Spar Platform

Seakeeping Test Lab Report
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Contents
Pages
1. Table of Contents...1
2. Spar Platform..2
3. Introduction. 5
4. Objectives6
5. Equipment7
6. Design..7
7. Procedure8
8. Result and Discussion...9
9. Conclusion..27
10. Appendix28
SPAR PLATFORM
As the research for oil and other natural resources have progressed into deeper waters, the
traditional fixed type of offshore structures have become unsuitable and new technologies had to
be resorted to. Spar is a type of deepwater floating type of platform used in ultra deepwaters of
depth more than 1500 m.
1

The spar platform has been modeled as a rigid body connected to the sea floor by multicomponent catenary mooring lines. Unidirectional regular wave and random wave
model spectra are used for computing the incident wave kinematics The response analysis
has been performed in time domain to solve the dynamic behavior of the moored spar platform
as an integrated system.
A spar, named for logs used as buoys in shipping and moored in place vertically, is a
type of floating oil platform typically used in very deep waters. Spar production platforms
have been developed as an alternative to conventional platforms.
A spar platform consists of a large-diameter, single vertical cylinder supporting a deck.
The cylinder is weighted at the bottom by a chamber filled with a material that is denser
than water to lower the center of gravity of the platform and provide stability. Spars are
anchored to the seabed by way of a spread mooring system with either a chain-wirechain or chain-polyester-chain composition.
There are three primary types of spars; the classic spar, truss spar, and cell spar. The
classic spar consists of the cylindrical hull noted above, with the heavy ballast at the
bottom of the cylinder.
2

A truss spar has a shorter cylindrical "hard tank" than a classic spar and has a truss
structure connected to the bottom of hard tank. At the bottom of the truss structure,
there is a relatively small, square shaped "soft tank" that houses the heavy ballasting
material. The majority of spars are of this type.
A cell spar has a large central cylinder surrounded by smaller cylinders of alternating
lengths. At the bottom of the longer cylinders is the soft tank housing the heavy
ballasting material, similar to a truss spar. There is currently only one cell spar in
operation
Characteristics
Applicable in 1,500 ft. to 10,000 ft. water depths

Cost relatively insensitive to water depth, most competitive in very deep water
Hull cost is relatively insensitive to deck payload
Platform motions are mostly lateral (minimal heave)
Uses standard shipyard and offshore deck construction
3
Hull is initially transported by towing in a horizontal, self-floating position

Wells can be pre-drilled or drilled from the platform
Production risers are steel pipe with surface trees
Hull can be configured for significant liquids storage if this is advantageous
Particularly applicable in remote locations which lack infrastructure
Economical to relocate to other sites, in both deeper and shallower water.
Type of Spar Platform based on depth:
INTRODUCTION
A Seakeeping Test on a spar platform will be carried out in Universiti Teknolgi Petronas
Wave Tank. The general purpose of this test and lab activities is to present the
procedures and result of the seakeeping test using the spar platform model. The test
will be carried out in test condition as shown in table 1 below:
Table 1:

Seakeeping test
Test
Condition
No
Lw/LM
Lw (m)
Hw (m)
TW (s)
(rad/s)
0.5
0.5
0.031
0.566
11.104
0.6
0.6
0.038
0.620
10.136
0.7
0.7
0.044
0.670
9.384
0.8
0.8
0.050
0.716
8.778
condition (V=0
0.063
0.800
7.851
m/s)
1.1
1.1
0.069
0.839
7.486
1.2
1.2
0.075
0.877
7.167
1.3
1.3
0.081
0.913
6.886
1.4
1.4
0.088
0.947
6.636
10
1.5
1.5
0.094
0.980
6.411
Semisubmersible
at trimmed
condition at static
Wave Characteristics
In accordance, this report contains a brief explanation about the theory for seakeeping,
equipment used for the test, procedures on carry out the seakeeping test, data analysis
in order to get the result, result of the test, observation during test is carried out,
discussion on the result, conclusion for the test and the references.
OBJECTIVE
To show the procedure on conducting a regular wave seakeeping tests for a spar
platform
To present the result of RAO (response amplitude operator) value at versus the
wave frequency.
To present the result of the RAO for the spar platform for head seas for both
heaving and pitching motions.
EQUIPMENT:
Equipments used in this test are:
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
Spar model
Wave tank
Data Acquisition and Analysis System (DAAS)
Potentiometer
Wave Generator System

