Proceedings of the Second (1992) International Offshore and Polar Engineering Conference

San Francisco, USA, 14-19 June 1992

Copyright 1992 by The International Society of Offshore and Polar Engineers
ISBN 1-880653-00-1 (Set); ISBN 1-880653-02-8 (VollI)

CONSIDERATIONS IN DESIGN OF FLEXIBLE RISER SYSTEMS

F_B. Seyed

John Brown Engineers & Constructors Ltd_

M.H.Patel

University College London

London,U.K.

1.

INTRODUCTION

The analyses have been carried out using a suite of flexible riser
analysis programs developed by the author over the past decade.
These programs are capable of analysing the response of all
common flexible riser configurations in the frequency and time
domains. The development and verification of these programs have
been detailed in Patel & Seyed (1989) and Seyed et al. (1990). The
validation studies presented in these references have included
comparisons against independent and in-house model tests as well
as other programs. Recently, a comprehensive verification was
carried out against results from 10 independent commercial
programs. The findings of the study which are reported in Larsen
(1992) indicate encouraging agreement amongst most of the
programs and discrepancies which highlight the present uncertainties
in the analysis of flexible risers.

In recent years, the growing confidence in the validity of flexible

riser analysis programs has been followed by the higher quality
assurances offered by the manufacturers of these pipes. These have
made the designers more certain of the quality of the product and of
their own analysis capabilities. The safety margins used in design of
flexible pipes have thus been reduced to reflect these reduced
uncertainties. Safety factors used in design of earlier systems not
only reflected uncertainties in material and analysis data but also
incorporated generous margins for dynamic effects which in some
cases were not specifically included in design. With reducing
allowable safety factors, uncertainties in design variables and
dynamic effects comprise a larger proportion of the total than before.
There is, therefore, a greater need than before to obtain reliable
design data and analysis results and to have an idea of the margins
of error involved.
Presently flexible risers are designed with full emphasis on dynamic
effects. The case by case nature of these designs has prevented a
systematic design approach from being formulated. To ensure that
the required levels of safety are achieved, it is essential to improve
our understanding of the generic behaviour of flexible risers and
move away from the case by case design approach. The large
number of variables involved in a typical design prevents but the
most limited of optimisations. The only approach open is a
systematic parametric study of the static and dynamic response of
flexible risers.

2.

PARAMETRIC STUDIES

2.1

Description of Analysis

To avoid repetition, details of the analysis methods have been

omitted. The reader is referred to Patel & Seyed (1989), Seyed et
al. (1990) and Seyed & Patel (1991) for full details. A brief
description is provided here to summarise the analysis techniques.
The static at-rest profile is determined from the catenary equations
and interfaced with a purpose written non-linear finite element
package using standard beam elements. It has been found that for all
conventional flexible riser geometries, the use of catenary equations
is by far the most accurate and reliable method for determination of
the static profile. The fmite element static analysis program is nonlinear in geometry and forces, i.e. considers the change in loading
and tensile forces with riser displacements. Options of frequency
and time domain analysis are both available. The frequency domain
calculations are based on the linearisation due to Krolikowski and
Gay (1980) and the time domain integrations are carried out using
the Newmark-~ method. Vessel motions, irregular directional seas
and internal flow dynamics may all be considered in combination or
separately.

Preliminary results from one such study were presented in the earlier
paper by the authors - see Seyed and Patel (1991). This paper
presents a second complementary set of findings from the study
and, ideally, should be studied in conjunction with the earlier paper.
These works do not attempt to provide a starting point to the
designer. Rather, they attempt to furnish the analyst, who is using a
commercial flexible riser analysis package, with some degree of
expectation towards the final results and with an ability to spot check
the results and make shortcuts saving time and cost in the process.
Due to shortage of space only illustrative findings have been
presented and no attempt has yet been made to generalise. The
presented data may only be considered a summary of analysis
experience.

The following sections describe a selection of results from the

parametric studies carried out by the authors.
300

2,2
- Numerical Difficulties with
Flexural Rigidity

Figu.re (2) s~~ws th.e changes in bending moments for the same
loadmg condmon. Little change from the static results are obtained
from the method with tensile non-linearity seeming to be the least
accurate.

