Journal of Marine Science and Application

, Volume 16, Issue 4, pp 446–457 | Cite as

Investigation of heave response of the deepwater octagonal FDPSO using various heave plate configurations

  • Chenfang Yu
  • Zhiqiang Hu
  • Shisheng Wang


Heave plates can be employed to control undesirable heave motion amplitudes of the deepwater octagonal Floating, Drilling, Production, Storage, and Offloading (FDPSO) platform. Numerical simulations and model tests were applied to analyze and investigate the hydrodynamic response and the feasibility of the heave plate configurations. The diameter and the depth below the free surface of a single-layer heave plate, as well as the spacing of two-layer heave plates, were considered as the primary variables when studying the effect of heave plates on FDPSO hydrodynamics. The analysis results indicate that the heave plate diameter significantly affects the heave hydrodynamics, and heave performance could be improved with an increased diameter. In addition, increasing the depth below the free surface of a single-layer heave plate does not effectively suppress the heave motion within the range of draft depths tested. The target FDPSO obtained better heave characteristics with increased spacing between the two-layer heave plates. Furthermore, the global performances of the octagonal FDPSO with these typical heave plate configurations were comparatively analyzed. The results indicate that from a hydrodynamic point of view, the single-layer heave plate configuration has an advantage over the two-layer heave plate configuration.


octagonal FDPSO hydrodynamic heave plate heave motion numerical analysis model test 


