = 0.046m,

0.5 ~ T ~ i0.0 S

Waves

- 2~A = 0.160m,

1.0 ! T <

Waves

211 - 2~A

3.

the base

Longi.

in fresh water

Displacement

line

3.5 S

, T

0.160m

, 1.0 S

0.280m

, 1.5 S

0.310m

, 2.0 S

0.160m

, 2.4 S

C O N T R I B U T I N G O R G A N I Z A T I O N S AND T H E I R P R O G R A M S

The names of the organizations which participated in this project and their calculation
programs are shown in Table 2. Since each program has its own ideas and features, it is
difficult to classify them clearly. Table 3 shows a rough classification according to the
answers to calculation m e t h o d questionnaires which were sent to the participating
organizations. With respect to the details of each calculation program, the reader should
refer to the reference papers listed in Table 4 which describe the calculation methods on

48

M. TAKAGI et al,

which they are based. From Table 3 the programs can be classified into five groups,
assuming that the effect of the bracings on the motion is small 'and directing our attention

LIST OF PROGRAM NAMES AND ORGANIZATIONS

TABLE 2.
Program name

Organization

REVMA

Alsthom-Atlantique/Ateliers

CANAgI

Bureau Verltas

(France

MARINA

Centre Technique Industriel de la Construction


Metallique

(France

RESEDA
AQUADYN

Ecole Natinale Superieure de Mecanique

(France

AQUADYN

Franlab Informatique

(France)

et chantiers de Bretagne (France

TRITON
i

MULTRI 83 VCFE~ CFEM & Principia R . D .

G1

SEMISUB

G2

DIFFRAC

(France)

Netherlands Ship Model Basin

(The Netherlands

Department of Mechanical Engineering.


Univer

UCLRIG

(U.K.

UMIWAVE

National Maritime Institute Ltd.


~epartment o
av
Arc itecture & Ocean Engineering,
'acult of E n l n e e r i n
okohama National U n i v e r s i t ~
)epartment of Naval Architecture & Ocean Engineering,
~
~
Hiroshlma Universit~

0CS

Akishima Laboratory Technical Research Development


(Japan)
Headquarters, Mitsui Engineering & Shipbuilding Co., Ltd.

OCS

(U.K.

(Japan)

HULMOT

~i~atsuka Research Laboratory, Sumltomo Heavy


naustries z Lta.
Tsu Research Laboratories, Technical Research Center,
Nippon K o ~
K.K.
Na~asakilndu
Technical Institute, M i ~ y

HISOS

D~rtment,
0 s ore ea quarters,
Hi
o en C o r p o r a t i o ~

(Japan)

Kawasaki Heavy Industries. L~d.


Research Institu-~
Ishi~waJima-Barima Heavy_ Industries Co.. Ltd.

(Japan)

MARINS
MOSES

Marine Design & Research Institute of China

(China)

KSRI

Krylov Shipbuilding Research Institute

SEMISYS

Ocean Engineering Division (LMT)

S ING-A

Technical University Aachen, FRG

MAPOS

WUCDSFV

Swedish Maritime Research Center, SSPA

SDFINI

China Ship Scientific Research Center

PLAT

Technical University of Szczecin


-'7
J A m e r i c a n Bureau of Shipping

ABS/SPLASHD

ABSI~IS~ .

(Japan)
(Japan)
(Japan)

(Japan)

(U.S.S.R.

(West Germany)
(Sweden)
(China)
(Poland
(U.S .A.

WAMOF

PLATFORM r K U b ~
XXPIAT

.
(Norway)

Norwegian Hydrodynamic Laboratories


Center "
_ _
[ Registro Italiano Navale

Development

(U.S.A.
(Italy)

AN

CO,LH
CO,LH

CO,LH
CO,LH

Z
ZA
ZB

~BR:2E

[AN:2c

AH:2E
AH:2E

RtL

R,L
I,L
-i
F

F
F
F

3
=
3
3

F
F
F

3
3

R,L

F
F
F
F
F

~
~
3
3
~

R,L
t,L
R,L
g,L
R,N

F
T
F
F
F
F
F
F
F
F
Y
F

R,N
L
L
R)L
g,L
R,L
R,L
R,L
R,L
R,L
R,L

3
3
3
3

F
F
T
F
F
F

3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3

i R,tg
L

~3

J ~
u
source.
contrlhutlgn

are both taken into accntmt

i s 1~4 I n t o t a l

~n t h e r a v e c r e s t

The number of e l e m e n t s

Remark

I n h e a v e mode.
in heave sode.

huiis.

3E:3 dim-Exp.'
2C:2 d i s - C a l . ,
and so on.

i n 3-D theory and i n 2-D t h e o r y e r e t a k e n i n t o a c c o u n t


individually.

F:Frequency domain, Su:gurle , g o : R o l l ,


T:Time domain.
5w:Sway, P i : P i t c h ,
He:Heave, Ya:Yaw.

The hydrodynamic i n t e r a c t i o n s

R e s s - S a i t h t e c h n i q u e . The body s u r f a c e was d i v i d e d i n t o 268. p a n e l s .


I n f l u e n c e o f p i t c h on a u r a e and o f r o l l on sway n o t c o n s i d e r e d . R e v e r s e l y - y e s .
V i s c o u s damping i s a d d e d .

V i s c o u s damping i s a d d e d .
t l a c r o - e l e m e n t - m e t h o d f o r columns and l o w e r
Slnk-souce technique.

~he h y d r o d y n s s l c e f f e c t s o f c o l u s m on l o w e r h u l l a r e t a k e n i n t o a c c o u n t i n h e a v e ~ d e .
V l s c o u s damping I s added to t h e l o w e r h u l l s .
An a d d i t i o n a l e x c i t i n g f o r c e s f o r o u t - w a t e r end and end p l a n e o~ c y l l n d e r e r e c o n s i d e r s .

The h y d r o d y n n w t c e f f e c t s o f c o l u m on l o w e r h u l l a r e t a k e n i n t o a c c o u n t
The h y d r o d y n a m i c e f f e c t s o f column on l o w e r h u l l a r e t a k e n i n t o a c c o u n t
Added mass o f l o w e r h u l l s f o r s u r g e mmtlon a r e n e g l e c t e d .
V i s c o u s damping is added to t h e l o w e r h u l l s .

Hess-Smith technique. The number o f elements i s 144 in t o t a l .


Boundary i n t e g r a l method.
J
r s d l a t i o n b o u n d a r y c o n d l t l o n s e n f o r c e d by
Finite element dtscrettsatlon
of the fluid; coupllng of F~ v[th asymptotic expanslons.
The w a t e r s u r f a c e i s e x a c t l y computed a t e a c h t i m e s t e p . The w a t e r s e a l e v e l c o r r e sponds t o an u n d l s t u r b e d A i r y wave.

Hydrodynamic and h y d r g n t a t l c

~elvln~8 pulsating

C A L C U L A T I O N METHODS

It,L 3
F
R:uning r e l a t i v e v e l o c i t y ,
N : N o n - l i n e a r CD t e r m ,
L : L t n e a r l z e d CD t e r m .

