Barge Roll Motions Slideshow

A Reanalysis of Barge Roll
Motion Data
Allen H. Magnuson Ph. D., P. E.
Naval Architect
J. F. Moore International
Introduction
Accurate prediction of roll motions for heavy-lift barges and ships, launch
barges, deck barges and the like are essential to assure the safety of the
vessel and cargo in transit.
Accurate prediction of roll motions for heavy-lift ships and barges is
necessary for designing sea fastenings and leg stresses on jackups.
Existing commercially-available ship motions programs are generally known
to over-predict roll motion of loaded barge hullforms due to under-prediction
of roll damping.
In addition existing motions programs do not appear to have been validated
for loaded barge hullforms with their high VCGs and large radii of gyration in
roll.
Ship model motions test data is almost always proprietary, so very little data
is generally available.
November 13, 2006
All Rights Reserved, J. F. Moore

International
Introduction
Purposes of Investigation:
To illustrate the unique relationships between barge
roll motions and barge design/loading parameters.
To present model test data on barge roll motions for
use by Naval Architects in developing and validating
in-house motions programs.
November 13, 2006

International
Introduction 2
Data Sources:
S. Andos Data (ref: Trans. West Japan Soc. Of
Nav. Archs., 1975 - Translation from Japanese by
R. LaTorre: (ref) N.A.M.E. Dept. Report, U. of
Michigan, 1980)
Noble Denton & Assocs. (NDA) Barge Motion
Research Project (JIP): Summary Report, 1984.
November 13, 2006

International
Outline
Intro: Definition of barge-type hullforms

Presentation of Andos Data: Roll Angle RAOs for various hull
design/loading parameters Comparison with strip-theory computations
Presentation of NDA JIP Data:
NDA Standard Barge
Roll Angle RAOs for variations in L/B, B/d, and Roll Period (Tn)
Data on nonlinear effects on Roll Motion due to waveheight
Discussion:
Comparison with predictions from strip theory program
Effect of hydrodynamic inertia in roll motion (a44)
Effect of location of roll center
November 13, 2006

International
Heavy Lift Semi-Submersible Barges

and Transport Vessels
November 13, 2006

International
Other applicable barge types:

Deck barges
Jacket-launch barges
Hopper barges
November 13, 2006

International
Definition of Barge -Type Hullforms

High B/d > 4
Block Coefficient > 0.85
Flat Bottom, rectangular sections
amidships, extensive parallel mid-body,
small bilge radius
When loaded:
Large Roll Radius of Gyration (Kxx/B) > .4
High KG (KG/d > 3)
November 13, 2006

International
Roll Motion Analogy to

Mass-Spring-Damper System
(RAO as a Frequency-Response Function)
Damped Harmonic Oscillator - Magnitude Response:
Various Percent Critical Damping Ratios
Magnification Factor (log scale
10.0
Resonant
Damping
Ratios
Subcritical
5%
10%
20%
1.0
0.10
70%
1.00
Supercritical
10.00
0.1
Frequency Ratio (w/wn) (Log Scale)
November 13, 2006

International
Roll Motion Analogy to

Mass-Spring-Damper System
(RAO as Frequency-Response Function)
Roll Natural
Period:
n = 2 /n
November 13, 2006

International
10
Roll Natural Period

= 2
Ixx + A44
M g GMT
A44 Is Added Hydrodynamic Moment of Inertia in Roll

GMT Is Transverse Metacentric Height
A44 can be computed from RAO data using the following
relation:
A44 = M g GMT / n2 Ixx
November 13, 2006

International
11
Roll RAOs Based on Wave Slope

w = k 0 , k = 2/g
w = Wave Slope
0 = Wave Amplitude
k = Wave number
November 13, 2006

International
12
The RAO in Wave Spectral Theory

(Random Waves)
oo
RMS = (RAO)2 Sw() d

0
Sw () = Wave Spectrum
Note that roll angle varies with the square of the roll RAO
November 13, 2006

International
13
From Andos Paper:

Original Faired Roll Motion Data
November 13, 2006

International
14
Andos Data Sets 1,2 & 3: KG/d

and Kxx/B Variation
Japanese Work Barge

Rectangular hull, zero bilge radius
L/B = 2.2, B/d = 10
L = 50 m (164 ft)
Regular Waves: Waveheight = 2.5 m (est.)
Note: OG = distance from W. L to CG
(KG/d = OG/d +1)
November 13, 2006

