Asia Link

The AsiaLink-EAMARNET International Conference on Ship Design, Production &Operation
Study of Coupled Motion Response and Relative Motion

between Two Side-by-side Ships in Waves
Xu Xiang1,a, Quanming Miao1,b, Xiaobo Chen2,cXiaofeng Kuang1,d
1
China Ship Scientific Research Center, 214082, Wuxi, Jiangsu, PRC.
2
Bureau Veritas, DR, 17bis, Place des Reflets, 92400 Courbevoie, France
a b c
Candit_xiang@yahoo.com, Qmmiao@graduate.hku.hk, Xiao-bo.chen@bureauveritas.com
Abstract: This paper presents the numerical study results of coupled motion RAOs of two side-by-side
ships in waves. The main efforts were made to the coupled motion RAOs of both ships. In order to
identify the degree of hydrodynamic influence imposed by the other ship in a Ship-to-Ship(STS) system,
case study on a real STS system at sea was carried out for three different cases: (a) A single ship in
waves ; (b) Take (the other) ship as fixed body boundary condition; (c) Both ships are freely moving in
the waves. A method for predicting relative motion RAOs between load points from two ships and
probability of collision was given in the frequency domain. In order to verify the developed program,
coupled motion RAOs of two identical barges in waves were calculated using CSSRC in-house program
CSR-INT and HydroSTAR [2, 5] and good agreement obtained.
Keywords: side-by-side operation;hydrodynamic interaction;coupled motion response; relative motion
Introduction
Applications of STS operations for cargo transfer are increasing daily. Theoretical studies of STS interaction problems
have not been a central topic for hydrodynamic research in recent years. For this paper, a three-dimensional approach
has been developed for solving the motions of two vessels in waves including hydrodynamic interactions basing on the
work of van Oortmerssen [1]. Method of using motions predicted in the frequency domain to estimate the relative
motions between load points during STS operations is given. For the purpose of validation, motions RAOs of two
identical barges from the developed program (CSR-INT) are compared with those from HydroSTAR [2] at the first step.
Then the program was used to do a case study on a Panamax+barge STS system with comparison to identify the degree
of influence imposed by different boundary conditions.
Basic Theory for Coupled Ship Motions in Waves

The major difference in predicting single and multi-ships motions in waves comes from the radiation problem. Each
ship in a STS system radiates wave which will influence the global wave system that interacts with ships in it in the
form of boundary conditions. Thus the radiated wave force of a ship is not only due to its own oscillation but also due to
the oscillation of the other ship(s). Based on the work of van Oortmerssen [1], the motions of two ships in waves can be
solved as a system with 12 degrees of freedom as follows:
{[ 2
e
( m ajk + aa
jk
) ie jkaa + C ajk ] xka + [ e2 ab
jk }
ie jkab ] xkb = f jWa
k =1
(1)
{[ 2
e
ba
jk
ie ba
jk
] xka + [ e2 ( mbjk + bbjk ) ie bb
jk }
+ C bjk ] xkb = f jWb
k =1
(2)
a b
Where j = 1, 2, ..., 6 ; m jk , m jk mass matrix of ship a and ship b; jk , jk added mass matrix of ship a and ship b
a b
a b
jk , jk damping coefficient matrix of ship a and ship b; C ajk , C bjk restoring force matrix of ship a and ship b
xka , xkb complex motions of ship a and ship b; f jWa , f jWb wave forces on ship a and ship b.
The coordinate system used in the description of vessels geometry and motion is defined as follows:
Axis Ox is positive in the forward direction;
The AsiaLink-EAMARNET International Conference on Ship Design, Production &Operation 473
Axis Oy is positive to port side;

Axis Oz is positive upwards.
The wave heading is defined by the angle between the propagation direction and the positive direction of the axis Ox.
Special attention should be paid to roll damping estimation for which the potential theory can not give satisfactory
results. The work of Schmitke[3] on nonlinear roll damping should be noted here and the authors program adopts the
same philosophy. For a given set of conditions, the coupled motion Eq.1 and 2 must be solved iteratively until roll
motion amplitudes for both ships converge.
Relative Motion Responses between Load Points