AH:2E
CO,LII:2E(Ro,FI)
AH:2E
AH:2E

[ AN:3E

AH:2C
BR:2C
B . . ~ CO:3C(~e)~
. . . . . LII:3C(Su)I

HR:2C

NI:2E
CO.BR:2E
LH:2C,CO,BR:2E
CO,BR:2E
AH:2E
AH:2E
LH:3E
CO.BR:2E
AH:3C

M4:2C
BR:2C
AH:3E

BR:3E
AH:2C

AN:3E
BR:3E

Horison formula

CO:2C,LH:2E
ICO:2C~ LII:2E
CO:Columns,
kM:All m e ~ b e r s ,
LH:Lower h u l l s , COH:Hain c o l u s n s ,
BR:Bracings.
COS:Sub-columms,

CO,LH
CO, LH

COH ~ CO3,LH

71
~'-

AN
LH

CO ,BI~
LH

LH

LII

~AN

CO,LH

co,~.~

co

CO,LFI

S
T
Ul

P
Q

LI
L2

I
J

E2 AN
F
CO,LIt
GI
C2 CO,LH

Cl
-~
D

! o~

T A B L E ~.

4~

~r

~r

~0

LI, L2

KANETSUNA, M. et al. 1978. A D e s i g n A n a l y s i s


No. 103.

Program System f o r Offshore S t r u c t u r e s ,

Review,

~to be contd.

Mitsui Technical

in R e g u l a r Waves,

I n d u c e d F o r c e s on a S e m i s u b m e r s i b l e .

TASAI, F. e t a l . 1970. A S t u d y on t h e M o t i o n s o f a S e m i - S u b m e r s i b l e C a t a m a r a n Ilull


The S o c i e t y o f N a v a l A r c h i t e c t s of West J a p a n , No. 40.

HOOFT, J . P . 1971. A M a t h e m a t i c a l Method of D e t e r m i n i n g t t y d r o d y n a m i c a l l y


SNAME, Vol. 79.

STANDING, R.G. 1979. Use of Wave Diffraction Theory with Morison's Equation to Compute Wave Loads and Motions
of Offshore Structures. NMI R74.

RINA Journal, Paper W7.

OORTMERSSEN, G. van. 1976. The Motions of a Moored Ship in Waves. NSblB Report 510.

G2

PATEL, M.II. 1982. On the Wave Induced Motion Response of Semisubmersibles.

HOOFT, J.P. 1972. Hydrodynamic Aspects of Semi-submersible Platforms. NSMB Report 400.

G1

COUDERT, JF., CIOLINA, THOMAS, P. and ALLOUARD, Y. 1977. Etude de Remorquage de Structures P@troli~res. ATMA.
DENISEj JP. 1979. A Comparison Between Linear and Non-llnear Response of a Proposed. OTC.

CHENOT, J.L. Notice th~orique du programme TRITON. Internal report.

E2

(1978)

Guevel et a l .

E1

Guevel et al. (1978)

Etude theorlque et numerique du probleme linearise du mouvement sur la houle tridimmensionnel. M. Lenoir,
D. Martin. Ecole Natlonale Superieure des Techniques Avanc~es. Rapport de recherche 124 (in French).
LENOIR, M. and JAMI, A. 1978. A Variational Formulation for Exterior Problems in Linear Hydrodynamics,
Computer Methods in applied Mechanics and Engineering, 16. 341-359.

C2

: 1983, N 2,

Marina User's Manual. C.T.I.C.M. Report n 11002-4.


Marina Technical Manual. C.T.I.C.M. Report n ||OO2-3,Constructlon M@tallique (in french)
pp 2 1 - 5 5 .

GUEVEL, P., DAUBISSE, J.C. and DELHOMMEAU, G. 1978. Oscillations des corps flottants soumis aux actions de
la houle. A.T.M.A. PARIS.

GREKAS, A. 1981. Contribution ~ l'~tude th@orlque et e x p @ r i m e n t a l e des efforts du second ordre et du


comportementdynamlque d'une structure marine solliclt~e par une houle r~guli@re et'un courant. Th@se de
Docteur-lng~nieur, E.N.S.M. NANTES.
GREKAS, A. and DELHOMMEAU, G. 1983. Diffraction Radiation in Presence of a Current. A.T.M.A. PARIS.

Reference

REFERENCE OF PROGRAM

Cl

Program

TABLE 4.

>

(1971).
of Semi-Submersible

(19711, Hooft

(1972).

R. 1974. Wave Induced Motions


TNO, Report No. 186s.

of Motions

of Semi-submersible

Nippon

on a Floating

__-

._

Technology

Offshore

of Moored Floating

in Waves

Research

in Waves,

Drilling

Units

Conference,

in

Vol. 4.

IHI Engineering

Ship

Structures

Netherlands

Platforms

Structure.

Offshore

Nc>38.

of Differing

Response

RINA Trans.

tiettweenTheoretical
RENA.

and Stability.

Theory - Comparison
with Forward Speed.

on Heaving

Ship Motion
Coefficients

Geometries

Semi-Submersible
1976.

The effect

No reference

W
Design:

INGLIS, R.B. and PRICE, W.G. 1981. A Three-Dimensional


Predictions and Experimental Data of the Hydrodynamic

KOKKINOWRACHOS,
K. 1978. Hydrodynamic Analysis of Large Offshore Structures, 5. Intern. Ocean Development
Conf. Tokyo.
Seebauwerke
KOKKINOWRACHOS,
K., ASORAKOS, S. and MAVRAKOS, S. 1980, Belastungen und Bewegungen gro8volumiger
durch Weilen, Research Report of the State of North-Rhine-Westfalia,
No.2905, Opladen.
KOKKINOWRACHOS,
K. and HOEFELD, J. 1980. Theoretische und experimentelle
Untersuchungen
des BewegungsverNo. 2915, Opladen.
haltens van Halbtauchern, Research Report of the State of North-Rhine-Westfalia,
KOKKINOWRACHOS,
K. and HOEFELD, J. 1983. Systematic Evaluation of the Seakeeping Characteristics
of SemiSubmersibles, PRADS '83, Tokyo, Seoul, Oct. 16-22.
KOKKINOWRACHOS,
K. and ZIBELL, H.G. 1984. Wave Interaction with Multiple Cross-Sections
in Finite Water
Depth. To be presented at the 3rd Intern. Symposium on Offshore Mechanics and Arctic Engineering, New
Orleans Febr

of Motions

in Sea Waves,

-.

Kokan Tech. Rep. Overseas,

_____of Semi-Submersible

4000M,

.._____I-._

of Semi-submersible

BORISOV, R.V. and MOLODOZHNIKOV,


A.B. 1980. Calculation
Regular and Irregular tiaves, Trudy LSL.

SUN, F. 1980. Analysis

Behavior

and Drift Forces

NOJIRI, N. and INOUE, Y. 1981. Dynamic


Review Vol. No. 2.