International
15
Andos Data Set 1: KG Variation 1
Roll RAO (deg/deg)
Roll Motion For Ando's Barge: VCG Variation:

Kxx/B = 0.65
10
8
OG/d=3
OG/d=4
OG/d=5
OG/d=6
2
0
0.40
0.50
0.60
0.70
0.80
Wave Frequency (rad/sec)
November 13, 2006

International
16
Andos Data Set 1:

Correlation With Computed Values
Commercially- Available Ship Motions Program

Uses Strip Theory (Valid for High L/B ratio)
Motions Equations Based on Schmitkes Paper: Trans. SNAME
1978.
Linear 2-D Wave-Making Roll Damping
Used Tanakas (1960 JSNAJ) Empirical Eddy Making Roll
Damping Model
Developed for destroyer type hull-forms, conventional ships
November 13, 2006

International
17
Andos Data Set 1: Correlation With Computed Values
Roll Motion For Ando's Barge: OG/d = 4:

Kxx/B = 0.65
Roll Motion For Ando's Barge:OG/d = 3, Kxx/B = 0.65
8
6
Model Test
Strip Theory
4
2
0
0.40
0.50
0.60
0.70
Roll RAO (deg/deg)
Roll RAO (deg/deg)
10
0.80
10
8
6
Model Test
Strip Theory
2
0
0.3
0.5
0.6
0.7
0.8
Roll Motion For Ando's Barge: OG/d = 5 :

Kxx/B = 0.65
Ro ll M o tio n F o r An d o 's Ba rg e : O G /d = 6:
Kx x /B = 0.65
10
10
8
6
Model Data
Strip Theory
2
0
0.3
0.4
0.5
0.6
0.7
W ave Frequency (rad/sec)
0.8
Roll RAO (deg/deg
Roll RAO (deg/deg)
0.4
8
6
Model Data
4
Strip Theory
2
0
0.1
0.2
0.3
0.4
0.5
0.6
0.7
0.8
W ave Fr e q u e n cy (r ad /s e c)
November 13, 2006

International
18
Andos Data Set 2: KG Variation 2

Ando's Barge OG Var: Fig. 21a
Kxx/B = 0.4
Roll RAO (deg/deg)
3.5
3.0
2.5
2.0
OG/d=1
OG/d=2
1.5
OG/d=3
1.0
0.5
0.0
0.4
0.6
0.8
1.0
1.2
Frequency (rad/sec)
November 13, 2006

International
19
Andos Data Set 2: Correlation with Computed Values

Ando's Barge OG/d = 2 Comparison
Kxx/B = 0.4
Roll RAO (deg/deg)
Roll RAO (deg/deg)
Ando's Barge OG/d = 1 Compa rison,

Kxx /B = 0.4
3
Model Test
Strip Theory
4
3
2
Model Test
Strip Theory
1
0
0
0.4
0.6
0.8
1.0
0.4
1.2
0.6
0.8
1.0
1.2
Frequency (rad/sec)
Fre quency (ra d/se c)
Roll RAO (deg/deg)
Ando's Barge OG/d =3: Comparison of Model Data

w ith Computed Values, Kxx/B = 0.4
4
3
Model Test
StripTheory
1
0
0.4
0.6
0.8
1.0
1.2
Frequency (rad/sec)
November 13, 2006

International
20
Andos Data Set 2: Correlation of RAO Squared (Proportional to

Motion) Model Data with Computed Values
Ando's Barge OG/d = 2 Comparison: RAO Squared
Kxx/B = 0.4
Roll RAO^2 (deg/deg)^2
12
10
Model Test
Strip Theory
6
4
2
0
0.4
0.6
0.8
1.0
1.2
Frequency (rad/sec)
Note approximate 2/1 difference in RAO^2 near natural frequency.