DESIGN OF SPAR MODEL:
PROCEDURE:
1. The model was ballasted until reaches its design waterline (models
displacement).
2. The centre of gravity of model is the being determined by using swing frame.
3. Check the heeling of the model by placing the model into basin. If there was
heeling, the weights were then moved sideways(port or starboard) until the
model at even keel.
4. The model was then attached to wire for restraining purpose.
5. After the wave generator system created the wave, the vertical motion will
measure by potentiometer inside the model. The potentiometer is connected to
the DAAS and the signals are simultaneously digitize and record on paper chart
or computer.
7

6. The data is then being analysis and plotted by the program in the acquisition
system.
7. Step 5 to 7 was repeated for other nine tests running with different wave
characteristics as in table 1.
RESULTS:
1. Obtained the results from D.A.A.S.
2. For example for test no 10, H w = 0.094m, plot the graph of heave (Z a), pitch a
and wave height Hw in time domain were plotted. Plot for every test.
Heave at all run:
Test 1:
Z(Heave)
12
10
8
6
4
2
0
0
10
12
Test 2:
Z
12
10
8
6
4
2
0
0
10
12
Test 3:
Z
12
10
8
6
4
2
0
0
10
12
Test 4:
Z
12
10
8
6
4
2
0
0
10
12
Test 5:
Z
15
10
5
0
0
10
12
10

Test 6:
Z
12
10
8
6
4
2
0
0
10
12
Test 7:
Z
12
10
8
6
4
2
0
0
10
12
Test 8:
11
Z
12
10
8
6
4
2
0
0
10
12
Test 9:
Z
12
10
8
6
4
2
0
0
10
12
Test 10:
Z
12
10
8
6
4
2
0
0
10
12
12
Pitching at all run

Test 1:
PITCH
12
10
8
PITCH
6
4
2
0
0
10
12
Test 2:
13
PITCH
12
10
8
PITCH
6
4
2
0
0
10
12
Test 3:
PITCH
12
10
8
PITCH
6
4
2
0
0
10
12
Test 4:
14
PITCH
12
10
8
PITCH
6
4
2
0
0
10
12
Test 5:
PITCH
12
10
8
PITCH
6
4
2
0
0
10
12
Test 6:
PITCH
12
10
8
PITCH
6
4
2
0
0
10
12
15

Test 7:
PITCH
12
10
8
PITCH
6
4
2
0
0
10
12
Test 8:
PITCH
12
10
8
PITCH
6
4
2
0
0
10
12
Test 9:
16
PITCH
12
10
8
PITCH
6
4
2
0
0
10
12
Test 10:
PITCH
12
10
8
PITCH
6
4
2
0
0
10
12
17

Wave heights at all run
Test 1
12
10
8
6
4
2
0
0
10
12
10
12
Test 2
12
10
8
6
4
2
0
0
Test 3
18

12
10
8
6
4
2
0
0
10
12
10
12
10
12
Test 4
12
10
8
6
4
2
0
0
Test 5
12
10
8
6
4
2
0
0
19
Test 6
12
10
8
6
4
2
0
0
10
12
Test 7
12
10
8
6
4
2
0
0
10
12
Test 8
20

12
10
8
6
4
2
0
0
10
12
Test 9
12
10
8
6
4
2
0
0
10
12
Test 10
21

12
10
8
6
4
2
0
0
10
12
3. Heave, pitch and roll value need to be consider is the average value (or mean)
1 n
1 n
. z i z1 z 2 ..... z n
n i 1
n i 1
Average value (mean)
4. The value for wave height, H w, and wave period, Tw , will follow the same step as
in step number 3. Therefore, fill in the table 3 given below.
Table 3:
Calculation
Heave vs
Time
Za
1 n
z1 z 2 ..... z n
n i 1
Average Value
0.00038
0.00055
0.00039
0.00106
0.00346
0.00308
0.00238
0.00094
0.00177
0.00095
22