Hooft

WAHAB,
Centre

Rig BINGO

Reference

__-___
Response Analysis

Drilling

On Structural
KATAYAMA, M. et al. 1978.
MHI Technical Review, Vol. 125, No. 2.

Hooft (1971).
Seakeeping Quality
1983.

Hooft

--.-

Ul,

Progr

(conltl.

PAULLING, J. R. 1970. Wave Induced Forces and Motions of Tubular Structures, Eighth Symposium, Naval Hydrodynamics, Rome, Italy, August 24-28.
STIANSEN, S.G. and CHEN, H.H. 1981. Computational Methods for Predicting Motions and Dynamic Loads of Tension
Leg Platforms, Second International Symposium on Integrity of Offshore Structures, Glasgow, Scotland, 3 July

PAULLING, J.R., HONG, Y.S., CHEN, H.H. and STIANSEN, S.G. 1977. Analysis of Semlsubmerslble Catamaran-type
Platforms, OTC 2975, Proceedings of Offshore Technology Conference, Houston.
PAULING, J.R. 1981. The Sensitivity of Predicted Loads and Responses of Floating Platforms to Computational
Methods, Second International Symposium of Integrity of Offshore Structures, Glassgow, Scotland, 3 July.

No reference

Paulling et al. (1977)

No reference

Y2

ZA

ZB

Reference

Y1

Program

(contd.)

t~

>
>

Methods for calculating semi-submersible wave motion

53

to the calculation methods of the hydrodynamic forces on the columns and lower hulls:
(1) Use of a three-dimensional potential theory with or without viscous damping
correction: A, B, C2, D, E l , E2, F, G2, I, U2, V and W.
(2) Use of Hooft's Method (Hooft, 1971) with the Morison Formula: C1, G1, H, J,
L1, M, O, P, S, Y1 and ZB.
(3) Use of Hooft's Method with a two-dimensional potential theory with or without
viscous damping correction: K, T, X, Z and ZA.
(4) A mixture of (1) and (3): U1 and Y2.
(5) A mixture of (2) and (3): L2, N, Q and R.
In the above classifications, the term "Hooft's Method" is used to mean the conception
that the hydrodynamic forces of a semi-submersible are calculated by dividing the whole
structure into some simple members, e.g. the column, lower hull, etc. However, some
calculation programs consider a partial interaction between the members. In method (2),
the hydrodynamic forces on the members are obtained by the use of the Morison
Formula, where the added mass coefficient Cm and drag coefficient Co are obtained
theoretically, experimentally, or as defined regulations. In method (3), the
hydrodynamic forces on the members are obtained by the use of a two-dimensional
diffraction and radiation theory. In methods (1) and (3), most programs consider a
viscous damping correction. In many of the programs, as shown in Table 3, the
correction is done in such a way that the viscous forces are calculated by using the
relative velocity between the members and the water particles, and then linearized.
Most programs use the frequency domain analysis method. In C1 and F, time domain
analysis is used and the coefficients of the hydrodynamic forces are constants.
Since F presented the results of high waves only, they are not shown in the figures but
in Table 5. Moreover, although the calculations for the model were requested, H
presented the results for the assumed prototype.
4.

COMPARISON OF CALCULATION RESULTS

The motion under the wave conditions (X=0, 45, 90; Waves I, II, III) shown in Table
1 were calculated by 34 programs. It would take too much space to show all the results in
this report, but a general view of the calculation results revealed that:
(a) With a few exceptions, the effect of the wave height on heave motion was large,
but virtually nonexistent in all other modes of motion.
(b) Changes in the angle of incidence of the waves caused very little change in the
heave.
The above matters can be also seen in the experimental results shown in Appendix A.
Therefore, only the calculation results of the wave height 2gA = 0.046 m are all shown
in the appendices. In Appendix B, the results of amplitudes of period T = 0.5 - 4 sec are
shown. However only the cases of = 45 are shown for heave motion. In Appendix C,
the calculation results of phases for period T = 1.0 - 10 sec and = 45 are shown. Since
it is difficult to show the results of 34 programs in one figure, they are divided into three
groups and shown in three figures. The axis of the abscissa in the figure is the wave period
in model scale, which is one-eighth of that which corresponds to the assumed prototype.
Now we will analyse the calculation results. Figures 2 - 11 show the cases of wave
height 2~A = 0.046 m. The shaded areas in the figures indicate the regions covered by
many of the program results. The results of water depth h = 0 which do not fall in the

54

M. TAKAGI et at.

'~

Surge at 45
....... : h=oo

1.0L - - - :

Exp.

0.5

0
Fl~. 2.

3 T(s) 4

Surge amplitude (2~A = 0.046 m).


I

Surge at 0
X

= O0

.~ t ~ ' ~ . < '~


x~,.

1.0

. . . .

0.5

0
F16. 3.

5 T(s) 4

Surge amplitude (2~A = 0.046 m).


I

Sway at 45
.

1.0

: h=OO
:Exp.

...

0.5

0
F~6. 4.

5 T (s) 4

Sway amplitude (2~A = 0.046 m).

Methods

for calculating

semi-submersible

Sway amplitude

FIG. 5.
I

wave motion

3 T(s) 4
(25,, = 0.046

m).

Heaveat 45"
2.c 2h=O.O46m
________:
h =(-J-J
G
la

----: Exp.

3
/
/

LC

_z

I
FIG. 6.

Heave

amplitude

3 T(s)
(2cn = 0.046

m).

above regions are indicated by the dotted lines. The experimental results are indicated by
the broad broken lines. the values of which are the mean values of the results shown in
Appendix A.
For surge and sway, there is a satisfactory degree of mutual agreement among the
calculation results. which also agree with the experimental results. It can be seen that the
effect of the water depth appears in longer periods.
For heave, roll, pitch and yaw, there is not a good mutual agreement among the
calculation results. Except for heave. however, the central values of the calculation

M. TAKAGI et al.

56
I

Roll Qt 45
.

1.0

:h:co
Exp.

- - - :

05

0
FIG. 7.

5 T (s) 4

Roll amplitude (2~A = 0.046 m).


I

Roll at 90
....... h=oo

1.0

- - - - "

Exp.

--1

Q5

0
FIG. 8.

5T(s

Roll amplitude (2~a = 0.046 m).


1

Pitch at 45
........ : h : o o

1.0

---:

Exp.

Q5

0
FIG. 9.

:5 T(s)

Pitch amplitude (2~A = 0.046 m).

Methods for calculating semi-submersible wave motion


I

57

Pitch at 0

<5

........ : h:oo

LO!

Exp

,'

2
Fl~. 10.

5 T(s)

Pitch amplitude (2~A = 0.046 m).