This would result in a 2/1 difference in roll angle, with the
computed roll angle being about twice that of the model test data.
November 13, 2006

International
21
Andos Data Set 3: Kxx/B Variation

Ando's Barge Roll Data for Varying Kxx: OG/d = 2.13
Roll RAO (deg/deg)
4.0
3.0
Kxx/B=.5
2.0
Kxx/B=.55
1.0
0.0
0.6
0.7
0.8
0.9
1.0
1.1
1.2
November 13, 2006

International
22
Andos Kxx/B Variation:

Comparison with Motions Program
Ando's Barge Roll Data Comparison with
Strip Theory Motion Program, OG/d = 2.13
Roll RAO (deg/deg)
4
3
Model Data Kxx/B=.55
Strip Theory Kxx/B = .52

Model Data Kxx/B = .50
1
0
0.4
0.5
0.6
0.7
0.8
0.9
1.0
1.1
1.2
November 13, 2006

International
23
Andos Data Sets 4&5:

Bottom Bevel (Rake Angle) and Draft
Variation
Rectangular Barge with Bottom Bevel (Rake)
Measured from Horizontal
Bilge Radius = 0
L/B = 3
B/d = 5
KG/d = 1.67
Kxx/B = 0.45
L = 75 m (246 ft) Full Scale
November 13, 2006

International
24
Andos Data Sets 4&5:

Bottom Bevel (Rake Angle) and Draft Variation
W. L.
Bev. Angle
Draft
November 13, 2006

International
25
Andos Faired Data Set 4: Bottom Bevel (Rake Angle)
November 13, 2006

International
26
Andos Data Set 4:

Bottom Bevel (Rake) Variation
Ando's Bevel- Bottom Barge Series:
Kxx/B = .35, KG/d = 1.67
Roll RAO (deg/deg)
7
6
5
Bev=20
Bev=30
Bev=40
Bev=50
2
1
0
0.50
0.60
0.70
0.80
0.90
1.00
Frequency (rad/sec)
November 13, 2006

International
27
Andos Data Set 4: Bottom Bevel (Rake) Variation

Roll RAO Comparison: Ando's Data vs. Strip
Theory for Bottom Bevel of 30 deg
Roll RAO (deg/deg)
Roll RAO (deg/deg)
Roll RAO Comparison: Ando's Data vs. Strip

Theory for Bottom Bevel of 20 deg
4
Strip Theory
Ando
8
6
4
Strip Theory
Ando
2
0
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
0.2
0.4
Frequency (rad/sec)
0.8
Frequency (rad/sec)
Roll RAO Comparison: Ando's Data vs. Strip Theory

for Bottom Bevel of 40 deg
8
6
Strip Theory
Ando
Roll Angle Correl. for 50 deg Beveled Barge

8
Roll RAO (deg/deg)
Roll RAO (deg/deg)
0.6
Strip Theory
Model Data
0
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
Frequency (rad/sec)
November 13, 2006
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
Frequency (rad/sec)

International
28
Andos Barge Data Set 5: Variable Draft:

Bottom Bevel = 20 deg.
Ando's Barge, Variable Draft
Roll RAO (deg/deg)
5
4
.5 draft
.75 draft
full draft
2
1
0
0.5
0.6
0.7
0.8
0.9
1.0
Frequency (rad/sec)
November 13, 2006

International
29
Part 2: NDA JIP: Roll Motions of the

Standard Barge
November 13, 2006

International
30
Part 2:
NDA JIP Data : Based on NDA
Standard Barge
Full Scale:
L = 300
B = 90
d = 9
Rectangular hull with 30 deg rake at bow, 28

long
Bilge radius 1.48 ft
Scale ratio = 1 / 30
November 13, 2006

International
31
Part 2: Typical NDA JIP Model Test Data Plot for Regular Waves
November 13, 2006

International
32
NDA JIP Roll Motions Data:

Barge Model Series
NDE JIP Barge Characteristics
Case
L/B
B/d
Tn sec
KG/B
Kxx/B
Vary L/B
4.5
10
10
0.356
0.576
Vary L/B
2.5
10
10
0.356
0.576
Std. Barge
3.33
10
10
0.356
0.576
Vary B/d
3.33
10
0.234
0.477
Vary B/d
3.33
12.9
10
0.423
0.661
Vary Tn
3.33
10
0.178
0.309
Vary Tn
3.33
10
14
0.445
0.803
November 13, 2006

International
* Data N. G.
33
NDA JIP Data Set #1: L/B Variation

Roll RAOs, Length/Beam Variation:
3m W. H., B/D = 10, Kxx/B = 0.575, KG/d = 3.56
Roll RAO (deg/deg)
5
4
3
L/B=4.5
L/B=2.5
L/B=3.3
1
0
0.0
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
1.0
1.2
Frequency (rad/sec)
November 13, 2006

International
34
L/B Variation: Computed Roll RAO Data
Roll RAO Comparison: NDA Barge: L/B Variation,