Pipes of Low

Numerical ill-conditioning problems involved with flexible 'riser

analyses result from two sources: the high ratio of the axial to
flexura~ stiffness of ~he ri.ser pipe (E'-:-IEI) and, the large rigid body
transl.atlOns and :<;>ta~lOns m space typically arising during shifting of
the pipe to eqUllIbnum. The latter problem is reduced for cases
where an initial static profile is available and the riser needs not be
shifted to ~quilibr!-~m .. This leaves. the high (EAIE!) as the major
source of Ill-condltlomng. Three different static analysis methods
were used; namely, the direct iteration method, the incremental
analysis method, and the hybrid techniques. Without prior
knowledge of the numerical behaviour of the solution, the choice of
the method is not obvious.

The same analysis was then repeated for the original pipe with
(E:A~I=34000). All other parameters including the convergence
cntenon ~ere ~ept constant. Figures (3) and (4) show the results of
the analYSIS. DlsI?lacement~ are seen to be indistinguishably similar.
A complet~ly different picture emerges in the case of bending
moments. Figure (4) shows large disagreements between the results
from th~ different methods. It should be noted that the magnitudes
?f bendmg. moments are very small and 1000 times less than those
m the prevIous case. The observed deviations are solely a numerical
featur~ and are caused by the finite precision of the computer used.
Reducmg the toleranc~ proved successful in bringing the solutions
toge~~er and cu~es Similar to those in Figure (2) were obtained.
A~~lllonally, us~ng a ~on-standard, quadruple precision feature of
DigItal Corporallon Mlcro-VAX FORTRAN compiler reduced the
to~er!lnc~ level, improved the rate of convergence as well as
ehml,natlng t~e problem. !t should be. n.oted that the existing
algo~~ms are Implemented m double precISIon and the use of single
preclSlon would be guarantied to produce numerical problems. The
fo:e~oing observations confirmed the problem to be of a numerical'
ongm and showed that increased computational precision was one,
met~~d of overcoming the difficulties. In the absence of high
preclsl<;>n computational facilities, it would be necessary to decouple
the aXial degrees ?f freedom or use a cable type solution and'
calculate the bendmg moments from the curvatures in the finaL
geometry.

With the direct method the iterations are carried out for equilibrium
of tensile forces. This involves a shooting approach about the mean
geometry where for each estimate of displacements, tensile forces
are. cal.culated and used to re-estimate the system stiffness matrix
which IS then used to re-calculate the force vector. An estimate of the
error is found from the ratio of the sum of squares of residual force
to total !orce. The geometry is only updated at the final stage after
calculation of forces. The second method is based on the incremental
approach where the loading is calculated for the original equilibrium
geometry. This is then applied in a user prescribed number of
increments and the geometry and internal forces are updated at each
st~ge. One equilibrium c<;>rrection is carried out per load step. The
third method uses a hybnd approach where the direct approach is
employed with two levels of iterations one for tensile forces and the
other for geometry. This amounts to placing the total load on the
mean geometry, calculating the resulting tensile forces and
displacements and computing the system stiffness matrix for the
updated geometry and tensile forces. The residual force is then
calculated as previously and the root mean squared error is used to
chec.k f~r convergence. Having established convergence, the total
loadmg IS re-calculated for the updated geometry and the difference
with that applied to the original geometry is used to replace the total
load vector and repeat the iterations. This correction constitutes an
outer incremental analysis loop for the displacement dependence of
loading. The convergence criterion for this section is the r.m.s of the
ratio of the residual force to the original total force. The hybrid
method represents an exact approach where the only non-linearity
excluded is that of the pipe structural properties. Details of these
methods may be found in Seyed et al.(1989).

The l?s.s of precision was traced within the program and was found'
to ongmate from local rotations of the element. These rotations
served to increase the curvature of the element and bring the ends
cl?ser together. These rotations have little axial strains associated
:-vlth them. However, the simple beam finite element model,
mterprete~ the apparent reduction in element lengths as a net
compressive stram. The large apparent compressions served to
sever~ly de-~tabil.ise the algori~hm through erroneous negative
effec~lv~ tenslO~S m the geometric stiffness matrix. It was possible
t~ ehmmate thiS effect by correction of the resulting first order
displacements before calculation of element forces This was carried
ou~ in accordance with the large deflection theory and was found
qUIte successful and accurate. The source of numerical illcon~i~ioning whic~ require~ t.he use of low tolerances and high
precIsion c<;>mPl!tatIon was.slmllar~y traced to the multiplications of
small r~tallon-m~uced a~IaI strams by the pipe axial rigidity in
calculallon of aXial tenSile forces. This constitutes an operation
between. very small and very large numbers and causes the system
geometric sllffness to undergo lengthy oscillations which damp out
very gradually.