I

Yaw at 45

0.2

........ : h : o o

,'/"

0.1

0
FIG. 11.

T(s)4

Yaw amplitude (2~A = 0.046 m).

results agree with the experimental ones. The water depth has no effect.
As the period increases, the response curves for heave have a small hump and then a
large hump through a hollow. Hereafter we refer to the large hump as the peak. The
natural period of heave is between the hollow and the peak.
Now we will investigate the results of heave in detail. Figure 12 shows Group (1) based
on a three-dimensional potential theory and a part of Group (2) based on the Morison
Formula. There are differences in peak period between Groups (1) and (2), and the
results of the latter give a good agreement with the experiment. The rest of Group (2),
(C1, G1, S, Y1 and ZB), which are not included in Fig. 12 in order to avoid complexity,
give value near those of Group (1), as do almost all of Groups (3), (4) and (5) (see heave
in Appendix B). Thus we can see the following:
(a) The calculations based on the Morison formula give different results depending
on the programming. It seems that if the choices of the CM and CD values are suitable,
they give results which agree with the experimental ones.

58

M. TAKAG1et al.

(b) The calculation results using the three-dimensional potential theory have a good
mutual agreement among them.
(c) Except for Q, Groups (3), (4) and (5) calculate the hydrodynamic forces of lower
hulls using the two-dimensional potential theory. These results give the same
conclusion as (b).
(d) Hence, the linear potential theory is insufficient to predict the heaving motion and
it is necessary to take into account the effect of the K - C Number, etc., on
hydrodynamic forces.

2.0

Heave at 45
2~A=O.O46m
~ :

Group(I),

A,B,D,El,G2,
N

1.0

0
FJc. 12.

I,U2,V,W
~ :
Group(2),
H,J, LI,M,
O,P
- - - - : Exp.

5 T (s) 4

Comparison of heave amplitudes from different methods.

Next we will examine roll. In Fig. 13 the natural period of roll, which is low frequency, is
emphasized and it is intended to clarify the groups to which the programs belong. The
peak values in Group (1) gather around 7.5 sec and those in Groups (3), (4) and (5) have
a similar tendency. On the other hand, five results in Group (2) using the Morison
Formula give peak values at around 7 sec. The rest, however, give scattered values.
Many of the results form hollows before the peaks as in heave, but a few have no hollow
at all or have them after the peaks. These matters depend on the calculation accuracy of
the virtual moment of inertia. These disagreements among the calculation results in the
low frequency region lead to the deduction that, as seen in Figs 7 and 8, the scattering of
the calculation results becomes larger as the period increases.
The same arrangement as in roll is done for pitch in Fig. 14. Except for one result, the
peak values in Group (1) are around 8.3 sec. Those in the other groups are more
scattered than in roll. Since in pitch the end effect of the lower hull on the hydrodynamic

59

Methods for calculating semi-submersible wave motion

Group

5
FIG. 13.

T (~1

Comparison of roll amplitudes from different methods.

forces is stronger than in roll, this scattering apparently shows that Groups (2) - (5)
based on two-dimensional hydrodynamic forces are worried about the correction of this
effect.
Figure 15 shows the classifications for the calculation results of yaw. When we study
the result for a water depth of h = 3 m, it can be seen that Group (1) predicts slightly
larger values than Group (2), and that the results of Groups (3) - (5), except for one, are
included in those of Group (1). The study of the case for h = 03 does not show any
features that are consistent according to the group classifications.
This concludes our examination of the results for Wave I. Next we will discuss Waves
II and III; our discussion, however, will cover only the results for heave in which the
wave height has an effect.
Figure 16 shows the results for Wave II where the incident wave height is 0.160 m.
With respect to the experimental values, the results not only for Wave II but also for
Wave I (wave height = 0.046 m) are shown for reference. Figure 16, together with Fig. 6.
shows us that the amplitude ratio (Z,&+) at the peak and the degree of the hollow
decrease as the wave height increases. The agreement between the experimental and
calculated results is not good.

60

M. TAKAG!et

al.

Pitch ot 0 o
Group(I): I
(3):3

IO

(4) :4
(5) :5

35

Group (2)

I0

(s)

FIG. 14.

-~.

Comparison of pitch amplitudes from different method.

Group

~,--:

/
/

10

(I)

"-- : t4)

J'

/
/

h = oom , ~ / ~ , , ~ r i ~ - ; _ : : : _ : _ 2

~-:7[:_~Q--Ei:.-:::::-:-_:_...........

O.II{ .....

/
0
FtG. 15.

, Y ~ ot 45
5

T(s)

I0

Comparison of yaw amplitudes from different method.

Methods for calculating semi-submersible wave motion

2.0

Heave ot 45
2~A=O.160m
D

X.9
I"-4

a,

CI
GI
62
H

61

Ix

-!
I I

I
I

-,~K
-LI,M,O,P,Q

-L_.-. N
L2

1.0

/. I Exp, 2z;.
0

I
Fro. 16.

\,
3 T (s) 4

Heave amplitude (2~A = 0.160 m).

The calculated amplitude ratios for Wave III are shown in Table 5. In order to clarify
the effect of the wave height, the ratios of the Wave III wave height to the Wave I wave
height are also listed. As is clear from the table, the wave height has no effect in periods
of less than 2.4 sec. This matter was also confirmed by the experiment (see Appendix A).
With respect to the phase, the calculation results are shown in Appendix C, but not
examined. Let us mention, however, that some programs calculate the phase advance
and some use coordinate systems or directions of motion that differ from those in Fig, 1.
5. CONCLUDING REMARKS
The results of the comparative study are as follows:
(1) Most of the programs provide virtually the same results for surge and sway in the
same water depth, and these" results are in good agreement with the experiment.
(2) There is no good agreement in the calculations for heave, roll, pitch and yaw
motion. The results, except for heave, scatter around those of the experiment.
(3) For heave, there is a considerably larger scatter in terms of natural period, and the
supposedly more exact three-dimensional potential theory did not necessarily
yield better predictions than the Morison programs using the experimental
coefficients of the hydrodynamic forces. This implies the necessity of taking into
account the viscous effect.
(4) The degree of agreement for roll and pitch deteriorates as the wave period
increases. This is especially noticeable for the behavior in the region around the
natural periods.

1.01
1.03

0.570
0.585
0.561

1.00
I. 01
1.02
1.01
0.99

0.593
0.570
0.578
0.561
0.554

1.01
1.00

Remark

R z = Z / Z c,

0.390

1.00

0.027

0.600

ZB

0.546
O. 643

1.01
1.00

0.546
1.06

0.186

1.05

0.023

Y2

O. 590
i. O0
0.572
1.01

0.374

1.05

0.023

Y1

0.591

Zc = ZA / CA (CA = 0.046m)

0.385

1.00

1.00

0.024

0.624

1.00

U1

0.672

1.03

1.00

1.01

1.00

i .05

i .00

1.01
O. 545

0.609

1. O0

0.026

0.368

0.99
O. 544

1.00

0.99

0.025

0.369

0.381

0.99

0.027

0.376

O. 641

i .00

0.026

0.369

1.00

1.04

0.028

0.377

0.599

0.93

0.024

1.00

i. O0

0.026

L2

0.376
0.390

0.385

1.01

0.028

0.557

I. OO

1.01

0.556

1.00

0.028

LI

1.00

1.02

0.527
0.618

1.06

0.594

1.05

0.394

1.04

0.028

0.395

1.12

0.624

0.98

0.570

O. 98

0.567

0.98

0.380

1.00

0.035

G2

0.620

0.98

0.572

O. 98

0.563

0.99

RZ

0.381

0.525

Z=ZA/~ a

1.00

RZ

0.028

Z=ZA/~ A

G1

Rz

T=2.4s, 2 ~ A = 0 . 1 6 m

0.548

Z=ZA/~ A

T=2.0s, 2GA=O.31m

0.357

RZ

T=l.5s, 2A=0.28m

0.013

2=ZA/~ A

T=l.0s, 2~A=0.16m

WAVE HEIGHT EFFECT ON HEAVE AT X = 45

TABLE 5.

