Design of Offshore Structures - Force - Wave PDF

Floating offshore wind turbines
Michael Muskulus
Department of Civil and Transport Engineering

Norwegian University of Science and Technology
7491 Trondheim, Norway
Stochastic Dynamics of Wind Turbines and Wave Energy Absorbers

August 6–8, 2014
M. Muskulus (michael.muskulus@ntnu.no) Norwegian University of Science and Technology

Floating offshore wind turbines Stochastic Dynamics of Wind Turbines and Wave Energy Absorbers,August 6–8, 2014
Introduction Wave forces Dynamics Wind turbine loads References
Part I
Hydrodynamics and design of floating

offshore wind turbines

Learning objectives
• Design criteria
• Wave forces on floating structures
• Basic equation of motion
• Wind turbine loads
• Mooring systems
• Floating wind turbine concepts
• Basic dynamic instability
• Recent work

Design challenges
• Highly dynamic and complex environment

• Nonlinearities
• Uncertainties in hydrodynamic loads and behavior
• Specialized analysis and software needs
Similar to challenges for fixed bottom wind turbines (cf. Schafhirt &
Muskulus 2014), but with a few additional issues.

Design criteria
• Hydrodynamic stability
• Frequency considerations
• Platform survival (storm conditions)
• No water on deck
• Air gap (no slamming loads)
• Mooring line fairlead breaking strength
• Tendons / mooring lines no-slack
• Sloshing in tanks
• Fatigue assessment
• System limits and performance
• Power-cable limit on excursions
• Maximum nacelle accelerations
• Design static / dynamic platform pitch angle (vs. power production)

Design criteria
• Hydrodynamic stability
• Frequency considerations
• Platform survival (storm conditions)
• No water on deck
• Air gap (no slamming loads)
• Mooring line fairlead breaking strength
• Tendons / mooring lines no-slack
• Sloshing in tanks
• Fatigue assessment
• System limits and performance
• Power-cable limit on excursions
• Maximum nacelle accelerations
• Design static / dynamic platform pitch angle (vs. power production)
VIDEO
Semisubmersible FOWT in extreme conditions
Frequency considerations
• Example: Hywind (Statoil)

• 1P = 17 rpm/60 min = 0.283 Hz

Wave forces

Intro
William Thomson (Lord Kelvin, 1857)

• Now I think hydrodynamics is to be the root of all physical science,
and it is at present second to none in the beauty of its mathematics.
Sir Geoffrey Ingram Taylor (1974)
• Though the fundamental laws of the mechanics of the simplest
fluids, which possess Newtonian viscosity, are known and
understood, to apply them to give a complete description of any
industrially significant process is often far beyond our power.
Turgut Sarpkaya (2010)
• The emerging fact is that the current body of analytical,
experimental, and operational knowledge is still inadequate to
describe the complex realities of fluid loading and dynamic response
of offshore structures as evidenced by often tragic and highly
expensive failures.

Linear wave theory
(Faltinsen 1990)
Wave spectra
(Faltinsen 1990)
• Spectral representation of short-term seastate
(e.g. Pierson-Moskowitz / JONSWAP spectrum)
• Assumption: stationary Gaussian
• Typically wind sea and swell need to be considered
Long-term sea state
(Faltinsen 1990)

Implications of linearity
(Faltinsen 1990)
Hydrodynamic problem dealt as two subproblems:
• Forces and moments on the body when the structure is restrained
from motion and there are incident waves: wave excitation loads
(Froude-Krylov / diffraction forces and moments)
• Forces and moments on the body when the structure is forced to
oscillate with a certain frequency in any rigid-body mode, and there
are no incident waves: added mass, damping and restoring terms.
Dimensional analysis
Wave forces depend on eight quantities:
f = Ψ(t, T , D, λ, u0 , u̇0 , ρ, ν)
T Wave period
D Structural dimension (relevant)
λ Wave length
u0 Water particle velocity (maximum)
u̇0 Water particle acceleration u̇0 = ωu0
In an M-L-T system, this leaves five dimensionless quantities
(Buckingham Pi theorem):

f t u0 D u0 T πD
=Φ , , ,
ρu02 D T ν D λ
t/T Dimensionless time
u0 D/ν Reynolds number
u0 T /D Keulegan-Carpenter (KC) number
πD/λ = kD/2 = ka Diffraction parameter
Three basic approaches to wave excitation loads