Pitch vs Time
1 n
1 2 ..... n
n i 1
0.41566
0.49813
0.48682
0.66248
0.52273
0.56310
0.48103
0.50269
0.55883
0.65602
1 n
H 1 H 2 ..... H n
n i 1
0.13836
0.183305
0.08694
0.38590
0.36437
0.24937
0.58261
0.42575
0.23251
0.22857
HW vs Time
HW
5. Repeat step 1-4 for every test (Lw/LM) and fill in the table 4 given below
Wave
Lw/
Lm
perio
Lw
d,
Tw
0.5
0.6
0.7
0.16
5
0.33
5
0.35
5
Encount
ering
Frequen
cy
e
Wave
Heigh
Wave
amplitu
de
Wave
slope
Average
Pitch
Amplitude
Hw
Average
Heave
Pitch
Heave
Amplitud
RAO
RAO
0.873
0.0007
23
98
1.518
0.0016
68
76
1.223
0.0009
16
79
0.566
11.104
0.025
0.0125
0.476
0.41566
0.00038
0.620
10.136
0.035
0.0175
0.328
0.49813
0.00055
0.670
9.384
0.045
0.0225
0.398
0.48682
0.00039
23
0.8
1.1
1.2
0.40
3
0.47
0.49
5
0.56
2
0.716
8.778
0.049
0.0245
0.382
0.66248
0.00106
0.800
7.851
0.055
0.0275
0.368
0.52273
0.00346
0.839
7.486
0.060
0.03
0.381
0.56310
0.00308
0.877
7.167
0.068
0.034
0.380
0.48103
0.00238
1.3
0.69
0.913
6.886
0.085
0.0425
0.387
0.50269
0.00094
1.4
0.78
0.947
6.636
0.087
0.0435
0.350
0.55883
0.00177
1.5
0.88
0.980
6.411
0.088
0.044
0.314
0.65602
0.00095
1.734
0.0027
24
74
1.420
0.0094
46
02
1.477
0.0080
95
83
1.265
0.0062
86
63
1.298
0.0024
94
28
1.596
0.0050
65
57
2.089
0.0030
23
25
6. Plot the graph of Heave RAO against encountering frequency
24
Heave RAO vs Encountering Freq

0.01
0.01
0.01
Heave RAO
0
0
0
6
10
11
12
7. Plot the graph of Heave RAO against Lw/Lm
Heave RAO vs Lw/Lm

0.01
0.01
0.01
Heave RAO
0
0
0
0.4
0.6
0.8
1.2
1.4
1.6
8. Plot the graph of Pitch RAO against encountering frequency.

25
Pitch RAO vs Encontering Freq

2.5
2
1.5
Pitch RAO
1
0.5
0
6
10
11
12
9. Plot the graph of Pitch RAO against Lw/Lm
Pitch RAO vs Lw/Lm

2.5
2
1.5
Pitch RAO
1
0.5
0
0.4
0.6
0.8
1.2
1.4
1.6
26

10. Discuss the results.
The results of The Pitch RAO and Heave RAO are the average of Heave or Pitch
divide by wave slope.

Graphs above represent Heave RAO and Pitch RAO against Encountering
Frequency and Lw/Lm.

From the test run, it can be seen that the graph not drawn as been expected.
The reason of this matter may be happen due to some errors which happen
during the test run.
11. It is given that :
A
B
. exp 4
5
Wave
Frequency,
11.104
10.136
9.384
8.778
7.851
7.486
7.167
6.886
, where A = 0.0081.g2 and B = 0.74(g/V)4;
A/5
B/4
S()
4.61770056963144E-06
2.51504709471954E06
4.61771E-06
7.28601438355825E-06
3.62240935416009E06
7.28604E-06
0.0000107123076816633
4.93073812806316E06
1.07124E-05
0.0000149570226420385
0.00000643993713810
38
1.49571E-05
0.0000261335342483804
0.00001006384697951
49
2.61338E-05
0.0000331569000210466
0.00001217487870194
59
3.31573E-05
0.0000412226599008697
0.00001449153253748
44
4.12233E-05
0.0000503486629266199
0.00001700575275734
29
5.03495E-05
27