>

>

Methods for calculating semi-submersible wave motion

63

(5) F o r y a w , t h e M o r i s o n p r o g r a m s g a v e s m a l l e r a m p l i t u d e s t h a n o t h e r p r o g r a m s
w h i c h use a t h r e e - d i m e n s i o n a l a n d / o r t w o - d i m e n s i o n a l p o t e n t i a l t h e o r y .
(6) E x c e p t for t h e h e a v e m o t i o n a r o u n d t h e p e a k , t h e w a v e h e i g h t h a s v i r t u a l l y n o
effect on m o t i o n , e i t h e r in t h e c a l c u l a t i o n s o r in t h e e x p e r i m e n t .
(7) F u r t h e r i n v e s t i g a t i o n s i n t o a d d e d m a s s a n d d a m p i n g f o r c e a r e n e e d e d in o r d e r t o
explain the differences among the programs.
Acknowledgements--The authors wish to express their gratitude to the organizations and persons who
contributed the comparative calculations, to the 17th ITTC Ocean Engineering Committee, and to the SR192
Committee.
REFERENCES
17th ITTC Report of the Ocean Engineering Committee. 1984.
HroFT, J.P. 1971. A mathematical method of determining hydrodynamically induced forces on a
semisubmersible. Transactions of SNAME 79, 28--70.

APPENDIX A
MODEL EXPERIMENTS
1. I N T R O D U C T I O N
The model experiments were performed in the following three tanks:
The Towing and Seakeeping Tank (100 (L) x 8 (B) x 3.5 (D) m) of Yokohama National
University.
The Seakeeping and Maneuvering Basin (56 (L) x 30 (B) 2.5 (D) m) of Sumitomo Heavy
Industries, Ltd.
The Seakeeping and Maneuvering Tank (70 (L) 30 (B) 3 (D) m) of Ishikawajima-Harima
Heavy Industries Co., Ltd.
These three organizations are referred to hereafter as YNU, SHI, and IHI respectively.
The measured results obtained in the experimental tanks were summarized and compared.
2.

EXPERIMENTAL

ARRANGEMENT

2.1. Model
A common model was used by the three organizations in order to eliminate errors caused by
using different models. The model is an exact representation of the theoretical full-scale vessel. It
is composed of two lower hulls and eight columns supporting a box type upper hull. The main
dimensions are shown in Table A1.
The model is stripped of anchor racks in the submerged portion and of structures on the upper
deck except for a heliport. The lower hulls and the columns are made of F R P and the upper hull,
the bracings, and the heliport on the upper deck are made of wood.
2.2. Experimental conditions
(1) Draft conditions. The model was ballasted by each organization to stimulate a survival draft
condition. The draft conditions are shown in Table A1. The three organizations succeeded in
attaining the draft conditions which provide the target values of the particulars of the full-scale
conditions as shown in Table A1.
Table A1 also shows the natural periods of heave, roll, pitch, and yaw obtained from free
decaying oscillation tests of the model.

64

M. TAKAGI et al.
TABLE A1.

M A I N DIMENSIONS AND EXPERIMENTAL BALLAST CONDITIONS OF THE MODEL

Designation

Model
(Scale ratio 1/64)

Unit Actual

YNU I
115
75

SHI I IHI
1.797
1.172

43
115
15

0.672
1.797
0.234

Height

9.75

0.125

Large columns
Diameter

10

0.156

0.125

2O

0.313

Length overall

Breadth moulded

Upper deck elevation

Length

B e a m

Lower hulls
(2)

Columns
(8)
Draft

Small Columns
Diameter
(Survival cond.)

Ton 35,000 131.8


kg

D i s p l a c e m e n t

Vert., VCG
above the base line
Longi., LCG
at the midship
Trans., TCG
at the center line
Metacentric Longi., LGM
height
Trans., TG M
Roll, Kx x
Radius of
gyration
Pitch, KY Y
Yaw, KZZ
Heave
Center of
gravity

Natural
period

Roll
Pitch
Yaw

Water depth at the time of the

model experiments

17.5

131.1 131.7

0.273 0.273 0.274

2.37
2.87

0.037
0.045
0.518
0.556
0.665
3.0
6.54
7.25

0.037
0.045
0.508
0.553
0.642
2.98
6.84
7.80
9.42

0.036
0.044
0.504
0.554
0.654
2.99
6.18
7.18
6.61

2.5

3.O

S
S
S
S
m

3.5

Methods for calculating semi-submersible wave motion

65

(2) Wave conditions. The model experiments were conducted in two types of waves: regular
water waves at SHI and IHI, and transient water waves at YNU. The regular water waves cover
wave periods ranging from 0.5 to 3.5 sec including the natural period of heave, with several wave
heights for some of the wave periods as shown in Table A2.

TABLE A2.

REGULAR WAVE CONDITIONS

Mode

Wave he ight
Hw = 2~A, m

Wave period

0.046

0.5 to 3.5

0.160

0.75 to 3.5

0.280

1.5

0.310

2.0

Tw, s

Modes (a) and (b) are for obtaining frequency response characteristics and for studying the
influence of the wave height on motion. Modes (c) and (d) correspond to the maximum wave
heights for the specified wave periods that can be generated by the wave makers. As for the
transient water waves, two types were used: one with a constant wave height and one with a
constant wave slope in ~ e Fourier Spectrum. The three wave directions specified for the model
experiments are as follows:
Head waves:
= 0 deg.
Bow quartering waves:
= 45 deg.
Beam waves:
= 90 deg.
SHI and IHI carried out experiments in all three states, while the YNU experiments were for
head and beam waves.

2.3. Experimental procedure


Motion in all six degrees of freedom of the model in waves was measured by using the following
two methods:
(1) Mechanical measuring system (at SHI and IHI). As illustrated in Figs A1.1 and A1.2, the
model is connected with measuring equipment consisting of carriages, a vertical (heave) rod, and
gimbals. Steady forces (drifting forces and moment) on the model are balanced by a counterweight
and soft springs to keep the model position within the specific measuring range of the equipment.
The vertical rod and other mechanical moving parts are light in weight, thereby reducing their
influence on motion. The six components of motion of the model are measured mechanically from
the relative displacements between the carriages and the model by using potentiometers.
(2) Opto-electronic measuring system (at YNU). With this measuring system, the model is set
completely free as seen in Fig. A1.3. The system consists of light-emitting diodes (LEDs) and a
position sensor device (PSD). The LEDs are attached to the model and illuminate continuously.
The PSD uses two camera heads to observe the movement of the lights from the LEDs. The six
components of motion of the model are derived from the translational motion of the points
observed as movements of the lights of the LEDs.