Total wave force consists of components due to drag, inertia and
scattering
• Morison formula
Accurate description if drag force is
significant, i.e., if KC > 5
Inertia term can be used (CM = 2) for
small structures (λ/D > 5)
• Froude-Krylov approximation
Pressure due to incident waves is used
on the surface of the structure
Applicable for relatively small
structures (λ/D > 5)
• Diffraction theory
Necessary for relatively large
structures, i.e., if λ/D < 5
Viscous effects not represented
Morison formula – Basic idea
F = CM AI u̇ + CD AD |u|u
where AI = ρ π4 D 2
and AD = 12 ρD.
• Inertia coefficient CM : represents changes in the fluid due to the
presence of the cylinder under non-viscous potential flow.
In a uniformly accelerated fluid CM = 2.0
• Drag coefficient CD : represents viscous effects due to turbulence
wake region behind the cylinder — difficult to predict.
NB: different values of CD apply for steady flow past the cylinder as
opposed to oscillatory flow
• Simple superposition of both effects assumed
• Interaction effects become important for separation < 2D between
members

Morison formula – Alternative formulations
Relative velocity model
F = CM AI (u̇ − ẍ) + CD AD |u − ẋ|(u − ẋ)
Split form
F = CM AI u̇ − CA AI ẍ) + CD AD |u − ẋ|(u − ẋ)

Morison formula – Corrections
Four-term Morison formula (Sarpkaya 1981):

Morison formula – Typical values

Borgman linearization
For linear frequency calculations, e.g., the nonlinear drag term is modified
and the Morison formula reads:
F 0 = CM AI u̇ + C̃D AD u
The right term is selected such that the sum of squares is minimized for
all points in the timeseries, i.e., such that
∂h(F − F1 )2 i
AD = −2hCD u 2 |u| − C̃D u 2 i = 0
∂ C̃D
which leads to
hu 2 |u|i
C̃D = CD
hu 2 i

Borgman linearization
hu 2 |u|i
C̃D = CD
hu 2 i
Assuming that wave surface elevation is zero-mean Gaussian and linear
wave theory applies, one finds that
(8π)σu3 p
C̃D = CD 2
= CD (8/π)σu
σu
and r
8
FD (t) ∼ CD AD σu u(t)
π
R∞
where σu2 = 0
Su (ω) dω.

Froude-Krylov force – General approach
Dynamic wave pressure

H cosh kz
p = ρg cos(kx − ωt)
2 cosh kd
Resulting horizontal force component
Z
Fx = CH pnx dS
S
NB: force coefficient CH corrects for changes in the fluid due to presence
of the structure — values not obtained by Froude-Krylov theory
Assumptions: small structure (D/λ < 5), wave height small

Froude-Krylov force for the vertical cylinder
Cylinder of radius a, where x = a cos θ is the horizontal coordinate.

Cylinder center at z, length of the cylinder l.
Z z+l/2 Z 2π
ρgHa
Fx = CH cosh kz dz cos(ka cos θ − ωt) cos θ dθ
2 cosh kd z−l/2 0
2J1 (ka) sinh(kl/2) ˙
= CH ρV u(z)
ka (kl/2)
in terms of the horizontal water particle acceleration at the cylinder

center, with the Bessel function of the first kind (order one) J1 .

McCamy-Fuchs theory
• Analytical solution to the linear diffraction problem (wave excitation

force)
• Fixed vertical cylinder, surface piercing
Net force per unit axial length
2ρgH cosh kz 1
fx = p cos(ωt − α)
k cosh kd A1 (ka)
where
J10 (ka)

0 0
−1
A1 (ka) = J12 (ka) 2
+ Y1 (ka), α = tan
Y10 (ka)

Relation to Morison approach
fx = CM ρπa2 u̇α
in which
4
CM = √
π(ka)2 A1
and u̇α is the water-particle acceleration at elevation z from the bottom
at a phase lag of α.
General diffraction theory
• Boundary-value problem with perturbative solution

• Linearization: Added mass, (wave radiation) damping and restoring
for the j-th motion mode qj :
d2 qj dqj
Fk = −Akj 2
− Bkj − Ckj q
dt dt
• NB: Added mass can be negative (e.g. catamarans)
• NB: Dependent on currents (quadratic correction)
• Added mass and damping terms experimentally accessible
• Free-decay tests
• Resonance testing (absorbed wave power)
• Determined through strip theory (two-dimensional approximation)
• Numerical (Green’s function method)
• Analytical (e.g. Lewis form technique)

Example: Added mass – rough estimates
(Barltrop 1998)
Second-order wave forces

Following Langley (1986) we write for the surface elevation
X
η(t) = < ân e iωn t , with E[|ân |2 ] = 2Gηη (ωn ) dω
n
The low-frequency second order force is then