The relative motion response between two load points can be calculated using results from coupled motion analysis in
regular sea.
Relative motion between two points a ( x a , y a , z a ), b ( x b , y b , z b ) is defined as:
rx = xa xb
(3)
ry = ya yb + lo
(4)
rz = za zb
(5)
Where ( xa , ya , za ) , ( xb , yb , zb ) describe motions of two points respectively. lo is the distance between two translating
coordinates when both ships are at rest. The distance between the neighboring sides of two ships can be expressed as
s = y a y b + lo
(6)
With deduction we can get
( A) (B) ( A) (B) (B) ( A)

rx = ( x a x b ) + ( x x ) + ( z a z b xa ) + ( y b y a )
(7)
( A) (B) ( A) (B) (B) ( A)

ry = (lo + y a y b ) + ( y y ) + ( x a x b ) + ( z b z a )
(8)
( A) (B) ( A) (B) (B) ( A)

rz = ( z a z b ) + ( z z ) + ( y a y b ) + ( x b x a )
(9)
( A) ( A)
Where x
( A)
y z ( A ) ( A ) ( A ) represent surge, sway, heave, roll, pitch, yaw of ship a. Ship b follows the
same convention.
What should be noted here is that we consider only the relative motions of two side-by-side ships with their mid-ships
attributing same global longitudinal coordinate. So only the y coordinates of two translating origins are different when
both ships are at rest. The collision of points a and b happens when r < 0 , so we get the condition of collision as the y
following form:
ry = ( y
( A)
y ( B ) ) + ( za ( B ) zb ( A ) ) + ( xa ( A ) xb ( B ) ) > s
(10)
Assuming that ship motions are linear system responses and sea wave normal Gauss process, we can deduce that
relative motion responses in STS system are of normal Gauss process, too. The probability of collision can be
expressed as:
2
s
P {r s} = exp(

y 2
)
2 r y
(11)
Where r2y is the variance of ry :

474 Journal of Harbin Engineering University, Vol.27 Suppl. December 2006
r
2

= m0 = S r ( ) d =
2 ya
ry
S ( ) d
0 y 0
a
(12)
S ( ) is wave spectrum adopted. Thus the times of collision in an hour is given by:
N=
{
3600 P ry s } m2
2 m4
(13)
m2 and m4 can be determined by:

mk = S r ( ) k d , k = 2, 4
0 y
(14)
Code Validation against HydroSTAR

HydroSTAR [2, 5] is the state-of-the-art hydrodynamic software developed by Bureau Veritas to assess one or several
offshore structures performance in waves. This part will give the coupled motion RAOs calculated by CSR-INT and
Hydro-Star for two identical barges with a 4m gap in between. The main dimensions of two barges are listed in Table 1.
Fig. 1 shows the potential flow panel model. Fig. 2 through 11 gives the motion responses by CSR-INT, HydroSTAR
and CSR (an earlier edition of CSR-INT, for single ship RAOs but considers the other ship as fixed boundary condition,
a dock, for example). The comparison shows that CSR-INT gives almost the same results with HydroSTAR, while CSR
results show great difference in most of the cases indicating that hydrodynamic interaction plays very important role in
predicting motion response of STS system.
Table 1 Main Dimensions for two ships
Main Dimensions Barge Panamax Container
Length /m 110.0 225.0
Breadth /m 27.5 32.3
Draft /m 4.0 7.92
Displacement/m3 8230 46000
Metacentric Height/m 12.0 3.0
Fig. 1 Hydrodynamic Panel Model for Two Identical Barges

1.0 1.0
Motion RAO of Ship A Motion RAO of Ship B
Heading=180 Degree Heading=180 Degree
CSR CSR
Heave RAO (m/m)

