Journal of Wind Engineering and Industrial Aerodynamics 84 (2000) 345}367

Dynamic e!ects of wind loads on o!shore deck structures * A critical evaluation of provisions and practices
S. Gomathinayagam *, C.P. Vendhan , J. Shanmugasundaram
Structural Engineering Research Centre, Madras, Chennai-113, India Ocean Engineering Centre, IIT, Madras, Chennai-36, India

Abstract Walk-ways, #are-outs, silos, cranes, heli-pad structures, ladders, rig-supporting derrick structures, living quarters, worksheds, claddings of module supporting frames (MSF), and boat landings are some of the major components of o!shore deck structures. These deck structures are designed for operational and extreme wind and wave, and impact loads. This paper presents a review of published literature on wind loading conditions on the structure, extreme wind loading, wind tunnel tests on decks of compliant as well as "xed platforms and full-scale measurements on o!shore decks. The paper also presents a study of vibration modes of typical derrick and inclined boom with respect to possible dynamic sensitivity to wind induced excitations. The scarcity of "eld measured data and the necessity of instrumenting o!shore deck structures for collection of scarce data on wind and structural response characteristics are also highlighted. 2000 Elsevier Science Ltd. All rights reserved.
Keywords: Dynamic e!ects; Wind loads; Deck structures; O!shore structures; Provisions and practices

1. Introduction With the increase in demand for oil and gas, a large number of o!shore structures have been constructed through out the world. O!shore structures are designed for random wind and wave loads. At the global level the lateral wind load in the design of "xed o!shore structures is of the order 10% of the total lateral loads and 25% in the case of compliant and #oating platforms. Practical estimation of design dynamic wind loads for complex shaped deck structures is an involved exercise. However, the e!ects
* Corresponding author. 0167-6105/00/$ - see front matter 2000 Elsevier Science Ltd. All rights reserved. PII: S 0 1 6 7 - 6 1 0 5 ( 9 9 ) 0 0 1 1 3 - 0

346

S. Gomathinayagam et al. / J. Wind Eng. Ind. Aerodyn. 84 (2000) 345}367

of extreme wind load, which constitutes one of the primary loads on local components such as #are-outs, silos, cranes, heli-pad structures, ladders, rig-supporting structures, living quarters, worksheds and claddings, are signi"cantly more than that of normal wind. Many failures involving deck components due to extreme wind have already been reported in damage investigation [1]. This paper reviews the research contributions on the dynamic e!ects of wind on o!shore deck structures under four broad areas which are multidisciplinary in nature, viz. (a) Wind environment in o!shore, (b) Fixed and #oating platforms in wind-wave environment, (c) O!shore deck models in wind tunnel, and (d) O!shore deck structures in natural wind "eld.

2. Wind loads on o4shore structures From damage surveys on o!shore platforms [1], it has been clearly observed that damage to deck structures such as #are-outs, deck pipeline networks, storage silos and other similar process and production equipment pose potentially large risk of environmental degradation due to oil spillage. Hence more than the overall lateral loads on the platform as a whole, the deck components require careful consideration in their design to resist lateral loads which are mainly due to winds. The models of o!shore wind "elds under normal and extreme wind climatic conditions and their use along with codes of practice are still being keenly studied, despite the practical problems of measurements. Compliant platforms as well as #oating systems which have lower frequencies compared to "xed platforms, are more vulnerable to dynamic e!ects of wind. A critical review of turbulence spectra for o!shore application has been presented by Kareem [2]. Further due to directional e!ects, and phase correlation between wind on deck structures and wave on the platform supporting system ("xed/compliant) there could be reduction in total lateral loads as well as considerable increase in total loads on the deck structures and components. The reasons are well explained by Kareem [1], and are summarised as follows: 2.1. Dynamic wind ewects during cyclones/hurricanes (i) Wind load contribution is 10% of total lateral loads in jackets and about 25% in compliants during normal winds, and these loads tend to increase to 20% and 40}50%, respectively, in jackets and in compliants, in the event of cyclonic winds. (ii) The dynamic pressure due to wind [0.5 <(t)*<(t)] becomes higher in cyclones, as the density of air is higher due to excessive moisture content and presence of micro molecules of water particles, in addition to the prevailing higher wind velocities than in normal conditions. (iii) Similar to topographic e!ects of hillocks and valleys on onshore structures, a high wave can cause temporal speed up of wind on o!shore structures. (iv) Turbulent wind-induced loads (Fig. 1) dominate deck structural loading and design. (v) Increased dynamic forces on deck (Fig. 1). (vi) Increased uplift forces on heli-deck or similar lifting surfaces on the deck (Fig. 1).

S. Gomathinayagam et al. / J. Wind Eng. Ind. Aerodyn. 84 (2000) 345}367

347

Fig. 1. Schematic of wind action on o!shore deck structures.

(vii) Turbulent wind on lattice structures (the complexities of the loading during cyclonic winds are yet not known fully even from full-scale measurements on onshore structures) and on cylindrical #are-outs and storage tanks. (viii) Down burst loads on deck structures. (ix) Wind #ow trained by wave crest and trough under the platform causing reversal of forces of uplift and drag. (x) Turbulent wakes of one structure over the other on the deck, as well as one platform over the other. (xi) Unsteady turbulent wind over crane booms and cantilever girders causing torsional dynamic loads. (xii) Impact of debris of cladding, berthed ships and boats on the platform structures.

3. Wind environment in o4shore The parameters that concern the structural loading are wind velocity, direction and terrain characteristics/wave "elds. Realising the devastating e!ects of

348

S. Gomathinayagam et al. / J. Wind Eng. Ind. Aerodyn. 84 (2000) 345}367

hurricanes/tropical cyclones on o!shore structures, many studies mainly concentrated on the evaluation of extreme wind characteristics. The research papers cover investigations on hurricane wind models [3}6,12}14,21], study of wind pro"le along height under various sea states [4,7,8,14], design load speci"cations [15,16], measurement of combined wind, wave and current loads [17}19], and joint probability description of wind and waves [20]. The problems associated in this grey area are not fully solved due to practical di$culties associated with uninterrupted operability of wind sensors and acquisition of noise-free signals [8}11]. Di$culties in obtaining good sampling rates for accurate measurement of turbulence had been one of the problems in the 1970 s [10]. Even with the availability of satellite data for numerical ocean surface wind predictions, improvements in models of simulation and in accuracy of predictions were limited by computer speeds [11]. A brief review of individual research contributions is presented in the Table 1.