The case study uses the pipe with properties indicated in Table (1).
A catenary riser of 250m length with horizontal and vertical
separations of 100 and 150 metres, respectively, was used. A
simple geometry was deliberately selected to simplify comparison of
results. A steady current of 0.5 mls of uniform distribution with
depth was applied to the riser in the direction of the positive x-axis.
This case study is used to demonstrate the effects of the calculation
method as well as the numerical problems with high (EAIE!) ratios.

C?n~

may conclude t~at short of resortin~ to higher order and special

fmIte element techmques whose use Will undoubtedly increase the
length of code and complexity of the program as well as its run time
the simplest approach is the use of standard beam elements with
double precision arit~metic. This is, however, only feasible where
t~e at-:est.geomet:Y IS calculated from the catenary equations. If
nser pipe IS to ?e mcrementally shifted to the eqUilibrium position
thr<;>ugh large displacements and rotations, special provisions need
be mcorporated or higher order finite elements used.

Figures (1) and (2) show the calculated geometries and bending
~oments respectively.
It is noted from Figure (1) that
displacements calculated using tensile non-linearity and incremental
loading, despite being close to each other, are larger than those
pred.icted using t.he exact non-linear approach including geometric,
tenSile and loadmg non-linearities. Additionally, the incremental
methods are seen to approach the fully non-linear version with
increasing number of steps. The validity of the presented results is
confirmed noting:

2,3

- Riser Response to Different Waye Headings

Riser respo.nse to. differ~nt wa.ve headings remains a sparsely

addressed Issue m fleXible nser research. It has remained
questi~nable whether out of plane effects are of much significance in
analYSIS. The steep-wave geometry was selected to examine out of
pl~ne loading on these risers. To enhance the dynamics, a wave
height of 20m was selected with a wave period of 16 seconds which
ensured that a large wave penetration with depth was achieved. A
total of 5 different wave headings were selected. Two headings were

a) the observed rises of the incremental solutions from the results

with tensile non-linearity only, suggesting that with increasing
number of load steps, the exact solution will be approached
asymptotically,
b) the fact that the programs used were developed independe~tly
and using different internal structures rules out major programnung
errors,

301

body motions of the upper riser which tend to be linear, periodic and
at the excitation frequency. Nevertheless, the apparent damping of
the non-linearities remains an interesting feature.

in-plane with the riser and in opposing directions whist a third was
perpendicular to the vertical plane of the riser. The remaining two
directions were chosen to be oblique at 45 degrees to the plane of the
riser. The co-ordinate axes were defined such that the positive x-axis
was horizontal along the line joining the riser base to the projection
of the riser top and the y-axis was vertical. With reference to the
riser geometry in Figure (5), the z-axis points towards the reader
(out of paper). The wave angles are measured from the z-axis using
the right hand screw rule such that a wave at an angle of 0 degree
propagates along the z-axis whilst a 90 degree wave is directed
along the positive x-axis. The riser is given a 30m freeboard over
the still water level (SWL). To avoid confusing the picture vessel
motions are set to zero. The simulations were carried out at 0.5
second intervals (V32nd. of excitation period) and for a total period
of 200 seconds. The remaining analysis parameters are given in
Table (2).

It is also noted that using 0.5 second time steps, 40 seconds of

integration, i.e. 80 steps were sufficient for the time history to
stabilise.

