offshore single point mooring systems

Offshore Single Point Mooring Systemsfor Import of

Hazardous Liquid Cargoes

SEA OK&7' PROJECT R1OE-26

by

Aaron Matthew Salancy

ard

Professor Robert G. Bea

Department of Naval Architecture and Offshore Engineering

University of California at Berkeley

September 1994

Offshore Single Point Mooring Systemsfor Import of

Hazardous Liquid Cargoes

by

Aaron M. Sahtncy

artd

Robert G. Bea

ABSTRACT

The goal of this project was the determination of feasibility of single point mooring systems

SPMS! for use as deepwater ports for the import of hazardous liquid cargoes offshore southern California.

The use o." deepwater ports is advocated because it has been determined by the U.S. Coast Guard that they

represent i he least risky form of crude oil import, lessening the likelihood of occurrence and environmental

impact se verit of accidents. Two configurations of SPMS were examined as deepwater ports in this

project: catenary anchor leg mooring CALM! and single anchor leg mooring SALM!, Two sites for

these syst.ms were chosen offshore southern California by the California State Lands commission: El

Segundo hand h4crro Bay. The project examined the environmental conditions at both sites, developed

analytical modets with which to evaluate the suitability of SPMS to these environmental conditions,

determined the reliability of the systems by use of state-of-the-art reliability methods, and evaluated the

feasibility of the systems by comparing reliability to system costs,

The results of this project indicate that SPMS for offshore southern California conditions are

feasible and do not require major technological developments to allow such systems to be designed.

constructed, and operated. Use of these systems should lo» er the number of accidents due to hazardous

hquid cargo import, as well as reduce the impact of those accidents which do occur.

Acknowledgments

Many people have been instrumemal in thc development of this paper. We would like to thank

Professor William C. Webster for his contribution to the direction of this research. We would also like to

thank Wei Ma Graduate Student Researcher!, who was responsible for a pamUci effort to develop analyticalmodels for CALM moorings.

We would like to express thanks to Califorma Sea Grant for its sponsorship of this paper. This

work has given us the opportunity to examine the state of hazardous cargo transportation and transfer, and

leam the means for avoiding accidents by designing against their occunence.

Many industry contacts helped guide this work. We would like to thank Dale G. Rolhns of the

Louisiana Offshore Oil Port for taking thc time to show us around the LOOP facility, as weIl as for

answering many questions at other limes concerning single point moorings and deepwater ports. We would

also like to thank Michael J, LcBlanc and Wayne E. Lolan of LOOP for their input and assistance.

M. Steven Mostarda of IMODCO was of great help in the systems design of the SPMS, as well as

in providing helpful background on thc systems. Wc would like to thank Capt. A. F. Fantauzzi of the

Chevron Shipping Company and Christopher P. Whatlcy of the Chevron Petroleum Technology Company

for their help in understanding the chaUenges involved in design and operation of facilities of this type.

We would also like to thank the foUowing for their contribution to the success of this research:

Jay Phelps of the California State Lands Commission, Paul Palo of the Naval Civil Engineering

Laboratory, Dr. Malcolm Sharpies of Noble, Denton and Associates, Inc., and Gavin Cleator of Bruce

Anchor Limited.

This paper is funded in part by a grant from the National Sea Grant College Prognun, National

Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, U. S. Department of Commerce, under grant number

NA36RG0537, project number R/OE-26 through California Sea Grant College, and in part by the

California State Resources Agency. The views expressed herein are those of the authors and do not

necessarily reflect the views of NOAA or any of its sub-agencies. 'Ile U. S. Government is authorized to

reproduce and distribute for governmental prrrlxxes,

CONTENTS

Contents

Introduction.

1.1 Project Overview

1,2 Project Background

1.3 Deepwater Ports.

1.4 Single Point Mooring Systems

1.4.1 SPMS Around the World.

1.4.2 LOOP Facility.

1,5 Report Structure ...........,.��...

Environmental Conditions . . ...,.. 6

2.1 Introduction .

2.2 Project Sites ..

2.3 Env;ronmental Conditions.

2.3.1 Wind................

2.3.2 Waves.

2.3.3 Current.

2.3.4 Weather Direc tionality...

2.3.5 Seismic Activity

2.3.6 Ocean Floor Topography.

2.3.7 Soils.

...10

...10

3.1 Introduction.

3.2 Existing SPMS Types..............

3.3 Applicable Requirements

3.4 Catenary Anchor Leg Mooring

3.5 Single Anchor Leg Mooring .

....17

...IS

S ystetn Coafigurattons ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ t ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ r ~ r ~ ~~ ~ ~ ~~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~+ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~~+ ~ ~ ot ~ ~ ~ «11

IvCONTENTS

3,6 Supporting Components and Systems.

3.6.1 Tankers .....................................

...,...20

......20

3.6,2 Product Risers and Pipeline ..........................

3.6.3 Tending Vessels and Connection Equipnmnt.

3.7 Operation .

...21

22

.....23

4.1 introduction

.... 25

.....25

4.2 Steady Environmental Forces.

4.2. 1 Wind,.

4.2.2 Mean Wave Drift..

4.2.3 Current.

...26

27

4.3 Oscillating Environmental Motions. .....28

4.3.1 First Order Wave Motions. .......28

4.3.2 Second Order Wave Motions...., 29

4.4 Seismic Activity 29

4.5 Fatigue ...30

4.6 CALM Analytical Model..

4.7 SALM Analytical Model

....33

...33

R eliabrlrty ~ ~ tt ~ ~ ~ ~ tent ~ t ~ ~ ~ ~ 36

5.1 introduction . ..36

5.2 Component Probability of Failure Calculations.....

5.2.1 Load and Capacity.

5.2.2 Variance and Deviation.

...36

.....38

38

5.2.3 Correlation.................,...

5.3 System Probability of Failure Calculations..

5.4 Failure due to Storm Loadings.

5,4.1 Storm Loadings by Sea State

5,4.2 Reliability for Storm Loadings.

5.5 Failure due to Seismic Loadings........

5.6 Failure due to Cyclic Fatigue Loadings .....,..........

5,7 Failure due to Human and Organizational Error....

5.8 Facility Probability of Failure.

...40

...41

, ...43

�...43

tt ~

...47

A nalytlcal Models e ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ t ~ ~ ~ ~ s ~ ~ rt ~ ~ e ~ e ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ t ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~

CONTENTS

5.9 Acceptable Reliability.... ,....47

Feasibility ...... ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ .. ~ ............. 4 9~ ~ ~ i ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ 0 ~ ~ ~ i 4 ~ ~ ~ ~ i ~ 1

.....496.1 Introduction ..........

6.2 System Hardware .�..49

50

�..50

,.�.50

...,52

7.1 Summary

7.2 Conclusions.

52

52

52

...53

53

7.3.1 Environmental Analysis.

7.3.2 Facility Design................

7.3.3 Reliability Analysis....

References 55

~ ~ ~ ~ ~ i ~ ~ ~ 4 ~ I 6 0

Appendix 2: Hoor Slopes at Designated SPMS Sites..

Appendix 3: Calculations of Steady Forces..

Appendix 4: Calculations of Oscillating Motions... �....�...

Appendix 5: Cakulations of Seismic Motions

Appendix 6: Calculations of Fatigue..........

Appendix 7: Calculations of CALM Line and Anchor Tensions

Appendix 8: Cakulations of SALM Line and Anchor Pile Tensions .

Appendix 9: Approximations to the. Standard Normal Distribution,

Appendix 10: Calculations of Reliahlity...........

Appendix 11: SPMS evaluated by ABS Factors of Safety.

....73

�.74

....94

....163

....169

....170

.�..175

....176

....178

6.3 System Development and Engineering .

6.4 Installation.

6.5 Total Initial Costs..............

6.6 Costs of Operation and Maintenance,,

Conclusions and Recommendatlons ..........

7.2.1 Deepwater Ports and SPMS.

7.2.2 Reliability Analysis of SPMS.

7.3 Recommendations for Future Work.

Appendices.....,.............................

Appendix 1: Partial List of Existing SPMS

i ~ i ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ i ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ Ot ~ ~ ~ ~ tt ~ ~ ~ ~ ~

LIST OF FIGURES

List of Figures

Figure 2.1: Site Locations.

Figure 3.1: Typical Catenary Anchor Leg Mooring Schematic ..

Figure 3.2: Typical Single Anchor Leg Mooring Schematic

Figure 3.3; Typical Tunet Mmxing Schematic

Figure 3,4: Typical Tour Mooring Schematic

Figure 3.5: SPMS Connection Type

Figure 3.6: Final CALM Design

Figure 3.7: Final SALM Design.

Figure 3.g: Schematic of Operating Procedure

Figure 4,1; SALM Restoring Force Schematic.

Figure 5,1 . Fatigue Reliability versus Service Life .

L/ST OF TABLES vu

List of Tables

Table 2.1: Environmental Conditions by Return Period.

Table 3.1: Applicable ABS Factor of Safety Requirements..

Table 3.2: San Diego Class Tanker Particulars.......................

......28

Table 4.2; Oscillating Motions, Two-Year Return Period Conditions. ..29

Table 4.3: SALM Vertical Seismic Offsets. �,30

Table 4.4: Component Fatigue Characteristics..

Table 4,5: Summary of Mean Fatigue Life

Table 4.6: CALM Line Tensions and Anchor Loads

Table 4.7: SALM Storm and Seismic Leg Tensions

...32

33

....,34

Table 5.1: Component Reliability Characteristics.

Table 5.2: Environmental Variance

39

,...39

Table 5.3: Probability of Connection by Sea State

Table 5.4: Storm Loadings and Probability of Failure by Sea State

Table 5.5: Probability of Failure due to Storm Loadings.....

Table 5.6: Component Probability of Failure due to Fatigue

Table 5.7: Facility Probabilities of Failure �.................................

4'7

...43

...45

.....47

Table 5.8: Acceptable Reliabili ties

Table 6.1: Total initial Facility Costs. 50

Table 6.2: Annual Operation Costs.

Table A.2.1: Ocean Floor Slopes at El Segundo.

Table A.2.2: Ocean Floor Slopes at Mono Bay .

Table A.6,1: Fatigue Reliability versus Service Life Chain!..

Table A.7.1: CALM Offset versus Tension.

51

73

.73

....169

Table A. 1 1.1: SPMS Evaluated by ABS . ....178

Table 4.1: Steady Environmental Forces, Two-Year Return Period Conditions..

L/ST OF SYMBOLS

List of Symbols

As

BB

Bias on K

CUss

CB

CD

CS

Cws

fco

fsc

fo

Steady wind ftmceFwiad

FS

FSF

CDj

CDrip

Cz

DBuoy

Dp

FBow, drip

FcurrcnT, blroy

Fcsrrent, Skip

FMean drip

Projected area

Side surface area of inle

Stress range model em@ parameter

Bem

Undrained shear strength

Coefficient of varianon of B

Drag coefficient

Drift coefficient

Average drift coefficient

Coefficient of variation of K

Wind shape coefficien

Wetted surface «ea coefficient

Coefficient of variation of 4

Buoy diameter

Pile diameter

Friction coefficient, chain and ocean bottomf

Unit skin hie tion capacity

Average stress freqtamy

Mean wave drift farce. bowwn

Current force on buoy

Current force on ship, bow-an

Mean wave drift force

Factor of safety

Fatigue safety life factor

L1ST OF SYMBOLS

HS

PC

Peosn

Py

Psea state

QP

Syg!

Sm

S5O

TDP

Tfl

TS

TSF

TSL

TWT

VC

VR

VS

VI

Vt.

VX

VZ

Design wave height

Maximum wave height

Significant wave height

Log life intercept of S-N curve

Length

Length of chain in contact with ocean bottom

Negative slope of S-N curve

Number of elements

S tress cycles

Chain holding power

Probability tanker is present at facility

Annual probability of failure

Probability of sea state being maximum annual sea state

Ultimate puU-out capacity

Mean capacity

Wetted surface area

Fatigue design stress range

Lagest expected stress range

Mean load

Wind gust duration

Design time period

Mean fatigue life

Significant wave period

Design time period, with safety factor

Service life

Minimum pile wall thickness

Current velocity

Coefficient of variation of resistance

Coefficient of variation of load

Wind gust velocity, duration t

Wind gust velocity, modified by elevation and duration

Coefficient of variation of X

Wind velocity at centroid elevation

LIST OF SYMBOLS

l I »Ii»

li'IO

Wg

xso

X99

ap

Ps

X m!

PAir

PE

PFM

PRs

Psw

<I» K

rr!n T

rrI X

ox

Wind gust velocity, 1 minute duration

Wind velocity at 10 meter elevation

Coefficient of variation of type II variances

Submerged unit weight of chain

Pile weight

Mean value of X

2-year face

100-year farce

Centmid elevation

Wave height exponent

Dimensionless pile factor

Safety index

Hement safety index

Syslem safety index

Accumuhted fatigue damage

Displaced volume

Stress range panuneter

Standard cumulative namal distribution

Gamma function

Rainflow correction factor

Air density

Correlation of elements

Failute mode correlation

Correlation coefficient, had to capacity

Salt water density

S tandy deviation log K

Standard deviation log R

Standard deviation log S

Standard deviation log T

Standard deviation log X

Standard deviation X

Stress range pantmeter

CHAPTER 1: NTRODUCTION

Chapter 1

Introduction

1.1 Project Overview

The purpose of this project Sea Grant project R/OE.26! was to perform an evaluation of the reliability andfeasibility of deepwater ports, specifically those consisting of a single point mooring system SPMS! andsupport equipment for tanker discharge, for offshore southern California These deepwater ports could serve

as discharge ports for tankers delivering crude oil from Valdez, Alaska, or other supply points. to southern

California Two locations along the California coast, El Segundo and Moiro Bay, were studied as potentiallocations for these facilities. These two locations were specified by the California State Lands

Commission. The water depth for both facilities was proposed as one thousand feet.

Direction in this project was provided by Professor Robert Bea principal investigator! andProfessor William Webster co-principal investigator!. 'nie research was performed by Mr. Aaron Salancyand Mr. Wei Ma. Mr. Salancy was responsible for the work presented in this report, consisting of thesystems engirlering of the facilities. Mr. Ma was responsibk for the development of the analytical modelsused in this project [Ma, l994j.

1.2 Project Background

This project investigated the feasibility of deepwater ports at the two locations proposed by the California

State Lands Commission. This investigation required examining the existing types of SPMS, evaluatinghow they would function in the offshore southern California environment, determining what configurationswould adequately withstand the environmental conditions while performing satisfactorily, and establishingthe financial and technical feasibility of the resulting configurations. 'Ihe determination of feasibility was

CHAPTER I .' INTRODUCTfON

based on an assessment of the reliability characteristics of each proposed system and the costs to build andoperate the system.

Two vility systems were chosen for detailed examination. Each facility was lo be capable ofservicing tankers up to roughly very large crude camer VLCC! size loosely de6ned as 200,000 to 275,000

DWT!, with the tankers requiring no major modification to use the facility. Each facility would also meetall major relevant requirements and guidelines for an offshore installation of this type. It was desirable that

the facilities should not require major leaps in technology from that currently existing in any component, orin installation, maintenance, or regular operation. This was consideied necessary to insure that reasonablereliability. feasibility, and cost estimates could be obtained. Above all else, the facility should be capableof rapid. safe disconnection in deteriorating sea states and be capable of surviving intact the 100-year stormand seismic conditions with a sufficiently high probability of success, Only once these requirements weremet by a system would the financial feasibility analysis be conducted for that system.

The scope of this project includes: the SPMS, the tankers which are expected to use the facihty,aII equipment necessary for connection and discharge of the tankers, and the piping system to transfer oilfrom the facility to the shore. The pipeline to shore itself is not a main focus of this project, however, andthe shoreside facilities have not been examined. Tiiese aspects of the systems should be given attention inthe future, as they will heavily impact system feasibility by their effect on facility cosL

1.3 Deepwater Ports

Deepwater ports, defined as ports several miles offshore which can service VLCC's and ULCCs ultra-largecrude carriers, loosely defined as 275,000 DWT and up!, have several obvious advantages over othermethods of crude oil delivery. They lessen the impact of accidents due to their distance froin shore and

reduce the probability of accidents by keeping tankers from entering congested ports. However, untilrecently, no quantifiable evidence proving the worth of deepwater ports existed. This changed when theU.S. Coast Guard declared deepwater ports to be the least environmentally risky form of crude oil import intheir report "USCG Deepwater Ports Study" pJ.S. Cielxsrtment of Transportation. 1993].

In the report, deepwater ports were compared with three other methods of crude oil import: directvesMI delivery tanker enter3 port and discharges at a terminal!, offshore lightemig tanker off-hads to a

smaller tanker or barge offshore, and this second vessel then tritnspcets oil to the port terminal! and offshoremooring delivery tankers less than VLCC size discharge through pipeline to shore at a shallow water

facility!. Offshore moorings are defined as being within 1 to 2 miles offshore in the study. Although theLouisiana Offshore Oil Port LOOP! facility was the only deepwater port examined, approximately 14% of

CHAPTER I: INTRODUCTION

all foreign-source crude oil imported to the U.S. has gone through LOOP in recent years, making itsignificant [U.S. Department of Transportation, 1993].

The determination of environmental risk in this report was based upon historical frequency ofspills, average spill size, and an environmental impact coefficien for each different environmental area

entered or transited by tankers for each method af delivery. This produced an average environmental impactfor each method of delivery. Deepwater ports were found to pose the lowest environmental risk primarilybecause; the transfers af crude ail occur offshore, where environmental impact is lower; the crude oil isdeliver into port by means of a pipeline, which is a very safe means of transportation; and no ships areexposed to through-port transit dangers. Deepwater ports also allow for the pre-positioning of spillresponse equipment at the port site. However, for "worst case" spills, the study found all methods of

import to pose roughly equal environmental risk, due to the disastrous consequences of complete loss of atanker's cargo [U.S. Department of Transportation, 1993].

Of course, deepwater ports have their drawbacks, and these should be mentioned. They requireenormous capital expenditure as well as efforts to obtain state and federal permits for construction andoperation.

I.4 Single Point Mooring Systems

The first parameter in this project was the use of a SPMS as a deepwater port. A SPMS is a mooringwhich allows a ship to weather vane around the mooring, thus minimizing the environmental loads on thesystem by allowing the moored ship to head into the prevailing weather, In this case, the SPMS also

provides the interface between the tanker and the pipeline far the discharge of crude ail.

1.4.1 SPMS Around the World

SPMS have been used successfully in many applications around the world in many different conditions.The challenge posed in this project for the ul of SPMS is the specified water depth of one thousand feetand the offshare Califtxnia oceanographic and seismic conditions. This is not an unprecedented depth forthe use of SPMS, as the Marlim Field catenary anchor leg mooring CALM! off the coast of Bi3zil islocated in approximately 1312 feet of water fHwang and Bensimon, 1990]. However, the environmentalconditions offshore California, including seismic activity, are more severe than those encountered by mostSPMS. Even so. the design of a SPMS for use in one thousand feet of water off the California coastshauM require na majar brea!through developments.


Single point mooring systems are in operation in many locations around the globe. Appendix 1gives a representative list of approximately 400 SPMS, their locations and their installation date. There are

currently SPMS in California. but these existing systems are in significantly shallower ~ater,

SPMS have been designed in inany different configurations, some of which are discussed in

Chapter 3, System Configurations. Two specific systems which best meet the needs of this project arechosen for analysis in Chapter 3.

1.4.2 LOOP Facility

ln the course of developing background for this project, we visited the Louisiana Offshore Oil Port LOOP!facility in Louisiana. This faci!ity was consideied to be highly relevant to the project, as it is currently theonly deepwater facility in the U.S. and makes use of three SPMS. The LOOP facility is owned and

operated by LOOP Inc., and is governed by the laws of the United States in the same manner as if the port

were an aiea of exclusive federal jurisdiction located within a state. The United States Coast Guard's Marine

Safety Office has governmental authority over LOOP [LOOP Operations Manual, 1992]. We conducted

several interviews at LOOP, and the findings were very helpful in many aspects of this project.

The LOOP facility encompasses offshore! three SPMS of the single anchor leg mooring SALM!

type and a platform complex consisting of a pumping platform and a control platform. The LOOP offshore

pumping facility is located at 28 degrees, 53.2 minutes North latitude, 90 degrees, l.5 minutes Westlongitude. We SALM's are heated in a radial pattern from the platform at a distance of 8150 feet, and were

built to accommodate vessels of up to 700,000 DWT. LOOP began operations in 1986 and over recent

years has received approximately 14% of all foreign-source US import crude oil. It has been visited by

tankers ranging in size irom 80,000 DWT to 556,000 DWT [US Department of Transportation. 1993].

The major physical difference between LOOP and the facilities proposed in this project is the water

depth. Although LOOP is considered a deepwater port � because it is capable of servicing VLCC's andULCC's � it is located in approximately 115 feet of water. The envuonmental conditions are also miMer

in the Gulf of Mexico than along the southern California coast. LOOP is located approximately 18nautical miles offshore Louisiana, a greater distance than the facilities in this project. The LOOP facilitywas designed to support a much greater amount of tanker traffic than the facility in this project

Bearing these differences in mind, there is still much to be learned from LOOP. All componentsat or near the water surface will be very similar to those in this project, as will operational procedure.

installation and maintenance will have the hrgest differences due to factors related to water depth.


k.5 Report Structure

This report examines environmental conditions, SPMS types, analytical models, rehability, and feasibilityof SPMS. Chapter 2 presents background on the sites chosen by the California State Lands Commissionand the environmental conditions encountered at these sites. The main environmental components

examined are wind, wave, current, and seismic activity, The ocean floor and soil conditions at each site are

also examlne|L

In Chapter 3 the various types of SPMS configurations are examined, and the configurationsd.erned most suitahle for this project. CALM and SALM, are detailed. The supporting components of

these systems are also examined. These include the tankers visiting the facility, the pipeline from thefacility to the shore, and all tending vessels requimd for facility operation,

Chapter 4 discusses the analytical models used to determine the effects of environmental

components on the facilities. Environmental loadings and environmental-induced motions are modeled fortheir effect on the horizontal offset of the SPM buoy, from which line tensions in the SPMS anchor legs

can be determined. The environmental loadings consist of steady forces wind. current, and mean wave drift

for e!, oscillating motions first order wave motions and second order wave motions! and seismic loadings.

The restoring force of both the CALM and SALM systems are modeled.

Reliability is examined in Chapter 5. The reliability of each vility is measured by its annualprobability of failure. The probability of failure is divided into four relatively independent components:

failure due to storm loadings, failure due to seismic loadings, failure due to fatigue. and failure attributable

to human and organizational error HOE!. Each of these components is examined. The annual probabilityof failure of each facihty for each component is examined and calculated.

Chapter 6 discusses the feasibility of the proposed facilities. This is done by comparing the costof each facility with its reliability. The financial analysis includes the cost of the system components,

system development and engineering, construction and transportation, installation, operation andmaintenance, and permitting. The feasibility of the systems is the result of tlus analysis.

Chapter 7 presents a summary of this work, as well as recommendations for future work on this

topic.

CHAPTER 2: EWVIRONIMENTAL CONDITIONS

Chapter 2

EnvironmentalConditions

2.j. Introduction

The goal of this chapter is the description of the environmental conditions which have an impact on the

design of the SPMS systems at the two chosen sites. A SPMS is always subject to forces from the

surrounding ocean and atmosphere, in the form of wind, wave and current ln a location such as southern

California, seismic events must be considered as well. The topography of the ocean floor needs to be

considered, as well as the nature of the soil with regards to anchor and anchor pile holding power.

Therefore, the conditions examined in this chapter include wind. waves, current, seismic activity. ocean

Aoor topography, and soil type.

2.2 Project Sites

Two sites along the southern California coast were identified by California Sea Grant as prospective SPMS

facility sites: El Segundo and Morro Bay. El Segundo is located at 33 degrees, 55 minutes North latitude

and 118 degrees, 25 minutes West longitude, while Morro Bay is located at 35 degrees, 22 minutes North

latitude and 120 degrees, 53 ininutes West longitude Figure 2.1!. The specified water depth of 1000 feet

gives a distance offshore ranging from 6 to 12 miles at both sites, for a variety of specific locations

Appendix 2!.

CHAPTER 2: ENVIRONMENTAL CONDITIONS

Figure 2.l: Site Locations

2.3 Environmental Conditions

The weather along the southern California coast is primarily a product of extra-tropical storms originatingin the Northeast Pacific during winter [Stevens, 1977]. Other weather phenomena such as tropical storms,thunderstmms, tornadoes and waterspouts are rare at best.

The main environmental components of wind, waves. cutTent and seismic activity are discussed in

the following sections and summarized in Table 2.l. The envimnmental conditions are presented in aprobability framework, which will allow for rapid integration with the methods used to determine

probability of failure in Chapter 5, "ReliabBity". This method is based on the concept of "return period".The return period is the mean elapsed time expected between occurrences of an event. For example, if athirty-foot wave is expressed as the 50-year return period wave, this means that a wave of thirty foot heightis expected to occur once every fifty years. These values are based on past statistical data and extrapolation.


It is customary to assume that all of the environmental components considered here follow a log normaldistribution, and this has been done. 'Itus type of distribution will be discussed more fully in Chapter 5.

Table 2.1; Environmental Conditions by Return Period

Another environmental component, visibility, should be noted. Heavy fog is possible in theseareas, and visibility is typically reduced to under one mile for approximately 2.5% of the year, varying bylocation [S tevens, 1977!. This may have an adverse effect on operations in a less direct manner than otherenvironmental components.

2.3. I Wind

Wind in this region is primarily from the northwest, circulating around the Pacific High, and varies fromwinter to summer. The most notable exception to this trend are the Santa Ana winds, generated inhmd andblowing out over the ctxtst. However. given the distance offshore of these facilities, the effects of this typeof wind can be ignored. Another phenomenon of this region is the Catalina Eddy. This eddy causesrecurvature of winds locally near the coast, but, for this project, it can also be considered insignificant[Stevens, 1977].

The wind speed can be expected to vary throughout the region under consideration, but estimates

for the area should prove sufficient for this project. Values for wind speed were iesearched from severalsources [Intersea Research Corporation, 1974; Stevens, 1977j and are given by return period in Table 2.1.

2.3.2 Waves

The primary wave direction offshore southern California is north to northwesterly, with little seasonalvariation. Values for maximum wave height were researched from several sources [Intersea ResearchCoqeration, 1974; Department of Navigation and Ocean Development, 1977: Stevens, 1977; API, 1989!and are given by return period in Table 2.1. It should be noted that for these values, maximum wave heightis related to significant wave height by Equation 2.1 [Stevens, I977].


�.1!H~~ I'86 HS

2.3.3 Current

Currents in this region are usua!!y relatively small. It is normal practice to estimate current speed by acombination of two components. The first component is shear force imparted by wind. The secondcomponent consists of tidal flows and currents arising from the topography of the ocean floor. Surface

icurrents are usua!!y wind-driven, whi!e subsurface currents are driven by geostrophic factors and tides,

In this project, the surface current speed will be taken as 4% of the steady wind speed, subsurfacecurrents at mid-depth will be taken as one-half surface current speed, and near-bottom currents will be taken

as one-third surface current speed [Stevens, 1977]. This approximation includes the small effect of tides.

is inevitable and subsurface currents are ignored. However, directional spreading can be addressed. and it isproven in Chapter 4 that subsurface currents have little effect on the analytical models. Therefore,unidirectionality of wind, wave and currents wi!! be assumed.

2.3.5 Seismic Activity

The southern California area has a relatively high degree of Musmic activity. Offshore structures ate usuallyanalyzed for seismic safety by examining the effects of local activity as well as distant, more severeactivity. The seismicity of a specific region, however, is highly variab!e, depending on local and distantfault positions. Since the area of interest in this project is !ocated in deep water, fau!t positions arerelatively unknown, and an accurate ponraya! of seismicity in the region is not possible. Therefore, values

The resulting values for current speed corre!ate well with those found in other sources [Intersea ResearchCorporation, 1974]. Values for maximum current are given by return period in Table 2. l,

2.3.4 %cather Directionality

For the analyses done later in this paper involving environmental !oads. it is necessary to know the primarydirection of wind, wave and current. Since only extreme conditions are examined, directionality need onlybe known for these conditions.

In this region, storms are usually from the northwest. In a large storm, wind and wave direction

wii! tend io coincide, especia!! y when short wind gusts are discounted, Surface current will also follow the

direction of the wind, as discussed in the previous section. Therefore, the environmental components willbe assumed to act unidirectiona!!y. There are some flaws to this assumption, as some directional spreading

10CHAPTER 2: ENVIRONhfENTAL CONDITION'S

from a study of the entire offshore southern California area have been used for peak ground accelerations byreturn period [Bea, 1992]. These values are given in TaMe 2.1,

2.3.6 Ocean Floor Topography

The features of the ocean floor of both sites were evaluated by examination of nautical charts prepared bythe National Ocean Service [U.S. Department of Commerce, 1991]. The purpose of this examination wasto detejmine the slope of the floor in these locations and discover which locations would be unfavorable dueto excessive slope, which may indicate a likelihood of sliding.

At El Segundo, the slope of the floor was found to vary from 12.8 degrees to 2.2 degrees at 1000feet depth, with the slopes growing steeper to the south Appendix 2!. The only feature of note in this areais the Santa Monica Canyon, which is nat especially deep. The slopes at Mono Bay were found to be lesssevere. ranging from 1.9 degrees to 0.9 degrees Appendix 2!.

2.3.7 Soils

Soils were investigated for the purpose of calculating anchor and anchor pile holding power, as well asdetermining the possibility of scour, sliding and other ocean floor phenomena which may have an effect onthe facilities. The soils in this region consist of "clayey silt" to a depth of approximately 15 feet below thesea floor, and "stiff, silty clay" below this level to a depth of approximately 200 feet. The former type ofsoil has an undrained shear strength of approximately 1.5 kilopounds per square foot, while the latter soiltype has an undrained shear strength of approximately 2,0 kilopounds per square foot [Waodwatd-Clyde,1984].

Scour, slumping and sliding are all possible in this area, but risks should be lower in areas with

shallower floor slopes [lntersea Research Corporation, 1974], Silt soils, such as those at the sea floor,have a low resistance to scour. Clay soils have a lower susceptibility to scow, however, so while some

scour may occur, it will not be severe, due to the presence of the stiff clay soils below the silt soilsPVoodwardWyde, 1983].

Liquefaction is probably a greater concern. This phenomenon involves the sudden loss of sail

strength due to ground shaking or wave effects, and could have a severe effect on the holding po~er of pileanchors. The tap soil type, "clayey silts" will be expected to experience some loss in strength, on the orderof 15%, but soU strength hss below 50 feet should be negligible PVoadward-Clyde, 1978]. Therefore, ifpiles extend more than 50 feet below the sea floar. they should be relatively safe &om liquefaction risks.

CHAPTER 3: SYSTEM CONFIGURAT/ONS

Chapter 3

SystemConfigurations

3.1 Introduction

The purpose of this chapter is the examination of various configurations of SPMS in operation around theworld, and the selection from these of two configurations which best meet the specific requirements of this

project. All equipment necessary for tanker discharge, such as hawser lines, pipelines, transfer hoses and

product risers. is also discussed. However, the main thrust of this project is the design of the SPMS, so

only components directly related to the operation of the SPMS are examined in detail. Onshore facilities

and offshore pipeline pumping stations are consideied to be outside the scape of this project.

In the course of the project, systems were designed and then tested against the analytical models,

reliability fmnework and feasibility criteria of later chapters. The designs were then reiterated as necessaryto produce systeins which met all applicable guidelines and rules. The trials of this iterative procedure are

not repeated here: for the sake of conciseness only the final designs are piesented.

3.2 Existing SPMS Types

Many types of SPMS are in use around the world, as can be seen in Appendix 1. The following is a non-exhaustive list of configurations of SPMS in operation: catenary anchor leg mooring CALM!, singleanchor leg mooring SALM!, tunet mooring, and fixed, articulated loading or catenary articuhted to~er,

This list covers the major systems implemented to date. These systems are illustrated in Figures 3.1through 3.4. Systems which use dynamic positioning can also be considered SPMS, although these were

not considered in this project due to the cost associated with a purp~-built vessel of this type.

CHAPTER 3: SVSTZM CONFIGURh TALONS

Figure 3.1: Typical Catenary Anchor Leg Mooring Schematic

Figure 3.2: Typical Single Anchor Leg Mornin Schematic

CHAPTER 3 .' SYSTEM CONFIGURATIONS

Figure 3.3: Typical Turret Mooring Schematic

14CHAPTER 3: SYSTEM CONFIGURATIONS

Figure 3.4: Typical Tower Mooring Schematic

There is an even greater diversity of systems once the nature of major components is considered.

The attachment between SPMS and tanker can be made by hawser, soft yoke or hard yoke Figure 3.5!. A

SALM system can have either a flexible riser or a rigid riser, and the rigid riser may be articulated. The

anchor legs of a CALM system can be made of chain, wire rope, or a combination of the two, with or

without spring buoys, The CALM can use either drag-embedment anchors or pile anchors. Turret

moorings can be internal or external to the moored vessel. Facilities can employ a permanent, dedicatedtanker.

CHAPTER 3: SYSTEM CONFIGURATIONS l5

Figure 3.5: SPMS Connection Type

modification, and is therefore inappropriate for this project.

Therefore, due to the restrictions on vessel modification and the specified water depth, only the

following systems remain as viable possibilities for this project: CALM with hawser connection and

SALM with hawser connection. %he CALM is the okfest and most common type of SPMS Appendix l!,

is relatively simple, and can be considered a baseline SPMS case. SALM systeins are also well-proven,

but have not been employed in this ~ater depth to date.

Most of these decisions do not need to be made until the detailed design phase of the project.

However, the t>~ of systems to be examined and the nature of the connection from the SPMS to the tanker

are decisions which must be made initially, The requirements already imposed upon this project limit the

choices available for system configuration. Of the systems mentioned, towers are not suitable for

unprotected waters or use in deep water depths. Turret moorings require either significant vessel

modification or a permanently moored tanker. A permanently mooted tanker was considered too costly to

pursue, while vessel modification was prohibited in the project definition. Therefore, towers and turrets

were discounted as inappropriate for this project.

The connection type was also decided based upon project requirements. While a hawser system is

the simplest form of connection, it leaves motions of the tanker and buoy completely uncoupled. This is a

drawback, as it can be a hability in withstanding harsh environments. This problem can be ameliorated by

the use of a rigid yoke, ensuring that the tanker and buoy will have strongly coupled motions, or a soft

yoke, causing some degree of coupling Figure 3,5!, However, use of either type of yoke requires vessel

16CHAPTER 3: SYSTEM CONF GURAT/ONS

The specific nature of the systems, such as the components of the CALM anchor legs, as well asthe number of anchor legs and their layout, the type of anchor, and the type of anchor leg for the SALMsystein, are discussed in later sections.

3.3 Applicable Requ|remeats

An initial criteria for this project was the requitement that both facilities meet all relevant rules and

guidehnes governing safety. In this project, the primary guidehncs are the ABS factors of safety onmiring lines, anchors and fatigue, and the API "watch circle" guideline governing maximum buoy offsetbased on product riser type [Jones, 1992; API, 1991].

A factor of safety F.S.! of 2.0 is required by ABS on mooring lines for floating productionsystems examined by quasi-static analysis in the intact condition [Jones, 1992]. The factor of safety isdefined as the ratio of the capacity to the 100-year load, as calculated by either quasi-static or dynamicanalysis. 'Ibis factor of safety drops to 1.6 for the damaged condition, which refers to one mooring linebroken. These and all other applicable ABS Factors of Safety are given in Table 3.1 [Jones, 1992].Appendix 12 enumerates SPMS that have been classified by the ABS criteria.

Table 3,1: Applicable ABS Factor of Safety Requirements

As Table 3.1 shows, factors of safety for dynamic analysis are lower than those for quasi-static,The methods of analysis employed in some parts of this project line tensions and anchor loads for the

CALM system! are considered dynamic, while the remainder of the analyses are considered quasi-static.


The watch circle specified by API states that the maximum horizontal buoy offset horn cahn waterposition under the maximum design conditions taken as the 100-year storm in this project! for systemsemploying flexible production risers in deep water �000 feet to 3000 feet! inust not exceed 15% of the

water depth. For shallow water below 300 feet! the criteria is 15% to 25% offset [API, 1991]. In thiscase. "flexible pmduct riser" refers to any hose or pipe falling from a buoy in a catenary shape or attached toa vertical leg system such as a SALM. Therefore, a maximum offset of 15% of water depth �50 feet inthis project! will be used as a design guideline.

Limits on operational sea states are another requirement that will be placed on these facilities.Requirements on operational sea states for the facility wiII be set by the Facility Manager, in conjunctionwith the Coast Guard. Establishing these operational constraints is necessary because both systems aredisconnectable, and require disconnection in order to be adequately resilient to severe storm conditions. Inoperation, the tanker captain and the facility pilot must decide when to stop cargo transfer and disconnectfrom the SPMS due to adverse or expected adverse environmental conditions. Details of operation anddisconrection ate covered in Section 3.7.

3.4 Catenary Anchor Leg Mooring

A catenary anchor leg mooring CALM! system consists of a set of anchored catenary legs arranged in aradial pattern around a large buoy, with some type of flow line from the sea floor to the buoy fortransporting liquids Figure 3.1!. This is the most common type of SPMS Appendix 1!. A CALMsystem derives its restoring force to offset from the tension in the anchor legs due to the weight of the legsand an initial pretension [Ma, 1994].

The disadvantages of these systems are: disconnection requires substantial amounts of time exceptfor emergency disconnection! while weather may be deteriorating; operation is limited by the sea-keepingability of the vessels assisting in line recovety; and tankers and other vessels can come into contact with thecatenary legs, causing damage to the legs. A problem which this system shares with all other systems notinvolving dedicated vessels is the presence of floating hoses on the water surface. Two sections ofapproximately 1000 foot long hose will be floating on the surface when the facility is not in operation.These hoses ate vulnerable to damage from passing vessels. This is why it is necessary to establish zonesfor the facility that are free of most maritime traffic and are constantly monitored for stray vessels seeSection 3.7, Operations, and [LOOP, 1992]!.

The final design of the CALM for this facility is illustrated in Figure 3.6. This design is theresult of iteration between the analytical models of Chapter 4 and the reliability and feasibility ana}ysis ofChapters 5 and 6. The two main components of this system are the buoy and the anchor legs. The buoy is

CHMZZR 3: SYSrE~ CONFrGUR>Tres 18

60' in diameter, 25' in depth and weighs 271 LT. There ate 8 anchor legs, arranged in a 45 degree spread.Each leg has three components: an upper chain section, a wire rope section and a lower chain section. The

upper section is made of chain for tensioning and wear pnyoses, awhile the lour section is chain for

bottom-abrasion purposes. The lower section aLo adds to the system holding po~er. Wire rope is used inthe supported section of the leg because it gives a higher restoring force for a given pretension, due to itslower weight when compared with chain tAPI, 199I]. The other components of the CALM system aredescribed in Section 3.6.

Figure 3.6: Final CALM Design

3.5 Single Anchor Leg Mooring

buoyant riser, a foundation, a pretensioned leg from the sea floor to the riser, and a flow line from the sea

A single anchor leg mooring SALM! system differs from a CALM in that it has only one anchor leg,which is vertical and highly tensioned. A SALM derives its restoring force from this single tensioned legby the horizontal component of the leg tension when angularly disphced, as well as the added buoyancyfrom the buoy resulting from horizontal displacement. A simple description of the physics of the systemwould be to describe i t as an inverted pendulum see Chapter 4, Figure 4.1!. A SALM consists of a vertical

CHAPTER 3; SYSTEM CONF/GURhTlONS 19

floor to the surface. A SALM has the same connection possibilities as a CALM system, which, in thisproject, means that only hawser connections are under consideration. The foundation is typicaOy of the pileanchor type in deep water depths.

There is some variation in SALM designs in the nature of the tensioned leg employed: chains.wire rope. tubular risers and articulated risers have all been used, along with various combinations of theseelements. In this project, wire rope was initially investigated as the anchor leg, but loadings and resultingtenStOnS required SwltChing tO an arttCulated tubular rlaer.

