Offshore Platform Fluid Structure Interaction (FSI) Simulation

Similar documents
A study of Jumper FIV due to multiphase internal flow: understanding life-cycle fatigue. Alan Mueller & Oleg Voronkov

ME Optimization of a Frame

Tutorial: Hydrodynamics of Bubble Column Reactors

Design Optimization of a Weather Radar Antenna using Finite Element Analysis (FEA) and Computational Fluid Dynamics (CFD)

Coupling of STAR-CCM+ to Other Theoretical or Numerical Solutions. Milovan Perić

Coupled Analysis of FSI

Figure 2: Water Into Kerosene, Volume Fraction (Left) And Total Density Of Mixture (Right)

midas NFX 2017R1 Release Note

CDA Workshop Physical & Numerical Hydraulic Modelling. STAR-CCM+ Presentation

Problem description. The FCBI-C element is used in the fluid part of the model.

CFD MODELING FOR PNEUMATIC CONVEYING

2-D Tank Sloshing Using the Coupled Eulerian- LaGrangian (CEL) Capability of Abaqus/Explicit

Calculate a solution using the pressure-based coupled solver.

THE EFFECTS OF THE PLANFORM SHAPE ON DRAG POLAR CURVES OF WINGS: FLUID-STRUCTURE INTERACTION ANALYSES RESULTS

Fluid-Structure Interaction in STAR-CCM+ Alan Mueller CD-adapco

Aero-Vibro Acoustics For Wind Noise Application. David Roche and Ashok Khondge ANSYS, Inc.

ME 475 FEA of a Composite Panel

Use 6DOF solver to calculate motion of the moving body. Create TIFF files for graphic visualization of the solution.

CFD modelling of thickened tailings Final project report

Optimization of under-relaxation factors. and Courant numbers for the simulation of. sloshing in the oil pan of an automobile

Hydro-elastic analysis of a propeller using CFD and FEM co-simulation

APPLIED COMPUTATIONAL FLUID DYNAMICS-PROJECT-3

Wall thickness= Inlet: Prescribed mass flux. All lengths in meters kg/m, E Pa, 0.3,

WAVE PATTERNS, WAVE INDUCED FORCES AND MOMENTS FOR A GRAVITY BASED STRUCTURE PREDICTED USING CFD

Tutorial 17. Using the Mixture and Eulerian Multiphase Models

THE APPLICATION OF AN ATMOSPHERIC BOUNDARY LAYER TO EVALUATE TRUCK AERODYNAMICS IN CFD

Simulation of Turbulent Flow over the Ahmed Body

EXPERIMENTAL VALIDATION OF STAR-CCM+ FOR LIQUID CONTAINER SLOSH DYNAMICS

2008 International ANSYS Conference

ALE and Fluid-Structure Interaction in LS-DYNA March 2004

CFD VALIDATION FOR SURFACE COMBATANT 5415 STRAIGHT AHEAD AND STATIC DRIFT 20 DEGREE CONDITIONS USING STAR CCM+

Analysis Comparison between CFD and FEA of an Idealized Concept V- Hull Floor Configuration in Two Dimensions

Simulation of a Free Surface Flow over a Container Vessel Using CFD

3D Finite Element Software for Cracks. Version 3.2. Benchmarks and Validation

Milovan Perić CD-adapco. Use of STAR-CCM+ in Marine and Offshore Engineering and Future Trends

Project #3 MAE 598 Applied CFD

2008 International ANSYS Conference

COMPUTER AIDED ENGINEERING. Part-1

DNV GL s 16th Technology Week

Design Verification Procedure (DVP) Load Case Analysis of Car Bonnet


Analysis of Fluid-Structure Interaction Effects of Liquid-Filled Container under Drop Testing

Use of STAR-CCM+ in Marine and Off-Shore Engineering - Key Features and Future Developments - M. Perić, F. Schäfer, E. Schreck & J.