2.4 - Non-linear Seabed Boundary Condition

The problem of a non-linear seabed boundary condition is illustrated
through an example case study. A lazy-wave riser is considered in
110 metres of water and subjected to a 12m, 20s regular wave inplane with the riser. The pipe properties are identical to the previous
cases and the geometry and buoyancy data are given in Table (3).
Figure (17) shows the intermediate riser profiles and Figures (18)
and (19) show the envelopes of tensile forces and bending
moments. The increase in tensile forces at the seabed is considerably
larger than that throughout the rest of the pipe. The bending
moments are similarly seen to increase at the seabed contact point.
These results were compared with simulations excluding a variable
seabed contact. The alternative model uses a set of linear springs at
the seabed contact position. The stiffnesses of these springs are
simply determined from a quasi-static analysis of the pipe. Plots of
tensile forces and bending moments show relatively little errOr. It
may be inferred that for cases of moderate lift-off, a linear model can
provide reasonable indications without resort to the more elaborate
non-linear cases. For large displacement cases the use of non-linear
models is unavoidable.

Figure (5) shows the envelope of maximum in-plane displacements

for in-plane and oblique waves. The oblique headings are clearly
seen to produce in-plane displacements which fall within those of
the 90 and -90 degrees in-plane waves. Proceeding to Figure (6),
which shows the envelope of riser displacements out of plane, it is
observed that the maximum displacements are obtained for the 0
degree wave as expected. It is noted that these envelopes are
weighted in the direction of the wave propagation and that they are
not symmetrical - as one might intuitively expect. It must be born in
mind that the illustrated figures are envelopes and not actual riser
deformation shapes. These have been calculated by scanning the
time histories of displacements at each node for the largest
magnitude of out of plane displacements and noting its associated x
and y value. Examination of time histories confirmed that these were
zero mean but with a larger and more peaked response in the
direction of wave propagation. To complete the riser displacements
envelope, the plan view of the riser is shown in Figure (7). This
shows, once again, the dominance of out of plane response to a 0
degree wave whilst illustrating the unsymmetrical nature of the
oblique wave envelopes.

It should be pointed out that conclusions of the study reported in

Larsen (1992) suggest that modelling of the seabed contact remains
one of the major areas of uncertainty in flexible riser analysis. The
modelling of friction in the axial and lateral directions is a very
subjective topic and indeed difficult to model accurately.

Figure (8) shows the envelopes of tensile forces for different wave
headings. It is noted that little dynamics are present which is partly
due to the low amplitudes of motion and partly a result of the riser
resisting lateral loads through the pendulum effect. However, it
should be stressed that this feature is not typical and should be
considered specific to this case. Figure (9) shows the out of plane
bending moment envelope for the riser. The magnitudes of bending
caused by all out of plane waves seem to be quite similar with large
magnifications noted at the SWL. Surprisingly, this comment was
seen to apply to the in-plane bending as well. It is seen in Figure
(10) that the bending envelopes produced by in-plane waves are
rivalled very closely by the out of plane and oblique waves. In
selected positions, such as the top connection and the SWL, the
latter are seen to dominate. These observations illustrate that out of
plane loading is of significance and is capable of exciting greater
responses than those induced by in-plane loadings. Whilst this
single case study cannot assert a general rule, it clearly provides an
example to prove the need for this type of analysis in design.

2.5 - Combined Waye vessel and Internal Flow Induced

Motions
.
This topic remains an untouched area in flexible riser research and
one which is causing increasing concern for designers. The
influence of steady flow has been addressed in Patel & Seyed
(1989) and Seyed & Patel (1992) and it has been shown that this
may be combined with the effective tension term, leaving the
geometric stiffness unchanged, but increasing wall tensions. The
dynamic nature of a fully comprehensive analysis of wave, vessel
and slug flow is illustrated here where an extreme slug, measuring
230 metres in length and with density variations at 25s period, is
passed through a lazy-S riser whilst it undergoes wave and vessel
induced motions. The geometric characteristics of the pipe are
detailed in Table (4).
A total of 5 wave periods ranging from 5 to 25 seconds were used.
Figures (20) and (21) present the displacements for the 5 and 15
seconds period. On each figure, the profile on the right illustrates the
wave and vessel induced motions and that on the left shows the
combined picture. Several important features are noted. Figures (20)
shows negligible wave action and may be taken as a slug only case.
Compari~on with Figure (21) shows that the pipe displacements are
totally dIfferent for exactly the same slug. The most interesting
feature is that despite the very low magnitude of wave and vessel
induced motions, the mere combination of loadings has altered the
results completely. This emphasises a strongly non-linear
phenomenon. Further proof is given in the remaining figures which
indicate that magnitudes of forces on a flexible riser due to an
extreme slug could easily outweigh those induced by very adverse
environmental loadings. Close examination of these profiles also
shows that, invariably, the fourth mode of vibration is excited. The
total riser length is 510 metres which is about 4 slug halfwavelengths. Hence, the slug loading is closely orthogonal to the
fourth riser mode shape which explains the dominance of this mode