A SALM has the advantages over a CALM of being mote forgiving of collisions, due to thenature of its restoring force, and has a lower likelihood of contact and entanglement problems as the leg islocated directly beneath the buoy.

A S ALM system has many drawbacks, however. They are more comphcated and expensive than acomparable CALM system. They have not yet been proven in this water depth, Maintenance can be aproblem, as a SALM fluid swivel is considered to be a high-maintenance item. and is usually located at thesea floor, And, like the CALM. the floating hoses on the surface are vulnerable to damage.

The final SALM design for this project is illustrated in Figure 3.7, As with the CALM, thisdesign is the result of iteration between the analytical models of Chapter 4 and the reliability and feasibilityanalysis of Chapters 5 and 6. The SALM buoy is 15' in diameter, 70' in depth and weighs 47.4 LT. Thetubular riser is divided into three sections. The sections are. from top to bottom, 300', 350' and 320' inlength. All four are four feet in outer diameter. The wall Sickness varies by section due to the differencesin hydrostatic pressures, The uppermost section has 0.5" thick walls, the middle section has 0.75" thick

walls and the lower section has 1.0" thick walls. In this design, the fluid swivel is located in the bottom of

the buoy, which makes it easily accessible. The articulated leg is divided into three sections, each of which

is slightly buoyant prior to installation and made negatively buoyant during installation. The transfer hosesconnect to the bottom of the SALM buoy.

CHAPTER 3: SYSTEM CONF/GURAT/ONS 21

Table 3.2; San Diego Class Tanker Particulars

A typical rate of discharge for this size of tanker is 80,000 to 100,000 banels per hour. This givesa time for discharge of approximatejy 17 hours for an entire cargo load of crude oil,

3.6.2 Product Risers and Pipeline

Product risers � the flow lings! used to transfer crude oil f'rom the moored tanker to the ocean floor pipeline� can be of three types: hoses. rigid pipe or flexible pipe, Hose will be used for the SALM system, as the

product riser is attached to the anchor leg and need not support itself, Flexible pipe will be used for the

CALM system. The flexible pipe will be free to hang in a catenary curve from the buoy to the sea floor,Flexible pipe is preferred over rigid pipe because flexible pipe allows for larger relative motions

and does not require heave compensation equipmenL Flexible pipe consists of seven or more separate layersof material. Mesc layers may be bonded or unbonded, although unbonded pipes are becoming the standard.The layers are typically from inside out!: a steel calm, a phstic sheet, a layer of wound steel wire, a flat

steel carcass, an anti-friction plastic sheet, armor layers and an external plastic sheet. A typical value for

minimum radius of curvature of flexible pipe is ten times pipe outer diameter [Sydahl, 1991].

Rexible pipe is well-proven in offshore applications, It has been used in water depths up to 850

meters. Over 2500 kilometers total of flexible pipe have been installed to date, with approximately half ofthat total presently over ten years old [Coutarel. l992].

The design of the pipeline necessary for these facilities was considered to be outside the scope ofthis study. However, some important points concerning pipeline design for offshore southern California

were found, and these are summarized here to give some feel for the difficulties involved in pipeline design.Laying and servicing pipeline in 1.000 feet of water is within the mach of today's technology.

However, the equipment required is not readily available on the West Coast, and should probably need to bedelivered from the Gulf of Mexico, the North Sea, or Brazil. This would have a substantial impact on theinstalhition and maintenance costs of the pipeline. Of the envinmmental conditions present at the locations

examined in this study, on! y one significantly affects the design of sub-sea pipeline. This is the seismic

activity of the southern California region [Cahfornia ~ Commission, 1978].

Seismic events can cause three possible actions: soil liquefaction, ehstic ground waves, and

inelastic, permanent ground movement. The issue of soil liquefaction has aheady been mentioned. Elastic

ground waves typically have peak-to-peak lengths of several miles, and amplitudes of inches or fractions of


inches. These waves wN not have a significant effect on ocean floor pipeline. Inelastic, permanent groundmovement occurs along faults during seismic events, and may be either horizontal or vertical, with rupture

regions up to several hundred feet in length. These ruptures are a major source of concern in pipehne

design. Locating pipelines clear of faults is the best design solution, but this is often not feasible, as faults

in deep water are difficult to locate. When it is known that a section of pipeline must cross a fault. thepipeline may be reinforced at this section or liAed off the ocean floor by bents. If the latter course of actionis taken. the area must be prohibited to commercial fishing and any drag-type opei3tions [Califariiia CoastalCommission, 1978J.

Federal regulations specify that offshore pipelines for the transfer of liquids must be buried. Burialeliminates the possibility of damage &om anchors and other ocean floor equipment. However, burial is

very expensive, especially for large diameter pipelines such as those considered in this study. Of course,

pipelines should not be buried in regions where they cross known faults. Burial can also be counter-productive in areas where liquefaction is likely fCalifortiia Coastal Cominission, 1978].

3.6.3 Tending Vessels and Connection Equipment

The following information on operations is based upon recommendations from Captain A. F. Fantauzzi of

Chevron Shipping, the LOOP Operations Manual P.OOP, 1992] and interviews conducted at LOOP duringthis study.

Two vessels will be required for normal operations. One of these vessels will handle the hawsers

during connection while the other retrieves the hoses, The primary mooring vessel must be sufficientlylarge and powerful to assist the tanker in adverse sea conditions. This vessel will be a standby/lowingvessel of 60 to 80 meters length. It should be capable of operating in all weather conditions under whichoperation of the facility is to be conducted, with an added margin far emergencies. It will have hose

handling capability of 10 meters by 22 meters with deck containment and drainage for crude oil. Wooden

clad will be provided for servicing floating hoses. It must be highly maneuverable, with twin-ducted

propellers, twin rudders and transverse thrust units. It should be equipped with two towing wires ofapproximate strength to the bollard pulL two towing winches or a dual winch! and all necessary wirepennants and ancillary towing czluipment. 11m required bollard pull will be based on the vessel being ableto assist the tanker in the following environmental conditions: 3S knot wind, 1 knot adverse current and3.S meter signiflcant wave height. This should give a required bollard pull of at least 60 tonnes. Thevessel should also have fire-fighting capability. This vessel would be similar to the LOOP Responder,a 1SS foot tractor tug with twin 7,300 hp engines, employing Voith Schneider propulsice.

23CHAPTER 3: SYSTEM CONFIGURATJONS

The secondary mooring vessel is a line handling vessel which is smaller in size and does not

require the same bollard puli capacity or sea-keeping capability. This vessel will pass the hawser messengerlines to the tanker in connection. This vessel will be siinilar to the LOOP Line and LOOP Loader.

'I1ese vessels are laiuLhes of 85 foot length, with twin 1 ~ hp engines.

Two hawsers will be used to connect the tanker to the SPMS buoy. The use of two hawsers for

safety through redundancy is considered standard. 17ie hawsers for use w ith both facilities examined in this

project will be 200 foot lang, 21 inch diameter nylon ropes with chafe chain attachments at both ends.

3.7 Operation

Figure 3.8 is a schematic of standard operational procedure with the two vessels assisting the tanker. Itshould be noted that a facility of this nature will require some type of vessel traffic control [LOOP, 1992!.7%is is considered to be outside the scape of this project, however,

A tanker using the facility will be guided ta the SPMS by the vessel traffic controller VTC! of

the facility, and will be escorted by the primary mooring vessel, to insure against possible damage resultingfrom a loss of power by the tanker and subsequent drifting in the area of the facility. Once the tankerreaches the facility, the primary mooring vessel will be responsible for keeping the floating hoses clear ofthe tanker, while the secondary inooring vessel passes the hawser messenger lines to the tanker, connectingthe tanker to the SPM buoy. The primary vessel then assists in connection with the floating hoses to thetanker manifold. Discharge can begin once the hoses are attached, The primary vessel maintains a stern

tow on the tanker during operations to avoid sudden swings by the tanker which can result in very hightransient loadings on the hawsers. Disconnection is handled in a similar fashion, removing the hoses fromthe manifold, lowering them into the water and then disconnecting the hawser lines from the tanker. Total

time for connection, discharge and disconnection for bath fiu:ilities is estimated to be 19 hours for San

Diego class tankers.

Disconnection states must be determined for both systems. Disconnection will be carried out to

avoid sea states which result in excessive loadings on the system for the attached condition. niere will also

be a margin on this disconnection sea state, to allow for worsening of weather during disconnectioii,Normal disconnection is estimated to take approximately one hour, including dimenection of the hoses andlowering the hoses into the water, but emergency disconnection should take no more than five minutes.

This emergency disconnection involves the use of cargo pump emergency trips, and is not recommended for

non~mergency use. Normally 20 to 30 minutes notice is recommended before hose disconnection is

24CHAI'TER 3: SYSTEM CONFIGURATIONS

Figure 3.8: Schematic of Operating Procedure

The determination of disconnection while in operation will be made by the captain of the tanker in

conjunction with the pilotIfacility manager. General guidelines for disconnection will be set by the facilityin conjunction with the Coast Guard, as discussed in Section 3.3.

25CHAPTER 4: ANALYTICAL MODELS

Chapter 4

Analytical Models

4.1 Introduction

The goal of this chapter is the examination of the effect of the environment on the proposed facilities interms of line tensions, anchor/pile loadings and fatigue damage. This is done by first modeling the loads inthe systems caused by the environmental components and then modeling the response of each facihty tothese loads. The environmental effects have been separated into four groups: steady forces. oscillatinginotions, seismic motions and fatigue. Which category each environmental component contributes to willbe discussed in the following sections. The analytical models of each facility are also discussed, includingline tensions and anchor loadings.

4.2 Steady Environmental Forces

Three environmental components act as relatively steady forces. These are: wind force, current force and

mean wave drift force. Each is described in detail in the following sections. These forces are combined and

applied to the facility to produce a steady offset, to which oscillatory offsets are added.

4.2.1 %ind

The effects of wind on the SPMS and other facility components have been evaluated by the conventionaldrag equation [Simiu, 1978]. Each above-water facility component buoy, tanker hull and tanker

superstructure! has been treated separately, with its own wind velocity based on centered elevation. Wind

velocities were given in Chapter 2 for a 10 meter elevation above still water. These velocities must be

adjusted to the component centered elevation velocity by Equation 4.1 for each component [Simiu, 1978].

26CHAPTER 4: ANALYT CAL MODELS

Vz =Vro �.1!

This velocity is then modifio} by gust duration as in Equation 4.2 [Sea, 1993]. The velocities

given in Chapter 4 are for a one-minute duration gust. It was decided that a three minute gust duration isappropriate for calculating steady force, due to the period of low frequency motions, following the exampleof Hunter, et al, for evaluating wind loadings on moorings and vessels [Hunter, 1993].

V, = V, �1+-ln 0.00535+0.00042V, �!2

� 2!

The steady wind force is then calculated from Equation 4.3 with this adjusted wind velocity.

Pa'cs aI aI ~ �.3!

The wind shape coefficient is considered typical of marine systems with relatively solid shapes[Bea, 1993]. The total steady wind force can be found in Table 4.1, while the calculations are given inAppendix 4.

4.2.? Mean Wave Drift

'Ihe effect of waves on the facility in question have been separated into three components: first order wave

head-seas condition, It can be seen from the equation that wave drift is roughly proportional to the square ofthe wave amplitude. and for a constant amphtude, the mean wave drif't increases as wave period demeses.

F~ ~ =O.I3 Cn~Bs LHr' �.4!

The average drift coefficient for tankers is 0.05 [Le Tirant, 1990]. Significant wave height isdetermined by Equation 2.1. For the buoy and the riser, the mean wave drift force is calcuhted by Equation4.5 [Le Tirant. 1990]. The drift coefficient is taken as 1175 Ns m4.

motions wave frequency motions!, second order wave motions low frequency motions! and a mean wavedrift force [AI'I, 1987]. While model tests would be a superior measure. this approach is considered to bean adequate approximation. The mean wave drift force is considered to be a steady f'cece component, whilethe first and second order motions are considered oscillating motions.

Mean wave drift force was calculated base} on Equation 4.4 [Le Tirant, 1990] for the tanker in the

CHAPTER 4: ANALYTICAL MODELS 28

Table 4.1: Steady Environmental Forces, Two- Year Return Period Conditions

4.3 Oscillating Environmental Motions

Two of the environmental components can be treated as oscillating components. These are first order wavefrequency! motions and second order Iow hequency! motions, both due to wave action. For the connected

condition, the tanker was considered to generate the governing motion, and buoy motions were ignored.The motions were combined by adding the maximum wave frequency motions to the significant lowfrequency motions [API, 1987].

4.3.I First Order Wave Motions

Wave frequency motions have been determined by the use of a ship motions program, SEAWAY [JourntLe,

l992!. SEAWAY is a PC-based ship motions program using ordinary and modified strip theory method. Itcalculates wave-induced loads and motions with six degtees of freedom. SEAWAY can simulate mooringsas weU, by adding up to six linear springs to the modeL

SEAWAY was used to model the San Diego class tanker and both the CALM and SALM buoys.Springs were then added to these models to simulate the mooring restoring force. Although the mooringrestoring force is not perfectly linear, for sinall offsets this is a relatively good approximation. Thesemodels were tested against the given wave events for various return periods. T7e details of this prograin andthe results of this analysis can be I'ound in Appendix 5. The offsets due to first order motions are given inTable 4.2.


4.3.2 Second Order Wave Motions

Low frequency motions have been determined by use of the API curves [API, 1987]. These curves weregenerated for drill ships in the 400 foot to 540 foot range, but with the given correction factors for vesselsoutside this length range, these curves should be an adequate approximation for tankers. A separate set ofcurves for semisubmersible hulls was used for low frequency motions of the SPMS buoys. Thecalculations for these motions can be found in Appendix S. The offsets due to second order motions are

given in Table 4.2. Total motions were determined by adding the maximum wave frequency motions to theroot mean square low frequency motions.

Table 4.2: Oscillating Motions, Two- Year Return Period Conditions

4.4 Seismic Activity

Seismic motions were examined for the SALM system only. This is because seismic motions will effect

only systems with significant vertical stiffness. The SALM must have a high vertical stiffness due to itsmethod of providing restoring force, but the CALM system does not require a high vertical stiffness.

The SALM system was modeled as a spring. PCNSPEC [Mahin, 1983', an earthquake analysisprogram, was used to determine peak motions. PCNSPEC is an inelastic response program for viscouslydamped single-degrees-freedcen systems. The SALM system was tested against the El Centm earthquake,scaled to have the peak ground accelerations given in Table 2.1 for the various return period events. Theresulting offsets are given in Table 4.3. As the values in the table indicate. seismic motions are not large,especially considering the anchor leg's 1000 foot length.

The input and output of PCNSPEC are described more fully in Appendix 6.

30CHAPTER 4: ANALYT1CAL AfODELS

Table 4.3: SALM Vertical Seismic Offsets

4.5 Fatigue

Fatigue is defined as the degradation of component characteristics such as strength or stiffness! due to cyclic

straining and stressing. In this application, the cycling is due to wave action. Cycling can also result from

operations cargo pumping, operation of other equipment!, construction installation, transport to

installation, launching! or other environmental components thermal changes, wind, current, earthquakes![Bea, 1990]. However, wave cycling is considered to be the dominant source of cyclic loading in thisproject.

Fatigue effects are calculated for the chain, wire rope and connections in the CALM system, and

for the riser and articulations in the SALM system, These components are considered to be the most likelycomponents to fail due to fatigue.

The calculation of fatigue "load" is done in a diffejent manner than for other environmental loads.

Since fatigue failure is a result of cumulative damage over a usually! long period of time, it is moreappropriate to determine a mean fatigue life. This mean fatigue life is the expected hfe of the component or

structure before failure due to cyclic fatigue occurs. The mean fatigue life is calculated by Equation 4.9[Bea, 1990].

�.9!

The accumulated fatigue damage ptu3meter is set equal to I,O for fatigue failure. The stress rangemodel error parameter is taken as 0.80, a standard value for the marine environment [Bea, 1990]. atevalues for the negative slope and the log life intercept are taken from the S-N curve for a particularcomponent [API, 1989; API, 1991: Bea, 1990]. These values are given in Table 4,4.


Table 4.4: Component Fatigue Characteristics

These values for K are biased, ho~ever, This bias is a result of the standard practice of offsetting

S-N curves by two standard deviations for design guidelines. This bias is removed by Equation 4.10,which. in effect. adds the two standard deviatiw back to K,

�.10!

The natural log of the standard deviation of the fatigue hfe is calculated by Equation 4.11.

v~ [In I=+C,'III+CnIII+Cnl" j �.11!

We values given for the various coefficients of variation are considered typical for marine systems[Bea, 1990].

The unbiased values for K can be found in Table 4.5. The stress range parameter is calculated byEquation 4.12.

0= k m! f,S"[InN~[ rI + I]� �.12!

The munflow correction and epsilon are both taken as l,0, considered a typical value for both

variables for marine systems [Bea, l990j, The design period was taken as 100 years, and the number of

cycles was based on this length of time and an average wave period of 13 seconds. The average frequency of

Kts'

~goasiml

C, =0.3

CL =0.73

CB =0,5

32CHAPTER 4: ANALYT/CAI. MOMLS

the stresses was taken as the inverse of the period of the uaves. The gamma function has beenapproximated by Sterling's asymptotic formula, Equation 4.13 tFmberg, 1985],

I z! = � i+ � + �.13!

The fatigue design stress range is calculated in Equ;uion 4.14.t

~KHin

TSFYO�.14!

values can be found in Appendix 7.

Table 4.5: Summary of Mean Fatigue Life

These mean fatigue life values may seem surprisingly large. This question is addressed in Section5.6.

The fatigue life safety factor is typically 3.0 for mariM systems [Bea, 1990]. This value is related

to the nominal design stress range by the stress concentration factor, as grven in Equation 4.13. Thisnominal design stress range is then used as the largest stress value in Equation 4.10.

These relations result in the mean fatigue lives given in Table 4.5. The calculations of these

CHAPTER 4: ANALYTICAL MODELS

SALM are: buoy size, riser size. number of riser sections, weight of buoy and risers, and the dimensions of

the anchor pile. The anchor leg of a SALM is given a pretension so that it will develop an adequate

restoring fmce. In this design, a pretension of 300 LT was decided upon.

Figure 4.1; SALM Restring Force Schematic

With system dimensions, weights and pretension decided, the SALM could be modeled

analytically. The horizontal environmental force acting on the system must be offset by the horizontal

component of the system tension, which is a function of the system pretension and the added buoyancy due

to offset, which are both functions of the angular displacement of the anchor leg. The spexhheets used for

the calculation of this iterative procedure are given in Appendix 9. The line tensions for storms and seismic

events are given in Table 4.7.

Table 4.7: SALM Storm and Seismic Leg Tensions

The determination of anchor pile characteristics were based on the leg tensions. as theses act

directly on the anchor. The anchor load is considered to be strictly vertical, due to the small angular

35CHAPTER 4: ANALITICAL MODELS

displacement values involved usually under 10 degrees for extreme conditions!. It was decided, based uponthe reliability analysis described in Chapter 5, to have a target pullet capacity of 2,000 LT. The ultimatepull-out capacity is given by Equation 4,16 [API, 1989].

Q~ =f~~s++p

'IIte unit skin friction capacity is determined by Equation 4,17 [API, 1989],

fw = <~<uss �.17!

From these relations, the length of a pile can be estimated, Wall thickness was based upon APIcriteria for minimum wall thickness, as given in Equation 4,18 [API, 1989].

T�7- = 0.25+~D

l00�.18!

With these criteria, a pile was selected of 140' length, 60" diameter and I" wall thickness. Thisgives a puII-out load of approximately 2,000 LT.

The undrained shear strength was determined to be 2.0 kilopounds per foot in section 2.3.7. Thedimensionless pile factor is taken as I.O [API. 1989].

CHAPTER S; RELIABILf7Y 36

Chapter 5

Reliability

�.1!

The probability of failure of the facilities under consideration is dependent upon four relativelyindependent failure hazards. Failure may be due to storm loadings, seismic loadings, cyclic fatigueloadings. or human and organizational ettor HOK!. The total annual probability of failure is expressed inEquation 5.2 again neglecting small cross-product terms!.

f,ttttat f,me~ /macaw j.fttttg~ ~f,Hos �.2!

The method of computation of each one of these components is examined in depth in thefollowing sections,

5.2 Component Probability of Failure Calculations

The procedure for calculating probabilities of failure for storm loadings, seismic loadings and cumulativefatigue damage is outlined in this section. The analyses are based on a log normal - log normal relationship

5.1 Introduction

This chapter examines the determination of the probability of failure for each SPMS facility. Failure isdefined as the breakage of one or more legs of the SPMS, insufficient holding power developed by theanchors or anchor pile, major damage to the risers f hoses, or damage to the buoy which would haltoperations, The total probability of failure is the sutn of the annual chances of these events occurring, asgiven in Equation 5.1 neglecting small cross-product terins!.

38CHAPTER S: REL/AB/L/7Y

5.2.l Load and Capacity

The mean Ioadings used in the peak load analysis are the 2-year return period Ioadings determined in Chapter4 for storms and seismic events, and the mean fatigue life for the seismic analysis. The capacities are theultimate limit state capacities given by the manufacturer, which are listed in Table S. 1 [Avallone, 1987;Bureau Veritas, 1980].

5.2.2 Variance and Deviation

There are two types of uncertainty in structures analyzed by reliabUity methods. Type I uncertainties referto natural or inherent randomness, such as peak environmenlal conditions. This type of uncertainty cannotbe controlled. Type II uncertainties refer to modeling uncertainties. This type of uncertainty includes

<xVx=�X

�.6!

a~ = Ia 1+ Vx' �.7!

However, these relations require more information than has been generated to this point.Therefore, Equation 5.8 is mac suitable for the calculation of Type I uncertainties, as loads for the 2-yearand 100-year return periods are known. Equation 5.8 calculates the coefficient of variation from the 2-year

In x gx�!2.33

�.8!

Systems were analyzed for the disconnected case to determine loading variance, as the systemsshould never be connected for the 100-year condition, This gave the variances listed in Table 5.2 for

uncertainties in computations of forces, uncertainties in measurement and uncertainties due to limited data

sets. This type of uncertainty is systematic. It is also information sensitive and can be reduced byacquiring additional information, whether the information is research, inspection or quality control /assurance [Bea, 1%2],

For distributions with Type I uncertainties, the variance of the distribution can be measured by twoparameters. %be coefficient of variation is a normalized measure of the variability of a parameter. Thestandard deviation is a measure of dispersion or variabihty of a distribution, as is the natural log standarddeviation. The relations between these parameters are given in Equations 5.6 and 5.7.

39CHAPTER 5: REL ABIL/7Y

environmental Type I uncertainty. The values for capacity Type I uncertainty [Yang, 1991; Bea, 1990] ateconsidered typical for marine system components. Ihe anchor / anchor pile variation is based on the soiltype [Bea, 1990], These uncertainties ate listed in Table 5.1 It should be noted that the systems weredesigned so that Ihe connections are the most likely element of each system to fail. IMs was dane becausethe connections are the easiest component of each system to maintenance and replace, Their failure shouMalso cause the least amount of damage. However, for the SAI.M system, nearly any failure will be aserious one, as its single load-path allows for no tedunthmcy.

Table S.l; Component Reliability Characteristics

Type II uncertainties are mare difficult to determine, as they must be based on historical analysisof analytical methods. Iherefate, representative values were taken from existing literature for this project.For storm loadings on marine structures, the Type II variation has been estimated as 0,07 to 0.11 [Bea,1992; Nikolaidis, 1992]. A value of 0.10 was taken for this project. For seismic laadings, literature TypeII variation ranged from G.G to 0.31 [Bea, 1992; Nikolaidis, 1992]. A value of 0.10 was selected for thisproject, based on the modeling tool used PCNSPEC! and the small effect of seismic loadings in linetensions. Type II uncertainties in fatigue analysis are discussed in section 5.6,

Table 5.2: Environmental Variance

The Type I and II variances are combined into a single variance by Equation 5.9. This relation isvalid for systems which have independence between load and capacity. This independence is discussed in thenext section.

CHAPTER 5: RELIABILITY 40

Vx= �.9!

5.2.3 Correlation

The correlation coefficient expresses how strongly two variables are related. A value of 1.0 indicates perfect

correlation, while a value of 0.0 indicates complete independence. The correlation coefficient can be

negative as well, up to a value of -1.0, which indicates perfect negative correlation. There are three types of

correlation which required examination in this project: correlation between load and capacity, cotrehtion

between capacities of different components, and correlation between failtue modes of different components.

The determination of load to capacity correlation is best carried out by model testing, as it is very

difficult to determine analytically. There may be some small positive conelation in these systems due to

larger wave heights higher loads! encountering more structure higher capacity!, but this may be offset by

slight changes in environmental directionality. Therefore, it was assumed that there would 'm no correlation

between 1oad and capacity.

The correlation between capacities of different elements is likely to be very high, due tosimilarities in design and manufacture, and has been taken as 1.0.

5.3 System Probability of Failure Calculations

The system probability of failuje is determined by calculating component probabilities of failure from the

given relations and reducing the systems into series and parallel elements. The CALM system is composed

VsPFht V2 V2

x s�.10!

For series elements, the system reliabihty is calculated by Equation 5.11. This equation is valid

for systems with perfect element-to-element correlation. Although this assumption concerning correlationmay not be completely true here, it is a good approximauon. As has been pointed out elsewhere [Bea,

of eight catenary anchor legs, which are modeled as series-loaded subsystems, These subsystems arecombined to form an eight element parallel system. elle SALM system is much simpler, being composedof one tensioned leg modeled as a series system.

One new attribute of a system must be considered in the calculation of system reliability.Correlation can exist between system components, due to their manufacture and due to their modes of

failure. An estimate of system failure mode correlation based on relative uncertainties attributed to Cornell

[Bea, 1990] is used here Equation 5. 10!.

41CHAPTER 5; RELIABIL/TY

1990!, the probability of failure of a system is well approximated by the probability of failure of the most-likely-to-fail element in the system.

~I u ~ = ~ ~I ~~! �.14

For parallel elements, the system reliability is calculated by Equation 5.12, This equation is validfa normally distributed identical parallel elements.

Is PE �.12!

lt should be noted that failure of one kg is essentially system failure for the CALM system it has

already been defined as failure for the SALM!. Failure of one leg of the CALM will halt operation.Therefore, "system failure" for the CALM refers to one leg broken or severely dainaged.

5.4 Failure due to Storm Loadings

The probability of failure due to storms must cover two separate cases: the SPMS alone and the SPMS

with an attached tanker. Loads in the system will be much higher with a tanker present. The facility willhave guidelines governing when a tanker using the facility should disconnect from the SPMS to reduce

loads. Therefore, the probability of failure due to storm loadings can be expressed as given in Equation5.13.

Pf= ,P< !disc! l P! + Pi � !conn! P ! �.13!

The percent of 0me in which a tanker is using the facility is an economic decision, affected onlyslightly by environmental conditions and facility downtime. The downtime of the facility is expected to bevery small, according to gathered data. Typical downtime values for systems operating for one year or morerange from 0% to 3.2% Key, 1993]. For this study. thtee San Diego class tankers will use the faciliry perweek. Given the l7 hour discharge time of this tanker class and the estimated 2 hour connection and

disconnection time, the facility will be in use approximately 31% of the time, allowing for a 3% systemdowntime.

The probability of failure while disconnected is a relatively sttaightforward calculation, comparingdisconnected loadings with capacities, as in Equation 5.4. All data for this calculation have already beendetermined, and the resulting probability of failtue can be found in Table 5.5. Failure while connected is a

CHAPTER 5: RELIABIL/TY 42

more difficult cakuhtion, due to the question of what sea states will be encountered before disconnection

will occur. Disconnection can be ordered to occur at the alyauance of a cotain sea state, but the actualoccurrence of disconnection depends upon perception of the sea state by the captain and pilot, and weatherdeterioration which may occur before disconnection can be completed. Thetefote, it is necessary to modeldisconnection as a probability distribution in relation to sea state. The probability of failure whileconnected can thereftse be expressed as in Equation 5. l4.

Pz form = g[ P<gonn,seas ateNP,KP Peas a e>]�.14!af ¹o neer

The probability of a given sea state being the annual maximum encountered is a function of theannual maximum wave height distribution. The probability of connection in a given sea state is basedupon assumed behavior and the uncertainty associated with identifying sea states and weather deterioration.

The values for these probabilities are given in Table 5.2. The probability of connection in a given sea stateis based on an instruction to disconnect to avoid operation and connection! during conditions with windexceeding 32.5 knots or waves exceeding 25.5 feet maximum, or a 13.7 foot signiTicant wave height. Thedistribution is log normal over the spectrum of sea states. The distribution is based on the mean

disconnection state being the 25.5 maximum wave height state, with a 5% chance of being connected at the29.5 foot maximum wave height state. This distribution has been assumed and should be verified.

Table 5.3: Probability of Connection by Sea State

The probability of failure for a given sea state while connected is then cakulated based on Equation5.3, with the mean loading based on the mean wave height, wind speed and cunent speed for a given seastare, and variance as previous! y determined. The. probabihties of failure are then summed over all sea states

43CHAPTER S: REL/AB/L/TY

to produce a total probability of failure for the SPMS while connected to a tanker. The results of this

calculation are given in Table 5.4.

5.4.1 Storm Loadittgs by Sea State

The loadings due to various sea states are given in Table 5.3. These loadings are based on the same

approach used to calculate loadings for the various environmental return periods. The variance on the

loadings are those for Type I and Type Il uncertainties given earlier in the chapter. The correlation of load

and capacity remains equal to 0.0. The probability of failure is also given in Table 5.3. This is the

probability of failure for the connected condition and the given sea state being the maximum sea state

encountered in a year,

MaximumWaveHeight

feet

CALMLeg

Tension

CALMAnchor

Tension

SALMLeg

Tension

CALMProbability

ofFailure

SALMProbability

ofFailure

Ptsea state

2.4x10 133.0xlO 122.3x10 11

4.8xl0 76.3xl0 77.1x 10 7

10

10

10

32,1

35.0

37.7

283.4

289.3

297.2

21

23.5

25.5

15,4

17.7

19.9

1.9x10 103.5xl0 94.3x10-8

1.1xIO<1.6x10-63.5xIO+

22.6

25.1

27.5

301.9

309.1

316.5

10

10

10

27

28.5

29.5

41.1

44.1

46.4

7.9x10 71.9xlO 56.7x10-3

10

10

20

50.7

55.8

70.1

9,4xIO+2.7xlO 54.5xlO 5

31

32.5

37

30.6

34.9

47.1

326.2

337.3

373.3

Table 5.4: Storm Loadings and Probability of Failure by Sea State

$.4,2 Reliability for Storm Loadittgs

System reliability is calculated for each facility based on the component probabilities of failure, as

explained earlier. The probabilities of failure are combined with the probabilities of given sea states beingencountered and connection during that sea state, as in Equation 5.13. The probabilities of failure are then

summed over ail sea states, as in Equation 5.14. The resulting values for probability of failure are given inTable 5.5 for the case of storm loadings.

CHAPTFR 5: RELlABILJTy

Table 5.5: Probability of Fai!tne due to Storm Loadings

5.5 Failure due to Seismic Loadings

The probability of failure due to seismic loadings is calculated in the same manner as the storm landings forthe unconnected facility, However, seismic loadutgs are considered to be significant for the SALM systemonly, as the CALM system has relatively little vertical stiffness. Seismic loadings were calculated in

Section 4.4, while capacities are given in Table 5.1. Variations in load are as given in section 5.2.2.Correlation between load and capacity is again assumed to be equal to 0.0.

It will be noted that the variance on seismic !oadings is !ower than that of storm loadings, which

may seem counter-intuitive. However, seismic loadings on the SALM system are of relatively low

magnitude. and tend to be overshadowed by the constant pretension f<lee of the system.

System reliability for seismic loadings is simi!ar to that for storm loadings. Since there is onlyone load path, the system is a series one. As in other system reliability sections, the system probability offailure of a series system is well approximated by the probability of failure of the most-like!y-to-fai!component.

The probability of failure of the SALM system due to seismic loadings is given in Table 5.7.

5.6 Failure due to Cyclic Fatigue Loadings

Fatigue reliability is characterized by mean fatigue life ana!ogous to capacity!, service life ana!ogous toload! and a deviation on the fatigue life. as in Equation 55. Mean faugue hfe is ca!cu!ated in section 4.5,

while service !ife is a design decision. The natural log of the standard deviation of the fatigue life iscalculated by Equation 4.! l.

The tesu!ting natural log standard deviation is found to be 1.53. It should be pointed oul that thisvariance is very high in comparison with other variances ca!cu!ated in this chapter.

The fatigue probabi!ities of failure, as calcu!ated by Equation 5,5, are given in Table 5.6. It can be

seen that the large mean fatigue lives ca!culated in Section 4.5 are offset by the large variance cakulated in

equation 5, . giving probabi!ities of failure similar to those for other environmental components.

45CHAPTER S: RELIABILI7Y

Table 5.6: Component Probability of Failure due to Fatigue

These probabilities of failure are for a service life of 20 years, To see the effect of service life on

probability of failure, Figure 5.1 is a graph of reliability versus service life for chain, the element mostlikely to suffer lrorn fatigue degradation.

Figure 5.1: Fatigue Reliability versus Service Life

This figure serves to illustrate the concept of preventative maintenance. By periodicaUy replacingthe elements of a system which are likely to suffer fatigue damage, the probability of failure is lowered,

The system effect of fatigue reliability is similar to that for other types of system reliability withhigh correlation. The most likely to fail element's probabihty of failure is taken as the system probabilityof failure.

46CHEAP re 5: ZEUmILln'

5.7 Failure due to Human and Organizational Error

Human and Organizational Error HOE! covers failures attributable to humans individuals!. organizations groups of individuals! and systems structures and etluipment! [Mome, 1993]. Approximately 80% ofhigh~uence marine accidents can be attributed to HOK.

The modeling of HOE is very complex. It involves the culture and specific work methods of anorganization, which have not been detailed in this project for these facihties and are considered to be outside

the scope of this research. However, a description of the procedures and contingencies at the LOOP facilitywiII be helpful in understanding the type of culture and work methods encountered at this type of facility inthe US g.OOP, 1992]. LOOP experiences the same types of risk from HOE that these facilities can beexpected to face: vessel traffic problems, exposed floating transfer hoses, communication between ship,tending vessels and shoreside vility, etc.

At the LOOP facility, a Port Superintendent is always physically present at t.'~ facility. It is thePort Superintendent's responsibility to direct all actions in the event of an emergency. ".'he LOOP facilitydefines emergency conditions as those which involve or could involve: safety, environmental protection,personnel injury or property damage. These conditions could occur at the Marine Terminal. on a tanker, onany other vessel or aircraft, or at any other location lying within the port's safety zone. Examples ofemergency condibons include:

Oil spillFire or explosionTanker collision actual or potential, with other vessel or platform!Tanker groundingEiectricai power failure on platformDisruption of communications between shore and portAircraft disasterSerious illness, injury or deathPresence of poisonous gasEvacuation operation of the platftznt

The LOOP facility has a Safety Zone established around it. This zone consists of three sections:the approach section. the ancIKMage section and the terminal section. The approach section is a 2 nauticalmile wide corridtx' leading to the tertninal. The anchorage section is a 2 NM by 4 NM area adjacent to theapproach section, The terminal section is approximately 2.5 nautical miles in radius Irom the pumpingcomplex platform.

Inside the terminal section, there are four "Areas to be Avoided." One is a 600 meter radius aroundthe platform, the other three are 500 meter radii about the SALM buoys.

47CHAPTER 5 .' RELIABllJ?7

5.8 Facility Probability of Failure

The probabilities of failure calculated in the previous sections are summarized in Table 5.7. These

probabilities are the annual probabilities of failure due to each loading case for each facility. The totalprobability of failure for each facility is the sum of these individual probabilities of failure for ea:h facility.This total probability of failure assumes independence between the individual probabilities of failure.Although values for probability of failure have not been calculated for ROE, it should be noted that these

probabiliues of failure may be very significant.

Table 5.7: Facility Probabilities of Failure

5.9 Acceptable Reliability

An acceptable reliability can be determined from the fa:tors of safety given in Table 3.1. This is done byequating the factor of safety FS! to the 100-year ked and the mean capacity, as in Equation 5.16 Pones,1992; Bea, 1990].

FS =~~S0

�.l6!

Using the relations developed in this chapter, equation 5.16 can be manipulated to give Equation5.17, rehting the safety index to the deviations and factor of safety.

2.33a + 1n FS!~P Cr �,17!

Table 5.8 presents the applicable factors of safety and the calculated target probabilities of failure for the intact condition only!.

CHAPTER 5: RELlABJLfTY

It can be seen that all components meet the acceptable reliability except for the SALM anchorlegs.

Table 5.8: Acceptable Reliabilities

4S

49CHAPTER 6; FEASIB L17T

Chapter 6

Feasibility

6.1 Introduction

This chapter examines the cost associated with the two facilities investigated in this study. Costinformation is relatively rare in published literature. Therefore, all information given in this chapter hasbeen obtained from industry contacts, based on existing structures or extrapolated from existing structures.

The information regarding SPMS costs is courtesy of M. Steven Mostarda of IMODCO, while the

information regarding tankers and tending vessels is courtesy of Capt. AS. Fantauzzi. Unfortunately, it

traffic control equipment and personnel is considered to be outside the scope of this study.

6.2 System Hardware

The cost of the hardware of the CALM system has been estimated as $13.5 million, This figure includes

the cost of the CALM buoy, eight catenary anchor legs. drag embedment anchors, product risers, hawsers

and transfer hoses. It does not include the cost of the pipeline or any onshore facilities, including vesseltraffic control. This cost estimate was based upon the existing Marlim CALM facility offshore Brazilf Hwang and Bensimon, 1990j.

The cost of the hardware of the SALM system has been estimated as $12.5 to $14 million. This

price is more uncertain than that of the CALM, as no SALM systems have been constructed for this waterdepth to date.

was not possible to obtain an estimate of the cost of the pipeline during the research. The pipeline is

.expected to account for a large percentage of the total facility cost, due to the water depth, the pipeline

length and the lack of deepwater equipment on the West Coast, The cost of shoreside facilities, vessel

50CHAPTER 6: FEASIBlL/77

6.3 System Development and Engineering

For the both the CALM and the SALM system, the total cost of engineering, certifying, projectmanagement, construction and installation supervision, and transportation has been estimated as SI.25million, This figure is also based on the Marlim CALM facility.

6.4 Installation

The installatiort of the CALM system is expected to lake 20 to 25 days. The installation is estimated to

cost from $3 to $5 million. This high cost is due in part to the necessity of bringing equipment to the sitefrom the Gulf of Mexico, as deepwater equipment is not readily avaihble on the West Coast,

The installation of the SALM system cannot be estimated as accurately. It is expected to be more

expensive. due to the necessity of driving the anchor pile at the sea floor. An estimate of $5 million isused in this study.

6.5 Total Initial Costs

The total facility costs are given in Table 6,1, These total costs do not include the pipeline or any onshorefacilities. The costs also do not include vessel traffic control. The entry "Other" refers to contingencies,insurance and overheads.

iTable 6.1: Total Initial Facility Costs

These figures indicate that the initial cost of the two systems are comparable. However, there is agreater degree of uncertainty regarding the SALM estimates, as no comparable system exists.

6.6 Costs of Operation and Maintenance

Table 6.2 outlines the cost of operation for the tending vessels which will be used at the facilities. Thetotal yearly cos is based on three days of operation per week, following the earlier assumption that the

CHAPTER 6 .' FEASIBlLl7Y 51

facility will be visited by three tankers per week, each taking approximately 19 hours to connect, dischargeand disconnect, No spot chartering has been assumed in the cost estimate.

Table 6.2: Annual Operation Costs

The cost of tanker charter is approximately $40.000 per day.