4. Fixed and 6oating platforms in wind-wave environment Scarcity of data has not been the barrier in the design of complex o!shore structures, built for the exploitation of o!shore oil, which is clearly seen in the study of various "xed and #oating/compliant o!shore platforms [22}48]. The need for dynamic analysis of o!shore structures to gusty wind has been realised even three decades ago [22]. Simple dual mass model [22] and use of codes of practice [29] have paved the way for safer designs. Structural analyses of jackets [22}26,34}36], tension leg platforms (TLP) [31,32,37,40,41,45,48], semi-submersibles [27,29,30,34,47], guyed towers [38], articulated towers [28], jackups [44] and moored vessels [33] have been carried out either in the time domain or in the frequency domain for appropriate loading of wind and wave. However, mention can be made of speci"c investigations on two-dimensional and steady state/static responses [23,34,36], three-dimensional and dynamic responses [25,26,36,46] and combined responses due to wind and waves [24,28,32,38,40,45]. Wind-induced dynamic responses of deck structures such as derricks [34,43], #are-outs [42] and other deck structures [36,39,46] have also been investigated with measured or simulated data. From the results for compliant structures, it has been well established [37,40,41,45,48] that wind excites su$cient number of higher modes also. Apart from di$culties in wind tunnel modelling of lattice structures, a recent computational #uid dynamic (CFD) study [47] has presented practical problems of analytical modelling for studying the #ow around lattices. This fact and the results of Kareem [1,2] explain the need for further improvements of existing design provisions based on full scale testing and analysis. Table 2 provides a comparison of historical developments and published results in this area.

5. O4shore deck models in wind tunnel To capture the aerodynamic admittance function or the forces on a complex platform deck, many scaled model studies of the deck, with lattice and cladded

Table 1 Studies on wind environment in o!shore Analytical Damage surveys on o!shore structures Hurricane Andrew-induced damages to o!shore platforms o! the Florida coast Speci"c wind e!ect Observation

Ref. No. Year

Lead-Author

Experimental

1993

A. Kareem

1985

A. Kareem

Tension leg platform

1971

J.I. Collins

Simpli"ed hurricane model upto 250 miles from the centre of the eye

4 *

1974

R.C. Hamilton

5 *

1974

E.G. Ward

S. Gomathinayagam et al. / J. Wind Eng. Ind. Aerodyn. 84 (2000) 345}367

6 * *

1974

Patterson

1974

J.L. Goldman

Ocean wind data collected along height Ocean wind data measured during extreme wind Ocean wind data in various zones E!ective use of sparse measurements over homogeneous terrain

Reasoning of failure of deck structures and platforms are presented and discussed the complex nature of dynamic wind e!ects Wind-induced response of TLPs Features of wind turbulence spectra to various wind spectra of Kaimal, Harris and Davenport discussed and a design spectrum for TLP suggested with more energy near the TLP's frequency, i.e., around 0.01 Hz Free-vortex type formulation; Realised the importance of wind Logarithamic functional directional e!ects. Wind velocity relationship components derived using the directional behaviour of free vortex model Wind data obtained using Wind speed $5mph Direction sensors on platforms $10 Possible shielding e!ects in data observed Concentrated in extremes of Discussed about wind patterns of measured wind data two hurricanes, Camille and Laurie and one tropical storm Hurricane Camille wind data in Wind speeds and direction data di!erent topographical locations during a hurricane presented Discussed the use of directional Realistic variation of vertical wind pro"le over NASA's 150 m factors and zero-plane displacement in de"ning wind tall tower as a function of pro"le variation roughness and thermodynamic considerations

349

350

Table 1. Continued Analytical Telemetry used for data acquisition Interference of buoy frequencies of 0.7}0.9 Hz realised in the acquired signal Reported problems of operation at all times Speci"c wind e!ect Observation

Ref. No. Year

Lead-Author

Experimental

1975

W.B. Mclead

1976

G.A.J. Smith

Moored buoy * deployed for longer periods with long term battery life Wind data in the * ocean * Three cup anemometers and wind vanes used for wind data collection Only one data for every 5.7 s obtained

10

1976

W.R. Mclead

Wind climate

11

1977

W.J. Pierson

12

1977

M.M. Kolpak

13

1979

V.J. Caradone

14

1980

G.Z. Farristall

S. Gomathinayagam et al. / J. Wind Eng. Ind. Aerodyn. 84 (2000) 345}367

15

1993

API-RP-2A

16

1994

API-RP-2T

17

1994

D.B. Driver

Reported the problem of getting su$cient level of accuracy of turbulence data SEASAT-A data For numerical weather Ocean surface wind prediction Improvement in model and predictions accuracy of prediction is limited by computer speed * Five parameter wind Made use of data for outer and Inner and outer Hurricane models model inner model. The inner model adopted to derive a "ve parameter based on well documented storms prediction model Conventional ship Three methods of synthesis Extra tropical storm wind "elds Storm wind "elds speci"ed from measurements of of data discussed studied historical data on sea level pressure, wind air and sea temperature Wind and wave Measurements on a drilling Wind velocity and direction Frequencies in the range of measurements 200 platform measured during Hurricane 0.25}0.5 Hz seem to be important above sea level Camille for Hurricane winds Wave and wind Planning and designing of * The length scale of Simple projection of area for steady loading speci""xed o!shore platforms turbulence o!shore' state wind e!ects and for dynamic cation for "xed * Standard Codal onshore Emphasis on dynamic e!ects, gust factors for wind and o!shore platforms provisions e!ects of wind highlighted turbulence spectrum Suggests increased wind gust Wind and wave Additional provisions for More comprehensive wind factors for component designs loading for TLP TLP loading based on averaging based on smaller averaging period time of wind Statistical analysis of extremes for Field wind and * Extreme condition and wind, wave and current "elds wave data directional analysis of storm tracks