0.8 CSR-INT 0.8
Heave RAO (m/m)
CSR-INT
HydroStar HydroStar
0.6 0.6
0.4 0.4
0.2 0.2
0.0
0.0
0.0 0.5 1.0 1.5
0.0 0.5 1.0 1.5
(rad/s) (rad/s)
Fig. 2 Wave heading=180 Degree, Ship A Fig. 3 Wave heading=180 Degree, Ship B
1.5 1.5
CSR CSR
Pitch RAO (Deg/m)

1.2
Pitch RAO (Deg/m)
1.2 CSR-INT CSR-INT

HydroStar HydroStar
0.9 0.9
0.6 0.6
0.3 0.3
0.0 0.0
0.0 0.5 (rad/s) 1.0 1.5 0.0 0.5 (rad/s) 1.0 1.5
Fig.4 Wave heading=135 Degree, Ship A Fig.5 Wave heading=135 Degree, Ship B
12
8
7 Heading=90 Degree Heading=90 Degree
Roll RAO (Deg/m)
Roll RAO (Deg/m)
CSR CSR
CSR-INT 9 CSR-INT
6
HydroStar HydroStar
5
4 6
2 3
0 0
0.0 0.5 (rad/s) 1.0 1.5 0.0 0.5 (rad/s) 1.0 1.5
4
4
Motion RAO of Ship B
Motion RAO of Ship A
Heading=90 Degree
Heading=90 Degree
CSR
Sway RAO (m/m)
CSR
Sway RAO (m/m)
CSR-INT 3 CSR-INT
3
HydroStar HydroStar
2 2
1 1
0 0
0.0 0.5 1.0 1.5 0.0 0.5 1.0 1.5
(rad/s) (rad/s)
0.8
0.8 Motion RAO of Ship B
CSR CSR
CSR-INT CSR-INT
0.6 0.6
Yaw RAO (deg/m)
HydroStar
Yaw RAO (deg/m)

HydroStar
0.4 0.4
0.2 0.2
0.0 0.0
0.0 0.5 (rad/s) 1.0 1.5 0.0 0.5 (rad/s) 1.0 1.5
Case Study: Panamax + Barge STS Operation System Motion RAOs

This part gives the motion RAOs predicted by CSSRC programs CSR-INT, CSR and CSR-Wave for comparison.
CSR-Wave is used to calculate the single ship motion RAOs without any other ship or fixed boundary. CSR takes one
of the ships as fixed boundary condition and CSR-INT performs coupled calculation. The barge obtains the same
dimensions and mass properties as the last one while a panamax container, which is much bigger than the barge, is
included illustrating a real STS system at sea. Gap between two ships is 4m as before. The STS hydrodynamic panel
model and main dimensions for the Panamax can be found in Fig. 12 and Table 1. Fig. 13 through 32 presents the
comparison of results. From the figures we can find that RAOs of the barge differ greatly in three cases considered. But
the RAOs of the Panamax container from three cases are just slightly different from each other.
Fig.12 Hydrodynamic Panel Model for a Panamax container + barge STS system
1.0 Motion RAO of Ship A 1.5
Heading=135 Degree Motion RAO of Ship B
CSR Heading=135 Degree
0.8 CSR-INT CSR
1.2
Heave RAO (m/m)
Heave RAO (m/m)
Single Ship CSR-INT

Single Ship
0.6 0.9
0.4 0.6
0.2 0.3
0.0 0.0
0.0 0.5 (rad/s) 1.0 1.5 0.0 0.5 (rad/s) 1.0 1.5
Fig. 13 Wave heading=135 Degree, Panamax Fig. 14 Wave heading=135 Degree, Panamax
1.2 1.2 Motion RAO of Ship B

Motion RAO of Ship A Heading=225 Degree
Heading=225 Degree CSR
1.0 CSR 1.0
CSR-INT
CSR-INT
Heave RAO (m/m)
Heave RAO (m/m)