Preventative maintenance will be carried out on the hawsers used to connect tankers to the SPM

buoys. These hawsers can have severe fatigue problems, and they can cause serious problems when theybreak by snapping back. It is common practice to replace them often � LOOP uses only 20% of thecalculated fatigue life before replacing hawsers. Hawsers will be replaced every six months at the facilitiesto avoid fatigue problems. The cost of hawsers was not available.

52CHAPTER 7: CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

Chapter 7

Conclusions andRecommendations

7.1 Summary

This study has examined the determination of feasibihty of single point mooring systems SPMS! for useas deepwater ports for the import of hazardous liquid cargoes offshore southern California. Two

configurations of SPMS were examined: CALM and SALM. The study examined the environmental

conditions at two sites. developed analytical models with which to evaluate the suitability of SPMS,

determined the reliability of the systems by use of state-of the-art reliability methods, and evaluated thefeasibility of the systems.

risks arising from the import of crude oil. This study has shown thai two types of single point mooringscan be used � without stretching today's technology � as deepwater ports offshore southern California.

The CALM system developed in this study is a rehtively simple design. The engineering is notcomplex and the system does not require custom-built components other than the CALM buoy itself. The

7.2 ConclusiOnS

Several preliminary conclusions can be drawn from the work conducted in this study. These conclusionshave been divided into two groups: deepwater ports and SPMS. and reliability analysis of SPMS, Theconclusions are detailed in the following secbons.

7.2.1 Deepwater Ports and SPMS

It has been proven by the US Coast Guard that deepwater parts are a viable way to reduce the environmental

53CHAPTER 7 .' CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

CALM proved to be relatively robust in rehability analysis, due to its inherent safety by redundancy�failure of one anchor leg will not entail catastrciphic failure for the system.

The SALM system «as also a relatively straightforwtud design. However, it requires morecomplex engineering and more custom construction of components. It also requires much more attention

for reliability, as the system is nat inherently robust � failure in one leg is a catastrophic failure, The.system also required a very high pretension to provide adequate restoring force to meet API guidelinesconcerning system offset. This high pretension dictated the need for the unusual components. It aIso

necessitated the high vertical stiffness of the SALM also moms that more attention must be paid to seismic

The study also showed that disconnection criteria are very important in reliability based design of

systems which disconnect to avoid extreme environmental conditions. The greater probabilitie' <if failure

associated while connected stiangly affect total system reliability.

In summary, there are no technical barriers to the use of SPMS for deepwater

ports offshore southern California in 1,000 feet of ~ater. However, a CALM system

appears to be much simpler than a SALM, with a greater degree of control of risk inthe design,

7.2.2 Reliability Analysis of SPMS

The reliability analysis showed the importance of characteristics which might otherwise have been

overlooked. lt was shown that seismic loadings, although low in magnitude, can have a substantial effect

on system reliability. Type II uncertainties can have a large effect on reliability of systems, especially

systems which have relatively little Type I variation in loading and capacity. These Type 11 uncertaintiesare often overlooked, due to the difficulty in their determination,

The correlation between load and capacity has a great effect an reliability. This is also often

overlooked, as it can rarely be determined without the use of model testing, Human and Organizational

Error can play a substantial rale in system teliability, and is perhaps the most difficult reliabilitycomponent to evaluate. The benefits of preventative maintenance were clearly proven in the reliabilityanalysis.

7.3 Recommendations for Future Work

ln the course of this research, several topics were touched upon which were too broad for detailed

examination, or required tools or testing facilities which were unavailable. These topics would make goad

CHAPTER 7 .' CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

subjects for future work. These recommendations for future work are divided into three groups:environmentaI analysis. facility design, and pliability analysis.

7.3.l Environmental Analysis

Several components of the environmental analysis carried out in this study could be further puteued. Theexact directionality of the environmental components at the specified sites would result in mmmm exactIoadings modeling. This would require environmental data more specific to the sites than that currentlyavailable.

Further examination of seismic characteristics, i.e. the exact positions of local and distant faults,would enhance the precision of the seismic analysis. The low frequency modeling could be carried out by amore exact tool than the API guidelines.

The most substantial work in extension of this study would be to create an uncoupled model fortanker and SPM loads and inotions. This ~ould give more accurate dynamic offsets for givenenvironmental conditions.

7.3.2 Facility Design

Other types of SPMS deepwater ports could be examined, such as permanently moored tankers, or deepwaterport systems employing dynamic positioning. These types of facilities were not examined in this studybecause their cost was considered to be too high.

The design of the facilities could be extended to include shoreside operations, pipeline and vesseltraffic control VTC!. The effect of other tanker sizes using the facilities could be investigated.

7.3.3 Reliabi!ity Analysis

The reliability analysis could be extended in several ways, Further examination of Type II uncertainties, inthe form of more historic data on analytical modefiny, would result in a more accurate mode!. Modeltesting to determine load/capacity correlation would also improve the accuracy of the reliability modeI. Thereliability for the case of one leg damaged could be investigated for the CALM system. Lastly, thedisconnection distribution could be verified and impmved by examination of historical disconnection data.

55REFERENCES

References

American Petroleum Institute. 1987, Analysis of Spread Mooring Systems for Floating Drilling Units.API RP 2P. Washington, DC.

American Petroleum Institute. 1989. Recommended Practice for Planning, Designing and ConstructingFixed Offshore Platforms. API RP 2A. Washington, DC.

American Petroleum Institute. 1991. Draft Recommended Practice for Design, Analysis and Maintenanceof Mooring for Floating Production Systems, API RP 2FPI. Washington, DC.

Anaturk, A. R., Tromans. P. S., van Hazendonk, H. C., Sluis. C. M., and Otter, A. 1992. Drag Forceon Cylinders Oscillating at Small Amplitude: A New Model. Journal of Offshore Mechanics andArctic Engineering. Volume 114.

Bea, R.G, 1990. R eli abi]ity Based Desi gn Criteria for Coastal and Ocean Structures. National Committeeon Coastal and Ocean Engineering. Institution of Engineers, Austrailia.

Bea. R.G. 1992. Re-qualification of Platforms: Offshore California 4, Alaska. Department of CivilEngineering and Department of Naval Atchitecture, University of California at Berkeley.

Bea, R.G. 1993. Course reader for NA 205B: Wind k Wave Forces on Marine StructNes. University ofCalifornia at Berkeley.

Berman, M.Y., Birrell, N. D., lrick, J. T., Lee, G. C., Rubin, M. and Utt. M. E. 1990. The Role of theAPI Committee on Standardization of Offshore Structures. Proceedings of Offshore TechnologyConference: OTC 6206. Houston, TX.

Bruen, F.J., Gordon, R. B�and Vyas, Y. K. 1991. Reliability of a Deepwater Gulf of Mexico FPSSpread Mooring. OMAE, Volume II, Safety and Reliability. ASME.

Bureau Veritas, 1980, Rules and Regulations for the Construction and CIasstfication of Steel Vessels,Offshore P!atforms and Subtnersibles; Characteristics and Inspection of Matenals. Bureau Veritas,Paris, France.

Avallone, Eugene A. and Baumeister, Theodore III. 1987. Marks' Standard Handbook for MechanicalEngineers, Ninth Edition. McGraw-Hill, Inc.

55REFERENCES

References

American Petroleum Institute. 1987. Analysis of Spread Mooring Systems for Floating Drilling Units.API RP 2P. Washington, DC.

American Petroleum Institute. 1989. Recommended Practice for Planning, Designing and ConstructingFixed Offshore Platforms. API RP 2A, Washington, DC.

American Petroleum Institute. 1991, Draft Recommended Practice for Design. Analysis and Maintenanceof Mooring for Floating Production Systems, API RP 2FPI. Washington, DC.

Anaturk, A. R., Tromans, P. S., van Hazendonk, H. C., Sluis, C. M., and Otter. A. 1992. Drag Forceon Cylinders Oscillating at Small Amplitude: A New Model. Journal of Offshore Mechanics andArctic Engineering. Volume 114.

Avallone. Eugene A. and Baumeister, Theodore III. 1987. Marks' Standard Handbook for MecltanicalEngineers, Ninth Edition. McGraw-Hill, Inc.

Bea, R.G, 1990. Re!i abi li ry Based Design Criteria for Coastal and Ocean Structures. National Committeeon Coastal aud Ocean Engineering. Institution of Engineers, Austrailia.

Bea, R.G. 1992. Re-tlualification of Platforms: Offshore California 4 Alaska. Department of CivilEngineering and Department of Naval Asehitecture, University of Cahfotnia at Berkeley.

Berman, M.Y., Birrell. N. D.. Irick, J. T., Lee, G. C., Rubin, M. and Utt, M. E. 1990. The Role of theAPI Committee on Standardization of Offshore Structures. Proceedings of Offshore TechnologyConference: OTC 6206. Houston, TX.

Bruen, F.J., Gordon, R. B., and Vyas, Y. K, 1991. Reliability of a Deepwater Gulf of Mexico FPSSpread Mooring. OMAE, Volume II, Safety and Reliability. ASME.

Bureau Veritas. I980. Rules and Regulations for the Construction and Classification of Steel Vessels,Offshore Platforms and Subntersibles; Characteristics and Inspection ojMaterials. Bureau Veritas,Paris, France.

Bea, R.G. 1993. Course reader for NA 205B: Wind k Wave Forces on Marine Structures. University ofCalifornia at Berkeley.

REFERENCES 56

California Coastal Commission. 1978. Study of Pipeline Feasibility for Offshore LNG Terminal Sites.San Francisco, California.

Chryssostomidis, Chryssostomos and Connor, Jerome J. 1983. Behaviour of Off-Shore Structures.Vohone 2. Hemisphere Publishing Corporation, NY. New York,

Chopra, Anil K. 1980. Dynantt'cs of Structures. Earthquake Engineering Research Institute. Berkeley,California.

Cornell, C. Allin. 1987. Offshore Structtu3l Systems Reliability: A Report to the Joint Industry project.C. Allin Cotttell, Inc.

Coutarel, A. 1992. Flexible Pipe Installation in Deep and Very Deep Waters. Protxedingsof the MarineTechnology Centre, International Seminar on Recent Research and Development of Flexible PipeTechnology. Trondheim, Norway.

Cramer. E.H. 1992. Fatigue Reliability of Continuous Welded Structures. Dr. Engineering Dissertation.Delnutment of Naval Architecture. University of California at Berkeley.

de Kat, Jan O. and Wichers, Johan E. W. 1991. Behavior of a Moored Ship in Unsteady Current, Wind,and Waves. Marine Technology. Society of Naval Architects and Marine Engineers. September 1991.

Department of Navigation and Ocean Development, Sacramento, California. 1977. Deep-Water WaveStatistics for the California Coast, Station 5.

Department of Navigation and Ocean Development, Sacramento, California. 1977. Deep-Water WaveStatistics for the California Coast, Station 6.

Det norske Veritas. 1991. Structural Reliab lity Methods. Det norske Veritas, Division Ship andOffshore, Norway.

Donley, M. G. and Spanos, P. D. 1992. Stochastic Response of a Tension Leg Platform to Viscous andPotential Drift Forces. OMAE, Volume II, Safety and Reliability. ASME.

D'Souza. Richard, Dove, Peter S.. Hervey, Donald G�and Hardin, Donald J. 1992. The Design andinstallation of Efficient Deepwater Permanent Moorings. Marine Technology. Society of NavalArchitects and Marine Engineers. Volume 29. No. 1.

Froberg. Carl-Erik. 1985. Nunterical Mathetnatics: Theory and Computer hpp ications,Benjamin/Cummings Publishing Company, Inc, ~nlo Park, California

Guenard, Yves Francois. 1984. Application of System Reliability Analysis of Offshore Structures. JohnA. Blume Earthquake Engineering Center, Departtttent of Civil Engineering. Stanford University,

Hanna, S., Dove, P. G. S., and Breese, G. B. H. 1988. The Design. Procurement and Installation ofPlacid Oil Company's Green Canyon Floating Production Platform Mooring System. Proceedings ofOffshore Mechanics and Arctic Engineering. Houston, TX.

Huang, E. W., Beynet, P. A., Chen, Jing Hui, Li, Jian Xun, and Lu, Zi Guang. 1993, FPSO ModelTests and Analytical Correlation. Proceedings of Onshore Technology Conference: OTC 71~.Houston, TX.

Hunter, K.C.. Froning, J.P. and DeSouza, P.M.FM 1993. BHP's Experience with FPSO's. SNAMEFPSO Technology Symposium. Houston, Texas.

57REFERENCES

Huse, E. and Matsumoto, K. 1989. Mooring Line Damping Due to First- and Second-Order VesselMo0on. Proceedings ofOgshore Technology Conference: OFC6137. Houston. TX.

Hwang, Yuh-Lin and Bensimon, Luiz Fernando Callado. 1990. Design Analysis for 0» MarlimDeepwater Calm System. Society of Petroleum Engineers, SPE Latin American PetroleumEngineering Conference, October 14-19. SPE 21122,

Intersea Research Corporation Research Corporation. 1974. Observed Winds. Uncompensated HindcastWaves and Calculated Cunents Offshore Southern California Prepared for Shell Oil Company. LaJolla, California.

Jiao, Guoyang. 1992. Limit State Design for Flexible Piipe. Marine Structures 5: 431-454. ElsevierScience Publishers Ltd., England. Great Britain.

Jones. D. E., and Mclntyre. S. R. 1992. A Classification Society's Approach and Procedures Utilized inAssuring Compliance of Floatmg Production Systeins to Applicable Codes, Standards and RegulatoryRequirements. Seventh International Confeience on Floating Production Systems, Oslo, Norway.American Bureau of Shipping.

Kentosh, J. M., Muscettola, M., and Ziliotto, F. 1988. Design Criteria for Permanent Mooring ofOffshore FPSUs: Mooring of a 138,000 DWT Tanker in the Sicily Channel. Seventh InternationalConference on Offshore Mechanics and Arctic Engineeing, Houston, Texas.

Key, Joe W, 1993. History of FPSO's. SNAMEFPSOTechnology Symposium. Houston, Texas.

Kwan, C.T, 1991. Design Practice for Mooring of Floating Production Systems. Marine Technology,Society of Naval Architects and Marine Engineers. Volume 28. No. I.

Le Tirant, Pierre and Meunier, Jacques. 1990. Anchoring of Flooring $1riscrures. Sc»ntific and TechnicalInformation Lid. Oxford, UK.

Lewis, Edward V, 1988. Principles of Naval Architecture, Volume I, Second Revision. The Society ofNaval Architects and Marine Engineers. Jersey City. New Jersey.

Lou, Jack Y. K. and Choi, Han S. 1990, Nonlinear Response of an Articulated Offshore LoadingPlatform. OTRC Report No. 6/9&A-2-100. Ocean Engineering Prognm, Texas AkM University.

Louisiana Offshore Oil Port. 1992. LOOP Operations Manual, Volume 7.

Lundgren, H., Sand, Stig E., and Kidregaard, J, 1983. Drift Forces and Damping in Natural Sea States.Proceedings of the Third International Conference on the Behaviour of Off-Shore Structures.Massachusetts Institute of Technology. Cambridge, ~husetts.

Luo, Yong and Ahilan, R.V. 1991. Mooring Safety Assessment Using Reliability Techniques,Proceedings of Onshore Technology Conference. OTC 6783. Houston, TX.

Ma, Wei. 1994. An Analytical Approach to the Dynamics of Cables. University of California atBerkeley.

Jouinbe, J.M.J. 1992. SEAWAY - DELFT; User Manual of Release 4.00. Delft University ofTechnology, Ship Hydromechanics Laboratory. Delft, The Netherlands.

58REFERENCES

Mahin, S, A. and Lin, J. 1983. Construction of Inelastic Response Spectra for Single-Degree-of-FreedomSystems: Computer Program and Applications. Report number UCB/EERC-83/17, EarthquakeEngineering Resource Center, College of Engineering, University of California at Berkeley.

McIntyre, S. R. and Jones, D. E l992. Classification and Certification of Floating Productioti SystemsUtilized in Asian/Austrttlasian Waters. Proceedings of the Ninth Offshore South East Asia Conference,Singapore. OSEA 92178.

Melchers, R. E. 1987. Srrnctnral Reliability: Analysis and Prediction�The Cainelot Press.Southampton, Great Britain.

Moore, W. H. 1993. Management of Human and Organizational Enor in Operations of Marine Systems.Dr. Engineering Dissertation. Department of Naval Architecture. University of California at Berkeley.

Nikolaidis, E. and Kaplan. P. 1992. Uncertainties in Stress Analyses on Marine Structures. InternationalShipbuilding Progress, Volume 39, Delft University Press.

Peuker, M., Kokkinowrachos, K., and Giese, K. 1987. Development of Flexible Risers for FloatingOffshore Production, Proceedings of Offshore Technology Conference: OTC 5469. Houston, Texas,

Saevik, Svein. 1992. On SIresses and Fatigue in Flexib e Pipes. Department of Marine Structures, 'HieNorwegian Institute of Technology, University of Trondheim, Norway,

Seelig, WitIiam N., Kriebel, David and Headland. John. 1992. Broadside Current Forces on Moored Ships,Proceedings of the International Conference of Civil Engineering in the Oceans V, American Societyaf Civil Engineers. New York, New York.

Simiu. Emil and Scanlan, Robert H. 1978. Wind Egrets on Srrncrures. John Wiley 4 Sons, Inc. NY,New York.

Stsdahl, Nils. 1991. Me hods for Design and hnalysis of Flexible Risers. The Norwegian Institute ofTechnology. Trondheim, Norway.

Sterhng. G. H. 1992. The Development of Oil k, Gas in the Deepwater, Gulf of Mexico. Shell OffshoreIncorporated. Ocean Engineering Seminar, University of Califrznia at Berkeley, January 22.

Stevens, P. M. 1977, Environmental Design Data for the Southern California OCS Region. TheAerospace Corporation. El Segundo, California.

U.S. Department of Commerce, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, 1991. Nautical Chart18700, Point Conception to Point Sur. Washington, D.C.

U.S, Department of Commerce, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Adminisuation. 1991. Nautical Chart18744, Santa Monica Bay. Washington, D.C.

U,S. Department of Transportation. Coast Guard. 1993. Deepwater Ports Study. Office of Marine Safety,Security and Environmental Protection. Washington, D.C.

Woodward-Qyde Consultants. 1978. Preliminary Geotechnical Evaluation of Potential Island and OffshoreCaliforttia LNG Import Terminal Sites. Orange, California.

Tein, Y.S.D., Lohr, C, J., Bitten, F. J., and Huang, K.. 1989. A Probabilistic Dynamic and FatigueAnalysis Procedure for Mooring Systems. Proceedings of Onshore Technology Conference: OTC6036. Houston, TX.

59REFERENCES

Woodward-Clyde Oceaneering. 1984. Geotechnical Investigation: Boring 308N Coal Oil Point. Houston,Texas.

Yong, Luo and Ahilan. R.V. 1991. Mooring Safety Assessment Using Reliability Techniques.Proceedings of Onshore Technology Conjerence: . Houston, TX.

Woodward&lyde Oceaneering. 1983. Soil and Foundation Investigation, Jackup Rig Sites, Leases 3120and 3242, Santa Barbara Channel. Califtania. Ksaston, Texas.

APPFNDIX I: PARTIAL LIST OF EXISTING SPMS

Appendices

Appendix 1: Partial List of Existing SPMS

The following is a partial list of existing SPMS, their location, installation date and conf gtltttion. T. islist has been provided by M. Steven Mostarda of IMODCO. The configuration listing of "CAL1 I

NORTH AMERICA

Canada

Location/Name

St. John' s, NB

Installed Config. LtrcatioNName1970 CALM St. Johri's, NB

installed Config.I987 CALM

United States

Catenary Anchor Leg Mooring! includes all SPMS connected by rigid or soft means to permanentproduction/storage tankers utilizing catenary legs. The listing of "SALM" Single Anchor Leg Mooririg!includes all single anchor leg systems single chain, rigid leg or articulated rigid leg!. The listing of"Tower" refers to any unarticulated fixed mooring structure, including jacket structures when they i reattached to soft moorings,

APPENDIX I: PARTIAl. l./ST OF EXISTING SPMS

CENTRAL AMERICA

Mexico

Panama

Dominica n Republic

Installed Config.Location/Name

Santo Dornirr;<r 1984 CALM

Trinidad dL Tol>at.<r

SOUTH AAIERI CA

Colombia

Instalied ConftgLocati<rn/Name

1986 CALMCove nas

ChileVenezuela

Location/Name

Moron

Insulted Confrg, Location/Name1 972 CALM Paienqve

Installed Conf rg. Locadron/NameI <j8S CALM Ctrvenas

lnstallcd Corrfrg. Location/NameI 968 CALM Qtrintero Bay

Installed Config.1971 CALM

APPENDIX I: PARTIAL LIST OF EXISTING SPMS

Brazil

Location/Name installed Config. Location/Name Installed Config.

Uruguay

Location/Name Installed Config.Installed Config. Location/NameJose Ignacio 1976 CALM Jose lgnacio 1988 CALM

Ai gentina

Ecuador

Tratrtandai SBM I

Trtunandai SBM II

Sao Francisco

Garou paGaioupaGarnupaEnchova

Tramandai 4 SF

AreinhepeGanlUp'i

BakjoRJS 28A

1969 CALM

1971 CALM

1976 CALM

1977 SALM

1977 SALM

1978 CALM

1978 CALM

1979 CALM

1980 CALM

1981 CALM

1981 CALM

]981 CALM

PampoCorvina

GatoupaLing uadoAIbacora SBM 05

Albacon

Pirauna SBM 02

Bicudo SBM 01

Bonito EMH 01

Garoupa SBM 03Marlim

1981 CALM

1982 CALM

1982 CALM

1982 CALM

1987 CALM

1987 CALM1988 CAIhf

1988 CALM

1989 CALM

1989 CALM

1990 CALM

APPENDIX I: PARTIAL LIST OF EXISTING SPMS 63

NORTH EUROPE

Sweden

1nstaUed Config.Location/Name Installed Config. Location/NameOxno 1959 CALM Dalarn 1959 CALM

Norway

Denmark

Britain

Location/Name l»stalled Coni3tg. 1nstaUed Config.Location/Name

West Germany

Nore EstuuyTemeyAuk

Arg yllBeryl IFiona

Flot<a

lVIO»lrose

Montrose

A»gleseyBre»t

Thistle

B rent S t»ndh>

1965 SALM

1971 CALM

1<! 72 CALM

1'! 74 CALM

1974 SALM

1975 Tower

1<�5 Tower

3975 CALM

1975 CALM

1975 CALM

1<! 75 CALM

1'�5 SALM

1977 CALM

Buchan

Maureen

BerylFubnar

Beryl 2

TetneyFalkland Isles

Beryl 3Birch

Qawfcttl

SWOPS

Emerald

Kiitiwake

1979 CALM

1980 SALM

1981 CALM

19&1 SALM

1983 SALM

1981 CALM

1985 CALM

1985 SALM

1988 CALM

1989 CALM

1989 CALM

1990 SALM

1990 CALM

APPENDIX 1 . PARTIAL LIST OF EXISTING SPMS

MEDlTKRRANKAK

Spain

APPENDIA' I; PARTIAL LIST OF EXISTING SPMS

Libya

TUnisia

France

AFRICA

Bouet

Ghana Ktiititorial G uineaLocation/Natne Installed Config

1979 SALM BataSaltpond 1963 CALM

hiorocco

Location/Name

El Aaium

Ivory Coast

Location/Name

lnstdled Conftg. Location/Name1961 CALM Mohammedia

installed Conlig. Locatiott/Name

1<j80 CALM Ekpoir

htstalled Config, Location/Name

Installed Config,

1971 CALM


APPE'VI!IX I; PARTIAL LIST OF EXISTING SPMS

Nigeria

Cameroon

Gal>on

Zaire

Congo

Location/Ntanc

Djenohtiulied Config. Location/Name

1973 CALM YomhohstaUed Config.

1990 CALM

67APPEJYI!IX I; PARTIAL LIST OF FXISTING SPMS

Angola

lnstal led Con fthm. Location/Namel <�0 CALM Durhan

Tanzania

Installed Config.Location/Name inst'tiled Config. Location/NameDar es Sat;attn 1983 CALMCALM Dar es Salaam

Sudan

5IIDDLE EGEST

Yemen A ral>

UAE

installed Config. Location/NameI <!8<! CALM 9aleh Field

Oman

htstal le<i Couftg.

South Africa

Location/Name

Durhau

South Yemen

Location/Name

Hir Ali

Sharjah

Locatio<t/Name

MUharel'

SharIi<hCALM

I'!8 l CALM

Location/Name

Muharek

Insty3ed Con fig.197< CALM


Installed Config,1987 CALM


Dubai

Abu Dubai

Qatar

Saudi 4 ra 1>ia

hi«u t rat Zt>ne

APPENDIX I: PARTIAL LIST OF EXISTING SPAIS

IND1AN SUBCONTINENT

lait;tileti Conlig. Location/Name19N6 CALM Chi ttagong

Kuwait

India

Sri Lanka

Locatiot>/N;one

Colotnho Harhur

Bang1adesb

1nstaHed Cottfig.1967 CALM

APPED>IX I: PARTIAL LIST OF EXISTING SPMS

FAR EAST

Singapore

Insiailo5 Config.Installed Config

1980 CALMSingapore Harbour

hfalaysia

Brunei

Vietnam

China

Singapore HarbourPulau Bukom

1971 CALM

1974 CALM


Taiwan

Korea

Japan

Okinawa

Fhiiii pines

APPENDIX I: PARTIAL I IST OF EXISTING SPMS

Indonesia

Location/Name Installed Config.Installed Conftg. LocationfName

Th all» nd

A U STRA I I. A 8 I A

Australlia

blew Zealand

New Ca le don i»

Pangkalan SusuArdjunaJava Sea

BalikpapanJava Sea

ArdjunaDjati BarangBeka~AfdjunflArdfunfl

Pn]en'Ardjull»Handii

Balongan

UdangSerrnz flt!g

1970 CALM

1971 CALM

1971 CALM1971 CALM

1972 CALM

1972 CALM

1973 CALM

1974 CALM

1974 CALM

1974 CALM

197' CALM

197~ CALM

1<�6 CALM

1977 CALM

1978 CALM

1%0 CALM

Cinta

ArdjunaBaIUtpapanKrisna

BalonganLaiangCbengkareng AirKakupArun

Buna

Bitna

Bima

Mdura Island

Intan

Anoa

1981 CALM

1981 CALI%

1981 CALM

1983 CALM

1983 CALM

1984 Tower

1984 CALM

1984 CALM

1984 CALM

198~ CALM

1985 CALM

1985 CALM

198S CALM

1989 CALM

1990 CALM

73APPEh'DIX 2: FLOOR SLOPES AT DESJGNATED SOS SJTES

Tahle A.'2.1; Ocean Floor Slopes at El Segundo

Table A.2.2; Ocean Boor Siopes at Morro Bay

Appendix 2: Floor Slopes at Designated SPMS Sites

Floor slopes were evaluated at six locations for each site specified by the California State Land~

Cotntnission fNOAA, 1~AH]]. 'ntese slopes are given in the tables below.

APPFNDIX 3: CALCULATIONS OF STEADY FORCES 74

Appendix 3: Calculations of Steady Forces

Steady forces were calculated ha»ed on the relations described in Chapter 4, with tbe environmentalconditions described in Copter 2. Tbe calculations of steady forces were canied out using Microsoft Excelspreadsheets, which are reproduced here. Calculations for tbe CALM and tbe SALM are given for threereturn period»: the 2-year, the 10-year and the 100-year.

tead orce valuat o for

lt'i nd 5'peed by Centroid Elevation

ll'ind Speed by Gus/ Duration

Element Dintensions AII areasin jeet squared!

0.002 slugs/ft "3Air den»hy:

Total N'ind ForcesSteady N'i ad Forces

Ban -on Hi'nd OnIv

75APPEND/X 3: CALCULAT/ONS OF STEADV FORCES

RR N

Tanker

Buoy

Riser

Totat Current Forces

APPEÃDlX 3: CALCULATIO.'VS OF STEADY FORCES

V GE FT

Significant Wave Height feet!

Tota1 1Vo re Drift Forces

Tanker

Buoy. Riser

'v' v

14.5 Period ~! 12

76

APPENDIX .7: CALCULATIOXS OF STEADY FORCES 77

Eletn ent Ditnensiuns AII areas in feet squared!

Air density 0.002 slug Vft "3

Total Wind Forces

Wind Speed by Centroid E evation

Wind Speed by Gast Duration

Steady Wind Forces

Boit:-on M'hand Only

~ Ii ~ ~

APPEÃDIX 3: CALCULATIOXS OF STEADY FORCES

Total Current Forces

TanLer

Buoi'

Riser

Tttnker

Sig~iittcunl fauve Heigh fee ! J8. Period ~!

78

APPEXDiX 3.' CALCULATIO.VS OF STEADY FORCES 79

Buoy, Riser

80APPED'DJX 3: CALCULATIOXS OF STEADV FORCES

Tomcat Wa ve Drif/ Forces

A AD Vl

APPE VDJX .4: CALCULATIO!VS OF STEADY FORCES

8/etn en t Din> en si u n s A// areas in feet squaredt

0.002 slogs/ft"3AU ilellill!'

Tota/ Wind Forces

tead ' orce va ua 'o o

Wind Speed by Centroid Elevation

Wind Speed hy Gust Durntiun

Steady Wind Furees

Bo»'-on N'ind Onfy

I i ~ ~

~ I

82APPED'DN 3; CALCULATIOXS OF STEADY FORCES

Tanker

Buoi'

Riser

Total Curren Forces

7anker

APPENDJX 3: CALCULATIONS OF STEADY FORCES 83

Buoy, Ri.~er

APPENDIX 3: CALCULATIOA'S OF STEADY FORCES

Total Wave Drif/ Forces

APPE/VDIX 3: CALCULATlONS OF STEADV FORCES

Element Divrensions All areas in feel squared!

Air dvusi >: 0.002 slugs/fr*3

Tosal Wind Forces

Wind Speed by Cenlroid Elevalion

lhind Speed by Gusl Duration

Slendy Wi nd Forces

Bo»-on Wind Only

I ~~ I i

APPENDIX 3; CALCULAT ONS OF STEADY FORCES

Total Current Furces

Tan/.er

Bui~ v

Riser

V

Tanker

Sigttificattt Wave Height feet! 14. Period seconds!

86

APPED'DIX 3: CALCULAT ONS OF STEADY FORCES

Buoy, Riser

TotaI 8'ave Drifl Forces

87

APPEJVDIX 3: CALCULATIONS OF STEADV FORCES

ad o ce va oatio or


Wind Speed by Gust Duration

Element Dimensions All areasin feet squared!

Air density 0.002 s! ogs/ft"3

Steady Wi nd Forces

B »c-nn tt'nuI OnlyTotoi W>nd Forces

APPENDIX 3: CALCULATIONS OF STEADY FORCES

Tolal Cvrrevr For .es

Tanker

Buoy

R� 'I

Tanker

Sig«if tea«t %ave Height feet! l8, Period seconds!

89

APPEhYPIX 3: CALCULATIONS OF STEADV FORCES

Buoy. Riser

Total Wa ve Drift Forces

A FAD FW'1'MOh'hIFh'>AL OR F

APPEÃDM 3: CALCULAT ONS OF STEADY FORCES


Wind Speed by Gust Duration

Eletnent Ditnensiuns Al! areasin feet stluared!

O.M2 slugs/ft*3Air duu.iily

Steady O'ind Furces

Bo»-on Wind OnIy

Total Wind Forces

APPENDIX 3 CAI CULATIOÃS OF STEADY FORCES

To of C urren l Forces

Tanj;er

Buov

Ris r

Tunjer

Si 'niiicant Wave Height feel! 2 Period secmcl~>

92

APPED!M 3: CALCULATIONS OF STEADY FORCES

Bvny, Riser

Tola/ 8'ave Drift Forces

T 7 4D ' V'l'IR 3'h

93

APPENDIX 4: CALCULATIONS OF OSCILLATING MOT1ONS

Appendix 4: Ca!culations of Oscillating Motions

Two types of oscillating motions were investigated in this study: Iow frequency and wave frequencyoscillations. Low frequency oscillations were based on the methods recommended by the AmericanPetroleum Institute [API, I987l, while wave frequency motions were calculated with the use of the shipmotions program, SEAWAY [Jounce. I992], as described in section 4.3,

Calculation of low frequency motions was carried out using Microsoft Excel spreadsheets, whichare given be/ow. For further information on this analysis, the reader is refened to API RP 2P.

APPENDIX 4; CALCULATIONS OF OSCILLATING MOTIONS

efereTlee surge/slvrri', r rrrs

elurrt slrr'gejs'lerri', r'rlrs

r'ruad srrrge/s«us', sig. singte urrrp/itude

'rvrri svrgr/cr rrri', rrur.r. srngle arrrpIrlude

APPENDIX 4: CALCULATJONS OF OSCILLATING MOTIONS

.ail>..t nile anrp!aude

,~in,l! ie arnphtude

97APPENDIX 4: CALCULATIONS OF OSCILLATING MOTIONS

reader is referred to the SEA WAY manual for a detailed explanation of this program. The program requirestwo input fi!es: a file describing the hull form of the ship in question, and a file describing the

environmental conditions and the ship loading. The program produces one output file, describing wavefrequency motions. Input files are given below for the CALM buoy, the SALM buoy, and the San Diegoclass tanker in light ship and full load conditions. Output files tue given for the four input cases.

4l.h Hull le

0,0 2.34 0,0 2.34 2,500

0. ! 3.99 0,0 3,99 2.500

O.O 5.06 0.0 5.06 2.500

0.0 6.82 0.0 6,82 2.500

0.0 7,92 0.0 7.92 2.500

0,0 9.15 0.0 9.15I

2.500

0.0 7.92 0.0 7.92 2.500

0.0 6.82 0.0 6.82 2.500

0.0 5.06 0,0 5.06 2.500

0.0 3.<!9 0.0 3.99 2,500

! ! 2.34 0,0 2,34 2.500

4 ]'i

CALM b4.5700

!Q0,60'!80.6098

11.0

0.002 342.0

0.003.'!'!

300.005,064,0

0.006.825.0

0.007,926.0

0.00 !.]5

7.00.007 !'!

8.00,006.829.0

0.005.0610.O0. K!3.'!'J

11.00.00

Wave frequency motions were calculated by the use of lhe ship motions program SEAWAY. The

uoy 6H.O x 15.0 di i" dr;dt �8,3'4,57!0, KKK! 18.3000 0.3050

0.6098 1.5244 1.5244 4.5732 4,5732 1.5244 l.52440.6098

O,OO.O 1.17

5 0 !00

Q. ! 1.995 0 !

O.OQQ 253

S, K!4 00

O.O3.415.00

0,00.0 3.96

5, K!4 OO

0.0 4.575,00

4 000.0 3.96

5, K!4 00

0.0 3.4]5,00

4 QQ0.0 2.53

5 K!0.0

0 0 1.995 K!

0,0 !. ! 1.17

98APPEh'DIX 4. CALCULATlONS OF OSCILLATlNG NOTIONS

2.34 5.001,0000 1.0000 1.0000

~" End of file ~"

4.12

CALM buoy with spring+I +I 0 +I 0

4.573 0.000 0.000 304.878 1.025E+00123456 1 6 +5 0

10.0

1180.0

2,500 I 0.200 1.700 0.0333331.474

+6.00 +7.561 4.750 4.7500

5.0 iO

0,0 6L 250 105.00001

<!. 8 0, ! 0,0I 1.7 0.0 0.0-l

9.000 0. t !O 4.00 j4

+24.766.06i7,538,84

0"~ End <it I'ite "'"

12. �13.0014,0015.00

¹ ¹ ¹ ¹ ¹ ¹ ¹ ¹ ¹ ¹ ¹ ¹ ¹ ¹ ¹ ¹ ¹ ¹ ¹ ¹ ¹ ¹ ¹ ¹ ¹ ¹ ¹ ¹ ¹ ¹ ¹¹ Progrmn: SEAWAY 1ournee ¹

¹¹ STRIPTHEORY CALO .ILATIONS OF MOTIONS AND LOADS IN A SEAWAY ¹

¹¹ Release 4,12¹ �1-07-1993!¹¹¹¹¹¹¹¹¹¹¹¹¹¹¹¹¹¹¹¹¹¹¹¹¹¹¹¹¹¹¹

Uwr: Universi<1 <if Calil'ornia, Herl'eley, U.S.A,INPUT DATA

CALM hu<iy with spriiig

PRI YI -C'UDE INI'UT DATA �. KPR I!; ]

APPED,'DIX 4: CALCULATIONS OF OSCILLATING MOTIONS

PRINT-CODE GEOMETRIC DATA ...�,.... KPR�!: IPRINT-CODE H YDRODYNAMlC COEFFICIENTS KPR�!: 0PRINT-CODE FREQUENCY CHARACIXRISTICS KPR�!: IPRINT-CODE SPECTRAL DATA ...,...,... KPR�!; 0

ACTUAL MIDSHIP DRAFT ................ DRAFI': 4.573 mACTUAL TRIM BY STERN ................. TRIM: 0.000 mDI IMMY VALUE, FOR THE TIME BEING ...... DIST; 0.000

WATER DEPTH ..............DENSITY OF WATER ....

... DEPTH: 304.9 m

....�.... RHO . 1.025 ton/m3

DEGREES OF FREEDOM CODE ...�.......... MOT: 123456VERSION-CODE OF STRJP TilEORY METHOD ... KTJI;NUh1QER OJ= TEJ&1S IN POTENTIAL SERIES .. MSER: 6CODE OF USLD "-D A}'PROX JMATJON ....... KCOF: 5NUh1BER OF "FIG=E-CJJOJCE" SECTlONS ...... NFR: 0

NUh1BFR OF I: <WARD Sl'EEDS,............. NV: IFORWARD Sl'I='EDS kii! ................ VK NV!: 0.00

M.JhIBER OF WAVE DIRECTIONS ........�... NWD: IO'AVE DII<ECTIONS deg off .«eni! WAVDIR NWD!: 180,0

WA VE Ah1PLITUDE FOR LINTARJSATJON ... WAVAMP . 1.474 m

INPUT I DATA c ainnUcd!

BASE L1NE TO CENTRE OF GRAVITY ... +CiKGM=KCi ' .6.000 m

MASS-Ci YRADILJS k-xx ...MASS-GYRADJUS k-y>' ...MASS-GYRADJUS k-zz ....

..., CiYR I!; 7.561 m

.... GYR�!: 4.750 m.... GYR�!: 4,750 m

NIJMBER OF LOAD.CALCLJLATION SFCTIONS .. NBTM; 0

CODE OI. ROLL DAMPINCi INPUT ....,..��, KRD: 3AVERAGE ROLL AMPLITl.JDE ...��.�... ROLAMP: 5.000 degHEiGHT OF BJLGF KEEL ......�.��..... HBK: 0.000 mDISTANCE OF A.P.P. TO AFT END B.K, ... XBKA: 61.25 mDISTANCE OF A.P.P. TO FORWARD END B.K. XBKF: 105.00 m

CODE OF ANTI-ROLLING DEVICES ......... KARD: 0

M.JhiBER Ol. 11NI.AR SPRINCiS ... ... NCAB: I

MAX. I-kEQ. Ol. I=NCOJ.JN JTR IN SERIES . FREQMAX: 2.500 rad/sec range = 0,000 - 3.125rM'wc!