18 Wind loading features Non-linear pushover analysis of jacket

1994

Q. Yuan

Model #oating platform

19

1994

G. Clauss

Experimental study in harbour *

20

1995

J.I. Dalene

Wind climate

S. Gomathinayagam et al. / J. Wind Eng. Ind. Aerodyn. 84 (2000) 345}367

21

1995

C.K. Cooper

Satellite-based data *

Wind: 19 m/sec with direction 1803 Mention the use of 60 or 10 min maximum wind Wind turbulence taken into account, and joint acceptance of wind-wave realised Free vortex type of maximum wind prediction

Combined wind, wave and current study Drag coe$cient &K' de"ned for rough sea and very rough sea Using joint description of wind and wave reduction of horizontal loading suggested Using satellite data interpretation of wave height in tropical and extra tropical storms (TS, ETS) predicted

351

352

Table 2 Studies on "xed and #oating platforms in wind-wave environment Analytical Sustained as well as gust wind e!ects Plane frame model Speci"c wind e!ect Observation Scarcity of o!shore wind data, the need for dynamic analysis reported

Ref. No. Year

Lead-Author

Experimental

22

1969

R. Blumberg

23

1970

G.H. Workman *

24

1974

A.E. Mansoor

25 Wind on the deck and Wave on platform structures Wind speeds from North sea location

1975

N.J. Heaf

Wind, wave and current, and e!ect of combined loading Dynamic e!ects of wind

26

1976

F. Holter

27

1977

M.K. Ochi

Single and dual mass dynamic models of platform and deck structures Normal mode method; timeand space-dependant forces Spectral and lumped mass modelling Concepts of wind loading on o!shore structures Design concepts for integrated platform and deck design Semi-submersible o!shore structure Articulated tower

28

1978

G.E. Deleuil

29

1978

P.M.F.M. Desouza

30

1979

H. Boonstra

Long-term combined wind wave and current e!ects Semi-submersibles with wind Wind speed with gradient and and wave loading drag and lift coe$cients used with classi"cation rules Semi-submersible platform Measured anchor chain forces and DNV rules discussed due to wind TLP, Dynamic response evaluation by digital simulation of random process Wind turbulence and wave characterisitics explained

Discussed steady state forces, de#ections and stresses Vortex shedding e!ect neglected and Ave. Cd"0.9 Primary and secondary e!ects of wind Capital cost can be minimised by integrated deck and platform design Wind speeds and frequency of occurrence used for computing response Wind velocity and sea state are assumed independent Conservatism in classi"cation rules to be preserved until further results are obtained Concluded that wind tunnel test results;full-scale measured forces Davenport, Harris, and Kaimal spectra compared. For the design of TLPs, Kaimal spectrum's superiority due to the presence of higher energy in the meso scale of 0.01 Hz (range lying between synoptic (low) and micro (high) scales of frequencies) highllighted

S. Gomathinayagam et al. / J. Wind Eng. Ind. Aerodyn. 84 (2000) 345}367

31

1982

A. Kareem

Wind forces and measured anchor chain forces *

32

1983

N. Spidoe

Measured motions Articulated loading platform

Wind and wave-induced motions

33

1983

P.A. Palo

34

1983

H. Rolfsman

35

1985

N. Spidoe

Full scale measurements on instrumented platform

36

1985

J.W. Bunce

37

1987

A. Kareem

38

1989

S. Seetharaman *

39

1989

ESSO

40

1990

Y. Li

S. Gomathinayagam et al. / J. Wind Eng. Ind. Aerodyn. 84 (2000) 345}367

41

1990

A. Kareem

42

1992

R.H. Kirkvik

Assuming independency of random process, wind and wave spectral responses are summed up Moored vessels Steady wind and current loads Use of non-dimentional coe$cients for load computation Alternative location of derrick Stepped wind; segmental wind Cd values in the range of subon Semi-submersible pro"le critical 0.5}0.6 Super critical 0.70 Jacket platform in the North Theoretical model for natural Higher length scales of turbulence Sea wind adopted for o!shore applications. Commonly used aerodynamic transfer function exaggerates the spatial coherence Integrity of platform All possible loads including MSF module design and analysis as superstructures wind loads for deck structures per API-RP-2A presented along with typical equipment weights Frequency domain approach Conceptual steps for evaluation Frequency domain approach to of wind induced responses MDOF explained Guyed tower spectral analysis Non-zero mean stationary ran- MDOF frequency domain dom process and combined calculation of responses and wind and wave and current stresses loading Design instructions for jacket Projected area for wind Wind speed @ 10 m above MSL platform deck structures loading for 4, 5 and 6 modules and the pro"le variation as per of the deck in a platform guidelines of US Geological survey, based on ave.time of wind TLP responses Stochastic response Combined wind, wave and current "eld TLP response in the Simultaneously acting wind Increased drag with added frequency domain with wave and current modules, for various wind and mean direction. Mean Cd, Cl, and Cm values provided Flare boom welded and Critical wind speeds and Four platform #are booms exabraced type vortex shedding e!ects studied mined and suggested stress ranges due to wind-induced vibrations be combined with normal fatigue, due to along wind #uctuations

353

354

Table 2. Continued Analytical Wind, wave and drilling loads are handled Speci"c wind e!ect Observation Measured accelerometer traces compared with numerical results

Ref. No. Year

Lead-Author

Experimental

43

1992

V. Gusella

44

1995

T.O. Weaver

Full-scale measurements Wind and wave loading North sea "eld data of wind used

Wind speed range: 7.9}22.9 m/s Wind, wave and current forces and Leg forces compared

45

1996

A.K. Jain

46

1996

K. Vandiver

Dynamic behaviour of drilling derrick on steel jacket platform Time-domain analysis, dynamic analysis of Jackup platform Step-by-step time-domain approach to TLP Fatigue damage of #are boom in unsteady winds