Air Assisted Atomization in Spiral Type Nozzles

Global to Local Model Interface for Deepwater Top Tension Risers

COMPUTATIONAL FLUID DYNAMICS ANALYSIS OF ORIFICE PLATE METERING SITUATIONS UNDER ABNORMAL CONFIGURATIONS

Tutorial: Simulating a 3D Check Valve Using Dynamic Mesh 6DOF Model And Diffusion Smoothing

Drop-Test FSI simulation with Abaqus and FlowVision based on the direct 2-way coupling approach

Transition Flow and Aeroacoustic Analysis of NACA0018 Satish Kumar B, Fred Mendonç a, Ghuiyeon Kim, Hogeon Kim

Chapter 3 Analysis of Original Steel Post

Exercise 1. 3-Point Bending Using the Static Structural Module of. Ansys Workbench 14.0

CHAPTER 1. Introduction

ME Optimization of a Truss

Advances in Simulation for Marine And Offshore Applications. Milovan Perić

Comparison Between Numerical & PIV Experimental Results for Gas-Solid Flow in Ducts

TABLE OF CONTENTS SECTION 2 BACKGROUND AND LITERATURE REVIEW... 3 SECTION 3 WAVE REFLECTION AND TRANSMISSION IN RODS Introduction...

CHAPTER-10 DYNAMIC SIMULATION USING LS-DYNA

Exercise 1. 3-Point Bending Using the GUI and the Bottom-up-Method

Applications of ICFD solver by LS-DYNA in Automotive Fields to Solve Fluid-Solid-Interaction (FSI) Problems

Modeling Submerged Structures Loaded by Underwater Explosions with ABAQUS/Explicit

Terrain settlement analysis

Quarter Symmetry Tank Stress (Draft 4 Oct 24 06)

Three-Dimensional Verification Model of Floating Wind Energy Converter Using LS-DYNA3D Code

Tutorial: Riser Simulation Using Dense Discrete Phase Model

Coupled Simulation of Flow and Body Motion Using Overset Grids. Eberhard Schreck & Milovan Perić

Using the Eulerian Multiphase Model for Granular Flow

Analysis of fluid-solid coupling vibration characteristics of probe based on ANSYS Workbench

Simulating Sinkage & Trim for Planing Boat Hulls. A Fluent Dynamic Mesh 6DOF Tutorial

Workshop 15. Single Pass Rolling of a Thick Plate

Exercise 2: Mesh Resolution, Element Shapes, Basis Functions & Convergence Analyses

Development of an Integrated Computational Simulation Method for Fluid Driven Structure Movement and Acoustics

Module 1: Introduction to Finite Element Analysis. Lecture 4: Steps in Finite Element Analysis

ANSYS Element. elearning. Peter Barrett October CAE Associates Inc. and ANSYS Inc. All rights reserved.

Developing Tools for Assessing Bend-twist Coupled Foils

Engineering Analysis

Advances in Cyclonic Flow Regimes. Dr. Dimitrios Papoulias, Thomas Eppinger

Guidelines for proper use of Plate elements

1.992, 2.993, 3.04, 10.94, , Introduction to Modeling and Simulation Prof. F.-J. Ulm Spring FE Modeling Example Using ADINA

Aufgabe 1: Dreipunktbiegung mit ANSYS Workbench

Recent Advances on Higher Order 27-node Hexahedral Element in LS-DYNA

Modelling Flat Spring Performance Using FEA

CHAPTER 4. Numerical Models. descriptions of the boundary conditions, element types, validation, and the force

Gear interlocking effect study using CFD

Development of the Compliant Mooring Line Model for FLOW-3D

NUMERICAL STUDY OF CAVITATING FLOW INSIDE A FLUSH VALVE

Verification and Validation for Seismic Wave Propagation Problems

CHAPTER 4 CFD AND FEA ANALYSIS OF DEEP DRAWING PROCESS

Chapter 5 Modeling and Simulation of Mechanism

Introduction to 2 nd -order Lagrangian Element in LS-DYNA

2: Static analysis of a plate

Simulation of AJWSP10033_FOLDED _ST_FR

CFD Simulation for Stratified Oil-Water Two-Phase Flow in a Horizontal Pipe

Revised Sheet Metal Simulation, J.E. Akin, Rice University

MASSACHUSETTS INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY. Analyzing wind flow around the square plate using ADINA Project. Ankur Bajoria

