0
CFD and VIV

On the Vortex-Induced Vibration Response of a Model Riser and Location of Sensors for Fatigue Damage Prediction

[+] Author and Article Information
C. Shi

Department of Civil, Architectural, and Environmental Engineering,  University of Texas, Austin, TX 78712

L. Manuel1

Department of Civil, Architectural, and Environmental Engineering,  University of Texas, Austin, TX 78712

M. A. Tognarelli, T. Botros

BP America Production Co., Houston, TX 77079

1

Corresponding author.

J. Offshore Mech. Arct. Eng 134(3), 031802 (Feb 02, 2012) (10 pages) doi:10.1115/1.4005193 History: Received January 02, 2011; Revised September 13, 2011; Published February 02, 2012; Online February 02, 2012

This study is concerned with vortex-induced vibration (VIV) of deepwater marine risers. Riser response measurements from model tests on a densely instrumented long, flexible riser in uniform and sheared currents offer an almost ideal setup for our work. Our objectives are two-fold: (i) we use the measured data to describe complexities inherent in riser motions accompanying VIV; and (ii) we discuss how such data sets (and even less spatially dense monitoring) can be used effectively in predicting fatigue damage rates, which are of critical interest for deepwater risers.

FIGURES IN THIS ARTICLE
<>
Copyright © 2012 by American Society of Mechanical Engineers
Your Session has timed out. Please sign back in to continue.

References

Figures

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 1

Displacement orbits associated with different values of θ as defined in Eq. 1

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 2

Displacement orbits: measured versus reconstructed using estimation of instantaneous amplitudes, Ax (t) and Ay (t), and phase angle, θ(t)

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 3

The NDP2120 (uniform current) data set: (a) phase difference between IL and CF displacements and (b) normalized amplitude of CF displacement

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 4

The NDP2350 (sheared current) data set: (a) phase difference between IL and CF displacements and (b) normalized amplitude of CF displacement

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 5

Morlet scalograms of strains measured at location, x/L = 0.11 for (a) the NDP2120 (uniform current) data set and (b) the NDP2350 (sheared current) data set

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 6

Traveling wave patterns for (a) the NDP2120 (uniform current) data set and (b) the NDP2350 (sheared current) data set

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 7

Thirty-four combinations of eight input strain sensors used with the WWA procedure to predict fatigue damage

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 8

The WWA procedure applied with the eight strain sensors of Combination No. 33 for the NDP2350 (sheared current) data set: (a) PSDs of the strains measured at the eight sensors; (b) summation of the PSDs and identification of the selected modes; (c) RMS displacements, reconstructed versus measured; and (d) RMS curvatures, reconstructed versus measured (PSD units: (με)2 /Hz)

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 9

Damage ratios estimated at various locations using the WWA procedure with the eight sensors of Combination No. 33

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 10

Damage ratios estimated from eight sensors considering all the 34 combinations for (a) the two uniform current data sets and (b) the two sheared current data sets

Tables

Errata

Discussions

Some tools below are only available to our subscribers or users with an online account.

Related Content

Customize your page view by dragging and repositioning the boxes below.

Related Journal Articles
Related eBook Content
Topic Collections

Sorry! You do not have access to this content. For assistance or to subscribe, please contact us:

  • TELEPHONE: 1-800-843-2763 (Toll-free in the USA)
  • EMAIL: asmedigitalcollection@asme.org
Sign In