47

1997

C. Aage

S. Gomathinayagam et al. / J. Wind Eng. Ind. Aerodyn. 84 (2000) 345}367

48

1997

P. Teigen

Wind tunnel, Full-scale test in harbour Full-scale measurements

Semi-submersible by computational #uid dynamics (CFD) Extreme values of response of TLP

Wind load in a horizontal plane studied using CFD and experimental results compared Wind and wave with direction e!ect considered

Wind excites su$cient number of higher modes Concluded that knowledge of turbulence intensities in o!shore is limited Expressed di$culties of modelling lattice structures such as cranes, booms, and derrick using CFD Cd values of columns and pontoons predicted using directional spread spectrum

S. Gomathinayagam et al. / J. Wind Eng. Ind. Aerodyn. 84 (2000) 345}367

355

structures on the deck have been carried out [49}67].While most of the experiments have aimed at quantifying mean drag and lift force coe$cients for the deck as a whole, there has been signi"cant research in understanding the contribution of various modules to the overall lateral load due to wind. Mean load coe$cients [49,54,55,61], dynamic e!ects [53,66], and use of power law [50], have been studied for jackets [49], TLPs [53,58,62,66], guyed towers [57,60], semi-submersibles [51,54}56], jackups [59,64] and ships [50]. General deck [57] con"guration and heli-deck optimum [52,65] location and Reynolds number e!ects have also been investigated. Haldo [65] has studied the complex Reynolds number (Re) e!ect by modelling an o!shore derrick and cautioned that large di!erences in drag coe$cients are possible, by testing lattice tower under low Re, which needs very careful interpretation. Also he concluded that the turbulence intensity variations have signi"cant e!ect on the drag of lattice structures. Simiu [68] has compiled the experimental results on wind force coe$cients, viz. the drag coe$cients, and lift force coe$cients of lattice frame works as well as plate girders, which have been one of the major sources of data for many contemporary design procedures. The claim of conservatism of using codal recommendation, based on wind tunnel model experiments, has been contested by the conclusion of Boonstra [30] which states that full-scale measured forces are far more than those predicted by the wind tunnel forces. More research has to be carried out on comparison of wind tunnel results with that of full scale. Summary information with regards to the di$culties of wind tunnel modelling and the interpretation of laboratory results to the "eld are presented in the Table 3.

6. O4shore deck structures in natural wind 5eld The design of o!shore deck structures is complex due to the non-availability of full-scale measured data. Field measured data has been compared with analytical procedures developed for wind [17,18], structural responses of jackups [44], semisubmersibles [47], and TLPs [48]. Spidoe and Brathaug [32] has compared full-scale experimental results on an articulated loading platform in natural wind with a simpli"ed theoretical model based on structural impedance and aerodynamic admittance functions. Full-scale results of semi-submersibles are compared in Refs. [30,56]. Some details of the instrumented platform measurements are already presented in Tables 1}3. However, speci"c survey of full-scale experimental investigations are given in Table 4.

7. Dynamic characteristics of deck structures and platforms The location of a derrick on any o!shore platform is governed by functional requirements and it normally has a skid base. The operations on oil well are usually suspended under extreme wind conditions. During gusty winds the derrick/inclined lattice boom gets a base excitation triggered by the wave, wind and current acting on the platform structure. In addition, wind gust loading with high-frequency contents

356

Table 3 Studies on o!shore deck models in wind tunnel Structure model Overall deck: small and large models Large crude carrier Speci"c wind e!ect Observation

Ref. No. Year

Lead-Author

Experimental

49

1969

J.T. Aiston

Wind tunnel

50

1977

F.A. Benham

Wind tunnel (force balance) Semi-submersible Heli deck location and shape Dynamic analysis of TLP Dynamic wind e!ects Wind #ow around heli deck Wind over turning moment

An overall drag coe$cient, Cd corresponding to the dimensions of the components Combined Lift and Drag force

51

1978

52

1979

E.T.D. Bjerregaard Wind tunnel 1 : 250 K.H.V. Blatin Wind tunnel 1 : 150

53

1980

A. Kareem

Wind tunnel

54

1981

D.J. Norton

Wind tunnel 192 : 1

Semi-submersible component e!ects

Dynamic wind e!ects

55 Semi-submersible

1981

E.T.D. Bjerregaard Wind tunnel

Semi-submersible

Wind induced lift/drag ratio

56

1982

H. Bonnstra

57

1982

P.J. Pike

Wind tunnel and full scale Wind tunnel tests Guyed tower o!shore platforms TLP

S. Gomathinayagam et al. / J. Wind Eng. Ind. Aerodyn. 84 (2000) 345}367

58

1983

Armstrong

Wind tunnel

Total wind loads at various wind speeds Wind loads and pressures on blu! body of deck compared Unsteady wind forces

59 60

1984 1985

A.G. Davenport B.J.Vickery

Wind tunnel Jack-up platform deck Wind tunnel model Lena Guyed tower 1 : 400

Turbulent wind loading Wind-induced drag-moment, torsional moment and lateral moments

Using incremental averaging of wind along height, the overall Cd for the deck is given as 0.90 Concluded (1/7)th power law "ts good for comparison with integrated pressures Conservativeness of empirical calculation methods Air gap is a must and Leeward edge should be well clear o! the platform edge Signi"cance of second order forces due to high mean wind and turbulent #uctuations emphasised Current methods over predict wind loads as 75% of all drag forces during drilling and 90% of all drag forces when #oating For various angles of incidence and H / values  Comparison of full-scale and wind tunnel results Wind tunnel force balence wind loads evaluated Measured aerodynamic admittance function, with frequency dependency developed Dynamic response calculations Three types of exposure categories studied