2D numerical simulation of ocean waves

The second part of the tutorial continues with the subsequent ANSYS Mechanical simulation steps:

Fluid-structure Interaction by the mixed SPH-FE Method with Application to Aircraft Ditching

Validation of CFD Simulation with Scaled Physical Model of Tailings Dissipation Boxes

Using three-dimensional CURVIC contact models to predict stress concentration effects in an axisymmetric model

Difficulties in FE-modelling of an I- beam subjected to torsion, shear and bending

Transcription:

Offshore Platform Fluid Structure Interaction (FSI) Simulation Ali Marzaban, CD-adapco Murthy Lakshmiraju, CD-adapco Nigel Richardson, CD-adapco Mike Henneke, CD-adapco Guangyu Wu, Chevron Pedro M. Vargas, Chevron Owen Oakley, Chevron 1

Introduction The main objective of this study was to predict the permanent deformation of an offshore platform from a large wave incident during a storm using Fluid Structure Interaction (FSI). A representative sub-modeled 1/8 th section of the offshore oil platform that was deformed permanently during a hurricane is demonstrated. Study was divided into three phases to progressively develop a FSI methodology to predict the permanent deformation of the platform : Phase 1: Static and transient dynamic structural investigation was conducted on a sub-model section of the platform to predict potential wave energy required to cause the field observed deformation (around 40 cm deformation was reported on one of the plate girders). ABAQUS 6.11 was used for Finite Element Analysis (FEA). Phase 2: Hurricane waves were simulated using Computational Fluid Dynamics (CFD) to determine wave characteristics required to induce the magnitude of pressure needed to observe same deformation on a structure (Based on Phase 1). STAR-CCM+ 6.06 was used for CFD analysis Phase 3: One-way coupled simulations were modeled to study impact analysis on the structure due to wave pressure. 2

Phase1 Finite Element Analysis A 3D finite element model of an offshore platform was generated from Chevron provided 2D drawings. The model was investigated for a single wave impact event using ABAQUS 6.11 to study the permanent plastic deformation. The model has been analyzed using both static and transient dynamic (implicit) approach. Varying pressure loads were applied in the static cases to validate recorded field data deformation (40 cm on one of the plate girders). Pressures were applied at different periods during the implicit analysis studies. 3

Phase2 Computational Fluid Dynamics A uni-directional wave field was generated based on 60 individual wave components (provided by Chevron) using a Fortran based user sub-routine code. 2D simulations were performed without the platform to determine the position of the peak wave occurrence to place the structure. 2D simulations also helped in estimating the mesh size and time step for coupling fluid-structure interaction phase. Platform was situated such that maximum energy would be imparted on the structure. 4

Phase3 One-way Coupled Fluid Structure Interaction One-way coupling scheme: Fluid imparted pressures on the structure will be transferred to the FE model but the response of the structure to the fluid will be neglected. Structure is treated as a rigid body in the CFD model One-way coupling analysis was performed to predict the observed deformation on plate girders using STAR-CCM+ and ABAQUS co-simulation. 5

Laser Scan Measurement of Plate Girders 6

Phase 1 7

Modeling Assumption and Material Properties The 3D FEA model was generated from 2D drawings provided by Chevron. C3D20R elements were used to model all solid parts. Local connection details (bolts and welds) were not considered. All joint were considered to be infinitely stiff. Elastic-plastic material properties was used for plate girders. For plate girders A588 typical material properties was used: Initial Elastic Modulus: 200 GPa Poisson s ratio: 0.3 Density : 7830 kg/m 3 Yield Stress: 379.2 MPa Ultimate Stress: 530.9 MPa 8

Finite Element Mesh Full Assembly ELEMENTS: 21,114 NODES: 118,200 9

Applied Boundary Conditions Fixed in x-direction Uniform Pressure in x-direction Applied pressure Fixed in all DOF Gravity is applied in negative z-direction. Uniform pressure distribution was applied to the plate girder in positive x-direction. 10

Displacement for 300kPa Pressure in Static Analysis t=0 s t=0.1 s t=0.2 s t=0.3 s t=0.4 s t=0.5 s t=0.6 s t=0.7 s t=0.8 s t=0.9 s t=1 s 11