Computed Values from Strip Theory
Roll RAO (deg/deg)
7
6
5
L/B = 2.5
L/B = 3.33
L/B = 4.5
2
1
0
0.0
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
1.0
1.2
Frequency (rad/sec)
November 13, 2006

International
35
NDA JIP Data Set #2: B/d Variation

NDA B/d (Beam/Draft) Variation Series
6
Kg/B, Kxx/B
5
4
KG/d
Kxx/B
2
1
0
4
10
12
14
Beam/Draft (B/d)
November 13, 2006

International
36
NDA JIP Data Set #2: B/d Variation

Roll RAOs, Beam/Draft (B/d) Variation:
3m W. H., Tn = 10 sec,: Kxx/B, KG/B Vary
Roll RAO (deg/deg)
5
4
B/d=10
B/d=6
B/d=12.9
2
1
B/D = 6 N. G.
0
0.0
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
1.0
1.2
Frequency (rad/sec)
November 13, 2006

International
37
NDA JIP Data Set #3:

Tn (Roll Period) Variation
NDA Tn (Roll Period) Variation Series
Kg/B, Kxx/B
5
4
3
KG/d
Kxx/B
2
1
0
4
10
12
14
16
Roll Natural Period (sec)
November 13, 2006

International
38
NDA JIP Data Set #3:

Tn (Roll Period) Variation
Roll RAOs, Roll Period (Tn) Variation:
3m W. H.,B/d = 10
Roll RAO (deg/deg)
8
T=14
T=10 sec
T=10
T=6 sec
T=14 sec
T=6
2
0
0.0
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
1.0
1.2
Frequency (rad/sec)
November 13, 2006

International
39
Comparison of NDA JIP Model Test Data with

Computed Data -1
Roll RAO Comparison: NDA Standard Barge,
Model Test Data vs. Computed Values from Strip Theory
Roll RAO (deg/deg)
7
6
5
4
Model Test
Strip Theory
2
1
0
0.0
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
1.0
Frequency (rad/sec)
November 13, 2006

International
40
Comparison of NDA JIP RAO-Squared for

Standard Barge Model Test Data with Computed Data -1
Roll RAO^2 Comparison: NDA Standard Barge, L/B = 3.33
35
30
RAO^2
25
20
Model Test
15
Strip Theory
10
5
0
0.0
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
1.0
Frequency (rad/sec)
Note approximate 2.5/1 difference in RAO^2 near natural frequency.

This would result in a 2.5/1 difference in roll angle, with the computed roll angle
being 2.5 times that of the model test data.
November 13, 2006

International
41
Comparison of NDA JIP Model Test Data with

Computed Data -2
Roll RAO Comparison: NDA Standard Barge,
Case 7: Tn = 14 sec
Roll RAO (deg/deg)
10
8
6
Model Test
Strip Theory
4
2
0
0.0
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
1.0
Frequency (rad/sec)
November 13, 2006

International
42
NDA JIP Data 4: Nonlinear Effect on

Roll Angle Peak Due to Wave Height
Effect of Waveheight on Peak Roll Angles
Roll Angle Peak (deg)
18
15
Tn=14 sec
12
B/d=12.9
Std Barge
B/d=6
L/B=2.5
3
0
0.0
1.5
3.0
4.5
6.0
7.5
9.0
Waveheight (m)
November 13, 2006

International
43
NDA JIP Data 4: Nonlinear Effect on

Roll Angle RAO Peak Due to Wave Slope
(Max Wave Slope for Stable Wave = 8 deg)
Effect of Wave Slope on Peak RAOs
Roll RAO Peak (deg/deg)
12
9
Tn=14 sec
B/d=12.9
Std Barge
B/d=6
L/B=2.5
0
0
10
Wave Slope (deg)
November 13, 2006

International
44
Summary
Roll RAO model test data for barge hullforms was
presented for a wide range of hull/loading parameters:
KG (VCG/d),
Roll Radius of Gyration (Kxx/B),
Bottom Rake Angle,
Draft (B/d)
L/B
B/d
Tn
Roll RAO model test data was compared to predictions

from a ship motions program based on Strip Theory.
November 13, 2006

International
45
Results
Generally, the computer RAO predictions agreed surprisingly well with

the reanalyzed model test data, even for very low L/B values.
The computed values generally underpredicted the roll damping
considerably.
However, if the RAOs are used to compute roll angles in random
waves using spectral representation, the computer predictions can
typically be twice the value obtained from the model test data.
The computer program used in the study uses Tanakas (1960) eddymaking roll damping, which is well known to underpredict viscous roll
damping, thus overpredicting roll motion.
Accurate means to predict roll damping for these barge-type hullforms
do not exist at present.
November 13, 2006