To obtain a more detailed picture of the riser response to different

wave headings, time histories of riser moments were examined in
selected areas of the pipe. These were the SWL, sagbend, arch-top
and at the start of the buoyancy collar. Figures (11) to (16) show
torsion, out of plane bending moment and in-plane bending moment
time histories for each position. Figures (11) and (12) show the
highlY non-linear nature of bending at the SWL. The out of plane
and in-plane bending moments show higher frequency components
at 3 and 40 times the wave frequency. The time histories are
expectedly peaked and typical of what one might expect at the SWL
region. In contrast, time histories of moments for the sag-bend
show the expected double frequency component but are seen to be
much smoother. Examination of Figures (15) and (16) shows the
respective bending time histories for the arch-top which indicate a
gradual disappearance of the double frequency component. This
may be easily explained considering that the riser receives little drag.
or inertia loading at these depths and is merely excited by the rigid

302

.~----

--------------------

in the response. The buoy upthrust provision is quite large and it is

noted that the flow curvature around the buoy is capable of
producing very large forces on the buoy connection.

Inner radius
Outer radius
Dry mass per unit length
AxiaJ rigidity (EA)
Flexural rigidity (EI)
Torsional rigidity (GJ)
Polar inertia (Ip)/ X-sect Area
Pipe drag coefficient
Pipe inertia coefficient
Water depth
Water density
Internal fluid density
Effective weight/length
Effective weight/length including buoyancy
Additional dry mass/length of buoyancy
foam
Effective outer diameter of buoyancy foam

In these studies the mean internal fluid density was 520 kg/~3 and
the amplitude of density variations was set at 500 kg/m 3 . This
represents a transition from heavy slug to gas. The effect of such
changes on the tensions and bending moments along the pipe are
quite drastic with the worst loadings occurring in the areas of high
curvature. The reason for the large motions is due to the large
fluctuations that changes in the internal fluid density of the pipe
impart on the flexible pipe stiffness which is predominantly derived
from the weight of the pipe. The influence of these large motions on
the internal forces in the pipe are quite severe.
The formulation of the internal flow induced loads is an
approximation whose range of validity may be assessed from the
earlier publication, Patel & Seyed (1989). Accurate quantification of
internal flow dynamics is presently not possible. However, the
observed trends from model tests - see Seyed et al. (1990) - and
their agreement with simulations suggest that these dynamic effects
do, indeed, have major implications in design. Further, the
interaction of internal flow with the pipe wall tension is a feature
without which fatigue and wear calculations may yield overoptimistic service lives.

3.

Table 1 - General pipe and buoyancy data for case studies

Horizontal offset
Vertical Offset
Pipe Length (Section I)
Pipe Length (Section n /Buoyant)
Pipe Length (Section III)
Element No. (Section I)
Element No. (Section II)
Element No. (Section III)

Results have been presented to illustrate features of the dynamic

response of flexible risers to wave, vessel and internal flow induced
forces. It is shown that waves at oblique incidence can induce loads
which in some cases may exceed those of in-plane waves. The nonlinear riser response in the region of the mean water level was found
to be damped rapidly with depth. Internal flow induced dynamics
were shown to induce large loadings on the riser pipe which in the
case of extreme slugs can compare with those due to design
environmental loading. The combination of environmental and
internal flow induced forces was found to give rise to a highly nonlinear loading and response on the flexible riser geometry. The
extreme influence of internal flow dynamics was noted to be in the
areas of high curvature where large fluid momentum forces can
develop.

100.0 m
380.0 m
180.0 m
95.0m
230.0 m
20
20
20

Table 2 - Geometric data for the steep-wave case study

Horizontal offset
Vertical Offset
Total Pipe Length
Pipe Length (Section I)
Pipe Length (Section II/Buoyant)
Pipe Length (Section III)
Element No. (Seabed)
Element No. (Section I-seabed)
Element No. (Section II)
Element No. (Section III)

REFERENCES

90.0m
110.0 m
200.0 m
70.0m
20.0m
11O.0m
10
15
5
20

Table 3 - Geometric data for the lazy-wave case study

with seabed contact

Larsen C M, "Comparison of Flexible Riser Analyses", To

appear in the Marine Structures Journal - Special Flexible Riser
Issue, Elsevier Science Publishers, 1992.