Plastic Strain in Static Analysis 12

Static Analysis OMAE 2012-83472: Offshore Platform Fluid Structure Interaction (FSI) Simulation In the static analysis, the load was applied as a uniform pressure. Five different load cases with different maximum pressure of (100, 150, 200, 250 and 300kPa) was considered. The pressure was applied as a ramp from zero to max from t=0 to t=0.5s. Then the pressure was released as a ramp from the max pressure to zero from t=0.5s to t=1s. A 43cm deflection Pressure=277kPa Displacement of node A in x-direction with different pressures Deformed location of node A in x-direction with different pressures 13

Implicit Analysis OMAE 2012-83472: Offshore Platform Fluid Structure Interaction (FSI) Simulation In the implicit analysis, the load was applied as a uniform pressure with the maximum pressure of 300kPa. Four different load cases with different total times of (T=0.01, 0.05, 0.1 and 1 second) was considered. The pressure was applied as a ramp from zero to max (300kPa) from t=0 to t=0.5t. Then the pressure was released as a ramp from the max pressure (300kPa) to zero from t=0.5t to t=t. A zero pressure was applied from t=t to t=3t. 14

Displacement in x-direction for Different Times in Implicit Analysis 0.5T T 1.5T 2T 2.5T 3T Displacement of node A in x-direction with different Frequency for 300kPa 0.5T T 1.5T 2T 2.5T 3T A Applied Force vs Time 15

Required Pressure for 43 cm Displacement Total Time (s) Pressure (kpa) 0.05 415 0.1 322 0.5 273 1 270 5 275 Static 277 16

Phase 2 17

Computational Domain, Mesh and Boundary Conditions Without Structure Top: Pressure Outlet Front and Back: Symmetry (One cell thick) 534.62 m 500.0 m Inlet: User Code Free surface Outlet: Pressure Outlet X = 800m X = 1200m Bottom: Wall (No-slip)- Ocean bed Mesh : 101,600 X = 2000m Delta X is fixed: 3m and Delta Y is fixed: 2m (One cell thick domain) Mesh size near free surface, Refined area 1 (Z= -25m to 25m): Delta Z = 1m Mesh size near free surface, Refined area 2 (Z=-50m to -25m & 50m to 25m): Delta Z = 1.5m In water, Delta Z increases to 10m (at ocean bottom) In air, Delta Z increases to 20m (at Top) 18

CFD Methodology Physical Models used: Three dimensional Implicit unsteady Gravity Multiphase mixture Eulerian multiphase Water: Constant density Density: 997.561 Kg/m 3 and Dynamic viscosity: 8.887E-4 Pa-s Air: Constant density Volume of Fluid Density: 1.18415 Kg/m 3 and Dynamic viscosity: 1.85508E-5 Pa-s VOF waves - Flat water condition (for generating mean free surface) Turbulence: Wave Damping SST (Menter) K-Omega turbulence model with High y+ Wall treatment Imposed from 400m from outlet 19

Wave specifications OMAE 2012-83472: Offshore Platform Fluid Structure Interaction (FSI) Simulation Water depth: 1754 ft (534.6m) Peak wave period: 14.8s Zero crossing (Mean) wave period: 10.2s Maximum wave height: 74 ft ±1.5 ft (22.55m ± 0.457m) Significant wave height: 43.3 ft (13.19m) Surface current (above 200ft) velocity: 2.1 knots (1.08m/s) Static wind speed: 85 knots (43.72 m/s) Direction of surface current and wind speeds are unknown Assumption: static current and wave speed direction is same as the wave advancing direction. Height of the lower deck to free surface: 56 ft (17.07 m) Wave properties: (provided by Chevron) Superposition of 60 waves Highest crest is 16.92m at 1325.6m and 166.0 s Velocity, height, volume fraction: calculated on a point-by-point basis from given data using a FORTRAN subroutine 20

CFD Methodology OMAE 2012-83472: Offshore Platform Fluid Structure Interaction (FSI) Simulation Initial Conditions: Pressure: Hydrostatic Pressure of mean free surface Velocity: User code Used single wave velocity field at t=130s for wave Volume fractions: Air: 0.0 Water: User code Wave Height at 130.0s From Fortran (Initial condition) 21