CODE FOR WAVE FREQUEN Y INPI.JT ....... KOMEG: IMINJh1 Jh1 CJJ<CJ ~LAR WAVE FREQUENCY ..... OMMIN: 0.200 rad/secMAXlM>1hl CIRCLJLAR WAVE FREQUENCY ��, OMMAX: 1,700 rad/secINCREh1EN'I' J N WA VE FREQl JENCIES ....... OM INC: 0.033 rad/sec

APPENDIX 4: CALCULATIONS OF OSCILLATING MOTIONS

NUMBER OF SEA STATES .......�........ NSEA: 4CODE OF IRREGULAR SEA DESCRIPTION .... KSEA . 2WAVE HEJGJ]TS m! HW K! / PERIODS s! TW K!: 4.76 12.00

6.06 13.007.53 14.008.84 15.00

INPUT,'T-C'ODJ. OF C J<JTEJeh I l>R SJJIPMOTIONS KRIT: 0

Execution: 18-04-1994 . 18:28CALM quoi' v'ill| xprlu 'SEA WAY4, I 2

GEOh IETJ< I AL JIULLFOJM DATA

AC'1VAL MJI!SHIP DRAFT T! ...ACTI AI TRIM BY STERN .......,

4.573 m0.000 m

LENGTJ1 BETWEEN PLRPENDIC'I.JLARS Lpp! �..... 18.300 mREAR SECTION TO A.P.i>, .........,.��,: 0,305 m

WATERLINE; LENCJTJ I Lwl>,.....��....,..: 17.683 mBEAM <B! �...,..............: 18.300 mARE A ,...........,. � ...,...., : 26 I m2

AREA C'OEFT1C'1E4'T Lpp! .��.,: 0.7785AJU A C !EFFICIENT La'I! ...,...; 0 8056CENTI<OIL! TO A.P.P, �,........: 8.537 m -0.613 m or -3.35 % Lpp/2!CLN'I J<OJJ! TO REAR SEC'TION .....: 8.842 m +0.000 m or +0.00% LwV2!

DISJ'LACEMEN'I; VOLUME ...�....�.....,...: 1304 m3BLOCKCOEFFJCJENT Lpp! ....: 0.8516BLOCKCOEFFJCJENT Lwl! ....: 0.8813CENTROID TO A.P.P.........: 8.537 m -0.613 m or -3,35 % Lpp/2!C'ENTROID TO REAR SECTION ..: 8.842 m +0,000 m or +0.00 % Lwl/2!CEM ROID TO WATERLINE .....: 2.501 mC'FNTROJD TO KEELLINE ......: 2.072 mMIDSHIP SEC'TION COEFFICiEVI' . I. 813LONG. PRISMATIC COEFFICIENT: 0,7804VERT. PRISMATIC C OEFFJCIENT: 1.0940RATIO Lpp/B,.�.......,...; 1.000RATIO L~.J/B ..�...........; 0.966RATIO B/T �...,......,...,: 4.002

WETIT=J! Sl JRFACE HI ILL .......; 484 m2

STAB I L JTY PAR AMETEJ<S

COORDINATES AND LINEAR SPRING COEFFICIENTS: 9.000 0.000 0.000 1.170E+010.000E-01 0.000E-O I

NUMBER OF DISCRETE POINTS ............ NPTS; -ICOORDINATES OF POINTS m!,. PTSXYZ NPTS,3!: 9.00 0.00 4,00

101APPENDIX 4; CALCULATIONS OF OSCILLATING MOTIONS

KB ....,.......: 2.072 mKG ............ : 6 .000 mBM-TRANSVERSE .: 4.229 mGM-TRANSVERSE .: 0.300 mBM-LONGITUDINAL: 4.092 mGM-LONGITUDINAL: 0.164 m

Execution: 18-04-1994, 18:28CALM hnoy with springSEAWAY4.12

SECTIONAL I I ULLFORM DATA

DRAFl

CALM h<!<>y wi !! springSEA WAY-4.12

Execution: 18-04-1994 / 18:28

TW !-PARAMI'TER LLWIS CONFORMAL MAPPING COEFFICIENTS

TO LEWIS

STATION X-APP HALF HALFNUMBLR CL-CL WIDTH

-! m! rn! m! tn! I. X! -0.305 0.000 2.340 s.0032.00 0.305 0. �0 3.<!90 s,0033,00 0.<! Ls 0,0 e s.060 s.0034.00 2.439 0. X� 6,82 ! s,003s. K! 3.<�3 0.000 7.<0 s.0036, X! I'.S3. Q. XK! <!.] s ! S.0037.00 13.110 0. X� 7.<0 S,QQ38 K! 14.634 Q,QQQ 6.820 s,0039.00 l6.!s9 0.000 S,060 s.00310.00 I 6,76$ Q,Q X! 3,<J<! ! s,00311.00 17.378 0,000 2.340 5.003

m2! -!23.4130

S0.628068.237879.243991.SSQ779,243968.237850.62803<! <!'!'! I

23.4130

STATION X-APP HALF DRAFT AREAHI JLLFORM REMARKS WITH REGARDNUMBER WIDTI I COEFF

CONFORM AL M APPJNC<

! m! m! m! ! tn! !1.00 -0.30S 2,340 5. X� 1.0000 4.17652.00 0.305 3,9<� s.003 1.0000 S.2190

B I !LBOI ! S

3.00 0.<315 s.060 s.003 1.0000 S,Ss28BL!LBOl.! S

4.00 2,43<! 6,820 s.003 1.0000 6,8484BI.ALBO .!S

s. X! 3.963 7.<0 S.QQ3 I.OQQQ 7.4SQs6. X! S.S37 <y. 0 5.003 1.0000 8,Ills7. X! l3.1� 7.<320 s.003 1,0000 7.4SQsS. X! �.634 6.820 s. 003 I,QQQQ 6.8484

B I ALBO '8

AREA AREA KB BO WEARIEDCOEFF LENGTH m! m! m!

l.0000 2.072 2.s01 14.68s1,0000 2.072 2.501 17.9851.0000 2.072 2.501 20.1251.0000 2.072 2.501 23,6451.0000 2.072 2.501 25.8451.0000 2.072 2.SOI 2S.30S1.0000 2.072 2,SQI 2S 84S1.0000 2,072 2.501 23.64S1.0000 2,072 2.501 20.1251,0000 2.072 2.501 17,98SI;0000 2.072 2.s01 14.68s

M S! A - I ! A�! A�! RMS

-! -! m!+1,0000 -0,3188 -0.1209 0.138 BULBOUS+1.0000 -0.0970 -0.1384 0.109 TLINNELED-

+1.0000 +0.0049 -0.1403 0.113 TUI4NELED-

+1.0000 +0.1327 -0.136S 0.150 TUNNELED-

+1.0000 +0.1958 -0.1327 0.1S9 TL!NNELED+1.0000 +0.2556 -0.1276 0.235 TUNNELED+1.0000 +0,1958 4.1327 0.189 TU!'~LED+1,0000 +0,1327 -0.1368 0.150 TUNNELED-

APPEKDIX 4; CALCULATIOA'S OF OSCILLATIN/G MOTIONS 102

9.00 16.1 9 5,060 .003 1.0000 5.&52& +1.0000 +0.0049 4,1403 0,113 TUI iNELED-BULBOUS

10.00 16,768 3.9'� 5.003 1.0000 5.2190 +1.0000 4.0970 -0.1384 0.109 TUICKZ~-BULBOUS

11.00 17.378 2.340 5.003 1.0000 4,1765 +1.0000 0.3188 -0.1209 0.138 BULBOUS

Execution: 18-04-1994 / 18:28CALM bnoy with springSEAWAY'.12

N-PARAMETER CLOSE.FIT CONFORMAL MAPPiNG COEFFICIENTS

CALM hLjo! wi!l> springSEAWAY-4,12

Execution: 18-04-1994 / 18:28

NATURAL ROLL AND COEFFICIENTS AT FIXED AMPLITUDE

FORWARD S!l!P SPEED . kn!: 0,00MEAN ROLL AMPLITUDE Beg!: .000

NATURAL ROLL PERIOD . s!: 30.749NATURAI. FREQI >ENCY . rf. ! ' .0,204

LINEAR EQUI% ALI=NT iM rn! '. 0.308

STATION Ni S > A -I !A l'!! iV7S

-! >n! -! -!1,00 ~4,2 9 +I.OOOO

+0.0 XN +0.0000 0.0142 OO + 2786 +I, XKX>

+0.0000 +0. KKK> 0.02 3.00 + .9161 +1. XK�

+0.01 +0.00 K! 0,0324,00 +6.r'!! +1.0000

+0.0 XX! +0. KKK> 0.028 .OO +7. +1.0000

+0.0000 + !. K� > 0.02 6.00 +8.2437 +1.0 KX>

+0, XXK! +O, KXX! 0,0267.00 +7. +1.0 XK!

+O.OOOO +0, >000 0.0 &.00 +6.92'! I + I .OO X!

+0,0000 +O, KX>0 0,0289.00 + .V 161 +1.0 KK!

+0, XXX! +O,NXK! 0.03210.00 + .2786 + I. KXX>

+O.OOOO +O.OOOO 0.02 11.00 +4.2 <! + I.OO X!

+O.OOOO +0.0000 0.014

A�! A�! A ! A�! A 9! A�1! A�3! A�5! A I 7!

-! -! -! -! -! -! -! -! -! rn!-0.334 -0.1430 +0.0274 +0.0057 -00058 +0.0000 +0.0000 +0.0000

-0.103! -0,1 &9 +0.0096 +0.0108 -0.0024 +0.0000 +0.0000 +0.0000

+0.00� -0.1610 -0.000 +0.0115 +0.0001 +0.0000 +0.0000 +0.0000

+0.1408 -O,I�0 -0,0127 +0.0101 +0.0031 +G.GOGO +0,0000 +G.0000

+0.2071 -0.1�0 -0.01&4 +0.0092 +O,GO43 +0.000G +0.0000 +0.0000

+0.26'! -0.1492 -0.0231 +0,0076 +0.0052 +0,0000 +0.0000 +0.0000

+0.2071 -O. I �0 -0.0184 +0.0092 +0.0043 +0.0000 +G.GOGO +0.0000

+0.1408 -0.1�0 -0,0127 +0.0101 +O.G031 +0.0000 +0.0000 +0.0000

+0. X!� -0.1610 -0.000 +0.0115 +0.0001 +0,0000 +0.0000 +0,0000

-0.1031 -0.1 8'! +0.0 K� +0.0108 -0.0024 +0.0000 +0.0000 +0.0 XN

-0.334 -0,1430 +0.0274 +0,0057 -0.0058 +0.0000 +0.0000 +0.0000

103APVEXI>IX 4: CALCULATIONS OF OSC/LLATING NOT'lONS

MASS, k-phi-phi .�� m!; 8.509COMPONENTS k-phi-phi:

SOLID MASS PART � in! ' .7.'5612-D POTENTIAL PART in!: 3,903

DAMPING, kappa ...... -!: 0.0142COMPONENTS kappa:

2-D POTENTIAL PART -!: 0.0000SPEED EFFECT PART -!: 0.0000SKIN FRICTION PART -!: 0.0007EDDY MAKING PART . ->: 0.013SLIFT MOMENT PART . -! . 0.0000BILCiE KEEL PART .. -!: 0.0000

NON!L]NEAR DA]!,IP &l COEFF]CIENTS:Kappa-] ��.... -!; 0.000'Kappa-2 .......... -!: 0.]s77

NATURAL HEAVE AT ZERO FORWARD SPEED

NATURA] ]]]-.A! E PLRIOI! ..!: 6.%81NA'I' JRA1 I'RLQl.lENCY lr/i]: 0.'!C0

NATURAL PITCl l AT ZERO FORWARD SPEED

NATURAL P]TCl I PERIOD x!: 4-!.277NAT].]RAL FREQUENCY r/x!: 0.]42

CALM hu<!y v'i!h iprh!gSEAWAY-4, I 2

Execution.' 18-04-1994 / 18:28

FREQUENCY Cl]ARACTERISTICS OF BASIC MPTIONS FORWARD SPEED = 0.00 knWAVE DIRECTION = +180 deg off stem

WAVE SQRT ENC ...SURGE......SWAY.......HEAVE......ROLL.......PITCH.......YA!!t '.... ADDED RESISTANCESFREQ SLPAL FREQ AMPL PHASE AMPL PHASE AMPL PHASE AMPL PHASE

AMPL PHASE AMPL PHASE GER/BEU BOESE r/x! -! r/i! m/m! deg! m/in! deg! m/m! deg! deg/m! deg! deg/m! deg! deg/m> deg! kN/m2! kN/m2!

0.200 O. I ]6 0.200 ].270 91.9 0.000 80.9 1.001 359.7 0.000 89.3 1,422 307.2 0.0002] ],,'! 2.4'!E- ]3 2.ROE+000.233 0,] 3] 0.233 I ]46 RV,7 0 000 90.1 1,001 359.9 0,000 276.9 0.629 315,7 0.000] R0.0 7.26K-� 8,.'! lE-01

0.267 0.]47 0.267 ].OR4 90.6 0.000 90,0 1.002 3~9,9 0.000 269.6 0.459 180,0 0.000] R j.] 2.01E.03 -C.<6L.-O]

APPFP<'I!JX 4,' CALCULATiONS OF OSCILLATII<IG MOTIOIVS

0.300 0.164 0.300 1.024 90.0179.9 1.77E-03 2.32E-O]0.333 0.182 0.333 0.999 9G.G180.0 2.53E-G3 1.29E-QI0.367 0.200 0.367 0.982 89.9179.9 4.31E-03 5.89E-020.400 0,218 0.400 0,96S 90.1180.0 8.59E-G3 2.2RE-020.433 0.236 0.433 0.950 90.3179.9 ].68E-02 -2.92E-020.467 0.2S4 0.467 0.935 90,4179.9 3.1SE-02 -4.42E-02O.SGO 0.272 O.SQO 0.919 90.6

]79.9 S.SRE-Q2 -1.71E-02O.S33 0.291 0.533 0.903 90.7

179.8 9.5GE-02 8,26E-02O.S67 0,309 0.567 Q.886 90.9]79,8 ].S7F-0 I 2.87E-OI0.60Q 0,327 0.600 0,87Q 9l .I

179 7 2,53E-Ql 6,4lE-QI0.633 0.345 Q.633 Q.R52 9].3179.6 3.96E-OI 1.21E+000.667 Q,363 0.667 0.834 91.S

17'!.5 6.Q'!F-0 I 2.1]E+00

0.700 0.38] 0.700 Q.81S 9].8179.4 9.25E-O I 3.47E+QO0.733 Q.400 Q.733 0.795 92.0179.3 1.3<!E+OO S.44E+OQ0.767 0.418 0.767 0.775 92.3179. l 2,07E+8! 8,3]F+OO0.800 0,436 O.ROO 0.7S3 92,6179,0 3.08E+QQ ].25E+O]0.833 0.454 Q.R33 0.73l 93.0178,7 4,58E+00 1.86E+010.867 0,472 0.867 0.708 93.1178. S 6.76E+QO 2.72E+010.9OO 0.490 Q.'�0 0.684 93,'!178.3 9.7SE+00 3,8SE+Gl0.933 O.SQ9 0.933 0.6S9 94.4178.] ].33E+Ol S.13E+O]0.967 O.S27 0.967 0.634 9S.Q177.8 1.64E+Ql 6.] ] E+0]I.OQO O.S45 1.000 0,608 9S.6

177,S l,72E+OI 6.1RE+011.033 O.S63 1.033 0.58] 96,4

177.3 1.�E+Ol 5.39E+OI1.067 O.SR I 1,067 0,554 '�.2

] 77.0 1.32E+OI 4,27E+Q1].100 O,S99 I. lOO O,S27 98,2

176.7 ],G7E+G] 3.26E+OII, 133 0.618 ].133 0.5OQ 99.3

] 76A 8.82E+00 2 49E+Ol].]67 0,636 ],167 0,473 I OQ.5

176.1 7 4QE+0 ! l.'! 1 E+01

1.064 3 S2.4 0.000 90.1 1.486 258.0 0.000

] .077 350.3 O.OOQ 90.3 1.543 258,6 0.000

90.4

9O.S

Q.OOQ 90.6 1.092 347.6 0.000 90.6 1.598 259,4 0.000

Q.QQQ 90.7 1.]07 343.9 0.000 91.0 1.651 260,6 O.GQO

Q.Q00 90.8 1. ] 15 339.0 0.000 9].4 1.704 261.8 0.000

Q.QOO 90.9 1.106 332,4 0.000 91.8 1.758 263.1 0.000

O.OOO 91,0 1.059 324.0 0.000 92,1 1.811 264.5 0.000

0,9SI 314.2 0.000 92.6 ].869 266.2 0.000O.QGO 91.1

0.000 91,3 0.784 305.7 0.000 92.9 1.925 267.7 O.GGG

0.000 91.4 0.602 301.3 0.000 93.3 1.983 269.2 G.OGO

0.000 91.6 0.449 303.0 G.OOO 93.6 2.045 270.8 0.000

0,000 91.8 0,352 310.9 0.000 93.9 2.]05 272.3 0.000

O,OOO 92.0 0.302 322.0 0,000 94.2 2.164 273.6 0,000

0.283 332,4 0,000 94.4 2.222 274.9 0.00092 2

0.000 9D.O '1.003 359.8 0.000 269.0 0.838 285.7 0.000

0.000 90.0 1.004 359.7 G.GOG 272.7 0.837 278.5 0.000

0.000 90.0 1.006 359.6 0.000 272.1 0.784 272.8 0.000

0.000 90,0 1.007 359,4 0.000 85.9 0.829 269.3 0.000

O.OOO 90,0 1,010 359.2 0.000 88.] 0.881 265.3 0.000

0.000 90.1 1.012 358.9 0.000 89.3 0.935 262,6 0.000

O.OOO 90.] 1,0]S 358.6 0,000 89.3 1.012 260,8 0.000

0,000 90,] 1.0]9 3S8,2 0.000 89,3 1.089 259.7 0,000

O.OOQ 90,2 ].024 357,6 0.000 89.4 1.161 258.7 0.000

O.QOQ 90,2 1.029 357,0 0,000 89.4 1.231 258.0 0.000

O.QOO 90.2 1,03S 3S6.2 0,000 89.5 1.300 257.5 0.000

O.GGO 90.3 1.043 355.2 0.000 89.7 1.365 257.4 G,GGG

O.OOQ 90.4 1.053 3S3.9 0.000 89.9 1.426 257,7 0.000


CALM buoy ivith sprit! 'SEA%'AY-4.12

Execution: 18-04-1994 / 18;28

FREQUENCY CIIARACTERISTICS OF MOTIONS POINTS FORWARD SPEED ~ 0.00 knWAVE DIRECTION = +! 80 deg off stern

POlh'T NR = 01X-APP = 9.000 mY-CL = 0.�0 mZ-BL = 4.000 m

............ABSOLUTE MOTIONS...,.......REL MOT..WAVE SQRT ENC ....,X..........Y.......Z..... �...Z.....FREQ SLOKA'L FREQ AMPL PHASE AMPL PHASE AMPL PHASE AMPL PHASE

r/s! -! r/s! m/m! deg! m/tn! deg! m/m! deg! m/m! deg!0.200 0.116 0.?00 1.311 93.2 O.OGO 89,8 0.994 0,2 0.062 182,00.233 0.13! 0.233 1.162 90.4 0.000 90.0 0.997 0.1 0,087 179.70,267 0.147 0.267 1.084 &9,& 0.000 90.2 1.006 359.9 0.121 177.50.3N! 0.164 0.3 X! 1.052 90.4 0.000 90.2 1.001 0.2 0.143 180.00.333 0.1!I? 0.333 I,028 <�.2 0.000 '�,3 1.003 0.1 0.173 178.90.367 0.200 0.367 1.009 90.0 O.OOO 90,4 1.005 360.0 0.206 178.0

1,200 0.654 1,200 0,446 101.8175,8 6.34E+00 1.48E+011.233 0.672 1.233 0.420 103.3

175,6 5.61 E+00 1.17E+011.267 0.690 1.267 0.394 105.1

175.3 5.08E+00 9.23K+001.300 0.708 1,300 0.369 107.0

175,1 4.70E+00 7.24E+001.333 0.727 1.333 0.344 I 09.0

174.9 4,40E+00 5.54E+001.367 0,745 1,367 0.320 111.3

174.7 4,17E+00 4,06E+001.400 0.763 1.400 0.297 113,9

174.5 3.99E+00 2.7 !E+OO1,433 0.781 1.433 0.276 116.6

1 74,4 3.84E+0 ! 1.44E+00l.467 0,799 1.467 0.255 119.7

174.3 3.72E+00 2.46L-OI1.500 0,817 I.SOO 0,? 35 3 0

174.2 3,59L+00 -R.89E-G II .533 0.836 I .533 0.216 126,6

174.1 3 46E+00 -1.96E+00I,567 0.854 1.567 O. I <!9 130.6

174,? 3.35E+0 ! -2 'JSE+001.6 K! 0.87? !.60 ! O. I &3 134.9

I 74.2 3 2? I=+00 -3 86E+OO1.633 0.8'� 1.633 0.168 I 3<!.6

I 74.3 3.0&E+00 -4.67E+ K!1.667 0.908 1.667 O,I 54 144.7

174,4 2 <�E+OO -5.37E+001.700 0.926 1.700 0.14 I 150.2

174.5 2.8!E+ N -5,'E+00

0.000 92.5 0.280 340.6 0.000 94.6 2.281 276.1 0.000

0.000 92.7 0.281 346.3 0.000 94.8 2.335 277.2 0.000

0.000 93.1 0.283 350.1 0.000 95.0 2.3&4 27&.2 0.000

0.000 93.4 0.282 352.7 0,000 95.2 2.428 279.0 0.000

0,000 93.7 0.280 354,6 0.000 95.3 2.467 279.7 0.000

0.000 94.1 0.275 355.9 0,000 95.4 2.497 280,4 0.000

0.000 94.5 0.268 356.9 0.000 95.6 2.519 281,0 0.000

0.000 < .0 0.25<! 357.6 0.000 95.7 2.532 281,4 0.000

0.000 95.5 0.249 358.2 0.000 95.8 2.535 281.8 0,000

0.000 96.1 0.237 358,6 0.000 96,0 2.528 282.1 0.000

0.000 96.7 0.225358.9 0.000 96.1 2.510 282,4 0.000

0.000 97,5 0.212 359,2 0.000 96,3 2.481 282 6 0.000

0.000 98,3 0.198 359,4 0.000 96,5 2.441 282.7 0.000

O.O00 99.4 0.184 359.5 0.000 96.6 2.391 282.8 G.GGG

0.000 100.6 0.170 359.6 0.000 96.8 2,33G 282.9 0.000

0.000 102.1 0.156 359,7 0.000 97,0 2.258 282.9 0.000

APPE/<'DJX 4: CALCULATJONS OF OSCJLLA TJNG MOTJONS

04 1 2GA 10 .003 I] 90.3 ] I..O0,3 fl 1 ]5,]0,3L'! I I 7.30.2<98 11'!,70,278 ]22.20.259 ]24,80.240 ]27.50.221 130.50.203 133.6

CALM bu<iy v it]> springSEAWAYA.]2

Execution. 18-04-1994 J 18:28

STATISTICS Ol. BASIC MOTIONS FORWARD SPEED = G.OO knWAVE DIRECTION = +180 deg off stem

........�..SI.A........,...........�...., ....SICNIF]CANT VALUES OF BASICMOTK!NS ..................�,. MEAN ADDED. �.]NI'I 'T...C'ALC . ILATED...,SURGE....,..SWAY......HEA VE.......ROLL....,.PITCH.......YAik',... Rl SISTANC l

IIEICI IT I'LR ] Il:ICI IT I'Elk AMPL PER AMPL PER AMPL PER AMPL PERAMPL Pl I AMP]. I'L<] C!ER/13EU BOESE

0.400 0.218 0.4000.433 0.236 0.4330.467 0.254 0.4670,50G 0.272 0.5000.533 0.29] 05330.567 0.30<! 0.5670.600 0.327 0.6000.633 0.345 0.6330.667 0.363 0,6670.700 0.38] 0,7000.733 0,400 0.7330.767 0.4] 8 0.7670.800 0.436 0,8000.833 0.454 0.8330,867 0.472 0,8670.900 0,490 0.'! K!0.933 0.5O<! 0.<�30,967 0.527 0.'�7] 000 0.545 I.OOO].O33 0.563 ].0:3].067 0.581 I 0671.100 0.599 I. IOO1.133 0.618 1.133].]6, 0.636 ].167].2 III U.654 1.2<xi1.233 0.672 ].233].267 0.690 1.267].30 I 0.708 1.300].333 0,727 1.333I.367 0.745 1.367].40� 0.763 1.400]433 0.78] 1.4331.467 0,7'!'! 1.467],500 0.8]7 ].500],533 0,836 ].533].567 0.854 ].5671,600 0,872 ],6 ]01.633 0.8'� 1.633],667 0,908 ],6671.700 O.'6 ].700

0.994 90.10.980 90.20.967 90.10.954 90,20.940 90.30.926 90.40.911 90.50.896 90.60.88P 90.80.8@ 91.00.8+ 94.20.8+ 91.40;86!' 9'f.70.7' <!$.]0.7 k0.7+ 9:00.$2:]O.j!8 <! 20.674 < 8

0.<g,o 9- 60. 90. 9 40 9 50... ! < .7

IOLG0.5@ ]0!,30.4@ I

0.000 90.40.000 90.50.000 90.60.000 90.70.000 90.90.000 91.00.000 91.10.000 91.30.000 91.50,000 91.70.000 91.90.000 92.10.000 92.30.000 92.60.000 92.80.000 93.1P.GGG 93.40.000 93,7 ].000 94,1$.000 94,50.000 94.80.000 95.30.000 95.7O.OOO <>6.2O.OO I i�,70.000 97.2G,GGG '�,70.000 98.30.000 98.'!0,000 '!9.60.000 100.30,000 ]01.00.000 101.80.000 102.70.000 103.70.000 104.80.000 ]06.10.000 107.40.000 ] 09.00.000 110,9

1.007 359.81.0 IO 359.61.013 359.41.017 359.11.020 358,71,025 358.21.031 357.51,037 356.81.045 355.81.054 354.61.065 353.01.078 351.01.091 348.31.]05 344.61.112 339.7].]01 333.11.052 324.70.941 314.90.772 306,40.589 302.10.435 304.20.339 312.70.291 324.50.274 335.60,273 344.]0.275 349.90.277 353.90,277 356.60.275 358.60.270 0.10.263 1.20,255 2.10.245 2.90.233 3.50.221 4.00.208 4.50.]94 5,00.181 5.50.167 6.00.153 6.4

0.241 17720.277 176.40.314 175.40,353 174.40.393 173.30.435 171.90.479 170.40.525 168.50.573 166,40.625 163,70,682 160.50,745 156,60.817 151,70.899 145,30.991 137,21,085 126.51,162 113.01.190 96.51.136 79.31,022 63.40,889 49.80.773 39.40,684 31.30.620 25.00.575 20.10,549 16.50.534 13.70.530 11,70,533 10.3

0.542 9,30.557 8.60.574 8.10.594 7.90.617 7.70.641 7.70.665 7.70,691 7.80.716 7,90,741 8.10.766 8.3

107APPENDIX 4: CALCULATIONS OF OSCILL4TJNG MOTIONS

Execution: ]844-]994 / 18:28CALM bony wii]i springSEA%'AY-I. 12

FORWARD SPEED = 0.00 IcuWAVE DIRECTION ~ +]80 deg off stern

STATISTICS OF MOTIONS IN POINTS

POINT NR = GIX-APP = '! GOG mY-CL = 0.0GO mZ-BL = 4. X� m

SIGNIFICANT VALUESOF....... , ..........., ........ ...... � � .....

.........DISPLACFMENTS..��.�,...�..VELOCITIES............�........A CELERAl IONS ...��...

.....SEA�.. �,.X..., ....Y,....,Z....,...X.... ��Y........Z........X...,,...Y.....�,Z...,HEICiHT PL'R AM PL PER AM PL PER AMPL PER AMPL PER AMPL PER AMPLPFR AMPI. PER AMPL PER AMPL PER

m! s! in! s! m! s! m! s! m/s! s! m/s! s! m/s! s! m/s2! s! rn/s2! s! in/s2 ! s!

4.76 12.00 '2,25 13.G 0.00 12.8 2.39 12.5 1.13 10.8 0.00 10.5 1.26 10.5 0.30 7.540. X! 6.28 0.7'! 8.74

6.06 I3.GG 2.92 14.0 0.00 ]3.7 3.05 ]3.4 1.37 11.4 0.00 ]1.1 1.50 ]1.0 0.33 7.800. K! 6.2' 0.90 9.0l!

7,53 14.00 3.69 ]5,0 G.GG 14.7 3.79 14.3 1,62 12.1 0,00 ]1.7 1.75 11.6 0.38 8.24O.G ! 7.50 I, K! 9.25

8.84 15.G i 4.41 ]6.0 G.GG ]5.7 4,44 15.3 1.82 12.8 0,00 12.4 ],93 12.2 0,41 8.940.00 '!,02 1.06 '!,48

........ VERTICAL RELATIVE MOTIONS..........SIGNIFICANT VALUES OF...,EXCEEDING,

,.�.SEA.... DISPLACEMENT .VELOCITY.....Z-BL...HEIGHT PFR AMPL PER AM PL PER PROB NR/H

m! < s! m! s! m/s! s! %! I/h!4.76 12.0G 1,03 8.87 0.69 7,44 54.0 230.06.06 13.GG 1.18 9.20 0.76 7.50 62,5 258.47.53 ]4.00 1.33 9,52 0.82 7.55 69,0 277.08.84 I5. X! I.42 9.83 0.85 7.60 72.2 282.2

SALM u ut4,]2

SALM hoiiy 15.0 x 70.0 din'droit �.573x2].34!2 I,340 0, XX!G 4,57300 0.0763

m! s! kN!

4.76 12.007.89 2,3

6.06 13.008.]7 2.8

7.53 14.0G8.43 3.3

8.84 ]5.008,67 3.4

m! s! m! s! m! s! m! s! deg! s! deg! s! deg! s! kN!

4,75 12.16 2.]6 13.13 0,00 12.87 2.39 12.47 0.00 7.27 2,64 9.67 0007.9

6,05 13.14 2.82 14.12 0.00 13.84 3.05 13.39 0.00 7.56 3.17 10.39 0.0095

7.52 14.12 3,58 15.13 0,00 14,82 3.79 14.33 0.00 8.34 3.73 ] l. 1 I 0.00] 1.1

8.83 15,10 4.28 16.17 0,00 15.81 4.44 15.27 0.00 10.91 4.16 11.83 0.0011.8


0.152S 038]1 0.3811 1.1433 1.1433 0.3811 0.38110,]S2S

4 0.00.0 0.29S

21. 344 0.0

0.0 0.5021.34

4 0.00.0 0.63

2].344 O.O

QQ 08S21.34

0,0O,O 0. !Q

21.344 Q.Q

O.O ].]gS21. 34

0.00. ! O.vu

21.34Q.Q

0.0 0,8S21.34

Q.QO, ! 0.63

2].344 Q.O

Q. ! Q.SQ21.34

O.O0,0 0.2'! s

2],341.0 XX! ] .OOQQ

<! f file " '

4.12SALM hu l!

+]16.77

123456]

O.O]

18O.O".SQ !1.474

+3,00Q

N'I!h lp Jill/+1 0 +] 0

O.OOO O.OOO 304.878 ] .025E+001 6 +S

] 0.200 1.700 0.033333

+ S. S61 2.37 S 2.73S

100,15250.] S2S

1,00.000,5852,0

0,001.003.0

0.00].26S

4,0O.QQ

1.70SS.Q

O.OQ].986.0

O.OQ2.285

7,0O.QO1,'! 8

8,O0.0 !1.7 !S

9.0O.OQ

],265]0.00.000.981 ].QQ,OO

Q.S8S].OQOQ

"' E!!d

0.0 0.585 0.0 0,585 10.00

0.0 1.00 0.0 1.00 10.00

0.0 1.26S 0,0 1.265 10.00

Q.Q ].70s Q,O 1.705 10.00

0.0 1.98 0.0 1.98 10.00

0.0 2.28S 0.0 2,28S 10.00

0.0 ] .'! 8 0.0 1.'! 8 ]0,00

0.0 1,70S 0.0 ],7OS ]0.00

Q.Q 1.26S 0.0 ],26S 10.00

0,0 0.98 0.0 0.98 10.00

O.O O. S8S 0.0 O.S8S 10.00

APPEÃDJX 4: CALCULATlOJVS OF OSCILLATING MOT/ONS

35.000

0.00

4.0020.4

-I9.000

4+

4.766,067.53II R4

0"' End ot

61.2CG I GC.000

0.0 0.00.0 0.0

0.000 4.000

12.0013.0014 JGI ~.00

t<ie *

I.iver; IJ<»veracity <>I'Calit'<arnis, Berkeley, U.S,A.INPl. JT DATA

SALM h»ny wiU! capri«

PRINT-CODE INI'l.l I DATA,.........,... KPR�!: IPRINT-CODE GEOMETRIC DATA ......,... KPR�!:PRINT-CODE HYDRODYNAMIC COEFFICIENTS KPR�!: 0PRINT-CODE FREQlJENCY CHARACTERISTIC! KPR�!; IPRINT-CODE SPECTRAL DATA ........... KPR ~! 0

ACTI.JAL MIDSIIIP DRAFT ................ DRAFT: 16.770 mACTIJAI TRIM BY STERN ................, TRIM: 0.000 mDIJMMY VALIJE, FOR THE TIME BEING ...... DIST: 0.000

WATER DEPT!l ......,.�...DENSITY OF WATER ...

... DEPTH: 304.9 m

.��,.... RHO: 1,025 ton/m3

DFGRFES OF FREEDOM CODE,...�.��.. MOT; 1234%6VERSION-CODE OF STRIP THEORY METHOD ... KTH:NUMBER OF TERMS IN POTENTIAL SERIES .. MSER . '6CODE Ol. I.ISED 2-D APPROXIMATION �..... KCOF: 5NI.'MBER OF "FREE-CHOICE" SECTIONS ...... NFR: 0

¹¹¹¹¹¹¹¹¹¹¹¹¹¹¹¹¹¹¹¹¹¹¹¹¹¹¹¹¹¹¹¹ Progr»<r<: SEA'<'i AY 3ournee ¹¹

¹ STRIP I l Jl.DRY CAI CI.JLATJONS OF MOTIONS AND LOADS IN A SEAWAY ¹¹ ¹¹ Rele~i<. 4.12¹ 31-07- I <I<! 3 ! ¹¹¹¹¹¹¹¹¹¹¹¹¹¹¹¹¹¹¹¹¹¹¹¹¹¹¹¹¹¹¹¹

APPEND/X 4; CALCULATIONS OF OSC/LLATING MOTIONS 110

NUMBER OF FORWARD SPEEDS ....�,...,.... NV; IFORWARD SPEEDS kn! ...,............ VK NV!: 0.00

NUMBER OF WAVE DIRECTIONS ...........,. NWD: IWAVE DIRECTIONS deg off stem! WA VDIR NWD!: 180.0

WAVL Ah1PLITI JDL FOR LINEARISATION ... WAVAMP: 1.474 m

DPI JT DATA continued!

BASE LINE 'I'0 EN I'RL OF iRAVITY ... +GiKGM=KG: 3.000 m

MASS-GiYRADIIJS k-xx ...MASS-GYRADII.JS k-yy ...MASS-GYRADIJ.JS k-zz ...

.. �GiVR�!: 5.561 m��GYR�!: 2.375 m��GYR�!: 2.735 m

h'LJMBER OF L !AD-CALC'I.ELATION SECTIONS .. NBTM: 0

CODE OF ROLL DAMPING INPUT �,......... KRD: 3AVERAGE ROLL AMP[ JTI JDE, ........... ROLAMP: 5.000 degHEIGilIT OF BILGE KELL ........��..... HBK: 0.000 rnDISTANCL= OF A.P.P. TO AFT END B.K .. XBKA: 61.25 mDISTANCE OI A.P.P. TO FORWARD END B,K, XBKF: 105.00 m

CODE OF ANTI-ROLLING DEVICES ......... KARD: 0

NUMBER OF LINEAR SPRINGiS .....��,... NCAB: ICOORDINATES AND I INEAR SPRINC COEFFICIENTS: 4.000 0,000 0.000 2.040E+010.000E-01 0.000E.OI

NUMBER OF DISCRETL POINTS ...,........ NPTS: -ICOORDINATES OF POINTS m! .. PTSXYZ NPTS,3!: 9,00 0.00 4.00

NLJMBER OF SEA STATES .........,.�..., NSEA: 4CODE OF IRREGI JLAR SEA DESCRIPTION .... KSEA: 2WA VE HEIGHTS tn! HW K! / PERIODS s! PA' K!: 4.76 12.00

6.06 I3.007.53 14.008.84 15.00

INPI.JT-CODE OF CRITERA FOR SHIPMOTIONS KRIT: 0

SALM hu<iy v ith caprineSEAWAY'.12

Execution: 18-04-1994, 18:19

MAX. FREQ. OF ENCOUNTER IN SERIES, FREQMAX; 2.500 rad/sec ranIIe ~ 0.000 - 3.125tad/sec!

CODE FOR WAVE FREQUENCY INPUT ....,.. KOMEG: IMINIMUM CIRCULAR WA VE FREQEJENCY .... OMMIN: 0.200 rad/secMAXIMUM CIRCULAR WAVE FREQUENCY .��OMMAX: 1.700md/secINCREMENT IN WAVE FREQUENCIES ....... OMINC: 0.033 rad/sec

APPFÃDIX 4/ CALCULATIONS OF OSCILLATING NOTIONS

GEOMETRICAL HULLFORM DATA

ACTUAL MIDSHIP DRAFT T!,.ACTUAL TRIM BY STERN .......,.

16,770 m0,000 m

LENGTH BETWEEN PERPENDICULARS Lpp! ......: 4.573 mREAR SECTION TO A.P.P.....,..............; 0.076 m

WATERLINE: LENGTH Lwl! ��.............: 4.421 mBEAM B! .....................: 4.570 mAREA,...,.�.................: 16.2806 m2

A]&A COLITIC ]LNT Lpp! .�,...: 0.7790AREA COEFFJC]ENT Lwl!,......: 0.8058CENTROID TO A.P,P...,........: 2.133 rn -0,153 m or -3.35 % Lpp/2!CENTRO]l! ']'O REAR SECTION,..... 2.209 m -0,001 m or -0.02 % LwV2!

D] S PLACEMENT; VOLUME ...,...,.... �. �...: 273 m3]3LOC XCOEIT'ICIEVT Lpp! ....: 0.7790BLOCKCOEFFICIENT Lv']! ..: 0.8058CENTROID TO A.P.P.....��: 2.133 m 4.]53 m or -3.35 % Lpp/2!CENI ROID TO REAR SECTION .,: 2.209 m -0.001 m or -0.02 % LwV2!CENTROID TO WATERLINE ...,; 8.385 mCJ:.N']'R<r]I! I'O KEELI.lNE ��: 8.385 mMIDS] IIP SLCTJON COEFFICIENT .' 0.9976LONC, PRISMATIC COEFFICIENT: 0,7809VERT, PRISM AT] COEFFICIENT .' 1.0000RAT]0 Lpp/B,...,...,......: ].00]RAT]O Lv ]/B ..��.......: 0.967RATIO B/T .................; 0.273

WETTED SLIIWACE HI.JLL ....... '

STABILITY PARA%]EI LR.'i

KB ............: 8.386 inKG . ......... : 3,000 mBM-TRANSVERSE: 0.079 inGM-TRANSVERSE,; 5.464 mBM-LONG JTI IDINAL: 0.076 inGM-LONCr IT |I r]NAL: 5.462 m

SALM buoy v iih . prirrySEAWAYA.] 2

Execution: 18-04-1994, 18:19

SECTIONAL I J rLLFORM DATA

STATION X-APP J]AI.F HALF DRAFT AREA AREA KB BO WETTEDNI.IMBER CL-CL WIDTH COEFF LENGTH

-! rn! rn! rn! rn! 0n2! -! m! m! m!