Horizontal offset (vessel-buoy)

Buoy Height above seabed
Pipe length (vessel buoy)
Pipe length (lower catenary)
Pipe length (seabed)
Buoy arch radius
Buoy up thrust
Buoy Cd
BuoyCm
Mass of buoy
Volume of buoy
Cross sectional area of buoy
Water depth
Element No. (Seabed)
Element No. (Sec. I excl. seabed)
Element No. (Section II)
Element No. (Section III)

M H Patel, F B Seyed, "Internal Flow Induced Behaviour of

Flexible Risers", presented at the One Day Seminar on Flexible
Risers, University College London, London, U.K., January
1989 and published in Engineering Structures, October 1989.
F B Seyed, M H Patel, G J Lyons; "Verification Studies of
Flexible Riser Hydrodynamic Analysis Software", Proceedings
of the First Pacific Offshore Mechanics Symposium PACOMS90, Seoul, Korea, 24-27 June 1990.
- F B Seyed, M H Patel; "Parametric Studies of Flexible Risers";
Proceedings of ISOPE-91, Edinburgh, U.K., 1991.
- F B Seyed, M H Patel; "Mathematics of Flexible Risers Including
Pressure and Internal Flow Effects"; To appear in the Marine
Structures Journal - Special Flexible Riser Issue, Elsevier Science
Publishers, 1992.

5.

0.406 m

Other parameters are indicated on plots

CONCLUSIONS

4.

0.0508 m
0.0762 m
26.7 kg/m
115MN
3400Nm2
2600Nm2
0.05
1.0
2.0
350m
1025 kg/m3
1025 kg/m3
160N/m
-425 N/m
45 kg/m

100.0 m
250.0 m
242.0 m
268.5 m
40.0m
8.0m
1100 kN
1.0
1.5
200.0 kg
2.929 m3
5.309 m2
350m
10
15
5
20

Table 4 - Geometric data for the lazy-S case study with

internal flow

TABLES

303

!------

150.0

350.0

+I-

-LBGEND- - Direct iteration

tensile non-linearity

---- ~~:::;~I:f~':.~!i!.~~+

300.0

U
11)
'0'
....

i5
E

60 eleme~ds pinned
BAlBI:
U, :O.Sm/s

250.0

-.au

.S

>

U, =0.5m/s

"

+":'"

+"
+.1

/"

,I

0.0

50.0

100.0

150.0

200.0

250.0

Arclength (m)

FIg 4 - Effect of non-linearities on static bending moments under current

Fig 1 - Effect of non-Iineaiities on static profile under current

400.0 - , - - - - - - - -_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _--,

-.------,+I-..,--------------~___,

xlO'

~""!,e~~ds pinned

Horizontal Projection (m)

15.00

1,'
'I

-f-:i .

60.0

150.0

100.0

50.0

1,1

1/\ ' .

+-----.----r-----,----1
0.0

III
I"

30.0

-50.0

+ Catenary without current

I
I I
1111

200.0

150.0

1 correction per step

+'I

'"Cl
10:
11)
,:Q

11)

Inaemental, 10 steps

"

I I
I I

90.0

'E

inaem"'ltal, 20 steps
1 correcbon per step

-tt:

bI)

geometric non-liiiearity

"

"
I,

11)

p...

- - - - Direct iteration tensile +

"

Z
'-"'

incremental, 10 steps
1 correction per step

- - Direct iteration

tensile non-lineanty

I
t

120.0

. inaem"'ltal, 20 $Ieps
1 cotrecbon per step

.9

-LBGEND-

+ +

-LBGEND- - DiR:cr ilelation

tensile non-1inearity

----=Irfc~::,'::~=~+

12.00

e
e
i5

,-..

inaemental, 20 steps
1 correction per step

Incremental, 10 steps
1 correction per step
9.00

300.0

.
u

Catenary without current

11)

~""!,,~s pinned

U,:O.Sm/s

200.0

6.00
-LBGEND--90deg
--- 4Sdeg

100.0

-45 deg

3.00

---- -90deg

0.0
0.0

50.0

100.0

150.0

250.0

200.0

~:~~ U:1fo:l;: l~
-t-----t-----,----..,------1
-100.0

0.0

200.0

300.0

Horizontal Projection (m)

Arclength (m)
Fig 2 - Effect of non-Iinearities on static bending moments under current
350.0

100.0

T;::=========:----,----.