Single Ship
Single Ship
0.8 0.8
0.6 0.6
0.4 0.4
0.2 0.2
0.0 0.0
0.0 0.5 1.0 1.5 0.0 0.5 1.0 1.5
(rad/s) (rad/s)
Fig.15 Wave heading=225 Degree, Panamax Fig.16 Wave heading=225 Degree, Barge
0.9 3.5
3.0
CSR CSR
Pitch RAO (Deg/m)
Pitch RAO (Deg/m)

CSR-INT CSR-INT
Single Ship 2.5 Single Ship
0.6
2.0
1.5
0.3
1.0
0.5
0.0 0.0
0.0 0.5 1.0 1.5 0.0 0.5 1.0 1.5
(rad/s) (rad/s)
0.8 2.1
CSR 1.8 CSR
CSR-INT CSR-INT
0.6 Single Ship Single Ship
1.5
Pitch RAO (Deg/m)
Pitch RAO (Deg/m)
1.2
0.4
0.9
0.6
0.2
0.3
0.0 0.0
0.0 0.5 1.0 1.5 0.0 0.5 1.0 1.5
(rad/s) (rad/s)
0.6
Motion RAO of Ship A 3

Roll RAO (Deg/m)
CSR-INT CSR
Roll RAO (Deg/m)
Single Ship CSR-INT

0.4
Single Ship
2
0.2
1
0.0 0
0.0 0.5 1.0 1.5 0.0 0.5 1.0 1.5
(rad/s) (rad/s)
0.6 3.0
CSR CSR
Roll RAO (Deg/m)
CSR-INT 2.4
CSR-INT
Roll RAO (Deg/m)

Single Ship Single Ship
0.4
1.8
1.2
0.2
0.6
0.0 0.0
0.0 0.5 1.0 1.5
0.0 0.5 (rad/s) 1.0 1.5 (rad/s)
2.0
2.0
Sway RAO (m/m)
CSR-INT CSR
Sway RAO (m/m)

1.5
Single Ship 1.5 CSR-INT
Single Ship
1.0 1.0
0.5 0.5
0.0 0.0
0.0 0.5 1.0 1.5 0.0 0.5 1.0 1.5
(rad/s) (rad/s)
2.0 2.1

Heading=225 Degree 1.8 Heading=225 Degree
CSR CSR
1.6
Sway RAO (m/m)
Sway RAO (m/m)
CSR-INT CSR-INT
Single Ship 1.5 Single Ship
1.2 1.2
0.9
0.8
0.6
0.4
0.3
-1 0.0
0.0 (s )
0.0 0.5 1.0 1.5 0.0 0.5 1.0 1.5
(rad/s)
0.6 1.2
CSR 1.0 CSR
CSR-INT CSR-INT
Yaw RAO (deg/m)
Single Ship
Yaw RAO (deg/m)
Single Ship
0.4 0.8
0.6
0.2 0.4
0.2
0.0 0.0
0.0 0.5 1.0 1.5 0.0 0.5 1.0 1.5
(rad/s) (rad/s)
0.6 1.0
CSR CSR
0.8
Yaw RAO (deg/m)
Yaw RAO (deg/m)

CSR-INT CSR-INT
Single Ship Single Ship
0.4
0.6
0.4
0.2
0.2
0.0
0.0
0.0 0.5 1.0 1.5
0.0 0.5 (rad/s) 1.0 1.5
(rad/s)
Discussion and Concluding Remarks