61

1986

D.C. Bayer

Wind tunnel

Cd and Cm of lattice tower

62

1987

A. Kareem

Wind tunnel

Section model studies on lattice frames TLP

63

1992

C. Swan

Wind-Wave

64 Lattice derrick on a o!shore platform Compliant o!shore towers Floating production systems

1993

T.S. Lee

Environment of wind and wave Mobile o!shore platform

65

1993

A.E. Holdo

Wind Tunnel 1 : 268 Wind tunnel

66

1995

M.T.S. Daneswaran

Wind and Wave tunnel facility

S. Gomathinayagam et al. / J. Wind Eng. Ind. Aerodyn. 84 (2000) 345}367

67

1995

L. Huang

Wind tunnel with hydrodynamic testing

Solidity ratio vs. drag coe$cient obtained Mean aerodynamic force Increased drag with added modules coe$cients for various wind mean directions Cd, Cl, Cm values provided Critical height at which wind Orientations for young and velocity"wave celerity established wind-waves identi"ed E!ect of removable component Application of building block on deck method of wind loading developed Turbulence intensity variation Lattice models below R "2200  may have drag coe$cients di!ering in order of 40% Wind only and wind-wave RMS of Cm values used and combinations using time domain measured and theoretical values and frequency domain solutions compared Stepped wind pro"le given by Forces computed on models API and ABS compared with codal provisions

357

358

Table 4 Full-scale experimental studies on o!shore deck structures Speci"c wind e!ect addressed Extreme values of wind in a given wave and current environment and directional analysis of storm tracks Wind speed of order 19 m/s and directions within 1803 Remarks

Ref. No. Experiment

O!shore structure/Location

17

Field wind, wave and South China-sea wind structure current data measurement over a long duration

18

Experimental study in harbour, to reduce the e!ects of wave and current Measured anchor chain forces due to wind components in small-scale model study. Expressed that mutual interaction, shielding e!ects, and accounting lift forces are di$cult to model in wind tunnels Mx#Cx#Kx"q (t)#q (t) K  a * aerodynamic h * hydrodynamic Existing Wind load models examined

Open bottomed #oating platform, large diameter columns separated by 30 m using truss-work

30

Wind forces on the deck structures and measurement of resulting anchor chain forces

Semi-submersible platform in Norway Coast

32

Measured motions due to Articulated loading platform in wind and waves North Sea

Statistical analysis of extremes for wind, wave and current "elds in the site examined with the help of measured and past data Wind, wave and current study, indicating the complex interaction of directional occurrences of the three environmental random processes which have low degree of correlation among them Concluded that wind tunnel test results on small-scale models have to be interpreted with caution since the measured model forces are an order less than that of full-scale measured forces due to some practical di$culties of modelling Measured motion transfer function; Using independency of random process of wind and wave, spectral responses are superimposed

35

Aerodynamic loading on wind sensitive structures

Steel jacket in North Sea

S. Gomathinayagam et al. / J. Wind Eng. Ind. Aerodyn. 84 (2000) 345}367

44

Jackup platform in North Sea

Time-domain analysis, dynamic analysis of jackup platform in the wind speed range of 7.9 to 22.9 m/s Need for full-scale data stressed for ship manoeuvring simulations, Overturning roll moment computations of dynamic stability using CFD

Adequacy of wind spatial coherency and aerodynamic transfer function models used for prediction are veri"ed Wind, wave and current forces and their e!ects evaluated and measured leg forces compared in a storm condition Expressed di$culties of modelling lattice structures such as cranes, booms, and derrick using CFD. Importance of wind shear in full scale on #oating systems with low metacentric height stressed

47

Full-scale measurements to calibrate dynamic analysis procedure in a severe storm CFD and full-scale tests in harbour as alternative to wind tunnel studies

Semi-submersible and a Ferry

48

Full-scale measurements for prediction methods

A large TLP `Heidruna o! the Norway Coast

56

Wind tunnel study and full-scale results

Semi-submersible model

Wind and wave with direction e!ect considered and extreme values compared in wind speed range of 17}24 m/s Total wind loads using DNV at various wind speed range of 5}35 m/s used for comparison

Cd values of columns and pontoons predicted using directional spread spectrum for comparison with full scale predictions Full-scale total wind loads vary from 200 to 1600 kN in the wind speed range reported

S. Gomathinayagam et al. / J. Wind Eng. Ind. Aerodyn. 84 (2000) 345}367 359

360

S. Gomathinayagam et al. / J. Wind Eng. Ind. Aerodyn. 84 (2000) 345}367

excites partially "xed/damaged free standing lattice structures. While shielding, interference and base #exibility may reduce the severity of extreme wind load e!ects on a derrick, local speed-up of wind, uplift e!ects, and possible resonant vibrations with higher frequencies of platform will increase the dynamic stresses in the structure. Under extreme wind conditions we will have high stress ranges which means lower cycles to failure requiring additional caution in design and detailing of the deck components. In order to draw inferences with regard to typical structural frequencies in relation to that of frequency content of wind loading a few examples are considered here. The natural frequencies and modes of a derrick and an inclined boom are presented in (Figs. 2}5). The structural data for these examples have been scaled from wind tunnel model data as given by Vickery [60]. The results for a Bombay High jacket platform (Fig. 6) resting on a bed of soft clay and a semi-submersible (Fig. 7) [69] are also presented.

Fig. 2. Modes of derrick with assumed rigid-deck-"xture.

Fig. 3. Modes of derrick with assumed partial-deck-"xture (one leg "xed).

S. Gomathinayagam et al. / J. Wind Eng. Ind. Aerodyn. 84 (2000) 345}367

361

Fig. 4. Modes of inclined boom with assumed rigid base.

Fig. 5. Modes of inclined boom with assumed partial (one leg) damage.

7.1. Codal provisions for wind loading and response in owshore/onshore The available terrain-dependant wind parameter measurements, even in onshore sites are today far from being su$cient around the world, even though onshore measurements are comparatively cheaper and reliable than o!shore wind measurements. For o!shore structural designs, mostly international codes such as API-series are being followed in the Indian coastline as well. However, rational use of regional wind data will be appropriate for a good design. Keeping this aspect the API (American Petroleum Institute) and BIS (Bureau of Indian Standards) codal provisions are brie#y compared in Table 5. API-RP-2A [15] suggests design-oriented

362

S. Gomathinayagam et al. / J. Wind Eng. Ind. Aerodyn. 84 (2000) 345}367

Fig. 6. Frequencies of a jacket platform on soft clay, in Bombay High, India.