Fig 5 - In-plane displacement envelopes for different wave headings

400.0 , - - - - - -_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _---,

-LBGBND- - Direct iteration

tensile non-1inearity

- - - - Dieecr it~ration,.tensi)e +
gcomemc non-uncanty

,-.. , 300.0

Inaemef!,tal, 20 steps
1 cotrccbon per step

Increm"'ltal, 10 steps
1 cotrccbon per step

.9
U
11)

.=

,-..

g
c

.9

U
11)

60 elementslBnds pinned
BAlBI: 34000
U,: 0.5 m/s

250.0

300.0

-.au

200.0

'E

>

100.0

---- 45 deg
--Odeg
-45 deg

150.0

~:~~ U;}fdS ;: le:'

--r----,-----r------r---_-l
-50.0

0.0

50.0

100.0

0.0

-t------;r-----+-----r-----l
-8.00

150.0

-4.00

0.00

4.00

8.00

Out of Plane Projection (m)

Horizontal Projection (m)

Fig 3 - Effect of non-linearities on static profile under current

Fig 6 - Side view of displacement envelopes for different wave headings

304

110'

UOO-,-------------------,

8.00
-LEGEND---- 45deg

-LEGEND- - 90deg

- - Odeg

4Sdeg

",

-45 deg
4.00

Wave Height
Wave Penix!

!:

-_ ...... -

C1.)

.,, ,,
,, ,,,
,
,

=20m
=168

.8

,,

... :.:.,

a::
.....

.......... :--':_-" ,

,,,

I
I

I,

'5

-4.00

---- -90deg

~:~: U=: rg:.

80

0.300

"0
!:

-0.300

C1.)

t:Q

"

C1.)

~
-8.00

-0.900

+----,-----,------;,----1
0.0

30.0

60.0

90.0

- - - -45 deg

::E
bIl
.S

,,
,,, .

, ....77.--- ....... - - - ........ ,~

0.900

Z
'-"
i:!
C1.)

,,

0.00

C1.)

"""
8

-1.500

120.0

-+-----.----.----...----,------l
100.0

0.0

200.0

Horizontal Projection (m)

Fig 7 - Plan-view of riser displacement envelopes for different wave headings
x10'

300.0

400.0

500.0

Arclength (m)
Fig 10 - In-plane bending envelopes for different wave headings

30.00

18.00
200.0 - , - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - ,

6.00

,,

,
,,
,,,

-6.00

",
"

45deg
-45 deg
-18.00

---- -90deg

MeanStatic

~:~: U:1!~: rg:.

-30.00

a::

+-----,,-----.-----.----.-----1
0.0

110.0

220.0

330.0

440.0

-160.0

.El

5500

Arclength (m)
Fig 8 - Tensile force envelope for different wave headings
1.500 - , - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - ,

s
e

30.00

45.00 -

60.00

. -4S deg

90.00

105.00

-LEGEND- - -45deg

~:~: U:1.s.!:l: rg:.

C1.)

75.00

Time (s)

--Odeg
0.900

:E

-280.0

-LEGEND----45deg

Odeg
- - - - 45 deg

0.300

90deg

~:~: U:iPo~ : rg:.

Figure 11 - In-plane moment time

histones at SWL
-1.500

+-----r----r-----.----.----\
0.0

100.0

200.0

300.0

400.0

500.0

Arclength (m)
Fig 9 -Out-of-plane bending envelopes for different wave headings
305

------

---------------------------------

120.00

~.OO

-LEGEND-

- - -45deg

Odeg
- - - - 45 deg

e0

90deg

W:~~ ~:A~ ;: rg:n

OIl

I
I

,,

-6.00

~
Q)

r'~~
~

,
I

,.,.1

!
,

,
I

Ii

;./11
1'"
"

""

r1:!,i

"i

:j

Ii

;
'i

:.;
,

I.,

,,

!
I :\1,/

,i

AI, !

i5:::

...... -21.00

.;

'I,

Q)

IV'

I'

I=:

';/,

,, .'" ,

, .,

,
,

I,

. ,! ~,

,,

1W.0 - , - - - - - - - - - - - -______________________-,

",

/.,'

"
!i
I;

"
!,

\hi ~

9.00

'.

