0
Ocean Engineering

Studies on Resonant Water Motion Between a Ship and a Fixed Terminal in Shallow Water

[+] Author and Article Information
Trygve Kristiansen

Center for Ships and Ocean Structures, and Department of Marine Technology, Norwegian University of Science and Technology, Trondheim N-7491, Norwaytrygve.kristiansen@ntnu.no

Odd M. Faltinsen

Center for Ships and Ocean Structures, and Department of Marine Technology, Norwegian University of Science and Technology, Trondheim N-7491, Norway

J. Offshore Mech. Arct. Eng 131(2), 021102 (Mar 04, 2009) (11 pages) doi:10.1115/1.2979802 History: Received July 23, 2007; Revised January 08, 2008; Published March 04, 2009

This work focuses on the hydrodynamical problem of a Liquid Natural Gas (LNG) carrier near a Gravity Based Structure (GBS) -type offshore terminal subject to incoming waves in medium deep to shallow water conditions. The work is restricted to 2D, and the ship is restrained from moving. The resonant behavior of the fluid in the gap between the ship and the terminal is investigated. The problem is investigated by means of a numerical model and model tests. Potential theory is assumed, and a linear as well as a nonlinear time-domain numerical wavetank based on a boundary element method with a mixed Eulerian–Lagrangian approach is implemented for this purpose. Model tests (near 2D) of a midship section near a vertical wall are carried out in a 26.5m long and 0.595m wide wave flume in model scale 1:70. In full scale the ship beam is 45m and the ship draft is 12m. The ship model is constructed in such a way as to avoid flow separation, i.e., no sharp corners. Several parameters are varied: water depth, wave period, and wave steepness. Wave elevation is measured at 12 locations.

FIGURES IN THIS ARTICLE
<>
Copyright © 2009 by American Society of Mechanical Engineers
Your Session has timed out. Please sign back in to continue.

References

Figures

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 2

Schematics of wave flume and positions of the 12 wave gauges w01–w12 (upper details of the model lower)

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 3

Model test setup. Terminal seen to the far left. Clay and rubber bands were used to seal gap between glass wall and models. The black cloths reduced reflections when acquring high-speed photos.

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 4

Wave calibration, h=0.40m, T=2.03s, and H∕h=1∕10 (case I)

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 5

Ship and terminal, h=0.40m, T=2.03s, and H∕h=1∕10 (case I)

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 7

Ship and terminal, h=0.29m, T=2.27s and H∕h=1∕6 (case III)

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 8

Snapshot of wave elevation, h=0.40m, T=2.03s and H∕h=1∕10 (case I)

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 9

Snapshot of wave elevation, h=0.29m, T=2.27s, and H∕h=1∕6 (case III)

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 10

Ratio of piston mode height to incoming wave height Hg∕H

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 11

Wave height H using mean of w08, w11, and w12

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 12

Piston mode height Hg using mean of w11 and w12

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 1

Domains of the nonlinear (top) and linear (bottom) numerical wavetanks

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 6

Wave calibration, h=0.29m, T=2.27s, and H∕h=1∕6 (case III)

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.

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