Comparison of Two Seafloor Observatory Mooring Designs

  • Sean Han
  • Mark Grosenbaugh
Part of the Fluid Mechanics and its Applications book series (FMIA, volume 75)

Abstract

The purpose of this study is to compare two seafloor observatory mooring designs. The first mooring uses a subsurface float with an “S-tether” positioned above it. The other design uses distributed buoyancy to create an S-tether in the lower half of the mooring line. The maximum tensions at the anchor and in the snubber hose, bending fatigue parameter called contact stress-slip parameter at critical locations, and the dynamic motion in the cable is monitored. The trade-offs between the two designs, and the important design parameters that affect the tensions, bending fatigue, and the dynamic motion are discussed.

Keywords

Wind Velocity Current Velocity Survival Condition Dynamic Motion Maximum Tension 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    R. Detrick, D. Frye, J. Collins, J. Gobat, M. Grosenbaugh, R. Petit, A, Plueddeman, K. Von derHeydt, B. Wooding, J. Orcutt, J. Berger R. Harriss, F. Vernon, J. Halkyard, and E. Horton, DEOS moored buoy observatory design study, National Science Foundation/Ocean Division (2000).Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    National Research Council, Illuminating the Hidden Planet: The Future of Seafloor Observatory Science, National Academy of Science, 2000.Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    M. Chaffey and E. Mellinger and W. Paul, Communications and power to the seafloor: MBARI’s ocean observing system mooring concept, Proceedings to Oceans (2001) 2473–2481.Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    W. Paul and D. Bently, Conductor survival in lightweight upper ocean working cables, Proceedings to ISOPE (2001) 708–714.Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    J. Gobal and M. Grosenbaugh, Technical Report WHOI-2000-08, Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution (2000).Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    M. Raoof and R. Hobbs, Analysis of multilayered structural strands, Journal of Engineering Mechanics, ASCE 114(7) (1988) 1166–1182.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    M. Raoof, Axial fatigue of multilayered strands, Journal of Engineering Mechanics 116(10) (1990) 2083–2099.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    M. Raoof, Free bending fatigue of multilayered strands, Journal of Engineering Mechanics, ASCE 118(9) (1992) 1747–1764.Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    M. Raoof, Design of steel cables against free-bending fatigue at terminations, The structural engineer 71(10) (1993) 171–178.Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    S. Han and M. Grosenbaugh, Bending analysis of seafloor observatory moorings, Proceedings to OMAE (2003).Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht 2003

Authors and Affiliations

  • Sean Han
    • 1
  • Mark Grosenbaugh
    • 1
  1. 1.Woods Hole Oceanographic InstitutionUSA

Personalised recommendations