0.585 16.7701.000 16.7701.265 16.7701.705 16.7701.980 ]6.7702.285 ]6.7701.980 16,7701.705 16.770],265 16.7700.980 16,770O. 85 16.770

1.0000 8.385 8.385 34.7081.0000 8.385 8.385 35.538].GGOO 8.385 8.385 36.0681.0000 8.385 8.385 36.9481.0000 8.385 8.385 37.4981.0000 8.385 8.385 38.]081.0000 8.385 8.385 37.4981.0000 8.385 8.385 36.9481.0000 8.385 8.385 36.068].0000 8.385 8.385 35.4981.0000 8,385 8.385 34.708

Execution: 18-04-1994 / 18:19SALM hu«y v it!} capri«pSEAWAY-],12

TWO-PARAMETER LEWIS CONFORMAL MAPPING COEFF]CIENTS

STA] lON X-APP IIALF DRAFT AREAHULLFORM REMARKS O'ITH REC<ARDN].t]<'l13ER WI I! ] l I COEFF

CONTOICMAL MAPPINC< ! Gn! <n! m! ! tn! !1,00 -0.076 G, 8 ]6.770 I. X�0 8.83482.00 0.076 ].000 16.770 1,0000 9 ]�83. X! 0.22<! ].26 16.770 1.0000 9,35]24.00 0,610 ],70 ]6.770 1, X}GG 9.6817 .OO 0,'!'>I ].<!80 16,770 ].GIN 9.88676. X! 2,] 34 2.285 ]6.770 I,NXN ]0.1]297.00 3.278 I.'!80 ]6.770 I.GOGO 9.88678.00 3.6 '! 1.70 ]6.770 I.OOGG '!.68] 79.00 4.040 1.265 16.770 1.00 !O <!.3�2I 0. X! 4.1' 0.<>80 16,770 ].MX!G 9.13�I ].00 4.34 0.585 16.770 ],0000 8.8348

M S! A -]! A�! A�! RMS

TO LEWIS

Execution: ]8-04-1994/18:19SALM bu«y will! springSEAV 'AY4.] 2

N-PARAMETFR CLOSE-FIT CONVORMAL MAPPING COEFF]CIENTS

A�! A�! A�! A 9! A�1! A�3! A�5! A�7!

-! -! -! -! -! -! -! -! I!-0.021] +0.0079 -0.000] -0.0030 +0,0000 +0.0000 +0.0000

-0.0371 +0.0]6'! -0,0074 +0.0006 +0.0000 +0.0000 +0.0000

-0.045<> +0.0208 -0.0093 +0.0014 i0.0000 +0.0000 +0.0000

-0.0 <>2 +0,0258 -O.G]GI +00009 +0,0000 +0.0000 +0.0000

STATION M S! h -I ! A�!A ]9! RMS

! }n! ! ! !I. X! +8.866] + I,O X� -0.'!]77

+0.0000 +0.0000 0.0822.00 +<!,2<!85 +],00 X! -0.86

+0.0000 +0,0000 0.0�3, X! +<!.5451 i],OOGG -0.8344

+0.0000 +0.0 X� 0.0444.00 +<! ' +]. Ni}0 -0.78�

+0.0000 +0.0000 0.0�

1.00 -0.076 0.0002.00 0.076 0.0003.00 0.229 0.0004.00 0,6� 0,0005.00 0.991 0.0006.00 2.134 0.0007.00 3.278 0.0008.00 3.6 <> 0.0009,GO 4.040 0.00010.00 4. ] 92 0.00011.00 4.34 0.000

19.620333,538942.426857.183966.407076.636566.407157.]83942.426832.868219.6203

! ! I!+ I.GOGO -0.9160 -0.0178+].0000 4.86]7 -0.0290+].0000 -0.8290 -0.0357+].0000 4.7780 -0.0459+1.0000 4.7480 -0.0518+].OGOO C.7]62 -0.0579+].0000 -0.7480 4.0518+1.0000 -0.7780 -0.0459+1.0000 -0.8290 -0.0357+ I.GOOG -0.8642 -0.0285+1.0000 -0,9160 -0,0178

0.106 BULBOUS0.171 BULBOUS0.208 BULBOUS0.281 BULBOUS0.297 BULBOUS0,339 BULBOUS0.297 BULBOUS0,281 BULBOUS0.208 BULBOUS0.167 BULBOUS0.106 BULBOUS

113APPENDIX 4: CALCULA7]OA'S OF OSCILLATING MOTJONS

Execution; 18-04-1994 / 18:19SALM huoy v'IU> sprit>gSEAWAY-4.12

NATURAL ROLL AND COEFFJCJEN IS AT F]XED AMPLITUDE

FORWARD Sl JIP SPEED . kn!: 0,00MEAN RO1.1. AMPI I I I IDE dog!: .00 !

NAT .tRAI ROLL PERJOD <! 4 7NATURAL FI&g rENCY . rj. !: 1,316

LINEAR EQUI VALENT GM m!: 5.461

MASS, k-phi-phi . >n!: .�1COMPOhTV'I'S k-phi-phi:

SOLID MASS PART .. m!: .5612-D POTENT]AL PART m!: 0,000

DAMPINCI, kappa .��. -!: 2,6400COMPONENTS kappa:

2-D POTENTIAL PART -!: 2.4314SPEED EFFECT PART -!: 0,0000SKIN FRJCT]ON PART -!: 0.000 EDDY MAKING PART . -!; 0.208]LIFT MOMENT PART, -!: 0.0000BILGE KEEL PART ., -!; 0,0000

NON!LINEAR DAMPING COEFFICIENTS:Kappa- 1,......... -!: 0.0003Kappa-2 ....�� -! . 2.3873

NATL>RAL IJLAYE A1 ZERO FORWARD SPEED

NATURAL I ]LAN'E PER JOB i!; 8.75

5.00 +10.1497+0.0000 +0,0000

6.00 +10.388 +0.0000 +0.0000

7.00 +10.]497+0.0000 +0,0000

8.00 +9,925 +0.0000 +0.0000

9,00 +9.��+0.0000 +0.00QO

10.00 +9,2796+0.0000 +0.0000

] ],00 +8.866]+0,00 >O + >. > > >0

+].00 X> -0.7571 -0.0665 +0.0276 0.0099 t0.0009 +0.0000 +0.0000 +0-00000.036

+1.0000 -0,7265 W.0738 +0.0296 -0.0091 %.0003 +0.0000 +0.0000 +0.00000 049

+1.0000 -0,7571 4.0665 +0.0276 4.0099 +0.0009 +0.0000 +0.0000 +0.00000,036

+1.0000 -0.7856 -0.0592 t0.0258 4.010] +0.0009 +0.0000 +0.0000 +0.00000.052

+1.0000 -0.8344 -0.0459 +0,0208 %.0093 +0.0014 +0.0000 +0.0000 +0.00000.044

+1.0000 -0.8680 -0.0364 +0.0166 -0.0072 +0.0006 +0.0000 +0,0000 +0.00000.0 I

+1,0000 -0.9177 -0.0211 +0.0079 -0,0001 4.0030 &.0000 +0.0000 +0.00000,082

APPENI! IX 4.' CALCUL/r<TlONS OF OSCILLATING MOTIONS 114

NATURAL FREQUENC Y r/s!: 0.718

NATURAL PITCH PERIOD s!: 2.694NATURAL FREQUENC Y r/s!; 2.332

SALM buoy with springSEA WAY4.1

Execution. 18-04-1994 / 18:19

FREQI.JENCY CI IARACTERISTICS OF BASIC MOT]ONS FORWARD SPEED = 0.00 I<nWAVE DIRECTION = +180 deg off sen

WAVE SQRT ENC ...SURGE......SWAY.......HEAVE......ROLL.......PITCH....�.YAW,... ADDED RESISTANCES

FREQ SL/%1. FREQ AMPL PHASE AMPL PHASEAMPL PI IASE AMPL PHASE CER/BEU BOESE r/s! -'! r/i! rn/rn! deg! m/m! deg! m/m! deg! deg/m

kN/m2! !.N/m2!0.200 O. 8 0.200 43.626 8.2 0. XX! 68.'! ].0]4 350.6

355.7 6.36E-O4 .4&L<+000.233 0,065 0.233 4,]]4 15].7 O.O $ 94.'! ],016 352.4

323.6 ].83E.O4 -2.34E.O]

0.267 0.073 0,267 ].628 91.4 G.GOO 85.3 1.012 0.3] 78.5 7.0]E-05 8.< E-020.300 0.082 0,300 1.135 ]11,4 0,000 91.6 1.018 0.2

359.5 ].6] E-04 -3.6OE-02

0.333 0.0<!I 0.333 ].357 96.6 G.OM! 89.2 ].026 358.5]60.1 3.6<!E-A -7.06E-02

0.367 G.]OO 0.367 ].] I3 ]00,9 0.000 '! I,O ].043 1.8]97.2 8,20E-O4 -2.68E-O20.400 0,]0'! 0.40 ! ],045 IGO.6 0.000 87.8 1.059 359.8]64.<! ],52E 03 5.38E 02

0.433 0.]18 0,433 0.928 98,0 0.000 87.0 1.085 359.7188.1 2,'! 7E-03 -1.20E-G I

0.467 0.]27 0,467 0.915 9].9 0.000 92.2 1.121 358.8171.] 5.4&E-03 -].03E-OI0.500 G.] 36 0.500 0.905 88.3 0,000 88.6 ].175 358,8

176.9 ].03E-02 -3.06E-O I

0,533 O.]45 0.533 0.89] 86.4 0.000 87.0 1.254 358.2]47.3 1.93E-02 -4.9OE-O I

0.567 0.]54 0,567 O.<6 79.0 0.000 86.0 1.376 357.615<!.9 3.65E-02 -<!.85E-01

0.600 0.]63 0.600 0.930 7".9 0.000 79.4 ].574 356.4]6 .2 7.44E-O2 -].45E+OG

0.633 O.]73 0.633 0.994 68.4 0.000 44,0 ].94G 354,5167,7 1.72E-OI -1.72E+UO

0.667 0.] 82 0.667 0,990 6!. I O.GGO 307.0 2.7&O 350.1]65.6 5,3]E-O I -'!.]OI=.-O]

NATURAL PITCH AT ZERO FORWARD SPEED

AMPL PHASE AMPL PHASE

! deg! deg/m! deg! deg/m! deg!

0.000 96,4 17.665 7.3 0.000

0.000 7.5 1.631 173.6 0.000

0.000 ]41.9 0.537 23.1 0.000

0.000 25.9 0,236 225.6 0.000

0.000 107.0 0.444 157.5 0,000

0.000 75.7 0.037 352.5 0.000

0.000 73.2 0,772 257,3 0.000

0.000 70.6 0.361 196.7 0.000

0,000 104.9 0.608 238.3 0.000

0.000 87.4 1.175 231.5 0.000

0.000 82.8 1.462 221.5 0.000

0.000 83.6 2.555 21&.4 0.000

0.000 78.0 3.404 210,5 0.000

0,000 39.4 4.537 212.0 0.000

0,000 300.0 5.278 205.7 0.000

APPENDIX 4: CALCULATIONS OF OSCILLATING hfOTIONS 115

0.700 0.19] 0,700 1.003 58.3] 60.2 3.84E+00 9.40E+000,733 0.200 0.733 1.072 54,8

160.5 5.34E+00 1.32E+PD0.767 0.209 0,767 1.108 50.9

157.2 7.87E-G] -8,17E+000.800 0.218 0.800 1.154 47.1154. I 3,0] E-01 .9.75E+000.833 0.227 0,833 1.187 45,7

151.9 1,57E.G I -1.05E+0]0.867 D.236 0.867 1.234 42.9149.0 9.62E-02 -1.16E+D10.9DD D.24S 0.9DD 1,290 4D.]146.4 6,4SE-P2 -1.29E+D I0.933 0.254 0.933 1.352 37.2

]44.2 4.S7E-02 -1,43E+P]0.967 D.263 D,'�7 1.4]3 34.3

143,2 3.4]E-D2 -1.58E+0 II.DDD 0.272 I,DDD 1.481 30,6

141.9 2. S9E-P2 -].76E+D]1,033 0.282 ].D33 I.S61 26,8

]4].2 2.02E-P2 -].97E+Dl1.067 0.2'! I ],067 ].646 22.]

141.6 ].68E-02 -2.2DI:+0 J].]DP D,3DP 1,100 ],736 ]6.7

142.2 1.38E-02 -2.47E+P I],133 0.3P'! ].]33 ].8]5 ]0.3

]43.5 ].]4E-D2 -2.75E+Pl1,]67 0.3]8 ].]67 ].874 2.9

] 45,3 9,43E-03 -3.0] E+D]1.200 0.327 ].200 1.9D1 3S4,5

]47.8 8.43E-P3 -3.2]E+01].233 0.336 ].233 ].868 315,6

]SP.S 6.73E-D3 -3.27E+01].267 0.34S 1.267 1.777 336,7

I S3.4 S.D2E-03 -3.]8E+0]1.300 D,354 1.3DD ].641 328.6

]S6,S 3.5]E-D3 -2.98E+G]1.333 0.363 ].333 1,486 32].S

9 4 2 &DE-03 -2.'72E+GI

1,367 0.372 1.367 ].323 315,9]62.2 1.84E-03 -2,44E+D1].400 0.381 ].4PP 1.17] 31].S

] 64.7 I.]3E-03 -2,20E+P I1,433 0.390 1,433 ].03S 308.4

]67,0 6. S2E-04 -2.DOE+0]1.467 0.4DD 1.467 0.920 306,1

169,0 S.29E-04 -].84E+0]].SDP D,40'! 1.50D 0.82P 3P4.7

170.8 3,0DE-P4 � ],71E+0 I].S33 0,4]8 ].S33 P.736 303.9

] 72.3 ].46E.D4 -].6]E+P I].S67 PA27 I.S67 D.666 303.6

] 73.S ].23]=-D4 -].53E+D1

O.OOG 310.5 6.185 332.0 O.OGO 287.5 6.055 202.6 0.000

0.000 49.0 6.017 214.8 0.000 282,8 7.115 204,1 0.000

O.GOO 80.0 1.906 193.1 0.000 281.9 7.963 202.9 0.000

0.000 85.7 0.969 188.4 0.000 281.3 8.867 202.1 0.000

0.000 87.4 0.573 186.4 0.000 282,6 9.430 203.8 0.000

0.000 88.7 0.363 185.4 0.000 282.9 10.255 203.8 0.000

0,00D 89.4 0,235 ]84.8 0.000 283.6 11.159 2G3.9 0.000

O.OOD 89.7 0,152 184.5 0,000 285.1 12.137 203.9 0.000

D.DOD 89.8 0.095 184,6 0.000 287.8 13.120 203.6 G.ODG

0.00D 90.0 O.OS5 18S.2 0,000 290.6 14.234 202.6 0.000

0.000 90.2 0.026 ] 87.2 0.000 294.2 15.502 201.4 0.000

P.PDD 90.2 G.GDS 205. } 0.00P 299.2 16,891 199.2 0.000

P.DOO 90.3 0.011 352.1 0.000 305.0 18.396 196.4 0.000

D.DDD 90.3 0.022 357.4 0.000 312.2 19.868 192.5 0.000

0.000 9D.4 0.030 35$.8 O.GOG 320.6 21.206 187.5 0.000

O.DDP 90,4 0.03S 3S9,3 0.000 329.8 22.239 181,4 0.000

O.GDP 90.4 0.039 3S9.6 0,000 339.0 22.623 17450.000

0.000 90,4 0.042 359.7 0.000 347.4 22.304 168,2 0.000

0.000 90.4 0,043 3S9.8 O,GDG 354.7 21.363 162,2 0.000

0.000 90.3 0.044 359.9 0.000 0.3 20.081 157.2 0.000

G.DDD 90,2 0.044 359.9 0.000 4.7 18.594 153.6 0.000

D.GDD 90.1 0.044 360.0 0.000 7.9 17.132 151.2 0.000

P.ODD 90,0 0.043 360.0 0.000 10.1 l5.795 149.& 0.000

0.000 89.8 0.042 360.0 0.000 11.2 14.641 149.3 0.000

D.POP &'!.7 0.04] 360.0 0.000 11.8 13.641 149,5 0.000

0.000 &9.4 0.040 360.0 0.000 11.9 12.802 150,3 0.000

D.PPD &9.2 0.039 360.0 0,000 11.2 12.]09 151.3 0.000


].600 0.436 ].600 0.60! 303.6 0.000 88.9 0.038 360.0174.6 6.38E-G! -1.46E+O]1,633 0.44! 1.633 0.5S4 304,0 0,000 88.6 0.036 360.0

175.6 2.13E-P! -1,4]E+0 I1.667 0.454 ].667 O.S]1 304.6 0.000 88.3 0.035 360.0

176.4 4.48E-06 -1.37E+011.700 0.463 1.700 0.474 305.2 0.000 88.0 0.033 360.0

177.0 -7.06E-G6 -1.33E+01

11.537 152.7 0.000

11.074 154,3 0,000

10.701 155.9 0.000

10.408 157.5 0.000

0.000 102

0.000 8.9

0.000 7.3

0.000 5.2

Execution: 18-04-1994 / 18:19SALM huny uith springSEAWAY4.]2

FREQ IEYC'Y C'l<ARACTERISTI S OF MOTIONS POINTS FORWARD SPEED 0.00 knWAVE DIRECTION = +180 deg off stern

POIYT YR = 0]X.APP = 9.000 rnY-CL = O,NK! mZ-]1L = 4.000 jn

Ll.!TE MOTIONX..........Y..�,PL PHASEin/m! deg! m/t.2 0.000 9,!.9 0.000 94.3I O.GGG ]40.7,6 0.000 49.].9 0,000 96,1.9 0,000 96,4,9 0,000 96.2

.4 0.000 92.8

.2 0,000 102.6

.I 0.000 95.S,6 P,GQP 92.3,8 0.000 94.6,S P,POP 84,]

0.000 47.6.6 0,000 303.0.2 0.000 ]94.!

0.000 ] 25.3.7 0.000 118.s.7 0.000 116.0. I G.ppo 114.].0 0.000 I ] 3,0.9 0.000 I I 2.].6 0.000 111.2.3 0.000 1]0.6,3 0.000 I I G.o

0,000 1 $.6,7 0.000 I 0!.!.8 O,ooo 1 s.s.8 0,000 ]09.8.8 0.000 I ]0,4

...�...,ABSOTC

Q AM! deg! 3.'l>34 8

4. I-'I ]S]].e32 t!I],]34 ] IIl.361 '>6I. I ]3 ]00].033 I GG0.'7 98O.'�7 920.888 890,874 8708'� 800,887 7S0.931 7]0.9]8 660,919 62O.'�7 s80.988 S4I.O]6 so1,036 491,067 46],]04421.147 39I.]89 Re].23S 32].292 27].3S]I.4]! I6].468 9].SOS I

WAVE SQRT EibFREQ SL/WL FRE

r/s! -! r/s! Jn/in0.20P 0,0!8 0.200 40.233 0,06S 0.2330.267 0.073 0.2670.300 0,082 0.3000,333 0.09] 0 3330,367 0,]00 0 3670.400 0.]P! 04OP0.433 0,] 18 0.4330.467 O.]27 0,467G.spp G.]36 G.!000 533 G,]4! P,!33O.S67 0.]!4 0,!67O.eop O.] e3 0,6OO0,633 0.173 0.6330.667 0.182 0.6670.700 0,]9] 0.7000.733 0.200 0,7330.767 0,20'! 0.767O,8OO o.2 I8 o,gop0.833 0.227 0.8330.867 0.236 0.8670.90G 0245 0,9000,933 0.2!4 0.933O.'�7 0,263 0.'�7].000 0.272 ].GN!].033 0,282 ].033].067 0.29] ].067].100 0.300 ].]0 !I. I 33 0.30'! I.]33].]67 0.3]8 l.! 67

S ........... .,REL MOT,......Z,.�......Z.�..

AMPL PHASE AMPL PHASE AMPL PHASEn! deg! m/m! deg!

].182 20].5 2,150 12.S1,211 3S2.6 0,282 135.90.9!3 3S8.8 0.08! 57.0],038 1.3 0.057 135.0

1.076 357.5 0.147 122.11,039 1.9 0.074 125.2].082 4,6 0.089 ]63.71.126 0.3 0,184 137.21.]S9 ].9 0.205 146.31.266 3.8 0.292 162.21.387 3.2 0.422 163.31.620 4.7 0.646 17],91.926 3.2 0.965 17].62,394 2.S 1.442 173,03.315 356.5 2.411 167.86.670 336.9 5.975 150 35.182 2]6.5 6.153 34,10.979 183.6 1.949 13.70.259 84,2 0.893 11.30.608 40.1 0,426 10.20.892 31.2 0.]09 21.01,118 27.9 0.146 174.21.312 26.1 0.359 180.71.483 24.8 0.553 18].51.6S4 23.2 0,755 180.61.833 2].6 0.971 179.72.0]9 19.2 1.209 177.62,2]4 16.3 1.469 ]75,02.402 ]2.4 1.745 171,12.S7] 7.4 2,029 ]66.2

l]7APPENDIX 4. CALCULATlONS OF QSClLLATlNG hfOT/ONS

SALM huoy e i I> .springSEA%'AY-4,12

Execution: 18-04-1994 / 18:19

STA'I ISTIC 8 OF BASK' MOTIONS FORWARD SPEED = 0.00 kn7 'AVE DIRECTION = +180 deg off stern

....,.....�SLA...........:...............,...SIGNIFICANT VALUES OF BASICMOTIONS....,................ MEAN ADDED�., I NP I. I'I ....C'A LCl! LATED.... SURGE...,... S WA Y......HEA VE,......ROLL......PITCH�,....YAii'.... RESISTANCE

HEIGHT PER HEIGHT PER AMPL PER AMPL PER AMPL PER AMPL PERAKI PL PER AM PL PER GER/BE I BOESE

m! s! m! s! m! s! m! s! m! s! deg! s! ]eg! s! deg! s! kN! kN!

4.76 12.0 ! 4.75 l2.16 2,51 ]1.75 Q.QQ 11.48 4.15 ]0,]l O.QO 9.91 10.90 6,46 0.0013.14 0 7 -4,3

6.06 13.00 6. I 3.14 3,32 ]3.24 0,00 12,04 4.85 10.57 0,00 9.93 I ].96 6.51 0.0017.12 0 8 -5.2

7.53 14.QO 7,52 14.12 4,58 15,%9 Q.QQ 12.68 5.60 11,12 0.00 9.97 12.94 6.56 0.00]9,6<! 1.0 -6.1

8,84 ]5.QQ 8.83 ]5.]0 7.43 20,69 0.00 13.41 6,]8 I ].74 0.00 10.02 13.49 6.71 0.0021.17 1.0 -6.5

SALM huov with spl'iiigSEAWAY-4.12

Execution: 18-04-1994 / 18:19

STATISTIC'S OF MOTIONS IN POINTS FORWARD SPEED = 0.00 knWAVE DIRECTION = +] 80 deg off stern

POINT NR = QlX-APP = '!,QQQ mY-CL = O.QOO inZ-BL = 4.OQO m

....SIGNIFICAV1' VALUESOF

1,200 0,327 1.2001.233 0.336 1.2331.267 0.345 1,2671.300 0,354 1.3001.333 0.363 1.3331,367 0,372 1.3671.400 0,381 1.4001.433 0.390 1.4331.467 0.400 1.467].500 0.409 1.5001.533 0.418 ].5331.567 0,427 ].5671.600 0.436 1.6001,633 0.445 1,633],667 0.454 1.6671.700 0.463 1.700

1.516 352.7].479 343.11.398 333.61.282 324,71.152 316.81.019 310.30.895 305.10,785 301.00.693 297.70.613 295.30.545 293.50,489 291.90.440 290.80.400 28'!.90.365 289.20.335 288,3

0.000 111.20.000 112.20.000 113.50.000 ] 14.90.000 116.40.000 118.10,000 119.80.000 121.60.000 123.50.000 ] 25.30,000 127.10.000 128.90,000 130.60.000 132.3Q.QQQ ]33.9Q.QQQ ]3%.4

2,701 1.42.750 354.92.714 348,32,602 342.52.447 337.62.268 334.12.092 331.71.931 330.51.791 330.01.671 330.21.569 331.01.485 332.01.416 333.41.360 334.91.314 336.51.278 338.1

2303 160.22.518 153.62.656 146.92.710 140.92.703 135.92.646 132.32.568 129.92.484 128.52.408 128.12.337 128.52.278 129.52.230 ]30.92.191 132.72.162 134.92.141 137.22.129 139.7

1!8APPENDIX 4: CALCULATIONS OF OSCILLATING AIOTIONS

..... �...D IS PLACEMENJ'S ........., ........... VELOCITIES ....................ACCELERATIONS .. �,....

.....SEA.... �..X.... �,.Y.....,.,Z.......3 ........Y.......Z........X......,.Y""HEIGHT PER AMPL PER AMPL PER AMPL PER AMPL PER AMPL PER AMPLPER AMPL PER AMPL PER AMPL PER

{m! {s! m! s! m! {s! m! s! m/s! s! m/s! s! m/s! s! m/s2! s! m/s2! s! m/s2! {s!4.76 12.00 2,42 12,3 0.00 ] 1.7 4.43 9,80 1.33 8.91 0,00 10.4 2.94 8,48 1,10 7.13

0.00 9.26 2,28 7.03

6,06 13.00 3.24 13.8 0,00 12.5 S.I6 10.2 !.59 9,69 0.00 �.7 3,30 8.65 1.23 7.320.00 9.29 2.51 7.11

7.53 14,00 4,51 16.2 0,00 ! 3.S S.94 10.8 1.92 ! 0.8 0.00 ! 1.2 3.65 8.82 !,37 7,650.00 9,33 2.73 7,]7

8.84 ] s. x! 7.4] 21,2 0.00 14.7 6.s2 1].4 2.39 13.1 0.00 .7 3.83 9.01 1.55 8.750.00 9.38 2.82 7.22

........ VERTICAL RELATIVE MOTIONS.........,h] iNIFICANT VAL !ES OF....EXCEEDING.

�...SEA.. DI Si I ACEMENT .VELOCITY.....Z-BL...HLIGH'I I'LR AMPL PFR AM PL PER PROB NR/H

m! i! m! i! m/x! i! 9 ! ]/h!4.76 ]2.00 3,40 8.s6 I s,86 8.61 0.0 0.0e.oe ]3.00 3.77 8.58 17,sl 8.6] 0.0 0,07.53 ]4. K> 4.0'> 8 6! 18.98 8.62 0.0 0.08.84 ] c.0 ! 4.24 g.ee I i>. cf 8.62 Q.Q 0.0

2.1840 ]6.4590 3,9310 17.678 5.359

1.6370 16 4S90 S.4120 17.0000 S.9980

4.2540 17.0690 7.6070 17.S000 &.0490

1.0840 14.6300 5.7S30 15.8500 7.52209.3180 18.0790 9.7220

s.]820 ]4.6300 7.2260 Is.8500 8.928010.6750 18.07<JQ ]1.0710

o,]840 I !.3630 0.8830 10,9730 1.98106.7]20 I S.2400 9.5060 16.4S90 11.0]40

4,]2Sar> Diei'<>

] 8.07'�26

3.A8! 0.66827.4323.023

2-6.70613.970I 8.079-3.65813.206018.0790-0.61012.407018,0790

Q.SQ1].626017,0690

].00] 0.9480]7,06'�

2.00ii. C930I 1.582 !

c ;>ii T;»i],er. 278.89 x 50,6 x 23.77 meter. Hu]i-draft =? meter,Q. xx! ! 27! ,8920 6.7060

3.048 ! 3. A8 3,048 3.048 3,6S8 5.944 6.096]0.6680 13.7]6 ]3.716 ]3.7]6 13.716 27.432 27.43227.432 ! ] 3,716 13.716 ]1,43 11.43 6.4 6.0962.921 !

4 0,0000Q. K�0 I S,24005.6980

4 0 0000Q.Q X� ]4.02107. ] 670

4 0.00000, x!oo ]4.63Oo8.6420

6 O, KXa0.0000 ]2.19209,0170 ]7,sooo

6 Q.Q !OOO, KX� ]3.4110]0.3790 17.50 X!

8 0.00%!<!.0 KK! 9.75403.229 ! 13,4 I ]0

APPENI>IX 4: CALCULATIONS OF OSCILLATING MOTIONS

18.07903.00

0.00003.658010.363018.0790

4.000.00001.2]907 92SO17.0690

5.000,00001.2!907.< CO] 6,4«�

6,000,0000].2!<>0

�0 107.00

0.00001,2 l<>0

] !,SR208.00

0.0000].8290

]0,3630'! Ki

0.0000!,21<�7.3! S0�.00

0.0 80!.2]'�4.2670I ].00

0.00001.21<�

] 8.079012,00

0.0000! .2190

l8.0790I 3,00

0.0000!.2190

! 8,07<�I 4.00

0. XXX j].2]90

! 8.07<�I S.OO

0, KKKl

12.700012 0,0000

0.0000 0.3050 0. ] 830 0,6100 0,3140 2.4380 G.99101.30 SO 7,9250 1.8670 9.1440 2.3050 9.7540 2.73003.37SO 15.2400 .]060 16.4590 12.5320 ]7.6780 13.7890]4.1270

14 0.00000.0000 0.0000 1,2]90 0.3050 2.0420 0.6100 2.70803.2070 1.8290 3.5590 3.0480 4.0610 6.7060 5.02605.4390 9,1440 6.1020 ! 0.3630 7.1750 15.2400 13.5950]S.4560 17.S000 15.8210 18.0790 16.3110

! 4 0.00000.0000 0.0000 3,3530 0.30SO 4,4200 0.6100 5,19! 0S.83<� ].82<� 6.2860 3.0480 6.9 80 6,7060 8.29308.9060 9.]440 9.7!SO ! 0.3630 10.7890 �,0210 14.808017.]230 �.0000 17.5320 18.0790 18.3480

I 0 0.00000.0000 0.0000 7.3] SO 0.30SO 8.7780 0.6! 00 9.5030]0.2460 !.82<� l0.7630 3.6SRO ! 1,9000 6.0960 13.3! 9019.0310 ]7.6780 2!.2]SO ]8.0790 21.3930

10 0.00000.0000 0,0000 ] ].2780 0.30SO 12.8020 0,6]00 13.5860�.3830 1.8290 14,'!800 6.7060 18.4210 9.1440 19.81802].0690 ]64S<� 23.01'� ]8.0790 23.S240

10 0. KK�0.0000 0.0000 ]6.4S'� 0.3050 17,6780 0.6100 ! 8.3450]'>.8020 4,2670 2].6 K� S,4860 22.2470 7.9250 23. 8023.7870 �.40 24,36SO ]8.0790 24.7740

] 0 0.00000,0000 0.0000 20.2390 0.30SO 2].4580 0.6�0 22.]330

2Z.RJ30 2 4380 23.7680 3.6580 24.30SO 4.8770 24.64402s, K�0 10.3630 25.]940 IR.0790 25.2880

]0 0.00000.0000 0.0000 222S00 0,3050 23.4090 0.6100 24.1710

24.6890 ],8290 24.97RO 2.4380 25.]460 3,0480 25.238025.2980 .0000 25.2980 18.0790 25.2<980

8 0. XSO0.0000 0.0000 22.8600 0.3050 23.83SO 0.6100 24.4730

24.'�� !.82'>0 25.2220 2.4380 2S.2980 10.0000 25.29802S.2980

8 0.00000,0000 0,0000 22.8600 0,30SO 23.83SO 0.6100 24.4730

24.'�10 I.R2'� 2S.2220 2.4380 25.2980 10.0000 25.298025,2<!80

8 0.0000

0,0000 0. NN 22.8600 0.3050 23.8350 0.6100 24.473024.97! 0 1.82<� 2S,2220 2.4380 25.2980 10,0000 25.298025,2<!RO

0.00000. XK� 0.00$! 22.86 j0 0.3050 23.8350 0.6100 24.4730

24.'�] 0 1.82'� 2S,2220 2.4380 25.2980 ! O,ONN 25.298025.2980

8 0, KK�0. KKK! 0.0�0 22.2500 0.3050 23.5920 0.6100 24.4760

120APPED!IX 4: CALCULATIO VS OF OSCILLATING I>fOTIONS

].]490 18.0790 3.1020

Sa 'e n u

4,]2

San Diego c]ass tanker t'uI] ]oat]> motions with spring+] +1 0 +] 0

18.290 0.000 0.00 > 304.878 ].025E+001234»6 ] 6 +» 0

1

0.0l

]80.0

2. »00 ] 0,2OO 1.700 0.033333] .474

+]6.800 +20.98] 6'!,7»0 6'!.7»003

».000

1.2190 24.9710 1,829018.0790 2S.2980

16.00 10 0.00000.0000 0.0000 0,00001,2] 90 24.6480 1.82908.0000 2».29»0 14.000017.00 10 0.0000

0,0000 0.0000 0.00001.2]90 23,2120 1.82905.4860 24.9020 12.000018.00 l 0 0.0000

0.0000 0.0000 0.00001.2]90 20.3490 1.8290».4860 22.8H90 7,92»19.00 10 0,0000

O.OOOO 0.0000 O.OOR>].2 l90 14 8720 2.43807.3]50 18 88»0 ]0,3630] '!.50 12 0.0000

0.0000 0.0 K>0 0.00001,»90 ]0.3440 1.8290» 4860 l4.20»0 7,'»018.07'� ]».9090

] '!.6O ] 0 0.00000.30»0 0.0000 0.6]002,4380 6.5630 3.65807.3]»0 9.6 >-t0 8,5340] 9,70 ] 2 0.0000

].6760 0,000 > ],82'! 03.658 4.�20 4.26706.0'�0 6,0230 7,3] 50] 8.0790 6,6020

1'!,80 2 0.000017,0]20 0,0000 ]7.»000].0 > >0 ]. > > > l ].0000' En<1 of ii]e '

2».2220 2.4380 25.2980 10.0000 25.2980

2].3360 03050 23.4700 0.6100 24.079024 9<940 2.4380 25.2030 3.0480 25,29502S.29SO 18.0790 25.2950

20.4220 0,30SO 21 7930 0.6100 22,431023.7390 3.0480 24.4090 4.2670 24.76802».O]10 18.0790 25.1130

16.1»40 0.3050 18.2880 0.6100 19.307021.0720 3,0480 22.0220 4.2670 22.56»023.17]0 ]8.0790 23,6970

'!.4490 0,30»0 11.8870 0.6100 13.672016.3<�0 3.6»80 17,4150 4.8770 18.10]0]'!.3830 ]8.0790 19,6440

»,]820 0.30»0 7.4680 0.6100 8.9410]1.2840 %,0480 12.7]90 4.2670 13.5190]5.0»30 10,3630 1»,4810 14,0000 15,6830

2.<9430 1.2]<� 4.»6'� 1.8290 5.70207,7600 4.8770 8.5880 6,0960 9.19SO9.8.»20 ]8.07'� 10,3970

2.02'� 2.4380 3.2320 3.0480 4.0290».]3]0 4.8770 5.»090 S,4860 5.80106,30'� 8.»340 6.38SO 12.0000 6.4640

APPEhY>IX 4: CALCULATIOIt/S OF OSCILLATIItIG MOTIONS

0.0 61.2sO I OC.OOO01

278.00 0.0 0.0I 1.66 0.0 0.0

-I

278.000 0.000 10.0004+2

4.76 12.006,06 13.007.53 14,008.84 15,00

0~'" Ettd ol tile "~'

User; 1.'ttiveriit! of Californi t, Berkeley>, U.S.A.INPUT DATA

San Diego @tais t;toker full load! motions v ith spring

PRINT-CODE INPl.lT DATA,............. KPR�!:PRIh'T-CODE GEOhiLTRIC DATA ...,...... KPR�!; IPRINT-CODE H YDRODYNAMIC COEFFICIENTS KPR�!: 0PRINT-CODE FREQUENCY CHARACTERISTICS KPR�!: IPRINT-CODE SPECTRAL DATA ........... KPR�!: 0

ACTUAL MIDSI IIP DRAFT .��.......... DRAFf: 18.290 mACTUAL TRIM 13Y STERN ................. TRIM: 0.000 mDUMMY VALUE, FOR THE TIME BEINCi,...�DIST: 0.000

WATER DEPTH,.�,........DENSITY OF WATER ...

�, DEPTH: 304.9 m.�....... RHO: 1.02S ton/m3

DEGREES OF FREEDOM CODE ............... MOT: 123486VERSION-CODE OF STRIP THEORY METHOD ... KTH: INUMBER OF TEIMS IN POTENTIAL SERIES ., MSER: 6CODE OF USI='D 2-D APPROXIMATION ....... KC'OF: 5NUMBER OF "FREE-CHOIC'E" SEC'TIONS ..�.. NFR; 0

M.:h1BER Ol: I. !l WARD SPEEDS ..��......... NV: I

¹¹¹¹¹¹¹¹¹¹¹¹¹¹¹¹¹¹¹¹¹¹¹¹¹¹¹¹¹¹¹¹ Pro gr;ttn: SEAWAY Jottrnee ¹

¹¹ STRIPTIIEORY C ALCI.JLATIONS OF MOTlONS AND LOADS IN A SEAWAY ¹

¹Re le,'tse 4.12�1-07-1993! ¹

¹¹¹¹¹¹¹¹¹¹¹¹¹¹¹¹¹¹¹¹¹¹¹¹¹¹¹¹¹¹¹

122APPENDIX 4: CALCULA7'IOUS OF OSC/LLATING &0170/</$

FORWARD SPEEDS kn! ... ... VK NV!; 0.00

NLJMBER OF WAVE DIRECTIONS �,.......... NWD: 1WA VE DIRECTIONS deg off stern! WA VDIR NWD!: 180.0

WA VE AMPLITl JDE FOR LINEARISATION ... WAVAMP: 1.474 m

INPI.JT DATA «: continue<I!

BASE LINE TO CENTI& OF GRAVITY .�+GKGM=KG: 16.800 m

MASS-GYRADIUS k,-xx ...MASS-GYRADI JS k-yy .�MASS-GYRADJi.JS k-zz ....

..... GYR�!; 20.981 m

...., CiYR�!: 6<!,750 m

.�, GYR�!: 69.7CO m

M.JMBER Ol LOAD-CALC JLATION SECTIONS .. NBA: 0

CODE OF ROLL DAMPJNG INPLJT ............ KRD: 3AVERAGF R !LL AMPLITUDE .....�,..... ROLAMP: C.000 degHEIGHT OF BILGE KEEL ................�HBK: 0.000 mDlSTANCE OF A.P.P. TO AFI END B.K,, XBKA: 61.25 mDISTANCE OF A.P.P. TO FORWARD END B.K. XBKF: 105.00 m

CODE OI= ANl I-ROLLING DI'VICES �....... KARD: 0

M JM DER OF LINEAR SPRINGS ...,.�.�... NCAB: ICOORDI4ATI=S AND LINEAR SPRINC COEFFICIENTS:278.000 0,000 0.000 1.166E+010.000L<- J I 0. � !L'-0!

NUMBER Ol= DJSCREI'E POINTS .��....... NPTS: -ICOORDINATES OF POINTS m! .. PTSXYZ NPTS,3!: 278.00 0.00 10.00

NUMBER OF SEA STATES .....,........... NSEA; 4CODE OF IRREGULAR SEA DESCRIPTION .�. KSEA: 2WA VE IIEIGI ITS m! HW K! / PERIODS s! TW K!: 4.76 12.00

6.06 13.007.S3 14.008,84 15.00

INPUT JT-CODE OI CR I' ll. R A FOR SHIPMOTIONS KRIT: G

Exectttion; 18-04-1994, 18:44San Dieg«ok<is t<utker tn<~ i<u<s blitt> springSEAWAY-4.12

GI:- !METRI AL Ill JLLFOIV] DATA

MAX. FREQ. OF ENCOI.JVIKR IN SERIES . FREQMAX: 2.500 rad/sec range ~ 0.000 - 3.125rad/sec!

CODE FOR WAVE FREQUENCY INPUT ......, KOMEG: 1MINIMUM CIRCULAR WAVE FREQUENCY ..... OMMIN: 0.2GO rad/secMAXIMUM CIRCULAR WAVE FREQUENCY ..... OMMAX: 1.700 rad/secINCREMENT JN WAVE FREQI.JENCIES ....... OMINC: 0.033 rad/sec

123APPEh'D/X 4: CALCULATlONS OF OSCJLLATING MOTlO/i/S

AC'.TUAL MIDSHIP DRAFT T! ....ACTI.JAL TRIM BY STERN �,......,

18.290 m0.000 m

LENGTH BETWEEN PERPENDICULARS Lpp! ......: 278.892 mREAR SECTION TO A.P.P................. �: 6.706 m

WATERLINE: LENCiTH Lwl! .�............,.: 285.598 mBEAM B! �...,........,......: 50.596 mAREA ...�,............,...�.: 12909 m2

AREA COEFFICIENT Lpp! .......: 0.9148AREA COEFFICIENT Lwl! .......: 0.8934CENTROID TO A.P,P. �.......... 139.862 m +0.416 m or +0.15 % Lpp/2!C'.EN I'ROID TO REAR SECTION ....,: 146.568 m +3,769 m or+1,32 % LwV2!