6.636
6.411
0.0000605746825558175
0.00001971689050927
65
6.05759E-05
0.0000719770676045087
0.00002263397472699
28
7.19787E-05
12. Plot the wave spectrum and motion response for heaving, and pitching.
Heave RAO vs Wave Spectrum

0.01
0.01
0.01
0.01
0.01
0.01
0
0
0
0
0
0.00E+00
2.00E-05
4.00E-05
6.00E-05
8.00E-05
Pitch RAO vs Wave Spectrum
28

2.5
2
1.5
1
0.5
0
0.00E+00
2.00E-05
4.00E-05
6.00E-05
8.00E-05
CONCLUSION:
1. What can you conclude from this experimental calculation?
As the conclusion, the wave height and wave amplitude affects the heaving and pitching
of the spar. Besides, the spar is in stable condition in the experiment. For the present
analysis, peak to peak method is used. In this method, the peak and trough values are
searched and analyzed to get the amplitude and frequency of a measured signal. Using
peak-to-peak method, the wave amplitude, heave and pitch amplitudes and wave
encounter frequency and period can be obtained
2. What is the physical relationship between wave length and wave frequency to the
heave and pitch response of the spar?
From the result, the effects of wave frequencies to heave pitch and roll is response to
the spar. So, the higher the wave frequencies, the higher the effect on the heaving and
pitching response occurs.
When we are properly scaled the vessel, constructed, balanced, instrumented, and
tested, physical models can be used to predict ship response from monochromatic
waves. Monochromatic waves are series of waves generated in a laboratory, each of
29

which has the same length and period. The movement of the spar under the static water
surface may caused by waves that will affect its motion. It will respond to waves by the
vertical motions of pitch, heave, and roll in the wave tank.
3. Discuss any error you observed during the experiment or the experiment data
itself.
The measurement of the wave height is measured by manual which using the ruler and
marking point may not precise and accurate. As the observation is conducted by human,
the value may have parallex error and error by human. Besides,The potentiometers
used for the measurement of heave and pitch amplitudes are zero-order instruments in
which there are no errors in the output due to the dynamic response. However, the
characteristic of the servo needle type wave probe(in the potentiometer) is not clearly
known. This error is considered to be asymmetric error because the measured values of
wave amplitudes are alwayssmaller than the true values.
4. Using graphical integration, find the average of the one-third highest wave
amplitude and the one-third highest, and one-tenth of heave and pitch amplitude
in Pierson-Moskowitz spectrum.
Heaving:
Wave
Frequenc
y, W
11.104
10.136
9.384
8.778
7.851
7.486
7.167
6.886
6.636
6.411
S (w)
S (we)
Heave
RAO
RAO^2
Heave
Sz (we)
SM
f (Sz)
4.62E06
7.29E06
1.07E05
1.50E05
2.61E05
3.32E05
4.12E05
5.03E05
6.06E05
7.20E05
4.62E06
7.29E06
1.07E05
1.50E05
2.61E05
3.32E05
4.12E05
5.03E05
6.06E05
7.20E05
0.0007
98
0.0016
76
0.0009
79
0.0027
74
0.0094
02
0.0080
83
0.0062
63
0.0024
28
0.0050
57
0.0030
25
6.36804E07
2.80898E06
9.58441E07
7.69508E06
8.83976E05
6.53349E05
3.92252E05
5.89518E06
2.55732E05
9.15063E06
2.94058E12
2.04663E11
1.02672E11
1.15096E10
2.31017E09
2.16633E09
1.61699E09
2.9682E10
1.54912E09
6.5865E10
2.94058E12
6.13989E11
3.08016E11
2.30192E10
6.9305E09
6.49899E09
3.23398E09
8.90459E10
4.64737E09
6.5865E10
3
3
2
3
3
2
3
3
1
30

f(Sz)
mo
1
3
3
=
x C.I. x f(Sz)
x 0.52 x (2.31852 x 10-8)
4.52114 x 10-9
H1 / 3
2.31853E08
mo
=
4.00
A1 / 3
mo
=
2.00
2.00
1.34478 x 10-4 m
(4.52114 x 10-9)
Pitching:
Wave
Frequenc
y, W
11.104
10.136
9.384
8.778
7.851
S (w)
4.62E06
7.29E06
1.07E05
1.50E05
2.61E05
S (we)
4.62E06
7.29E06
1.07E05
1.50E05
2.61E05
SM
Pitch
RAO
0.8732
3
1.5186
8
1.2231
6
1.7342
4
1.4204
6
Pitch
RAO^2
0.762531
2.306389
1.49612
3.007588
2.017707
S (we)
3.52115E06
1.68044E05
1.6027E05
4.49848E05
5.27303E05
1
3
3
2
3
f (S)
3.52115E06
5.04133E05
4.80811E05
8.99696E05
0.000158
191
31