XX
∗
F =< ân âm Hnm e i(ωn −ωm )t
n m
with a complex transfer function Hnm . This can be written as:

X X
F = |ân |2 Hnn + Xk e iωk t
n k
where X
∗
Xk = 2 Hm+k,m âm âm+k
m
The first term above represents a mean drift force whereas the second
term is slowly-varying.
Model tests for the DeepCwind semisubmersible
(Coulling et al. 2013)
• Wave-only response improves signficantly when including

second-order wave forces
Significance
(Coulling et al. 2013)
• In an operational case with turbulent wind, a difference of only 3

percent occurs without second-order wave forces

Heave plates
(Tao & Cai 2004)

Heave plates introduce additional viscous damping into the heave degree
of freedom (which is often critical)
Heave plates
Additional viscous damping from heave plate:
(Tao & Cai 2004)

• Linear with KC number
• Strongly depends on disk/cylinder diameter ratio
Dynamics

Equation of motion — General form
M q̈ + B q̇ + Cq = F
M Inertia
B Damping Wave radiation
C Stiffness Hydrostatic restoring, Mooring
F External Forces Wave excitation, Viscous forces

Response in irregular seas
Wave elevation:
N
X
ζ= Aj sin(ωj t − kj x + j )
j=1
Steady-state response to j-th component:
Aj |H(ωj )| sin(ωj t + δ(ωj ) + j )
determines RAO (Response Amplitude Operator) — response amplitude

per unit wave amplitude (transfer function)

Added mass
Presence of a body in a fluid causes complex changes in the flow.

May theoretetically be calculated using diffraction theory.
As a first approximation, can be treated as an additional mass of fluid ma
that is trapped by the body.
The hydrodynamic force on a body in an accelerating fluid is (cf. inertia
term in Morison formula):
F = FFroude−Krylov + ma ẍfluid
The force required to accelerate a submerged structure is:
F = (mstructure + ma )ẍstructure

Equation of motion — Frequency domain
(M + A(ω))q̈ + B(ω)q̇ + Cq = F (ω)
M Inertia
A(ω) Addedd mass Frequency-dependent
B(ω) Damping Frequency-dependent wave radiation
C Stiffness Hydrostatic restoring, Mooring
F (ω) External force Wave excitation

Natural periods
21
Mii + Aii
Ti = 2π
Cii
• For an unmoored structure there are no resonance periods in surge,

sway and yaw.
• Typical periods for a moored structure: T > 60s in these DOF.
• Standard design criterion: T > 20s in heave, pitch and roll.

Natural periods — Semi-submersible
Heave degree of freedom:

12
M + A33
T3 = 2π ,
ρgAw
where Aw is waterplane area.

• Possible to achieve T3 > 20s in a semi-submersible by large water
plane area.

Natural periods — TLP
Heave degree of freedom:

12
M + A33
T3 = 2π ,
EA/l
where E , A, l are modulus of elasticity, cross-section and length of the

tendons.
• Lower than wave excitation spectrum, i.e., T3 < 5 s.

Equation of motion — Time domain

Cummins equation:
Z t
(M + A∞ )q̈ + K (t − τ )q̇(t) dτ + Cq = F
0
with
Z ∞
2
K (t) = − ω [A(ω) − A∞ ] sin(ωt) dω
π 0
Z ∞
2
= B(ω) cos(ωt) dω
π 0
1 ∞
Z
A∞ = A(ω) + K (t) sin(ωt) dt = lim A(ω)
ω 0 ω→∞
B∞ =0

Wind turbine loads

Mean rotor thrust
(Zaaijer 2007)

Turbulence
• Stationary Gaussian process

• Simulated from a spectrum (e.g. Kaimal)
• Typically on a relatively coarse grid

Turbulence
• Stationary Gaussian process

• Simulated from a spectrum (e.g. Kaimal)
• Typically on a relatively coarse grid

Variability due to stochastic environment
(Zwick & Muskulus 2014)
• Wind turbines are strongly forced systems

• Significant variability due to fluctuating environment

Variability due to stochastic environment
(Zwick & Muskulus 2014)

• Fatigue analysis shows a bias for < 60 min
• With probability 5 percent a difference in DEL of ±10 percent
between estimate and expectation for 60 min analysis

The rotor: Basic model
• Loads based on lift/drag component in direction of horizontal axis;