66

M. TAKAG!et

al.

,'b'~O000000 ~

~'~;p ring ~ '

Weight \=c~

~T~ Heaverod

Wave

\
Wire rope

Pulley

I
J

FIG. AI.1.

J "

Scheme of apparatus for the model experiment (SHI).

Heave rod
Wire rope

~/

Yaw spring for drifting moment

\
~

G i~m t' ~ ~' ~ ' - - ~-,

~
FiG. AI.2.

Puley
-~ ~Weight for drifting force

~Wave
Scheme of apparatus for the model experiment (IHI).

Measurements of the motion were made on t h e u p p e r deck as shown in Figs A1.1 - A1.3 and the
measured results were translated into motion at the model's center of gravity.
The wave profiles were measured at two points in the experimental tanks: one near the model
and the other at a fixed position near the flap of the wave maker.
3. C O M P A R I S O N O F M E A S U R E D R E S U L T S
The results of the measurements of the three organizations and the calculations of IHI with
respect to the frequency response characteristics (amplitude and phase characteristics) of the
motion about the center of gravity are given in Figs A3(a) - A l 0 ( b ) ; (a) shows the amplitude
characteristics and (b) the phase characteristics. In these figures, the measured results obtained by

Methods for calculating semi-submersible wave motion


Remote

Measurement

by P o s i t i o n

Sensor Device

(YNU)

--Rail

67

r-S,"-~Cl

~ ~B"=
I'
S E I
--Wave

A , B , B ~- C a m e r a
C
- Wave Probe
D
- Wave Prove
E
- L.E.D(target
for
p o s i t i o n s e n s o r device)
F
Nylon rope for guLde

!
LMAIN

CARRIAGE

ESUB

3,500

CARRIAGE

FIG. A1.3.

Scheme of apparatus for the model experiment (YNU).

the three organizations are plotted together. The marks used in these figures are illustrated in Fig.
A2. For the measured results from Y N U , only the amplitude characteristics are indicated here.
The amplitude and phase angle of motion are determined from the measured data by means of a
harmonic analysis technique at SHI and IHI.
The results are presented in the form of a non-dimensional frequency response of the amplitude
of the motion to a base of the wave periods. The phase angles of the motion are given in degrees,
also to a base of the wave periods.
As for the comparison of the results of the three organizations, the natural period of heave
agreed very well, whereas those of pitch and roll had slight differences.
Measurements of the natural periods were conducted at YNU and IHI under a completely
free-floating condition and SHI carried out the measurements by using the model and the
measuring equipment for the motion. The difficulty of precise measurements due to the free
decaying oscillation of a long period with fast decaying is considered to be one of the factors for the
differences in the natural period for the pitch and roll among the three organizations.
The natural period of yaw is the natural period of the mechanical measuring system as
mentioned above. A large difference in the natural period of yaw between two of the organizations
(SHI and IHI) is due to the different stiffness of the soft springs used by each organization.

atton

S H t

I H I

Y N U

3.0 m

3.5 m

Water DeDth
2.5 m

Transient Water Wave

Regular Water Wave


EXP.

0.046
0.160
0.280
0.310

CAL.

EXP.

CAL.

0
ZX
[]

EXP.

FIG. A2. Explanation of marks used in Figs A3 - A10.

CAL.

68

M. TAKAGIet al.
SURGE
X = 0 deg'

1.fir

~o

,eo 8 ~ 7

0.5

1.0

2.0

3.0

Tw, s
FIG. A3(a).

Surge motion in regular head waves.

SURGE
X : 0 deg"

180r

90

z~

0 e

1.0

'

~io

'
Tw,

31o
s

,x

-180

FIG. A3(b).

Surge motion in regular head waves.

69

Methods for calculating semi-submersible wave motion


SWAY
1.5 r

X = 90 de~


1.0

0.5

0 o

1.0

2.0

3.0

Tw, $
FiG. A4(a).

Sway motion in regular beam waves.

SWAY
X = 90 deg
180

o~A2 ~ ~ t

90

"10

z~ 1.0

2.0

i
3.0

Tw. s

-90

-180

FIG. A4(b).

t ~t~

Sway motion in regular beam waves.

M. TAKAGI e t al.

70

HEAVE

:~

X = 0 ae9

2.0-

1.5

<
N

&

1.0

0.5

Z,+,,
1.0

2.0

Tw,
Fm. A5(a).

3.0

Heave motion in regular head waves.

HEAVE
X = 0 dig.

mo V

O o

9O

oil ;~ ~oo~o,+
"~

1.o"

"o

Tw.

3.0

--'Ii

-180 c

FZC;. A5(b).

Heave motion in regular head waves.

Methods for calculating semi-submersible wave motion

HEAVE
2.0

X = 45 deo.

eo

1.5

/x

1.0
r,

o 90 P~2

*~

0.5

- ~ c /

1.0

J ~o
310

2.0

'

Tw, s
FIG. A6(a).

Heave motion in regular bow quartering waves.


HEAVE
x = 4 5 de~.

180

O
O

90

"o
O

~G

1.0 ~
o

-90

" 2.0

3.0

Tw, s

.!

-180

FIG. A6(b).

Heave motion in regular bow quartering waves.

71

72

M. TAKAG[ et al.

HEAVE
2.0

X = 90deg .
e

1.5
-+

@ Q~.
~0 @

\~@.

1.0
&

0.5

1.0

2.0

3.0

Tw, s
FIG. A7(a).

Heave motion in regular beam waves.

HEAVE
X = 90 deg'

O
O

&

4lo S'2.

6
0

1.0

J
2.0

3.0

Tw, s
-90

Fl~. A7(b).

Heave motion in regular beam waves.

Methods for calculating semi-submersible wave motion


ROLL
1.5

90d'g -

1.0

1.0

FIG. A8(a).

2.0
Tw, s

3.0

Roll motion in regular beam waves.

ROLL
180

X = 90deo

~'

90

'1o
i

1.0

2.0

3.0

Tw, s
0

-90

-180

FIG. A8(b).

Roll motion in regular beam waves.

73

M. TAKAGI et al.

74

PITCH
X=

1.5

0 dee.

1.0
O

^~ 0

O0

0.5

J
1.o

2'.o
Tw,

FIG. A9(a).

'

alo

'

Pitch motion in regular head waves.

PITCH
X = 0 aeu.

180 -e
O

90

,.o.

0
O

210

'
Tw.

310
s

-180
FIG. A9(b).

Pitch motion in regular head waves.

'

Methods for calculating semi-submersible wave motion


YAW
X = 45 d,~.
0.3

<[

0.2

OA

e o ~ o ,~~t--~'~'~

0.1
-

1.0

2.0

3.0

Tw, s

FIG. AlO(a).