DISPLACEhIENT: VOLUME ....��,...........: 217682 m3BLOCK OEFFICIENT Lpp! ....: 0,8434BLOCKCOI.JTICIENT Lv I! ....: 0.8236C L'N I ROID TO A,P,P.........: 147.407 m +7.961 m or+2.85 % Lpp/2!C ENl ROID TO REAR SECTION ..; 154.113 m +11.314 m or +3.96 % LwV2!C I'.N I'ROID 10 WATERLINE .�..: 8.870 mC'ENTROID TO KEELLINE ......; 9.420 mhIIr!SI IIP SECTION C'OEFFIC.iEm: 0.9970LONC!. PRISMAllC C'OLFFICIENT: 0.84S9VERl, PRISMA'1'lC' COEFFIC'IENT: 0.9220RATIO Lpp/B ............�.: S.S12RA I IO Lwi/II,....,..: 5,645RAI'IO B/I,.�, ..; 2.766

WET1T:D Sl >RFAC'E HI.ILL .......:

STAI3II ITY PARAMETI=RS

K B .......,....: <!.420 inKG .......,..... I6,800 mBM-TRANSVERSE .: 11.366 mGM-TRANSVERSE .: 3.986 mBM-LONGITltDINAL . 3?4.977 mGM-LONGIT IDINAL: 327.S97 in

Saii Diego clnii i.'utker inoiioni v,'iih springSEAWAY-4.12

Execution: 18-04-1994, ]8;44

SEC'TIONAL HI.ILLFORM DATA

STATION X-APP HALF HALF DRAFT AREA AREA KB BO WETTEDNI.IMBER C'L-C'L WIDTll COEFF LENGTH

-! m! m! m! m! m2! -! m! m! m!-6.71 .6.706 0. KK! S.876 4.?20 28.6977 O,S6S2 16.777 I.S13 14.683-3.66 -3.6S8 0 000 7,396 5.084 42.6789 0.5676 I 6,448 1.842 18.054

124AVVLNDIX 4: CALCULATIONS OF OSCILLATING MOTIONS

San Die~»<r c]nii n<rlker m<r<i<r<ri v.'iU> springSEA%'A Y-4.]2

Execution: 18-04-1994 I ] 8:44

T%'0-PARA%I LTER LEWIS NONFORMAL MAPPING COEFFIC]ENTS

STATION X-APP HALF DRAFT AREA M S! A -I ! A I! A�! RMSHN LFORM IWI<IARKS WITH R];GARD

I I'vf HER '4'! DTI I C'OEFF TO LEWISCONFORh< AL M AI'Pl NG

-! <n! m! m! -! m! -! -! -! m!-6.71 -6.706 S.876 4.320 0.56S2 4.4761 +1.0000 +0.1739 +0.1390 0.100

CON VENTIONA].

.3.66 .3,6S8 7.3<� S.P84 P.S676 S.4934 +1,0000 +0,2104 +0.1359 0.121CON VEh'T]ONAL

-0.61 -0.610 8.8SS S,883 P,s706 6.SOS4 +].0000 +0.2287 +0.1330 0.136CON VENT]ONE

O.SP 2.438 9.86<! 6,664 O.S839 7 3483 +].0000 +0,218] +0,1250 0.222CON VENTIUNAL

1.00 S.486 1].2]S 7.342 P,S966 8.3125 +1.0000 +0.2330 +0.1162 0.187CONVEN I'IONAL

2.00 8,S34 ]2.'0 8.6'� 0 S466 9.4092 +1.0000 +0.2244 +0,1487 0.3S6A!NSZNTIONAI

3.PP ]Z.]' ]4.30S ]8 290 0,3463 12.7238 +1.0000 -0,1S66 +0.2809 0.660R].1 N IRAN'I m:0,3S<! I

4.00 ]8. I 36 ! 6.4<! ! ]8.2'� 0.4820 ]4.S]49 +],0000 -0,0620 +0.]9&1 0.746GOX VrN-I lux,a

-0.6] -0.610G,SP 2,4381.00 5.4862 00 8 S343.00 12,1'4.00 18.1365.00 24.2326.00 34.9007.00 4S, S688.00 59.2849.00 73.00010.00 86.716]1.00 100.432]2.00 ]27.864]3.0 ! ] 5S.2<�]4.00 182.728]S.OP 210.]60]6.00 223.876]7.00 237.S<18.00 24<!,022]<!,00 260.4S219.SP 266.8S2]9.6P 272,'�8]9.70 27 S.<! 7]]<!,80 278,Y'

0.000 8.&S8 5.883 59,4725 0.5706 16.194 2.096 21,4050,000 9.869 6.664 76.8099 0.5839 16.066 2.224 24.1160,000 11.215 7.342 98,2492 0.596615.664 2.626 27,1840.000 12.<0 8.697 122.8398 0.5466]5340 2.950 31.3520.000 ]4.305 18.290 181.2260 0.3463 13,722 4.568 49.4430.000 ]6.490 18.290 290.7200 0.4&2011.928 6362 52.0770,000 18.508 18,290 396.68]S 0.5859 11.096 7.194 55.6170.000 2].487 ]8.290 565,9597 0.7201 10.419 7,871 62,0970.000 23.S90 ]8.290 707.2645 0.8196 10.003 8.287 68.4570.000 24.792 18.290 835.6&S9 0.9215 9.554 &.736 75,8110.000 25,29] ]&.290 904.0583 0.9772 9,296 8.994 81.5330.000 2S.298 18,290 921.0693 0.9953 9.184 9.106 84,5060,000 25.2'!& 18.290 922.664S 0.9970 9.171 9.119 85.031P.PPP 2S.298 ]8.290 922.664S 0.9970 9,171 9,]19 85.031O,OPP 2S.2'!8 ]8.2'� 922.664S 09970 9.171 9.119 85.03]O.PPP 2S.~<!8 ]8.290 922,664S 0.9970 9,171 9.119 85.0310,000 2S,2'!8 ]8.290 922.4080 0.9968 9.173 9.117 84.9910.000 2S.29s ]8.290 920.7]pl 0.99SO 9.]87 9.103 84.4400,0 m 2S.I I7 18.290 902.6983 0.9825 9.256 9.034 &2,07]0.000 23,708 18.290 834.]7&3 0.9619 9.36] 8.929 77.039O.OPP I'!.65] ]8.290 673.5606 0.9370 9.558 8.732 67.274P.OPP Is.<] ]8.2<� 524.318] 0.9003 9.769 8.521 58.800P.OOP ]0.40<! 17.'!&S 323.S]87 0.&641 10.229 8.06] 47.811P. XK! 6.6 � 16.6]4 I'!8.3256 0.9034 ]G.S79 7.7]1 40,672O,P !O 3.814 ].278 4.3194 0.443] 17.911 0.379 8,062

125APPENDIX 4: CALCULATION'S OF OSCKLATING MOTIONS

18.290 0.5859 16.3016 +1.0000 +0.0067 +0.1286 1.040

18,290 0.7201 19.0979 +1.0000 +0.0837 +0.0414 1.181

18.290 0.8196 21.3989 +1.0000 +0.1238 4.02]4 0.954

] 8.290 0.9215 23,5525 +1.0000 +0.1380 4!.0854 0.425

18.290 0,9772 24.7977 +1 0000 +0.14]2 -0,1213 0.157 TUNNELED8.290 0.9953 25.]472 +1.0000 +0,1393 -0.1333 0.365 TUNNELS

18.290 0.'!970 25.1809 +].0000 +0.1392 -0.1345 0.405

] R 2<� 0,<!<�0 25.180<! +1.0000 +0,1392 -0,1345 0.405

18.2<� 0,<!<�0 25.]80'! +1.0000 +0,1392 -0.1345 0.405

18,2<� 0,9970 25.]809 +1,0000 +0.1392 -0.]345 0.405

]8,2<� 0.9968 25.]755 +1.0000 +0.1392 -0.1343 0,404

] 8,2'� 0,'!' 0 25.1402 +1.0000 +0.1393 -0.1332 0.364

I.27R 0.443]!.4<�R

San Diego cL<is i;<nker rnotioiis v,i' springSEAWAYA. I2

Execution: 18-04-1994 / 18:44

N-PARAMETER CLOSE-FJT CONFORMAL MAPPING COEFFICIENTS

STATION M S! A -I ! A�!A ]'!! RMS

-! in! -! -! -!-6,7 I +4,456'! + l,0000 +0.1844

+0,0000 +0,0000 0.017-3.66 + ,4 S2 +1,0000 +0,2l5R

+0.0 80 +0.00 � 0.024-0,61 +6.4834 +1.0000 +0.2347

+0.0000 +0.0000 0. AR0.5 ! +7.336S +].000 ! +0.2350

+0. K60 + !. ! ! ! ! 0.065

5.00 24.232 18,508CONVENTIONAL

6.00 34.900 2].487CON VErmoNAL

7.00 45.568 23.590CONVENTIONAL

8,00 59.284 24.792CON VERSIONAL

9.00 73.000 25.29110.00 86.716 25,298

BULBOUS11.00 100.432 25,298

T JNNEI ~.BK JLBOUS12.00 1~7 R64 ~5.2<!R

'Il.lh>ELED-B JLBO JS]3,0 ! ]55,2<� 25.2<!R

TUh~ELED-B ]LB OUS14.00 IR2,728 25.2<!R

TI.lh&TI ED-BULB ! ! S1 ,00 2]0.160 25.2<!S

TI.Jh>PLED-BI.JLBOVS16.N! 223.876 25,2<

Tl&WTI ED-BI.JLBO JS17,00 237.5< 25.]17I 8 0 ! "4<! 0~" ~3 708

I<>,00 260.A<2 l9.65]CONI~TIONAL

I<!.50 266.S52 1~.<1CON VEhlTI ONAI

I'! 60 272 <>AS ]0.40'!CONVE4 TIONAL

]9,70 275.<�I 6.607CON VEN TIONAI

I<!.R0 27S.R' 3.R t4REEN'I'R '<NT Cin:

JR.2'� 0.9825 24.8018 +].0000 +0.1376 4.]249 0.221 T JNNELEDl R.2'� 0.<�1'! 23.6549 + l.0000 +0.1145 -0.1]23 0.119 TUhFKLEDIS,2'� 0.9370 2].0209 +1.0000 +0.0324 -0.0975 0.190

IR 2<� 0.9003 JR 4575 +1,0000 4.0642 -0.0733 0.167

]7,<!R5 0 R&I 14.89J4 +l.0000 -0.2544 -00466 0098

16,6]4 0.9034 12.3704 +].0000 -0.4045 -0.0614 0.077

2,2268 +].0000 +0.5694 +0.]433 0.096

A�! A�> A�! A 9! A�1! A ] 3! A�5! A�7!

-! -! -! -! -! -! -! -! m!+0,1]80 -0.0086 +0.0156 -0.0011 +0.0103 +0.0000 +0.0000

+0.]157 -0,000! +0.0195 -0.0032 +0,0080 +0.0000 +G.NNG

+O. I ]51 -0.00]8 +0,02 I 7 4.0036 +0.0000 +0.0000 t0.00 N

+0.1005 -0.0]51 +0.0263 -0,0014 +0.0000 +0.0000 +0.0000

APPEIt DIX 4: CALCULATIONS OF OSCILLATING MOTIONS

Execution: 18-04-1994 I 18:44Satt Diego c!:tax t'tnker motiot!i v.ith sprit!8SEA V 'A Y-!,12

NATl !RAL R< !I.L ANI! C'UEFFI IENTS AT FIXED AMPLIT IDE

1.00 +8.3004+0.0000 +0.0000

2.00 +9.3781+0.0000 +O. XOO

3,00 +12.62RS+0,0000 +O.OOOO

4,GO +14.7506+G.OOOO +O.GOGO

5.00 +16.s6ss+0.0000 +O,OO N

6,00 +19,2021+O,OOOO +O.OOOO

7.00 +2].4]O4+0.0000 +0.00 �

R.OO +23.sae5+0.0000 +0,0000

<!.M! +24,RS96+D.OOM! +0. N

IO,OO +25.349!+0.0M� + !.00 !O

I],M! +2s.4068+0,0%� +0. XX�

12 OO +Ps.4<�R+0.0000 +0,0 K! !

]3,00 +2s.aO6R+0.�00 +O,M�0

]4,0O +2s.4<�8+0.0000 + !. M>O !

I s. K! +'s.39'J5+0.00M! +0.0000

]6.00 +2S.34M!+0.0000 +0. KK!O

17.00 +24.9! 6]+0. N00 +0. X�0

]8,00 +23.6883+O. NM! +<! X!OO

19.00 +21, 3s+O,OMX! +O.OMX!

I<! So +]8.4766+0. OM! +0. X!M!

1<!.60 +14.8984+0. N +O.MKX!

]9.70 +12.3611+0.0000 +0.00M!

]9.80 +2.]69s+O.OMX! +G.NKK!

+],OMX!0.067

+].0000O. I I s

+1.00000.443

+I.NXm0,30]

+1.00000,173

+].00000.102

+1.00000.1s7

+ I.OMK!O.O66

+].00 K!0.047

+I.M!M!0,036

+ I .OMX!0.�7

+1.00000.�7

+] .OO X!0.047

+1.0<X�0.047

+1.0 KX!0.044

+ I.M!M!0,034

+ I. NOUO.os 5

+].M!l�0.03R

+ I.MXX!0.]07

+].00000.083

+ I.OM�0.051

+].00000.033

+],00000.038

+0,2436 +0.0968 -0.0083 +0.0210 4.0020 +0.0000 +0.0000 +G.GGGG

+0.2433 +0.1182 -0.0133 +0,0343 -0.0049 +O.GNO +0.0000 +0.0000

-0.1523 +0.3011 -0.0159 -0.0105 +0.0104 +0.0000 +0.0000 +0.0000

-0.0998 +0.2053 +0.04D7 -0.0264 4.00]9 +0.0000 +O.OOOO +O.ONN

-0.0562 +0.]305 +0.0642 4.0]99 -0.0014 +0.0000 +0.0000 +0.0000

+0,0216 +0.0350 +0.06]4 +0,0007 +0.0002 +0.0000 +0.0000 +G.GOGO

+0.0790 -0.0291 +0.0417 +0.0071 +0.0031 +G.GOGO +0.0000 +O.OGOO

+0.]2]3 -0,0<�0 +O.018s +0.0048 -0.0018 +0.0000 +0.0000 +O.OOOO

+0.1433 -0.]269 -0.0003 tO.OO34 -0.0022 +0.0000 +0.0000 +O.OOOO

+0.]472 -0.1475 -0,0]06 +0.0073 +0.0017 +0.0000 +0.0000 +0.0000

+ !,1473 -0,1502 -0.0] l7 +0.0080 +0,0022 +0.0000 +0.0000 +00000

+0,1473 -O.]502 -0.0]]7 +0.0080 +0.0022 +0.0000 +0.0000 +0.0000

+0,]473 -0.1502 -0.0]]7 +0.0080 +0.0022 +0.0000 +0.0000 +O.OOOO

+0.]473 -O,]502 -0.0117 +0.0080 +0.0022 +0,0000 +0.0000 +O.OOOO

+0.1474 -0.1498 -0.0]]8 +0.0079 +0.0023 +0.0000 +0.0000 +0.0000

+0.1473 -0,1471 -0.0110 +0.007] +0.00]9 +0,0000 +0.0000 +0.0000

+0.]4]2 -0,1348 -0.0051 +O.OOS8 +0.0009 +0.0000 +O.OOOO +O.ONN

+D.I ] IR -0,]174 +0.0026 +0.0039 O.ONN +0.0000 +O.ONN +0,0000

+0.02S5 -0,0897 +0,0043 -0.0079 +0,0026 +0.0000 +O.OOOO +O.GGOO

-0,0736 -0.0703 +0.0027 -0,0040 +0.0068 +O,NXN +O.GNN +0.0000

-0,2S4] -0.0497 -0.0066 +0.0026 +0.0064 +00000 +0.0000 +0.0000

-0.4066 -0.0603 -O.OOS7 -0.�04 +0.0075 +0.0000 +O.OOOO +O.OOOO

+0.601S +0.1370 -0.0201 +0.0364 +0.0030 +0.0000 +O.OGOG +0.0000

APPEND/X 4: CALCULATIONS OF OSCILLAT/NG MOT10%$ 127

FORWARD SHlP SPEED . kn!: 0.00MEAN ROLL AMPLITUDE tleg!: 5.000

NATURAL ROLL PERIOD . s!; 22.731NATURAL FREQUENCY . r/s!: 0.276

LINEAR EQUIVALENT GM m!; 4,005

MASS, k.phi-phi ..... m!: 22.672COMPONENTS k-phi-phi:

SOLID MASS PART ., m!: 20.9812-D POTENTIAL PART m!: 8.591

DAMPING. kappa ...., -!: 0.0042COMPONENTS kappa:

2-D POTENTIAL PART -!: 0,0007SPEED EFFECT PART ~ !: 0.0000SKIN FRICTION PART -!: 0,0002EDDY MAKING PART . -!: 0.0033LIFT MOMFNT PART . -!: 0,0000BILCE KEEL PART � -!: 0.0000

NON!LINEAR DAh1 PING COEFFICIENTS:Kappa-I .......... -!: !.00 ! lKappa-2 .....�... t-!: 0.03'�

NATLJRAL IJEAVE AT ZERO FORWARD SPEED

NATLJRAL HEAVE PERIOD s!: 1].542NATL JRAL FREQL JENCY r/s!: 0.544

NATURAL I'I l'CH AT ZERO FORWARD SPEED

NATLJRAL PITCJ I PERIOD . !: 10.633NATI.JRAL FREQL JENCY r/s!: 0.591

Execution: 18~-1994 / 18:44San Diego class tanker motions with springSEAWAYA I2

FREQLJENCY CHARACTERISTICS OF BASIC MOTIONS FORWARD SPEED = 0.00 knWAVE DIRECTION ~ +180 deg oN stern

WAVE SQRT ENC ...SLJRGE... �.SWAY.......HEAVE......ROLL.......PITCH...�.. YA'6'. �, AI>DED IKS IS I'ANCES

FJKQ Sl A~ I. I.REQ AMPL PIIASE AMPL PHASE AMPL PHASE AMPL PHASEA~il'I PI JANET-. Ah1PI Pl IASE GER/BELJ BOESE


r/s! -! r/s! m/m! Beg! m/m kN/m2! kN/m2!0.200 0.452 0.200 ],023 90.4180,2 1,7]E-O] -8.37E-O]0.233 0.510 0.233 0,909 90.8180.6 5.43E-01 -8.74E-010.267 0.574 0.267 0.8]4 91,5184.2 1,71E+00 -3.1]E-010.300 0.64] 0.300 0,720 92.6177.7 S.03E+00 2,34E+000.333 0.710 0.333 0.616 94.6178.& ].33E+01 1.06E+010.367 0,780 0.367 0,499 97.7]79,0 3. I ]E+ !] 2.86]:.+Ol0,400 0.85! 0.1$! 0.373 102.7179.1 6.38E+0] 6,00E+0]0,433 0,922 0.433 0.248 I I ],9]79.0 1,]SE+02 1.03E+020.467 0.<!93 0.467 0.]40 ]32,1]78.7 1.79E+02 ].SOE+020.500 1,064 O.S � 0.0&7 ]83,3178.4 2.S]E+02 ].76E+020,533 I .]35 0,533 0. ] I 0 23 ] . ]]78.0 3.22E+02 1.70L+020.567 ],206 0,567 O.] 38 252.3] 79,3 3.72E+02 ] . ] &E+020.600 ].277 0,6 � 0.]40 26S.&

34S.4 4.07E+02 V.N!L+0 I0,633 ].347 0,633 O.]]6 279.7

354.4 4.] 5E+02 ].52L+020.667 1 41& 0.667 0.077 302.S

3<<,a 3.fiCLi02 ].4]E+020.700 1.48<! 0.700 0.051 348,4

356.<J 3.SHE+02 3.96E+0]0.733 ].560 !.?33 0.054 37,6

3 4 3.5S8]:+02 -].0]E+010.767 ].63] 0.767 O.O5S8 66.9

54.4 3.47E+02 ].66E+0]0.800 1.702 0.800 0.04<> 93,3146.6 3.]OE+02 4.28E+0]0.833 1.773 0.833 0.03S ]3].91S9.2 2.75E+0'! 2.60E+0]0.867 1,844 0.867 0.030 ]83.]169.6 2,60E+02 2,82E+000,<�0 1.9] S 0,<�0 0.030 224.1

2]7.1 2,S2E+02 6.47E+000.933 ].986 0.<>33 0.024 263.0

306,8 2.3SE+02 ].53E+0]0.967 2.057 0.967 O.O]9 31S.6

322.7 2,23E+02 7.<�E+R!1.000 2.128 ].000 0.0] 8 5.4

337.3 2.]7E~02 1.44E+001.03 2.]9& ].033 0.0]5 4&.8

i 03 0 2.10L+ 4.&3E+0 !

! deg! m/m! deg! deghn! deg! deg/m! deg! deg/m! deg!

0.000 90,0 0.950 359.6 O.OOO 85.1 0.255 266.9 O.OOO

0.000 90.0 0.918 359,5 0.000 83.2 0.319 265.8 O.OOO

0.000 89,6 0.869 359.3 0.000 79.7 0.389 264.5 O.OOO

0.000 90.3 0.797 359.2 0.000 257.6 0.461 262.7 O.OOO

0.000 90,0 0.701 359.2 0.000 25].5 0.526 26G.4 0.000

0,000 89,7 O.S77 3S9,9 0.000 241.3 0.571 257.5 0.000

0,000 89.2 0,430 2.s 0.000 211.6 0.585 253.8 0.000

0.000 88.2 0.272 11.9 0.000 113.2 0.556 249.1 0.000

0.000 83.] 0.] S9 49.3 0.000 78.8 0.477 242.5 0.000

0.000 3s],8 0.217 96.6 0.000 64.9 0,344 233.6 0.000

0.000 278.6 0.324 100.9 0.000 52.6 0.168 216.9 0.000

0.000 273.3 0.33S 88.6 0.000 37.8 0.064 80.1 0.000

0.000 272.8 0.242 72.3 0.0 m 19.7 0.222 25.3 G,OOO

0.000 274.s 0.10] 43.7 0.000 3s6,5 0.265 357.2 0.000

0.000 282.2 0.049 275.4 0,000 328,6 0.182 329.8 0,000

0.000 1,6 0.100 233.2 0.000 300.0 0.066 28].3 0.000

0.000 69,8 0.09S 217.4 0.000 273.5 0.068 176.3 0,000

0,000 80.6 O.OS6 203.1 0.000 248.9 0.098 147.6 0,000

0.000 92.0 0.01S 1 S6,6 0.000 223.5 O.O&2 134.2 0.000

0.000 126. I 0.025 48.8 0.000 194.5 0.039 121.5 0.000

0.000 207.1 0.032 34.6 0,000 159,7 0.00& 354.4 0.000

0.000 23S.8 0.022 29.7 O.NN 12s. S 0.030 310.6 0.000

0.000 2S4,8 0,005 32.3 O.OGO 98.1 0.030 305.5 0.000

0,000 319.4 0.007 200.2 0.000 74.7 0.014 308.6 G.OOO

0.000 30.7 0.0]0 204.9 0.000 44.9 0.005 87,7 0.000

0.000 48,3 0,005 221.0 0.000 348,0 0.013 108.4 0.000

129APPE/VD IX 4: CALCULAT/ONS OF OSClLLATING MOTlONS

Sa<< Dieg<i cinss u«<I'er <noti<nts a<t]! springSEAWAY-t.]2

Execution: 18-04-] 994 / ]8:44

FREQIIENC'Y Cl]ARACTERISTICS OF MOTIONS POINTS FORWARD SPEED = 0.00 IcnWA VE DIRECHON = +1&0 deg oK stern

POIM NR = OIX-APP = 278 KQ <nY-C'L = 0.0OO <nZ-BL = 10, �0m

..REL MOT..2,.... ..,..z.....

�.....,....AB SOLI. ITE MOTIONSWhVI: SQI ! I;%AC' .....X..........Y ...

1.067 2.269 1.067 0.0] I 108.8130.1 2.04E+02 4.14E+OO1.100 2,340 ]. ]GO 0.0] I ]65.6

136.4 2.00E+02 7.40E-O]1.133 2.4]1 ]. I 33 0.0 S 2]1.3

281.7 1.97E+02 2.18E+OO].]67 2.482 ].167 0.007 283.8

307.9 1.9]E+02 1.84E+OO1,200 2.S53 1.200 0.008 340,9

307.0 1.90E+02 4.0<! E-0 I].233 2.624 ].233 O,OOS 32.2

144.1 1.88E+02 1.35E+00].267 2.6<! C ].267 O,OOR 120.7

129.0 ].8CE+02 6,50E-O]1.300 2.766 ].300 G.OOS ]68,C

] ]7.8 I.H3]':+02 3,7%E-OI

1.333 2.837 ],333 O.OO3 242.9323.8 ].8]E+02 6.63E-OI].367 2,<! !8 ].367 O.O� 324.6

306,8 ].79E+02 ].38E-Ol1.400 2.<�<! 1.400 0.003 ]7,7

253.6 1.77E+02 2.84E-O]],433 3.04<! ].433 O.GG3 I ]2.C

] 33.<».7~E+02 <>.7<>E-O21.467 3.120 1.467 0.003 180,

]] I,8 !,74E+ I2 7.78E-02].~OO 3. I<! I I.,~OO O.N>2 2C<!,S

] .7] V+02 -2.%el<-03].C33 3.262 I.C33 0.002 33<!.0

297.] 1,6'!E+02 ~.I ~E-021.667 3,333 I.%67 0.002 67.4

164,8 ].67E+O2 -4.8CE-O2].600 3.404 I.600 0.002 ] 3%.3

1]8,6 1.6~E+02 3.'! 2E.02].633 3,47% 1.633 O N2 24O 4

]6,0 1.63E+02 -6.'�E-02],667 3.546 1.667 O.GO I 30<>.0

298.0 ].6]E+02 3.2]E.021.700 3.617 1,7 IO 0.005 22]. I

2O<!.2 I C&E+O2 -5,!ATE-O2

0.000 76,5 G.G03 325.1 0.000 295.0 0.009 119.0 0.000

0.000 203.8 0.004 0.6 0.000 266.4 0.003 210.0 0.000

0.000 219.0 0.002 27.0 0.000 232.4 0.006 267.1 0.000

0,000 230.4 0.002 143.3 0.000 132.0 0,004 2843 0.000

0.000 3].5 0.003 171,8 0.000 83.9 0.002 32.2 O.OGO

0,000 36.1 0.001 204.3 0.000 46.8 0.004 79.7 0.000

0,000 28.4 0,001 328.3 O.OOG 305.4 0.002 102.4 0.000

G.GGG 220.6 0.001 3%4,4 0.000 256.0 0.001 230.7 0.000

O.GOO 214.2 0.000 55.0 0.000 207,1 0.002 264.2 0.000

0.000 83.0 0.001 162.7 0.000 106.0 0,001 300.8 0.000

0,000 39.9 0,001 ]87.2 0.000 65.0 0.001 80.6 0.000

0,000 21.2 O.OOO 334.8 0.000 325.2 0.001 106.0 0 000

G.OOO 225,2 0.001 10.2 0.000 252.0 0.000 230.9 O.OOO

0.000 208.0 0.000 40.4 0,000 199.2 0,001 290.7 O.OOO

0.000 S6.<! O.OOO ]94.5 G.GOO 71.0 0.000 317.9 0.000

0.000 28.6 0.000 202.9 0.000 32,4 0.001 I 07,3 0,000

0.000 269.] 0.000 13.2 0,000 255,2 0.001 116,1 0.000

0.000 208.4 0.000 7,9 O.GOO 213.3 0.00] 287.2 0.000

0.000 119.8 0.000 209.1 0.000 75.8 0.001 280.8 0.000

O.GOO 26.C 0.000 184.2 0.000 28.9 0.000 12],4 0.000I

130APPENDIX 4: CALCULATIONS OF OSCJLLATII</G MOTIONS

AMPL PHASEREQ AM PL Pn! <leg! m/m

].053 90.30,947 90.60.860 91.10,774 91.90.677 93.30.563 95.30.43S 98,30.300 103.30.]68 1]3,70.069 1S6.10. S] 234.20,146 25'2.70.]SS 2S7,30.]13 264,0Q.QS9 292.80.04<! 3S7.00.06 I 32.6P.Q580.042 84.60,030 133.40.03! ! 82.80.030 2]7.10.022 2S6.50.017 3! 6.20.0180.014 43.70.010 107,70.0] I 164.40,00<! 207.20.006 283,70,00 < 33<!,7Q.QQS 28.40.005 l2!.7Q.OQS I 67.00.003 24!.00. G4 32S. I0.003 I S.60,002 112.90.003 180.1Q.QQ2 257.90.002 339.50,002 65.80.002 136, I0.002 238.80.00] 310.4O.OQS 22],6

San Dieg<i cl;<ss pucker !n<itiuns v,it!! springS EA'A'A'! '-! . 12

Execution: 18-04-1994 / 18:44

FORWARD SPEED = 0.00 knSTA'I IS'I'I '8 !F l3ASI MOTIONS

FREQ SL/WL F r/s! -! r/s! m/r0,200 0.452 0,2000.233 0,5]Q 0.2330.267 0.574 0 2670.300 0.64] 0.3000.333 0.7� 0.3330.367 0.780 G.367G.400 0.851 0.4000,433 0.922 0.4330.467 0.993 0.4670,500 1.064 0.5000,533].135 Q.S33Q,S67 1.206 O.S670.600 1.277 0.6000.633 1.347 0.6330.667 ].418 0.6670.700 ].4!i<! 0 7000.733 I.S6<! 0,7330.767 1.631 0.7670.800 1.702 Q.8QQ0.833 1.773 0.833Q.867 I,HW Q.867O. �0 I <! I.S <!.<!<�Q.'�3 I.<!!<6 <!,<�3Q.<�7 2.0S7 0 <�7! PQ ! I !< I �01,033 2.1<!8 1,033].067 2.26'! 1.067I.IQQ 2.340 I.IQQ1, 133 2.4 ! I 1,1331.167 2.482 1.1671,2QQ 2 S53 I 2001.233 . 624 !.233!.267 2.6< ].267!.3QQ 2.766 1.300],333 2.837 1,333!.367 2,908 ].3671.400 2.'�9 1.4001.433 3.04<! 1.4331.467 3.]20 !.467I.SQQ 3.1<! I I.SQQ1,S33 3.262 I,S33].567 3.333 1.567],600 3.404 1.600].633 3.47S 1.633].667 3.546 !.6671.700 3.617 !.70 !

HASE AM! deg! m/m0.000 120.30.000 125.60.000 122.60.000 148.60.000 151.30.000 156,10.000 161.10.000 166,00.000 171.20.000 177.3O.QQO 186.90.000 212.90.000 293.10.000 331.60.000 34S,30,000 3SS.70.000 13.S0.000 68,90.000 ]3~.80.000 1SS,80.000 175.S0.000 222. 30,000 2'�,40.000 324.2

0,000 353.7Q.QQQ 76.50.000 124.70.000 I Sp. 10.000 238,30.000 29'!.'!

0000 3 160.000 75.30.000 4.1G.GQQ 142,90.000 29 I.30.000 309,80.000 35S.90.000 124.90.000 134.90.000 300,40.000 307.2O.GOO 1]6,70.000 122.40,000 308.20.000 298.90.000 223,0

PL PHASE AMPL PHASE! deg! m/m! deg!

1.138 30.4 0.193 188.71.207 36.4 0,300 190,6].293 42.4 0.454 192.71.389 47.9 O.iM4 194,91.479 52.4 0,934 197.31.534 55,9 124] 200.01.527 58.3 1.55] 203.0].434 59.9 1.809 206.61.242 60.8 1.950 211.20.954 62.5 1.903 218.]0.600 65.9 1.659 229.00.190 95.2 1.204 250.50.385 178.0 1.154 298.60,539 169.4 1.555 323.20.388 155.7 1.486 338,00,112 ]43.0 1.096 8,1

0,104 319,5 ],Gl ] 58.00.]96 314.0 1.194 97.3O.]74 312.4 1,230 129.10.085 317.6 1.098 166.70,022 66.0 1.02S 2]4.00.068 112,0 1.079 260,90.069 12],1 1.096 304.40.034 140.4 1.041 351.6

0,019 239.0 1.026 43.40.031 279.5 1.045 95.00,022 302.2 ].030 ] 47.40.010 17.7 1.016 203.20.016 79.8 1.G24 260.10.0]2 110.3 1.016 318.10.006 195.9 1.010 18.7

0.009 2S3.9 1.014 80.60.006 29].3 1.008 144,00.004 33.0 1.006 209.S0.005 82.0 1.008 276,40.002 134,6 1.004 345.10.003 246.7 1.005 55.60.003 290.1 1.004 127.50.001 29.1 1.G02 201.40.002 107.1 1.004 276.90.001 ] 57.8 1.002 353,9

0.002 277.6 1.003 72.90.001 311.1 1.002 153.30,001 89.9 1.002 235.70.001 1] 1.3 1.002 319.50.001 272.4 1.001 45.2


5.12 13.44 7.19 13.62 0.5 1.5 0.0 0.0 1.5 11.9S.6S 13,77 7.8S 13.79 1.3 3.6 0.0 0.0 3.2 ?A.6

7.53 14.008.84 15.00

4.12San Diego class tank

+I +I6. 88 0.000123456 1

0.0I

180.02.SOO I 0.2001.474

+16.80 ! +2 !.081 e'!.7SO 69.7500

S.O ! !

0.0 61.2SO !OS.00001

27Y.OO !. ! 0,020.4 0.0 0.0

278.000 0.0 � 10.000

+

3.00 12.004,00 I 3.<!OS.OO 14,003 SO 12 SO4 SO 13 SO2. kJ 11.0 !

0End ot t'ile

er light ship! motions with spring0 +I 0

0.000 304.878 1,025E+006 +S 0

1,700 0.033333

User: 1.!niieriity ot' ,"a! i or!!ia, Berkeley. U.S.A.Ih'I' !T DATh

San Diego cttt« tattker light ship! motions with spring

¹¹¹¹¹¹¹¹¹¹¹¹¹¹¹¹¹¹¹¹¹¹¹¹¹¹¹¹¹¹¹¹ Progratn: SEAM'AY JOUrnee ¹

¹¹ STRIP'I'IIEOJ Y C'ALC' !LATIONS OF MOTIONS AND LOADS IN A SEAWAY ¹¹ ¹

Release 4,12 ¹�1-07-1993! ¹

¹¹¹¹¹¹¹¹¹¹¹¹¹¹¹¹¹¹¹¹¹¹¹¹¹¹¹¹¹¹¹


PRINT-CODE INPLJT DATA ......,......, KPR I !: 1PRINT-CODE GEOMETRIC DATA .......... KPR�!: IPRINT-CODE HYDRODYNAMIC COEFFICIENT KPR�!: 0PRINT-CODE FREQUENCY CHARACTERISTICS KPR�!: IPRINT-CODE SPECTRAL DATA ........... KPR�!: 0

ACTUAL MIDSHIP DRAFT ................ DRAFI': 6.098 mACTUAL TRIM BY STERN ................. TRIM: 0,000 mDUMMY VALI.JE. FOR THE TIME BEING ....., DIST: 0.000

WATER DEPT!I ..............DENSITY OF WATER ...

... DEPTH: 304.9 m

.......... RHO: 1.025 ton/m3

DEGREES OF FRLEI>OM CODE ..........,..., MOT: 123456VERSION. CODE OF STRIP TkIEORY METHOD ... KTH: INt!MBLR Ol- ITRhIS IN POTENTIAL SERIES,. MSER: 6CODE OF t ISED 2-D APPROXIMATION ....... KCOF: 5NLJMBER OF "J=REE-CkIOIC'E" SECTIONS ...,., NFR: 0

NUMBER OF FORWAItD SPI;EDS ......,.��... NV: IFORWARD Sl'ELDS k<i! ............�., VK NV!: 0.00

NtJMBLR OI WAVE DIRECTIONS .......�.... NWD: 1WA VE DIRl: C'I'l !NS d<., o0 s<ern! WAVDIR N"A'D!: 180.0

WAVE AM PLITl. JDL FOlk LINEARIS ATION ... WA VAMP: 1.474 m

LNPt I DA1 A c<1<>nUcd!

BASE LINl=' l'O CFNTRE OF GRAVITY ... +GKGM=KG: 16.800 m

..., GYR I!: 20.<I81 m,... GYR�!; 69.750 m.... GYR�! . 69,750 m

MASS-GYRADltJS k-xx ...MASS-G YR AD It JS k-yy ...MASS-GYRADIUS k-zz ...

NIJMBER OF LOAD.CALCtJLATION SECTIONS �NBTM: 0

CODE OF ROLL DAMPING INPUT .......�... KRD: 3AVERAGE ROLL AMPLITLJDE .......,.�., ROLAMP: 5.000 degHEIGIIT OF BILGE KEEL .................. HBK: 0.000 mDISTANCL. OF A.P.P. TO ATT END B.K, ... XBKA: 61.25 mDISTANCE Ol= A.P.P. TO FORWARD END B,K. XBKF: 105.00 m

CODE OF ANTI-ROLLING DEVICES .......�KARD: 0

NLJMBER OI LINL'AR SPRINCS,...�.�.... NCAB '.

MAX. FREQ. uF ENCOJ.JNTER IN SERIES . FREQMAX: 2.500rad/sec range= 0,000- 3.125rdd/~c!

CODE FOR WAVE FREQUENCY INPtJT .....,. KOMEG: IMINIMtJM CIRCLJLAR WAVE FREQUENCY ...., OMMIN: 0.200 rad/secMAXIMtil<I CIRCULAR WAVE FREQtJENCY ..... OMMAX: 1.700 rad/secINCREMENT IN WA VE FREQUENCIES .��OMINC: 0.033 rad/sec

APPED!/X 4: CALCULA7/OXS OF OSCILLATI/t/G hfOTJOP/S

NUMBER OF SEA STATES .........�...... NSEA: 6CODE OF IRREGULAR SEA DESCRIPTION ..., KSEA: 2WAVE HEIGI ITS m! HW K! / PERIODS s! TW K!; 3.00 12.00

4.00 13.005,00 14.003.50 12.504.50 I3.502.00 11.00

IYPI. T-CODE !F CR]TERA I.OR Sl IIPMOTIONS KRIT: 0

San Dit.gti cl;«i t:tttkt.r mtttiotti wi h xpriltgSEAWAYA.]2

Execution. 18-04-1994, 18:53

GEOMETRICAI. I ILJLLFOIW DATA

AC TI AL It I! DSIlll' DRAFI t'I ! ...ACTUAL I'RIM BY STERN .........

6.098 m0.000 m

LED'GTI I BL'TWEEY PERPENDICULARS Lpp! .....,: 278.892 mREAR SECI I !Y I 0 A.P.P.......�,..........: 6.706 m

WATERLINE: I FYGTII Lw I! �,.........��.: 285.598 mBEAM tB! ................�...: 50,5t>6mARLA...�............: 11676 m2

AREA C !EFT1C I6'T Lpp! .......: 0,8274AREA COEFFICIENT Lwl! .....�: 0.8080CFN'I'ROID TO A,P.P.....,......: 150.548 m +11.102 m or+3.98 % Lpp/2!CENTR DID TO REAR SECTION .....: 157.254 m +14.455 m or +5.06 % LwV2!