Wave Height Monitor OMAE 2012-83472: Offshore Platform Fluid Structure Interaction (FSI) Simulation 20 LinearEstimation CFD 20 LinearEstimation CFD 15 15 10 10 Wave Height, m 5 0 130 135 140 145 150 155 160 165 170 175 180 Wave Height, m 5 0 130 135 140 145 150 155 160 165 170 175 180-5 -5-10 -10-15 -15 Time, s Wave Height at X = 1000m 20-20 LinearEstimation CFD Time, s Wave Height at X = 1200m 15 10 Wave Height, m 5 0 130 135 140 145 150 155 160 165 170 175 180-5 -10-15 -20 Time, s Wave Height at X = 1400m July August 28, 13, 2011 2013 22 adapco Report No. 438-0031-001

Computational Domain and Boundary Conditions Top: Wall (Slip condition) Outlet: Pressure Outlet Sides: Symmetry Inlet: User Code Platform Model in CFD Analysis Bottom: Wall (No-slip)- Ocean bed Z= 300m Z= 0m Z= 17m Transparent view X=800m X=1150m X=1600m X=2000m Damping Zone Z=-534.62m Y= -150m Y= 0m Y= 150m Platform: Length along X: 15.7m Depth along Y: 16.1m Height along Z: 1.56m I-Beam 3 at X=1150m Bottom of Structure = 17m X: Wave Advancing Direction Z: Normal to Wave Advancing Direction Along Gravity 23

Mesh OMAE 2012-83472: Offshore Platform Fluid Structure Interaction (FSI) Simulation Plane Y=0m Plane X=1150m Mesh : 7,154,319 Mesh size near free surface, Refined area (Z= -15m to 25m): Delta X & Delta Y = 2.44m, Delta Z = 0.609m Away from free surface: Delta X = 19.5, Delta Y = 9.75m, Delta Z = 19.5m 24

Mesh Plane Y=0m OMAE 2012-83472: Offshore Platform Fluid Structure Interaction (FSI) Simulation 25

Surface Elevation OMAE 2012-83472: Offshore Platform Fluid Structure Interaction (FSI) Simulation Wave history plots and surface elevation plot indicates free surface in 3D model is close to that of the free surface from 2D model 26

Phase 3 27

3D- Domain OMAE 2012-83472: Offshore Platform Fluid Structure Interaction (FSI) Simulation Z= 300m Z= 0m Z= 17m Z=-534.62m X=800m X=1150m X=1600m X=2000m Y= -150m Y= 0m Y= 150m Damping Zone Model: I-Beam 3 at X=1150m Bottom of Structure = 13m 28

Finite Element Mesh Full Assembly * The connection details has been ignored. All joint were considered to be infinitely stiff. Top Plate 269,361 linear hexahedral elements of type C3D8R Total Elements: 269,361 Total Nodes: 408,231 C3D8R: 8-node linear brick, reduced integration with hourglass control 29

Applied Boundary Condition Fixed in X, Y-direction (Connected to rest of the deck) Fixed in Z-direction (Supports) Fixed in X, Y-direction * Top deck was vertically restrained Fixed in X,Y and Z Rot 30

Displacement Magnitude OMAE 2012-83472: Offshore Platform Fluid Structure Interaction (FSI) Simulation 47cm 17cm 31

Comparison of Deformation of Plate Girders with Filed Data 50 Displacement in x-direction (cm) 45 40 35 30 25 20 15 10 5 Member A - Field Data Member A - Analysis Results Member B - Field Data Member B - Analysis Results 0 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 Lentgh of plate girder (m) Length =0.0m Length = 12.0m 32

Conclusions OMAE 2012-83472: Offshore Platform Fluid Structure Interaction (FSI) Simulation A One-way coupled Fluid Structure Interaction was investigated for predicting permanent deformation on an offshore platform from a large wave incident during a storm. Results are comparable to the actual field measurements The deformation on plate girders can also be due to several wave impacts during the hurricane and the deformation magnitude of the plate girders will be superimposed due to these multiple impacts Results suggest that sufficiently accurate solution for the design of offshore platforms can be obtained with this methodology. 33