The coupled motion RAOs of two identical barges by CSR-INT and HydroSTAR show good agreement with each other.
Only small difference occurs at some frequencies, this may be caused numerically.
The case study on Panamax+Barge mainly gives us three pieces of knowledge: a) In a STS system with two ships of
large difference on dimension, the larger ships motion RAOs are just slightly influenced by the smaller one. Thus we
can ignore the smaller ship or take it as fixed boundary in preliminary hydrodynamic studies of the bigger ship for some
of the cases. b) But for the smaller ship it is the other way round. The larger ship poses great influence on its
hydrodynamic characteristics, so the coupled motion calculation must be performed. c) The sheltering effect can be
easily identified through comparing motion RAOs of the barge from the 135 degree (when the smaller barge is at the
weather side thus with larger motion RAOs) and the 225 degree wave heading (when the smaller barge is sheltered)
cases.
For STS systems with relative large gaps between ships, the linear potential flow theory is applicable. However,
resonant conditions/piston mood occur between two hulls in very close proximity. In order to get meaningful results,
special treatment on the free surface conditions should be made. This kind of treatment has already been included in
HydroSTAR and is ready for use [2, 5]. Please refer to the work of Dr. Xiao-bo Chen [5] for theoretical details on this
issue.
Acknowledgements
The author would like to acknowledge Prof. Faltinsen from NTNU for helping me in understanding the physical
limitations of the 1st order potential theory when two ships are in close proximity.
References
[1] van Oortmerssen, G. Hydrodynamic interaction between two structures floating in waves. In: Second International Conference
on Behavior of Off-Shore Structures, BOSS79, London. (1979).
[2] Bureau Veritas HydroSTAR For Experts, User Manual (2006).
[3] Schmitke, R.T. Ship Sway, Roll, and Yaw Motions in Oblique Seas. In: Transactions, Society of Naval Architects and Marine
Engineers. 86, 26-46. (1978)
[4] Chakrabarti, S.K. Hydrodynamics of Offshore Structures, Springer-Verlag (1987)
[5] Xiao-Bo Chen. Hydrodynamics in Offshore and Naval Applications - Part I. In: Keynote Lecture, the 6th International
Conference on HydroDynamics, Perth (Australia). (2004).

Asia Link

Enviado por

Dados do documento

Título original

Direitos autorais

Formatos disponíveis

Compartilhar este documento

Compartilhar ou incorporar documento

Opções de compartilhamento

Você considera este documento útil?

Este conteúdo é inapropriado?

Direitos autorais:

Formatos disponíveis

Asia Link

Enviado por

Direitos autorais:

Formatos disponíveis

The AsiaLink-EAMARNET International Conference on Ship Design, Production &Operation

Study of Coupled Motion Response and Relative Motion

Keywords: side-by-side operation;hydrodynamic interaction;coupled motion response; relative motion

Basic Theory for Coupled Ship Motions in Waves

Axis Oy is positive to port side;

Relative Motion Responses between Load Points

Relative motion between two points a ( x a , y a , z a ), b ( x b , y b , z b ) is defined as:

( A) (B) ( A) (B) (B) ( A)

( A) (B) ( A) (B) (B) ( A)

( A) (B) ( A) (B) (B) ( A)

Where r2y is the variance of ry :

m2 and m4 can be determined by:

Code Validation against HydroSTAR

Main Dimensions Barge Panamax Container

Length /m 110.0 225.0

Breadth /m 27.5 32.3

Draft /m 4.0 7.92

Displacement/m3 8230 46000

Metacentric Height/m 12.0 3.0

Fig. 1 Hydrodynamic Panel Model for Two Identical Barges

Heave RAO (m/m)

Pitch RAO (Deg/m)

1.2 CSR-INT CSR-INT

Yaw RAO (deg/m)

Case Study: Panamax + Barge STS Operation System Motion RAOs

Single Ship CSR-INT

1.2 1.2 Motion RAO of Ship B

Heave RAO (m/m)

Pitch RAO (Deg/m)

Pitch RAO (Deg/m)

Motion RAO of Ship A 3

Single Ship CSR-INT

Roll RAO (Deg/m)

Sway RAO (m/m)

Motion RAO of Ship A Motion RAO of Ship B

Sway RAO (m/m)

Yaw RAO (deg/m)

Discussion and Concluding Remarks

[2] Bureau Veritas HydroSTAR For Experts, User Manual (2006).

[4] Chakrabarti, S.K. Hydrodynamics of Offshore Structures, Springer-Verlag (1987)

Você também pode gostar