Fig. 7. Frequencies of a Semi-submersible platform [69].

simple techniques for overall platform design subjected to wind and wave and other relevant forces. Rightly recognising the increased wind sensitivity of TLPs, API-RP2T [16] vividly describes the actions for varying time scales of wind and for the design of components and systems as a whole. Fig. 8 gives excitation source spectra used in o!shore design [8].

S. Gomathinayagam et al. / J. Wind Eng. Ind. Aerodyn. 84 (2000) 345}367 Table 5 Codal provisions for o!shore wind loads (for use o! the Indian Coast) Parameter Basic wind speed O!shore (API-series) 1.15 < (as recommended by IS875 up to 200 km o! the coast, for India) 0.125 (API-RP-2A of July 1993) Onshore (IS875/ISO) < m/s (Wind zones Map, for India)

363

Power-law coe$cient for mean wind pro"le

Wind gust factor @ 10 m (3-s gust)

0.07 * Class A open (greatest dimension of height or width (20 m) 0.14 * Class C type structures (greatest dimension of height or width'50 m) 1.49 (for 3-s gust from hourly mean)

G(t, z)"(<(t, z)/<(3600, z)) "1#g(t).0.15(10/z)\  g(t)"3.0#ln(3/3)  "1.55 (API-RP-2T for TLP) At 50 m 0.15*(50/20)\  "0.120 At 10 m 0.15*(10/20)\  "0.181 Category 2+0.20

Turbulence intensity ( /;) (for #uctuating component) * standard deviation ; * Mean wind velocity

Category 3+0.24

Note:< * Basic wind speed (India); <(t, z), G(t, z) wind speed and wind gust factor for averaging period of t seconds at given elevation &z'.

Fig. 8. Excitation Source spectra for o!shore structures [2].

364

S. Gomathinayagam et al. / J. Wind Eng. Ind. Aerodyn. 84 (2000) 345}367

8. Conclusion Dynamic wind e!ects on o!shore deck structures as investigated by various authors have been reviewed to gain an insight into the possible missing links and focus new research on unexplored areas. The excitation frequencies in the design wind spectra during normal wind conditions seem to have considerable energy in the highfrequency regime. Under the extreme wind conditions the high-frequency regime is likely to extend further in the regime of design structural frequencies [70]. The review reveals that, only very few researchers have studied the individual module contribution to the overall wind load for the design of o!shore platforms. The numerical results of natural frequencies of typical platforms and "xed/partially "xed derrick/lattice boom frequencies and modes illustrate the possibility of response involving component modes as well as platform modes under the action of extreme wind and wave, which are generally assumed to be two independent random processes with considerable energy in the higher frequencies near the tail end of spectra. The modes of the inclined booms having frequencies closer to extreme wind excitation frequencies, not only increases the risk of higher torsional loads on the platform, but also pose potential danger of impact loads on the lower deck structures. It is obvious that failure of #are booms can cause extensive damage through oil sleek as well as "re hazards on the deck. For the design of components on the deck, the dynamic e!ects must be understood by conducting more elaborate full-scale measurements, by instrumenting existing platforms and analysing both the load and response data. Comparing the measured observations, which could be even from routine inspection and maintenance, with the existing design practice, more consistent analytical models for rational designs can be developed.

Acknowledgements The authors thank Dr. T.V.S.R. Appa Rao, Director, SERC, for his guidance, encouragement and permission for this publication

References
[1] A. Kareem, C.E. Smith, Performance of o!shore platforms in Hurricane Andrew, Proceedings of the seminar on Hurricanes of 1992 held in December 1993, Miami, Florida, USA, 1993, pp. C3 I-1}10. [2] A. Kareem, Wind induced response analysis of tension leg platform, J. Struct. Eng. ASCE 111 (1) 1985, 37}55. [3] J.I. Collins, M.J. Viehman, A semi empirical model for hurricane wind "elds, OTC Paper 1346, Vol. I, O!shore Technology Conference, USA, 1971. [4] R.C. Hamilton, E.G. Ward, Ocean data gathering program * quality and reduction of data, OTC Paper 2108-A, Vol. II, O!shore Technology Conference, USA, 1974, pp. 749}769. [5] E.G. Ward, Ocean data gathering program, OTC Paper 2108-B, Vol. II, O!shore Technology Conference, USA, 1974, pp. 771}780. [6] Patterson, Oceanographic data from Hurricane Camille, OTC Paper 2109, Vol. II, O!shore Technology Conference, USA, 1974, pp. 781}790.