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. DNV, 1993. SESAM User’s Manual-WADAM. Det Norske Veritas.Google Scholar
  2. DNV, 2005. SESAM User`s Manual-DeepC. Det Norske Veritas.Google Scholar
  3. Downie MJ, Graham JMR, Hall C, Incecik A, Nygaard I, 2000. An experimental investigation of motion control devices for truss spars. Marine structures, 13(2), 75–90. DOI: Scholar
  4. Fan T, Qiao D, Ou J, 2014. Dynamic effects of equivalent truncated mooring systems for a semi-submersible platform. Brodogradnja, 65(4), 35–51.Google Scholar
  5. Garrido-Mendoza CA, Thiagarajan KP, Souto-Iglesias A, Colagrossi A, Bouscasse B, 2015. Computation of flow features and hydrodynamic coefficients around heave plates oscillating near a seabed. Journal of Fluids and Structures, 59, 406–431. DOI: 10.1016/j.jfluidstructs.2015.10.003CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Harris WD, Howard HJ, Hampshire KC, Moore JA, Bayne KJ, Pepin-LeHalleur J, 2010. FDPSOs: The new reality, and a game-changing approach to field development and early production system. Offshore Technology Conference, Houston. DOI: 10.4043/20482-MSGoogle Scholar
  7. Haslum HA, Faltinsen OM, 1999. Alternative shape of spar platforms for use in hostile areas. Offshore Technology Conference, Houston. DOI: 10.4043/10953-MSGoogle Scholar
  8. Lavrov A, Guedes Soares C, 2016. Modelling the heave oscillations of vertical cylinders with damping plates. International Journal of Maritime Engineering, 158, 187–197. DOI: 10.3940/rina.ijme.2016.a3.365Google Scholar
  9. Lee C, Newman JN, 2005. Computation of wave effects using the panel method. Numerical Models in Fluid Structure Interaction, 42, 211–251. DOI: 10.2495/978-1-85312-837-0/06CrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  10. Li J, Liu S, Zhao M, Teng B, 2013. Experimental investigation of the hydrodynamic characteristics of heave plates using forced oscillation. Ocean Engineering, 66(5), 82–91. DOI: 10.1016/j.oceaneng.2013.04.012CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Li YC, Cheng L, Thiagarajan K, 1999. Numerical estimation of hydrodynamic heave damping of a vertical cylinder with appendages. The ninth International Offshore and Polar Engineering Conference, Brest, France, ISOPE-I-99-297.Google Scholar
  12. Lopez-Pavon C, Souto-Iglesias A, 2015. Hydrodynamic coefficients and pressure loads on heave plates for semi-submersible floating offshore wind turbines: A comparative analysis using large scale models. Renewable Energy, 81, 864–881. DOI: 10.1016/j.renene.2015.04.003CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Lu HN, Yang J, Peng T, 2006. Research on parameters of perforated wall in current generation system of deepwater offshore basin. Journal of Hydrodynamics (Ser. A), 21(2), 198–204.Google Scholar
  14. Philip NT, Nallayarasu S, Bhattacharyya SK, 2013. Experimental investigation and CFD simulation of heave damping effects due to circular plates attached to spar hull. Ships and Offshore Structures, 2013, 1–17. DOI: 10.1080/17445302.2013.835146CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Rho JB, Korobkin AA, Jung JJ, Shin HS, Lee WS, 2007. Coupled analysis of deepwater floating system including VIV in time domain. Proceedings of the 26th International Conference on Offshore Mechanics and Arctic Engineering, 639–649. DOI: 10.1115/OMAE2007-29523Google Scholar
  16. Prislin I, Blevins RD, Halkyard JE, 1998. Viscous damping and added mass of solid square plates. 17th International Conference on Offshore Mechanics and Arctic Engineering, Lisbon, 54–75.Google Scholar
  17. Shen W, Tang Y, Liu L, 2012. Research on the hydrodynamic characteristics of heave plate structure with different form edges of a spar platform. China Ocean Engineering, 26(1), 177–184.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Stansberg CT, Ormberg H, Oritsland O, 2002. Challenges in deep water experiments: hybrid approach. Journal of Offshore Mechanics and Arctic Engineering, 124(2), 90–96. DOI: 10.1115/1.1464129CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Su Y, Yang J, Xiao L, 2009. Hybrid verification of a deepwater cell-truss spar. China Ocean Engineering, 23(1), 1–14.Google Scholar
  20. Tao L, Cai S, 2004. Heave motion suppression of a Spar with a heave plate. Ocean Engineering, 31(5), 669–692. DOI: 10.1016/j.oceaneng.2003.05.005CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Tao L, Dray D, 2008. Hydrodynamic performance of solid and porous heave plates. Ocean Engineering, 35(10), 1006–1014. DOI: 10.1016/j.oceaneng.2008.03.003CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Tao L, Lim KY, Thiagarajan K, 2004. Heave response of classic spar with variable geometry. Journal of Offshore Mechanics and Arctic Engineering, 126(1), 90–95.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Tao L, Molin B, Scolan YM, Thiagarajan, K, 2007. Spacing effects on hydrodynamics of heave plates on offshore structures. Journal of fluids and structures, 23(8), 1119–1136. DOI: 10.1016/j.jfluidstructs.2007.03.004CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Tao L, Thiagarajan K, 2003a. Low KC flow regimes of oscillating sharp edges I. Vortex shedding observation. Applied Ocean Research, 25(1), 21–35. DOI: 10.1016/S0141-1187(03)00031-2CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Tao L, Thiagarajan K, 2003b. Low KC flow regimes of oscillating sharp edges. II. Hydrodynamic forces. Applied Ocean Research, 25(2), 53–62. DOI: 10.1016/S0141-1187(03)00046-4CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Thiagarajan KP, Datta I, Ran AZ, Tao L, Halkyard JE, 2002. Influence of heave plate geometry on the heave response of classic spars. 21st International Conference on Offshore Mechanics and Arctic Engineering, Oslo, 621–627. DOI: 10.1115/OMAE2002-28350CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Ward G, Hansen VL, Kim MH, Wang L, 2004. Model-the-model: validating analysis models for deepwater structures with model tests. Offshore Technology Conference, Houston, 1144–1152. DOI: 10.4043/16586-MSGoogle Scholar
  28. Zhang F, Yang JM, Li RP, Hu ZQ, 2006. Effects of heave plate on the hydrodynamic behaviors of cell spar platform. American Society of Mechanical Engineers, Hamburg, OMAE2006-92199: 203–209. DOI: 10.1115/OMAE2006-92199Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Harbin Engineering University and Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany 2017

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.State Key Laboratory of Ocean EngineeringShanghai Jiao Tong UniversityShanghaiChina
  2. 2.Jiangnan Institute of TechnologyJiangnan Shipyard (Group) Co., LtdShanghaiChina
  3. 3.School of EngineeringNewcastle UniversityNewcastle upon TyneUK
  4. 4.China National Offshore Oil Corporation Research InstituteBeijingChina

Personalised recommendations