DISPLACEMENT; VOLUME ...........�..�...: 68354 m3BLOCKCOEFFICIMT Lpp! ....: 0.7944BLOCKCOEFFICIENT Lwl! ...,: 0.7757CENTROID TO A.P.P. �......: 150,967 m +11.521 m or +4.13 !tf Lpp/2!CENTROID TO REAR SECTION ..: 157.673 m +14.874 m or +5.21 % LwV2!CENTI<OID TO WATER.INE ...... 2.984 mCENTROID TO KEELLINE,.....: 3,114 mM 1DSI I IP SECTION COEFFICIENT: 0.9911LONG. PRISMATIC COEFFICIENT: 0.8015VERT. PRISMATIC COEFFICIENT; 0.9600RATIO Lpp/B ........�..... . '5.512RATIO Lwl/B,..............: 5.645RATIO B/I .................: 8.297

l4 E'JTED S 'JiG-ACE III 1LL .......:

COORDINATES AND LINEAR SPRING COEFFICIENTS:278,000 0.000 0.000 2.040E+010,000E-OI 0.000E-01

NUMBER OF DISCRETE POINTS .....�,.... NPTS:COORDINATES OF POINTS tm! ., PTSXYZ NPTS,3!: 278.00 0.00 10.00

135APPFNI!IX 4.' CALCULATIONS OF OSCILLATING MOTIONS

STABILITY PARAMETERS

K B . � ......... : 3, I I 4 rnKG ...,........ : I 6.800 mBM-TRANSVERSE .: 32,494 mGM-TRANSVERSE .: 1&.808 mB M-LONGIT ]DINAL: 792.786 mGM-LONG]H.JDINAL: 779,]00 m

Execution: 1844-1994, 18:53San Diego c]ass lanker rno!ions wit]! springSEA V'AY 4.] 2

SEC'T]OI<'AL I ] .ILL]<DIG% DATA

Execu ]on: 18-04-1994 / 18:53San Diego et»»i n<nker in<i i<»is wit]i springSEAV 'AY4.] 2

TWO-PARA~]ETER LEV']S CONFORMAL MAPPING COEFFICIENTS

STAT]NI!M B

-!-6.7]-3.ee-G.e]0.5 !1.002.003. !O4. X!5.0 !6,007.0 !8.009.0010,001].0012.0013.0014.0015.0016.00]7,0018.00]9.0019,5019.6019,70]9.80

ON X-AER

in! -6.706-3.658-0.6] 02.43854868.5 ']4] 0 ]<

] 8.13624.23234.'�045,568

73, XX!86.7]e

] 00,432] 27.864155,2<�182.7282�,]60223.876237.592249.022260.452266.852272.948275.97 ]278,8'

PI' HALF HALF DRAFT AREA AREA KB BO WETTEDCL -CI. WIDTH COEFF LENGTH

m! m! m! m2! -! m! m! m!0.000 0.003 0.003 0.0000 0.7500 6.097 0.00] 0,0090.000 0.003 G.003 0.0000 0.7500 6.097 0,001 0.0090. X� 0.003 0.003 0,0000 0.7500 6,097 0.001 0.0090.000 0.003 0.003 0.0000 0.7500 6.097 0.001 0.0090.000 0.003 0.003 0.0000 0.7500 6.097 0.001 0.0090.000 0.003 0,003 0.0000 0.7500 6,097 0.001 0.0090,000 ].44] 6, 88 11.9976 0.6&25 3.738 2.360 12,6940.000 4.837 6,098 46.64]2 0.7906 3.389 2.709 17.6250.000 8,0I6 6.098 80,'!939 0.8285 3.304 2,794 23.1830.000 ]3,320 6.098 138,54&2 0.8528 3.247 2,851 32,6870.000 ]7.992 6,098 191.0340 0.8706 3.218 2.880 41.5060.000 22.502 6.098 250.4236 0.9125 3.173 2,925 50.8820.0 X! 24.877 6.098 289.3329 0.9536 3.123 2,975 57.1190.000 25,298 6.098 304.2029 0.9860 3.081 3017 60.1220.000 2<.2<!8 6,098 30%.798] 0.9911 3.072 3.026 60.6470.000 25.298 6.098 305.798] 0.9911 3,072 3.026 60.6470,000 25.298 6.098 305.7981 0.99] ] 3.072 3.026 60.6470,000 25.298 6.098 305.7981 0.9911 3.072 3.026 60.6470,000 25.298 6.098 305.5416 0.9903 3.074 3.024 60,6070.000 25.295 6,098 303.8590 0.9850 3.085 3.013 60,0470.000 24,9]2 6.098 292.7500 0.9635 3.117 2,981 57.6840.000 22.965 6,0<!8 262.1276 0.9359 3.160 2.938 52.5950,000 I &,592 6.098 199.7755 0.8811 3.247 2.851 42.7070.000 ]4,457 6.098 146.7948 0.8325 3.338 2,760 34.1200,000 9.]96 5.793 79.2156 0,7435 3.656 2.442 23.2100,000 4.024 4.422 41,0068 0.7697 4.160 1.938 16,2070.000 0.003 0.003 0.0000 0.7500 6.097 0.001 0.009

136APPENDIX 4: CALCUTTA TJONS OF OSClLLATING MOT/ONS

15,1240 +].0000 +0.5423 -0.054516.6193 +].0000 +0.56SO -0.068117,0732 +].0000 +0.5623 -0.080517.1126 +1.0000 +0,5610 -0.082717.1126 +1,0000 +0.56]0 -0,082717.1126 +].0000 +O.S6]0 -0.0827]7,1126 +1.0000 +O.S610 -0,082717.1062 +1.0000 +0.56]2 -0.0823]7.0641 +1.0000 +0.5625 -0.080116.70<>8 +],0000 +0.5630 -0.0721] S.522S +1.0000 +0.5433 4.063812,9321 +1.0000 +0.4830 -0.04S4

TUNNELEDTUNNELEDTUNNELEDTUI~ EDTUNNELEDTIJNNELEDTUNNELEDTIJNNEl.EDTUl'INE LEDTlPPNELEDTUNED

Execution: 18-04-]994 / 18:53Satt Diego cltt~i t <tiker motion~ with xpri»8SEAWAY-4. l2

N-PARAI<iL'TER 'LOSL-FII COYFORMAL MAPPING COEFFICIENTS

STATION X-APP H ALF DRAFT AREA M S! A - I ! A I ! A�! RMSHULLFORM REMARKS WITH REGARDNUMBER W]DTH COEFF TO LEWIS

CONFORMAL MAPPING -! m! m! m! -! m! -! -! -! m!

-6.71 -6.706 0.003 0.003 0.7500 0,0025 +1.0000 +0.0000 +0.0225 0.001CON~'TIONAL

-3.66 -3.6S8 0.003 0.003 0.7 S00 0.0025 +1.0000 +0.0000 +0.0225 0.001CON VEhTIONAL

-0.61 -0.610 0.003 0.003 0.7S00 0.002S +1.0000 +0.0000 +0.0225 0.001CON VENI'ION AL

O.SO 2,438 0.003 0.003 0.7SOQ 0.002S +1.0000 +0.0000 +0.0225 0.001CONVEr ilONAI.

1.00 5.486 0.003 0.003 0.7500 0.002 S +1,0000 +0.0000 +0.0225 0.001COY,VEN l'lONAL

2.00 8.534 0,003 0.003 0.7500 0,0025 +].0000 t0.0000 +0.0225 0.00]CON VEN I lONAL

3.00 12.1< ].4-] I 6.0<!8 0.682s 3.6227 +].0000 -0.6427 +0.0406 0.058COr 'VEI VlONAL

4.00 18.136 4.837 6.0'!8 0.7<>06 S.4855 +1.0000 -0.1149 -0,0033 0,]93COY KXM IONAL

S.OO 24.232 8.016 6,0'!8 0.828S 7.2S23 +].0000 +0.1322 -0.0270 0,302COY VFN I 1 ! NAI.

6.00 3A.'! XJ ]3.3 0 6,0'!8 0.85 8 10.0827 +1.0000 +0.3581 -0.0371 0,382CONVENTJONAL

7.00 4s.S68 17.'!'>2 6.0'!8 0.8706 l2.S611 +].0000 +0.4734 -0,0411 0.4l]CON ~~TIONAL

8.00 5<>.284 22.S02 6.0'!8 0.912S 0.2639.00 73. XX! 24.877 6,098 0.9536 0.17510.00 86.716 2S 298 6 0<>R 0 9860 0.37311.00 ]00.432 2S. '!8 6,0'>8 0.991] 0,43112.00 ] "7 864 2S.298 6.0'!8 0.'>'! l l 0.431]3,� ISS.296 2S.298 6.0<>8 0.9<>ll 0.431]4.00 182.728 2S.2<!8 6,0'!8 0.'!9] I 0.431]5.00 2]0.]60 2S.298 6.098 0,9903 0,42616,00 223.876 25.295 6.0'!R 0,98SO 0.36817.00 237.S92 24,9]2 6.098 0.963S 0.191IR.00 24'!.0 2 22.'�S 6,0'!8 0.93S<> 0.09419.00 260,4s2 ]R,S92 6.098 0,8811 0.261

CON VENTIOYAL]9.50 266.8S2 14.457 6.P>8 0.832S ]O.S4]9 +1,0000 +0.3965 -0.025] 0.244

CON VEN.r]OI,AL

19.60 272.948 9.196 S.793 0.7435 7.3094 +1.0000 +0.2328 +0,0253 0.132CON VERI 1ONAL

19.70 27S.'�l 6,024 4.422 0,76>7 5.1725 +1.0000 +0.1548 +0.0097 0.138CON YEN T]ONAL ]'!.80 278.892 0.003 0.003 0,7500 0.0025 +],0000 +0.0000+0.0225 0.00 I CON VENTIONAL

APPENDIX 4: CALCULATIOItIS OF OSCILLATING MOTIONS 137

A 9! A ll! A03! A�5! A�7!A�! A�! A�! A�!STAT1ON M SA�9! RMS

-! m! -6.71 +0.0031

+0.0000 +0.0000-3.66 +0.0031

+0.0000 +0.0000~ 0.61 +0,0031

+0.0000 +0.0000O.SO +0.0031

+0.0000 +0.00001.00 +0.0031

+0.0 K� +O.DGOO2.00 +G. �31

+0.0000 +O,OOOO3.00 +3.624'

+0.0000 +O. KX�400 +S,S354

+0,0000 +0,0000S,GO +7.282 S

+0,0000 +O. K�06,00 +]0. �! 7

+0, KX!O +0, K!OO7.00 +! 2.4274

+0. K!OO +O,OOOO8,00 +1S.0270

+0. KXK! +O,OOOO9.00 +16.676S

+0.0000 +O.OOOO10. X! +17.3S66

+0.0000 +0.000011.00 +17.4423

+0. XK� +0. XXK!12.00 +17.4423

+0.0000 +0.0 KX!13.00 +17.4423

+0.0000 +0.000014.00 +! 7,4423

+0.0000 +0.00001S.00 +17.4306

+0.0000 +0.000016 X! +17.3371

+0.0000 +0.000017.00 +�.8167

+0,0000 +0.000018,00 +15.S149

+0.0000 +0.00001'!.OO +12,867 l

+0. XK!O +O. K!OO] <!,SO +10.46!l !

+0, XKX! +0 OOOO

! A -1!

<m!+1.0000 -0.0203 -0,1787 +0.0203 +0,0000 +0.0000 +G.OGOG +0.0000 +0.0000

0.000

+1,0000 4.0203 4.1787 +0,0203 +0.0000 +0.0000 +0.0000 +0,0000 +0.00000.000

+1.0000 -0.0203 .0.1787 +0,02G3 +0.0000 +0.0000 +0.0000 +0.0000 +0.00000,000

+1.0000 .0,0203 -0.1787 +0,0203 +0.0000 +0.0000 +0.0000 +0.0000 +0.00000.000

+1,0000 -0.0203 -0.1787 +0.0203 +0.0000 +0.0000 +0.0000 +0.0000 +0.0000O.OOO

+1.0000 -0.0203 -0.1787 +0.0203 +0.0000 +0.0000 +0.0000 +0.0000 +0.0000O,GOO

+l.oooo -0.6402 +0,037s -0.0163 +0.0027 +0.0142 +0,0000 +0.0000 +0.00000,042

+1.0000 -O.1slo -0.0205 +O.G189 +0.0062 +0.0182 +0.0021 +0.0000 +0.0NN0.OS'

+1,0000 +0.0834 -0.037S +0,0238 +0.0089 +0.0077 -0.0024 +0.0168 +0.00000.0S6

+1. K� ! +0 32! 8 -0 0483 +0.0322 +0.0190 +0.0070 +0.0000 +0.0000 +0.0000o.Os3

+1, X!OO +0.4446 -0.0S07 +0.0291 +0.0199 +0.0048 +0.0000 +0.0000 +0.00000,032

+1.0000 +0.5 8S -0.0641 +0.0125 +0.01S8 +0.0048 +0.0000 +0.0000 +0.00000.031

+l.OOOO +0.6642 -0.0801 -0.0060 +0.0088 +0.0048 +0.0000 +0,0000 +0.00000.030

+1.0000 +0.5742 -0.0933 -0.0218 -0.0022 +0.0007 +0.0000 +0.00GO +0.00000.027

+!. X!O ! +O.S746 -0.0964 -0.0250 -0.0036 +0.0008 +0,0000 +0.0000 +0.00000,033

+1.0000 +0.5746 -0.0964 -0,0250 -0.0036 +0.0008 +0.0000 +0.0000 +0.00000,033

+1.0000 +0.5746 -0.0964 4.0250 -0.0036 +0.0008 +0.0000 +0,0000 +0.00GO0.033

+1,0000 +0.5746 -0. X>64 -0.02~0 -0.0036 +0.0008 +0.0000 +0.0000 +G.00000.033

+1.0000 +0,5750 -0.0954 -0.0247 4.0040 +0.000S +0.0000 +0.0000 +0,00000.031

+1.0000 +0.574s -0.0917 -0.0212 -0.0029 +0.0003 +0.0000 +0.0000 +0.00000.034

+1.0000 +O,S671 -0.0813 -0.0093 +O.G033 +0.0015 t0.0000 +0.0000 +0.00000.034

+1.0000 +0,5406 -0,0700 +0,0013 +0.0066 +0.0017 t0.0000 +G.0000 +0.00000.019

+ l. KKX! +0.46 l0 -0,0430 +0,0117 +0,0024 +0.0128 +0.0000 +0.0000 +0.0000O.OI7

+1,0 KK! +0.37� -O.O 16 +0.0164 +0.0034 +0.0111 +0.0000 +O,OGOO +0.00000.067

138APPE'VI!IX 4; CALCULA710h'S OF OSCILLATIA'G hfOTIOWS

Execution: 18-04-1994 / 18:53San Diego class tanker motions with springSEAWAYA. I 2

NATURAL ROLL AND COEFFICIENTS AT FIXED AMPLITUDE

FORWARI! SIIIP Sl'ELD . kn!; 0.00MEAN ROLL Ah1PLI'JDE deg!: 5.0 N

NATURAL ROLL PERIOD . s!; 11.922NATI.JRAL FRFQI!ENCY . r/s!: 0.527

LINEAR EQUIVALENT GM m!: 18,858

MASS, k-pl!i-p!>i..., m!: 2c,802COMPONEN'I S k-phd-pi! i:

SOLID h1ASS I'AR I,. tn!; 20.9812-D POTENTIAL PART m!: IS.OIR

DAMPIYGi, k ippa ...... -!: 0.026!COh1 PONEN'I'S kapp;n

2-D POTENTIAL PART -!: 0.0227SPEED EH-T=C'T PART -!: 0.0000SKIN FRICTION PARI -!; 0.0003EDDY MAKING PART. ~ !: 0.0031LIFT MOh1ENT PART, -!: 0.0000BILGE KELL P<RT .. -!: 0.0000

NON!LINT='AR DAMPING COEFFICIENTS:Kappa-1 .......... -!: 0.0002Kappa.2 .....,.... -!: 0.0371

NATURAL I IEA VE AT ZERO FORWARD SPEED

YATURAL HEAVE PERIOD s!: 9,2I INATURAL FREQUEYCY r/s!: 0.682

NA H.'RAL I'I'I Cl I AT ZERO I=ORWARD SPEED

NATI IRAI P!'I Cl I PEIV !D s!: 8.825

19.60 +7.2776 +1.0000 +0.2124 +0,0228 +0.0125 +0,0069 +0.0089 +0.0000 +0.0000 +0.0000+0.0000 +0.0000 0.027

19.70 +5.1174 +1.0000 +0.1274 +0,0222 +0.0155 -0.0017 +0.0136 +0.0000 t0.0000 +00000+0.0000 +0,0000 0,03 I

19.80 +0.0031 +1.0GGO -0,0203 -0.1787 +0.02G3 +0.0000 +0.0000 +0.0000 +0.0000 ~-0000+0.0000 +G.0000 0.000

139APPED IX 4: CALCULAT/0/</S OF OSC LLAT/NG MOT10iVS

N ATURAL FREQUENCY r/s!: 0,712

San Diego class tanker modons with springSEAWAY4.]2

Execution: 18~1994 / 18:53

FREQ].!ENC'Y CHARACTER]ST]CS OF BAS]C MOTIONS FORWARD SPEED 0,00 knWAVE DIRECTION = +180 deg o6 stem

E... �,SWAY.......HEAVE......ROLL....,..PITCH...CESHASE AMPL PHASE AMPL PHASE AMPL PHASEGER/8EU BOESE

deg! m/rn! deg! deg/m! deg! deg/m! deg! deg/m! deg!

0.168 151.6 0.000 152.1 0.188 285.7 0.000

0.195 ]59.4 0.000 125.8 0.095 340.0 0.000

WAVE SQRT ENC ...SURG....YAW..., ADDED RES]STAN

FREQ SL/WL FREQ AMPL PAMPL PI]ASE AMPL PHASE r/i! -! r/i! <n/m! deg! <n/m! kN/m2! kN/m2!0.200 0.452 !.20 ! ]. �4 90.] 0,000 90.0 0.953 359.9 0.000 91.1 0.257 269.4 0.000

]7<!.0 6,46E- -].67E-0!

0,233 0.~] 0 0."33 0.< 6 90.2 0,000 90.0 0.924 359.9 0.000 9].S 0.321 269.2 0.000]78.8 2..~'!E- ! ] ],52E- �0.267 O.C74 0.267 0.870 90.5 0.000 90.1 0.880 359.9 0.000 91.8 0,394 268.9 0.000]78.5 9.6! E-01 4,] ]E-0!0.300 0.%1 0.300 0.785 <>0.8 0.000 <JP. 1 0.816 359.9 0,000 92.1 0.470 268.6 0.000178.3 3.22E+00 ].37E+00

0.333 !.7]0 0.333 0.69 ! 9!.5 0. XX! 90. 0,729 0.2 0.000 92.3 0.540 268.2 0.000178. ! <!.5UL'+0 ! 3.4BE+0 !

0.367 P.780 0.367 0.578 92.5 0 000 90.4 0.619 0.7 0.000 92.2 0.594 267,8 0.000177,7 2.4<!E+0] 7.OBEAH 0 !

0.4 X! 0.85] 0.400 !.450 <�.0 0,000 90 4 0,489 1.9 0.000 9].5 0.622 267.5 0.000177.4 5.73E+ !] !,2] E+0]

0.433 0.<2 ! 433 0.3 <�.7 0.000 <>0.2 0.345 4.8 0.000 89.3 0.614 267.3 0.000177.3 !.]7E+ !,71E+01

0,467 0 <!<�; 467 0 l75 ]02,8 0,000 87.5 P,198 13.1 0,000 83.3 0.562 267.5 0,000]77.3 2.]3E+ ].98E+01 !.5 K! ].064 !, X! !. 7 13!,7 0, X� 66,8 0,08P 50,0 0.000 64.6 0.466 268.8 0.000] 77.7 3.4'!]. + ] .65E+0!0.533 !.]35 !.533 0,070 242,2 0,000 240.0 0.100 131.6 0.0 X! 280.9 0.335 272 7 0.000] 83. ! 5.]4E+02 8. E+000,567 !.206 0.567 0,�5 260,3 0.000 254.2]85.7 6.79E+02 2,] ]E+OP0.600 ].277 0,600 0,�4 266.7 0,000 273.3

224,6 8.2!E+02 9.53E+000.633 ],347 0,633 0.154 272. ] 0,000 285.7 0,177 167.7 0.000 ]14.8 0.146 36.1 0.000

334,6 9.23E+02 3.39E+0]

0.667 !.418 0.667 0.]]2 280.0 0.000 303.3 0.132 184.3 0,000 105.0 0.197 52.1 0.000346,2 9.<>3E+02 5.85E+0!0.700 ],48'! 0.700 0.057 300,4 0.000 334 3 0.099 2! 8.4 0.000 88.7 0,192 62.9 0.000

354.] 1.06E+03 5.65E+0!

0.733 ].560 0.733 0,032 20.6 0.000 ]2.7 0.099 254.4 0.000 34,9 0.148 82.0 0.000]0.<! ].]5E+03 2,58E+0]

0.767 ],63] 0,767 0.057 67,<! 0.000 44.5 0.098 277.7 0,000 321.2 0,116 117.5 G,QQQ63.3 ].27]:.+ � 5.66E+00

0.8 K! ].702 P.B � 0.066 84,5 0,0 X! 92,] 0.080 30].5 0,000 299.7 0.]15 152,4 0.000]12.6 !.36E+ � 2.34]+ !]

APPENDIX 4: CALCULATIONS OF OSClLLATII<IG MOTlONS 140

0.833 1.773 G.833 G.GS] 10].S! 29.4 1,4!E+G3 4.82E+0!0.867 ].844 0.867 O.G28 140.7! 48.4 1.42E+G3 4.G7E+0]0.90G 1,91S G.GGG 0,027 211,1

271.5 ].44E+03 1.73E+010.933 1.986 G.933 0,032 246.2

293.3 1.48E+G3 1,34E+G 10.967 2.057 0.967 0,025 276.4

297.S ].49E+G3 2,]4E+0]!.000 2.128 ],000 0,0]7 336.S

3GS.O 1.48E+G3 1.73E+0 11.033 2.]98 ].G33 0,020 33.4

]G!.G ].46E+03 8.]7E+00],067 2.26'! 1.067 0.0]7 66,7

]]S.S ].44E+03 8.!DE+GO],] a 2.340 l,] ! ! G.GG'! ]24.4

]27.3 !.42E+03 8.46E+00].]33 2.4]] ].]33 0,0l2 l'!<!.7

228,S ] .38L+03 4.]3E+001,! 67 2.482 ],]67 G.G]2 233.8

27~ i ].34L'+G3 3.38E+OG],200 2.5s3 1.200 G.G07 2<!].0

303.4 ].2<!E+03 4.15E+00].233 2.624 1.233 0,0G<! l G.G

43.6 ].24!.+03 2.G'!E+00!.267 2.6<!S ],267 0.008 52.8

7S,2 ].]'!E+ � 1,78E+GG].3GG 2.766 ].3 ! ! 0. !Gs ]2S,4

] ]7.9 ],14I:+03 2.12E+00],333 2.837 ].333 G !G7 ]9] <!

242,8 ! . !'!E+03 ].06E+001.367 2.<�8 ].367 G OOS 2S]4

2S<! S ]. �F+03 I. ! !E+GG] 400 2.<�<! ],400 G.GGS 337.0

26 7 <!.80E+02 7.'�L'-0]] 433 3. �<! ] A33 G,004 26.6

7G.G 9,2RF+02 5,34E-G]l.467 3.120 !.467 0,003 142.1

120,1 8.ROE+02 4,'�E-0]!.500 3.!9] !.500 0. X ]88,G

225.7 8.30E+02 2,'�E-0]!.S33 3.262 !.S33 G.O02 269.4

262.4 7.82E+02 4.0SE-G]],S67 3.333 ],S67 O.OG4 3S9.8

2G.6 7,3<!E+02 2, l8E-01].60G 3.404 1,600 G.GG3 49.0

SS.4 6,<�E+02 2.7GE-G]1.633 3.47S ],633 G.GG3 172.4

! 79.6 6.54E+G2 ],78E-0]].667 3.S46 ].667 G.003 230.0

2]<! S 6, LSE+02 ].8'!E-Gl

] 700 3.6l7 ].7 !G !, ! 34S.3S.8 !]. + ] .] 6E- ! ]

O.GGG ! 67.9 0.062 337.5 0,000 286.6 0.107 177.3 0.000

G.OGG 192.5 0.058 15.2 0.000 269.9 0.081 207.6 0.000

0.000 200.9 0.052 44.0 0,000 201.1 0.067 251.8 0.000

0.000 205,1 0.038 76.8 0.000 128.4 0.067 289.0 0.000

O.OGG 24.1 0.028 125.3 0.000 114.6 0.055 318.1 0.000

O.OGO 27,5 0.027 168.4 0.000 110.3 0.036 0.5 0.000

0.000 32.0 0.021 202.4 0.000 114.2 0.033 58.0 0.000

O.GOG S4.] G,G]3 25S.2 0.000 269.6 0.032 95,5 0,000

G.GGG ] 87.3 G.G]3 318.0 0.000 295.8 0.021 132.7 G.GGG

G.GGG 209,7 0.012 353.4 G.GOG 320.2 0.015 204. O.GOG

G.GOO 247.9 G.GG7 38.4 0.000 344,2 0.017 257.1 0.000

G.GOG 320.2 0.006 130.5 0.000 3S3.7 0.013 294.7 G.GGG

G.GGG 3 S7,7 G.GG7 174.S 0.000 228. ! 0,008 6.1 0.000

G.GGG 97.G 0,004 220.2 G.GGO 198,8 0.009 71.3 O.GOO

G.OGG 14'!.4 0.003 300.4 0.000 191.0 0.007 121.7 0,000

G.GOO 168.6 0.003 2.5 0.000 138.0 0.006 189.6 0.000

G.GGG 323.7 0,003 67.0 G.GGO 52.3 0.005 246.3 0,000

O.GGG 347.3 0.002 120.9 0,000 58.3 0.003 329,2 0.000

G.GGO 48.4 0.001 200.6 0.000 141.0 0.004 28,8 0.000

G.GOG 147.7 0.002 282.3 G,GGG 213.9 0.002 82.8 0.000

G.GGG 19S,8 0.001 327.4 O.OGG 294.9 0.002 196.0 0.000

O,OGG 294.9 O.OG! 83.2 0.000 339.2 0.002 244.2 0.000

G.GGO 336.4 0.001 ]38.1 0.000 33. l 0.001 348.1 0.000

0.000 95.4 0.001 240.2 0.000 146.2 0.002 46,8 0.000

G.GGG 133.2 0,001 294.4 O.GGG 182.7 0.001 149,7 0,000

0 GGO 2S7.2 0,000 40.3 O.GOG 314,4 0,00! 204.0 0.000

G,GGG 304,] G.GG] ] ]0,3 0,000 338.6 0.001 292,8 G.OOG

APPEI</DIX 4; CALCUL/rr TIONS OF OSCILL/r TING MOTIONS 141

San Diego class tanker motions with springSEAWAY4.12

Execution: 18-04-1994 I 18:53

FREQUENCY CHARACTER]ST]CS OF MOTIONS POINTS FORWARD SPEED 0.00 ]tnWAVE DMC.EON = +180deg oNstern

POINT NR = 01X-APP ~ 278.000 mY-CL = O.OOO mZ-BL = ]O.OOO m

MOTION.....Y�...

HASE

! <]eg! m/rO.OOO 118.00.000 ]23.9O.OOO 130.]0.000 136.20.000 141,70.000 146.60.000 ] 50,8ONe ]54,0G.OOO ]S6.10.000 LS4,10.000 209. SO.GOO ] 89.30,000 218.60.000 326,00,000 34S.70.000 356.60.000 12.7O.OOO 50.00.000 107.40.000 141.30.000 174,40.000 236.S0.000 281 40.000 30S.80.000 3S4.20.000 81.80.000 109.5O.GOO 139.30.000 226.30.000 273,90.000 310.20.000 3].lG,OOO 81.50.000 139.2O.OOO 228.40,000 270.30.000 11,70,000 68.<!

X..PLPm/m.12

.4

.7

.2<j

.1

.0

.6 ,6.1

.8

.0

.7,7,2,7.1,8,4.6

.1

<!

.0,S.1.1,1.1.7

REL MOT..,z.....AMPL PHASE

........ABSONC-Q AM! <]eg! ].O<� <�O.'!94 '�0.'7 900.841 900.7S4 <0%8 91O,S23 930,384 <!S0210 980.10S 1100.042 2130.11S 2SS0,161 2620.164 2670.129 2720.072 28S0,028 347O,OSO SS0.062 720.050 870,026 1200,021 1970.027 2340.02] 2640.013 3280.016 270.0]4 5<!0.007 1210.010 1<!80.010 2290.006 2900.008 ]G0.007 SOO.OOS 1260.006 1920,004 2S20.00S 3370.0% 26

QRT EAVL FlU:

! m/rn0.20 !0.2330.2670.3000.3330.36i70 4<K>0 1330.467 ! ..SOOO,S330. S670.6000.63 30.6670.7000.7330.7670.8000,8330,86i70.'�00,'! 330.'�7

1,0001.0331,0671.1001.1331.167].2001.2331.2671.3001,333],3671 400L433

AMPL PHASE

'<r<'A VE

FREQ SL r/s! -! r/i0.200 0,4s20.233 O,S100.267 O,S740.300 0.6410.333 0.7100.367 0.78 !0.400 0.8 S l0433 09"0.467 0 9<�0.500 LO i40 S33 1,1 3 S0.567 1.2060.600 1.2770.633 1.3470.667 1.4180.700 1.4890,733 1.5600.767 1,6310,800 ].7020.833 1.7730.867 L8440.900 1,<! Ls0.933 1.<! 860.967 2,0S71.000 2,1281.033 2,1981.067 2.2691.100 2.340],133 2.411].]67 2.482].200 2.SS31.233 2.6241.267 2.6'! S1.300 2.7661.333 2 8371,367 2.'�8].4I! 2.<! 7'j],4333.049

S ,.................z .....

AMPL PHASEn! deg! m/m

1.114 30,61.173 37,21.2SG 44.21.337 51.01.423 57.41.484 63.21.499 68.51.446 73,61,313 79,2],097 86.20.822 97.1O.S48 118.40.407 ] 59.70,461 199.4O.S34 22].60.517 238.40.427 260.20.351 292,00.327 325.20.296 353.20.237 24.60.196 64.70.181 102.601150 135.70,108 177.5

0.091 230.20,084 272.40.061 313.90.044 15.90.044 71.70.034 117.3

0.024 182.80.024 245.80.019 301.40,016 8.20.013 66,40.010 142.30.010 207,8

! deg!0.152 191,00.237 193.40.360 196.10.529 199.10.744 202.50,995 206.31,257 210.81.496 216.11.665 222,61.719 231.11.632 243.01.430 261,11.233 289.01.211 324.61.354 357.01.465 24.5].447 53.2

1.387 87.11,381 123.91.374 160.41.313 199.21.263 241.91.246 285.81.199 330.51.139 19,]

1.120 70.01,104 12].21.065 174.81.052 231.21,052 288.01.033 346.6

1,026 47.51.026 109.4

1.018 173.01.016 238.4].011 30S.3],009 14.11.009 84.1

APPFM!IX <: CALCULATIONS OF OSCILLATING NOTIONS 142

].467 3,120 1.4671.500 3,19] ].5001.533 3.262 ].5331.567 3.333 ],5671,600 3.404 1.600],633 3.475 1.6331.667 3,546 ].6671.700 3,617 ].700

0.003 145.90,004 ]87.50.00] 273.30.004 0,30.002 49.20.003 ]73.60.003 23].70.002 347.0

0.000 ] 33.10.000 222.60.000 274.8

G.OOG 11.10.000 66.20.000 l64.90.000 227.30.000 327.4

0.006 268.5 1.004 156.10.006 6.9 1.007 229,70.005 67.4 1,005 304.7

0,004 161.1 1.005 21,50.004 229.1 1,004 99.80.003 321.0 1.004 179.90.004 25.6 1.003 261.50,002 111.9 1.002 344.9

San Diego class tar!ker mo!ious with springSEA WAY4,] 2

Execution: 1844-1994 / 18:53

STATISTICS OF l3ASIC' MOTIONS FORWARD SPEED = 0.00 knWAVE DIRECT]ON = +180 deg of stem

.........�.SLA................,..........,...,.SICiNIFJCANT VALUES OF BASICMOTIONS...., .................. MEAN ADDED.... IN P J.!T....C'ALC'I ! Lh TED..., S'L JR C'E,...... S WA Y......HEA VE.......ROLL......PITCH...�..YAV .... IKSJSTANC'E

JKICi] IT PER I JEICi] I'I' PER AMPL PER AMPL PER AMPL PER AMPL PERAM Pl PF R AM PL PEI CER/BE I BOESE

m! s! <in! <s! m! s! m! s! m! s! deg! <s! deg! s! deg! s! JrN!

3.00 I .0 ! 2.'!9 ]2.16 0,55 17.]0 0.00 6. 8 0.59 16.87 0.00 13.33 0.70 14.94 0.006 28 470 8 ]7.]

4.00 13.00 3,'!'! 1~.]4 0.8JJ ]8.05 0,00 9.49 0,94 ]7,84 0.00 13.67 0.97 15.52 0.007,43 6'~'!.5 26.5

5.00 14.00 4,<!9 ]4.12 ].27 ]8,'� 0.00 ]8.' ].34 ]8.75 0.00 14.02 1.24 16.07 0.008]4.4 35.5

3.50 ]2.50 3.4'! ]2.65 0.7] ]7.58 0,00 6.28 0,76 17.37 0.00 13.50 0.84 15.24 0.006,28 568.7 2 I .8

4,50 ]3.5 ! 4.4'! ]3.63 ]. � ]8,5] G,GG ]3.93 1.]3 18.30 0.00 ]3.85 1.11 15.80 0.009.7 I 74 ].6 3],]

2.00 1].0 ! ]!!'! I I, I '! !,2'! ]6.03 0 00 6.28 0.3] ]5.76 0.00 12,98 0.43 14.32 0 006.28 26'. I 8.6

San Diego class !anJ er mn!ions with springSEAWAY4.] 2

Execution: 18-04-1994 / 18;53

STATISTIC;S OF MOTIONS IN POINTS FORWARD SPEED = 0.00 knWAVE DIRECI1ON = +180 deg off stern

POINT NR = 0]X-APP = 278. �0 inY-CL = O.RK! mZ-BL = ]0.000 m

. �,.S]GNJFICANT VALUESOF

.�.......DI SPLACEII3 ENTS�...,.�.....�, .... VELOCITIES............,AC'.C ELERATIOVS,........,

....,SEA,...,...X.�, ....Y,....�,Z..., .�,X..., ....Y........Z......X,.......Y......Z.�.HE]CJIT PI:R AMPL PER AMPL PER AMPL PER AMPL PER AMPL PER AMPLPER ANJJ'1. PE]< AM]'L PER AMPL PER


,....... VERTICAL RELATIVE MOTIONS..��...SLAMMING DEFINED BY.....SIGNIFICANT VALI.IES OF....EXCEEDING, ....BOW EMERGENCE AND....

.....SEA�,. DISPLACEMENT .VELOCITY....Z-BL...,VELOCITY..PRESSURE.HEIGI IT PLI< AMPI PER AM PL PER PROB NR/H PROB NR/H PROB NR/H

rn! i! <in! i! 0nji! ~! %! I/h! %! I/h! %! �/h!3,00 I 2,00 2,02 I I.'! I 2,14 11,5S 0. I 0.2 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.04.00 13.00 2.S6 I2.36 2.6& I 1.97 1,0 2.9 0.0 0.0 0.0 O. 1s,00 14.00 3.00 I 2,74 3.11 12,2& 3.4 10.0 0.0 0.0 0.2 1,13,SO 12.50 2.30 I 2.14 2.42 I I.77 0.3 1.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.04.SO I3.5 i 2.7i»2,SS 2,<!I I2.I4 2,0 6,0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.S2.00 I 1.00 1.40 11.36 1.4'! IO,i! II 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

m! s! m! s! in! s! m! s! m/s! m/s2! s!

3.00 12.00 0,62 17.0 0.00 I S.6 1.72 15.00.00 6.28 0.34 12.7

4,00 13.00 0,9& 17.9 0.00 16.3 2.42 15.70.00 6,28 0.43 13,2

5.00 14.00 1.40 1&.8 0.00 17.0 3.13 16 40,00 6.2& 0.S2 13,7

3.50 12.50 0,79 17.4 0.00 15.9 2.07 15.30.00 6,28 0.39 13.0

4.50 13,SO 1.18 1&.3 0,00 16.6 2,78 16.00.00 6.2& 04& 13,5

2.00 11.00 0,33 16.0 0.00 &.62 I,OS 14.30.00 6.2& 0.23 ]2.]

s! m/s! s! m/s! s! m/s2! s! m/s2! s!

0.23 16.0 0.00 6.28 0.73 14.0 0.06 11.5

0.35 16.9 0.00 7.87 0.99 14.6 0.08 11.7

0.47 17.7 0.00 12.6 1.22 15.1 0.09 11 9

0.29 16.5 0.00 6.28 0.86 14.3 0.07 11.6

0.41 17.3 0.00 10.1 1.11 14.9 0.08 11.8

0.13 15,0 0.00 6.28 0.47 13.3 0.04 11.3

APPEXDIX 5: CALCULATJOWS OF SEISMIC MOTJOIVS

Appendix 5: Calculations of Seismic Motions

Seismic motions were calculated with the use of the PCNSpEC seismic analysis program. He reader isreferred to the PCYSPEC manual for a more detailed description of the program. Two input files arerequired by the program: a ground motion file and a system characteristics file. The characteristics for the

SALM system, subjected to 2., 10-, 100- and 1000-year peak acce]erations are given below. The groundinotion history is that of t]ie El Centro earthquake, scaled to match the predicted pea]t ground accelerations.

n ut Fi]e o -ea

SALK] SYS]TM. EL CEYTR0=2-year quake, damping&.33

].00 NO. 0.3300.-00000, 1, 2, 2, 0, 1.00000��1,1. 0,

0. ]0007,42330.0

] '!

0.02.0. 20 ! Rf]0.0!0.0287

SALM S'i'STEM, EL CEh'TRO=]0-year quake, damping&.33

] .00 ! !O, 0.,'t.i ! !. -O.O !OO. ], 2, 2, 0, 1.00000�,.1, 1, 0,

0. l 0007,4266,0

12��.0.02,0, 20 ! ]Ir]O.0!0. ]44

SALM SYSTEM, EL CENTRO=]00-yev quake, damping~0.332

1,00000, 0.3300,-0.0 KK!, 1, 2, 2, 0, 1.00000��0,

0. ] 0 !O7.42

] 2

145APPENDIX 5: CALCULATIONS OF SEISMIC MOTIONS

0,02.0, 200 Sfl�.o!0.5]7

SALM SYSTEM, EL CENTRO ]000-year quake, w/damping&.332

1.00000, 0.3300,-0,0000, 1, 2, 2, 1, 1,00000��1, 1, 0,

0. ]0007 4'!

8.2 ] '!

0,02,0. 500 8[ ] 0.0!].]48

~ 14-1]0~ 108

3 !-30623623 4 �~ <!

] 44<!120<!] 7�-]7

h0h6

-l86 17�-670

-716-372219

-1308-1]62-] 0'!

772'!

64 ] 76'!

]3]9]8�

-] "�-�4-8 �

-]08.8

]41-]7~7�

33<!4 �]34]] 328

-] 75336032 K!

-]0'!

�6-]980-271 <! <!

-4024]-6'! 2-762

]72]]2 <!<!�

]2�-202

]8]8

-21] ]-]200-]634

-1 ! ]

4<!-1<! 7

33641263

308<�

-]47 -]80578

34]7-7�

- 631-]641-44

-3341]

683-�6-�92<! <!

5682<�1128-1207-183

]68 -l6]7] '! !<!

-8 '!