S. Gomathinayagam et al. / J. Wind Eng. Ind. Aerodyn. 84 (2000) 345}367

365

[7] J.L. Goldman, Oscillations of vertical wind pro"les, OTC Paper 2112, Vol. II, O!shore Technology Conference, USA, 1974, pp. 819}827. [8] W.B. Mclead, L.C. Adamo, R.C. Hamilton, A unique strategy for obtaining wave and wind data in the Gulf of Alaska, OTC Paper 2297, Vol. II, O!shore Technology Conference, USA, 1975, pp. 503}516. [9] G.A.J. Smith, Canadian ocean data system * an early review, OTC Paper 2593, Vol. II, O!shore Technology Conference, USA, 1976, pp. 709}718. [10] W.R. Mclead, Operations program on the wave and wind measurement on the Gulf of Alaska, OTC Paper 2594, Vol. II, O!shore Technology Conference, USA, 1976, pp. 719}727. [11] W.J. Pierson, V.J. Cardone, Ocean surface winds from Seasat-A, OTC Paper 2762, Vol. I, O!shore Technology Conference, USA, 1977, pp. 303}310. [12] M.M. Kolpak, Wind and wave model for Hurricane wave spectra hind casting, OTC Paper 2850, Vol. II, O!shore Technology Conference, USA, 1977, pp. 339}348. [13] V.J. Cardone, A.J. Broccoli, C.V. Greenwood, J.A. Greenwood, Error characteristics of extra-tropical wind "elds speci"ed from historical data, OTC Paper 3598, Vol. III, O!shore Technology Conference, USA, 1979, pp. 2013}2111. [14] G.Z. Farristall, Wind and wave measurements in the "rst year of drilling in the Baltimore Canyon, OTC Paper 3713, Vol. I, O!shore Technology Conference, USA, 1980, pp. 307}316. [15] API-RP-2A * Recommended Practice for Planning, Designing and Construction Fixed o!shore Platforms} Working Stress/Load and Resistance factor Design(WSD/LRFD), 1st Edition, July, 1993. [16] API-RP-2T * Recommended Practice for Planning, Design, and construction of TLP API-RP-2T87, July, 1993. [17] D.B. Driver, L.E. Borgman, J.B. Bole, Typhoon, wind, wave, and current directionality in the south China Sea, OTC Paper 7416, O!shore Technology Conference, USA, Vol. I, 1994, pp. 359}366. [18] Q. Yuon, Experimental study on behaviour of an open bottom #oating platform in wave, wind, and current, IVth International Seminar on o!shore and Polar Engineering, Osaka, ISCOPE, 1994, pp. 334}337. [19] G. Clauss, E. Lehmann, K. Ostergaard, Wind loading features, O!shore structures, Vol. II, Strength, Safety for Structural Design, Springer, Berlin, 1994, pp. 164}168. [20] J.I. Dalane, S. Haver, Requali"cation of an unmanned jacket structure using reliability methods, OTC Paper 7756, Vol. 2, O!shore Technology Conference, USA, 1995, pp. 549}556. [21] C.K. Cooper, On the use of Satellite wave data to derive extreme criteria, OTC Paper 7687, Vol. I, O!shore Technology Conference, USA, May 1995, pp. 363}376. [22] R. Blumberg, N.R. Strader, Dynamic analysis of o!shore structures, OTC Paper 1009, Vol. I, O!shore Technology Conference, USA, 1969, pp. 107}126. [23] G.H. Workman, J.E. Sorenen, Elastic response of o!shore platforms subjected to time and space dependent forces, Vol. II, O!shore Technology Conference, USA, 1970, pp. 509}520. [24] A.E. Mansoor, D.N. Millman, Dynamic random analysis of "xed o!shore platforms, OTC Paper 2049, Vol. II, O!shore Technology Conference, USA, 1974, pp. 157}172. [25] N.J. Heaf, R.K. Henrywood, L.R. Wootton, Assessment of the accuracy of the design process for o!shore structure, O!shore structures, Proceedings of the Conference held by Institution of Engineers London, 7}8 October 1974, published in (1975). [26] F. Holter, K. Hagen, Integrated and semi integrated deck concepts for production platform with emphasis on capital cost optimization, OTC 2686, Vol II, O!shore Technology conference, USA, 1976, pp. 789}806. [27] M.K. Ochi, S.L. Bales, E!ect of various formulations in predicting responses of marine vehicles and ocean structures, Vol. I, O!shore Technology Conference, USA, 1977, pp. 133}148. [28] G.E. Deleuil, E.A. Durgeat, C.G. Davis, Long term responses of articulated towers to wind, waves and current, Vol. I, O!shore Technology Conference, USA, 1978, pp. 465}472. [29] P.M.F.M. De Souza, N.S. Miller, The intact and changed stability behaviour of two semi-submersible under wind and wave loading, OTC Paper 3298, Vol. IV, O!shore Technology Conference, USA, 1978, pp. 2147}2157. [30] H. Boonstra, Analysis of full scale wind forces on semi-submersible platform using operators data, OTC Paper 3628, Vol. IV, O!shore Technology Conference, USA, 1979, pp. 2345}2352.