Rotor thrust load modelled as
1
Ta = ρπR 2 ct (λ, θ)vrel
2
2
where λ = vωR
rel
is the tip-speed-ratio, and θ is pitch angle.
• Standard model used for control-system or simplified dynamical
studies.
• Weakly non-Gaussian

The rotor: Rotational sampling
(Murtagh et al. 2004)
• Stochastic component: Numerically integrated from two-point

covariance function
• Periodic components: At multiples 1P, 2P, 3P, . . . , of rotor
frequency?
• Amplitudes: Can now be studied numerically

The rotor: Rotational sampling
(Murtagh et al. 2004)
• Stochastic component: Numerically integrated from two-point

covariance function
• Periodic components: At multiples 1P, 2P, 3P, . . . , of rotor
frequency?
• Amplitudes: Can now be studied numerically

Rotor thrust modelling
• Goal
• A simple model that is accurate enough for response analysis and
fatigue calculations
• Ambition
• Significantly faster than time-domain
• Similar accuracy

Combined periodic and stochastic wide-band signal
• Classical treatment according to Madsen & Frandsen (1984):
Y (t) = Z (t) + X (t)
where X (t) is stationary Gaussian process characterised by spectral

density SX (ω), and
N
X
Z (t) = < αn exp(in(ωR t + θ)).
n=0
• Spectral moments:
" N
#
Z ∞
k 1X k 2

λk = 2 ω SX (ω) + ω |αn | δ(ω − nωR ) dω
0 2 α=1

Upcrossing intensity
• Crossing frequency conditional on random phase θ = θ0 . An
upcrossing of the level ξ by Y (t) corresponds to an upcrossing of
the time-dependent level ξ − Z (t) by X (t):
Z ∞
νY (ξ, t|θ0 ) = (ẋ + Ż (t))fX Ẋ (ξ − Z (t), ẋ) dẋ (1)
−ż(t)

ξ − Z (t) −Z (t)
= 2πν0 φ Ψ (2)
σX ω0 σX
where Ψ(x) = φ(x) − xφ(−x).

• Crossing frequency by averaging Rice’s formula over a full period
T0 = 2π/ωR :
T0 /2
ξ − Z (t) −Z (t)
Z
2π
νY (ξ) = ν0 φ Ψ dt
T0 −T0 /2 σX ω0 σX

Model fitting
• ARMA model plus periodic components (not SARIMA model)

• Difficult to separate out the “seasonal” (deterministic) components
• Example: AR(0.9997) with σ = 1

Model fitting
• ARMA model plus periodic components (not SARIMA model)

• Difficult to separate out the “seasonal” (deterministic) components
• Example: AR(0.9997) with σ = 1

Model fitting
• Harmonic components multiples of ω = 0.04 Hz (3P = 0.397 Hz)

• Z (t) = 2Zω (t) + 2Z2ω (t) + 0.4Z3ω (t) + 0.4Z4ω (t)
• X (t) = 0.9997X (t − 1) + N(0, 1)
• Y (t) = X (t) + Z (t) + mean

Model fitting
• Harmonic components multiples of ω = 0.04 Hz (3P = 0.397 Hz)

• Z (t) = 2Zω (t) + 2Z2ω (t) + 0.4Z3ω (t) + 0.4Z4ω (t)
• X (t) = 0.9997X (t − 1) + N(0, 1)
• Y (t) = X (t) + Z (t) + mean

References
N.D.P. Barltrop: Floating structures — A guide for design and analysis. CMPT
(1998).
A.J. Coulling, A.J. Goupee, A.N. Robertson, J.M. Jonkman: Importance of

second-order difference-frequency wave-diffraction forces in the validation of a
Fast semi-submersible floating wind turbine model. Technical Report
NREL/CP-5000-57697, National Renewable Energy Laboratory (2013).
O.M. Faltinsen: Sea loads on ships and offshore structures. Cambridge University
Press (1990).
R.S. Langley: On the time domain simulation of second order wave forces and
induced responses. Applied Ocean Research 8 (1986), 134–143.
PJ Murtagh, B Basu, BM Broderick. Along-wind response of a wind turbine

tower with blade coupling subjected to rotationally sampled wind loading.
Engineering Structures 27 (2005), 1209–1219.
PH Madsen, S Frandsen: Wind-induced failure of wind turbines. Engineering

Structures 6 (1984), 281–287.
M.E. McCormick: Ocean engineering mechanics — with applications. Cambridge

University Press (2010).
References
M Muskulus, S Schafhirt: Design optimization of wind turbine support structures

— a review. ISOPE Journal of Ocean and Wind Energy 1 (2014), 12–22.
T. Sarpkaya: Morison equation and the wave forces on offshore structures.