-88-]3]-66

-]28-163463�0

- ]

892-2066-]630

1 ]64282]-173

-1�7-168

188-108344689

72-21

488826. 1447. �2-]3]7-169-1380-16<! 2-] ]58-961

.9 -]76

-]31-]44

-1644<! 2

639-7877]0

926-]'!8'!

-13471 98

2324113

-]729-]481

-9518

� ]3]8675-126

6081206

- l471629-384-'�0

28 <!<!<!

-] 306-1 ]4 -3'! 6

-120 -142 -128-194 -162 -144-190 -196 -66-203 -260 -32

-67 25 150419 3 9 27l732 652 599

-603 -484 -250995 1219 1529

839 901 993-2034 -1816 -1725-]087 -782 -429

1960 2412 2729~ ]198 .2373 -1640533 89 1186-]012 -579 237-1231 -100] -751

433 -838 -951420 673 -97

883 < 1130 13631353 2040 -931

~ 1067 -14SS -107]-674 -324 -337222 -32 -2451478 1737 421]43 206 499

194 1856 1984-311 -1118 -1661-325 ]54 816

447 983 1424-1089 -907 469-111] -773 -510-717 -546 64

-147 319 648

APPED'DJX 5: CALCULATIONS OF SEJSMIC MOTIONS

785314

-248-428

380-95-244

445204

-229-41

21035

421-91

35548

41953

492368

4]14S8

-308-783QS

-1354-91

867-960

1669-I ] S2

-270-S90

80]168

-3 S2

23777

-2386S

6]5]26-S]3~ 881432

1334-555-80952

525239

-14S

466588

-426-83

79-38~ 994SO8

-34

705

1594-693-850

21535588

-984-860

24519777

-241

193797

-275445

-2S]

296-744

-489

-316

479822

-416139

-1]S

]OS-807-22

876]352496-69

95157-16

-I77-I ] I184

428-204

232

42S-24'!-208-26S

3]0136

-8298S

] I I ]-670667

-36'!

20

' 3

-5S

205-2]7

36]

-I68-57037

-266-473

9332037

-1246-863

580]99

-]48-2822794 !

-270

/-333

-S3 !

477

] 60623S]47'! $0

-32

38-129-9'!

-263-2]6-827'!I]

3'! 8

4 ! 2-26 !

3S8384

-65l]63

-] I �-SS2

]467464

S]<!

-8738I

-803-4]0

-474-428-S4]-333l 0661236

-I ] 79-873

3144 !'!

~ 77]82274

74-6'! .

! 6 !

'!S7

-330

198]86l

-84379

-]29-11]85-18-2

-124-43

-206-8S2SS'!

-4] 3-530

-86]-444

SG-366.37- ! S

S37382

-406-]23

854-'�3-56S 'l 3

-80

-679-628-199

]]30442

-IOSO-868

236343

-]9-

4263934S

428-7'�

-3018 ! 8

-]28

-27

1281-168S79~ SO

5-56

20373

]S9-]37200937S6

-47 ]-362-3093S8

-] 349-2S8

264-44S378SAO

] ]787<! 8S67

-4S I-282

] ]44-S8'!

-20'!-340

79-243-661-908

20]187-]40-920

-88S

4852887S439SQ4

-]23-23]

-20017'!3]

291

640-]]32558076

-304-]08235

]S9320-SS

4352SS

365-4334QS-217

287-1342

-60SR2

-236]072-82716]0

-20S7S3-79

-437733

-336-317

-1]

374~ 48-S90

-1107211

1247-666-743

-537SR9432

44S12S77

-347-387

-67-362148

-219l23

134191

52S98

-S7

-31687112-1193

-182

1200-656947

-] 15034

-169S93

567-2SS

-3682S9

-376-37665379408-770613

1033373

-157-133510

-36-236-106779467-16026692

541-204

178-265281214-1042

-147

1695-597408

-803-S6

-17530493

-11]-271

508-550

254241-309-582767

1797

APPEAY!IX 5: CALCULATIONS OF SEISMIC MOTIONS 147

84174

6-178

-555-15-247

-363601

-170-351

-120

576350174

-96-388532]

-57 !-391-277765

104147-302

97474

-250-21

79-323376

-111-270407

-115484

-276-54

554-863351

286-276-184

-205-563579

460280

94

-3581388544

-21098

-81

482-1]0-]8432

-664-335-346-73

]2]-]4-l'7 7<!

-]855]3215

-307-3]6- 1 ~'!

80205] <!-

]77238

-630-] lo

I ]

-287

-357-]8735844237

184-376

246563

-450

-388-555

4]

-530

-6<! 1

l]933 ! J

-303

13725078350

]70344

-387-2]8~ '!]

-777

338-343.388

]23]86

- l 45

-68]374

-]87

2 lY]]5

-5<! l.'l3 1

253

]56576

-3<!e-57654

-288426-]75-48

87]'!

53]-534

-34 l-4-]e

A7

-3]-70]

-5]6751

45-512

221410622241-80505

-222-]273

-6083]7

-33<!74'!

87]5

-]249

-4<! ]

507-l26

-56-7

26]-7<!

-413

4 le

-33'!-40

424-402

7]6-384

6041

-30330'!

- 1 <! 8

3]4-483

2-287

-8

340

2]-3]

-371

225-82-727437182331-34

5653-33142

30 !-438

-]45-2]5

-]'�. 3'! !

-]80-475722

-]5.72

]5520

302-]24

-68-5]<!3'! ]

-]53

]43-488-19

762-492

452254-53]58'!

-158]65

-3795<!-328253357355444-52

88-88

-185-57991

-27-14

-2]6

230683]1970

472-209

206-28

-1826<

-15]-519-318-420

8783Q70]05

5034654

272-222

164-76

-289-7

48077

73<J-428

28448]-708614-15-24

-2<!e-23

40741]

85Q4

!9-25

94

632-227

-20-266

-548-243-195471374

]72-128-63603

31198]70

-] 74910-73

-708-465-361782

]04106-1]557

38627277

30-136]25

-316-135

406-16 J

628-416

126641-928385 !9

-189-196

-l ]2-487644

-254371

135-124 -235

328 478

1276181

-11740

-243247-212-195516-527-514

-322330293

21-255

-27760

129-462-345-258439

193-9-309

134393

-566-60

139-29140294

-341-351

126264

-52-275413<3]311

408-371-159

-322444474

471158

58406

509

APPENE>IX 5: CALCULATIONS OF SEISMIC MOTIONS

3S8-365-3S7

1]0-432

78-4116612]44

-846248S<! S

-32<!-20'!5<!p

-380744<! 27

-85<!-380<! 40

.13322<! 1

><!

S77- l0]]S

-]63

-45736'

-]26]RJ2'! 8-48

393-68

-26'!2S6SS

0-]04]0'!-SO'><�

331-3 W

-2 1<!

$4'!

-310-308108

-300-S&-227-S8

84S6

-1226<

6]7

l28630

-4S7749<� I-46K-347&05}3'!S

-176-6IS62

~ 201-1<!

- 1 '�-336<! Q!<�

-68

-8<!

-374406

-]30-3SO] <!<!

-66-66

-10128

-84-]10328

-277

30730l

306-297-193

92-192

-215-76

-396-168

783-864227S93

-490

38l370

~ SOSS6292<!81

-20608-1207-141

46-'l

-188<!

-8<!-34'!~6<!

18~ 156

136-]SS

-3653&S

-128-3S<!

]60-<! 7

-<!'!

SS]S2-

-178SO

2S2'< <7

6S2981'�-10

285-280

198948

-2343]

-444-382]103-616338466-660488217

-7774SS

8145'�

180508-1006-<!8

~ 13

300

-2l6-236-430

-]SO'! Sg

101'�

-31'!

102-148-2S]

329-l 1S-297]07

-26-]0<!

129137

301132173

-174

2Sl

106ll

263-2371961997

60182-241

-566953-228505]S&

-72336340

-628S2S264

633206

-762-SO

76107]34

-]67-175-334

-164-17245

200-219

24-76-]64183

-102-227156

16~ 115

200117

4201574S

-121SO

2]6- I<!

- S3

16&-266]60

-13116&

262310-101

-781489150

594-77

-7842SO23

-18963S

-289SS6

1013-20]

-S48

20S

243-]20-124-213

-23&-20

-]2S286-118-100-14125

-84

]8]98

100-131

]9997

-S]8177-&S

-12664

163-]63

-101

-5-308129

-247

148269479

217%]9

122477

5]9-230-846158

-62

18973]

-9013011122-572

X&980

327-33

266-64-185-69

-323156

-24536S

15-23

-2015370

-141

99242

94-168

16960

-472195

-] 90-129

126192

-322-126

-212-366140

P3617384

459261

-256-387

323552

-303-566377

-286509851

-1364-111107

-1021405

3S4SO

-69265

-l29-265

30-421

284-229

311153

-36148

302-1

-205203

14139-199

143-28

-394255

-229-80

179234

-335-143

APPEJVI!IX 5; CALCULATIONS OF SEISMIC MOTIOI<IS 149

-71318

-1 S672317

-8373

-15]6

-]04

-]21462�-S3143

-29

]�

4 -17]4

668-64]-65

2 -<!8

-1] 1lS2

-�-2 l-! !-]08-1301�

-13 !1 !-I

-1 < 1

t8

14

ll]13

8]36

- 1'�-4'!

<�

87'�

105

-278-10 3 47168

'l 8"

-10'!

J832]73

2H12 4676

-8<!

48]3

-1�-12 -4

�4'

-32

1'!

7<!

43-80

32140

-]12-12<!

'7

�

-3I!

] 2<!3]9-7

14200-3620 -�

10231

-28-7

-76~ 3638

-! 17

�10

-2 74]44

-17'!

] �

-40-l2-31

67102118-68

-278] 'l<!

-23

36181

<!

143]06]8Oj

27137-8 ]43-21'

0 !

74

- ]

-67 -10 -217 -178

]87 232-47 -]4'!

-87 -]20

~ 18213

-11686287

-52

2]0

S3AO52-S

65-107

-8]-]081<! 7

] 0'!

-11626'!

-2]0-]4

121-194-3'!

68<! '!

777 77

-1 9-270-9S

63159

4012220

103

6913<!

-]<�-120

431'!

127

33

3373

-5698

231-7-22

-1

86-984

-1763-16136-4]-76-98170

-138-612

2�44100

-] '1<!9]

11 <!

3470S344

-1'!82 8-91

488

14754

]24S

-30

89]02

-188-116

-]4

303316'!

.<!

859

-6124

10537-70

126-9618

-22S2-17482-4 -110

-98140

-]660

227

8'!

72-100

-22'�

-922'!

6]6212

-~'13.2 'l

-72

43110

10869

126-]1

1016

1]230

-182-l]4

1911

48]44

-9]44

158-15~ 3

147

96-100

-] 115446-2

-366-]]7

115-6 -138

-63103

-215�171

-245

-44-]6

56-86407579-21~ 258-21959

43134

68l 9S

130-25

6212133

-32-]70-106

-8-5

57105

-8340

23947-3172

-11155

-75-10

131-7

-29-3245

-7070

-]20-166

-2

64-26999

127-226100

-2844

-1617

-52548797-42-270-173

-40

38160

32117

133-11

1822140

-63-156

-6411-24

6570

-73

30

APPED! IX 5: CALCULATIONS OF SFISMIC MOTIONS ]SO

2023-3

-68-5

-87-202

SS

3S47396879

2P- l I6

]3-8060

-S2-]-7

-7S>]

S2'! 147].S

-] 07-6 '

~ 3'!S4

-106-6363

-4<!

780<!'!

8-47

]77]

-6'!

-]02-'! 6

1016

-30-63

-1]0-2]3g'!

-24Sg6'!

1]472

23<!S

~ 33-8'!S

-8

-75

"I f-, I i

3]6781!

S

]421!

]2 I

-3]S5

-]6<! <!

-404]-S]

]7'�'�

3]]3

7'!

47-84-'! 81! 7

-66

]16

-60-57]3-129-1988'!

-S7

6264126564<! 3

-66]4

-36-�4<!

-37-7

71!

8736]2

-]38-S6-26633<!

-]S-8<!

]3

1'!'�]�27] <!-48

I7

-gg-<! S

-66

-]0

26-87-5021-JSJ-l73

10245

655813940S289

-6-]

-47

2S-6'7 <!

4<!

84

]2-37-]43

-]1842g

-3]-7<!

]3-]4-S6

25]0~7<!

2]'! 7

6]

-'�~ <! ]-8]

-14

32-1 ]6

4]1-16S-13593

-1369S4131

246]

-80-]'!

3S-SS

S3<!

-]92-1-28-76jg4'!'�

]1-48-120

-50

10]0]27

-68-74

43-35-Sg2S]0572]79

-3883

-]6-'! 5

-87-7l

245

-107-33

-18-174

-6580

137248

1237

720

-97

] ]43-62

46'! <!

3-28-84

1849'�

80360-63-]03

-48

3]841 '!

99-727]

-37-463S1086312

-3-251]2

-24-97-8'!-68-SO

1646-94-24

-40-184-14

6]337561

1144

79-S

-1]4-9

44-686S02

7-2S-822]48967732

-10-77

-784S467]

-1-]02

-68

99-44-2'!

501]0

SS

7-17

~ 9]07

.33.99-91-68-43

3021-78

-14-64

-19420

33487779

103889

-20-128

39-73

60-26

0

-24-832]47936219

-20-92

-67-42

48

-Ja-]05-6786

-46-1364

104463

-31787

46-101

~ 93-67-34

APPENDIX 5: CALCULATIONS OF SEISMIC MOTIONS

48484444444tt40444444tbttt44444tttttttkttt444V ltd

I'C'N S VEC

w vleoclRAMBY

R. BOROSCI IEK

A MODIFIED VERSION OFNONSI EC

BYS. A. MAI{IN

ASSISTED BYle. Ill relerreA

-23 -13-14 -7

0 2-12 -24-30 -26-43 -38]3 4184 7835 37

-13 1-12

9 1062 508?

l85-2 Hl -148- l � - l 5

86 52-2 !

-' .6 !

1 l-84 -'! ~-45 -103

15 612l-57

80 68-I

-4-l -28-5 !

- l2 l -'�~ 63 -72

-2 10

6 169 14-24 -19-22 -22-32 -2667 7061 4824 73 1-8 -4

22 3332 163 l'� '

-7 1 076'! l 38

24 1614 48

24 l3-6 l ~ 36-77 -2373 74

075 77

-10-7

-66 -'! I-7i -46-80 -73

1713

21-16-32-207631

-8-1

146

-62779967

1397384

3176

-6-l

3385

'! !

-33-1 I4

-34�

912

22-1841-197829

-28-5

5590

-28

904820

-115814

-8

334173

-68

7061

-46-5 I-140

4'l

-37

38

10-22-51-188030

-35-8

8723058

163

35-34-48-1

-27

3726

71

9637

-69-60-138

Q5-26

-5

50-27

-158132

-22-11

87952130

-84-69

9047

-119-7

-55-14

1357

-5485

7-65-56

-140-55-14

APPEÃDIX 5: CA/ CULATIOÃS OF SOS/!f/C MOTJO/!/S

J. LIN

JULY 10, 1991

NOTE: INPUT FILE WITH FIRST LINE CONTAINING THE WORD "HELP"TO OBTAINE INPUT FILE FORMATLIKE pCkpec foo.fileAND foo.file: help

t t t t tt t t t t t 0 t 0 t t t t t tt t t t t t t t t t t t t t t t t tt t t t t t t t t t t t t t t t

SALM SYSTEM, EL CENTRO=2-year quake, w/damping~0.33

tetvtstet+~4t~t+vtt+vttaktt+tetttftttttttttttttttttttt

ANALYSIS TYI'E ..........I-S INCiLE S'I'RUC I L! IQ:2-SPEC'1 RUM REPONSE

SYSTEM I IASS ............:SYSTEM DAM!'INCi .�.......;POST YIELD Sl ll=F I=ACT !R .ELEMEN'I' TYVL' �..., ......:

1-B I LINEAR ~ IODEL2-DECiRADIN ii MODEL

PROPERTY PARAMEl ER,....,:I-STII.VKF S S2-PERIOD

YIELD PARAME'I'ER .....,...:1- YIELD DlSI'L.2-ETA MAL> ! E3-TARCiL'I'

P-DELTA El=I-I C'1 .

0-ONLY POST Y l!=LDI -HILL EFFECT

YIELD PARAMETER SCALE ...

1.00000.50000

I

1.00000

NI!MBER OF STIFF/PERIODS .:NUMBER OF YIELD DISP/ETA:COMBINATION OF RESULTS ..;

0-TOTAL COMBINATION1-ONE-TO-ONE COMB&ATION

I I0

MAXIM<!M TIME, STEP ��...: . I

STIFF/PEIV !D VAI.ULS:!: I !: 7.42 ! !

YIELD DISPL/L'1'A/TAIKiET VALUES:!: 1!; 3~ !. ! ! ! !

ttttttttttttttttttttttttttttttttttttttttttttttttitttttttttttttttttttttttttttttt

153APPE,'>T!IX 5; CALCULATIONS OF SEISMIC MOTIONS

LOAD TYPE ... 12

INPUT FUNCTION TIME STEP.: .02000INPUT FUN 'TION TYPE .....: READ OTHERGMINPI.IT RJNCTION LENGTH ...: 200

INPI.JT RJNCTION FORMAT ...: <8f10.0!

INITIAL VELOCITIY ...

INITIAL DISPLACEMENT ...,:,00000

.02870LOAD FACTOR ...

ELEMENT Pi OPI:R I Y SUMMARY:

stiO»ess nu<ur;dI re<I ue»ey

.71705>4L+0 ! .8467<! :+00,742000E+01 .451324E+05 .323624E+05

EXECU I 1 !N STARTS ......,..GROI AT! hl !'I'l !N MAXIMA

~~rout!d ~'round grounddlspt»ce<neul >'e!oc<ly ttecelerauotl

E41'HGY hi AX Ih1A

i»put ki»etio recoverable hysteretic dampinge»erg y energ y su ain energy energy

energy

maximum .470 I E+02 .7238E+Ol .3966E+01 tOOOOE+00 .4614E+02time 3.9600 2.6400 2.5800 .0000 3.9800RELATIVE RES>PONSE MAXIMA

displace<»<'»< ve inc<< y accelefauo<1 resistance

maxhnu<n 1.560<! 6.8683 81.9621 1.1192time '3.9600 2.9400 2.4400 3.9600minimum -3.326! -9.3652 -91.9137 -2.3850time 2.5800 2.] 800 2.1200 2.5800

AB SOLI.! TE RESI'ONSE MAXIMA

disap!uce!net>t velochy acceleration

maximum<i<no

minimumti<ne

peri<>d yield yielddisplacement shear

,43'.>8I:+01,1094E+02 .9807E+022.6600 2.1800 2.1200-. 1 37<!L'+0 1 �.387iE+OI -.755 IE+02I . � ! 0 2.<�00 2.4400

APPFKDJX 5: C>>r>LCULATIO!VS OF SEISMIC NOTIONS

maximum 9,145 C 3.8048 3.7393time 2. 1800 2.6400 3.9800minimum -4.6384 - I.�30 -.8424time 2.9600 1.0200 1.5400DUCTILITY FNVELOPES

RESPONSE ENVELOPES

0 00 2

- I 2<!~E-15

0

0 0 I l ll. 5 ~ 0' ~ 0 ~ 0 4 4 4 4 w lt 5 4 8 0 W t- 0 5 5 I> 0 0 4 t 4l IF 4 0 0 t 4 If 4 0 0 t t 4 4 It 0 4c 4 f f 0 0 0 4 IIK lit t 4 0 0 0 4 C 0 0 4 4 4 4 t 4 4 0 4 4 0

IVNSPEC

A PROC>RAMBY

R. I3OROS llEK

A IilODIFIED VERSION OFNONSPEC

BYS. A. MAHIN

ASSISTED BYR. HFRRERAJ. LIN

JI.ILY ]0, I<J<>I

NOTE'. INPI.JT FILE WITH FIRST LINE CONTAINING THE WORD "HELP'TO OBTAINE INPl lT FILE FORMATLIKE pdif>et.' c f<>o.tileAND 1'<x>. rle; I>eli>

~te~W+WI>+Vol>+$+eskIgketeaatktketggglggttekee4tkt44tt&40444444t444ft4't

maximum poxitive ductility ratiominimum negative ductility ratiocyclic ductility ratioaccumulative ductility rationormalized hyxteretic energy

numher of ix>iitive yield exc<rrxit>r>i>intr>her ol ne~".rtiv<.' yield excurxit>>>xnumher of' yield reverx;tlxnumher ol zen> cr<>iiir>,'x

rciidtr:d diff>l;tee>net>tEXECUTION ENDS ��WRITING> RESL,'L'I S �.

-.00011.0000

1,00001.0000

155APPED'/!/X 5, C>LCULAT OWS OF SEISMIC AIOT/0/ S

SALM S YSTEM, EL CiENTRO= I 0-year quake, w/damping&.33

4 4 4 t 4 f 4 f 0 0 0 4 % 1 4 4 4 i 4 4 4 0 0 '4 '4 4 4 4 4 e 0 4 4 '4 4 'f 4 '4 4 4 0 0 '4 44 4 0 0 0 f f 0

ANALYSIS TYPE ..�,...,..:I-SINGLE STRUCTURE2-S PECTR JM RE PONS E

SYSTEM MASS ��,........;SYSTL'h1 DAMPINCi ...��,.;POS T YIEI.I> S I II=F FAC T !R .:ELFMLNT TYI'L ...�...,..

I -B II.IN LAX h1UDE.I2-DE iRADINCi MODLL

PROPERTY PARAMLTERI-S I !IT-NESS2- VER l !D

YIELD IiAI<AML"I'LR .........:I- YIELL! Dl Sl'I.,2-ETA i'Al I 'I=''i-l AR i!. I

P-DELTA El'I'L' 'I .

0-ONLY POST YIELDI -H.! L L El-T-'EC'T

YIELD PARAh1ETER SCAI L ...

1.00000.33000

.00000I

].00000

M.JMBER OF STII-F/PERIODS .:M JhIBER OI' YII='l.l'! l!ISP/F I'ACoh1BINAT]Oi OF RESLJLTS ..: !- TOTAI. ' ! M 0 I NA11ONI-ONE-I !-ORE COMB ISA I ION

I I 0

MAXIh1 Jh1 'I JME. S 1 El' ....

STIFF/PE!GOD VAL JES:

732 ! !

YIEI D DISI'I./L"I A/TARGET VAL1JES:

!: I !: 66. �0 J

LOA I ! I Y I 'I ' .............

INP JT FL'N 'I'l !N 1 IME STEP.;,02000INI' JT I= >Y"I'ION TYPE .....; READ C!THERGMINI'Lrl F JN 'I'ION LENC!TH ...; 200

44444 4ttt4eett44tet8w st+sstvrtetkkt4444rleettt44040044

APPED'VI!IX 5: CALCULA71OI<,'S OF SEISMIC MOTIOI<IS 156

INPUT FLJNC'TION FORMAT ...: 8fl0.0!

INITIAL VELOCITIY .......; .00000

INITIAL DISPLACEMEI<lT ...

LOAD FACTOR ...,...,.....:

ELEMENT PROPERTY SI JMMARY .'

stiffness r!;< uralfre<Iucncy

period yield yieldtlisplacement shear

,717054F+00 .8467'!DE+M! .74 000E+Ol .4528<�E+OS .324752E+OS

EXEC'l TION STAR IS .........CiR ! JND M !TION MAXIMA

ground ground &rou<rddlspl'rccn!en veI<rci<y accelerati<rn

FNLR IY M AXI.'<1A

hlpul I<Inc!le Iccoccrutrle Irysteretrc dampingenc«cue< gy str:<in energy errergy

el!orgy

max imum .887&E+03 .1310E+03,1270E+03,0000E+00 .8530E+03time 3.'�00 2 7200 2.6000,0000 3.~!800RELAT]'v'L RES!'ONSE MAXIMA

disp!;<cetnen! ~el<~ity acceleration resistance

maxirnu!n 7.<<� 34.4778 407.0706 5.685&lime 3.<!800 2,<�00 2.4400 3.9800minimum -18.8176 -4<!.2111 -468.8034 -13.4932lime 2.6 X� 2.180 ! 2,] 200 2,6000

ABSOL !'l I. RLSPONSL MAXIMA

displ;<cement velocity acceleration

maximum 34.1'�1 16.1868 18.9277time 2.18 � '2.7200 3.<!800mi«hnu<n -] 6.5668 -4.5784 -3,7SS3tun e 3.7000 1,0600 1.6000iD ! "I I LI'I Y I.M'I:1.. !PES

max ununrlimemrtlt!r! u<ntttnc

.2187 F+02,54<!OE+02 .4<0E+032.66 � 2,1800 2,1200-.6'! ! 7I:+01 -. I <�3E+02 -.378<!E+03I. WD > 2.<�00 " 4400

157APPED!IX 5: CALCULATIOXS OF SEISMIC MOTIONS

RESPONSE ENVELOPES

0 00 2

. I 0 I <!E- l 5

! utC t t Y Y * t t t t t t t t t t t t t t t 't t t 't t t t t t t t t t t t t t t t t t t t t t t t t t t t t t t' t t t t t t

I'CNS PEC

A I'ItO iRANIl3Y

R. BOROSCIIEK

A MODII'IED VERSION OFNONS PFC

BYS, A. MAHIN

ASSISTI:D BYR. I IERRERA

.1. LlN

I UL Y I 0, 1991

NOTE: INPI.el FILE 0'J1 H FIRST LINE CONTAINING THE WORD "HELP"TO OB TAKE IN PI.JT FILE FORMATLIKE pdspec < f<x>, lileAND f<x>.I<Ie: help

ttttttttttttttttittttttt*tttttttttttttttttttttttttttttttttttttttttttttttttttttt

ttttttttttttttttttt

SALM SYS'l I:11. I;I CENTRO=IOG.yc;u <Iuake, w/damping&,33

maximum positive ductility ratiominimum negauve ductility ratiocyclic ductility ratioaccumulauve ductility rationormalized hys<cretic energy

numher of positive yield excursion'numher of negative yield exc ursiousnumher of yield reversaisnumher of zero crossings

residual diiplaccjnc<uEXI;CI 11K!N I=.NDS ....WRITING RESl'L I'S ...

.0002-.0004

1.0000I.GGGG1.0000

158

ANALYSIS TYPE ...........;1-S INGLE STRUCTURE2-SPECTRUM REPONSE

SYSTEM MASS ........,..�:SYSTEM DAMPING .........,:POST YIELD STIFF FACTOR,ELEMENT TYPE ......�....:

I-BILINEAR MODEL2-DEGRADING MODEL

PROPERTY PARAMETER �....:I-STIRLESS2-PERIOI!

YIELD PARAMETLR .�......:I- YIELD DISJ'L�2-ETA VALUL3- TARCiEI

P-DLI TA EFI LC'T ..........;0-ONLY I<!S'I' Y]ELI!I-FL Ll EIl LC'T

YIELD PARAMI; I'I:R SC'ALE ...

.33000.00000

1

1.00000

N.IMBED OF S I'll'I /PI=.RJODS .:Y JMBER OF YIL'LD DISP/ETA:COM B I N AT I ! N OF IWS I JETS ..:

0-TOTAL COMB IN Al'JON1-04T.-1' !-O'.iE C'OM B LN ATION

I I0

MAXIM M TJhK STI=P

STIFF/PI Ri !D VALI;FS;

!: I J: 7.42 ! !YJELD DJSPI /1.'I'A/I Al<GI- I VALISES .

18.33 X!

12LOAD TYPE ...

INPU I' FI.JNC'I'JON TIME STEP,: .02000INPI.JT F WY'TION TYPL .....: READ OTHERGMINPLJT FL JNC'I'K!N LENG TII �,: 200

INPLJT I fNCTI !N FORMAT ...: Ilflo.0!

INITI AI VELOCITI Y ��...:

INJTJAI. 1!JSPI ACI'MENT ...

LOAD FAC"I !R ,S I 700

ELEMENT PJ !l'I R'I Y SLJMMARY ',

API'ENDIX 5 . CALCULATIONS OF SFISMIC MOTIONS

159APPEXT!JX 5: CALCULATJO!v'.S OF SElSMJC MOT/ONS

stiffrress naturalfrey ue«cy

period yield yielddisplacement shear

.7170S4E+00 .846790E+00 .742000E+01 .451592E+05 .323816E+05

EXECUTION STARTS .........GROI JND MOTION MAXIMA

grourrd ground grounddisplacetnent velt>city acceleralion

maxirnurn .7851E+02 .1971E+03 .1767E+04time 2,66 O 2.18 $2.1200mirrirnu~n -.2- 84E+02 �,6975E+02 -.1360E+04titne 1. r4 ! ! 2.'�00 2.4400

EbrERCiY MAXIMA

inpu kinetic recoverahle hysteretic dampingerrergi etrergy suain energy energy

crrcr'gy

mar,im um .11441=.+05 .168'+04 .1636E+Of .0000E+00 .1100E+OSlime 3 '�00 2 7200 2.6 IOO .0000 3.9800REI ATIN'E RLSI' !NSE- MAXIMA

di.place me trr t c toe it y acceleration resistance

2 t .46N'! 123. 7848 1461.4964 20.41373.'! BOO 2.9400 2,4400 3.9800

-67.5603 -176.6814 -1683,1346 -48,44442.60 � 2.1800 2.1200 2.6000

AB SOLI.lTIr ICOSI'ONSL MAXIMA

displacement velocity acceleration

maximu~n l22,7733 S8,1150 67,'!S58l 1m c 2.1800 2.7200 3.9800minimum -S'! 47'� -16,4377 -13.482Stime 3.7000 1.0600 1,6000DI.ICTILI I'Y EN VEI OPES

maximum positive ductility ratiominimum negative ductility ratiocyclic ductility ratioaccumul;tlive ductility rationormalized hystere ic energy

RESP lNSI: I;Ni'EI.OPI;S

nutnher ol positive yield excurii<urinutnber of negative > ield cxcuriior>i 0 0

maximumntneminimumlime

.0006-.0015

1.00001.00001.0000

APPENDIX 5; CALCU LATIOXS OF SEISMIC MOTIONS

numh«r of yield reversalsnumher of zero crossin s 0 2

.2422E-14

tttttttttttitttttttttt ttttttttttttttttttttttttttttttttttttttttttttttttttttttttt

PC NSPEC'

A I'ROGRAh1BY

R. BOROSC'I IEK

A h1ODJFIED VERSION OFNONSPEC'

BYS A. hJAJIJN

ASSIS'I ED BYk. JJERRERA

I, I.IN

.JULY 10, J99l

NOTE: INPJ.'J' I-ILE WITH FIRST LINE CONTAINING THE WORD "HELP"TO OB'I ALNL JNJ'! 'I' FILE FORh1ATLIKF pd.pec foo.! tieAND Joo.f'ile; J!elp

tt+~ttea +0s4+tttttttttt~tttrttttttttttttttttttttttttttttttttttttttttttttttttt

ttt+~+ttittwvttttttttttttttttttttttttttttttttttttttttt

SALM SYSTEhl. EL CENTRO= I 000-year quake, w/damping&.33

t t tt t t t t t t t t t t t t a tt t tt t t't t t t tt t t t t t t t t tt t tt t tt tt t tt t tt

residual displacem eniEXECUTION ENDS ....WRITING RESJ.JLTS ...

ANALYSIS TYPJ= ..�......:I -SINCiLE STRI JC'Tl.JRE2-SPLCTRJ. Jh1 kEPONSE

SYSTEM h1ASS .............:SYSTEh1 IMh1PJN i ..��.�.;POST Yli=LD Sl JJ.J-' FA "I Ok,:FLLh11:NT TYJ'I

1.00 J J0.33000

.0MXJ0I

APPEND/X 5: CALCULATIOXS OF SEISMIC MOTIONS

I-8ILINEAR MODEL2-DECiRADINCi MODEL

PROPERTY PARAMETER ...,..;] -STIFFNESS

2-PERIODYIELD PARAMETER,........:

1- YIELD DISPL,2-ETA VALUE3-TARGET

P-DELTA EFFECT ..........:0-ONLY POST YIELDI -FULL EFFECT

YIELD PARAMETER SCALE .� 1,00000

Ni.iMI3EI< Ol= STII I /PEI<IUI!S .;51.JMI3ER OF YIELD DISP/L'I A;COMOINATION OF RES<XTS ..:

0- TOTAL COM B I NATIONI -ONE-1'O-ONI ' COM 8 LN AT 1 ON

I I0

MAXIMIiM TlME STEP ...,

STIFF/PERIOI! VALI,iES:

7.42 iIi!; I !:

YFEl D DIS VL/I I A/I'AI<CiI:.'I' VALI.IES:

!; I!: h.2i K!

LOAD I YPL ........... 12

INPliT Ft'N< THON TIME STEP.: .02000INPIJr rt>CI1OS TYl'E ...,.: READ OTHERGMINPUT FliNC1'ION LEYGTH ... . 'S00

INPI.;T Fl.m CTION FORMAT ...; Sf10.0!IYITI AL VEI.OCITI Y .......: .00000

IYITIAL DISPI.ACEMEN1 �.

LOAL! FAC'I OR ...........�, I, 14800

ELEMENI PROPLI<TY SUMMARY:

stiffaess n;incur;d period yield yieldfregUeae~' displacement shear

.7 l 70~4K+00 .846790L+00 .742000E+0 I .4%1324E+05 .323624E+05

APPENDIX 5 ' CALCULATIONS OF SEISMIC MOTIONS 162

GROL JND MOTION MAXIMA

grout'td groultd groutlddisplace!net ! t ve]<wity accelerauon

maximum .5973E+03 .4377E+03 .3923E+04time 9,9800 2.1800 2.1200minimum -.5515E+02 -.2211E+03 -.3020E+04time 1.0400 5.3800 2.4400

ENERGY MAXIMA

inpm kinetic recoverable ]tysteretic dampingener i e«orgy strain energy energy

encl'g y

maximutn .]06]E+06 .9876E+04,806<!E+04,0000E+00 .1026E+06time 9.22 � ] .5]�0 2.6000 .0000 9,9800RELATIVE RLSPONSE MAXIMA

disp]acement velocity acce]eralion resistance

maximum 63.2153 323.54] ] 3245.2570 45.3288time 3,9] X! 5.3]<00 2.4400 3.9800minimum -150. ! ] 78 -392,3216 -3737.4052 -107.5709time .6 ! ! ! 2, I ] ] ! 2,12 X! 2.6000

ABS !I.I']l ] I..Sl' l."iSI. ] ]AX]MA

dt~p]I tee net! ve]oct iy accelet a i<a!

maximutn 272.6186 ]40.54]9 649.0404time 2.18 � 8.5800 9.9800minimutn -16'!.3432 -36.5000 -29.9378tune 5.4 $0 ] .06 K! 1.6000Dl.!CTILITY ENVELOPLS

RES]&NSE ENVELOPES

0 00 6

.] 8] 14-]4

maximutn positive ductility ratiomittimu!n ttegative duct]]it> ratiocyclic ductility r,'< i<iaccumulative duc ility ra i<>nortnalized hystetetic energy

number of positive yield excursionsnumber of negative yield excursiottsnumber of yield reversalsnutnher of zer<> cr<isiltigs

residual diiplacetne<t EXH t!i]ON ENDS .O'BIT]NCi RL'S]!I TS ...

.0014-,0033

1.00001.00001.0000

163APPEh'DIX 6 .' CALCULATIOA'S OF FATIGUE

Appendix 6: Calculations of Fatigue

calcuhtions were done for the luhular riser, wire rope, connections, articulations, and chain amnponents.

The followiug fatigue calculations are based on Ihe relations given in Chapters 4 and 5. Tbe caknhttionswere carried out with the use of Microsoft Excel spreadsheets, which are reproduced bere. Fatigue

APPED!lX 6: CALCULATIOKS OF FATJGUE

APPEÃDJX 6: CALCULATIONS OF FATIGUE

APPENDIX 6: CALCULATIONS OF FATIGUE

APPEÃDJX 6: CALCULATJONS OF FAT1GUE �7

APPENDIX 6: CALCULATlOXS OF FATIGUE

The cutnulative annual probabiiities of failure are given in Table A.6.1. Tbese values ~

obtained by varying the service life in the fatigue reliability calculations for chain. '1be values are plotted

in Figure 5. l.

Table A,6.1: Fatigue Reliability versus Service Life Chain!

APPF.NI!IX 7; CALCULATIONS OF CALM LINE AND ANCHOR TFNSIONS

Appendix 7: Calculations of CALM Line and Anchor Tensions

The calculations of CALM line and anchor tensions urere carried out by Wei Ma, and tbe reader is referrOd tohis report for a detailed discussion of this analysis [Ma, 1994!. A table of Offset versus Line and AucborTensiotts is provided in Table A.7.1..

Table A.7,1: CALM Offset versus Tension

l70APP'EM!lX 8: CALCULATIONS OF SALM LINE AND ANCHOR PILE TENSIONS

Appendix 8: Calculations of SALM Line and Anchor PileTensions

The design ot the SALM system was carried out using Micmsoh Excel spreadsheets, which are Ieproduced

here. The SALM system consists of three major components: the buoy, the anchor leg, and the pile

anchor, The anchor leg for this system is composed of three solid risers, Tbe hoses were also examined in

this design process. Bwied on the weight and buoyancy of all system components, a buoy draft could bedetermined, A pretension was then added by increasing the draft of the buoy, Tbe effectiveness of aprete»ii<><> a< pro< i<iini reit<>ring force is calculated in the next section.

ht C<»n»neat 3esi n

APPENDIX 8: CALCULATIONS OF SALM LINE AND ANCHOR PILE TENSIONS

buoyancy refers tnt I> to solid ho.ce. nor interior

APPFh'DIX h': CALCULATIONS OF SALM LINE AND ANCHOR PILE TENSIONS 172

Witty the system characteristics determined, the horizontal environmental force versus the

horizon t:d re itoriu f<» ee could be iterated to find an equilibrium offset position. This procedure is given inthc sprct<d>hue<i bel<<w f<>r the SALM systetn without a moored tanker for the 2-year, � year and 100-year

return period couditi<»<. The pr<~edure was aLso carried out for the SALM system with a connected tanker,

for the uml er iu both the t«ll-!<tad and lightship conditions. The procedure was then carried out given total

oft'iet s e«dy i<iree <ii'iset plus pe.<k oscillating offset!, iterating to find forces and tensions based on

equil ibrium oi i i<.t.

APPENDIX 8: CALCULATIONS OF SALM LINE AND ANCHOR PILE TENSIONS 173

APPED Y>IX b': CALCULATIONS OF SALM LINE' AND ANCHOR PILE TENSIONS

175APPENDIX 9: APPROXIMATIONS TO THE STANDARD NORMAL DISTRIBUTION

Appendix 9: Approximations to the Standard NormalDistribution

Several formulas have been proposed for approximating the standard tMMma1 distribution. A handy form of

estitnation v as necessary in this paper due to the number of iterations am wbich made use of the standard

normal tiistrihu lion, Two approxhnations were examined, one by Abramowilz [Meichers, 1987! and one

from IBea, 1'P�]. These approximalions are:

1 1C> P! = l �,�exp � � P'P�'!' 2

Abramowitz!

c> $} = I � 0.475exp � s' '}

] hc values calculutct} hy the Ahramowitz approximation were found to more closely approximate

the s andurJ normal di~iribuliou for the values of beta encountered in this project, and this approximation

was UM.'8.

APPENDIX JO: CALCULATIONS OF RELJABJLJTY 176

Appendix 10: Calculations of Reliability

The calculation of reliahili ty was carried out using Microsoft Excel spreadsheets. The relations used in the

reliability analysis are detailed in Chapter 5. For the sake of conciseness, only one reliability aLleuhtion is

presented here for each system, as only the load will vary for caicuhtion of different return periods, and theresults for other return periods can be found in Chapter 5.

APPENDIX /0: CALCULATIONS OF RELIABILITY 177

P of .c!. tent

APPEP'l>IX 11: SPMS EVALUATED BY ABS FACTORS OF SAFETY

offshore single point mooring systems

Documents