海上永久设施系泊分析方法综述

S. Pahos, G. Maldonado, P. Westlake
{"title":"海上永久设施系泊分析方法综述","authors":"S. Pahos, G. Maldonado, P. Westlake","doi":"10.1115/omae2020-18000","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"\n Traditionally mooring line strength assessment is based on a deterministic approach, where the mooring system is evaluated for a design environment defined by a return period. The mooring system response is then checked against the mooring strength to ensure a required factor of safety. Some codes adopt a deterministic approach [1], [2], [3]. Other codes like [4] adopt a partial safety factor format where uncertainties are addressed through load factors for load components and material factors for line strength. Industry practices give guidance on mooring analysis methodology together with analysis options like coupled, de-coupled, time domain, frequency domain and the associated line tension safety factors. Prior work has demonstrated that discrepancies in mooring line tensions are observed when different analytical approaches are used [5]. Namely, the mooring line tensions of a semi-submersible unit in a coupled time domain analysis, were found to be non-compliant, whereas those calculated using a decoupled time domain analysis returned compliant tensions.\n This work focuses on a coupled dynamic analysis where all inertial, hydrodynamic and mechanical forces are assessed to determine the subsequent motions. Despite being considered the most accurate to capture the true dynamic response, a coupled analysis is also the least efficient in terms of the required computer resources and engineering effort [1].\n This paper presents further discussion on the above observation in mooring tensions and also considers differences in the installation’s excursion. All responses are evaluated in the time domain where the nonlinear dynamic behavior of the mooring lines, slowly varying wave drift forces and coupling effects are captured.\n Agreement is found in the present computations, carried out with two renowned hydrodynamic codes, which validate former results and reiterate the need to distinguish between time domain methods and recommended appropriate safety factors accordingly.","PeriodicalId":427872,"journal":{"name":"Volume 6A: Ocean Engineering","volume":"12 5 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2020-08-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"A Review of Mooring Analysis Methodologies for Permanent Offshore Installations\",\"authors\":\"S. Pahos, G. Maldonado, P. Westlake\",\"doi\":\"10.1115/omae2020-18000\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"\\n Traditionally mooring line strength assessment is based on a deterministic approach, where the mooring system is evaluated for a design environment defined by a return period. The mooring system response is then checked against the mooring strength to ensure a required factor of safety. Some codes adopt a deterministic approach [1], [2], [3]. Other codes like [4] adopt a partial safety factor format where uncertainties are addressed through load factors for load components and material factors for line strength. Industry practices give guidance on mooring analysis methodology together with analysis options like coupled, de-coupled, time domain, frequency domain and the associated line tension safety factors. Prior work has demonstrated that discrepancies in mooring line tensions are observed when different analytical approaches are used [5]. Namely, the mooring line tensions of a semi-submersible unit in a coupled time domain analysis, were found to be non-compliant, whereas those calculated using a decoupled time domain analysis returned compliant tensions.\\n This work focuses on a coupled dynamic analysis where all inertial, hydrodynamic and mechanical forces are assessed to determine the subsequent motions. Despite being considered the most accurate to capture the true dynamic response, a coupled analysis is also the least efficient in terms of the required computer resources and engineering effort [1].\\n This paper presents further discussion on the above observation in mooring tensions and also considers differences in the installation’s excursion. All responses are evaluated in the time domain where the nonlinear dynamic behavior of the mooring lines, slowly varying wave drift forces and coupling effects are captured.\\n Agreement is found in the present computations, carried out with two renowned hydrodynamic codes, which validate former results and reiterate the need to distinguish between time domain methods and recommended appropriate safety factors accordingly.\",\"PeriodicalId\":427872,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Volume 6A: Ocean Engineering\",\"volume\":\"12 5 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2020-08-03\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Volume 6A: Ocean Engineering\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1115/omae2020-18000\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Volume 6A: Ocean Engineering","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1115/omae2020-18000","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

传统的系泊线强度评估是基于一种确定性方法,其中系泊系统是根据由返回周期定义的设计环境进行评估的。然后根据系泊强度检查系泊系统的响应,以确保所需的安全系数。一些代码采用确定性方法[1],[2],[3]。[4]等其他规范采用部分安全系数格式,其中通过荷载元件的载荷系数和线路强度的材料系数来解决不确定性。行业实践给出了系泊分析方法的指导,以及耦合、解耦合、时域、频域和相关的线张力安全系数等分析选项。先前的工作已经证明,当使用不同的分析方法时,可以观察到系泊线张力的差异。也就是说,在耦合时域分析中,发现半潜式装置的系泊线张力是非柔顺的,而使用解耦时域分析计算的系泊线张力返回柔顺张力。这项工作的重点是一个耦合的动态分析,其中所有的惯性,流体动力和机械力被评估,以确定随后的运动。尽管耦合分析被认为是最准确地捕获真实动态响应的方法,但就所需的计算机资源和工程工作而言,耦合分析也是效率最低的。本文对上述系泊张力的观测结果进行了进一步的讨论,并考虑了装置偏移的差异。所有响应都在时域内进行评估,其中捕获了系泊线的非线性动力行为,缓慢变化的波浪漂移力和耦合效应。本文的计算与两个著名的水动力规范一致,它们验证了以前的结果,并重申需要区分时域方法和相应推荐的适当安全系数。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
A Review of Mooring Analysis Methodologies for Permanent Offshore Installations
Traditionally mooring line strength assessment is based on a deterministic approach, where the mooring system is evaluated for a design environment defined by a return period. The mooring system response is then checked against the mooring strength to ensure a required factor of safety. Some codes adopt a deterministic approach [1], [2], [3]. Other codes like [4] adopt a partial safety factor format where uncertainties are addressed through load factors for load components and material factors for line strength. Industry practices give guidance on mooring analysis methodology together with analysis options like coupled, de-coupled, time domain, frequency domain and the associated line tension safety factors. Prior work has demonstrated that discrepancies in mooring line tensions are observed when different analytical approaches are used [5]. Namely, the mooring line tensions of a semi-submersible unit in a coupled time domain analysis, were found to be non-compliant, whereas those calculated using a decoupled time domain analysis returned compliant tensions. This work focuses on a coupled dynamic analysis where all inertial, hydrodynamic and mechanical forces are assessed to determine the subsequent motions. Despite being considered the most accurate to capture the true dynamic response, a coupled analysis is also the least efficient in terms of the required computer resources and engineering effort [1]. This paper presents further discussion on the above observation in mooring tensions and also considers differences in the installation’s excursion. All responses are evaluated in the time domain where the nonlinear dynamic behavior of the mooring lines, slowly varying wave drift forces and coupling effects are captured. Agreement is found in the present computations, carried out with two renowned hydrodynamic codes, which validate former results and reiterate the need to distinguish between time domain methods and recommended appropriate safety factors accordingly.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信