366

S. Gomathinayagam et al. / J. Wind Eng. Ind. Aerodyn. 84 (2000) 345}367

[31] A. Kareem, C. Dalton, Dynamic e!ects of wind on tension leg platforms, Vol. I, OTC Paper 4229, O!shore Technology Conference, USA, 1982, pp. 746}757. [32] N. Spidoe, H.P. Brathaug, Measured motions of a North sea Articulated loading Platform, OTC Paper 4639, O!shore Technology Conference, USA, 1983, pp. 491}506. [33] P.A. Palo, Steady wind and current induced forces on moored vessels, OTC Paper 4530, Vol. II, O!shore Technology Conference, USA, 1983, pp. 159}166. [34] H. Rolfsman, A.B. Goetaverken, Wind forces on a semi-submersible equipped with alternative drilling Derricks, OTC Paper 4531, O!shore Technology Conference, USA, 1983, pp. 167}176. [35] N. Spidoe, H.P. Brathhaug, Full scale measurements of aerodynamic response of a north sea steel jacket platform, OTC Paper 4957, O!shore Technology Conference, USA, 1985, pp. 553}567. [36] J.W. Bunce, The integrity of platform superstructures * analysis in accordance with API RP2A, 1985. [37] A. Kareem, Dynamic response of structures under stochastic environmental loading, J. Struct. Eng. SERC, India, 14(1) (1987) pp. 1}8. [38] S. Seetharaman, Linear Stochastic response of o!shore guyed towers, under combined loading, Ph.D. Dissertation, Ocean Engineering Centre, I.I.T., Madras, 1989. [39] ESSO, Design instructions section. Part-2. Structural ESSO Production Rev., 2 Aug (1989). [40] Y. Li, A. Kareem, Stochastic response of tension leg platforms to wind and wave "elds, J. Wind Eng. Ind. Aerodyn. 36 (1990) 915}926. [41] Y. Li, A. Kareem, Response of a tension leg platform to wind, wave and currents, Paper No. 6318, OTC1990, Texas, USA, 1990, pp. 437}442. [42] R.H. Kirkvik, A study of wind induced vibrations, International O!shore and Polar Engineering Conference, Vol. III, 1992, pp. 293}300. [43] V. Gusella, O. Spadaccini, Vignoli, Dynamic behaviour of drilling Derrick on Steel Jacket platforms * comparison between numerical and experimental results, Vol. I, BOSS 92, 1992, pp. 337}348. [44] T.O. Weaver, C.R. Briskman, Calibration of a dynamic analysis procedure based on measurements from the north sea jack-up in severe storm, OTC Paper 7840, Vol. 3, OTC, 1995, pp. 333}342. [45] A.K. Jain, O!shore tension leg platform behaviour under wave and wind forces, Proceedings of the 6th International O!shore and Polar Engineering Conference Los-Angeles, May 26}31, USA, 1996, pp. 220}227. [46] K. Vandiver, C.Y. Fei, A procedure for predicting the fatigue damage of structural members in unsteady winds, OTC, Paper 8081, O!shore Technology Conference, Texas, Dallas, USA, 1996, pp. 473}483. [47] C. Aage, S.L. Hoid, P.H. Hughes, L. Anderson, Wind loads on ships and o!shore structures estimated by CFD, Proceedings BOSS97, Vol. 2, Delft, The Netherlands, 1997, pp. 237}252. [48] P. Teigen, S. Haven, The Heidrun TLP * measured versus predicted response, Behaviour of O!shore Structures, Proceedings of the BOSS97, Vol. 2, 1997, pp. 319}331. [49] S.T. Aiston, J.F. Nath, Wind drag coe$cients for blu! o!shore ocean platforms, OTC Paper 1068, Vol. I, 1969, pp. 713}720. [50] F.A. Benham, S.S. Fang, C.H. Fellen, Wind and current shape coe$cients for very large crude carriers, OTC Paper 2739, Vol. I, 1977, pp. 97}108. [51] E.T.D. Bjerregaard, S. Velschon, wind overturning e!ect on semisubmersible, OTC Paper 3063, Vol. I, O!shore Technology Conference, USA, 1978, pp. 147}154. [52] K.H.V. Blohn, Earl and Wright, J.A. Peterka, J.E. Cermak, E.J. Barnard, R.L. Ewald, O!shore platform heli-deck location for minimum wind turbulence, Vol. I, OTC Paper 3431, O!shore Technology conference, USA, 1979. [53] A. Kareem, Dynamic e!ects of Wind on o!shore structures, 12th Annual O!shore Technology Conference, USA, 1980, pp. 235}246. [54] D.J. Norton, C.V. Wol!, Mobile o!shore platform wind loads, Proceedings of the O!shore Technology Conference, USA, Vol. IV, OTC, 1981, pp. 77}88. [55] E.T.D. Bjerregaard, E.G. Sorensen, Wind overturning e!ects obtained from wind tunnel tests with various semi submersible models, OTC Paper 4124, Vol. IV, O!shore Technology Conference, USA, 1981, pp. 89}97.

S. Gomathinayagam et al. / J. Wind Eng. Ind. Aerodyn. 84 (2000) 345}367

367

[56] H. Boonstra, Leynse, Wind tunnel tests on a model of a semi-submersible platform and comparison of the results with full scale data, OTC Paper 4245, Vol. II, O!shore Technology Conference, USA, 1982, pp. 177}192. [57] P.J. Pike, B.J. Vickery, A wind tunnel investigation of loads and pressures on a typical Guyed tower o!shore platform, OTC Paper 4288, Vol. II, O!shore Technology Conference, USA, 1982, pp. 671}689. [58] Armstrong, F.H. Barmes, Unsteady aerodynamic loading of a TLP, OTC Paper 4641, Vol. III, O!shore Technology Conference, USA, 1983, pp. 517}524. [59] A.G. Davenport, E.C. Hambly, Turbulent wind loading and dynamic response of Jackup platforms, OTC Paper 4824, O!shore Technology Conference, USA, 1984. [60] B.J. Vickery, An Investigation of dynamic wind loads on o!shore platforms, OTC 4955, Proceedings of the O!shore Technical Conference, Houston, Texas, 1985, pp. 527}541. [61] D.C. Bayer, Drag coe$cient of lattice Towers, ASCE J. Struct. Eng. Vol. 112 (2) (1986) 417}431. [62] A. Kareem, P.C. Lu, T.D. Finnigan, S. Lin, V. Liu, Aerodynamic loads on a typical tension leg platform, Ocean Engineering 14 (3) (1987) pp. 201}231. [63] C. Swan, Wind}wave interactions, 6th International Conference on Behaviour of O!shore Structures, Vol. 2, BOSS 92, 1992, pp. 146}157. [64] T.S. Lee, H.T. Low, Wind e!ects on o!shore platforms: a wind tunnel model study, Proceedings of the III International O! shore and Polar Engineering Conference ISCOPE, 1993, pp. 466}470. [65] A.E. Holdo, Reynolds number e!ects on lattice structures forming part of a wind tunnel model, J. Wind Eng. Ind. Aerodyn. 45 (1993) 229}238. [66] M.T.S. Daneshvaranan, B.J. Vickery, Dynamic response of a compliant tower in wind and waves, Vol. 3, Paper 7806, OTC 1995, pp. 23}40. [67] L. Huang, H. Padron, T.C. Baner, P.J.K. Omega, D.C. Scovel, Aerodynamic and hydrodynamic model tests on Enserch Garden Banks Floating prodution facility, OTC 7771, Vol. 2, O!shore Technology Conference, USA, 1995, pp. 681}690. [68] E. Simiu, Trussed frameworks and plate girders, Wind e!ects on structures, 1985, (Chapter 12). [69] S. Fuzhong, Analysis of motions of Semi-submersibles in sea waves, OTC Paper 3899, O!shore Technology Conference, USA, 1980. [70] J. Shanmugasundaram, P. Harikrishna, S. Gomathinayagam, N. Lakshmanan, Wind, terrain and structural damping characteristics under tropical cyclone conditions, Eng. Struct. 21 (1999) 1006}1014.