Yaw motion in regular bow quartering waves.

YAW
X = 45 d,g.

180
O
O

90

"o

1.0

2.0

3.0

Tw,s

-90
@
@

o ~,~,

t,

-18o J
FIG. A10(b).

Yaw motion in regular bow quartering waves.

75

76

M. TAKAGI et al.
CAL.

1.5

SWAY
X=90a=o.

Water Depth
3.5 m (Y N U )
3.0m(I H I)
2.5m(SHI)

J
1.0

0.5

1.0

2.0

3.0

Tw, s
Fro. A11.

2.0

Influence of water depth on sway amplitude.

HEAVE
X == 9 0 dig.

CAL.

Water Depth

----3 . 5 m (Y N U )
--3.0m(IHI)
....

2 . 5 m (S H I )

1.5

<

1.0

0.5

1.0

2.0

3.0

Tw. s
FIG. AI2.

Influence of water depth on heave amplitudc.

Methods for calculating semi-submersible wave motion

77

ROLL
1.5

CAL. Water Depth


3.5m(YNU)
3.0m(I H I)
2.5 m (S H I )

X = 9 0 n,o.

1.0

"o.
0.5

1.0

2.0

3.0

Tw, s
Fro. AI3.

Influence of water depth on roll amplitude.

From Figs A3(a) - A10(b), it is seen that both amplitude and phase characteristics show good
a g r e e m e n t a m o n g the three organizations, notwithstanding the different experimental
arrangements and different water depths. Figures A l l - A13 show the results of the calculations
which were done to see how much the difference in water depth at the three organizations
influenced the frequency response characteristics of the motion. The figures show the results in
regular beam waves (X = 90 deg.) with a wave height of H w = 0.046 m. The calculations were
performed by employing the water depth of each of the three organizations under the same
conditions for measurement as those at IHI.
The influence of the water depth on the amplitude characteristics appears around the wave
period of Tw = 1.8 sec and appears to increase toward longer wave periods.

M. TAKAGIet al.

78

APPENDIX

CALCULATION RESULTS OF AMPLITUDES


(T=O.5-4sec.

= 0 , 4 5 , 90 )

AMPLITUOES OF SURGE
1(. =0, 2BA =0.046 m
1.0

,,

----

ZA

0.51

06

:5

T(S)

T(S)

FiG. BI.1
i

AMPLITUDESOF SURGE
9(, =0", 2z~A:0.046m
1.0
x

0.5

o6

2
FIG. B1.2

Methods for calculating semi-submersible wave motion


i

79

AMPUTLDES OF SURGE
% =0",2Z:,A=O.046rn
1.0

--S

~ -

.....

Q5

--:-- /o,,,,.e,,
00

2
FIG.

T(S)

T(S)

T(S)

BI.3

AMPLITUDESOF SURGE
% =45, 2~,A=OO46m
1.0

A
B

>I
Q5

00

2
FIG. B2.1
i

AMPLITUDESOF SURGE
% =45~,2~A=QO46m
1.0

- - ~ - K,R
--.-- LI
. . . . L2

O5

2_*-

06

2
FiG. B2.2

80

M. TAKAGIet al.
i

AMPLITUDESOFSURGE
% :45 ~,2~A:OO46m
1.0
....

050!

S
T
Ul
U2
V

.....
......

W
X

--+--

YI
Y2

......

3
FIG.

I.O
,#

Q5

o ......

AMPLITUDES OF SWAY

% =45 , 2~A=O.O46m

CI

GL

-"

G2

.....

ZA

T(S) 4

B2.3

:ii: !

/
I

_ ~..........
............II

T(S)

Fio. B3.1

AMPLITUDES OF SWAY
% : 4 5 , 2~A = O O 4 6 m

I.O
--M
--

05

....

LI, L2

_,~z~..

.....

-. . . . .

T(S)

ZB

Oo

2
FIG. B3.2

Methods for calculating semi-submersible wave motion


i

81

AMPLITUDES OF SWAY
% =45 ,2BA =0046 m

,f

x,
0.5

. ~ o o

-7-- ~2

,,.~

~
00

" i

T(S)

FiG. B3.3

1.0

CI

AMPLITUDES OF SWAY
9(, =90, 2~A=OO46m / _ ~ - . . ~ " '

__._ ~2

~ L \

_:_ ~,

.~'o

......

~'~-

Q5
......

Jp,

."

.,A!,

.
2

T(S)

'~

FiG. B4.1

AMPLITUDES OF SWAY
% =90,2z;A=O046m,~

1.0
+

. , , ~ " ~ ' ' b ' ' ' ~ ' ' A ~ "'1~'=

0.5

o6

.--..ii~~' /
I

2
FiG. B4.2

.5

T(S)

82

M. TAKAGI et at.

AMPLITUDESOF SWAY
i(, =90~2~A=0.046m

1.0

s
- - -

U I
~t
>.-

05

....
o

U2
V

.....
......

W
X

_~-:=-:t:_z~

t~=:--

/,~'o-

""

~ Y I

--:--~2 / f
iiI

00

,~i

is'

T(S)4

FIG. B4.3

AMPLITUDESOF HEAVE
% =45~ 2~A:0.046m

+~

"~

iJ"

~I~,o.
* I!J[

,l,/Ir

F_2.

I.O

2
FIG. B5.1

T(S)

Methods for calculating semi-submersible wave motion

'

'

AMPLITUDES OF HEAVE
3(, =45? 2~A =QO46m

2.0

--,~-- K
....
LL~

_.--=

.......

I.C

ZB

T(S)

FIG. B5.2

2.0

AMPLITUDES OF HEAVE
% =45, 2~A=O.O46m
--S

r.,J

------

-----UI
....

U2

--+-- Y2

I.(

r////

.3
FIG. B5.3

T(S)

83

M. TAKAGIet al.

84

--A

I.O

o Cl

E2

--

Q5

AMPLITUDESOF ROLL
% :45 ~, 2r~A:OO46m

-o-

....... J

(Z~A~ I~

T
T(S)

FIG. B6. l

AMPLITUDES OF ROLL
% =457 2z:,A=OO46m

I.O
s~
05

-.....

K,P
LI
L2

- -

M,Q

.....
--.o.--

~pr

T(S)

T(S)

FtG. B 6 . 2

/~VIPUTUDES OF ROLL

% =45, 2r~A=O.O46m

I.O - - S
v,

-----..w

o
.....
.......

Q5

UI

Uv2
W
X

YI
---~--- Y 2

00

FuG. B o . 3

Methods for calculating semi-submersible wave motion

-o

A
B

85

AMPLITUDESOF ROLL
9(,-90,-2~A=OO46m

Lo
Q5

~ "~" -

.....

Z,a,

"~"-//

T(S) 4

FIG. BT, 1

AMPLITUDES OF ROLL
% :90 , 2~,A:OO46m

1.0
el

--....