II

i::

. - - - - - - - - - - -________________~----.,

'5

-36.00

+----.,----...-----r-----.------"r-----1
30.00

45.00

W.OO

75.00

90.00

105.00

120.00

Time (8)

Figure 14 - Out-of-plane moment time

histories at sagbend
-320.0 - , - - - - - - - -________________________--,

'5

-280.0

+---.,---,----r----;,---r-,-30.00

45.00

W.OO

75.00

90.00

105.00

,," ,,
:..,',~

,I 'I

-480.0

120.00

i::

Time (8)

I '

!,

"

OIl -640.0

.5

Figure 12 - Out-of-plane moment time

histories at SWL

"2
Q)

~
Q)

3W.0 , - - - - - - -__________________________- ,

i5:::

-800.0

.s
-9W.0 +--;-----,--~--,.....--;__-___1
30.00
45.00
W.OO
75.00
90.00
105.00
120.00

Figure 15 - In-plane moment time

histories at arch top

16.00 , - - -______________..:....________- ,

',,I'
I

i5:::

8.00

126.0

"

.,j

;,

:j

30.00

45.00

W.OO

75.00

90.00

105.00

,
.,,

120.00

Time (s)

,;

"

"

:t

0.00

48.0

,, !

';

"

"
"

"

.!

"

.s

,~

,',
.! .:
,

,
,, ,,,

"

',',

{,
i,'1

.,,,

Figure 13 - In-plane moment time

histories at sagbend

306

Figure 16 - Out-of-plane moment time

histories at arch top

400.0

120.0

-LEGENDlntcnnediate Profiles

-LEGENDRiser Profile
Slug: 230m, 25s
Wave: 2.6m, 5s

320.0

960

.g

.g

72.0

ti
<1.)

ti
<1.)
.~

'0'
.....

,:l.

,:l.

""@
u

240.0

""@
u

480

'E

'E

>

>

160.0

Slug
80.0

24.0

0.0

Wave +
Vessel

Wave +
Vessel +

<1.)

<1.)

+--""'-=~--"---r----,:-----1
-50.0

-10.0

-30.0

10.0

30.0

50.0

0.0

-l--.t:..--.,.-----,.-.....::..--,----.,------l
-100.0

70.0

0.0

200.0

300.0

400.0

Horizontal Projection (m)

Horizontal Projection (m)

Figure

100.0

J 1- - Lazy-wave response in
12m, 20s regular waves

Figure 20 - Combined wave, vessel and

srug induced dynamics in 5s regular sea
state

.,~", - , - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - ,

400.0 - . - - - -_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _

-LEGEND-

-~~,1if~2ss
Wave: 12m, IS.

/ /
,/

"
,,/ / /

------ ... "

- - - - -..,,,/
'

320.0
\

'" .... ,,\ :\

\

....

,,"/
/

........

!':

;'/

.g
ti
<1.)

240.0

E
<a

Arolenglh (m)

--,....

.Lt!CE<D

160.0

'E

- - - - ~)(V ......... s..Md

Wavc+

>

80W11J10 (R..dS-..... C _ )

Vessel
Slug

Wave +
Vessel

80.0

Figure
\10-'

.~

10 - Bounds of tensile forces

in 12m, 20s regular seas

-r---------------------,

0.0

'10 -

,I

_--J
---. ....... /\

I
I

...

..

.,,,, - + - - - - - - , r - - - - - - , - - - - - - , - - - - , . - - - - - - j

I,.

It'"

"'10

An:length (m)

Figure

100.0

200.0

300.0

400.0

Figure 21 Combined wave, vessel and

slug indlilced dynamics in 15s regular sea
state

0.0

Horizontal Projection (m)

.<-10 -

+-""--.,------.---'--"T"----.-----I
-100.0

l'f - Bounds of bending moments

in 12m, 20s regular seas

307