International
46
Results: Nonlinear (Waveheight) effect

from NDA Data
1. RAO Model test data shows that roll
damping increases with waveheigt
- RAO peak decreases with waveheight
- Roll angle peaks vs. waveheight tend
to level off as waveheight increases
2. These are all nonlinear effects
3. Nonlinear effects can be treated using
frequency-domain spectral analysis by using
least squares approach and appropriate
amplitude-dependent RAO.
November 13, 2006

International
47
Summary, Conclusions
The parametric RAO data presented here provides:
a. Useful insight into how roll motion is affected by
various hull and hull loading parameters
b. Data for use in validating ship motions programs
c. Guidance and direction for future studies
November 13, 2006

International
48
Recommendations
Further Work: (Possibly form a JIP)
Purpose: Reduce risks for ocean transport of platforms, other
large cargo on barges and barge-like transport ships
Conduct new model test programs for typical modern barge /
semi-submersible heavy lift ship designs
Perform model tests in regular waves, random waves
Examine effects of bilge radius, bilge keels on roll motion, esp.
nonlinear damping
Examine effects of quartering seas as well as beam seas
Acquire full-scale trials data for validation of model test data

Validate/evaluate current ship motions programs
November 13, 2006

International
49

Barge Roll Motions Slideshow

Hochgeladen von

Dokumentinformationen

Copyright

Verfügbare Formate

Dieses Dokument teilen

Dokument teilen oder einbetten

Freigabeoptionen

Stufen Sie dieses Dokument als nützlich ein?

Sind diese Inhalte unangemessen?

Copyright:

Verfügbare Formate

Barge Roll Motions Slideshow

Hochgeladen von

Copyright:

Verfügbare Formate

A Reanalysis of Barge Roll

November 13, 2006

All Rights Reserved, J. F. Moore

November 13, 2006

All Rights Reserved, J. F. Moore

November 13, 2006

All Rights Reserved, J. F. Moore

Intro: Definition of barge-type hullforms

November 13, 2006

All Rights Reserved, J. F. Moore

Heavy Lift Semi-Submersible Barges

November 13, 2006

All Rights Reserved, J. F. Moore

Other applicable barge types:

November 13, 2006

All Rights Reserved, J. F. Moore

Definition of Barge -Type Hullforms

All Rights Reserved, J. F. Moore

Roll Motion Analogy to

Magnification Factor (log scale

Frequency Ratio (w/wn) (Log Scale)

November 13, 2006

All Rights Reserved, J. F. Moore

Roll Motion Analogy to

November 13, 2006

All Rights Reserved, J. F. Moore

Roll Natural Period

A44 Is Added Hydrodynamic Moment of Inertia in Roll

A44 = M g GMT / n2 Ixx

November 13, 2006

All Rights Reserved, J. F. Moore

Roll RAOs Based on Wave Slope

November 13, 2006

All Rights Reserved, J. F. Moore

The RAO in Wave Spectral Theory

RMS = (RAO)2 Sw() d

November 13, 2006

All Rights Reserved, J. F. Moore

From Andos Paper:

November 13, 2006

All Rights Reserved, J. F. Moore

Andos Data Sets 1,2 & 3: KG/d

Japanese Work Barge

November 13, 2006

All Rights Reserved, J. F. Moore

Andos Data Set 1: KG Variation 1

Roll RAO (deg/deg)

Roll Motion For Ando's Barge: VCG Variation:

Wave Frequency (rad/sec)

November 13, 2006

All Rights Reserved, J. F. Moore

Andos Data Set 1:

Commercially- Available Ship Motions Program

November 13, 2006

All Rights Reserved, J. F. Moore

Andos Data Set 1: Correlation With Computed Values

Roll Motion For Ando's Barge: OG/d = 4:

Roll Motion For Ando's Barge:OG/d = 3, Kxx/B = 0.65

Roll RAO (deg/deg)

Roll RAO (deg/deg)

Wave Frequency (rad/sec)

Wave Frequency (rad/sec)

Roll Motion For Ando's Barge: OG/d = 5 :

W ave Frequency (rad/sec)