LI
L2

ZB

,__..----o--

,..:~

05
C

.5

T(S)

FIo. B7.2
I

AMPLITUDES OF ROll
9(, =90~, 2BA=OO46m

1.0

0.5

o6

~ S
_ _ m

....

Ul
U2

t3

oo

--'o'-" Y2

--/

.l",'"

I~ ' ~

.3

FIG. B7.3

T(S)

86

M. TAKAOt et al.

AMPLITUDES OF PITCH
9(, =0, 2z;A=0.04.6m

1.0
,..g

Q5
__..~_.

06

T(S)4

FI6. B8.1
i

AMPLITUDES OF PITCH
7,, =01 2~A =0.046 m
1.0

--~--

-----

LI

....

L2

ZB

Q5,

.5

T(S)

Fi6. B8.2

AMPLITUDES OF PITCH
1(, =~ 2~A=OO4.6m

1.0

U|

o
Q5

---:-- }2

2
FIG, B8.3

T(S) 4

Methodsfor calculatingsemi-submersiblewavemotion
l

i'

AMPLITUDES OF PITCH
Z :45 , 2~A :0046m

I.C

- - A
o
B

,~

Cl

61
G2

Q~

...... Z

,
I

T (S) 4

T(S) 4

FK}. B9. l
i

AMPLITUDES OF PITCH
% =45~,2~A:O046m

1.0

--~--

LI
L2
- - M

(:P

N
.......

0.5

-.,w~-- Q
p

~
~

R
ZB

-.J

00

2
FIG. B9.2
I

AMPLITUDES OF PITCH
% :45 , 2c~A:OO46m

1.0 - - S
------

- - . - - UI
....
U2
(:D

...~~

_-1i_- w

Q5

FIG.B9.3

T(S) 4

87

88

M. TAKAGI et al.

- - A

O2

_---::_ c~

"~"

AMPLITUDES
OF YAW
/
,,~ :45 , 2 ~ :o.046rn /

O.

T(S) 4

FIG. BI0.1

--~-- K
--.--LI
....
L2
--M

0.2

0.1

AMPLITUDES
OF YAW
~, : 4 5 2~A = O O 4 6 m

- - o - . ZB

Oo

~ _ . ~ - - - - ~ -

..........

r(s)

T(S)

FI6. BIO.2

O2

AMPLITUDESOF YAW
%=4sTS,2~A:0.046 m
::: uL

-..#.
OI
B

o6

/ / /

2
Fic. BI0.3

89

Methods for calculating semi-submersible wave motion


APPENDIX
CALCULATION
(T=

RESULTS OF PHASES

1-10sec,

= 45 )

PHASES OF SURGE
1C=45~,2BA:O.O46m
9O

'

'

5'

' (T
s')

'

'

IO

-90
A
---"-+

-180

I,ZA-C2
D
......

I
d

FIG. Cl.1

PHASES OF SURGE
% : 45~,2z~A:OO46m

5
~ K
-----

-9(

LI, L2,M,N,O,R

---0---

~ Z B

-18C
FIG, C1.2

+(s)

ic

M, TAKAGIet al.

90

180
PHASES OF SURGE
9(, : 45, 2~A=O046m

90
T

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

-90

;... ~
.,.,.~-.--a...--

. . . . . .

- - S
....

T'2UI'YI'Y2

T(S)

- ~ o - - c~.---e---.q~..~- . . . .

.....
. . . . . .

W
X
Z

-180
FIG. C1.3

18C
PHASES OF SWAY
7(, : 45 , 2roA= 004.6m

9(:
I
I

-90

T (S)

--A
o

-180
FiG. C2.1

---D
- - - -

GI,G2

......

.....

7A

Methods for calculating semi-submersible wave motion

91

18C
PHASES OF SWAY
%. =45, 2gA :QO46m

9(]

5'

'

'

'T(Si

~ K
-

-9C

-18C
FIo. C2.2

PHASES OF SWAY
,,

rr

'X. =45 2~A =O.O,~m

_c~
s

-18C
FIG. C2,3

.....

IC

LI,L2,M,O,P,Q.R.ZB

'

L~

"tl

-(.J1

_ _

tl,I

- - ~ - .

"1'

0.1> . . . .

iI/

7"-

.o~

ii

p O O

-~

L~

(Jl-

CrY-

~l~Ig - U O

J tl~

-to

---

-'I~ - - I

---

~:IiIJ

fill

~t,

.0: ol

......

ii

-71rl-i

>

>

Methods for calculating semi-submersible wave motion

18C

PHASES OF ROLL
"~ :45, 2~, :o~m

93

,4

9O
,:
0

z~,

~ / ! !

: ,, /I/ J"$

/ ',

! i I

-90

..... z,,

J/f---q

-180
FIG. C4. l

i80

PHASES OF ROLL
% =45, 2~a =0.046m

~ I //~

/ !~/~

90

0
: / - - -

t.I

-9(

-18(
FIG. C4.2

'

94

M. TAKAGIet al.

I PHASES OF ROLL
IC:4~2~,:0.046m

I,

:T(Si

i ~ t ~X.
i A/ i \

" \/' "~[/]

"

-90
/"

---

.....

!
,

?,, /

f \i\,

--- T ...... X
----U --~-Y
--

-180

ml

Fio. C4.3

18C

PHASESoOFPITCH
~C:45, 2~A :0.046m
9O

"

~
~jX~,

--

t
.

::-

--~--7

~,
--

G2

,'

~2

8~

I/'l},J o

IA/I

../

5 T,(s)/[,

-:- ~
-90

~h r - ; ~ T ~ ,

..,--4---4~.-f----4

,'

/
/

~ ,;

I,~,, 'q

,,'>" ,,! IV! ',, 1

.~ ......
~ - ~, ~ ~ :.- . ~. . . ._.

-180
FiG. C5.1

L~~ L

-Io

Methods for calculating semi-submersible wave motion

95

180 ~

PHASES OF PFFCH
9(, =45*,2~A :0.046m
K

90

--.-....

LI
L2

.....

......

-..,-..

....

',

i(~)fi!II x", ~<

.--o-.- R
~
Z~

-90

FIG. C5.2

PHASES~ P,~C,

\ \ 7

.45;2..oo4m

CO

\\I

9O

,~

UI

.....-

u2--~Y,

-'~""

Y2

z-

FIG. C5.3

/"

\\

"

\I

\]

96

M. TAKAGIet al.

2~
03

180

F =!
- - A

9C

"~..

PHASES OF YAW
% =45~ 2z;A=004.6m

. . . . ZA5

=----~-----~

T(S)

I0

-90
FIG. C6.1

27(1
PHASES OF YAW
'X, =45 2z;A=QO4.6m

C,O

180
~ K
----....

90

o[

-90
FI6. C6.2

LI
L2

....

~Q

........

~ R
-'~

ZB

T(S)

I0

Methods for calculating semi-submersiblc wave motion

270'
PHASES OF

YAW

180
~ S

90

.....

0
N

I
I

",,

""N
N

-90
FIG. C6.3

97