Technical Report CR82.008, US Navy Civil Engineering Laboratory (1981).
L. Tao, S. Cai: Heave motion suppression of a Spar with a heave plate. Ocean
Engineering 31 (2004), 669–692.
M. Zaaijer: Introduction to wind energy. Lecture notes Offshore Wind Farm

Design, TU Delft (2007).
D Zwick, M Muskulus: The simulation error caused by input loading variability in

offshore wind turbine structural analysis. Wind Energy, to appear.


Design of Offshore Structures - Force - Wave PDF

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Design of Offshore Structures - Force - Wave PDF

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Floating offshore wind turbines

Department of Civil and Transport Engineering

Stochastic Dynamics of Wind Turbines and Wave Energy Absorbers

M. Muskulus (michael.muskulus@ntnu.no) Norwegian University of Science and Technology

Hydrodynamics and design of floating

M. Muskulus (michael.muskulus@ntnu.no) Norwegian University of Science and Technology

M. Muskulus (michael.muskulus@ntnu.no) Norwegian University of Science and Technology

• Highly dynamic and complex environment

M. Muskulus (michael.muskulus@ntnu.no) Norwegian University of Science and Technology

M. Muskulus (michael.muskulus@ntnu.no) Norwegian University of Science and Technology

• Example: Hywind (Statoil)

M. Muskulus (michael.muskulus@ntnu.no) Norwegian University of Science and Technology

M. Muskulus (michael.muskulus@ntnu.no) Norwegian University of Science and Technology

William Thomson (Lord Kelvin, 1857)

M. Muskulus (michael.muskulus@ntnu.no) Norwegian University of Science and Technology

Linear wave theory

Long-term sea state

M. Muskulus (michael.muskulus@ntnu.no) Norwegian University of Science and Technology

Three basic approaches to wave excitation loads

Morison formula – Basic idea

M. Muskulus (michael.muskulus@ntnu.no) Norwegian University of Science and Technology

Morison formula – Alternative formulations

Relative velocity model

F = CM AI (u̇ − ẍ) + CD AD |u − ẋ|(u − ẋ)

F = CM AI u̇ − CA AI ẍ) + CD AD |u − ẋ|(u − ẋ)

M. Muskulus (michael.muskulus@ntnu.no) Norwegian University of Science and Technology

Morison formula – Corrections

Four-term Morison formula (Sarpkaya 1981):

M. Muskulus (michael.muskulus@ntnu.no) Norwegian University of Science and Technology

Morison formula – Typical values

M. Muskulus (michael.muskulus@ntnu.no) Norwegian University of Science and Technology

M. Muskulus (michael.muskulus@ntnu.no) Norwegian University of Science and Technology

M. Muskulus (michael.muskulus@ntnu.no) Norwegian University of Science and Technology

Froude-Krylov force – General approach

Dynamic wave pressure

M. Muskulus (michael.muskulus@ntnu.no) Norwegian University of Science and Technology

Froude-Krylov force for the vertical cylinder

Cylinder of radius a, where x = a cos θ is the horizontal coordinate.

in terms of the horizontal water particle acceleration at the cylinder

M. Muskulus (michael.muskulus@ntnu.no) Norwegian University of Science and Technology

• Analytical solution to the linear diffraction problem (wave excitation

M. Muskulus (michael.muskulus@ntnu.no) Norwegian University of Science and Technology

Relation to Morison approach

General diffraction theory

• Boundary-value problem with perturbative solution

M. Muskulus (michael.muskulus@ntnu.no) Norwegian University of Science and Technology

Example: Added mass – rough estimates

Second-order wave forces

The low-frequency second order force is then

with a complex transfer function Hnm . This can be written as:

Model tests for the DeepCwind semisubmersible

(Coulling et al. 2013)

• Wave-only response improves signficantly when including

(Coulling et al. 2013)

• In an operational case with turbulent wind, a difference of only 3

M. Muskulus (michael.muskulus@ntnu.no) Norwegian University of Science and Technology

(Tao & Cai 2004)

(Tao & Cai 2004)

M. Muskulus (michael.muskulus@ntnu.no) Norwegian University of Science and Technology

Equation of motion — General form

M. Muskulus (michael.muskulus@ntnu.no) Norwegian University of Science and Technology

Response in irregular seas

Steady-state response to j-th component:

Aj |H(ωj )| sin(ωj t + δ(ωj ) + j )