7.486
7.167
6.886
6.636
6.411
3.32E05
4.12E05
5.03E05
6.06E05
7.20E05
3.32E05
4.12E05
5.03E05
6.06E05
7.20E05
1.4779
5
1.2658
6
1.2989
4
1.5966
5
2.0892
3
2.184336
1.602402
1.687245
2.549291
4.364882
7.24267E05
6.60563E05
8.49519E05
0.000154
426
0.000314
179
3
2
3
3
1
f(S)
mo
1
3
3
=
x C.I. x f(S)
x 0.52 x 0.00173188
3.377166 x 10-4
H1 / 3
0.000217
28
0.000132
113
0.000254
856
0.000463
277
0.000314
179
0.001731
88
mo
=
4.00
A1 / 3
mo
=
2.00
2.00
0.0367 m
(3.377166 x 10-4)
5. Is this submersible/spar platform is seaworthy in sea state 7. Please give your

comment.
Yes, this spar platform is seaworthy in sea state 7 as the design of the spar platform can
provide stability in the deep sea and irregular wave. There are many type of spar
32

platform can withstand with the high wave and current based on the depth of seawater.
Since the laboratory experiment is testing the spar model, the result can be obtained as
the spar is in stable condition with the wave of different height and amplitude. So, the the
actual spar platform is seaworthy in the deep sea state 7.
APPENDIXES
Overview of UTP Wave Tank:
33
Wave Generator at UTP Wave Tank:
34

Spar Platform

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

Spar Platform

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Seakeeping Test Lab Report

Seakeeping Test Lab Report

Seakeeping Test Lab Report

Applicable in 1,500 ft. to 10,000 ft. water depths

Seakeeping Test Lab Report

Hull is initially transported by towing in a horizontal, self-floating position

Type of Spar Platform based on depth:

Seakeeping Test Lab Report

Seakeeping Test Lab Report

Seakeeping Test Lab Report

Seakeeping Test Lab Report

Seakeeping Test Lab Report

Seakeeping Test Lab Report

Seakeeping Test Lab Report

Seakeeping Test Lab Report

Seakeeping Test Lab Report

Pitching at all run

Seakeeping Test Lab Report

Seakeeping Test Lab Report

Seakeeping Test Lab Report

Seakeeping Test Lab Report

Seakeeping Test Lab Report

Seakeeping Test Lab Report

Seakeeping Test Lab Report

Seakeeping Test Lab Report

Seakeeping Test Lab Report

Seakeeping Test Lab Report

Seakeeping Test Lab Report

6. Plot the graph of Heave RAO against encountering frequency

Seakeeping Test Lab Report

Heave RAO vs Encountering Freq

7. Plot the graph of Heave RAO against Lw/Lm

Heave RAO vs Lw/Lm

8. Plot the graph of Pitch RAO against encountering frequency.

Seakeeping Test Lab Report

Pitch RAO vs Encontering Freq

9. Plot the graph of Pitch RAO against Lw/Lm

Pitch RAO vs Lw/Lm

Seakeeping Test Lab Report

divide by wave slope.

Frequency and Lw/Lm.

11. It is given that :

, where A = 0.0081.g2 and B = 0.74(g/V)4;

Seakeeping Test Lab Report

Heave RAO vs Wave Spectrum

Pitch RAO vs Wave Spectrum

Seakeeping Test Lab Report

Seakeeping Test Lab Report

Seakeeping Test Lab Report

x 0.52 x (2.31852 x 10-8)

Seakeeping Test Lab Report

5. Is this submersible/spar platform is seaworthy in sea state 7. Please give your

Seakeeping Test Lab Report

Seakeeping Test Lab Report

Wave Generator at UTP Wave Tank:

You might also like